TLDR I am going to use a sentence I always use. The game we play now is not Star Citizen. The purpose of Master Modes, as you mentioned, is accessibility. We need to look at a much larger picture than current gameplay. I am going to enter the Soon tm. territory. SQ42 is coming. There is traction with the game and I have a feeling it might release Citcon 2025. This means, if successful, a huge amount of players will come into the game through the single player story. The flight model is the biggest part of the learning curve, since a high amount of mainstream players have the puzzle and FPS part of the game down. But, piloting a ship has a higher learning curve. We see it with noobs everyday. Master modes is not tailored to current experienced dog fighter players. They are a minority. It is tailored to mainstream players to go to the Flight Academy in several stages. Learn the basics and some, more advanced options... Auto-aim and longer weapon range and lower speeds help to get the satisfaction of a kill in SQ42. The Held the Line presentation showed a subpar pilot killing NPCs. That is the immediate gameplay objective. SQ42 will bring a ton of money to the game, and it is the gateway for SC. It is the correct vision for CIG. Now, to go back to the current patch is not SC. 100 players per server is a drop in SC. The flight model after onboarding hundreds of thousands of players with SQ42 will be tightened, weapon ranges drop and speeds adjusted. Just will 800 players per shard the game will be different. If they are able to double and triple this we will start seeing what SC is about. Server meshing is just the enabler to economy, capital ships and more gameplay like base building, exploration, data running.... Two systems is a short term target, but Nyx and Odin could appear in 2025 and 2026. All mentioned above will come fast as the foundation backend, database and networking is in place. To conclude, they have metrics and qualitative data for new players. They are lowering the barriers to come into the game. Citizens are about to double within a year and a half if they release SQ42, which is the cinematic tutorial for people to join the verse.
Current MM to much aim assist. I aim to the engines and bullets nudge to the center of the ship. Not cool remove aim assist. If to hard for you to hit use auto gimble, the reason he was created for people that cant aim
@@WRL-J0rgeNDoes the aim assist matter that much when weapon spread is so high anyway? I mean, everyone is for removing the aim assist, sure. But does it matter currently that much?
I feel like engineering gameplay is going to impact the light fighter debate a lot. At the moment, taking the odd stray shot from a larger turret only makes the LF pull out for a little bit until the shields regenerate. In the future, taking hits like that could mean you suddenly only have half the power output or your coolers burned out etc. That's going to make you think twice if you want to reengage if you can even get away in the first place. In a multicrew ship, you can send someone to do a quick repair and return the ship to a more or less optimal fighting condition.
That's one of the major advantages of ships with interiors vs fighters. Ie internal access to components vs having to Eva outside the ship to do the same repairs. Eg MSR, Vanguards, Connie's, Corsairs ect @@BuzzCutPsycho
@@BuzzCutPsycho It should. A core angle of its lore is it's redundancy and ability to take a hit. Plus having hull that's partially at least made out of tungsten. The Warden itself has an engineering station for the crew to use as well.
14:00 - To me, it look like a lot of people are confusing "easier to enter" and "lowering the kill floor" with "lowering the kill ceiling". Hence all these people complaining about the "lower skill ceiling".
No the issue is that cig is getting the opposite results of what they want to achieve. Everyone wants a low skill floor with deep gameplay, it’s just difficult to design.
@@teahousereloadedWell at least they 100% managed to get the engagement distances closer with the lower speed, right, RIGHT? ;-) But on a more serious note, I applaud them to a change that makes ganking so much easier, as old EVE-Player I can appreciate a good gank. It makes the role of multi-crew ships as objectives to be taken so much clearer when they can not engage anything basically, but do hold out now longer when under attack. So overall master modes might be still an improvement. Calling in help from fighters when you get into trouble transporting something worth transporting becomes more reasonable when you are not able to fight back, but at the same time are able to at least protect your critical systems somewhat. So maybe, just maybe mm is the way to go despite all the things we are going to lose. Maybe.
Here's my take: CIG is going for more WW2 naval style battles. Fleet v Fleet combat. In this case, a single light fighter is going to certainly have an impact, but they aren't going to be the single deciding factor. Fleet management & teamplay are going to be the deciding factor more so than individual skill.
you notice none of this was an issue or topic until the ISC said people like MM? I was asking A1 for his thoughts on MM the moment they hit live AC..... nothing, not a word. then ISC dropped, and "WAAAAAAH"
Well obviously an opinion straight after a release on AC would be useless. You need time with it, experiment, and try out as much as you can. Now that people have had time with it, they have informed opinions they are expressing them. I wouldn't trust anyone with little to no experience in it.
Back in the day of 3.11-3.13 when I learned to PvP, I did it in the PU. I would get a trespassing ticket at a comm array to turn red, then waited around PO for people to attack me and I could claim space castle doctrine. In regards to players disengaging at speed, they don't even need that. If there isn't a Mantis or Antares around; if a person doesn't want to engage in combat in the PU, they can just quantum away. Way back I got jumped at port in and Ion en route to do ERTs by a Gladius. I started a lazy barrel roll while I decided where I was going to quantum. There was no real threat to me, as I could leave at will.
@@BuzzCutPsycho IMO it's ok that you can escape alive.... BUT the more you delay the decision to run, the more punishment you should get. Otherwise you can just run, recharge and come back infinitely. No consequences!
@@BuzzCutPsycho fair enough. My youngest two daughters got into this game very recently, so I’m doing a play through and making a Videos for them while they are playing in Chrono Trigger for the first time.
People just fear change, even more people who are at the top and feel this change will "allow" others to reach their precious golden throne; MM raises the skill floor, but also the skill ceiling with it being accesible as you say so its a good movement forward and indeed will receive more tweaks and etc. And it is true we need more buff to turrets to fully benefit going as gunner, i hope they give more autotargetting or alike so a crewed ship is "more defendable" than having 2 or more ships of the same type covering eachother. Good vid as always!
Thanks! Did you hear turrets are bugged? Apparently CIG is aware of it and we will get getting a fix next update. Or so I was told. That may be why gunners suck.
If someone was flying at 2000+ m/s in space how quickly would they be able to stop without dying? It’s logical that high speed, quick stopping or even opposing thrust to change direction quickly and pinpoint manoeuvrability isn’t something that a human brain could withstand at those sorts of speeds?
Before patch 3.5 you could quickly stop ship with boost. and then they added this stupid inertia after patch 3.5 they totaly destoy flyght model. Finally they realize their mistakes and with MM they at least redused speeds so now not necessary stop quick because speed not so fast. i just dont know how they gonna fix this inertia with nav mode all they need to do is just increase power of brakes because now brakes not makes any sense at hight speed with large ships.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Not only brakes whole boost system sucks. It must have mutch more power for trusters and main engines.Thats why ships larger than LF cant normaly fly at hight speeds. But if thay wanna keep MM at low speeds its ok they just need remove this stupid cooldown from shields.Before 3.5 shield was regenerating no matter you got hit or not.With so low speeds you just cant regen shield because always get hit.
When people talk about "dps race" they mean that there is not much you can do through maneuvering to prevent damage. So all you do is apply damage. You just aim and click until one of the two explodes.
@@BuzzCutPsycho no it hasn't. In love you can maneuver at close range to get people to waste their clip. Not talking about corkscrews. You can waste people's clips by pulling through their nose. I am very pro MM but o am concerned about the loss of maneuvering ability of light fighters, only because they are the base that all other maneuverability will be based on. Once we get up to cap ship size we are going to have 50ms movement and a turn rate that will take minutes.
@@citizenzero5437I think your ability to avoid damage now depends on more than just your agility. Situational awareness Coordination with allys Teamwork
The FUNDAMENTAL problem of the Connie is having its main weapons fixed forward firing (FFF). FFF weapons in space are, to put it mildly, moronic. They were a sop to the early state of the game, where everyone wanted to fly their own ship and nobody was really interested in team play. Never mind that the state of the game could not support it either. Maybe they make a touch of sense on very small and nimble ships, but not on anything larger. Look at the development of armored fighting vehicles in the 20th century and see where we are today. Early tanks often had large caliber guns on sponson mounts with limited directional capability which proved less effective than a primary turret. Yes some anti tank vehicles or self propelled artillery have limited mounts, but that is more about cost and ease of production than improved combat efficacy. Or look back even further to the development of ironclad warships. The pattern is clear - primary armaments should be mounted in a manner which provides the greatest fields of fire and rapid target acquisition. Why be required to maneuver a large ship in order to bring weapons to bear? So much faster and accurate to simply move the weapons. In the real world this is also less stressful on the craft itself. The Connie should be the same, those four large weapons should be on one or two turrets mounted towards the front of the ship (chin and/or top mount) and the two smaller defensive turrets should be further back for defending the tail position.
FFF is an issue but honestly I usually use it in manual gimbal against light targets. Despite the ROF debuff it gets I tend to shoot down the light fighters before they can get around me. I may actually do a video about it. I totally agree with you btw, I think manual gimbals need to be less crap though.
It's finally starting to click good video. Like Virgil said in his video which is the Mantra we should all go by which is let's master master modes before we pick it apart. SC is turning a corner let's see what happens bring on Master Modes.
If my Ares Ion meets an Arrow, that Arrow should pop with 1 or 2 hits of the size 8 gun. Arrow turns faster and is more nimble, but should need a hell of a lot of shots to take me down.
Considering the Arrow is supposed to be the Ares counter your best bet should be a combo of missiles and wingmates over hoping for a lucky shot. Afteralll your handling only needs to be good enough to land shots on gunships and up target wise.
I think the reference to World of Tanks and World of Warships was appropriate. They are able to make all ships, of all sizes, viable and fun. It's absolutely possible, and the time of the light fighter meta needs to end. I want big ships to finally come into their own and be fun for all crew members. Light fighters still have their place, they should still be fun. But they cannot be the only option anymore.
WoT and WoWS are great examples of how to give everything an archetype and a role. Not saying copy the game obviously, but the design concept is there.
Considering that SC is a flight game and we don't have a overbearing HP bar on our head. Referencing War Thunder is a better idea. WoT's philosophy applied to flight, WoWP, was terribly mediocre.
Also: remember that people ( ac sweaters -like me btw) telling you that skill ceiling has been lowered in master mode are the one who suck at … master mode. Do the math.
Great video, I think it's fair to say the average player has absolutely no interest to sit in AC for even half an hour, especially if it means being farmed by a sweatlord in a Gladius. The average player wants to enjoy the actual content in the actual game. PVP is something that happens and it ABSOLUTELY needs to be viable to upskill yourself in the PU. I bet most backers have 3-4 hour as most a week to play and they are being scared away because they know, as it stands today, you need 100s of hours of combat experience to even stand a chance not to get swatted like a fly by a LF if you do choose to take the fight instead of just running.
100%. And then there is also the chunk of people that were absolute crap all through 3.23 and prior - now they will say there were in the top 1% of pvp dogfighters ever to log into the verse ..but Now this stupid MM ruined everything. 'You didnt beat me - i lost because of this horrendous Master Modes.. i was TopGun before the changes and people used to write songs about me.. random groups and orgs i would single handedly kill in 20 v 1 would write me letters and tell me that I am what they aspire to be.. now i cant win a fight vs an argo cargo ..skill hath been removethed' !!!!!!!!
Good video. Have a like. I've been quite appalled at the extreme amount of absolutely disingenuous and/or ignorant arguments I've seen from the vocal and obnoxious anti-MM crowd, bordering and fully sliding into the realm of propaganda and outright lies. They're so desperately terrified by the idea that the incredibly flawed meta they're invested in (which has always and explicitly been a placeholderI) changing, that they've become absolutely pathetic. Among the bad takes I'd add the "slower = lower skill ceiling." People who fly WW1 and WW2 fighters in simulators would want to have a word with these people. I guarantee many of them are much, much better pilots than any the self-professed "top aces" and sweats in Star Citizen. The skill ceiling is infinite at any speed. In something as complex and nuanced as air (or space) combat, there will always be room for improvement, no matter how good you are. Anyone who thinks they can reach a "skill ceiling" in any kind of flight combat, regardless of speed, simply doesn't know what the words mean. A lower speed cap doesn't create a lower skill ceiling. It simply partly shifts the balance of the skills favored away from pure muscle memory, reflexes, and twitch, and moves the needle toward precise maneuvering, tactics, teamwork, planning ahead of your opponent, and so forth. A different skillset is not equivalent to less skills.
Thanks man. Would you be interested if I start doing some Connie master mode PvP with commentary? Genuine question here. The one I have recorded actually mentions team work and maneuvers like you mention...
For what it's worth, that's something I'd love to see, even if it also included tactics for the vanguard etc as well. Pretty much all of the space combat guides are largely focused on fighter versus fighter with very little attention paid to gunships or multi-crew craft as a whole. To echo a comment, I saw in one of the master modes videos or spectrum threads somewhere, we have a whole lot of fighter aces but very few gun ship aces or heavy fighter aces @@BuzzCutPsycho
You know I never once thought about equating the speed of ww1 and ww2 flight games to skill That is an absolutely excellent example and talking point. This is why I love to read the comments here. Well done. 100%.
"realistic" space combat in the far future would (given interstellar travel, interplanetary society etc.), likely take place at speeds that exceed a significant proportion of the speed of light. Even at 1% c (1 % of the speed of light), we are talking in m/s equivalents roughly 3 000 000 m/s. Realism just is not an argument.
If CIG were turning this game into Starfield, they'd fully release the PU right now and then let modders finish their job for them. Master Modes will work. I still think the next big priority they should focus on should be ship armor; no light fighter should be engaging a HH or other Corvette and knocking out its turrets easily. Large ships should outperform 2-3 man fighter gangs, unless they're all heavy fighters. That's not a DPS race. That's a ship filling its role. Its a large ship. It has turrets. It should be a damn challenge.
When people bring up "realism" in video games, it reminds me of an excerpt from an interview with a Tripwire Games dev regarding Rising Storm 2. I think it went something along the lines of "We aren't aiming for realism. We are aiming for authenticity." In other words, it is more important in a video game that things *look and feel* right than are actually right. It's more important that space flight in Star Citizen looks right, feels right, and behaves in a manner consistent with its own rules that it establishes for itself than for it to be strictly realistic.
Every time someone brings up "realism" remind them that realistic space battles would be shooting missiles at a target you will never see. Also your ship would be a very boring rectangle or cylinder.
In other forms of entertainment (books, movies, etc) this is called 'willing suspension of disbelief.' Which is hard to define, but you know it when you see it. Or you really notice it when it is violated. My word for it is 'plausibility' but you are also quite right that it requires some sort of internal consistency and predictability.
@@RasakBlood This. I've never believed that a real space battle would be like a WW2 airplane dogfight. It would be more like a submarine battle. Something a lot of people would probably find 'boring.
The Devs have Literally said they want AC to be a Simulator within your ship. For "training" purposes. So you hit the head on that one. I like the aspect of training, builds team work, skill and as a leader you can see peoples strengths and weakness first hand. As well as gives you a purpose to have that ship with that simulator with in your ORGS fleet. This gives you a Collective Goal to reach as an ORG. Prices for these Huge Ships should be quite High "imo". This allows us to better our chances in experiencing multiple types of content as well as giving you a reason to log on day to day and help save up for this ship that can make your org better than another. With other MMO's you can run the same instance until you remember it by heart but with Star Citizen, In the future with dynamic NPC behavior. Flanking, Bounding, Etc, The experience will be different every time and you as a team will be better suited to take upon this sudden change in the situation with the bonus of training with no risk within a simulator. (given death of a spaceman happens, Loot/Gear being lost) This may also be applied to tactics on dealing with Apex Predators that may have specific means or difficulties of killing. This game has so much potential to be anything players want it to be. Want to be a Tourist. ok, here. Want to be a Military G.I, Boom, Kick some ass. Professional Fauna Hunter? why not?
I have no issue with the training per say but it being a separate minigame that I am spending all my time in to hone the skills is my issue with it. Then again I am against any minigame in an MMO that is totally separate from the MMO itself. I am weird like that. But I am totally pro training for orgs. I am actually looking forward to private lobbies for that very purpose. SC may be the first game I "train" for but I hope it isn't mandatory. Dibs on Military G.I. btw. ;)
Go to love how often you hear about pve players having main characters syndrome when you have PvP players thinking ships should perform outside of their roles. Eg M50s and Razors being used as fighters.
I read alot of global chat while playing, and I know the most vocal critic of MM is in the server because he's the saltiest I've ever seen when he loses, blaming game mechanics on his opponent and trashtalking more than anyone else. So there's a certain amount of schadenfreude to enjoy when the biggest real criticism is the size of the targeting reticle. This is all major progress, and I can't wait to see some of the large scale battles of the future.
Space do have drag. The space is not empty but full of plasma state hydrogen. Another huge energy is the solarwind, one of reason asteroids spin. So unless you are in stellar void where the drag might not be noticable, the solar system is full of moving particles that would propel the craft or create form of drag.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Have you ever wondered about the northern lights (aurora)? Those are highly energetic particles hitting ionosphere. Same stuff hitting a space sail can propel a spacecraft. Its like a wind, does wind creates drag?
Even when I'm not playing SC I still watch and agree with your videos. Really, I mean it. God. SC turns me into an egotistical prickhead and I'm sorry if I ever came off that way. I won't comment on MM, only that I want to help friends, and MM makes that easier. I would much rather take a supportive role. I am rambling.
I and another Teammate helped another Teammate with his CrimeStat once. Was in my F8C, he in his Vanguard and a M50 come across. The M50 smacked us both, I in my F8C could not outrun or outturn him, i coudnt even get Guns on him for me then 0.5sec everytime, he killed us/me after a while because 900-1,200m/sec fights are "great"... So yeah.. MM will not make a Heavy Fighter like the F8C godlike BUT a stupid RACE Plane can trolland Kill a Military, Heavy Armed ship? C'mone dude..
I swear UA-cam ate my comment so here's a sad repost. Everything you have said makes sense. The limits make sense because the human body can take so much and lets be honest people would be complaining about dying in a dogfight due to the G forces turning their guts into soup. For all the realism and the DPS race they destroyed Missiles in the game. I rather swap out my Missile Racks for 2 more weapon hardpoints or upsize the weapon hardpoints on a ship. The biggest complaint I hear is this "my ship cannot 1 v 10 heavy fighters anymore...SC fix this" that's how I translate all the MM light fighter crybabies. When shields 2.0 and Armor 1.0 comes to the verse...its just going to get worse for light fighters.
YT has been eating mine too and it is my channel. I think once you see heavies such as the Scorpius and Hurricane you will see light fighters even more screwed. I really think they're going to have an easy to mass benefit as well as an anti bomber role. I hate to predict things like this I cannot see a world where the hurricane or scorpious cannot just eat a single lf alive.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Oddly I've done some testing with a Scorp....I have a split Throttle setup (since I love using the F-14) so I went in and see if I could tinker with the engines and set them....Let me put it this way the Scorp is a hidden monster once you understand how to split throttle and cross throttle her engines. You can out pivot light fighters...although you're slamming yourself with Massive Gs.
@@BuzzCutPsychoto be fair, it is expressly what they are built towards countering at least as far as I'm aware. It's also requires two people to properly prove that shit as well
@@BuzzCutPsycho I've played too much battlefield. I can command, fly, use armor and ground pound. Although now I find myself playing more into the Command and Flight role. I just need a good gunner on my Scorp to take advantage of her firing arcs. I think my go-to ships are going to be the F8C when I complete SQ42 and my Scorp...although I'd love to see a medium single seat variant of the Scorpius. A bit more agile...but slightly less upgunned.
I think most people know what a DPS race is. And I don't think they are whining about dps race because of auto aim. They are whining about dps race because ship speeds are so slow you can't dodge incoming fire. Thus, it's a dps race because both combatants are for sure gonna hit their shots.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Uhm I wonder if we are talking about the same thing. There was no whining about dps race in legacy. There was whining about dps race in master mode. Because the speeds were so slow you couldn't evade. If they still have auto aim in master modes that is certainly a problem because slow speed + auto aim makes it absolutely impossible to evade for sure. But still, with slow speeds it's still hard to evade. Especially if the ship is large. Anyway, you are basically confirming the whiners point that it is a dps race because there is no evasion. Most guns wins. How much $ was that F8C again? :)
as a pure PU player when I play SC, I can say for certain that it cannot be stressed enough how important it is to have the accessibility to new players in the PU. AC & SM are intended as minigames, not alternate games. you're supposed to go through the PU before you get to AC & SM.
I get it. I feel you. Sometimes I feel like AC is a mistake outside of testing. That isn't to say I advocate for its removal. But it wouldn't be something I'd would have kept once PU became a thing.
@BuzzCutPsycho THANK YOU. You are doing important work educating the community to withstand the ridiculous propaganda onslaught of certain influencers against MM right now. I am actively playing almost daily as well as actively participating on spectrum for the past 3 months now and so many times I have found myself discussing points about the current PU or AC with people that in the end turned out, haven't been playing the game for YEARS! But at the same time slinging arguments your way with the utmost conviction, when in fact they are just replicating what they heard on UA-cam. One thing I would like to add to the archetypes discussion, although in principle I'm sure you already know this. Every good PVP game must bring up a certain rock-paper-scissors mechanic and archetypes are representing just that. Right now LF's are just the Shotgun, when even the termin "LIGHT Fighter" invokes they were never intended to be that way. It just is the part of the skill layer that comes down to (ship) knowledge and tactical decision making. It allows CIG further on to tweak the entire system in a consistent way, whereas now every ship is individual and if you tweak one thing, you break another (like currently evident in the hornets unwanted acceleration boost). The role of a light fighter should really be to provide point defense by strength in numbers (price being a factor as well in balancing), besting Medium Fighters and Heavy Fighters, as well as non-combat ships. Interceptors are the defacto counter to LFs, but can't hold any ground and their Hit & Run is ultimately bested by larger ships shield regen rates. Medium Fighters are designed to be multirole capable and fight both smaller and bigger ships, but not excelling at any of those. Heavy fighters are meant to punch above their size. I am stopping here, but of course the list goes on. As with turrets. If anything needs to become OP in SC it is turrets. Or they simply won't get used. Experimenting with gimbals and everything is all fun and dandy. But I am quite positive that the best way to increase people actually wanting to be turret operators is by increasing weapon sizes for all turrets across the board by 1 or 2 classes. As someone on the forums mentioned= 1+1 should equal three when it comes to turrets. So if you have 2 players manning a ship, they should be as strong as 3 ships of the same type with just a pilot.
Great comment. By all means feel free to share this video around. I always welcome more eyes on the content. I enjoy your idea and understand of the roles and balance. Particularly the part where you mention turrets needing to be borderline OP to be used. Right now in MM I don't even let people gun my Connie. It is worthless. They're better off in their own ships. It really bothers me that people form opinions based on what others say and don't get in and test themselves. I don't expect people to agree with me all the time but I do expect people to form their own opinions and try things out. Real quick on the shields. Big ships are having serious staying power due to the shields recharge being turned off by any damage. Even a light hit. It makes big ship on big ship combat feel weird and shield face tanking awkward. I'm actually working on some Connie MM videos that I want to try out. A new format. But you will see it there. Thanks again man. Replies and comments like yours actually make me smile.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I mean my on the fly categorization might not be accurate, but just a general illustration of how things could turn out in the end. TTK is currently a bit high on fighters. I did like the War Thunder damage model, but I see how in SC death is supposed to be way bigger a thing. Also I am seeing varying results in hits vs. damage. Sometimes you do 1000 dmg in one strafe, sometimes you just do a 100 or so even when most hits connected. Even in your video there were cases where it wasn't really clear, as the target was close enough and not erratically moving. Other times you are completely unloading your entire battery on a hornet or so and it still survives with barely a scratch. On the other hand, I LOVE the tankiness of the Heavy Fighter and above, as it provides the necessary room (=time) to figure out certain strategies and change tactics accordingly instead of just blowing up for making 1 bad initial decision. And also the effect that many players will just not attack you in the first place as it is just too bothersome :D I also liked that you pointed out how it is not hard to aim, but hard to hit right now, and I agree that this is kind of weird still. It might be one of those things where you can really build up skill by learning to how make those damage-dump-killshots compared to just blurping out some damage. So it might not be a candidate for reworking. I need more training to assess that. Contrary to you, learning new things is what I love about gaming and when it stops, I usually stop playing those games. A small amount of training can help with that. although the PU right now is quite PVP friendly to learn in. Whereas a game like Tarkov is so brutal you absolutely need an arena mode to get quick action and experience.
I've had a similar thought myself with regards to complaints about the buccaneer Meta under master modes. It's not a meta Gladius pilots. It's your counter.
I have a full time job already. I play video games to relax and escape the stress of all the things I am responsible for. I play Star Citizen because of it's detail and fluid experience, as well as being the closest I'll ever get to space travel. Some of the people expressing their opinions are streamers/content creators and getting paid to do this. SC, for all intents and purposes IS their job. It's all well and good for them to want a product that feeds their ego and their needs, but they're being selfish in not considering that the rest of us don't have that kind of time. I'm not interested in something being so complex that it feels like coming home and sitting down to another time-punch. I also don't want it to be so simple that it isn't interesting, but telling me I'm going to need to dedicate my play-time to "Git Gud" is moronic.
@@BuzzCutPsycho The potential perspective of another is the first thing often ignored. It's difficult, since we're spend so much time trying to properly communicate or own ideas, to spend additional time considering other people that are doing the same. Never attribute malice where ignorance or incompetence is in greater supply. I'm paraphrasing, but the spirit of the quote is there.
14:50 Warframe have a training area. It doesnt take away from anything. It's optional for players that need it then don't want to practice in a live setting
I think the only way to fix the auto aim issue is to make weapons have unlimited or extreme ranges but outside of their current maximum range they have zero aim assist or bullet bending at all, and we all know any gun that repeatedly fires would never hit a follow up shot at 5 km away versus moving ship without massive amounts of bullet bending. This system will allow teams to do suppressive fire, and saturate areas and use ship of the line tactics, making multi cruise ships very valuable in area denial, defensive and breakout assault roles. Currently the ranges are too short for a light fighter to miss a big ship, And the big ships are slow, so it compounds the issue. When you were in the Gladius at 2 km away, spinning around firing repeaters … you’re not skilled, it’s auto-aim. So this system would reward those pilots that are kiting the heavy if they stay in a narrow range band just like Eve online, where a heavy assault cruiser that was four times smaller than a battleship could beat it if it stayed in a tiny range window and out traverse their guns. But the larger ships have the ability to change course and cut engines and flip around and decoupling mode to shake the light fighter who is now going to be out of their range band and have zero Ami assist while the large ship will have 40 to 80% more range and simply melt him.
This is actually really good feedback and I didn't think of some of it. I'm putting notes down for it now. I did not play EVE, but what you described sounds really elegant. A good potential solution. Think it could work in a game like sc? The auto aim is a huge issue and you're totally spot on. It is actually the "magnetism" or bending as you call it. It is obnoxious.
For a long time ship choices haven't really mattered or had any role-based consequences outside of is it a light fighter or not? You definitely do get a little bit of a vibe of people being too used to being able to use ships in ways that they're not supposed to be. For example, Avenger one complaining about not being able to dogfight in an aurora ie a starter ship.
Yes the starter ship part was weird. I want to tackle the perceived Buccaneer issue now. Interceptors are a result of objectiveless combat not the ship itself. I will start writing for it tonight.
16:35 Tbf, permadeath is coming, so training in AC will about training or sport without the worry of lowering your IVS. Just playing in the PU without training will almost certain shorten your character's lifespans. Those other games you mentioned don't have permadeath and aren't life sims.
Yeah a lot of people don't understand how a gladius would be able to take out caterpillar back in the 3.0 days it was so silly and annoying. But your Connie take is the same one I had for the Aries it was really no need to Nerf the Aries back in the day because it made no sense people were really arguing how a arrow shouldn't be taken out by a size 7 cannon but had nothing to say about getting taken out by a railgun born Nova tank with one shot. Multi crew be really the strongest ships in a game to be honest lightfighter shouldn't even be able to fight anything over a medium solo I can understand if it's a wing of three or more but solo is ridiculous. But I'm glad cig and other people are starting to notice how silly this was back in the day when arrows can kill hammerheads😂
I actually wonder what balance issues the Ares will bring about when it finally comes in. To Master Modes that is. Poor Hammerhead already sucks as it is :(
@@BuzzCutPsycho I guess because the SCM speeds for the Aries are going to be the balance that and maybe Nerf the distance but if they do that that's definitely going to cause a problem so I've been wondering that myself. Maybe it will become a heavy version of The Bucc for The inferno I'm not sure what they're going to do with the ion
I don’t know the answers but I feel like ship armor/shield types/etc should be fleshed out before altering the flight model this heavy, my main gripe is flying defenseless while in Nav mode while exploring. My opinions are changing as points or being put out, so I appreciate vid’s like this, but it kinda feels like being pigeonholed for PvP purposes, when that’s only 1 aspect of many. Hopefully it gets figured out proper tho cuz I’m in for the long haul, and being “realistic” is the main draw 🤙🏻
It may never be realistic but it could at least be authentic or "believable" in a sense. I am also interested to see how MM works out for the other non-combat ships.
Pilot, Turret Gunners - Shoot and Maneuver. Must be filled or ship goes dead in the water. Pilot is the master of all ship movement. Can receive power boosts from Engineering or Science stations. Emergency power to thrusters to help keep enemy ship targeted in-front of the ship. Receives targeting bonuses from Science station that is doing Sub System Targeting. Receives emergency power from engineering when Emergency Capacitors are full and able to boost a downed shield to half, or instantly recharge a weapon group for better sustained dps. Engineering Station - Balances Power, Creates Power Boosts to reinforce a down shield that goes from 15% to 65%, At the cost of the Emergency Capacitor Charge that takes TIME and SKILL to charge up to get this boost. Consider it Emergency Power Transfer from systems that are at 100% and do not need further charging. Extra Power management = Bonus to Power System the Engineer Chooses. Shields, Weapons, Thrust. Transfer Power from Life Support to Weapons when Weapons take damage and do not charge as fast. Can exit station to go repair as necessary. Science Station - Targeting, Scanning enemy shields frequency for better penetration, Scanning enemy ship for better sub system targeting. Relaying that info to the targeting computers of the turrets, and main guns. Searches surroundings for natural advantages like a Gas Cloud that would damage any shields below level 2. Can exit station to go repair as necessary. Many Fighters will not have access to this kind of team gameplay. This is the reason that a single fighter vs a Coni or equivalent would never stand a chance. The Options and Systems the bigger ships have are not contained in a single fighters hull where the fighter pilot would need to exit into a spacewalk to repair. When a fighter is near dead, it must retreat, and that is only if its engines were not targeted by the science station on the bigger ship.
I've been saying for the longest time that "I would rather have 4 people each in separate Corsairs instead of 1 fully crewed Corsair". It shouldn't be like this but it is; in the current state of the game fully crewing a single ship feels like a punishment over having everybody piloting separate ships. It's possible this will be fixed with Engineering and Armor allowing crews to extend the survivability of multicrew ships for far longer than a single seater ever could, providing additional reasons to actually have a crew as opposed to just having turret gunners and almost shifting the game into a more "Sea of Thieves"-like. Sure if you're good, you can beat a 4-man Galleon in a solo Sloop, but it's an uphill resources/APM battle, where as a solo Galleon vs a solo Sloop would be an easier match for the Sloop user; I think this same principle should apply to the "crewed gunships vs light fighters" debate. It does not make any sense for a small single seater craft to be able to take down a fully crewed heavy weapons platform like a Constellation, Corsair, or Hammerhead. In the current state of the game, I would automatically assume a light fighter in the hands of the right pilot would handily be able to solo each of those; this WILL change in the future, and that is a good thing. Star Citizen is intended to be an MMO, and a classic trait of MMO balancing is team composition, of which Star Citizen will eventually be balanced around. Light fighters will still be good in large scale engagements, as they are cheap to field and easy to transport en masse to a battlefield via hangars/carriers. Light fighters are not intended to be 1v1 kings like they currently are, they are intended to be deployed in outnumbering swarms as support for larger ships.
I agree with you 100% and I want very desperately for a reason for players to want to be in a crew with the Connie not off on their own in their own. Sadly I wonder if cig can even accomplish that without breaking the ship.
We don't know what MM will feel like until 3.23 goes live. Surely, over time it will get tweaked. We are mostly only talking about LF vs LF in SCM as if that's the be all and end all of space flight interactions. The first iteration of MM in live 3.23 will be a hugh compromise since there are so many game systems and tuning not done and will not be done for 3.23 live. So much focus on the LF category! It's annoying.
You're totally correct. LF still has it's place but you are seeing some more guys try out the mediums and heavies now too. I have been doing a lot of work with the Connie as of late and plan to put some stuff together for it video wise.
I always thought that is should be that bigger crewed ships should absolutely wreak a single fighter of any kind but a small squadron should wreak a lone bigger ship within reason.
But Avenger Squadron dont like it and they have almost 1000 members parroting what their leader says. On a lighter note i have had discussions with several of them and a few of them can see where CIG is trying to go and are patiently waiting. But A1 has turned into the thing he hated when he started. The elitist who is unable or unwilling to adapt or change. This is part of the reason he quit Star Wars. Because they changed combat and he didnt want to adapt. I say and will continue to say, CIG is working on fixing an issue. The changes arent done you have a minimal amount of changes. 1 light, 1 interceptor, 1 heavy, 1 gunship and 1 corvette. We dont know how interceptors will be balanced vs other interceptors. Let alone gunships, vanguards, hornets or even gladii.
You're totally right and I get that change is hard. I'm adapting myself. I'm committed to learning the gunboats archetype myself. This will be my last MM talking video for awhile. I'm working on a Connie video now. Connie in MM that is. Learned quite a bit I would like to share with people.
Personally, I think there should be a point where weapons simply become ineffective relative to the size of the target. At some point it would be like firing a machinegun at a tank, which simply wouldn't phase it. In SC, ships are works of art rather than engineered combat vehicles, manned with hundreds/thousands of crew, which results in blindspots, also to avoid having zones of immediate destruction for torpedos, boarding craft and the like. It's a rock paper scissors situation, except the fact that big ships getting killed by fighters made big ships obsolete as well as bombers designed to take out big ships. Like who the hell brings a fully crewed Polaris trying to get the expensive torps in on a Javelin when they could just park a few fighters behind the engine nacelles? Fighters still aren't victims of bigger ships, since they can dictate the engagement, meaning it's their choice to get into a dangerous situation. Even in a bigger battle, bigger ships would primarily target each other rather than trying to hit fighters. So I don't have any sympathy for fighter pilots acting like they are now in a bad spot, when they engage a battle they end up losing.
I agree 100%. At some point special weapons need to be used to kill certain targets. Size of cannons, type, etc, should all matter. I want to believe that this is the direction that they are going.
People who complain about the purpose of master modes are just not old backers. They don't realize that master modes is a return to the original flight system. If people would just take a few minutes to ask themselves why arena commander has never had enough room to utilize the tactics they use in the live build with what, for some reason has come to be called the legacy system, they might realize their cries are futile. Fun fact, this "legacy system" isn't actually the legacy system, SCM mode was what we started with, and how all ship battle missions have been designed the whole time. Ever wondered why all the bounty missions in space take place among pockets of asteroids? It's because everything in this game has been designed around the speeds they're going for now. ( I don't mean Yela. I mean the asteroid pockets around all the OTHER moons.) They can cry and whine all they want, CR has said multiple times now that we're getting a WW2 close combat emulating combat system, and he hasn't ever changed his words. It's not even worth arguing about. Expect more crying as well when armor comes into the game. All these people asking for "game balance" right now in the ways they repeat, are wasting their breath. Even after master modes things are still not close to done.
I don't think the idea of a combat mode and travel mode is the problem. The problem is the actual flight model and the involved systems and tunings. They are shite.
@latjolajban81 the dissenters have been pretty vocal that the speed changes are the issue. We're talking in a general sense. There's little doubt that tuning and small things probably need work, but the overall complaint is that changing the speeds is the issue for the people against it. Again, asking for well refined tuning and balance at this point in development is pointless. There's still too much to add.
@@llMoofasall Ok. For me it's not just speeds. It's the whole feeling of flight in space. There is no weight to it. Acceleration is way too high in every direction. Cork screwing should be a massive slow corkscrew. Not the tight propeller plane aerobatic cork screw we have had for years. The boost characteristics needs to be different for different ships/categories/roles so ships have a chance to counter or outplay each other. For example give heavy fighers a short boost that massively increase maneuvering so they can keep their guns on agile targets temporarily, but doesn't increase top speed much (they should have decent top speed anyway). Light fighters could have a decently long boost that increase general thrust output so they can be flexible. Racers could have variations of any type of boost really depending on what kind of racer you want. Or make it so more power to engines (the power triangle) increase thrust output. Especially for ships with larger/more thruster. And so on.
I had fun in master modes, and it wsa nice to have connies with their galdreens doing good work. It's never about edging out the other side from the skirmish, it's about the whole battle. Light fighters are harassers, gunships are the heavy hitters, frigates are the annihilators... we all have roles. I hope in the future they allow the squadron battles to be larger in AC so we can have true compliments of ships slugging it out. Yes servers will be the tech issue there, but man that's the true fun, squad battles. It's called Squadron 42 right? not Pilot 42, so even this elite ace we'll be solo playing won't be the end all be all gladius kills the idris solo event so why would it ever be the same in P.U.? Also I was totally checking the video to see if you showed your kills of myself in A.C. lol
I did not select anyone in particular to show off. I just dropped the videos in. I actually saved the ones where you beat me to reference for a video I was going to work on but until MM hits PU I may hold off on the guides.
Elitists in any game end up destroying that game. While I admire the dedication, some people take to get better at using light fighters they forget that there are other ships and other roles out there. I love my cutlass black it is not a light fighter.
I agree with you conclusion that MM is a good thing but I disagree with some of your reasoning. I think the way you described the DPS race argument isn't fair. Obviously as soon as you shoot each other it is mostly a DPS race but the point is that people want the fight to be more than just a DPS race. Before they could disengage, reposition or dodge more easily (as far as I understand, I don't fly a lot) and they are sad that these things aren't really possible anymore. Just like FPS combat isn't just shooting each other but also includes thinking about the sound you make, your positioning, use of cover and so on, flying isn't just shooting each other either. I think Vergil made a better counter argument by showing that it's easier to use the environment like asteroids and stations with MM.
You can dodge and everything now currently. That has not changed. And the Connie on Connie fights are pretty dynamic now too especially with multiple shield face tanking, etc. Good comment, I could have worded it better for sure. But I still don't think much has changed, the only thing keep stuff from being a "DPS RACE" before was tri-cord disengage, which just created a race to see who got bored and left first. ;)
Love the video bro. I am awaiting a time when all different shapes and sizes of ship will have a part to play. I dont own a single LF. Yet I am a PvP focused player. Id like to fly a gun ship or drop ship. Those are the ship type that most interest me.
@BuzzCutPsycho I'm happy with baby steps. I'll play whatever version of the game is fun for us. I don't expect anything and am happy when they make good changes for the good of the game as a whole. Cheers
I hear you speak about barrier to entry but the only barriers to entry that exists to getting involved in PvP is just choosing to fight anywhere i spent hours in the PU asking people to fight when i started because PvP is so taboo that the only places people fight are at OM points in a scripted agreed upon way or in AC which offers little to no tools to let people practice without joe-shmoe coming in and interrupting practice or being paired with someone outside of your skill level to play against which i dont think the second thing is a bad thing especially ever since they added global chat. This game is probably one of the only few games where the top of PvPers allow people into their communities to learn other PvP games, people play on such an astronomically high level that there is 0 chance you get to interact with those players in that same skill level without getting steam rolled. The desire to try to play PvP is at an all time low because there is nothing to gain but glory most people play for fun and those two things generally dont happen unless you are a specific type of player. There are probably 1% of players who try to play win or lose and probably 0.0001% that is actually good but that's simply because players don't want to fight and justify not trying and CIG is currently appealing to these people's emotions by balancing things instead of giving us tools to practice, a matchmaking system if you are only looking for quick fights and making fighting in the PU more common without the risk of being punished for doing combat. This game just isn't optimized i know alot of PvPers that don't play because the game doesnt offer modern optimization currently alot of players literally only play in AC because you can gain 30+ frames in AC vs the PU. Larger ships do need a buff but IMO the reason large ships are so ass is because of turret placement and effectiveness i understand a hammer head should be effective against lightfighters but against how many because you cant find an angle where all turrets can land damage so even fully manned you might have 4 turrets trained on one fighter at a time and the moment you go beyond 4 fighters there's just not enough turrets to keep all these fighters at bay at once a single turret or two needs to be extremely strong to beat a light figher which i hope eventually rolls out.
Alright, great comment. Read what you said. Now hear me out, and I promise I am not going on a tangent... but this may be why we don't get much PU PvP, well, part of it. I think a big reason why we get no PvP in PU is due to respawns honestly. Something people aint bringing up much. If people could respawn to the closest point where they died you may see more PU PvP. The fundamental concept here is to provide all players with the option to respawn at the nearest available spawn point, regardless of where their regeneration point is set. I firmly believe that this addition is crucial for the overall health of the product, and its inclusion would enhance every aspect of gameplay, from PvP to PvE. This feature would empower players to mount a defense against station campers, enable haulers to reclaim potentially lost cargo, or allow ground-based players to swiftly return to a bunker and resume their mission. The potential applications are limitless, and the impact would be uniformly positive across the board.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Well that's the thing though perhaps if they made a health insurance system where you could spawn closest to your last death for the highest premium, spawn at a location you last set for a lower cost and spawn at the beginning planet for free that could add that element of loss and could be a good money sink for players who want to engage eachother for wars where its not just a buy your ship and your done the logistics of fighting one another would be extremely costly if people had something to prove that wasn't directly giving them a return. This sort of ties into one of the only reason i wouldn't want to see the skill expression be diminished because training is probably the only way we can circumvent the cost of combat besides bringing more people.
@@BuzzCutPsycho forward operating bases/ vehicles would also be an excellent addition especially if you could spawn an assortment of ground vehicles and maybe small transport ships from.
Ive noticed there's a small, but vocal, minority of players that primarily play fighters. This minority seems to be figureheaded by a certain popular content creator, who i wont name, but we all know. This small minority will not be happy unless SC is unequivocally dominated by light fighters (as it always has been), with everything else just being a target. At the top of the pile of these light fighters will be the ones with thousands of hours of seat time that are untouchable by the unwashed masses. They want to live out their own main character hero story while everything and everyone else is fodder for their fantasy. Anything that chellenges their light fighter, ace pilot bubble must be squashed out immediately.
Oh I agree. I actually had some part of that in my original video I cut. I will upload them later as a short. They were done in jest but I felt like they took away from the real content of the video. "There are certain, not all, PvP players in this community who absolutely adore clubbing seals. They relish maintaining their position at the top of garbage mountain, sitting upon their porcelain throne and pointing down at their perceived lessers with meaty, grime-covered digits. And it makes sense; these certain individuals have built an entire brand upon being good at this constantly in development, never-out-of-alpha project. They've spent a lot of time, energy, and in some cases a lot of money on getting the peripherals necessary to maintain their position. And to them, that is in danger. Master Modes and the word "accessibility" present to them an existential crisis like no other that they've experienced in Star Citizen. The possibility that, through this lowered barrier of entry, rivals may crop up. Better players may be introduced into the ecosystem, and, dare I even suggest it, defeat may come live on stream before the combat log can be swiftly executed. Truly, a living nightmare to those individuals."
Idk who you talking about, but I will mention something that maybe funny to you. A1 advocated for lower fighter muzzle velocity to shorten their effective range.
I think I very much disagree with you regarding "DPS race" stuff. I actually wrote something on spectrum regarding this. MM as it is currently is a DPS race for a number of reasons (not just speed). Like you mention, aim is one of those factors. That does not take away from the fact that evasion, or player action to avoid damage, has been effectively nullified in SCM. It was not previously, because there WAS the capacity to create distance between yourself and another fighter. This was especially the case in fights involving multiple ships. The battle space is simply too small now in fighter combat (although oddly, fighters can kite large ships better at range due to cone fire, but thats another point). In particular, I see the negative effect of this being that in a group fight, the winning is ALWAYS the one better capable of focusing fire, or simply with greater numbers. Number are and SHOULD be important, but player skill beyond ganking players 1 by 1 should also play a part in determining who wins. If combat speeds were increased slightly, increasing the battle space, and ending the situation in which everyone is constantly in range of everyone else, the game and tactics would be much improved.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I think it's a balance of factors. Personally I'd remove auto-aim for everything but turrets, allowing a much lower skill ceiling for them. That way we solve at least one of the persistent issues of SC combat (that turret gunning is underwhelming). My specific problem with the current balance however (coming from a middling to ok pilot who plays AC solo), is that I will either dominate entirely, or be dominated entirely, depending exclusively on which side gets the first kill or two. Numbers, combined with the ability to focus fire on any target, and a TTK that prevents some quick kills to even the odds, makes fighting even in a 4 v 5 a very bad idea. I don't think it's good for the game (especially the PU), as it requires ganking as the only viable strategy.
Good vid. The one place I gotta disagree is the skill ceiling and longevity. MM absolutely is limiting in comparison to the old model. I hear you about the importance of all the other aspects of the game beyond space combat, and I agree the new change is net positive for the game, but still the new model 100% is a hugely limiting factor in terms of pilot skill. Both things are true. Also, "bigger is better" is just another way of saying "pay to win" in this game. Not hyperbole. Literally.
Fair enough! But do you think it is limiting enough to drive players away? Or are the types of players who like being at the top very likely to stick around regardless?
Yeah for sure it will drive some away, I feel turned off myself tbh, but it will bring in way more than we lose. So it's good for the game, and I'm hopeful the new systems like maelstrom, resources, etc., will spice things up in new ways.
I think any game that relies on it's combat alone to keep players is usually doomed to struggle. A lot of the better games, MMOs anyway, usually have an over arching hook that is a lot more interesting.@@CitizenScott
One way I've heard it described is While the merging ceiling may have declined Reading when to fight, dog fighting skills. Teamwork and knowing when to disengage have all had their skill ceilings increased.
@@gyratingwolpertiger6851 that's actually a good way of putting it. I was mulling over posting a match of me playing with real time commentary to help people understand my thought process in fights.
They need to put floating ammo and repair pickups in the PU and it will fix everything about mastermodes. On a serious note. So glad you called these comments out. Most of them are beyond ridiculous and some ppl are just making up complaints to hate mastermodes because their favorite UA-camr does too. Also the jump scare at 13:22 😄
A1 going Karen mode on CIG was odd but looking at the reaction of the community, I really think A1 did a 200IQ reverse-uno move on players. Pretty sure CIG needed testing but we all know how players are not really into testing for CIG BUT right now they have 2 groups testing trying to either prove A1 right or wrong. All theses concerns are happy problems... If A1 thinks he need speed then (soon enough) he can upgrade with components focusing on speed and agility. with thousands more possibilities. Again, I won't believe A1 isn't aware of all the fine tunings and nobs CIG can play with in the near future, its just a reverse psychology move to get peoples involved. I think. I was happy to hear your sensible take with a zest of irritation from the parrots, bots and bad actors. Don't get caught in the current ;)
Oh yes, training has to be NOT a core thing. I think the game DOES have to cater for player growth and skills expression, but not via the LF vs LF category. That's a mistake! Hopefully, the highest skilled players and PVP is channelled into a specific role not associate with the LF vs LF. Perhaps, this could be given to the anti-capital category, like a torpedo ship in a fleet battle.
Well said! You will be happy to know I am doing a series of videos on the gun ship role in MM soon. AC in particular. I gotta get the time to get everything together and put it out. Wanna try that out, share some knowledge and all. I can't just rant and rave all the time.
It is unironically so important for the game. It shouldn't take a new player a month just to learn how to keep nose on. If it stays that way nobody will play.
So Star Citizen went the same route as Elite Dangerous with space cops enforcing space speed limits. Sad, although understandable. It would be hella fun to zoom around at first or second space speed where you really gotta match speed to intercept someone, else you're gonna just zoom past one another.
@@BuzzCutPsycho But isn't that the point? Faster ship can outrun the slower one by going at higher acceleration. If you really wanna catch someone, you better be faster than they are, so they can't break away and lose you. Or do you mean that engines were so good with acceleration that it wasn't really a problem to break away out of effective range on a whim even if opponent is faster?
Oh my God a space care bear. Criticizing Avenger one's video while Raising the exact same concern for the space Care Bears only in reverse. Oh my God I'm not a hypocrite.
"People complain that master modes feels too slow that there's no drag in space and bla bla... So what speeds do they propose?" [Enter some side rant about game lore and never return that question] I think part of the whole problem in this video is trying to lump everyone into some generic broad "them" category while still suggesting that they're simply influenced by certain content creators. A much more productive conversation would be naming someone in particular... Say Avenger_One or something like that... And responding to the particular proposals or conversation that he honestly wants to have, instead of wildly punching a the invisible "enemies" everywhere.
I was actually pretty particular with everyone in this video. Especially in regards to the sorts who make spectrum posts. I was very specific to not generalize every LF player for example. Most people are dumb sadly.
Well said! And that is the thing, it gives you a good step off point to succeed. You wont be a master right away, but it sure as heck gives you a solid place to start.
I understand their livehod is on the line, A1 lives from youtube content, and not being able to run away for hours and slowly pick stragglers 1 by 1 for a YT montage will hurt his brand a lot, now he will just die or QT away, a hard sell for a brand wanting to look like maverik, hurting his job, i meant he its so focused about his branding, that he named te recommend changes the "Avenger one package", just in case it sticks he can claim to be te creator of MM lol, and he makes good points on his recommendations, but his self center branding kinda ruins it or stains it And thats the problem i think, people are so use to be easy, to just run away, that now that there is SOME danger, they jus call it skilless, the same people that couldn't handled hover mode (for you guys wanting realism), the same guys that dont say anything about the horrible & unsable UI, horrible non interactable sensors, horrible unskilled missile/decoy gameplay and many other problems They are stuck in their own marketing and think that 1v1 light fighter PVP is what SC is, but SC is way more than that, way wider than that, there is much more than hex in gown
There are certain, not all, PvP players in this community who absolutely adore clubbing seals. They relish maintaining their position at the top of garbage mountain, sitting upon their porcelain throne and pointing down at their perceived lessers with meaty, grime-covered digits. And it makes sense; these certain individuals have built an entire brand upon being good at this constantly in development, never-out-of-alpha project. They've spent a lot of time, energy, and in some cases a lot of money on getting the peripherals necessary to maintain their position. And to them, that is in danger. Master Modes and the word "accessibility" present to them an existential crisis like no other that they've experienced in Star Citizen. The possibility that, through this lowered barrier of entry, rivals may crop up. Better players may be introduced into the ecosystem, and, dare I even suggest it, defeat may come live on stream before the combat log can be swiftly executed. Truly, a living nightmare to those individuals.
The fact that avengerone asks CIG to use the "A1 tuning package" is so cringe and like you said, he just wants to give himself credit for "saving star citizen" to build his brand. He cares more about himself than the health of the game. Fact
@@cypher5726 no, everyone has come with those solutions for years now, he it's just taking credit and making marketing, and not everyone wants those solutions at all, very entitled from your part to say that every SC player wants that, kinda shows who else is self centered
@@BuzzCutPsycho yes sadly they are completely walled by their own small perception of the game and can see over it, specially when there is economic interest, and I think that's why CIG has ignore them so hardly, MM is not perfect but it's a star that needs a lot of tuning, and the PU will be very good for that, more than a game mode almost no one plays and is not representative of how the verse interact or plays, let it go live and self adjust Some of the points Brought by A1 (and many other players before) are actually good ideas, I believe once in the PU it will self balance, and I hope it never returns to the old "mutual consent" FM In DCS the best pilot cannot defeat 10 other pilots at will, because the FM is realistic and comprehensive, if you don't feel fear on going 10 v 1, and you can leave the fight at will, it means the system is broken and can be exploited, not that you are to good or too bad, and that's why when In DCS you get ambushed in a 3v1 and you win or let a lone you just scape with your life, it's a memorable feature, because it's not supposed to happen, but you really flew your machine like Maverick to come on top
The archetype complainers are funny. I really do think that if you are dumb enough to sit in front of a prospector and threaten it your shields and systems should be instantly fried. That happened on a video and oh my god the whining from the pvp elite instantly forced CIG to protect them from their own stupidity. Bring THAT back CIG. Please!
@@BuzzCutPsycho If you haven't seen it this It's on youtube from another content creator. Look up" Star Citizen: 3.2 - Prospector Close Quarters Combat! ". The thing that so annoyed me was that this made so much sense for, in a fictional world where you make the trade of pumping everything into a device designed to inject so much energy into rocks that you cause them to explode, and if you do it wrong you wreck your own ship (which someone was talking about at the beginning of the segment) if some idiot were to rock on up and try to seal-club a miner there was a limited way for it to fight back. To anyone that would cry about balance I would say that it could be balanced by in-space making the range of the beam about equal compared to guns (laser or ballistic) and it would take some skill to hit a manuevering target because you have to make contact and obviously in an atmosphere it could be even more limited because miners already don't have unlimited range. Note that the funniest part is that the tail end of that ship lands in the background about 30 seconds after the explosion.
Currently if you're flying decoupled and you boost above the speed cap, you loose the ability to change your vector if you stop boosting. The only thing I would change is I would get rid of the ability to boost above the speed limit. This would fix the problem.
Great points, accessibly (doesn't mean easy to master) and multicrew needing to be a force multiplier makes absolute sense in a MMO. Also doesn't take a genius to figure out that with limited server fps (even at godly server 60fps) huge speeds are still very difficult to account as it's reactionary and will always trail behind. Armor should have been combined with the MM implementation imho, as it certainly makes a difference for big ships (and probably invalidate the damage potential of light fighter, turning them from lethal to mere annoyances)
I don't know what the heck is going on with armor or what is taking so long. I actually worry about what, if any real impact it is going to have for the positive. Is it just another feature that is going to break?
You and me both... Imo Armor is an integral part of the ship 'combat' meta which MM seems to revolve around. Without it how can you correctly balance ship archetypes. Or does CIG plan to rebalance the whole thing when armor comes into play?! This is madness... Armor is just stats; numbers that reduce/negate damage, don't see why it couldn't have been introduced at the same time. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I can't think of any argument to delay it.
@@Nectu-STRMIND Unfortunately, armor isn't just a number for the star citizen devs. As I recall armor was intended to be physics based and basically requires maelstrom. Which is apparently done but not ready for a live release yet.
@@BuzzCutPsycho There is also the possibility that there's major art issues involved as they might actually make the armor visible on each of the ships when fitted onto the hull. Since there might be multiple armor types available to each ship, that could explain in part why it's taking so long.
Don't really have a favorite sc cc, I guess I would pick RiverGrit or DigThat32 or AstroHistorian... anyway I'm not really repeating anyone talking about mm. I haven't logged in for a few weeks and the speed seems a lot better when you aren't used to flying in the standard model. I still don't think either mm or current model is better or worse but I do think MM will make more sense then the current model when we are doing more then just combat but I'm just some dumb hick. I notice the AC score isn't consistently 1 person with 10 kills and 7 with 0, that's probably good for the life of AC. I agree partially with the avenger vid when he said it feels like you have wind resistance in space although to me it's more like being in water then wind resistance. Some people act like they are going to drop some mm patch and then never update the flight model again for the rest of time, I think they're gonna implement and tweak stuff for a while. As for little ships can't do much to big ships, that just seems common sense and I can't understand why anyone would have a problem there, however it would be great if you could gut a stolen snub fighter and weld a bomb to it and fly it into a ship as you eva right in time for some makeshift boarding anti-establishment shenanigans... also I'm an ED refugee so maybe my perspective is... I'm just happy there's no space starfish
MM is going to change so much from now that it will be hardly recognizable. This is the last of my MM content for awhile as a result. Gotta wait for the changes.
The only concerns I have about MM is the big changes it makes. But before we even get it in live and test all the various ships, with many different players, in a practical application, I'm hearing "NO and "not gonna happen", from the community and the devs. All I been hearing is love it or hate it debates. I hate closed minds. This hardened mindset just blocks any potential opportunity for change and balance. Though this comment section seems more optimistic to what balance it can offer in time. I have so many thoughts from what I know of it. Every one is focused on what we have now, which is time to destroy. But we are still missing maelstrom and armor, and time to disable, which could be within seconds of engagement, with the right round of ammo in the right spot. We now have how we move in the verse divided into separate categories, as well as several components from several classes and grades, with sub components, that can open up a whole world of engineering and tuning. Don't forget the plan of engine and thruster tweaks. I recall different grades of fuel being talked about. With all this, two of the same ship, could be tuned to act completely different from each other. Why not an industrial shield generator that could allow some shielding for an evade, for ships that can't fight. Vulture and SRV are pretty helpless as it is. But if "HARD NO" is the mindset, than what is the point of trying? And the purpose of all those engineering options?
The "hard no" from the communities is pretty much a normal part of gaming now whenever personalities attach themselves or are attached to ideas or concepts even good ones. CIG still has no idea what they're going to do with these ships and I predict oxne they start making proper multicrew it will be an absolute disaster. Mark my words torp bombers and ares will invalidate crewed ships. Cig will do cig things. One of the reasons why I am hesitant to make guides in general is that the game is in such balance Flux. I didn't give too much specifics because for all we know this changes next week. You're right. Gotta wait to maelstrom and things like it.
@@BuzzCutPsycho The guides thing cracks me up. So many on the internet over the years that went out of date in a month. But still available to confuse new players, or researchers. Content creators have the power to delete those but don't. The community can be its own worst enemy. And devs can kill a project with a closed mind, or listening to people for the wrong reasons. We have a long road ahead with much more to come. But closed minds in anything really bother me. Witch trials, come to mind. Heck of time to be alive.
@@festersmith8352 I would have deleted all my old out of date ones if it wasn't proven to hurt my channel in terms of the youtube algorithm. I've learned a lot on it in almost a year and it is quite a lot of black magic nonsense.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Ah, that makes sense now. Yeah, bad ideas in the YT algorithm too. Don't suppose YT willing to change, or to close minded? We do what we must with what we have to work with. Or go play in the street I guess. If that is the case, then a new guide video a month might be a good thing for ya.
I have never liked arena commander so I am not the one to say its good or bad or not fun. However for the sake of trying master modes I endured it and yes I did get bored and could not take it anymore. Now does that mean master modes is the reason? Unsure to be honest but I did find it to slow to keep me engaged but I suspect the bigger problem for me is arena commander. Never could like being in some fish bowl and forced to stay there. So I am going to hold my opinions for after this goes to the PU before I bitch anymore than I have. I will say for sure, unless they make it more challenging then it is now I will lose interest and try and find another reason to like playing the game. I did find your comments here to be far to one sided and defending it way to hard, with your limited skill set of course you are going to love it!
Glad you enjoyed it! This one was not too popular. might be MM fatigue or the fact I accidently uploaded two videos in one day... Oh well, I am moving onto some "guides" and stuff for MM next!
To be NOT forced to fight is exactly the right thing. In a sandbox, you should have options and the pirate has to be looking how he catches his victim. If "death of a spaceman" ever will be a thing, I dont want to be locked into every fight till death of either me or the attacker. Even in Pokemon on Gameboy you had the option to flee. MM takes too many options away for almost no benefits except having a better view on the ships. Some ideas are good, like conefire. But all in all it kills the sandbox feeling.
It's hard to say really, on the sandbox thing. I don't think death of a spaceman will ever be a thing. SC may always be a sandbox, and running will always be an option, but once QED comes into MM NAV mode wont be a thing. Is that acceptable do you think?
@@BuzzCutPsychoIm not sure to understand you correct here. If QED can block/interrupt NAV Mode (or even can be activated in NAV), the attacker is always controlling every aspect of an encounter, because he can force the fight onto everyone, because you just can not outrun or outmanouver anyone unless you fly an interceptor. SC has not enough variety (they took out/levelled stats on weapons and components) and MM erases even more variety, because it kills more stats like topspeed and acceleration. Then we have this unspeakable stupid thing called fixed assist, which is only assisting in NOT hitting. Large ships are easier to kill with MM, because you can not longer "form the fight bubble" by going fast, but everyone can circle you and chip your shield away, due to the recharge delay.
QED will disable NAV when it comes in. I get what you're saying, but I gotta be honest I don't struggle in my Connie in AC MM. The turrets suck mostly not just the big ships. And interceptors are not balanced imo I agree @@hix420
@@BuzzCutPsychoOk thx for clarification. So if you can not run, how then is it beneficial for new and casual players (which are not "trained pilots"), to be forced to be seal clubbed in their low dps starter ship each and every time they encounter an unfriendly player? I mean, even if they want to "try" to fight, they are commited to the duel till death because you can just not get away in the current model.
10:10 - I tried a few days ago, and I didn't find the aim assist that good. To be more precise, it feel like the fixed assist was disabled or greatly reduced. I am good enough to aim precisely and still hit. But my friend couldn't do that with enough skill to kill NPCs reliably, nor quick enough. I remember that at the start of MM testing, it was much more easier to hit.
Well, you didn't train in other MMOs since almost every gameplay aspect doesn't have any depth compared to things like mining or fighting in SC, for example. In other games, you simply press or hold one button to gather, mine, do *action*. SC always was a different game, it was promoted as a game with depth and skill-based systems without any in-game skills - it's your knowledge, reaction, hours you've spent in game. We have games like Escape From Tarkov or Elden Ring and they are extremely fun to play because there's a high skill ceiling, these games want to test you and bring challenge. But in case of SC we're starting to lose this experience.
I really don't care about combat that much. I just want to live my space fantasy of parking the Enterprise (Carrack) in an orbit and taking the shuttle (Pisces) down to explore. The 7800m/s you stated is orbital velocity for Earth at a reasonable altitude. For Microtech, that velocity would be about 3000m/s at 100km. It could be lower, but gravity cuts off at 100km so we can't get further out than that at the moment. So here's my proposition: do whatever you want in SCM mode, but give me 3000m/s in NAV mode. Now I know a lot of reasons why that won't happen and all of them are technical: SC isn't a simulation in the sense that every object gets to do its thing all the time: entities that aren't observed are "streamed out" to conserve server resources. An object in a stable orbit never stops moving so could either not be streamed out (bad for performance) or would only move while observed by a player (bad for immersion). But a girl can dream.
Amazing isn't it? The people who complain about the 'unrealistic' reduction in speed have no problem with insanely shallow atmospheres on planets with ostensibly breathable pressures.
Once you bring orbital mechanics to those "I want my space sim" guys, their brains melt, they can't even wrap their heads around pointing "down" will not de orbit you at all 😂
Well you're clearly way smarter than I am about that subject. :D I will be honest I don't care too much about what happens with NAV mode. Maybe I should, but I don't. So I have no opinion to offer you on that speed. There isn't anything wrong with dreaming. There isn't anything bad about wanting what you want. I want to think that they could get similar things within reason through abstraction or "gamey" mechanics. That is how I view the speed limiters and IFCS myself, just abstract ways to get certain mechanics in the game.
Completely agree on this. MM is good for the game. It just needs more tuning, bug fixing, and polish. Anyone who doesn't like the taste of garbage will understand that immediately if they play both MM SQB and LIVE SQB.
I avoid stuff I do not focus too much on, like duels, etc. But I can say I have seen more people in MM now than I have ever before in AC. I am sure a lot of that is because it is new, but I see some retention and some new faces sticking I don't usually see. Unless they're dirty alts.
@@BuzzCutPsychodon't bully my alts :( You're right though, MM SQB is popping off all of the time. I've even managed to get a friend into the game by having him try it.
TLDR I am going to use a sentence I always use. The game we play now is not Star Citizen. The purpose of Master Modes, as you mentioned, is accessibility. We need to look at a much larger picture than current gameplay.
I am going to enter the Soon tm. territory. SQ42 is coming. There is traction with the game and I have a feeling it might release Citcon 2025. This means, if successful, a huge amount of players will come into the game through the single player story. The flight model is the biggest part of the learning curve, since a high amount of mainstream players have the puzzle and FPS part of the game down. But, piloting a ship has a higher learning curve. We see it with noobs everyday.
Master modes is not tailored to current experienced dog fighter players. They are a minority. It is tailored to mainstream players to go to the Flight Academy in several stages. Learn the basics and some, more advanced options... Auto-aim and longer weapon range and lower speeds help to get the satisfaction of a kill in SQ42. The Held the Line presentation showed a subpar pilot killing NPCs. That is the immediate gameplay objective. SQ42 will bring a ton of money to the game, and it is the gateway for SC. It is the correct vision for CIG.
Now, to go back to the current patch is not SC. 100 players per server is a drop in SC. The flight model after onboarding hundreds of thousands of players with SQ42 will be tightened, weapon ranges drop and speeds adjusted. Just will 800 players per shard the game will be different. If they are able to double and triple this we will start seeing what SC is about. Server meshing is just the enabler to economy, capital ships and more gameplay like base building, exploration, data running.... Two systems is a short term target, but Nyx and Odin could appear in 2025 and 2026.
All mentioned above will come fast as the foundation backend, database and networking is in place. To conclude, they have metrics and qualitative data for new players. They are lowering the barriers to come into the game. Citizens are about to double within a year and a half if they release SQ42, which is the cinematic tutorial for people to join the verse.
I'm gonna pin this comment. Well said.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Keep the awesome vids coming :)
My favorite criticism of MM so far is that the person doesn't like the floating wrenches and ammo.
LOL I did not see that. Yes, we must bring those to the PU as well! :D
Do you know how to pilot a ship? Lol
Current MM to much aim assist. I aim to the engines and bullets nudge to the center of the ship. Not cool remove aim assist. If to hard for you to hit use auto gimble, the reason he was created for people that cant aim
@@WRL-J0rgeN I'm not a huge fan of aim assist i promise you that
@@WRL-J0rgeNDoes the aim assist matter that much when weapon spread is so high anyway? I mean, everyone is for removing the aim assist, sure. But does it matter currently that much?
I feel like engineering gameplay is going to impact the light fighter debate a lot.
At the moment, taking the odd stray shot from a larger turret only makes the LF pull out for a little bit until the shields regenerate. In the future, taking hits like that could mean you suddenly only have half the power output or your coolers burned out etc. That's going to make you think twice if you want to reengage if you can even get away in the first place.
In a multicrew ship, you can send someone to do a quick repair and return the ship to a more or less optimal fighting condition.
I hope you can "repair" the ship from the inside. Realism be damned. Just something to give them an edge and to encourage the multi-crew part.
That's one of the major advantages of ships with interiors vs fighters. Ie internal access to components vs having to Eva outside the ship to do the same repairs.
Eg MSR, Vanguards, Connie's, Corsairs ect
@@BuzzCutPsycho
Of course. And I wonder if the Vanguard will end up like that too.
@@BuzzCutPsycho It should. A core angle of its lore is it's redundancy and ability to take a hit. Plus having hull that's partially at least made out of tungsten.
The Warden itself has an engineering station for the crew to use as well.
They out themselves when they say you "cant disengage". Disengage is the B button on my keyboard.
True! And it works better now.
14:00 - To me, it look like a lot of people are confusing "easier to enter" and "lowering the kill floor" with "lowering the kill ceiling".
Hence all these people complaining about the "lower skill ceiling".
Yes. They are 100% confusing that and you are correct.
No the issue is that cig is getting the opposite results of what they want to achieve. Everyone wants a low skill floor with deep gameplay, it’s just difficult to design.
@@BuzzCutPsycho 100%, I am just confused and bored. 100%.
@@teahousereloadedWell at least they 100% managed to get the engagement distances closer with the lower speed, right, RIGHT? ;-)
But on a more serious note, I applaud them to a change that makes ganking so much easier, as old EVE-Player I can appreciate a good gank. It makes the role of multi-crew ships as objectives to be taken so much clearer when they can not engage anything basically, but do hold out now longer when under attack. So overall master modes might be still an improvement. Calling in help from fighters when you get into trouble transporting something worth transporting becomes more reasonable when you are not able to fight back, but at the same time are able to at least protect your critical systems somewhat.
So maybe, just maybe mm is the way to go despite all the things we are going to lose. Maybe.
Here's my take: CIG is going for more WW2 naval style battles. Fleet v Fleet combat. In this case, a single light fighter is going to certainly have an impact, but they aren't going to be the single deciding factor. Fleet management & teamplay are going to be the deciding factor more so than individual skill.
That's what I'm hoping for and want from this game. Everyone to have a role.
you notice none of this was an issue or topic until the ISC said people like MM? I was asking A1 for his thoughts on MM the moment they hit live AC..... nothing, not a word. then ISC dropped, and "WAAAAAAH"
Of course the ISC people like MM because it makes the game playable for more people. A1 doesn't want that.
Well obviously an opinion straight after a release on AC would be useless. You need time with it, experiment, and try out as much as you can. Now that people have had time with it, they have informed opinions they are expressing them. I wouldn't trust anyone with little to no experience in it.
I would not either. But I wish more people would get in and put in the time.@@Chronoclysm17
Back in the day of 3.11-3.13 when I learned to PvP, I did it in the PU. I would get a trespassing ticket at a comm array to turn red, then waited around PO for people to attack me and I could claim space castle doctrine.
In regards to players disengaging at speed, they don't even need that. If there isn't a Mantis or Antares around; if a person doesn't want to engage in combat in the PU, they can just quantum away. Way back I got jumped at port in and Ion en route to do ERTs by a Gladius. I started a lazy barrel roll while I decided where I was going to quantum. There was no real threat to me, as I could leave at will.
There is no commitment in PU and you're right. That is my concern and one of the things I want MM to fix. I always just tri-cord and leave.
@@BuzzCutPsycho IMO it's ok that you can escape alive.... BUT the more you delay the decision to run, the more punishment you should get. Otherwise you can just run, recharge and come back infinitely. No consequences!
Hi, yes this whole discussion is getting absolutely crazy. If I wasn’t busy making videos for Chrono Trigger, I would weigh in.
I think you playing Chrono Trigger is likely a better use of your time tbh.
@@BuzzCutPsycho fair enough. My youngest two daughters got into this game very recently, so I’m doing a play through and making a Videos for them while they are playing in Chrono Trigger for the first time.
People just fear change, even more people who are at the top and feel this change will "allow" others to reach their precious golden throne; MM raises the skill floor, but also the skill ceiling with it being accesible as you say so its a good movement forward and indeed will receive more tweaks and etc.
And it is true we need more buff to turrets to fully benefit going as gunner, i hope they give more autotargetting or alike so a crewed ship is "more defendable" than having 2 or more ships of the same type covering eachother.
Good vid as always!
Thanks! Did you hear turrets are bugged? Apparently CIG is aware of it and we will get getting a fix next update. Or so I was told. That may be why gunners suck.
@@BuzzCutPsycho You are welcome! And had no clue about it but has total sense now! I do hope we get a fix and they are amazing
If someone was flying at 2000+ m/s in space how quickly would they be able to stop without dying? It’s logical that high speed, quick stopping or even opposing thrust to change direction quickly and pinpoint manoeuvrability isn’t something that a human brain could withstand at those sorts of speeds?
Oh no doubt. People do not think about that though. Does not fit there narrative.
Before patch 3.5 you could quickly stop ship with boost. and then they added this stupid inertia after patch 3.5 they totaly destoy flyght model. Finally they realize their mistakes and with MM they at least redused speeds so now not necessary stop quick because speed not so fast. i just dont know how they gonna fix this inertia with nav mode all they need to do is just increase power of brakes because now brakes not makes any sense at hight speed with large ships.
@@arthurvartanov2573 brakes do kinda suck don't they ?
@@BuzzCutPsycho Not only brakes whole boost system sucks. It must have mutch more power for trusters and main engines.Thats why ships larger than LF cant normaly fly at hight speeds. But if thay wanna keep MM at low speeds its ok they just need remove this stupid cooldown from shields.Before 3.5 shield was regenerating no matter you got hit or not.With so low speeds you just cant regen shield because always get hit.
@@arthurvartanov2573 agreed. I would love a constant shield regeneration personally
When people talk about "dps race" they mean that there is not much you can do through maneuvering to prevent damage. So all you do is apply damage. You just aim and click until one of the two explodes.
Pretty much always been that way.
@@BuzzCutPsycho no it hasn't. In love you can maneuver at close range to get people to waste their clip. Not talking about corkscrews. You can waste people's clips by pulling through their nose.
I am very pro MM but o am concerned about the loss of maneuvering ability of light fighters, only because they are the base that all other maneuverability will be based on. Once we get up to cap ship size we are going to have 50ms movement and a turn rate that will take minutes.
@@citizenzero5437I think your ability to avoid damage now depends on more than just your agility.
Situational awareness
Coordination with allys
Teamwork
I agree with this. It is why I mentioned team not 1v1, I don't mention 1v1.
I believe it is all balanced around team work now my friend
The FUNDAMENTAL problem of the Connie is having its main weapons fixed forward firing (FFF). FFF weapons in space are, to put it mildly, moronic. They were a sop to the early state of the game, where everyone wanted to fly their own ship and nobody was really interested in team play. Never mind that the state of the game could not support it either. Maybe they make a touch of sense on very small and nimble ships, but not on anything larger. Look at the development of armored fighting vehicles in the 20th century and see where we are today. Early tanks often had large caliber guns on sponson mounts with limited directional capability which proved less effective than a primary turret. Yes some anti tank vehicles or self propelled artillery have limited mounts, but that is more about cost and ease of production than improved combat efficacy. Or look back even further to the development of ironclad warships. The pattern is clear - primary armaments should be mounted in a manner which provides the greatest fields of fire and rapid target acquisition. Why be required to maneuver a large ship in order to bring weapons to bear? So much faster and accurate to simply move the weapons. In the real world this is also less stressful on the craft itself. The Connie should be the same, those four large weapons should be on one or two turrets mounted towards the front of the ship (chin and/or top mount) and the two smaller defensive turrets should be further back for defending the tail position.
FFF is an issue but honestly I usually use it in manual gimbal against light targets. Despite the ROF debuff it gets I tend to shoot down the light fighters before they can get around me. I may actually do a video about it.
I totally agree with you btw, I think manual gimbals need to be less crap though.
It's finally starting to click good video. Like Virgil said in his video which is the Mantra we should all go by which is let's master master modes before we pick it apart. SC is turning a corner let's see what happens bring on Master Modes.
Yup. It is finally all coming together. I plan to make a Connie video for the hell of it next. MM Connie that is. LOL.
@@BuzzCutPsycho your content is unique and necessary and I know everyone is listening
If my Ares Ion meets an Arrow, that Arrow should pop with 1 or 2 hits of the size 8 gun. Arrow turns faster and is more nimble, but should need a hell of a lot of shots to take me down.
I agree. Good luck hitting it though ;)
Considering the Arrow is supposed to be the Ares counter your best bet should be a combo of missiles and wingmates over hoping for a lucky shot.
Afteralll your handling only needs to be good enough to land shots on gunships and up target wise.
I think the reference to World of Tanks and World of Warships was appropriate. They are able to make all ships, of all sizes, viable and fun. It's absolutely possible, and the time of the light fighter meta needs to end. I want big ships to finally come into their own and be fun for all crew members. Light fighters still have their place, they should still be fun. But they cannot be the only option anymore.
WoT and WoWS are great examples of how to give everything an archetype and a role. Not saying copy the game obviously, but the design concept is there.
Considering that SC is a flight game and we don't have a overbearing HP bar on our head. Referencing War Thunder is a better idea. WoT's philosophy applied to flight, WoWP, was terribly mediocre.
@@nekomancer4641 i did reference both. But mostly for the archetypes. Comically most everything in WT feels same same due to high tier game play. Imo.
@@BuzzCutPsychoyeah WT high tier gameplay is meh. Missile homogenized the game.
Propeller era was the real golden age of WT.
Based. I still play my F15C/F16C for the lulz though. Prop really was the most fun.
Also: remember that people ( ac sweaters -like me btw) telling you that skill ceiling has been lowered in master mode are the one who suck at … master mode. Do the math.
The match checks out. If you're saying it is good I am going to believe it is good.
Great video, I think it's fair to say the average player has absolutely no interest to sit in AC for even half an hour, especially if it means being farmed by a sweatlord in a Gladius. The average player wants to enjoy the actual content in the actual game. PVP is something that happens and it ABSOLUTELY needs to be viable to upskill yourself in the PU. I bet most backers have 3-4 hour as most a week to play and they are being scared away because they know, as it stands today, you need 100s of hours of combat experience to even stand a chance not to get swatted like a fly by a LF if you do choose to take the fight instead of just running.
AC has actually created this problem. I briefly touched on it but beyond testing I feel like AC is a net negative for the game in the future.
Change exposes the weak. Competent people can adapt.
And most of the competent people will.
100%. And then there is also the chunk of people that were absolute crap all through 3.23 and prior - now they will say there were in the top 1% of pvp dogfighters ever to log into the verse ..but Now this stupid MM ruined everything.
'You didnt beat me - i lost because of this horrendous Master Modes.. i was TopGun before the changes and people used to write songs about me.. random groups and orgs i would single handedly kill in 20 v 1 would write me letters and tell me that I am what they aspire to be.. now i cant win a fight vs an argo cargo ..skill hath been removethed' !!!!!!!!
😤 if MM doesnt make my cutter the meta ship, im not for it!
Dude it will be a flying brick how could it not be meta?
Good video. Have a like. I've been quite appalled at the extreme amount of absolutely disingenuous and/or ignorant arguments I've seen from the vocal and obnoxious anti-MM crowd, bordering and fully sliding into the realm of propaganda and outright lies. They're so desperately terrified by the idea that the incredibly flawed meta they're invested in (which has always and explicitly been a placeholderI) changing, that they've become absolutely pathetic.
Among the bad takes I'd add the "slower = lower skill ceiling." People who fly WW1 and WW2 fighters in simulators would want to have a word with these people. I guarantee many of them are much, much better pilots than any the self-professed "top aces" and sweats in Star Citizen.
The skill ceiling is infinite at any speed. In something as complex and nuanced as air (or space) combat, there will always be room for improvement, no matter how good you are. Anyone who thinks they can reach a "skill ceiling" in any kind of flight combat, regardless of speed, simply doesn't know what the words mean.
A lower speed cap doesn't create a lower skill ceiling. It simply partly shifts the balance of the skills favored away from pure muscle memory, reflexes, and twitch, and moves the needle toward precise maneuvering, tactics, teamwork, planning ahead of your opponent, and so forth. A different skillset is not equivalent to less skills.
Thanks man. Would you be interested if I start doing some Connie master mode PvP with commentary? Genuine question here. The one I have recorded actually mentions team work and maneuvers like you mention...
For what it's worth, that's something I'd love to see, even if it also included tactics for the vanguard etc as well.
Pretty much all of the space combat guides are largely focused on fighter versus fighter with very little attention paid to gunships or multi-crew craft as a whole.
To echo a comment, I saw in one of the master modes videos or spectrum threads somewhere, we have a whole lot of fighter aces but very few gun ship aces or heavy fighter aces
@@BuzzCutPsycho
@@gyratingwolpertiger6851 ill begin working on it this week
You know I never once thought about equating the speed of ww1 and ww2 flight games to skill
That is an absolutely excellent example and talking point. This is why I love to read the comments here. Well done. 100%.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Absolutely. I don't see how any kind of video showing good teamwork would not be useful :D
"realistic" space combat in the far future would (given interstellar travel, interplanetary society etc.), likely take place at speeds that exceed a significant proportion of the speed of light. Even at 1% c (1 % of the speed of light), we are talking in m/s equivalents roughly 3 000 000 m/s. Realism just is not an argument.
Ranges would also be insane.
@@BuzzCutPsycho it would make for an interesting game to be sure lol, just not a star citizen game
I for one am ready for the Forever War
@@nelson460 only because you want to be on that one planet where everyone is like you IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN
Oh I wish there was a limit to our acceleration. Maneuvering is waaaaay too fast and twitchy. Ships have no weight at all to them.
I can agree with that 100%
If CIG were turning this game into Starfield, they'd fully release the PU right now and then let modders finish their job for them. Master Modes will work. I still think the next big priority they should focus on should be ship armor; no light fighter should be engaging a HH or other Corvette and knocking out its turrets easily. Large ships should outperform 2-3 man fighter gangs, unless they're all heavy fighters. That's not a DPS race. That's a ship filling its role. Its a large ship. It has turrets. It should be a damn challenge.
Yeah this is nothing like SC in any way LOL
When people bring up "realism" in video games, it reminds me of an excerpt from an interview with a Tripwire Games dev regarding Rising Storm 2. I think it went something along the lines of
"We aren't aiming for realism. We are aiming for authenticity."
In other words, it is more important in a video game that things *look and feel* right than are actually right. It's more important that space flight in Star Citizen looks right, feels right, and behaves in a manner consistent with its own rules that it establishes for itself than for it to be strictly realistic.
That is the best quote. Have another pin.
Every time someone brings up "realism" remind them that realistic space battles would be shooting missiles at a target you will never see. Also your ship would be a very boring rectangle or cylinder.
People never think about that. Aint no BVR in Star Citizen!@@RasakBlood
In other forms of entertainment (books, movies, etc) this is called 'willing suspension of disbelief.' Which is hard to define, but you know it when you see it. Or you really notice it when it is violated. My word for it is 'plausibility' but you are also quite right that it requires some sort of internal consistency and predictability.
@@RasakBlood This. I've never believed that a real space battle would be like a WW2 airplane dogfight. It would be more like a submarine battle. Something a lot of people would probably find 'boring.
The Devs have Literally said they want AC to be a Simulator within your ship. For "training" purposes. So you hit the head on that one. I like the aspect of training, builds team work, skill and as a leader you can see peoples strengths and weakness first hand. As well as gives you a purpose to have that ship with that simulator with in your ORGS fleet. This gives you a Collective Goal to reach as an ORG. Prices for these Huge Ships should be quite High "imo". This allows us to better our chances in experiencing multiple types of content as well as giving you a reason to log on day to day and help save up for this ship that can make your org better than another. With other MMO's you can run the same instance until you remember it by heart but with Star Citizen, In the future with dynamic NPC behavior. Flanking, Bounding, Etc, The experience will be different every time and you as a team will be better suited to take upon this sudden change in the situation with the bonus of training with no risk within a simulator. (given death of a spaceman happens, Loot/Gear being lost) This may also be applied to tactics on dealing with Apex Predators that may have specific means or difficulties of killing. This game has so much potential to be anything players want it to be. Want to be a Tourist. ok, here. Want to be a Military G.I, Boom, Kick some ass. Professional Fauna Hunter? why not?
I have no issue with the training per say but it being a separate minigame that I am spending all my time in to hone the skills is my issue with it. Then again I am against any minigame in an MMO that is totally separate from the MMO itself. I am weird like that. But I am totally pro training for orgs. I am actually looking forward to private lobbies for that very purpose.
SC may be the first game I "train" for but I hope it isn't mandatory.
Dibs on Military G.I. btw. ;)
You’re first take I’ve literally never heard anyone say
Really?
Go to love how often you hear about pve players having main characters syndrome when you have PvP players thinking ships should perform outside of their roles. Eg M50s and Razors being used as fighters.
I think people use those for pvp too in pu due to speed.
I read alot of global chat while playing, and I know the most vocal critic of MM is in the server because he's the saltiest I've ever seen when he loses, blaming game mechanics on his opponent and trashtalking more than anyone else. So there's a certain amount of schadenfreude to enjoy when the biggest real criticism is the size of the targeting reticle. This is all major progress, and I can't wait to see some of the large scale battles of the future.
Well that guy is a doofus. ;) but if they're upset the system is working imo.
Well said, thanks for taking the time.
My pleasure!
Space do have drag. The space is not empty but full of plasma state hydrogen. Another huge energy is the solarwind, one of reason asteroids spin. So unless you are in stellar void where the drag might not be noticable, the solar system is full of moving particles that would propel the craft or create form of drag.
I didn't know space had drag.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Have you ever wondered about the northern lights (aurora)? Those are highly energetic particles hitting ionosphere. Same stuff hitting a space sail can propel a spacecraft. Its like a wind, does wind creates drag?
I never thought about that, but I trust your expertise on this. :D
Even when I'm not playing SC I still watch and agree with your videos.
Really, I mean it. God. SC turns me into an egotistical prickhead and I'm sorry if I ever came off that way.
I won't comment on MM, only that I want to help friends, and MM makes that easier. I would much rather take a supportive role. I am rambling.
Nah you have never come off as anything but pleasant to me. :D
I and another Teammate helped another Teammate with his CrimeStat once. Was in my F8C, he in his Vanguard and a M50 come across. The M50 smacked us both, I in my F8C could not outrun or outturn him, i coudnt even get Guns on him for me then 0.5sec everytime, he killed us/me after a while because 900-1,200m/sec fights are "great"... So yeah.. MM will not make a Heavy Fighter like the F8C godlike BUT a stupid RACE Plane can trolland Kill a Military, Heavy Armed ship? C'mone dude..
MM will make heavy fighters pretty viable I think. The Vanguard is pretty okay currently. What you described is why PU PvP sucks so hard too. IMO.
I swear UA-cam ate my comment so here's a sad repost.
Everything you have said makes sense. The limits make sense because the human body can take so much and lets be honest people would be complaining about dying in a dogfight due to the G forces turning their guts into soup.
For all the realism and the DPS race they destroyed Missiles in the game. I rather swap out my Missile Racks for 2 more weapon hardpoints or upsize the weapon hardpoints on a ship.
The biggest complaint I hear is this "my ship cannot 1 v 10 heavy fighters anymore...SC fix this" that's how I translate all the MM light fighter crybabies. When shields 2.0 and Armor 1.0 comes to the verse...its just going to get worse for light fighters.
YT has been eating mine too and it is my channel.
I think once you see heavies such as the Scorpius and Hurricane you will see light fighters even more screwed. I really think they're going to have an easy to mass benefit as well as an anti bomber role. I hate to predict things like this I cannot see a world where the hurricane or scorpious cannot just eat a single lf alive.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Oddly I've done some testing with a Scorp....I have a split Throttle setup (since I love using the F-14) so I went in and see if I could tinker with the engines and set them....Let me put it this way the Scorp is a hidden monster once you understand how to split throttle and cross throttle her engines. You can out pivot light fighters...although you're slamming yourself with Massive Gs.
Too fancy for me, I will stick to gunning. ;) I seen people doing that in WarThunder I think too.@@grygaming5519
@@BuzzCutPsychoto be fair, it is expressly what they are built towards countering at least as far as I'm aware.
It's also requires two people to properly prove that shit as well
@@BuzzCutPsycho I've played too much battlefield. I can command, fly, use armor and ground pound. Although now I find myself playing more into the Command and Flight role. I just need a good gunner on my Scorp to take advantage of her firing arcs. I think my go-to ships are going to be the F8C when I complete SQ42 and my Scorp...although I'd love to see a medium single seat variant of the Scorpius. A bit more agile...but slightly less upgunned.
I think most people know what a DPS race is. And I don't think they are whining about dps race because of auto aim. They are whining about dps race because ship speeds are so slow you can't dodge incoming fire. Thus, it's a dps race because both combatants are for sure gonna hit their shots.
The auto aim is why evasion isn't a thing. You're not fighting the players aim but rather the perfect systems aim.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Uhm I wonder if we are talking about the same thing. There was no whining about dps race in legacy. There was whining about dps race in master mode. Because the speeds were so slow you couldn't evade. If they still have auto aim in master modes that is certainly a problem because slow speed + auto aim makes it absolutely impossible to evade for sure. But still, with slow speeds it's still hard to evade. Especially if the ship is large.
Anyway, you are basically confirming the whiners point that it is a dps race because there is no evasion. Most guns wins. How much $ was that F8C again? :)
as a pure PU player when I play SC, I can say for certain that it cannot be stressed enough how important it is to have the accessibility to new players in the PU. AC & SM are intended as minigames, not alternate games. you're supposed to go through the PU before you get to AC & SM.
I get it. I feel you. Sometimes I feel like AC is a mistake outside of testing. That isn't to say I advocate for its removal. But it wouldn't be something I'd would have kept once PU became a thing.
@BuzzCutPsycho THANK YOU. You are doing important work educating the community to withstand the ridiculous propaganda onslaught of certain influencers against MM right now. I am actively playing almost daily as well as actively participating on spectrum for the past 3 months now and so many times I have found myself discussing points about the current PU or AC with people that in the end turned out, haven't been playing the game for YEARS! But at the same time slinging arguments your way with the utmost conviction, when in fact they are just replicating what they heard on UA-cam.
One thing I would like to add to the archetypes discussion, although in principle I'm sure you already know this. Every good PVP game must bring up a certain rock-paper-scissors mechanic and archetypes are representing just that. Right now LF's are just the Shotgun, when even the termin "LIGHT Fighter" invokes they were never intended to be that way. It just is the part of the skill layer that comes down to (ship) knowledge and tactical decision making. It allows CIG further on to tweak the entire system in a consistent way, whereas now every ship is individual and if you tweak one thing, you break another (like currently evident in the hornets unwanted acceleration boost).
The role of a light fighter should really be to provide point defense by strength in numbers (price being a factor as well in balancing), besting Medium Fighters and Heavy Fighters, as well as non-combat ships. Interceptors are the defacto counter to LFs, but can't hold any ground and their Hit & Run is ultimately bested by larger ships shield regen rates. Medium Fighters are designed to be multirole capable and fight both smaller and bigger ships, but not excelling at any of those. Heavy fighters are meant to punch above their size. I am stopping here, but of course the list goes on.
As with turrets. If anything needs to become OP in SC it is turrets. Or they simply won't get used. Experimenting with gimbals and everything is all fun and dandy. But I am quite positive that the best way to increase people actually wanting to be turret operators is by increasing weapon sizes for all turrets across the board by 1 or 2 classes. As someone on the forums mentioned= 1+1 should equal three when it comes to turrets. So if you have 2 players manning a ship, they should be as strong as 3 ships of the same type with just a pilot.
Great comment. By all means feel free to share this video around. I always welcome more eyes on the content.
I enjoy your idea and understand of the roles and balance. Particularly the part where you mention turrets needing to be borderline OP to be used. Right now in MM I don't even let people gun my Connie. It is worthless. They're better off in their own ships.
It really bothers me that people form opinions based on what others say and don't get in and test themselves. I don't expect people to agree with me all the time but I do expect people to form their own opinions and try things out.
Real quick on the shields. Big ships are having serious staying power due to the shields recharge being turned off by any damage. Even a light hit. It makes big ship on big ship combat feel weird and shield face tanking awkward. I'm actually working on some Connie MM videos that I want to try out. A new format. But you will see it there.
Thanks again man. Replies and comments like yours actually make me smile.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I mean my on the fly categorization might not be accurate, but just a general illustration of how things could turn out in the end.
TTK is currently a bit high on fighters. I did like the War Thunder damage model, but I see how in SC death is supposed to be way bigger a thing.
Also I am seeing varying results in hits vs. damage. Sometimes you do 1000 dmg in one strafe, sometimes you just do a 100 or so even when most hits connected. Even in your video there were cases where it wasn't really clear, as the target was close enough and not erratically moving. Other times you are completely unloading your entire battery on a hornet or so and it still survives with barely a scratch.
On the other hand, I LOVE the tankiness of the Heavy Fighter and above, as it provides the necessary room (=time) to figure out certain strategies and change tactics accordingly instead of just blowing up for making 1 bad initial decision. And also the effect that many players will just not attack you in the first place as it is just too bothersome :D
I also liked that you pointed out how it is not hard to aim, but hard to hit right now, and I agree that this is kind of weird still.
It might be one of those things where you can really build up skill by learning to how make those damage-dump-killshots compared to just blurping out some damage. So it might not be a candidate for reworking. I need more training to assess that.
Contrary to you, learning new things is what I love about gaming and when it stops, I usually stop playing those games. A small amount of training can help with that. although the PU right now is quite PVP friendly to learn in.
Whereas a game like Tarkov is so brutal you absolutely need an arena mode to get quick action and experience.
I've had a similar thought myself with regards to complaints about the buccaneer Meta under master modes.
It's not a meta Gladius pilots. It's your counter.
I have a full time job already. I play video games to relax and escape the stress of all the things I am responsible for. I play Star Citizen because of it's detail and fluid experience, as well as being the closest I'll ever get to space travel. Some of the people expressing their opinions are streamers/content creators and getting paid to do this. SC, for all intents and purposes IS their job. It's all well and good for them to want a product that feeds their ego and their needs, but they're being selfish in not considering that the rest of us don't have that kind of time. I'm not interested in something being so complex that it feels like coming home and sitting down to another time-punch. I also don't want it to be so simple that it isn't interesting, but telling me I'm going to need to dedicate my play-time to "Git Gud" is moronic.
Pretty good point about this being their job and need it to be harder. I never looked at it that way.
@@BuzzCutPsycho The potential perspective of another is the first thing often ignored. It's difficult, since we're spend so much time trying to properly communicate or own ideas, to spend additional time considering other people that are doing the same. Never attribute malice where ignorance or incompetence is in greater supply. I'm paraphrasing, but the spirit of the quote is there.
No the quote is perfect and is entirely applicable here. I think they are starting to see the other side of things though slowly but surely.
14:50 Warframe have a training area. It doesnt take away from anything. It's optional for players that need it then don't want to practice in a live setting
Gotcha. It is also a PvE grinder game though with no stakes.
The UI sucks and the ships should fly slightly faster.
I don't know about the speed but yes the UI is TERRIBLE lol
I think the only way to fix the auto aim issue is to make weapons have unlimited or extreme ranges but outside of their current maximum range they have zero aim assist or bullet bending at all, and we all know any gun that repeatedly fires would never hit a follow up shot at 5 km away versus moving ship without massive amounts of bullet bending.
This system will allow teams to do suppressive fire, and saturate areas and use ship of the line tactics, making multi cruise ships very valuable in area denial, defensive and breakout assault roles.
Currently the ranges are too short for a light fighter to miss a big ship, And the big ships are slow, so it compounds the issue.
When you were in the Gladius at 2 km away, spinning around firing repeaters … you’re not skilled, it’s auto-aim.
So this system would reward those pilots that are kiting the heavy if they stay in a narrow range band just like Eve online, where a heavy assault cruiser that was four times smaller than a battleship could beat it if it stayed in a tiny range window and out traverse their guns.
But the larger ships have the ability to change course and cut engines and flip around and decoupling mode to shake the light fighter who is now going to be out of their range band and have zero Ami assist while the large ship will have 40 to 80% more range and simply melt him.
This is actually really good feedback and I didn't think of some of it. I'm putting notes down for it now. I did not play EVE, but what you described sounds really elegant. A good potential solution. Think it could work in a game like sc?
The auto aim is a huge issue and you're totally spot on. It is actually the "magnetism" or bending as you call it. It is obnoxious.
For a long time ship choices haven't really mattered or had any role-based consequences outside of is it a light fighter or not?
You definitely do get a little bit of a vibe of people being too used to being able to use ships in ways that they're not supposed to be. For example, Avenger one complaining about not being able to dogfight in an aurora ie a starter ship.
Yes the starter ship part was weird. I want to tackle the perceived Buccaneer issue now. Interceptors are a result of objectiveless combat not the ship itself. I will start writing for it tonight.
16:35 Tbf, permadeath is coming, so training in AC will about training or sport without the worry of lowering your IVS. Just playing in the PU without training will almost certain shorten your character's lifespans. Those other games you mentioned don't have permadeath and aren't life sims.
I really don't think SC is going to end up with perma death man. Too much has changed.
Way too many carebares play this game, they'll never do permadeath, it would kill the player base.
@@escapetarkov3838 i would never do permanent death
Yeah a lot of people don't understand how a gladius would be able to take out caterpillar back in the 3.0 days it was so silly and annoying. But your Connie take is the same one I had for the Aries it was really no need to Nerf the Aries back in the day because it made no sense people were really arguing how a arrow shouldn't be taken out by a size 7 cannon but had nothing to say about getting taken out by a railgun born Nova tank with one shot. Multi crew be really the strongest ships in a game to be honest lightfighter shouldn't even be able to fight anything over a medium solo I can understand if it's a wing of three or more but solo is ridiculous. But I'm glad cig and other people are starting to notice how silly this was back in the day when arrows can kill hammerheads😂
I actually wonder what balance issues the Ares will bring about when it finally comes in. To Master Modes that is. Poor Hammerhead already sucks as it is :(
@@BuzzCutPsycho I guess because the SCM speeds for the Aries are going to be the balance that and maybe Nerf the distance but if they do that that's definitely going to cause a problem so I've been wondering that myself. Maybe it will become a heavy version of The Bucc for The inferno I'm not sure what they're going to do with the ion
Only way to find out is to test but my first predictions are annihilation for any large ship.
I don’t know the answers but I feel like ship armor/shield types/etc should be fleshed out before altering the flight model this heavy, my main gripe is flying defenseless while in Nav mode while exploring. My opinions are changing as points or being put out, so I appreciate vid’s like this, but it kinda feels like being pigeonholed for PvP purposes, when that’s only 1 aspect of many. Hopefully it gets figured out proper tho cuz I’m in for the long haul, and being “realistic” is the main draw 🤙🏻
It may never be realistic but it could at least be authentic or "believable" in a sense. I am also interested to see how MM works out for the other non-combat ships.
Pilot, Turret Gunners - Shoot and Maneuver. Must be filled or ship goes dead in the water. Pilot is the master of all ship movement. Can receive power boosts from Engineering or Science stations. Emergency power to thrusters to help keep enemy ship targeted in-front of the ship. Receives targeting bonuses from Science station that is doing Sub System Targeting. Receives emergency power from engineering when Emergency Capacitors are full and able to boost a downed shield to half, or instantly recharge a weapon group for better sustained dps.
Engineering Station - Balances Power, Creates Power Boosts to reinforce a down shield that goes from 15% to 65%, At the cost of the Emergency Capacitor Charge that takes TIME and SKILL to charge up to get this boost. Consider it Emergency Power Transfer from systems that are at 100% and do not need further charging. Extra Power management = Bonus to Power System the Engineer Chooses. Shields, Weapons, Thrust. Transfer Power from Life Support to Weapons when Weapons take damage and do not charge as fast. Can exit station to go repair as necessary.
Science Station - Targeting, Scanning enemy shields frequency for better penetration, Scanning enemy ship for better sub system targeting. Relaying that info to the targeting computers of the turrets, and main guns. Searches surroundings for natural advantages like a Gas Cloud that would damage any shields below level 2. Can exit station to go repair as necessary.
Many Fighters will not have access to this kind of team gameplay. This is the reason that a single fighter vs a Coni or equivalent would never stand a chance. The Options and Systems the bigger ships have are not contained in a single fighters hull where the fighter pilot would need to exit into a spacewalk to repair. When a fighter is near dead, it must retreat, and that is only if its engines were not targeted by the science station on the bigger ship.
That is stuff I would love to see, I just hop all that extra work ends up paying off if CIG ever gets close to that.
I've been saying for the longest time that "I would rather have 4 people each in separate Corsairs instead of 1 fully crewed Corsair". It shouldn't be like this but it is; in the current state of the game fully crewing a single ship feels like a punishment over having everybody piloting separate ships.
It's possible this will be fixed with Engineering and Armor allowing crews to extend the survivability of multicrew ships for far longer than a single seater ever could, providing additional reasons to actually have a crew as opposed to just having turret gunners and almost shifting the game into a more "Sea of Thieves"-like. Sure if you're good, you can beat a 4-man Galleon in a solo Sloop, but it's an uphill resources/APM battle, where as a solo Galleon vs a solo Sloop would be an easier match for the Sloop user; I think this same principle should apply to the "crewed gunships vs light fighters" debate.
It does not make any sense for a small single seater craft to be able to take down a fully crewed heavy weapons platform like a Constellation, Corsair, or Hammerhead. In the current state of the game, I would automatically assume a light fighter in the hands of the right pilot would handily be able to solo each of those; this WILL change in the future, and that is a good thing. Star Citizen is intended to be an MMO, and a classic trait of MMO balancing is team composition, of which Star Citizen will eventually be balanced around. Light fighters will still be good in large scale engagements, as they are cheap to field and easy to transport en masse to a battlefield via hangars/carriers. Light fighters are not intended to be 1v1 kings like they currently are, they are intended to be deployed in outnumbering swarms as support for larger ships.
I agree with you 100% and I want very desperately for a reason for players to want to be in a crew with the Connie not off on their own in their own. Sadly I wonder if cig can even accomplish that without breaking the ship.
We don't know what MM will feel like until 3.23 goes live. Surely, over time it will get tweaked. We are mostly only talking about LF vs LF in SCM as if that's the be all and end all of space flight interactions. The first iteration of MM in live 3.23 will be a hugh compromise since there are so many game systems and tuning not done and will not be done for 3.23 live. So much focus on the LF category! It's annoying.
You're totally correct. LF still has it's place but you are seeing some more guys try out the mediums and heavies now too. I have been doing a lot of work with the Connie as of late and plan to put some stuff together for it video wise.
I always thought that is should be that bigger crewed ships should absolutely wreak a single fighter of any kind but a small squadron should wreak a lone bigger ship within reason.
I would agree. Right now it is totally out of whack atm tho.
But Avenger Squadron dont like it and they have almost 1000 members parroting what their leader says.
On a lighter note i have had discussions with several of them and a few of them can see where CIG is trying to go and are patiently waiting. But A1 has turned into the thing he hated when he started. The elitist who is unable or unwilling to adapt or change. This is part of the reason he quit Star Wars. Because they changed combat and he didnt want to adapt.
I say and will continue to say, CIG is working on fixing an issue. The changes arent done you have a minimal amount of changes. 1 light, 1 interceptor, 1 heavy, 1 gunship and 1 corvette. We dont know how interceptors will be balanced vs other interceptors. Let alone gunships, vanguards, hornets or even gladii.
You're totally right and I get that change is hard. I'm adapting myself. I'm committed to learning the gunboats archetype myself.
This will be my last MM talking video for awhile. I'm working on a Connie video now. Connie in MM that is. Learned quite a bit I would like to share with people.
Personally, I think there should be a point where weapons simply become ineffective relative to the size of the target.
At some point it would be like firing a machinegun at a tank, which simply wouldn't phase it.
In SC, ships are works of art rather than engineered combat vehicles, manned with hundreds/thousands of crew, which results in blindspots, also to avoid having zones of immediate destruction for torpedos, boarding craft and the like.
It's a rock paper scissors situation, except the fact that big ships getting killed by fighters made big ships obsolete as well as bombers designed to take out big ships.
Like who the hell brings a fully crewed Polaris trying to get the expensive torps in on a Javelin when they could just park a few fighters behind the engine nacelles?
Fighters still aren't victims of bigger ships, since they can dictate the engagement, meaning it's their choice to get into a dangerous situation. Even in a bigger battle, bigger ships would primarily target each other rather than trying to hit fighters.
So I don't have any sympathy for fighter pilots acting like they are now in a bad spot, when they engage a battle they end up losing.
I agree 100%. At some point special weapons need to be used to kill certain targets. Size of cannons, type, etc, should all matter. I want to believe that this is the direction that they are going.
People who complain about the purpose of master modes are just not old backers. They don't realize that master modes is a return to the original flight system. If people would just take a few minutes to ask themselves why arena commander has never had enough room to utilize the tactics they use in the live build with what, for some reason has come to be called the legacy system, they might realize their cries are futile.
Fun fact, this "legacy system" isn't actually the legacy system, SCM mode was what we started with, and how all ship battle missions have been designed the whole time. Ever wondered why all the bounty missions in space take place among pockets of asteroids? It's because everything in this game has been designed around the speeds they're going for now. ( I don't mean Yela. I mean the asteroid pockets around all the OTHER moons.)
They can cry and whine all they want, CR has said multiple times now that we're getting a WW2 close combat emulating combat system, and he hasn't ever changed his words. It's not even worth arguing about. Expect more crying as well when armor comes into the game. All these people asking for "game balance" right now in the ways they repeat, are wasting their breath. Even after master modes things are still not close to done.
I didn't even know that. Thank you for that. This is a good comment. Have a pin.
I don't think the idea of a combat mode and travel mode is the problem. The problem is the actual flight model and the involved systems and tunings. They are shite.
Oh@@latjolajban81
@latjolajban81 the dissenters have been pretty vocal that the speed changes are the issue. We're talking in a general sense.
There's little doubt that tuning and small things probably need work, but the overall complaint is that changing the speeds is the issue for the people against it.
Again, asking for well refined tuning and balance at this point in development is pointless. There's still too much to add.
@@llMoofasall Ok. For me it's not just speeds. It's the whole feeling of flight in space. There is no weight to it. Acceleration is way too high in every direction. Cork screwing should be a massive slow corkscrew. Not the tight propeller plane aerobatic cork screw we have had for years. The boost characteristics needs to be different for different ships/categories/roles so ships have a chance to counter or outplay each other. For example give heavy fighers a short boost that massively increase maneuvering so they can keep their guns on agile targets temporarily, but doesn't increase top speed much (they should have decent top speed anyway). Light fighters could have a decently long boost that increase general thrust output so they can be flexible. Racers could have variations of any type of boost really depending on what kind of racer you want. Or make it so more power to engines (the power triangle) increase thrust output. Especially for ships with larger/more thruster. And so on.
I had fun in master modes, and it wsa nice to have connies with their galdreens doing good work. It's never about edging out the other side from the skirmish, it's about the whole battle. Light fighters are harassers, gunships are the heavy hitters, frigates are the annihilators... we all have roles. I hope in the future they allow the squadron battles to be larger in AC so we can have true compliments of ships slugging it out. Yes servers will be the tech issue there, but man that's the true fun, squad battles. It's called Squadron 42 right? not Pilot 42, so even this elite ace we'll be solo playing won't be the end all be all gladius kills the idris solo event so why would it ever be the same in P.U.? Also I was totally checking the video to see if you showed your kills of myself in A.C. lol
I did not select anyone in particular to show off. I just dropped the videos in. I actually saved the ones where you beat me to reference for a video I was going to work on but until MM hits PU I may hold off on the guides.
Elitists in any game end up destroying that game. While I admire the dedication, some people take to get better at using light fighters they forget that there are other ships and other roles out there. I love my cutlass black it is not a light fighter.
It is easy to forget the other classes exist when they have effectively not existed for such a long time in terms of effectiveness. :D
I agree with you conclusion that MM is a good thing but I disagree with some of your reasoning. I think the way you described the DPS race argument isn't fair. Obviously as soon as you shoot each other it is mostly a DPS race but the point is that people want the fight to be more than just a DPS race. Before they could disengage, reposition or dodge more easily (as far as I understand, I don't fly a lot) and they are sad that these things aren't really possible anymore. Just like FPS combat isn't just shooting each other but also includes thinking about the sound you make, your positioning, use of cover and so on, flying isn't just shooting each other either.
I think Vergil made a better counter argument by showing that it's easier to use the environment like asteroids and stations with MM.
You can dodge and everything now currently. That has not changed. And the Connie on Connie fights are pretty dynamic now too especially with multiple shield face tanking, etc. Good comment, I could have worded it better for sure. But I still don't think much has changed, the only thing keep stuff from being a "DPS RACE" before was tri-cord disengage, which just created a race to see who got bored and left first. ;)
Love the video bro. I am awaiting a time when all different shapes and sizes of ship will have a part to play. I dont own a single LF. Yet I am a PvP focused player. Id like to fly a gun ship or drop ship. Those are the ship type that most interest me.
Well I hate to break it to you but they will likely be turds forever
@BuzzCutPsycho I'm happy with baby steps. I'll play whatever version of the game is fun for us. I don't expect anything and am happy when they make good changes for the good of the game as a whole. Cheers
I am not a great pilot by any means, I want turrets to be fixed so I can play with my friends
Yeah you suck LOL
I hear you speak about barrier to entry but the only barriers to entry that exists to getting involved in PvP is just choosing to fight anywhere i spent hours in the PU asking people to fight when i started because PvP is so taboo that the only places people fight are at OM points in a scripted agreed upon way or in AC which offers little to no tools to let people practice without joe-shmoe coming in and interrupting practice or being paired with someone outside of your skill level to play against which i dont think the second thing is a bad thing especially ever since they added global chat. This game is probably one of the only few games where the top of PvPers allow people into their communities to learn other PvP games, people play on such an astronomically high level that there is 0 chance you get to interact with those players in that same skill level without getting steam rolled.
The desire to try to play PvP is at an all time low because there is nothing to gain but glory most people play for fun and those two things generally dont happen unless you are a specific type of player. There are probably 1% of players who try to play win or lose and probably 0.0001% that is actually good but that's simply because players don't want to fight and justify not trying and CIG is currently appealing to these people's emotions by balancing things instead of giving us tools to practice, a matchmaking system if you are only looking for quick fights and making fighting in the PU more common without the risk of being punished for doing combat.
This game just isn't optimized i know alot of PvPers that don't play because the game doesnt offer modern optimization currently alot of players literally only play in AC because you can gain 30+ frames in AC vs the PU.
Larger ships do need a buff but IMO the reason large ships are so ass is because of turret placement and effectiveness i understand a hammer head should be effective against lightfighters but against how many because you cant find an angle where all turrets can land damage so even fully manned you might have 4 turrets trained on one fighter at a time and the moment you go beyond 4 fighters there's just not enough turrets to keep all these fighters at bay at once a single turret or two needs to be extremely strong to beat a light figher which i hope eventually rolls out.
Alright, great comment. Read what you said. Now hear me out, and I promise I am not going on a tangent... but this may be why we don't get much PU PvP, well, part of it.
I think a big reason why we get no PvP in PU is due to respawns honestly. Something people aint bringing up much. If people could respawn to the closest point where they died you may see more PU PvP. The fundamental concept here is to provide all players with the option to respawn at the nearest available spawn point, regardless of where their regeneration point is set. I firmly believe that this addition is crucial for the overall health of the product, and its inclusion would enhance every aspect of gameplay, from PvP to PvE.
This feature would empower players to mount a defense against station campers, enable haulers to reclaim potentially lost cargo, or allow ground-based players to swiftly return to a bunker and resume their mission. The potential applications are limitless, and the impact would be uniformly positive across the board.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Well that's the thing though perhaps if they made a health insurance system where you could spawn closest to your last death for the highest premium, spawn at a location you last set for a lower cost and spawn at the beginning planet for free that could add that element of loss and could be a good money sink for players who want to engage eachother for wars where its not just a buy your ship and your done the logistics of fighting one another would be extremely costly if people had something to prove that wasn't directly giving them a return. This sort of ties into one of the only reason i wouldn't want to see the skill expression be diminished because training is probably the only way we can circumvent the cost of combat besides bringing more people.
@@BuzzCutPsycho forward operating bases/ vehicles would also be an excellent addition especially if you could spawn an assortment of ground vehicles and maybe small transport ships from.
Ive noticed there's a small, but vocal, minority of players that primarily play fighters. This minority seems to be figureheaded by a certain popular content creator, who i wont name, but we all know.
This small minority will not be happy unless SC is unequivocally dominated by light fighters (as it always has been), with everything else just being a target.
At the top of the pile of these light fighters will be the ones with thousands of hours of seat time that are untouchable by the unwashed masses.
They want to live out their own main character hero story while everything and everyone else is fodder for their fantasy.
Anything that chellenges their light fighter, ace pilot bubble must be squashed out immediately.
Oh I agree. I actually had some part of that in my original video I cut. I will upload them later as a short. They were done in jest but I felt like they took away from the real content of the video.
"There are certain, not all, PvP players in this community who absolutely adore clubbing seals. They relish maintaining their position at the top of garbage mountain, sitting upon their porcelain throne and pointing down at their perceived lessers with meaty, grime-covered digits. And it makes sense; these certain individuals have built an entire brand upon being good at this constantly in development, never-out-of-alpha project. They've spent a lot of time, energy, and in some cases a lot of money on getting the peripherals necessary to maintain their position. And to them, that is in danger. Master Modes and the word "accessibility" present to them an existential crisis like no other that they've experienced in Star Citizen. The possibility that, through this lowered barrier of entry, rivals may crop up. Better players may be introduced into the ecosystem, and, dare I even suggest it, defeat may come live on stream before the combat log can be swiftly executed. Truly, a living nightmare to those individuals."
@@BuzzCutPsycho spot on
Idk who you talking about, but I will mention something that maybe funny to you. A1 advocated for lower fighter muzzle velocity to shorten their effective range.
@@nekomancer4641 I would like shorter ranges not slower velocities personally
@@BuzzCutPsycho shorter range like applying damage falloff curve? What's your reason of preferring this?
I think I very much disagree with you regarding "DPS race" stuff. I actually wrote something on spectrum regarding this.
MM as it is currently is a DPS race for a number of reasons (not just speed). Like you mention, aim is one of those factors. That does not take away from the fact that evasion, or player action to avoid damage, has been effectively nullified in SCM. It was not previously, because there WAS the capacity to create distance between yourself and another fighter. This was especially the case in fights involving multiple ships. The battle space is simply too small now in fighter combat (although oddly, fighters can kite large ships better at range due to cone fire, but thats another point).
In particular, I see the negative effect of this being that in a group fight, the winning is ALWAYS the one better capable of focusing fire, or simply with greater numbers.
Number are and SHOULD be important, but player skill beyond ganking players 1 by 1 should also play a part in determining who wins.
If combat speeds were increased slightly, increasing the battle space, and ending the situation in which everyone is constantly in range of everyone else, the game and tactics would be much improved.
You think auto-aim is a bigger role in the DPS feel over the speeds? Genuine question. I am starting to think auto-aim is the root of all evil here.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I think it's a balance of factors. Personally I'd remove auto-aim for everything but turrets, allowing a much lower skill ceiling for them. That way we solve at least one of the persistent issues of SC combat (that turret gunning is underwhelming).
My specific problem with the current balance however (coming from a middling to ok pilot who plays AC solo), is that I will either dominate entirely, or be dominated entirely, depending exclusively on which side gets the first kill or two.
Numbers, combined with the ability to focus fire on any target, and a TTK that prevents some quick kills to even the odds, makes fighting even in a 4 v 5 a very bad idea. I don't think it's good for the game (especially the PU), as it requires ganking as the only viable strategy.
Good vid. The one place I gotta disagree is the skill ceiling and longevity. MM absolutely is limiting in comparison to the old model. I hear you about the importance of all the other aspects of the game beyond space combat, and I agree the new change is net positive for the game, but still the new model 100% is a hugely limiting factor in terms of pilot skill. Both things are true.
Also, "bigger is better" is just another way of saying "pay to win" in this game. Not hyperbole. Literally.
Fair enough! But do you think it is limiting enough to drive players away? Or are the types of players who like being at the top very likely to stick around regardless?
Yeah for sure it will drive some away, I feel turned off myself tbh, but it will bring in way more than we lose. So it's good for the game, and I'm hopeful the new systems like maelstrom, resources, etc., will spice things up in new ways.
I think any game that relies on it's combat alone to keep players is usually doomed to struggle. A lot of the better games, MMOs anyway, usually have an over arching hook that is a lot more interesting.@@CitizenScott
One way I've heard it described is
While the merging ceiling may have declined
Reading when to fight, dog fighting skills. Teamwork and knowing when to disengage have all had their skill ceilings increased.
@@gyratingwolpertiger6851 that's actually a good way of putting it. I was mulling over posting a match of me playing with real time commentary to help people understand my thought process in fights.
A Hammerhead should decimate light fighters. At present it’s just fodder. Something is really broken with this.
I heard, and do not quote me, that turrets are bugged.
They need to put floating ammo and repair pickups in the PU and it will fix everything about mastermodes. On a serious note. So glad you called these comments out. Most of them are beyond ridiculous and some ppl are just making up complaints to hate mastermodes because their favorite UA-camr does too. Also the jump scare at 13:22 😄
Yeah that was pretty funny. He wanted to get close and gimme a look.
A1 going Karen mode on CIG was odd but looking at the reaction of the community, I really think A1 did a 200IQ reverse-uno move on players. Pretty sure CIG needed testing but we all know how players are not really into testing for CIG BUT right now they have 2 groups testing trying to either prove A1 right or wrong.
All theses concerns are happy problems... If A1 thinks he need speed then (soon enough) he can upgrade with components focusing on speed and agility. with thousands more possibilities.
Again, I won't believe A1 isn't aware of all the fine tunings and nobs CIG can play with in the near future, its just a reverse psychology move to get peoples involved. I think.
I was happy to hear your sensible take with a zest of irritation from the parrots, bots and bad actors.
Don't get caught in the current ;)
A1 has zero influence on anything I say or do. I have always had these view. But this is most likely my last video on MM for awhile. :)
Oh yes, training has to be NOT a core thing. I think the game DOES have to cater for player growth and skills expression, but not via the LF vs LF category. That's a mistake! Hopefully, the highest skilled players and PVP is channelled into a specific role not associate with the LF vs LF. Perhaps, this could be given to the anti-capital category, like a torpedo ship in a fleet battle.
Well said! You will be happy to know I am doing a series of videos on the gun ship role in MM soon. AC in particular. I gotta get the time to get everything together and put it out. Wanna try that out, share some knowledge and all. I can't just rant and rave all the time.
Good take. You didn't act like your cat died as you were explaining it either.
I love my cat.
Everything you say is unquestionably exactly what I think this game should be.
There's nothing I need to say because you've said it already.
Well I appreciate the comment either way, even if there was not much to say.
Finally a voice of reason and logic...I agree with you sir 💯
Thanks! I try to be reasonable, just not always.
How the heck did you get 4 galdereens on the connie?
She's quad size 5snow
S5 now. And buffed.
@@BuzzCutPsycho YESSSS
@@blub9217 yes its nice
It is unironically so important for the game. It shouldn't take a new player a month just to learn how to keep nose on. If it stays that way nobody will play.
Agreed. And it should not take a player a month to master, they will find a balance I am sure. Or maybe I am just stupid.
So Star Citizen went the same route as Elite Dangerous with space cops enforcing space speed limits. Sad, although understandable. It would be hella fun to zoom around at first or second space speed where you really gotta match speed to intercept someone, else you're gonna just zoom past one another.
I think it just had to be done for gameplay reasons. it was bad before
@@BuzzCutPsychoHow it was like before? I am quite curious.
People just zooming by at speeds that prevented any real pvp from happening unless both players agreed to not fly fast.@@MaximilianBrandt
@@BuzzCutPsycho But isn't that the point? Faster ship can outrun the slower one by going at higher acceleration. If you really wanna catch someone, you better be faster than they are, so they can't break away and lose you. Or do you mean that engines were so good with acceleration that it wasn't really a problem to break away out of effective range on a whim even if opponent is faster?
@@MaximilianBrandt the latter.
Thank you for the content
Thanks for still being here!
holy eff. do i see 4x galdereen on the andromeda? 😳
yessir s5s now
oh man, reader rabbit. that hurt. I felt that in the feels.
Hey it was a good game!
Playing with MM for several dozen hours and I think its a bit to slow not putting enough space between types.
Solid opinion. I think speeds are nice so far.
Honestly it just feels less exciting and fun. I never like being speed limited but we'll see what happens when it comes out.
To each his own. I been having a blast in master modes personally.
You are speed limited under live as well.
MM was good in 3.22 but then CIG chickened out and made it just like LIVE.
Hope they revert it!!!
Oh my God a space care bear. Criticizing Avenger one's video while Raising the exact same concern for the space Care Bears only in reverse. Oh my God I'm not a hypocrite.
lol what
"People complain that master modes feels too slow that there's no drag in space and bla bla... So what speeds do they propose?" [Enter some side rant about game lore and never return that question]
I think part of the whole problem in this video is trying to lump everyone into some generic broad "them" category while still suggesting that they're simply influenced by certain content creators. A much more productive conversation would be naming someone in particular... Say Avenger_One or something like that... And responding to the particular proposals or conversation that he honestly wants to have, instead of wildly punching a the invisible "enemies" everywhere.
I was actually pretty particular with everyone in this video. Especially in regards to the sorts who make spectrum posts. I was very specific to not generalize every LF player for example.
Most people are dumb sadly.
I know SC is your content base, but if you ever do analysis of other games PvP/PvE and what was good/bad or what happened, I will follow you anywhere.
Maybe PlanetSide 3. ;)
Great video, I hear a lot of my own thoughts reflected here. Being a player that benefits from a lower barrier to entry, MM is a boon.
Well said! And that is the thing, it gives you a good step off point to succeed. You wont be a master right away, but it sure as heck gives you a solid place to start.
I understand their livehod is on the line, A1 lives from youtube content, and not being able to run away for hours and slowly pick stragglers 1 by 1 for a YT montage will hurt his brand a lot, now he will just die or QT away, a hard sell for a brand wanting to look like maverik, hurting his job, i meant he its so focused about his branding, that he named te recommend changes the "Avenger one package", just in case it sticks he can claim to be te creator of MM lol, and he makes good points on his recommendations, but his self center branding kinda ruins it or stains it
And thats the problem i think, people are so use to be easy, to just run away, that now that there is SOME danger, they jus call it skilless, the same people that couldn't handled hover mode (for you guys wanting realism), the same guys that dont say anything about the horrible & unsable UI, horrible non interactable sensors, horrible unskilled missile/decoy gameplay and many other problems
They are stuck in their own marketing and think that 1v1 light fighter PVP is what SC is, but SC is way more than that, way wider than that, there is much more than hex in gown
There are certain, not all, PvP players in this community who absolutely adore clubbing seals. They relish maintaining their position at the top of garbage mountain, sitting upon their porcelain throne and pointing down at their perceived lessers with meaty, grime-covered digits. And it makes sense; these certain individuals have built an entire brand upon being good at this constantly in development, never-out-of-alpha project. They've spent a lot of time, energy, and in some cases a lot of money on getting the peripherals necessary to maintain their position. And to them, that is in danger. Master Modes and the word "accessibility" present to them an existential crisis like no other that they've experienced in Star Citizen. The possibility that, through this lowered barrier of entry, rivals may crop up. Better players may be introduced into the ecosystem, and, dare I even suggest it, defeat may come live on stream before the combat log can be swiftly executed. Truly, a living nightmare to those individuals.
The fact that avengerone asks CIG to use the "A1 tuning package" is so cringe and like you said, he just wants to give himself credit for "saving star citizen" to build his brand. He cares more about himself than the health of the game. Fact
@@cypher5726 no, everyone has come with those solutions for years now, he it's just taking credit and making marketing, and not everyone wants those solutions at all, very entitled from your part to say that every SC player wants that, kinda shows who else is self centered
@@StoneCoolds huh? Lol. Maybe you misread my post. Try again. I never said anything about "every SC player wants"
@@BuzzCutPsycho yes sadly they are completely walled by their own small perception of the game and can see over it, specially when there is economic interest, and I think that's why CIG has ignore them so hardly, MM is not perfect but it's a star that needs a lot of tuning, and the PU will be very good for that, more than a game mode almost no one plays and is not representative of how the verse interact or plays, let it go live and self adjust
Some of the points Brought by A1 (and many other players before) are actually good ideas, I believe once in the PU it will self balance, and I hope it never returns to the old "mutual consent" FM
In DCS the best pilot cannot defeat 10 other pilots at will, because the FM is realistic and comprehensive, if you don't feel fear on going 10 v 1, and you can leave the fight at will, it means the system is broken and can be exploited, not that you are to good or too bad, and that's why when In DCS you get ambushed in a 3v1 and you win or let a lone you just scape with your life, it's a memorable feature, because it's not supposed to happen, but you really flew your machine like Maverick to come on top
The archetype complainers are funny. I really do think that if you are dumb enough to sit in front of a prospector and threaten it your shields and systems should be instantly fried. That happened on a video and oh my god the whining from the pvp elite instantly forced CIG to protect them from their own stupidity. Bring THAT back CIG. Please!
Actually now that you mention it I want to see that too!
@@BuzzCutPsycho If you haven't seen it this It's on youtube from another content creator. Look up" Star Citizen: 3.2 - Prospector Close Quarters Combat! ".
The thing that so annoyed me was that this made so much sense for, in a fictional world where you make the trade of pumping everything into a device designed to inject so much energy into rocks that you cause them to explode, and if you do it wrong you wreck your own ship (which someone was talking about at the beginning of the segment) if some idiot were to rock on up and try to seal-club a miner there was a limited way for it to fight back. To anyone that would cry about balance I would say that it could be balanced by in-space making the range of the beam about equal compared to guns (laser or ballistic) and it would take some skill to hit a manuevering target because you have to make contact and obviously in an atmosphere it could be even more limited because miners already don't have unlimited range. Note that the funniest part is that the tail end of that ship lands in the background about 30 seconds after the explosion.
Currently if you're flying decoupled and you boost above the speed cap, you loose the ability to change your vector if you stop boosting. The only thing I would change is I would get rid of the ability to boost above the speed limit. This would fix the problem.
That's one of the things I was thinking. Make boost act like boost, not afterburner.
Yeah it could. I never notice much in a Connie. ;)
Yeah that's a good take
There used to be separate keys for boost and afterburner, believe it or not. They should bring that back
@@sulferix7265 I think we have too many keys personally :(
Great points, accessibly (doesn't mean easy to master) and multicrew needing to be a force multiplier makes absolute sense in a MMO. Also doesn't take a genius to figure out that with limited server fps (even at godly server 60fps) huge speeds are still very difficult to account as it's reactionary and will always trail behind. Armor should have been combined with the MM implementation imho, as it certainly makes a difference for big ships (and probably invalidate the damage potential of light fighter, turning them from lethal to mere annoyances)
I don't know what the heck is going on with armor or what is taking so long. I actually worry about what, if any real impact it is going to have for the positive. Is it just another feature that is going to break?
You and me both... Imo Armor is an integral part of the ship 'combat' meta which MM seems to revolve around. Without it how can you correctly balance ship archetypes. Or does CIG plan to rebalance the whole thing when armor comes into play?! This is madness... Armor is just stats; numbers that reduce/negate damage, don't see why it couldn't have been introduced at the same time. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I can't think of any argument to delay it.
@@Nectu-STRMIND Unfortunately, armor isn't just a number for the star citizen devs. As I recall armor was intended to be physics based and basically requires maelstrom. Which is apparently done but not ready for a live release yet.
@@BuzzCutPsycho There is also the possibility that there's major art issues involved as they might actually make the armor visible on each of the ships when fitted onto the hull. Since there might be multiple armor types available to each ship, that could explain in part why it's taking so long.
I would be shocked if that was a thing when SC currently struggles to handle shields sometimes :D@@Hylanvahr
Don't really have a favorite sc cc, I guess I would pick RiverGrit or DigThat32 or AstroHistorian... anyway I'm not really repeating anyone talking about mm. I haven't logged in for a few weeks and the speed seems a lot better when you aren't used to flying in the standard model. I still don't think either mm or current model is better or worse but I do think MM will make more sense then the current model when we are doing more then just combat but I'm just some dumb hick. I notice the AC score isn't consistently 1 person with 10 kills and 7 with 0, that's probably good for the life of AC. I agree partially with the avenger vid when he said it feels like you have wind resistance in space although to me it's more like being in water then wind resistance. Some people act like they are going to drop some mm patch and then never update the flight model again for the rest of time, I think they're gonna implement and tweak stuff for a while. As for little ships can't do much to big ships, that just seems common sense and I can't understand why anyone would have a problem there, however it would be great if you could gut a stolen snub fighter and weld a bomb to it and fly it into a ship as you eva right in time for some makeshift boarding anti-establishment shenanigans... also I'm an ED refugee so maybe my perspective is... I'm just happy there's no space starfish
MM is going to change so much from now that it will be hardly recognizable. This is the last of my MM content for awhile as a result. Gotta wait for the changes.
The only concerns I have about MM is the big changes it makes. But before we even get it in live and test all the various ships, with many different players, in a practical application, I'm hearing "NO and "not gonna happen", from the community and the devs.
All I been hearing is love it or hate it debates. I hate closed minds.
This hardened mindset just blocks any potential opportunity for change and balance.
Though this comment section seems more optimistic to what balance it can offer in time.
I have so many thoughts from what I know of it.
Every one is focused on what we have now, which is time to destroy.
But we are still missing maelstrom and armor, and time to disable, which could be within seconds of engagement, with the right round of ammo in the right spot.
We now have how we move in the verse divided into separate categories, as well as several components from several classes and grades, with sub components, that can open up a whole world of engineering and tuning. Don't forget the plan of engine and thruster tweaks. I recall different grades of fuel being talked about. With all this, two of the same ship, could be tuned to act completely different from each other.
Why not an industrial shield generator that could allow some shielding for an evade, for ships that can't fight. Vulture and SRV are pretty helpless as it is.
But if "HARD NO" is the mindset, than what is the point of trying? And the purpose of all those engineering options?
The "hard no" from the communities is pretty much a normal part of gaming now whenever personalities attach themselves or are attached to ideas or concepts even good ones.
CIG still has no idea what they're going to do with these ships and I predict oxne they start making proper multicrew it will be an absolute disaster. Mark my words torp bombers and ares will invalidate crewed ships. Cig will do cig things.
One of the reasons why I am hesitant to make guides in general is that the game is in such balance Flux. I didn't give too much specifics because for all we know this changes next week.
You're right. Gotta wait to maelstrom and things like it.
@@BuzzCutPsycho The guides thing cracks me up. So many on the internet over the years that went out of date in a month. But still available to confuse new players, or researchers.
Content creators have the power to delete those but don't.
The community can be its own worst enemy.
And devs can kill a project with a closed mind, or listening to people for the wrong reasons.
We have a long road ahead with much more to come.
But closed minds in anything really bother me.
Witch trials, come to mind. Heck of time to be alive.
@@festersmith8352 I would have deleted all my old out of date ones if it wasn't proven to hurt my channel in terms of the youtube algorithm. I've learned a lot on it in almost a year and it is quite a lot of black magic nonsense.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Ah, that makes sense now.
Yeah, bad ideas in the YT algorithm too.
Don't suppose YT willing to change, or to close minded?
We do what we must with what we have to work with. Or go play in the street I guess.
If that is the case, then a new guide video a month might be a good thing for ya.
I have never liked arena commander so I am not the one to say its good or bad or not fun. However for the sake of trying master modes I endured it and yes I did get bored and could not take it anymore. Now does that mean master modes is the reason? Unsure to be honest but I did find it to slow to keep me engaged but I suspect the bigger problem for me is arena commander. Never could like being in some fish bowl and forced to stay there. So I am going to hold my opinions for after this goes to the PU before I bitch anymore than I have. I will say for sure, unless they make it more challenging then it is now I will lose interest and try and find another reason to like playing the game. I did find your comments here to be far to one sided and defending it way to hard, with your limited skill set of course you are going to love it!
I'm quite talented. Ask your mother.
Well put, 400 % agreed !
Thanks. I will be moving on from MM for a bit. Some new stuff video wise coming.
Best video yet on MM! Keep it up.
Glad you enjoyed it! This one was not too popular. might be MM fatigue or the fact I accidently uploaded two videos in one day... Oh well, I am moving onto some "guides" and stuff for MM next!
To be NOT forced to fight is exactly the right thing. In a sandbox, you should have options and the pirate has to be looking how he catches his victim. If "death of a spaceman" ever will be a thing, I dont want to be locked into every fight till death of either me or the attacker. Even in Pokemon on Gameboy you had the option to flee. MM takes too many options away for almost no benefits except having a better view on the ships. Some ideas are good, like conefire. But all in all it kills the sandbox feeling.
It's hard to say really, on the sandbox thing. I don't think death of a spaceman will ever be a thing. SC may always be a sandbox, and running will always be an option, but once QED comes into MM NAV mode wont be a thing. Is that acceptable do you think?
@@BuzzCutPsychoIm not sure to understand you correct here. If QED can block/interrupt NAV Mode (or even can be activated in NAV), the attacker is always controlling every aspect of an encounter, because he can force the fight onto everyone, because you just can not outrun or outmanouver anyone unless you fly an interceptor. SC has not enough variety (they took out/levelled stats on weapons and components) and MM erases even more variety, because it kills more stats like topspeed and acceleration. Then we have this unspeakable stupid thing called fixed assist, which is only assisting in NOT hitting. Large ships are easier to kill with MM, because you can not longer "form the fight bubble" by going fast, but everyone can circle you and chip your shield away, due to the recharge delay.
QED will disable NAV when it comes in. I get what you're saying, but I gotta be honest I don't struggle in my Connie in AC MM. The turrets suck mostly not just the big ships. And interceptors are not balanced imo I agree @@hix420
@@BuzzCutPsychoOk thx for clarification. So if you can not run, how then is it beneficial for new and casual players (which are not "trained pilots"), to be forced to be seal clubbed in their low dps starter ship each and every time they encounter an unfriendly player? I mean, even if they want to "try" to fight, they are commited to the duel till death because you can just not get away in the current model.
This year is a make or break for CIG
Agreed. They have to pull it off.
Great points, let's go camping!
Sure, where at?
❤
10:10 - I tried a few days ago, and I didn't find the aim assist that good. To be more precise, it feel like the fixed assist was disabled or greatly reduced.
I am good enough to aim precisely and still hit. But my friend couldn't do that with enough skill to kill NPCs reliably, nor quick enough.
I remember that at the start of MM testing, it was much more easier to hit.
Velocities were a lot higher during the first MM testing and it felt a lot better.
🍻
based
Well, you didn't train in other MMOs since almost every gameplay aspect doesn't have any depth compared to things like mining or fighting in SC, for example. In other games, you simply press or hold one button to gather, mine, do *action*. SC always was a different game, it was promoted as a game with depth and skill-based systems without any in-game skills - it's your knowledge, reaction, hours you've spent in game.
We have games like Escape From Tarkov or Elden Ring and they are extremely fun to play because there's a high skill ceiling, these games want to test you and bring challenge.
But in case of SC we're starting to lose this experience.
I think the games I played had a lot of depth. The training just came from playing the game organically. Perhaps we disagree on the type of depth.
I really don't care about combat that much. I just want to live my space fantasy of parking the Enterprise (Carrack) in an orbit and taking the shuttle (Pisces) down to explore. The 7800m/s you stated is orbital velocity for Earth at a reasonable altitude. For Microtech, that velocity would be about 3000m/s at 100km. It could be lower, but gravity cuts off at 100km so we can't get further out than that at the moment. So here's my proposition: do whatever you want in SCM mode, but give me 3000m/s in NAV mode.
Now I know a lot of reasons why that won't happen and all of them are technical: SC isn't a simulation in the sense that every object gets to do its thing all the time: entities that aren't observed are "streamed out" to conserve server resources. An object in a stable orbit never stops moving so could either not be streamed out (bad for performance) or would only move while observed by a player (bad for immersion). But a girl can dream.
Amazing isn't it? The people who complain about the 'unrealistic' reduction in speed have no problem with insanely shallow atmospheres on planets with ostensibly breathable pressures.
Once you bring orbital mechanics to those "I want my space sim" guys, their brains melt, they can't even wrap their heads around pointing "down" will not de orbit you at all 😂
Well you're clearly way smarter than I am about that subject. :D
I will be honest I don't care too much about what happens with NAV mode. Maybe I should, but I don't. So I have no opinion to offer you on that speed.
There isn't anything wrong with dreaming. There isn't anything bad about wanting what you want. I want to think that they could get similar things within reason through abstraction or "gamey" mechanics. That is how I view the speed limiters and IFCS myself, just abstract ways to get certain mechanics in the game.
Of course they don't. It "feels" better to them.
This is why I keep my mouth shut. I aint no space mans. No idea how any of that works.
Great video I'm hoping the day of the light fighter will soon be over.
I think it may be coming to some degree. Maybe. ;)
Completely agree on this. MM is good for the game. It just needs more tuning, bug fixing, and polish. Anyone who doesn't like the taste of garbage will understand that immediately if they play both MM SQB and LIVE SQB.
I avoid stuff I do not focus too much on, like duels, etc. But I can say I have seen more people in MM now than I have ever before in AC. I am sure a lot of that is because it is new, but I see some retention and some new faces sticking I don't usually see.
Unless they're dirty alts.
@@BuzzCutPsychodon't bully my alts :(
You're right though, MM SQB is popping off all of the time. I've even managed to get a friend into the game by having him try it.