Star Citizen Megathread - Fly FREE thru Dec 14th! Link in OP - Games

jfc late [t]http://puu.sh/lIXM5/2c01b6f48c.jpg[/t] According to someone on Reddit, this system's name means "darkness" in Lithuanian.

RIP IN THE MEANTIME: Talking in the vanguard thread (terrible idea btw) people brought up the fact that right now, constellations are absolutely wrecking retaliators. People are still whining that tali is broken and unbalanced and connie is the golden mary sue. However, the situation is pretty great! It's a ship with 4 huge front-facing lasers that's meant to be able to smack equal and smaller ships hard if they cross its path, and you can shoot them as a solo pilot. Retaliators however are purpose-built to deliver big powerful torpedoes to equal or larger targets and only have turrets to act as fly swatters in a firefight. It's meant to fly in groups and have escorts, and even then a solo pilot can't fire anything but its small handful of (15-second lock-on) torpedoes. So, I want to (eventually) prove a point. In conjunction with the Hunt the Ghost get-together game we eventually want to play (possible in 2.0!) I'd like to fly missions in varying combinations, probably while doing laps around the asteroid ring moon thing >Tali with all turrets manned (and maybe engineering???) (I think a few turrets are currently borked but we'll see) >>VS 1 hornet, 2, 3, etc til we know it absolutely has no chance. I'm gonna say 2. >>VS a solo connie, then turret-manned connie, maybe throw a P52 in the mix if we don't mind fighting at Olisar >Tali with and without being fully manned, with increasing numbers of hornets PROTECTING IT. I'm also gonna say 2 >>Same VS situations >>Flying around the asteroid belt may be interesting. A connie just wouldn't tank all that incoming damage while focusing solely on its prey, and maneuvering to fire on its attackers would probably let the tali slip out of range pretty fast >Tali's capability to avoid connie missile barrages with flares >Connie's capability to avoid torps likewise I'll probably recruit some dummies from TEST to help out with the raw numbers. We'd PROBABLY need the ability to have our own server lobby before getting the right numbers for the bigger groupings

My main concern about turrets right now is if they're good for [I]anything[/I] considering how fast and maneuverable everything is in Star Citizen. Even flying the Constellation, it's so maneuverable that I don't see much benefit in having somebody else gun instead of me just shooting the turrets myself. The Retaliator probably "sucks" because its turrets need to be manned and don't face forwards. Actually, they said just as much today on Reverse the Verse. There's a thread on the subreddit about turrets right now, so it's something that's been on my mind today, but it's something that I've also been concerned about since the very beginning. [editline]4th December 2015[/editline] From the Reverse the Verse transcript. All the dev talk in this one makes me want to go and watch it myself, because they always paraphrase in these transcripts. [quote]Tali and Connie balance – doing balance for the Tali and the Connie, getting that into the state they want it. Generally the goals are to have it so that a multicrew situation comes out on top. Should be able to take advantage of multiple people controlling things like shields, radar, turrets, etc… They envision the Connie, it’s been built to have a really devastating forward facing armament. The Tali is more designed, it has its torpedoes and missiles to do tons of damage, but for actual dogfighting the Tali is about having fewer places to go where you can’t be hit. The Tali will have guns on you at all times. It’ll be a matter of who can manage their multicrew better. 1 v 1 connie and tali, one player only, the Connie will probably win, because the Connie is forward facing more. A fully crewed Tali vs. a fully crewed Connie though, the Tali will likely win. They’re working on DPS values on all their weapons based on size as well, and working on expanding out the turret variety. The balance is a challenge, but they’re getting there. It also gets into flight too. The Tali has armour that the Connie doesn’t have. Its hull is naturally stronger, and the shield is a bit stronger as well, though the Connie shields currently recharge faster. The more manoeuvrable Connie vs. the more heavily armoured Tali. Just lots of different areas where there’s interesting balance going on. Right now because of the incompleteness of how the stations are, especially the Engineering, once that’s designed the copilots will have much more say in the outcome of a battle, by doing things like shifting power to shields, etc… Once that system’s in multicrew dogfights should be much more dynamic. Next year we’ll see a lot of headway for what will make a multicrew ship, for multiple stations etc… Lots of that is the avionics computers in ships. They drive everything digitally in the ships, so they have to make sure all that’s set.[/quote] [editline]4th December 2015[/editline] This little nugget was interesting as well. [quote][multicrew vs. dogfighters?] They are still intending for it to be three hornets against a Connie. They’ll take lots of damage too. For a Tali, it’s three hornets, and one of those hornets is dead.[/quote] I don't see it happening, but I hope they can figure something out to make manned turrets worth anything.

[QUOTE=Why485;49247648]My main concern about turrets right now is if they're good for [I]anything[/I]. Even flying the Constellation, it's so maneuverable that I don't see much benefit in having somebody else gun instead of me just shooting the turrets myself. There's a thread on the subreddit about the topic right now, so it's something that's been on my mind today, but it's something that I've also been concerned about since the very beginning.[/QUOTE] I think their biggest probem right now is being rather slow to rotate, and pilots just not giving enough fucks about maneuvering to keep line of sight open and steady for gunners. In the testing, I think it'd be beneficial to do the whole 'flying around the asteroid ring' thing, because both the retaliator and the constellation are doing something [i]new[/i] that players aren't used to doing in the game yet: [b]not dogfighting in a small arena where you're pulling sharp turns and flipping around without rhyme or reason[/b]. In AC, really even in 2.0, the ONLY goal either ship had was to destroy each other. What's worse is they were in a bubble of an arena, unable to 'run away' and with no purpose to do anything but turn around and exchange blows with their attacker in a small scramble So, in this scenario, the retaliator is flying "towards a target" (just chasing its tail in circles around the belt). This keeps it moving forward and only performing light maneuvers to avoid asteroids. The attackers' job is to intercept before it does damage. (indefinite timeline til one or the other side is destroyed). Because of this, instead of all that aforementioned dogfight brawling maneuvering, the attacker(s) are also flying forward to keep up with the tali, and have faaaar less reason to be rolling and flopping around, save for evasive maneuvers for incoming missiles (but is that even worth it compared to flares on the bigger ships?). It's a great scenario for turret play, given the tali's firing squad HAS to shoot anywhere other than straight forward while the pilot focuses on flying, and if the tali has escorts, the connie's turrets will also have to keep trained to the sides/behind to keep the escorts hot on their toes while the pilot tries to focus on keeping the tali in its sights. In both cases, the ships are making minor adjustments and the gunners aren't constantly trying to correct for unpredictable changes to their coverage

shit man I really want to see some long range artillery action for some reason, like 2 battleships fighting.

Multi-crew in general is a thing that I've been yearning for for a long time now. I've never tried anything like it before in space, but being a crew of a helicopter in the Battlefield franchise I loved so much, especially in BC2. I know that these two games are different, but some similarities may be drawn such as trying to coordinate the vehicles position relative to other hostiles when you as a gunner can only aim within a narrow range (along with other people as well). That type of chaos is fun.

[QUOTE=Karmah;49247802]Multi-crew in general is a thing that I've been yearning for for a long time now. I've never tried anything like it before in space, but being a crew of a helicopter in the Battlefield franchise I loved so much, especially in BC2. I know that these two games are different, but some similarities may be drawn such as trying to coordinate the vehicles position relative to other hostiles when you as a gunner can only aim within a narrow range (along with other people as well). That type of chaos is fun.[/QUOTE] You'll probably love working a Redeemer then (and I'd love to fly one, heyyy) another note is, I'd LOVE if during these tests, we could get the pilots involved to coordinate in teamspeak. Having gunners calling out what direction/elevation hostiles are at can help keep the pilot maneuvering with keeping gunners in good vantage points, and engineering know how to balance shields (if that's a thing we can do well)

To jump into this conversation: the WWII style turrets worked in WWII because just one of those turrets could feasibly take down a pursuer with a good burst hit, and the formations and number of turrets increased the likelihood of an eventual hit. Star Citizen combat is more about maximizing your hull's damage with the assumption that hitting is not an important factor, but DPS is. So I don't see the place "self-protected" WWII style craft pocked with turrets outside of truly large formations where they add light DPS to a "cloud".

[QUOTE=Techbot;49247789]shit man I really want to see some long range artillery action for some reason, like 2 battleships fighting.[/QUOTE] SQ42 opening apparently starts with [sp]a big capital ship fight and you get to steer a Javelin for a bit.[/sp] Also, the reason CIG chose Discord was so that testers could voice chat to test things together in coordinated ways (a little hopeless with 5-minute stability lifetimes and effectively dysfunctional matchmaking, but it's been [U]great[/U] for triaging specific bugs apparently). TS or Discord or w/e for voice coordination between crews seems basically essential. I know crew can change the power priority triangle on the Connie, but I can't remember if you can change shield facing yet; if not, it's bound to happen imminently with 2.1, which shouldn't be as terribly painful to get out once 2.0's gone through its birthing pains on the PTU.

[QUOTE=Mbbird;49248005]To jump into this conversation: the WWII style turrets worked in WWII because just one of those turrets could feasibly take down a pursuer with a good burst hit, and the formations and number of turrets increased the likelihood of an eventual hit. Star Citizen combat is more about maximizing your hull's damage with the assumption that hitting is not an important factor, but DPS is. So I don't see the place "self-protected" WWII style craft pocked with turrets outside of truly large formations where they add light DPS to a "cloud".[/QUOTE] I know "size 1 lasers" seems cheap for such a huge ship (and rightfully so, the comparison of a WWII turret being able to carve planes out of the sky makes them seem worthless) but you can have between 4 and 6 of the little pea shooters trained on a ship in most positions around you. If there's just one harassing fighter, its shields would get buzzed off pretty fast, and I'd say the damage would be decent to make a smart player back off til they can get their shields back up and make another pass at you. If you've got time, rent a gladius. It comes with 2 gimballed S1 "Bulldog" laser repeaters on the wings (same as a tali turret). Replace its nose gun with the S2 "Badger" repeater. DPS data I can find shows a bulldog hits 138, and the badger is 183, so an S2 doesn't exactly equate to two S1's; You're now equivalent to 1 and 2/3 turrets. Try it out in AC/VS/2.0 and see if that seems sufficient enough deterrent to keep a fighter or two minding their range [editline]e[/editline] looked up some more. Not accounting for armor (and time burning shields), a hornet had roughly 2,100 HP not that long ago. So, 1 turret = 276 DPS = 7.6 second kill 2 turret = 552 DPS = 3.8 seconds 3 turret = 828 DPS = 2.5 seconds If a ship gets caught with their pants down anywhere above a retaliator it's going to feel a LITTLE pressure to bail [editline]e[/editline] oh hi

Hi I couldnt find out how to send a PM to you so im just having to use this I was wondering if I could join the club you own on star citizen my friend joshthesmith has told me about the club and when I saw it I thought it would be cool to join, if thats ok?

PMs don't exist on Newpunch and we don't have an alternative method set up. Also, this thread was created and last posted to in 2015, here is our current Star Citizen thread. I'm not Jono Porter but I think I speak for him when I say that we'd like to get to know you a bit more first before we let you into FPCORP. Having said that, you should know that at the current moment in Star Citizen, orgs are essentially meaningless and the FPCORP org is basically inactive. You're certainly welcome to join the Facepunch SC community (which is not exactly the same as FPCORP but has a huge overlap), i.e. start posting with us in the other, current thread, and join us in our Discord (linked in the current thread). But welcome! (Mods pls lock this)

Ok thanks for replying to my post though I will join that FacePunch SC community for sure but just one question if i were to join FPCORP when would you say i would get in?

I couldn't tell you when you'd be invited in; we don't have exact criteria, it's mainly that we want people who are a part of the Facepunch community to play with us. You registered just to ask if you could join the org -- you're not a part of the Facepunch community yet because you just got here; you haven't had time to get to know anyone around here. In other words, we do not have a specific minimum waiting period that you have to wait out, we just want to get to know you before we invite you into the group.

I vouch for him, he seems like a nice guy from the time I played with him and keen to help out with the org. What you say is right though he does need to get to know us and what we're about, I only gave him a brief intro to what we are about since you learn by experience

Ok m8 thanks for telling me about it I had to go because I was trying to join the club but I still couldn’t get in sry about that I will get u on my friends list at some point