Note: This conversation started as a break and forth between Yogi and Avenger One. I'm not a combat focused player, I'm here for good information and context. I hope you enjoy and get the most out of this 😊 Also apologies on any sound issues, still ironing out the new PC!
Thank you for bringing on such awesome guests as always. The discussion on MM has us all on the edges of our seats. Your opinion matters too. We want to hear what you think.
YOGI: Thank you so much for participating in this podcast. Thank you for all the work you have done, are doing, and will do for the project. You are an asset to the community. o7
Yogi being on this Podcast is absolutely amazing. Im also very glad to learn hes a DCS veteran and seemingly a very experienced PvP player, so i cant think of someone better suited to be in charge of the flight model. Ofc he still has to act from a design perspective, but after hearing him talk here im convinced PvP is in good hands.
@@SpaceTomatoToo Avenger referencing Squadrons to talk about locking players into long term play via quality pvp is so ironic. His ultra-sweaty meta-exploits went a long way toward killing that community. Someone needs to ask him about that. --Hardcore Squadrons guy that saw it firsthand.
Tomato, Avenger_One, and SaltyMike are the 3 biggest content creators in this game (for me at least). I would absolutely LOVE to see them Immortalized in S42 as characters as storyline or even tutorials. Maybe something like Avenger_One as a aerospace combat mentor of some sort, Tomato as an overall tutor, and Salty as maybe a grumpy npc ally/foe that could be hired/fought or even as a contract provider… With their own voices, appearance, and likeness… Im willing to bet without these 3 content creators the game would feel more empty as far as player base and morale regarding the development of the Verse overall… Love ya’ll, and wish the best! o7
@@SpaceTomatoTooreally ? - I think its more than that - its the tech starting to come together - the realization that maybe the promises are now almost real . I'd be confident too if I could suddenly now glimpse the finish line as a developer .
@@kerravon6058 is kinda a saying. They have the receipts as in a lot of what has been worked on that couldn't be talked about is not there as receipts to back up what they're saying.
I appreciate Yogi coming out explaining the issues. I like the direction CIG is going with being more open and facing critics and having hard conversations.
Bro, you crushed it as a damn good moderator during a pretty tense discussion around a contentious issue. Really appreciate you hosting this discussion, and I hope this leads to more informal sitdowns with devs in the future.
Yogi is awesome! Thank you for taking the time to interact with the community on this level, a lot of the big gaming companies lost their sense of community and great games first focus. This is refreshing! Yogi is definitely the type of dude it would be great to sit down and have a beer with!
@@Turican76 Completely out of context as usual. Skilled Pilots can dance around for 15 mins before a 1v1 kill. Also as a general rule If you kill someone quickly you are more skilled than your opponent. Someone offering feedback after thousands of hours of play is someone i definitely want to give CIG feedback. You may not agree with AV1s feedback, but the issues he and the PvP community raises are legit. These are the people flying the most. I haven't seen anyone saying to stick to the current flight model. MM fixes a lot of issues in the current flight model. However in it its current iteration MM needs some work. I honestly dont know why I'm pissing in the wind here. It just astounds me how people have such hate for people who genuinely want the game to be the best it can be.
Thank you and the PvP community for always trying to make the game better for us all. You all do us a great service even when faced with a lot of angry haters. It is great to see the discussion of these podcasts. This one and the one with SaltEMike and Virgjl. Keep the discussions going. A lot of us who do not have the time to play as much want to know from the guys who sit in the cockpit more than anyone else. We want to know and understand. Keep it up!
ok, hearing he worked with audio before and then got put on the flight model kinda made it all clear to me why MM is so bad.. he has no clue what hes doing, the old flight was made by a sim veteran.. MM is made by a audio guy.. but good for you i guees
Love the fact that Yogi mentioned Matchmaking as an issue… this is (imo) the biggest issue with dogfight right now. It is too hard for rookie pilots to find people at their level to train without getting absolutely destroyed by ace pilots who sleep in AC !
I would much rather learn from an ace than make mistakes and get lucky beating a rookie. The coolest ace pilots out there are best to train against when they are willing to tell you how to improve. The masters will see how you fly and know how to coach you. Beating another rookie in a free for all might have you create and cement bad habits
@@schlagzahne6741 Agreed, and this is how I learned too (and keep learning). But I don't believe it to be the most common way of playing a video game. Most people don't engage with others in their first 100hours of playing a game, they just take fight see if they like the game and that's it. And that's the reason why we have so few pilots with the current way it is. If you add matchmaking, have the noobs enjoying the game and then if they really like it and they want to learn, they will go and engage with others to learn.
This has been some of the most interesting MM content on UA-cam in the past week or so. REALLY enjoyed hearing Yogi's takes on the game, development, the future, etc. Thanks for making this happen!
Agreed...however a light fighter shouldnt be allowed to tank at the same levels of a heavy fighter. A 2 second burst from a main cannon should splash it quickly where a Medium and heavy fighter you need a bit more time to kill.
Give heavy ships and their turrets special capacitors that increase energy weapon velocity and range that small ships don't get. This might be a way to balance the weapons with both a "lore" reason and improve gameplay. Ballistics wouldn't be affected but obviously still have the limitations of total ammo stored.
Faster charging capacitors and deeper ammo pools (maybe switchable ammo types) are the coolest and easiest to explain bonuses to give larger ships. Being able to switch the magazines on a large ships turrets could help as well.
Or just add flak. An aoe proximity weapon would literally solve all of this. And it’s a stated planned weapon and baked into the lore. Just. Add. Flak.
Big thanks Tomato for facilitating this conversation and your questions to Yogi as well. This is the kind of development communication we've been hoping for!
The thing about pips is interesting, I personally think the pips should ONLY show within "effective range" so you would still be forced to get into visual range before the pips even appear, this would keep the quality of life the pips provide and also prevent the "hud only gameplay" that comes from fighting outside of visual range. I could see this being a best of both worlds outcome.
i would love that too. Having a lag pip within range makes since. Gyroscopic sights existed towards the end of ww2 which is basically a lag pip (range is estimated by knowledge of wingspan). Getting rid of pips outright would be a mistake, at that point you might as well also get rid of radar because thats more detrimental to manual gunnery than a pip is
OK>... GOT IT... 1:09:00 I see what they are doing now. Elite Dangerous, all ships fly the same, crap slow yaw, crazy fast pitch, you roll to compensate, no matter if it's an Anaconda, or a Sidewinder. They all behave the same. That's what they are changing. They are talking about flight characteristics, so, for example, some ships might yaw faster then pitch, some might roll better or worse, boost performance, top speed, yaw, shield strength, etc. all of this is set by the archetype. They have internal crappy names for groupings of performance settings, then they will further adjust individual ships after this baseline is established. Now I get what they are doing. Each ship is gonna fly differently, it's gonna feel different.
So you went from "oh they are making all ships fly the same" to "but eventually each ship will fly differently". Okay, so what are you trying to say here?
@@Aztaable Eventually they will be different when MM is done. What ever the ships are now will be gone. Each type of characteristic, be it pitch, yaw, roll, acceleration, boost, different thrusters, etc, are being put in groups of archtypes they are defining for each ship as a starting point. Those archtypes are loosely based on the role of the ship. Then they will customize each ship individually to the needs of the ship. That's what's happening.
This was really interesting to listen to. I always wondered what a conversation between these two would look like. Good job Space on letting these guys talk. I love to hear from you, but I think you were right to just let the conversation proceed in this case. I totally disagree with Avenger on his ttk points though. I would argue that ships really shouldn't "die" but instead should become more and more disabled. I know this is really an argument for when armor and other systems come online but along with Yogi's point, it doesn't feel good to spend a half an hour and then die in 2.5 seconds. It would feel much more immersive to me to have my ship get disabled where I live but lose the battle and have to call for help to get repaired or get a lift.
Yogi: "I like the feeling of not knowing what's happening. You know there are some FPS with no hit markers and you fire at somebody and the enemy would be knocked over behind a desk, and like is he dead, is he not dead, and you go there and the guy is not there. I like that you have to work with imperfect knowledge." Exactly! I have been saying this since freaking 2015. So why do we have so much information in our HUDs? hit markers, kill confirms, Xray vision? Jesus. There is no room for suspense and intel gathering with the direction this is going!
Great interview Space. Was nice to hear the different view points, it still feels like all these MM discussions are missing hugely critical game systems that CIG in their own words have said, will have fundamental and critical effects on combat. Making MM like 25 percent of the overall combat balance metric. These include but are not limited to, resource management (finally brought up at 1hr 17min), ship uptime, tuning, counter repair gameplay, and many other aspects that cig have said will drastically effect things. Not to mention other systems like maelstrom, death of a spaceman (as described by CR) etc. I am also concerned that fighters are being balanced with out any real consideration to large and capital ships even at this early stage. This is a bad omen and feels like it will just set up pvp and combat players to get frustrated when the eventual rebalance comes and changes everything once again. I know they will get to it eventually but hopefully they are at least having it top of mind now while they are so focused on fighters. In short… this debate will pop up time and time and time and time again. Can't help but feel alot of drama over something that will be unbalanced by new gameplay systems coming online after 3.23.
Great to have representatives from different stakeholders of SC come together to discuss the topic of MM. We're long past the stage of this topic of just receiving information passively from CIG. This is exactly where the topic should be. Hearing input from both the devs and the players in an open forum (thank you @spacetomatotoo!). And we can already see the fruits of this. Open and public realization that on fundamental aspects of MM, are shared. We are all on the same page - CIG with their vision and players with their expectations. The rest, tbh, are details (not to diminish the importance of them). But with realizing fundamentals are shared, then we can talk more openly and less aggressively about the spectrum of solutions at our disposal.
I agree with A_One in that the mechanical focus of combat should be PVP. Balancing for PVP is more difficult but also more fundamental, because for PVE you can then take PVP balance and just adjust the AI competence, AI equipment, AI enemy amount, mission structure etc...
I think the answer to almost ALL of these questions should be based on COMPONENTS and or engineering choices! If I throw in a HIGH Output power generator that can shove juice down the barrel of my lasers then I should get a better range and higher DPS out of them but obviously a ridiculously lower rate of fire. Vs I equip a generator that has the ability to rapidly push power down the barrel then I gain rate of fire but lose range and possible DPS. You add to this the weapon choice itself, as in the weapon only has the ability to accept x amount of power so even if you equipped a generator that has the ability to push a higher amount of power the weapon itself can't take it without perhaps damage to it in an over charge situation. The conversation on the HH vs fighter range for instance. If a squadron of fighters shows up and is equipped appropriately that they can switch to long range mode and its upto the HH crew to recognize this and also shift power accordingly to either increase weapons range or dump all the extra power into their shields which cause zero damage from the fighters coming in. There is NO end to possibilities if this is adjusted through components which makes all of it player decisions.
I dont think tomatoe realizes how much this video is about to blow up. This is finally a statement about the game not being a pvp murder hobo fest like eve, and instead being pvevp
They have been saying that for years. How are ppl still not clear about that? Oh, it's because there are no safe zones, and the only thing those people can think of is how they are going to die anywhere they go.
Great conversation. It's also a great reminder for a lot of folks out there that like to think "just change X and it will be objectively better". It's easy to forget how big of a game SC is and that changes made have to consider the FULL CONTEXT and not just for a small percentage of players in just one of the many branches of gameplay. It's all a balancing act.
At 1:10:50 the turret changes coming will make the Vanguard significantly more potent vs light fighters getting too close if the turrets get autogimbal.
Holy crap!! This was awesome! Thank you, for bringing these two together! I'm a fan of both Yogi and Avenger! So, nice to be in a space that they both can come together to really talk about the flight model, combat, game design progression, etc! This was a dream show for me. So, happy that CIG supports such Frank and open communication with the community. Thanks, tomato for making this happen!
Conversations like this remind me why I will probably play SC on and off for years and years and years. Can't say that about many games. Much love to spacetomato, yogi, and a1 for the discussion.
ROFL @1:11:36 Yogi with that cup of tea smirk... So your sayin you have that higher chance against heavy fighter then ? A1) Yes.... Yogi) smirks again without sayin it but i think he wants to say " you wont think that this patch" lol think this is where the weapon size vs shields is playin a roll. heavies wont fear lights as much unless there are many . Im liking Yogi more and more
There have been some epic talks across many channels in the past few days, but Yogi throwing his hat into the ring... I didn't see that coming!! Amazing
Yogi!! Thank you for taking the time to expand upon this subject with players in the community! Please come back from time to time and keep up the great work. A1 and Space as always thank you for having this conversation.
I really don't want to not enjoy this game..I want to play forever, but right about 33:00 is where it gets hard for me to have faith. I have a ton of respect for Yogi and other devs, he gives valuable information, and he has a great attitude, and I do believe him, and know it's not easy, but It's the little comments. At the time stamp he defines that if you don't have the right weapons you can't fight. What if you set up your ship a certain way? Now we all need $60mil aeuc to walk around with and buy other weapons, pre knowing what we'll need in every situation? Or just... eliminate the need for situations? .. not cool. Then shortly after, you can hear the death of the Space Cowboy. All the SWars people wanting SC to be the same, just witnessed the death of the Falcon. If you can't Han Brolo in a rando unexpected ship and win they day because "that's not it's role", or "I used the wrong ballistic weapon's on my ship", or " I can't fly in and help because 'role' reasons " .. then we lose the Outlaw, or Hero, or rando Heroic Citizen, you know? Yogi describes that no ship will be different in the way they're all eliminated the same in the face of any given power struggle, and that you will HAVE to overwhelm your opponent with dps.. how is that fun or inclusive to pro or casual players new or old not in an org or group? How can you Space Cowboy and be the Falcon or the Po if the "rules" and "roles" and "loadouts" say you can't? This is what it feels like will happen in the PU with MMs. I just really want to continue to enjoy SC. This comes from a place of genuine enjoyment of ALL parts PvP and PvE in SC. I hope it works out
I have concerns about how balance is planned to be done, based on feel and what is wanted. Classic current design example is the M50 and Gladius, in the old TR(thruster rating system) both ships had identical TR on the twin primary and maneuver thrusters, the main difference between these was the M50 had racing versions and Gladius had military, after that fact both had similar components in size(including maximum possible), with the m50 having slightly better power generation with twin s2(2x 2small in current sizing) power plants and Gladius max if s3(3x small). The key thing was the M50 was smaller, lower mass by almost 50%, at the cost of limited armament (2x s2 gun hardpoints and 2x s1 missiles) and no armour. It was said the m50 was the Murray Cup racer, to surpass the 350r and Razor, yet the heavier Gladius almost matches the flight performance of the m50. My concern is CIG loss of ship concern and design to feeling and what they think should happen. It's like YogiKlatt comments about the F7C Hornet, this ship even being heavier than the Gladius was marketed and designed by how it's maneuver thrusters and its gimballed primary thruster was designed to have extremely high turn rates, and slightly lower primary thruster compared to the Gladius. I get the feeling cig has lost the focus of ships being designed and modeled to meet their role, for instead spreadsheet balancing. Why did the early ships have their thrusters located in specific locations, it was to make the craft act and look like the spaceshuttle when it maneuvered, or like the B5 Fighters, where thruster placement and power actually meant something. The MSR hull design and thruster placement should make its maneuver profile much worse than it currently is. I don't know how I feel about the current focus of balancing and ship modelling. I'm very concerned this is turning SC into battlefield 2024 in space, and no the vision of Chris Roberts Freelancer he wanted to make back in the day now.
When will the CONI VTOL Mode produce lift? When You turn off the Coni bottom thrusters, it drops as if no thrust is coming from the VTOL. If you turn the VTOL on and thrust directly up, Your acceleration upwards is the same as if the VTOL is not even on. A Coni In Atmosphere could use the VTOL to increase its pitch up speed for better targeting. I expect the Coni in Atmo to have its VTOL on even in combat for better maneuvering. Coni VTOL is very powerful because it does not use the same thrusters or engines to produce lift that it uses to move forward. It is a completely different VTOL than any other ships. It is Added to the Ship and not a change in direction of other engines. Coni is Special like that.
Interesting topic. Yogi is right Star Citizen is a PVE game that allows PVP not the other way around. For A1, all he mainly does is PVP so I can see where his confusion lies.
This was super interesting, thank you for the talk! I'd love to see more conversations like this one, with the understanding of course that it's all a bit off the cuff and maybe not the 'official' final word on a subject. I'm still not convinced about MM with regards to light industrial. It's still the case if you're in a light industrial and any other kind of ship appears, you have already lost the engagement, nothing you do matters. You can't run, you can't fight and it doesn't matter if your shields are good, they can take all the time in the world just wearing them down. Generally, if you're in a light industrial ship, you don't have that many resources, so you probably don't have escorts. Still very keen to see how that pans out. That all said, I like most of what Yogi said. It feels like it's in good hands. The tricky part will be making PvP enjoyable for for both 'P's, rather than just being one-sided. Ground PvP combat is just the same, boring cheese strats over and over in PvP so I hope ship combat works out better.
Tomato, Avenger_One, and SaltyMike are the 3 biggest content creators in this game (for me at least). I would absolutely LOVE to see them Immortalized in S42 as characters as storyline or even tutorials. Maybe something like Avenger_One as a aerospace combat mentor of some sort, Tomato as an overall tutor, and Salty as maybe a grumpy npc ally/foe that could be hired/fought or even as a contract provider… With their own voices, appearance, and likeness… Im willing to bet without these 3 content creators the game would feel more empty as far as player base and morale regarding the development of the Verse overall… Love ya’ll, and wish the best! o7
Thanks yogi for the amazing input. Really makes up for the scl. Good work as always on the game!! And thanks space youre the best loce your content keep it up!!!
8:41 this is when the ship fighting was at its best. I remember the change. Instead of shooting at the pips, I was shooting at the actual enemy ship. I remembered that era because that's when I beat Vanduul Swarm and got my "aggressor" patch.
Thanks Tomato for getting Yogi and Avenger together to discus this.. I gotta say I was really salty about MM combat.. I think as of now it is slow and boring and pretty much kneecap's and drop's the skill ceiling to the floor, and I had little faith that they would actually fix this.. But after watching Yogi and Avenger talk it out, and hearing how Yogi feels about the system as it stands and how he wants to improve is makes me feel better about where they plan to go with MM.. Fingers crossed!!
This whole talk was, Yogi saying, "So this is the data we have so this is what we're going to do." and Avenger One saying, "That's not true, my 1v1 and I'm awesome so I kill everything in a Gladius." Yogi's portion of the talk was great and revealing, Avenger One is not a great guest and wouldn't have him back. It's clear he just wants Star Citizen to be Star Wars Squadrons.
@1:22:40 This is how you get 85% of your playerbase to ALT-F4 and never return. Yogi absolutely correct that low/fast* TTK is fun... in _Arena Commander._ PVP'ers who think Star Citizen should be _Rust in Space_ apparently have no idea how much direct harm they cause to the potential success of the game.
This is a great and important discussion. FYI for some reason while listening to the podcast on apple today, in my vehicle, the sound cut out for about 85% of the interview in the middle. I hope everything is going well with you personally Tomato! I just heard about your misfortune. Good vibes, well wishes and prayers heading your way!
"This is a PVE game that allows PVP" - That is a very clear, agreeable and sensible directive. Players should always be in and engage with the environment first and if that leads into a situation where they engage each other then hat is as it should be. This very much aligns with my general attitude that PVP should be a means to an end and not a goal. Having said that, I am pretty sure many PVP focussed players wil not have appreciated hearing those words even when in the context of the game they absolutely make sense and are the correct position to take.
Yeah, Yogi corrected that statement on spectrum earlier today saying he misspoke and that they prioritize pve and pvp equally. “This was indeed misspoken on my part. My comment was part of a casual discussion on space combat and was meant to emphasis that Star Citizen is not purely a PVP-focused game, and that there are design decisions we have to balance to consider how to best support PVE scenarios and combat simultaneously. Just to be clear: Star Citizen prioritizes both PVE and PVP aspects equally, and it is crucial that we develop an experience that caters to and supports both playstyles. This should be the biggest takeaway.”
@@zipflame That is just a more political way of saying the same thing. The whole discussion was about how emphasis on PVP as a main driver is not good for the game as the audience for it is just a subset of the total player base. Of course both get the attention they need and both have their place. Facts are that in general though, while maybe louder, the "pure PVP player" is in the minority and so, for the good of the game, PVE needs to eventually be the driver (while PVP is the closer). The sidestep to EVE there was good as that game may have the pretty pictures and stories around PVP, the core of the game, where everything starts, is PVE content though. Now EVE and SC are different beasts so there is no real 1:1 compare, but the general rules of game design are the same. In the end I felt the bottom line was "If the few that excel at PVP need to lose some of their advantages (and "suffer") for the good of the game overall, then that is what happens". To draw a hard line, if CIG lost the hardcore PVP top end, i would be a relative minor number, if they fail to attract the lower end into the game (and possibly PVP) AND not retain them, then they lose big time.
@@blazemonger1 I think agree with the overall interpretation, but I think I have to disagree that his clarification is essentially the same thing as his initial comments. In the stream he made it clear that pvp was secondary to pve but his later statement clarifies that they are prioritized equally. There are of course instances like he said where decisions are made to prioritize the wellbeing of the game as a whole rather than a subset of players. But that can affect pve and pvp both depending on the situation. For example master modes is primarily meant to benefit the pvp experience. I think it’s a misinterpretation to think he means star citizen is pve or pvp first. Star citizen is an overall health first game, which could hurt pvp and pve respectively. Just my interpretation.
@@zipflameRegardless, the point to take is that the game is meant for ALL types of gamers...yet the vocal minority within the PvP community (typically the sweats) try to demand that the game be entirely about PvP and everything should cater to them...with the whole galaxy being a constant warzone pretty much. THIS is the extremism us normal players are trying to fight against
I think UI plays a bigger role than we currently discuss for beginners especially. The UI must communicate the effective range of a weapon or a missile intuitively and precise. Balancing around weapon range by adjusting the cone spread will probably be the defining property for combat ships. It will dictate how you need to engage an enemy and what types of ships are favorable fights to pick.
31:30 - Large shields not being effected by small weapons (example: size 3anti fighter vs size 3 shields) 1:07:35 - Archetype tuning in depth 1:08:24 Xi'an Ships mentioned. understand that theyre easy to hit but 3.23 tunings dont make up for that 1:12:17 - Mention ships that dont fit archetypes
Great episode, sir. Lots of good info. I would really like to see the devs do more of these. It's interesting to see a more loosely formatted discussion. Lots more info gets dumped. Well done, both you and Avenger_One!
What im looking forward to the most is a time were armor and flight model and such are relatively sorted out and they can get into adding crazy weapons. Id love to see stuff close to what starsector has; cluster missiles, EMP lasers, laser/Drone missiles! Maybe something like a misile taht deploys a cloud of chaff on its target, that can force capital ships to move or something. I dont know, but overall i just want more flashy weapons, theres no way they will ignore the chance to have lasers of every color with different properties. And CANNONS, like actual cannons, not just slower repeaters.
When you tell someone "This game has PVP in it" Anyone who wants pvp will see that and play. No Need to cater to them, They will find and practice so they are better than the average person. No mater how easy you make it for someone with mouse and keyboard to have a great time and easily control the ships within its limits, someone who wants to pvp will be better and focus on the pvp interactions far more than the average player.
furies and snub snips are competitors to light vehicles. they are potential replacements for ground vehicles with more limited up time. For example in my carrack. i can stick 2 cyclones inside to be sent on long term patrols guarding ground missions or picking up stranded troops. but i can also stick 2 furies inside for emergancy response to provide air support to my ground troops on missions until the carrack can get airborne and get into position. so in my carrack for instance if possible i would keep 2 argo cargo inside the front bay. 2 rovers and 2 cycles with 2 titan suits inside the lower cargo area. then 1 pisces and 2 furies in the top bay. i can then deploy rovers or ground mining vehicles with a rover or cyclone as a defense against possible attackers. in this case i would keep the cyclones as a response team and keep a rover with the mining vehicles. they come under attack the miners retreat into the rover and arm up while the rover runs. the carrack deploys 1 or 2 furies to provide additional support and the carrack either launches 2 rovers or moves to provide additional support. say your rover goes down then your 2 cyclones have 1 spare seat to pick up the miners and if the rover and 2 cyclones goes down you have a backup rover ready to go. but the basics are that this also means when the carrack lands for a mission it can deploy 10-14 additional guns and another possible 2-4 on a Pisces. i would keep missile lauchers or anti air guns inside the rovers and you get 4 missiles on the cyclones and 4 missiles per fury. which is a decent small package for ground fights.
If you see this, Yogi, how I feel is like this: appreciative that you were prepared to do this stream; believing that you as an individual are striving for a balance where newcomers don't rage-quit in frustration but flight is not an arcade game; hopeful, as a former professional pilot, that you will give me a decent in-game experience since the only reason I got into SC was to fly - but fly more as when jumping into a Tiger Moth than as pilot in command / pilot flying of a computer system that has wings.
For the snub fighter question at the end, I see snubs as a swarm ship. They absolutely suck by themselves but give them lots of numbers and they become a threat.
I think the biggest issue SC has had in previous flight models and weapons is too much ambiguity. If I am playing DCS and I want to avoid a missile for BVR combat, I know there are well-documented techniques like notching that will always work if done correctly. In SC if I want to dodge a missile, I just continuously spam the flare noise button and the missile just zips around and will maybe hit me? This isn't something only for missiles but this is some of the gameplay inconsistencies I am talking about.
This was amazing, yogi having a chill chat with the backers makes this feel like a group project instead of a souless corpet enterprise. I hope more deves choose to do more podcasts like this🙏
![[UA] NAVI vs MOUZ | BO5 | IEM Rio 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CMBYk0cbGoA/mqdefault.jpg)
Note: This conversation started as a break and forth between Yogi and Avenger One. I'm not a combat focused player, I'm here for good information and context. I hope you enjoy and get the most out of this 😊
Also apologies on any sound issues, still ironing out the new PC!
Thank you for bringing on such awesome guests as always. The discussion on MM has us all on the edges of our seats. Your opinion matters too. We want to hear what you think.
Great job letting things flow so Yogi could really share his expertise and insight with us!
Such a good video! Thanks for creating a platform that facilitates this kind of communication!
This was honestly so good, thank you.
This is a great example of dev direct contact you don’t see this often with video game companies today
YOGI: Thank you so much for participating in this podcast. Thank you for all the work you have done, are doing, and will do for the project. You are an asset to the community. o7
I am glad that Yogi Klatt is telling it as it is. Thanks for coming Yogi.
yeah
Awesome to hear honesty from an actual expert for sure.
No BS, just how it is or how he see it.
It's fantastic to hear him just talk about these things.
Yogi being on this Podcast is absolutely amazing. Im also very glad to learn hes a DCS veteran and seemingly a very experienced PvP player, so i cant think of someone better suited to be in charge of the flight model. Ofc he still has to act from a design perspective, but after hearing him talk here im convinced PvP is in good hands.
Good on you for getting Yogi on here. Tomato you deserve some voice lines to be recorded and put into SC one day or in S42.
Shout out to Avenger for getting the ball rolling on the talk. Always happy to facilitate some good conversation around these topics.
@@SpaceTomatoToo Avenger referencing Squadrons to talk about locking players into long term play via quality pvp is so ironic. His ultra-sweaty meta-exploits went a long way toward killing that community. Someone needs to ask him about that. --Hardcore Squadrons guy that saw it firsthand.
Tomato, Avenger_One, and SaltyMike are the 3 biggest content creators in this game (for me at least). I would absolutely LOVE to see them Immortalized in S42 as characters as storyline or even tutorials. Maybe something like Avenger_One as a aerospace combat mentor of some sort, Tomato as an overall tutor, and Salty as maybe a grumpy npc ally/foe that could be hired/fought or even as a contract provider… With their own voices, appearance, and likeness… Im willing to bet without these 3 content creators the game would feel more empty as far as player base and morale regarding the development of the Verse overall… Love ya’ll, and wish the best! o7
Yogi stepping into the ring, if nothing else, speaks to a new found confidence at CIG
haven't been more excited
The receipts
@@SpaceTomatoTooreally ? - I think its more than that - its the tech starting to come together - the realization that maybe the promises are now almost real . I'd be confident too if I could suddenly now glimpse the finish line as a developer .
@@kerravon6058 is kinda a saying. They have the receipts as in a lot of what has been worked on that couldn't be talked about is not there as receipts to back up what they're saying.
He is full of shit.
I appreciate Yogi coming out explaining the issues. I like the direction CIG is going with being more open and facing critics and having hard conversations.
Dude this was a bloody good achievement getting Yogi and A1 to hash it out, such a good civil chat! On ya Toes!! 🙂
Lol on ya toes! Amazing getting to speak with Yogi and Avenger on this topic.
Bro, you crushed it as a damn good moderator during a pretty tense discussion around a contentious issue. Really appreciate you hosting this discussion, and I hope this leads to more informal sitdowns with devs in the future.
Yogi is awesome! Thank you for taking the time to interact with the community on this level, a lot of the big gaming companies lost their sense of community and great games first focus. This is refreshing! Yogi is definitely the type of dude it would be great to sit down and have a beer with!
It's amazing we get this kind of interaction.
Big thanks to everyone interested in these conversations as well thank you again Tomato for being a great host as always.
You showed everyone that you have no idea how to design a good game for everyone. Quick killing has nothing to do with skill
no thanks to yogi for taking time off to come and talk?
@@Turican76 Completely out of context as usual. Skilled Pilots can dance around for 15 mins before a 1v1 kill. Also as a general rule If you kill someone quickly you are more skilled than your opponent.
Someone offering feedback after thousands of hours of play is someone i definitely want to give CIG feedback. You may not agree with AV1s feedback, but the issues he and the PvP community raises are legit. These are the people flying the most. I haven't seen anyone saying to stick to the current flight model. MM fixes a lot of issues in the current flight model. However in it its current iteration MM needs some work.
I honestly dont know why I'm pissing in the wind here. It just astounds me how people have such hate for people who genuinely want the game to be the best it can be.
@@Silveraga Trolls gona Troll.....
Thank you and the PvP community for always trying to make the game better for us all. You all do us a great service even when faced with a lot of angry haters. It is great to see the discussion of these podcasts. This one and the one with SaltEMike and Virgjl. Keep the discussions going. A lot of us who do not have the time to play as much want to know from the guys who sit in the cockpit more than anyone else. We want to know and understand. Keep it up!
Heck yeah Yogi on Launch Sequence! Yogi's the best! Always great to hear from Yogi!
Amazing podcast! Thank you so much to all who helped make this happen and participated!
Hearing Yogi talk makes me so much more confident that flight combat in SC will stay a cut above any other game. He's great.
ok, hearing he worked with audio before and then got put on the flight model kinda made it all clear to me why MM is so bad.. he has no clue what hes doing, the old flight was made by a sim veteran.. MM is made by a audio guy.. but good for you i guees
As a pvp player I feel much better now after seeing this video - thanks for the explanation and clearing ideas out in a direct way
Love the fact that Yogi mentioned Matchmaking as an issue… this is (imo) the biggest issue with dogfight right now.
It is too hard for rookie pilots to find people at their level to train without getting absolutely destroyed by ace pilots who sleep in AC !
I would much rather learn from an ace than make mistakes and get lucky beating a rookie.
The coolest ace pilots out there are best to train against when they are willing to tell you how to improve. The masters will see how you fly and know how to coach you.
Beating another rookie in a free for all might have you create and cement bad habits
@@schlagzahne6741 Agreed, and this is how I learned too (and keep learning).
But I don't believe it to be the most common way of playing a video game.
Most people don't engage with others in their first 100hours of playing a game, they just take fight see if they like the game and that's it. And that's the reason why we have so few pilots with the current way it is.
If you add matchmaking, have the noobs enjoying the game and then if they really like it and they want to learn, they will go and engage with others to learn.
"Do we have lore for that?", new favorite thing to ask
Reminded me of my autistic af friend😂
Ho-Ly. What incredible guests you have! Especially the man himself Yogi!
This was the best conversation I’ve seen so far in relation to this game.
This has been some of the most interesting MM content on UA-cam in the past week or so. REALLY enjoyed hearing Yogi's takes on the game, development, the future, etc. Thanks for making this happen!
with regard to ttk, that should probably based more on the weapons used, the shields, the hull armor etc etc. Not just on some arbitary number.
Agreed...however a light fighter shouldnt be allowed to tank at the same levels of a heavy fighter. A 2 second burst from a main cannon should splash it quickly where a Medium and heavy fighter you need a bit more time to kill.
Such a good podcast, thanks a lot for making this happen. Lots of info!
Thanks for watching!
I feel like this is the reason Star Citizen is and will be something extremely special for years to come. Great podcast, great discussion!
As a lag pip main, I liked the pip vs sight aim section of the talk. Im nearly convinced that's the future of SC gunnery!
Give heavy ships and their turrets special capacitors that increase energy weapon velocity and range that small ships don't get. This might be a way to balance the weapons with both a "lore" reason and improve gameplay. Ballistics wouldn't be affected but obviously still have the limitations of total ammo stored.
Faster charging capacitors and deeper ammo pools (maybe switchable ammo types) are the coolest and easiest to explain bonuses to give larger ships. Being able to switch the magazines on a large ships turrets could help as well.
Or just add flak. An aoe proximity weapon would literally solve all of this. And it’s a stated planned weapon and baked into the lore.
Just. Add. Flak.
Great talk and so good to have Yogi on the Podcast. Well done ST
so refreshing to hear a dev push back against a content creator's assertion of the (avenger)One True Way
Big thanks Tomato for facilitating this conversation and your questions to Yogi as well. This is the kind of development communication we've been hoping for!
Dang bro, these are the two guys that I MOST want to hear from. Can't wait to watch the rest of the video. NICE JOB!!
"I've never heard of that stream.... OH MY GOD!" Very nice
The thing about pips is interesting, I personally think the pips should ONLY show within "effective range" so you would still be forced to get into visual range before the pips even appear, this would keep the quality of life the pips provide and also prevent the "hud only gameplay" that comes from fighting outside of visual range. I could see this being a best of both worlds outcome.
i would love that too. Having a lag pip within range makes since. Gyroscopic sights existed towards the end of ww2 which is basically a lag pip (range is estimated by knowledge of wingspan). Getting rid of pips outright would be a mistake, at that point you might as well also get rid of radar because thats more detrimental to manual gunnery than a pip is
OK>... GOT IT... 1:09:00 I see what they are doing now. Elite Dangerous, all ships fly the same, crap slow yaw, crazy fast pitch, you roll to compensate, no matter if it's an Anaconda, or a Sidewinder. They all behave the same. That's what they are changing. They are talking about flight characteristics, so, for example, some ships might yaw faster then pitch, some might roll better or worse, boost performance, top speed, yaw, shield strength, etc. all of this is set by the archetype. They have internal crappy names for groupings of performance settings, then they will further adjust individual ships after this baseline is established. Now I get what they are doing. Each ship is gonna fly differently, it's gonna feel different.
This is what I feel is pretty lame and the reason I don't play other games anymore and only SC.. until 3.23 I guess? lol
So you went from "oh they are making all ships fly the same" to "but eventually each ship will fly differently".
Okay, so what are you trying to say here?
@@Aztaable Eventually they will be different when MM is done. What ever the ships are now will be gone. Each type of characteristic, be it pitch, yaw, roll, acceleration, boost, different thrusters, etc, are being put in groups of archtypes they are defining for each ship as a starting point. Those archtypes are loosely based on the role of the ship. Then they will customize each ship individually to the needs of the ship. That's what's happening.
This was really interesting to listen to. I always wondered what a conversation between these two would look like. Good job Space on letting these guys talk. I love to hear from you, but I think you were right to just let the conversation proceed in this case. I totally disagree with Avenger on his ttk points though. I would argue that ships really shouldn't "die" but instead should become more and more disabled. I know this is really an argument for when armor and other systems come online but along with Yogi's point, it doesn't feel good to spend a half an hour and then die in 2.5 seconds. It would feel much more immersive to me to have my ship get disabled where I live but lose the battle and have to call for help to get repaired or get a lift.
Absolutely outstanding discussion Tomato, A1 and Yogi! Puts concerns at ease and can't wait to see the road ahead!
Saw this on Salty Mike's and now coming here to watch the full thing. Amazing work to host these two on your podcast! Bravo!
ST, good job prompting discussion and staying clear to let your guests talk. Too many people jump in too soon.
Yogi: "I like the feeling of not knowing what's happening. You know there are some FPS with no hit markers and you fire at somebody and the enemy would be knocked over behind a desk, and like is he dead, is he not dead, and you go there and the guy is not there. I like that you have to work with imperfect knowledge."
Exactly! I have been saying this since freaking 2015. So why do we have so much information in our HUDs? hit markers, kill confirms, Xray vision? Jesus. There is no room for suspense and intel gathering with the direction this is going!
Shame he's not the FPS guy. I do think CIG is doing a bit to much hand holding/idoit proffing with there FPS.
Great interview Space. Was nice to hear the different view points, it still feels like all these MM discussions are missing hugely critical game systems that CIG in their own words have said, will have fundamental and critical effects on combat. Making MM like 25 percent of the overall combat balance metric. These include but are not limited to, resource management (finally brought up at 1hr 17min), ship uptime, tuning, counter repair gameplay, and many other aspects that cig have said will drastically effect things. Not to mention other systems like maelstrom, death of a spaceman (as described by CR) etc. I am also concerned that fighters are being balanced with out any real consideration to large and capital ships even at this early stage. This is a bad omen and feels like it will just set up pvp and combat players to get frustrated when the eventual rebalance comes and changes everything once again. I know they will get to it eventually but hopefully they are at least having it top of mind now while they are so focused on fighters. In short… this debate will pop up time and time and time and time again. Can't help but feel alot of drama over something that will be unbalanced by new gameplay systems coming online after 3.23.
This was super interesting, thanks to Yogi and Avenger, and the lovely tomato host! Can't wait for 3.23 to go live!
glad they let Yogi talk (on CIG's end). that fucker is awesome. this is actually pretty rare.
he has a great perspective. i don't trust CIG to balance PVP. but... if they're gonna... i'm glad it's this fucker thinking about it.
Great to have representatives from different stakeholders of SC come together to discuss the topic of MM. We're long past the stage of this topic of just receiving information passively from CIG. This is exactly where the topic should be. Hearing input from both the devs and the players in an open forum (thank you @spacetomatotoo!).
And we can already see the fruits of this. Open and public realization that on fundamental aspects of MM, are shared. We are all on the same page - CIG with their vision and players with their expectations. The rest, tbh, are details (not to diminish the importance of them). But with realizing fundamentals are shared, then we can talk more openly and less aggressively about the spectrum of solutions at our disposal.
What a valuable resource you're providing to us with these interviews, Tomato! Thank you!
I agree with A_One in that the mechanical focus of combat should be PVP.
Balancing for PVP is more difficult but also more fundamental, because for PVE you can then take PVP balance and just adjust the AI competence, AI equipment, AI enemy amount, mission structure etc...
I think the answer to almost ALL of these questions should be based on COMPONENTS and or engineering choices! If I throw in a HIGH Output power generator that can shove juice down the barrel of my lasers then I should get a better range and higher DPS out of them but obviously a ridiculously lower rate of fire. Vs I equip a generator that has the ability to rapidly push power down the barrel then I gain rate of fire but lose range and possible DPS. You add to this the weapon choice itself, as in the weapon only has the ability to accept x amount of power so even if you equipped a generator that has the ability to push a higher amount of power the weapon itself can't take it without perhaps damage to it in an over charge situation. The conversation on the HH vs fighter range for instance. If a squadron of fighters shows up and is equipped appropriately that they can switch to long range mode and its upto the HH crew to recognize this and also shift power accordingly to either increase weapons range or dump all the extra power into their shields which cause zero damage from the fighters coming in. There is NO end to possibilities if this is adjusted through components which makes all of it player decisions.
Awesome job hosting this ST, this really helped ease my concerns going forwards!
Thank you Space Tomato for organising this really enjoyed listening to Yogi explaining his thoughts.
This was significantly better quality than any SCL.
I love you Yogi! Thank you for all you do! Thanks for setting up this awesome guided discussion tomato!
I dont think tomatoe realizes how much this video is about to blow up. This is finally a statement about the game not being a pvp murder hobo fest like eve, and instead being pvevp
They been saying that the game aims to have a NPC to PC ratio of 9 : 1 or something like that for a while.
They have been saying that for years. How are ppl still not clear about that?
Oh, it's because there are no safe zones, and the only thing those people can think of is how they are going to die anywhere they go.
Great conversation. It's also a great reminder for a lot of folks out there that like to think "just change X and it will be objectively better". It's easy to forget how big of a game SC is and that changes made have to consider the FULL CONTEXT and not just for a small percentage of players in just one of the many branches of gameplay. It's all a balancing act.
Great stuff, I love how open Yogi is about everything.
It's refreshing!
Best Pod Cast you have done yet. Thank man.
At 1:10:50 the turret changes coming will make the Vanguard significantly more potent vs light fighters getting too close if the turrets get autogimbal.
Every turret will get autogimble
The Vanguard is an S tier fighter. I'm sad it looks like a frozen turkey.
@@CapnSnackbeardalways thought it looked like a knock off pelican
Holy crap!! This was awesome! Thank you, for bringing these two together! I'm a fan of both Yogi and Avenger! So, nice to be in a space that they both can come together to really talk about the flight model, combat, game design progression, etc! This was a dream show for me.
So, happy that CIG supports such Frank and open communication with the community.
Thanks, tomato for making this happen!
Holy crap. Yogi!
This was a fantastic conversation.
That said, yogizis a DCS guy. no discussion of the gun funnel as a pip replacement?
Fun funnel would be cool as fuck
Conversations like this remind me why I will probably play SC on and off for years and years and years. Can't say that about many games.
Much love to spacetomato, yogi, and a1 for the discussion.
Great podcast, always professional from all that were involved. Loved the back and forth between Yogi and you guys. Keep up the great work!
ROFL @1:11:36 Yogi with that cup of tea smirk... So your sayin you have that higher chance against heavy fighter then ? A1) Yes.... Yogi) smirks again without sayin it but i think he wants to say " you wont think that this patch" lol think this is where the weapon size vs shields is playin a roll. heavies wont fear lights as much unless there are many . Im liking Yogi more and more
Cool format and topic glad to see CIG outside of ISC and SCL
There have been some epic talks across many channels in the past few days, but Yogi throwing his hat into the ring... I didn't see that coming!!
Amazing
So awesome this happened. The three perfect parties we need for this discussion and to host it. Hats off to all.
Yogi is such a legend. Thank you for taking the time to explain this stuff. It's so important!
Yogi!! Thank you for taking the time to expand upon this subject with players in the community! Please come back from time to time and keep up the great work. A1 and Space as always thank you for having this conversation.
Yogi you dropped so much information for us to digest, thanks for the view in.
Thanks, great conversation and quite reassuring to hear Yogi's thinking in a lot of areas.
This is my favorite episode of Launch Sequence. Thanks guys for the great discussion.
I really don't want to not enjoy this game..I want to play forever, but right about 33:00 is where it gets hard for me to have faith.
I have a ton of respect for Yogi and other devs, he gives valuable information, and he has a great attitude, and I do believe him, and know it's not easy, but It's the little comments. At the time stamp he defines that if you don't have the right weapons you can't fight. What if you set up your ship a certain way? Now we all need $60mil aeuc to walk around with and buy other weapons, pre knowing what we'll need in every situation? Or just... eliminate the need for situations? .. not cool.
Then shortly after, you can hear the death of the Space Cowboy. All the SWars people wanting SC to be the same, just witnessed the death of the Falcon. If you can't Han Brolo in a rando unexpected ship and win they day because "that's not it's role", or "I used the wrong ballistic weapon's on my ship", or " I can't fly in and help because 'role' reasons " .. then we lose the Outlaw, or Hero, or rando Heroic Citizen, you know? Yogi describes that no ship will be different in the way they're all eliminated the same in the face of any given power struggle, and that you will HAVE to overwhelm your opponent with dps.. how is that fun or inclusive to pro or casual players new or old not in an org or group?
How can you Space Cowboy and be the Falcon or the Po if the "rules" and "roles" and "loadouts" say you can't? This is what it feels like will happen in the PU with MMs. I just really want to continue to enjoy SC. This comes from a place of genuine enjoyment of ALL parts PvP and PvE in SC.
I hope it works out
I have concerns about how balance is planned to be done, based on feel and what is wanted.
Classic current design example is the M50 and Gladius, in the old TR(thruster rating system) both ships had identical TR on the twin primary and maneuver thrusters, the main difference between these was the M50 had racing versions and Gladius had military, after that fact both had similar components in size(including maximum possible), with the m50 having slightly better power generation with twin s2(2x 2small in current sizing) power plants and Gladius max if s3(3x small).
The key thing was the M50 was smaller, lower mass by almost 50%, at the cost of limited armament (2x s2 gun hardpoints and 2x s1 missiles) and no armour.
It was said the m50 was the Murray Cup racer, to surpass the 350r and Razor, yet the heavier Gladius almost matches the flight performance of the m50.
My concern is CIG loss of ship concern and design to feeling and what they think should happen.
It's like YogiKlatt comments about the F7C Hornet, this ship even being heavier than the Gladius was marketed and designed by how it's maneuver thrusters and its gimballed primary thruster was designed to have extremely high turn rates, and slightly lower primary thruster compared to the Gladius.
I get the feeling cig has lost the focus of ships being designed and modeled to meet their role, for instead spreadsheet balancing.
Why did the early ships have their thrusters located in specific locations, it was to make the craft act and look like the spaceshuttle when it maneuvered, or like the B5 Fighters, where thruster placement and power actually meant something.
The MSR hull design and thruster placement should make its maneuver profile much worse than it currently is.
I don't know how I feel about the current focus of balancing and ship modelling.
I'm very concerned this is turning SC into battlefield 2024 in space, and no the vision of Chris Roberts Freelancer he wanted to make back in the day now.
When will the CONI VTOL Mode produce lift? When You turn off the Coni bottom thrusters, it drops as if no thrust is coming from the VTOL. If you turn the VTOL on and thrust directly up, Your acceleration upwards is the same as if the VTOL is not even on.
A Coni In Atmosphere could use the VTOL to increase its pitch up speed for better targeting. I expect the Coni in Atmo to have its VTOL on even in combat for better maneuvering.
Coni VTOL is very powerful because it does not use the same thrusters or engines to produce lift that it uses to move forward. It is a completely different VTOL than any other ships. It is Added to the Ship and not a change in direction of other engines. Coni is Special like that.
Interesting topic. Yogi is right Star Citizen is a PVE game that allows PVP not the other way around. For A1, all he mainly does is PVP so I can see where his confusion lies.
This was super interesting, thank you for the talk! I'd love to see more conversations like this one, with the understanding of course that it's all a bit off the cuff and maybe not the 'official' final word on a subject.
I'm still not convinced about MM with regards to light industrial. It's still the case if you're in a light industrial and any other kind of ship appears, you have already lost the engagement, nothing you do matters. You can't run, you can't fight and it doesn't matter if your shields are good, they can take all the time in the world just wearing them down. Generally, if you're in a light industrial ship, you don't have that many resources, so you probably don't have escorts. Still very keen to see how that pans out.
That all said, I like most of what Yogi said. It feels like it's in good hands. The tricky part will be making PvP enjoyable for for both 'P's, rather than just being one-sided. Ground PvP combat is just the same, boring cheese strats over and over in PvP so I hope ship combat works out better.
Tomato, Avenger_One, and SaltyMike are the 3 biggest content creators in this game (for me at least). I would absolutely LOVE to see them Immortalized in S42 as characters as storyline or even tutorials. Maybe something like Avenger_One as a aerospace combat mentor of some sort, Tomato as an overall tutor, and Salty as maybe a grumpy npc ally/foe that could be hired/fought or even as a contract provider… With their own voices, appearance, and likeness… Im willing to bet without these 3 content creators the game would feel more empty as far as player base and morale regarding the development of the Verse overall… Love ya’ll, and wish the best! o7
the t-shirt glove combo really needs to be the official SC gamer wear
Thanks yogi for the amazing input. Really makes up for the scl. Good work as always on the game!! And thanks space youre the best loce your content keep it up!!!
8:41 this is when the ship fighting was at its best. I remember the change. Instead of shooting at the pips, I was shooting at the actual enemy ship. I remembered that era because that's when I beat Vanduul Swarm and got my "aggressor" patch.
Yogi’s pretty good at shutting down obnoxious egos without directly insulting them. I’m impressed!
Great conversation, thank you! I don't do combat but it's cool seeing what's coming up!
much respect to Yogi!
Thanks Tomato for getting Yogi and Avenger together to discus this.. I gotta say I was really salty about MM combat.. I think as of now it is slow and boring and pretty much kneecap's and drop's the skill ceiling to the floor, and I had little faith that they would actually fix this.. But after watching Yogi and Avenger talk it out, and hearing how Yogi feels about the system as it stands and how he wants to improve is makes me feel better about where they plan to go with MM.. Fingers crossed!!
This whole talk was, Yogi saying, "So this is the data we have so this is what we're going to do." and Avenger One saying, "That's not true, my 1v1 and I'm awesome so I kill everything in a Gladius." Yogi's portion of the talk was great and revealing, Avenger One is not a great guest and wouldn't have him back. It's clear he just wants Star Citizen to be Star Wars Squadrons.
@1:22:40 This is how you get 85% of your playerbase to ALT-F4 and never return. Yogi absolutely correct that low/fast* TTK is fun... in _Arena Commander._ PVP'ers who think Star Citizen should be _Rust in Space_ apparently have no idea how much direct harm they cause to the potential success of the game.
Well rust is popular, sometimes trying to make ur game more mainstream might have the averse effect
Low TTK in arena. *
The problem is high ttk doesn't feel good either. It's gotta be low enough to feel deadly but high enough to not feel unfair.
This is a great and important discussion. FYI for some reason while listening to the podcast on apple today, in my vehicle, the sound cut out for about 85% of the interview in the middle.
I hope everything is going well with you personally Tomato! I just heard about your misfortune. Good vibes, well wishes and prayers heading your way!
"This is a PVE game that allows PVP" - That is a very clear, agreeable and sensible directive. Players should always be in and engage with the environment first and if that leads into a situation where they engage each other then hat is as it should be.
This very much aligns with my general attitude that PVP should be a means to an end and not a goal. Having said that, I am pretty sure many PVP focussed players wil not have appreciated hearing those words even when in the context of the game they absolutely make sense and are the correct position to take.
Yeah, Yogi corrected that statement on spectrum earlier today saying he misspoke and that they prioritize pve and pvp equally.
“This was indeed misspoken on my part. My comment was part of a casual discussion on space combat and was meant to emphasis that Star Citizen is not purely a PVP-focused game, and that there are design decisions we have to balance to consider how to best support PVE scenarios and combat simultaneously.
Just to be clear: Star Citizen prioritizes both PVE and PVP aspects equally, and it is crucial that we develop an experience that caters to and supports both playstyles. This should be the biggest takeaway.”
@@zipflame That is just a more political way of saying the same thing. The whole discussion was about how emphasis on PVP as a main driver is not good for the game as the audience for it is just a subset of the total player base.
Of course both get the attention they need and both have their place. Facts are that in general though, while maybe louder, the "pure PVP player" is in the minority and so, for the good of the game, PVE needs to eventually be the driver (while PVP is the closer). The sidestep to EVE there was good as that game may have the pretty pictures and stories around PVP, the core of the game, where everything starts, is PVE content though. Now EVE and SC are different beasts so there is no real 1:1 compare, but the general rules of game design are the same.
In the end I felt the bottom line was "If the few that excel at PVP need to lose some of their advantages (and "suffer") for the good of the game overall, then that is what happens". To draw a hard line, if CIG lost the hardcore PVP top end, i would be a relative minor number, if they fail to attract the lower end into the game (and possibly PVP) AND not retain them, then they lose big time.
@@blazemonger1 I think agree with the overall interpretation, but I think I have to disagree that his clarification is essentially the same thing as his initial comments. In the stream he made it clear that pvp was secondary to pve but his later statement clarifies that they are prioritized equally. There are of course instances like he said where decisions are made to prioritize the wellbeing of the game as a whole rather than a subset of players. But that can affect pve and pvp both depending on the situation. For example master modes is primarily meant to benefit the pvp experience. I think it’s a misinterpretation to think he means star citizen is pve or pvp first. Star citizen is an overall health first game, which could hurt pvp and pve respectively. Just my interpretation.
@@zipflameRegardless, the point to take is that the game is meant for ALL types of gamers...yet the vocal minority within the PvP community (typically the sweats) try to demand that the game be entirely about PvP and everything should cater to them...with the whole galaxy being a constant warzone pretty much. THIS is the extremism us normal players are trying to fight against
@@ChristoffRevan totally agree
I think UI plays a bigger role than we currently discuss for beginners especially. The UI must communicate the effective range of a weapon or a missile intuitively and precise. Balancing around weapon range by adjusting the cone spread will probably be the defining property for combat ships. It will dictate how you need to engage an enemy and what types of ships are favorable fights to pick.
Great content as always Tomato. This is HUGE
31:30 - Large shields not being effected by small weapons (example: size 3anti fighter vs size 3 shields)
1:07:35 - Archetype tuning in depth
1:08:24 Xi'an Ships mentioned. understand that theyre easy to hit but 3.23 tunings dont make up for that
1:12:17 - Mention ships that dont fit archetypes
Such a great podcast thank you everyone and great information!!
Great episode, sir. Lots of good info. I would really like to see the devs do more of these. It's interesting to see a more loosely formatted discussion. Lots more info gets dumped. Well done, both you and Avenger_One!
What im looking forward to the most is a time were armor and flight model and such are relatively sorted out and they can get into adding crazy weapons. Id love to see stuff close to what starsector has; cluster missiles, EMP lasers, laser/Drone missiles! Maybe something like a misile taht deploys a cloud of chaff on its target, that can force capital ships to move or something. I dont know, but overall i just want more flashy weapons, theres no way they will ignore the chance to have lasers of every color with different properties. And CANNONS, like actual cannons, not just slower repeaters.
This was great! I wish more CIG devs would get on a podcast and discuss plans and goals of the game for hours. Great Episode!
When you tell someone "This game has PVP in it" Anyone who wants pvp will see that and play. No Need to cater to them, They will find and practice so they are better than the average person. No mater how easy you make it for someone with mouse and keyboard to have a great time and easily control the ships within its limits, someone who wants to pvp will be better and focus on the pvp interactions far more than the average player.
This was a great podcast, and ggs to everyone for participating in it.
Thank you ST for bringing the temperature down around MM.
Thanks to yogi for being open and honest.
Subbed for sure.
furies and snub snips are competitors to light vehicles. they are potential replacements for ground vehicles with more limited up time.
For example in my carrack. i can stick 2 cyclones inside to be sent on long term patrols guarding ground missions or picking up stranded troops. but i can also stick 2 furies inside for emergancy response to provide air support to my ground troops on missions until the carrack can get airborne and get into position.
so in my carrack for instance if possible i would keep 2 argo cargo inside the front bay. 2 rovers and 2 cycles with 2 titan suits inside the lower cargo area. then 1 pisces and 2 furies in the top bay.
i can then deploy rovers or ground mining vehicles with a rover or cyclone as a defense against possible attackers. in this case i would keep the cyclones as a response team and keep a rover with the mining vehicles.
they come under attack the miners retreat into the rover and arm up while the rover runs. the carrack deploys 1 or 2 furies to provide additional support and the carrack either launches 2 rovers or moves to provide additional support. say your rover goes down then your 2 cyclones have 1 spare seat to pick up the miners and if the rover and 2 cyclones goes down you have a backup rover ready to go. but the basics are that this also means when the carrack lands for a mission it can deploy 10-14 additional guns and another possible 2-4 on a Pisces. i would keep missile lauchers or anti air guns inside the rovers and you get 4 missiles on the cyclones and 4 missiles per fury. which is a decent small package for ground fights.
If you see this, Yogi, how I feel is like this: appreciative that you were prepared to do this stream; believing that you as an individual are striving for a balance where newcomers don't rage-quit in frustration but flight is not an arcade game; hopeful, as a former professional pilot, that you will give me a decent in-game experience since the only reason I got into SC was to fly - but fly more as when jumping into a Tiger Moth than as pilot in command / pilot flying of a computer system that has wings.
very good interview. thank you
My absolute favorite episode thus far, what a treat!
Awesome job managing this discussion.... Feels like a really poaitive contribution to the game! Feels optimistic ❤
For the snub fighter question at the end, I see snubs as a swarm ship. They absolutely suck by themselves but give them lots of numbers and they become a threat.
I think the biggest issue SC has had in previous flight models and weapons is too much ambiguity. If I am playing DCS and I want to avoid a missile for BVR combat, I know there are well-documented techniques like notching that will always work if done correctly. In SC if I want to dodge a missile, I just continuously spam the flare noise button and the missile just zips around and will maybe hit me? This isn't something only for missiles but this is some of the gameplay inconsistencies I am talking about.
This was amazing, yogi having a chill chat with the backers makes this feel like a group project instead of a souless corpet enterprise.
I hope more deves choose to do more podcasts like this🙏