The INSANELY Detailed Flight Model Changes Coming to Star Citizen
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лют 2025
- CIG, always looking to push the space genre forward. Are now setting their sites toward updating Star Citizen's existing flight model, pushing the level of detail to extreme levels. One of these new upcoming changes is the inclusion of control surfaces for ships when operating in atmosphere and in some cases, dense gas clouds. This creates a high fidelity simulation of ships now behaving more like planes when flying along planets and moons. Further separating the distinction between space and ground flight and combat. Join me as we take a deep dive looking into this interesting new feature coming down the pipe.
TIMESTAMPS
0:00 Intro
1:29 Disclaimer About The Progress Tracker
2:10 What Are Aerodynamic Control Surfaces (ACS)?
2:50 The Current Flight Model (FM)
4:12 ACS In The Real World
4:33 How ACS Will Work
5:57 Why Is It Being Added?
6:26 CIG And WW2 Style Combat
6:53 The Problem With The Current FM
7:18 How Ships Will Perform With ACS
8:27 ACS Are Already Modeled On Ships
8:54 Thruster Outputs In The Future
9:39 Thrusters Impacted By Temp, Wear, Etc
10:31 Thruster Vs ACS Balance
10:55 ACS And Gas Clouds
11:30 What Will We Have Over ACS?
12:51 What About Wheeled Landing Gears?
13:58 ACS And Damage Model Changes
15:03 How Often Will We Use ACS?
15:45 Conclusion
16:36 Outro
-
My sound design playlist
• Game Audio - Sound Des...
Looking for a disciplined, teamwork-oriented org to play SC with?
Apply to join The Forgotten Heralds today!
-
Recruitment is currently CLOSED, check back later for an opportunity to sign up!
Interested in creating an account to play Star Citizen? Hold on there buddy! Be sure to use my referral code when you sign up and you will be given an additional 5000 credits which you can then use to buy extra gear for your character or ships!
Code: STAR-4L6V-VLWM
#StarCitizen #StarCitizenUpdate
Thanks for checking out my deep dive into ACS or Aerodynamic Control Surfaces. I know a lot of you enjoy these little conversation starters so I do hope you found it insightful and entertaining. If you did genuinely enjoy this video, please leave a like as it really does help out the channel! That being said, are you excited for the inclusion of control surfaces coming to our ships? Or are you not really that interested at all? Do you even fly? Are you even REAL??? Let me know what you think!
It's important to remember that we will likely not see this new feature until at least Master Modes is in a more finalized state after community feedback and a release to LIVE. This because of how radical a change MM is to the current flight model and control surfaces will be a compliment to this new system. But of course, it too will require data collection and community feedback before it becomes a permanent feature. With that being said, it is very possible that some of the ideas and scenarios I illustrated here can/will change in the future. Especially, after players get their hands on it and provide feedback to CIG.
See you all in the next one.
o7
IMO you have done an INSANELY Detailed video, explaining the new Flight Model Changes that will be coming to SC. Not only in the verbal explanation, but the video capture of the talking points simultaneously is awesome . You have def. earned my sub. Looking forward to many more videos . Can't wait to see ship tractor beams implemented into SC as well and all the many uses they will bring. Since SC is not a fleshed out game as of yet, I always enjoy the ideas, speculation and scenarios that could or will be in the game, when officially launched. Contemplating these things IMO is just as fun as playing in the current state of SC.
I felt there was not enough difference between space flight and atmo flight. I welcome the changes
Heavily depends on some shots right now. The Hawk and Khartu al control hella different in atmo
Hopefully there will be a way to land safely. I would love rolling runways for ships with wheels.
Not only do I want control surfaces but an accurate autopilot: direction, speed, altitude, max sink/raise rate, max bank angle, etc.
Let's hope the updated manufacturer specific HUDs and MFDs will provide more flight information to the pilot when they eventually come out!
9:07 I did wonder for a long time why we had so much overhead for the cooler component in each ship. If there is a return to this style after the implementation of control surfaces...well that would explain the current overhead. The quality of your cooler component (and possibly the power plant supplying power to damaged thrusters) will be significantly more impactful.
In the future, I guess I won't be ignoring my coolers when calculating how much it costs to upgrade a ships components 😅
I'm pretty iffy on Master Modes, but control surfaces sounds really cool. Landing via wheels is pretty fun
One thing that you get in good WW2 sims is the experience of being too damaged to fight but not so damaged that you can't limp home. The control surfaces potentially also allows a emergency unpowered but controlled glide to the ground. I do think it will be necessary to have some kind of pilot post ejection landing system as well basically parachutes but ones that work in no atmosphere.
there are gravity systems in game so why not an anti gravity thing that replaces the pilots parashute? after use you have to recharge it but it makes landing better to survive
As a Flight Sim person, I am also looking forward to control surfaces making an appearance in the game.
im hoping that they also plan on adding small landing strips for those vehicles that have wheels on the bottom, even if it was at the main ports id love to have a open landing strip that you can use then taxi to a parking space
maby on out posts and player ownd bases i dont think the ll do it on large planets
Atmo flight barely feels different from space flight currently, in my opinion. Sure, you feel the ship's weight more, but it feels nearly as maneuverable. The fact that I can stop and hover as efficiently in atmo as I can in space regardless of ship design or size is a testament to this. This is especially apparent in the brick-shithouse type of ships that have little to no aerodynamic design at all. Auroras, Vultures, Reclaimers, etc. should drop like a rock without engines and thrusters, and struggle to turn or stop even with them or perhaps fail to altogether in certain scenarios. It should feel like you're trying to guide a rocket around, relying more on sheer engine thrust at speed to stay aloft than the thrusters. Only while slow should you feel the thrusters doing the heavy lifting, and even then they should feel like they're struggling to. This would emphasize these kinds of ships relying on their VTOL modes at low speeds, rather than just their thrusters. Something like the Vulture doesn't belong flying through the air, and that should be reflected in their atmospheric performance.
IMO the main reason for CIG to implement these flight model changes is to stop players from stopping in Atmo and hovering nose down over targets. Unless your ship has dedicated VTOL thrusters and a bottom turret, this will not happen anymore . It also gives players more reason to use ground vehicles for combat.
A lot of ships currently look like they should be amazing in atmosphere, and then really disappoint when you actually fly them. Think ships like the 100i and Reliant, so I'm really hoping these changes can make those ships live up to how aerodynamic they look.
The Reliant has a very cool looking design in both configs. I do hope they will perform different with control surfaces when in either mode in atmo just for added uniqueness and cool factor. Also the Reliant has that really cool retro-thruster shunt that directs retros out the front of the ship when in flat mode. Unfortunately, there is no VFX that show when in this config. I could really could do with a gold standard pass.
i love the idea of control surfaces on smaller ships, but larger ones I feel like should not be punished nearly as much for hovering, such as the hammerhead, I feel like fighters and racers should rely more on the lift of their wings, but larger ships should be capable of hovering for prolonged periods, if not indefinitely in the case of ships like the connie with vtol fans instead of traditional thrusters.
as long as they hover horizontally, I am agreeing. But the moment a hammerhead or connie tip their nose down while hovering, they should fall like a rock
12:56 The landing gear "feet" or "skids" never really made sense for me. It results in weird situations where Gladius need to have their thrusters on to hover just to move around in a carrier ship.
Wheels are so much more useful in the real world and allows vehicles to be moved around on the ground without having to use fuel.
Maybe for giant ships, feet/skid landing gear makes sense because they need as much surface area as possible. But for any fighters or passenger jet sized ship, not having wheels is just crazy.
Wheels kinda make sense on some ships, and don't on others. For example, Wheels don't make sense on a Constellation Andromeda (that things about as big as a 747). They also don't make sense for the Aurora because the Aurora doesn't have control surfaces nor any wings to generate lift with. Its supposed to have VTOL fans like the Andromeda does but those haven't been modelled in despite the hatches for them being modelled but not active. Skid landing gear also works better for transports like anything from the Cutlass Black all the way up to the upcoming Galaxy since Skids are far more durable than wheels for such vessels. While fighters that use a more traditional layout design (like the afformentioned Gladius as well as the Arrow and the Hornet) will benefit more from them since they're more like hybrid fighters meant to operate in both atmo and space with decent mobility. But then you get the others that aren't designed like that and are more space orientated. And for space orientated ships that use landing pads, skids make more sense.
I've been waiting for proper flight surfaces for years. Currently some of the ships with the most wing and control surface area are the worst in atmo, and I look forward to that changing... as well as there being some mechanical advantages (like decreased fuel burn and signature in atmo) for those ships. Wings shouldn't just be an expanded hitbox to min-max around.
I hope ships like the vulture that have no wings aren't too negatively impacted by the efficiency changes. Also fighters should have at least some power to hover or else they cant VTOL.
Slightly off topic, but I hope we get more info on master modes. It kinda seems like it'll be almost impossible to chase or intercept a ship while attacking, as switching to "combat mode" lowers speed. (correct me if I'm wrong, just going off what I remember)
Control surfaces don't mean a dang if the flight model is crap.
Aerodynamics and gravity needs to be modeled correctly which it is not currently.
So it took from 3.05 to 3.19.1 to decide to introduce control surfaces to counter thruster loss of control in atmo? Pretty good example of half finishing things in perpetuity. This game has so much potential but will never finish with CR at the helm.
I had no idea that they were even working on control surfaces, thank you for the info!
This is perfect to get away from say, a Hammerhead if you have a atmos to dive into.
7:23 "You can expect ships to behave more restrictive..."
But why? When in a real fight, everyone would just keep their maneuvering thrusters turned ON to have as much maneuverability to not lose advantage. No one will trade their maneuverability for restrictive but "cinematic" flying in a real dogfight.
So dogfights will just stay how they are and will not turn into plane-like dogfights.
Hell I'd just be happy with thruster orientation having actual meaning. And VTOL settings. Right now I can take a ship, stand it on its nose 5 feet above the ground, and it will just magically hover there as its maneuvering thrusters on the nose apparently can hold the whole ship up. And you can do that in ANY orientation. It just makes no sense and makes it feel so silly.
That doesn't work on bigger ships like the MOLE or 600i to name just two.
This game is going to be so awesome for my great grandkids who will inherit my account.
Will be looking forward to seeing how this finally ends up working once in the game. More on making ships feel like actual ships should will be nice as I've always found it jarring that some multi-ton vessel can just flip-flop around, and act like a leaf on the wind (RIP Wash).
Might be controversial but I really wish CIG made the ships a bit more challenging to fly well. I understand the need for making the game accessible to those with KB&M or a gamepad, but I hope this goes away to making that less ideal for full control of your ship by taking away thruster authority for manouvering thrusters and generally making the ships feel like they have a more correct mass.
Once done, this could be a source for tonnes of brilliant game play opportunities. Atmospheric search and resque in inclement weather, or in areas with some sort of disturbance preventing "coupled" flight from working, or even just piloting large ships on high-G planets without smacking into the ground. There will be so much to do in SC that gating some of these things to those who have taken the time to learn to fly (and bought a HOTAS/HOSAS setup of some kind) should be possible.
I think the way control surfaces will work for most fighters and other smaller ships is fairly straightforward. The much more interesting question in my opinion and which hasn't been adressed by CIG in any way yet, is how control surfaces will affect larger ships. Especially on ships like the Raft, Connie or Carrack that have no way of believably flying with control surfaces but still need to spend significant time in atmosphere to fulfill their primary function. Will larger ships be left handicapped or will they just have big enough thrusters and coolers to not need to care about control surfaces at all?
And there are also smaller ships that can't use control surfaces. Think something like a Cutter, but also alien fighters like the Khartu-al and San.tok.yai. These ships can also only fly with thrusters, and making their thrusters burn out fast or consume a lot of fuel would just unfairly handicap them and make them inevitably worse than their alternatives.
The introduction of control surfaces causes a lot of problems for a lot of ships (practically anything that doesn't have wings), so it will be interesting to hear how CIG intends to solve these problems. Since we haven't heard anything on it yet, I don't think CIG has figured it out yet. Their work on control surfaces is probably far from finished and given CIG's slow pace of development I don't expect to see this feature in the PU for a while.
Bigger ships will rely a lot more on thruster usage from dedicated VTOL engines. Connie will be unique in that it uses its fans for keeping it airborne in atmosphere. This is where the resource management system from engineers aboard bigger ships will play a role in keeping systems running smoothly.
Cutter has little control surfaces on its stubby winglets above the cargo bay. So it can maneuver but will probably fly like a potato.
Xian ships will probably burn more fuel, but their benefit will be those articulating engines. Making them be able to maneuver in crazy ways.
as a DCS player it would be nice to see animated control surfaces like real planes so I am happy to see this come along. I wonder if they also plan on adding body flexing as a thing too when pull alot of lift from high gs? I remember them talking about soft body physics a long time ago
Endless possibilities
I hope they do something about planetary approach as well. Last I jumped in you could just turn the engines off in space and free fall towards the planet and then just above the surface turn them on and you'd safely come to a halt automatically 🤷
The problem is 4:08 this is not fly!, all planes fly like was under whater, the thruster are so strong that make you a baloon so you dont need physics because you dont have momentum or aerodinamics or gravity or aceleration etc
really great video Hybrid o7
I really dislike how ships float without penalty atm, I hope these surfaces are a big move towards ships without VTOL having to really think about using an expensive thruster over their flight profile, although VTOL should be expensive to use also imo
All these mechanics are obviously important to combat
but I'm actually more interested as a cargo runner, I want a situation where if I fly well to a place to pick up cargo, I save money, or I have to use a ship with good VTOL flight to pick up higher mass cargo, but if I use my VTOL for a long time, I eat into my profits.
hmm. in my short time playing Sc I've gotten used to the physics of vectored flight in and out of atmosphere. I hope this new system doesn't fully replace that in-atmosphere. If it does, I'm not sure I'd like that as much.
I landed an avenger with the wheels once when my throttle broke. It was amusing to say the least.
I hope these changes won’t deal the finishing blow to the combat performance of the Banu Defender… that beauty doesn’t come with a single ACS :/ I would be okay with it shifting more toward an out of atmo dog fighter but it has to have a niche somewhere…
Love the Defender. It feels like a better super hornet in some places, and I hope that they make it super fuel efficient with it's thrusters to compensate for the lack of control surfaces. If not, then I can see that it will be almost like a dead horse in atmo after a short time, as it is already a bit of a gass guzzler.
@@RavingNut I‘m worried what they will do to it,… hopefully it won‘t be neglected come the new changes
IMO the main reason for CIG to implement these flight model changes is to stop players from stopping in Atmo and hovering nose down over targets. Unless your ship has dedicated VTOL thrusters and a bottom turret, this will not happen anymore . It also gives players more reason to use ground vehicles for combat.
Definitely a solid reason why they want this feature. It will also make future dedicated air to ground weapons like bombs more useful rather than the hover and shoot approach today.
This totally clarified why the control surfaces matter. Can’t wait to chase someone down with the turret shooting back! Instead of a nose to nose battle. Now let’s get that audio update in there huh! 😉
I hope they fix that weird looking thing where banking in atmo, where the noise points at the ground while in a perfect banking turn but yet the ship does not seem to lose altitude or head toward the surface.
I hope they can balance it via IFCS to not be murder on amateurs like myself, but I'm all for it.
It will also have a big effect on ship choice when doing various missions. Granted, most of the current meta ships are gonna be just fine in atmo...
Subbed!!!
Great video
You really got me considering things I never thought about before. Well done 🎉 keep them coming!
These changes sound great. I have always found the hovering in atmosphere to be a total immersion breaker. Hopefully they continue to work on that, along with the thousands of other things they have promised.
I've said it before, but I love EVERYTHING about Star Citizen EXCEPT the flight model. I know there are two camps here and I'm on the losing side, but I really wanted the "WW2 in Space" ALA Star Wars like pretty much all of Chris Robert's old games, and how Elite does it. It just feels a lot more fun to fly like that. What we have now is just not fun for me.
I for one am happy that that is the losing side, because we already have all those games. I've never seen any argument for "WW2 in space" that goes beyond the personal preference of players that are mentally hard stuck in atmosphere. Atmosphere should always be a layer on top of _spaceship_ flight, not the foundation of _spaceship_ flight. We don't have to hamstring freedom in Star Citizen's flight model for it to be fun. Being a clone of Microsoft Flight Simulator or DCS would be boring, and we should expressly avoid doing so for it to be new and interesting. What would even be the point of the game being about spaceships if they were just glorified airplanes? And I grew up on Microsoft Flight Simulator, so there are zero grounds to call me a flight sim hater. We even already tried hamstrung atmospheric flight in the past and everybody hated it.
I really think it is an incredibly unwise decision to bend the knee to the vocal minority of flight sim purists in this case. (As it has proven to be in every case for this game.) Sure, DCS is fantastic, we all have it. But Star Citizen is not and should not become DCS, or we'd all be playing DCS instead. We're not. Star Citizen represents freedom, rather than the same old stuff we've had for decades.
I, for one, prefer the spaceflight model of Babylon 5. "WW2 in Space" makes absolutely no sense to me.
Nice vid! I am bugged everytime when the ships in SC fly like baloons as you said, but also like they have no weight. Every ship should behave more sluggish, just like you see in basically every cinematic trailer from SC or even every cinematic trailer or movie basically anywhere else where there is cool spaceships. Thanks for making this video, I completely agree! Keep it up man!
Well some or rly a lot of ships especially igher ones will always have to their thrusters on because they either don't have wings or their design just would never actually allow them to fly like a regular jet plane.. that is of course if we're going for realism here
can someone tell me what game is at 0:57 please?
sounds awesome but i hope they don't make it so complicated that it discourages players
It blows my mind that they didn't learn from Zelda's last two games where the one foul design choice that virtually everyone hates is things constantly breaking from use. "What if everything you do slowly wears out everything you're using so you have to constantly repair items and ships?" Is a bad gameplay choice.
Please no, CIG. Please. Please.
So I wonder, how will this work with alien ships such as the San'tok.yāi or Khartu-Al? That should be really interesting. Will those ships just have an advantage in atmosphere due to their unique designs?
There are a lot of assumptions made in this video about "what it means" that will not pan out, if a decade of history has anything to say about it. Still a good discussion video, and some nice things presented, and I appreciate how it is well-structured with relevant b-roll.
im wayy more of a fan of tuning the thruster outpout as opposed to making them "wear out qucker" or "overheat"
It will be interesting to see what they do with the block with thrusters on it (constellations) and the Redeemer.
Even Star Citizen doesn't give you total, complete freedom - your Quantum Drive can only take you to places you lock onto first - you CANNOT just pick a direction and go, at least, not with Quantum Drive! You CAN do so with standard, sublight engines/thrusters, but how far can those really take you?
I guess they don't want people running out of fuel in the middle of nowhere, and calling the Fuel Rats for help. Strange, since they have introduced a ship that is perfect for that!
The Aegis Vulcan handles refueling, rearming, and even light repairs on-site, far away from space stations! Why then, would CIG limit the Quantum Drive so? There's already a solution!
the atmospheric flight model is not complete without those flight control surfaces
To buld on what you said about hot and cold planets, hot planets should overheat your engines more, but i think it would be cool if cold planets had a fully reversed effect where control surface icing becomes a concern but engines cool off faster, encouraging super aggressive engine use while still operating in atmosphere. This could even give a slight edge to different ships that focus on different aspects depending on the atmosphere present. For example, a brick of a ship with overcompensating maneuver thrust would fair better in cold environments than the more forward thrust, control surface ships. How that makes sense when they all use exclusively maneuver thrust in space? Idk lol it just sounds fun.
I hope that in the future they will have materials that would no longer burn out the thrusters like Musk is doing now. It would really help if they really knew how it all worked vs. winging it like the past.
Hopefully they balance it well. Many industrial/large ships do not have any control surfaces so they will Need to still rely on thrusters.
well researched and put together vid. thanks.
This would be useful for when some idiot accidentally turns off their ship and the engines won't turn back on despite fatality falling
Which game is at 0:55?
finally a good use for those landing tires (300i) series
are we gonna have a landing runaways?
I'm not against these changes but is this really something that needed to be worked on in the grand scheme of things? Seems like there's a lot bigger, more fundamental, issues that need working on...
Coming from DCS, it seems weird to see a massive hull-C stand still meters above the ground like a levitating feather
Aerodynamic Control Surfaces via physical flaps and such is a welcome improvement. However I think a non physical version via shaped shield force fields (blade based processing to handle the task) would be another way to achieve this. A lumpy ship like the Starfarer, with its exposed belly of tanks and catwalks, could have an extended and aerodynamic shape via such a virtual shield based hull that might look graceful with such a winglike robe of a shield form. Something manta like lit up by reentry plasma while slamming through a Gas Giant's atmosphere, for an example. I'm imagining this by animating the Signed Distance Field tech they've used to switch to conformal shields from the older bubble fields.
Cant wait hope they get it more believable as for now its more arcade than sim. Also keep for runways and the like for those ships with wheels.
I don't think this is a game anymore, just a simulator that progressively gains complexity and might take on some more solid gameplay characteristics in the distant future.
Looking forward to the control surfaces. It will do more to add atmosphere as a layer on top of spaceship flight. It will not (and future additions should never) replace the foundation though. Y'all hardcore flight sim-heads should be careful about where you set your expectations.
Control surface have been part of the plan for a while. Even the Aurora got them, as well as the hover propellers.
I really hope they do this properly and not half assing a tier 0 of it where most of the features aren't even implemented and keeping it that way for years like they did with so many other features.
Does microsoft simulator, ace combat or call of duty or battlefield have that mechanic?
Momentum needs to be a factor too, so the vehicles look like they're having their weight pushed around by thrusters. Don't know if that's an animation problem or if weight can be keyed into a physics engine, which takes care of the whole thing, but right now ships, whether in space or in an atmosphere, move like they're being clicked and dragged through a volume - it's so dissatisfying.
Still on a mission to get you hired by CIG to fix their #!@$ing audio.
i look forward to flying my first glyde slope and landing already
what is with landing gear with tank tracks like the vanguard ? XDDD This should destroy the landing zone you land ^^ ^^ would be nice addition .
As someone who backed in 2012, I'm really disappointed that in year 11 they're still talking about prototyping features, and can't roadmap when they'll be done.
You mentioned changes to the damage modeling and disabling ships via destruction of components and thrusters, but I have one question that so far nobody that I know of, either in CIG or the community has asked.
What about pilot sniping?
In other words, if a ships shields go down and a system is in place where projectiles can penetrate a ship and damage interior components, whats stopping a single sufficiently sized round from penetrating the cockpit and immediately pulping the pilot? It seems to me that, in terms of dogfighting, most of the systems they want to add are irrelevant because most fight are going to end the moment someones shields go down and they get shot through their cockpit window.
It would entirely depend on how strong they want the armor for the cockpit windows to be balanced. In the game's lore the cockpit windows are not glass. They are instead transparent metal alloys. So with fictitious metals already in the game, they could balance the cockpit armor to be decently strong if they wanted. Overall, they never want 1-hit kill weapons for combat outcomes. They always want it to be an earned kill in some way.
So all of this is super cool, but has anyone thought about the more alien ships in this system? They work primarily on main thrusters and dont have standard wings for flaps.
If I wanted realistic atmospheric flight I would play DCS
I find the current "flight model" to be more akin to moving a camera around 3D space. It's neither fun nor interesting to me. I'm psyched for these control surfaces, even if it means that I smash my ship into the ground / trees / buildings / et al until I learn how to fly using it. This is my most anticipated (potentially near term) feature, followed by ship tractor beams.
i cant wait for a near DCS level fligt model, give us drag and lift please!!!. (i hate hovering ships)
What is that black and white ship 10 secs into the video?
This is why Star Citizen is still going! - Attention to Detail
Ugh. I am apprehensive for what this will do to low-flying and racing.
I really hope that ships without proper vtol and even those with wont be able to hover in place for more than a few moments
Engine activity should have next to nothing to do with radar signature. Radar is all about surfaces. Control/lift surfaces tending to increase signature massively.
*Laughs in Vulture
Why do all of your vids make me want to buy a RAFT
I'm curious how the racing community are going to take this change when it comes. I'm here for it completely but we can pretty much say goodbye to the current racetracks we have.
No control surfaces on the vulture ...lmao.
it will fall like a brick
Or guzzle all it fuel turning in atmo... then fall like a brick.
More interesting atmospheric flight is itself a reason to go in atmo. Current atmospheric flight is very boring, the option to just hover anywhere with no real cost really drains the fun of planning a flight, plus the current model's low altitude sludge effect on speed kills any dreams of zipping around mountains, etc.
Fix the atmo model to be easy enough to get "just flying well enough" but with a very high risk high reward skill ceiling and I wager lots of people will spend more time planetside just to enjoy the thrills.
STOP FUNDING SCOPE-CREEP. If we're doing control-surfaces, allow artificial gravity only by spin or by thrust
Until they Nerf the maneuvering thrusters none of this matters. Ships in Star Citizen behave like they have anti-gravity technology right now
So hopefully a connie bcomes a brick in atmo and a cors becomes lots and lots better and A2's become more low orbit bombers, not atmo bombers? (wishfull thinking)
Shout out to all the owners of a cutter.
So... 17 minutes of speculation. Got it.
So... another snarky comment from some random on youtube. The man literally tells you it's all speculation at 1:50. Hear that? It's the sound of you getting toasted alive.
Idk how my cutter is gonna fly in atmosphere when they add this in
Starfarer pilots rejoice! Spoilers = aerodynamics 🤪
Why is it getting changed? Thought its not out until Sept? Oh sorry mistook this demo for that actual game.
All I hear is top gun in my head…
Current casual flight model is a joke.
Nothing but a money grabbing ship simulator. Maybe they should fix the broken buggy pos game before they worry about how you fly, but why do that when every just keeps sinking more money into Roberts yachts and million dollar homes.
really miss old concept of hover mod (2 or 3 years ago?). Thats was fun to handle ship and way more realistic. I hate hovering ship with nose done hanging in air without movement like a ballon...afraid that everything in flight model will be simplified because of stupid lazy player...want a sim, not arcade.
"Pyro on the horizon" LMAO 🤣 Yeah, VERY FAR ON THE HORIZON. Like another 4 years.
...in 10 years
Crash simulator