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

Yeah, there are like 4-5 people doing CS, between Santa Monica and Manchester. Community team gets dragged in to answer tickets when they're really fucked (like Arch's Pugh encounter). Sandi's even answered tickets, although that seems to have been early on more than recently IIRC. And according to Ben on RtV every time Chris says something, like he describes how XYZ thing is going to work in 10FTC, CS gets tickets from backers basically going, "I want you to confirm that <exact opposite of whatever CR said>" Alexis was like, "Uh, whatever Chris Roberts says... [I]is[/I] what's going into the game. I don't know what you want me to do..." Poor CS, they're expected to be able to overrule the godfather of the whole damn project. They also swear and mock shitty tickets a lot when nothing's recording them, too, (at least at CIG LA) so if you're going to send in a frivolous ticket at least give them a good laugh.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47266831]Yeah, there are like 4-5 people doing CS, between Santa Monica and Manchester. Community team gets dragged in to answer tickets when they're really fucked (like Arch's Pugh encounter). Sandi's even answered tickets, although that seems to have been early on more than recently IIRC. And according to Ben on RtV every time Chris says something, like he describes how XYZ thing is going to work in 10FTC, CS gets tickets from backers basically going, "I want you to confirm that <exact opposite of whatever CR said>" Alexis was like, "Uh, whatever Chris Roberts says... [I]is[/I] what's going into the game. I don't know what you want me to do..." Poor CS, they're expected to be able to overrule the godfather of the whole damn project. They also swear and mock shitty tickets a lot when nothing's recording them, too, (at least at CIG LA) so if you're going to send in a frivolous ticket at least give them a good laugh.[/QUOTE] Tempted to submit a ticket now demanding that CS reps get more vacation time. "This is clearly a balance issue in Star Citizen."

Looks like the 1.1 ptu is up, 31 gb patch in the wip patch notes. No retaliator for now :suicide:

Take heart, that's still the PTU. Wait for the official rollout. I'm sure as hell not downloading a 31 gb PTU patch.

it's actually 21gb class 2 mounts now require -1 size when mounting gimballed weapons, suck it hornet

[QUOTE=krail9;47268356]it's actually 21gb class 2 mounts now require -1 size when mounting gimballed weapons, suck it hornet[/QUOTE] Actually, that doesn't change my hornet loadout at all. It doesn't apply to turrets, according to people playing the patch. So I still get a size 2 ball gun, my size 1 canard gun, and my size 3 wing guns. Though I prefer size 2 for those.

that would be fun if it doesn't apply to turrets, basically a nerf to everything BUT the hornet

[QUOTE=krail9;47268427]that would be fun if it doesn't apply to turrets, basically a nerf to everything BUT the hornet[/QUOTE] Not true. People were mounting size 3 guns on all six mounts on the Hornet, which is what made it so ridiculously OP. It's about right now. That could just be a PTU bug, maybe even those have reduced sizes.

the only size 3s available are the cf227 and the minigun, which have nothing on the omniskys very few people are actually taking advantage of that bug atm, rectifying the size limits wont change shit

Maybe the Omniskys need a nerf, then. I never use them, it's an all Badger/Bulldog loadout for me.

Holy shit. [url=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/GDC-2015-Grafikeffekte-und-Schadensmodell-vom-Weltraum-Epos-Star-Citizen-2569768.html]From this german article on a GDC talk.[/url] [t]http://2.f.ix.de/imgs/18/1/4/4/6/2/0/7/08-4b347d3a0355984e.jpeg[/t]

That's some pretty damage states on the Gladius.

[QUOTE=Why485;47269996]Holy shit. [url=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/GDC-2015-Grafikeffekte-und-Schadensmodell-vom-Weltraum-Epos-Star-Citizen-2569768.html]From this german article on a GDC talk.[/url] [t]http://2.f.ix.de/imgs/18/1/4/4/6/2/0/7/08-4b347d3a0355984e.jpeg[/t][/QUOTE] Dear lord, that is FANTASTIC. Really can't wait to see all of the ships using this system. Wonder if we can repair the underlying components from outside with that kind of damage. And maybe weld sheets of metal on for extra protection.

[url=https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/238010/capital-ship-corvette-fighter-cover-interaction-relative-velocity]Made a post[/url] on the Game Ideas section of the RSI forums. I'd appreciate some input and/or support from my fellow FPers. [quote] [B][U]Capital Ship/Corvette-Fighter Cover Interaction - Relative Velocity.[/U][/B] I'd been thinking about the current max speed of ships. The Aurora LN can do about 150, the 350R can do about twice that. Which is all well and good when flying independently. Still, when you increase ship sizes up to and including the size of capital ships like the Bengal or Idris, you start to realize that in order to maintain good fighter cover and launch fighters from their deck, their top speed would have to be lower by a considerable amount than smaller ships. Which, considering their huge engines, makes very little sense. Ideally, a capital ship would be able to move, if not more quickly than, at least at the same speed as, say, a Hornet. The kicker is that it can't slow, stop, or change directions [I]nearly[/I] as quickly. Going from that assumption, I'd like to propose an IFCS mode that can address this problem. In a vacuum, acceleration and deceleration determine G-force limits on the bodies of pilots and ships. If an IFCS mode is created so that ships can 'slave' their safeties to any sufficiently larger ship, from perhaps Connie to Bengal size, then the 'zero' throttle position for fighter cover will be zero relative to the velocity of the 'parent' ship, and provided that ship takes its time changing directions and speeds, this should allow fighter cover to maneuver around the ship freely while keeping pace with it easily. What this means is that with the throttle setting on 'idle' for a fighter pointed in the same direction as its parent ship, the fighter will naturally keep pace with it and adjust for small changes in its throttle input. This should allow for battles very similar to the original Paul Steed trailer. If, however, the parent ship maneuvers violently, the IFCS safety lock will break, and the fighter slaved to the parent ship will slowly decelerate to normal speed parameters. Please let me know what you think of this idea in the poll below, and if you do not like the idea, I'd appreciate it if you'd share your reasoning.[/quote]

You do know there's a "match target velocity" button, right? I'm not knocking the idea, but I imagine that could be useful for formation flying without some sort of IFCS sync.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47270653]You do know there's a "match target velocity" button, right? I'm not knocking the idea, but I imagine that could be useful for formation flying without some sort of IFCS sync.[/QUOTE] Not what I meant. I mean that ships launching from and covering for a capital ship need to be able to move much faster than said ship to properly cover it. If the top speed of the Bengal is 200m/s, and the top speed of the Hornet is 200m/s, that's a major problem. My solution addresses it by slaving all speed inputs of the fighter cover to be relative to the velocity and vector of the parent ship. You can't expect a capital ship under attack to slow down and wait for its attackers to be defeated before carrying on, it's got to try and put distance between itself and the ambush point. [editline]6th March 2015[/editline] The alternative is keeping the top speed of capital ships ridiculously slow, which I don't like.

[QUOTE=archangel125;47270560][url=https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/238010/capital-ship-corvette-fighter-cover-interaction-relative-velocity]Made a post[/url] on the Game Ideas section of the RSI forums. I'd appreciate some input and/or support from my fellow FPers.[/QUOTE] The Infinity Combat Prototype and X:Rebirth both have a really cool solution to that problem where when you fly near a large capital ship, you start to get dragged around in their frame of reference. Once you're super close and/or inside them, all your movement is now relative to the capital ship. I never played Rebirth, but in the ICP, it made flying into docking bays of moving and turning capital ships while in combat super easy and really fun. It let you fly yourself the ultra smooth fighter docking that happens in Homeworld 2 where fighters just seamlessly fly into the docking bays of moving capitals. Since Star Citizen loves to bang on about "muh immershun," maybe the IFCS could direct thrusters to do this instead of leaving dedicated fans to fanwank an explanation for that frame dragging, or creating [CONCERN] threads because it doesn't live up to their definition of realism.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47270653]You do know there's a "match target velocity" button, right? I'm not knocking the idea, but I imagine that could be useful for formation flying without some sort of IFCS sync.[/QUOTE] basically the idea is if escort drops throttle to idle, he'll keep pace with capital if escort throttles up, he'll now go faster than capital

Over 40 views on that thread and not a single vote yet, mine aside. :(

[URL="https://imgur.com/a/6Isdl"]Someone on Reddit put up a gallery of PTU shots. [/URL] [t]http://i.imgur.com/fRWbz64.png[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/winfGDP.png[/t] The SimPod's here! [t]http://i.imgur.com/ZruUH1u.png[/t] Multiple landing platforms in free-flight Broken Moon, [del]and your helmet HUD now follows you out of the ship![/del] I'm dumb. However, the platforms now have HUD icons, too. [t]http://i.imgur.com/oPcqkZW.png[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/KKYdhJG.png[/t] [del]dafuq is this, this is a new piece of UI. Maybe it's showing the path back to your ship?[/del] People in the Reddit comments are talking about landing assist stuff, but I've never had a problem with landing manually once I figured out how (I blew up by smashing my belly into the platform a few times first). [t]http://i.imgur.com/y419zaS.png[/t] [t]https://i.imgur.com/wqjoR23.png[/t] [t]https://i.imgur.com/mzcXh0A.png[/t] The pistol apparently does significantly less damage to ships, now. No surprise, really.

[QUOTE=archangel125;47270865]Over 40 views on that thread and not a single vote yet, mine aside. :([/QUOTE] It's a great idea, the only problem is breaking barrier that occurs from network latency. The only real way I can think of that would make it work right is to include the escort ships in the cap-ships local physics grid (the thing that lets crew walk around without glitching out while the ship is moving) But that would get very odd-looking to outside onlookers, because each ship could be + or - 50m from their actual position due to network latency (even more if the connection is worse) Predictive updates to other clients could partially solve this problem, but still... [sp] I probably worded that very strangely but yeah[/sp]

[QUOTE=archangel125;47270865]Over 40 views on that thread and not a single vote yet, mine aside. :([/QUOTE] The ideas forum is a bit of a shitty place because comparatively few people go there. My distress call thread went 24 hours without any responses at all and ~40 views. Create a thread pointing to it on /r/starcitizen and encourage discussion in the Reddit thread comments, that'll direct traffic to it.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47271040] [t]http://i.imgur.com/oPcqkZW.png[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/KKYdhJG.png[/t] dafuq is this, this is a new piece of UI. Maybe it's showing the path back to your ship? People in the Reddit comments are talking about landing assist stuff, but I've never had a problem with landing manually once I figured out how (I blew up by smashing my belly into the platform a few times first). [/QUOTE] that's a landing UI for the platform.

Fuck I want to play now.

Oh, and the Herald finally finished decrypting this: [t]https://robertsspaceindustries.com/media/iz34dwfucdbpbr/source/100.jpg[/t] [URL="https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/4559186/#Comment_4559186"]According to Ben,[/URL] February monthly report is going up today. The damage states design post is going up tomorrow, along with a Tali video. When 1.1 goes live, the weapon mounts overhaul design post will go up, along with a brochure for the Tali and a round-up 1.1 post with details on the landing modes and an update to the AC1.0 manual.

That sounds like it may be Monday. Bit of a shame. Between us, MISC's designs are pretty underwhelming, for a ship manufacturer supposedly working closely with the Xi'an.

They use Xi'An tech, not Xi'An design sensibilities. They sell reliable, no-nonsense ships. The MISC Freelancer commercial is basically the Ford pickup commercial of the future. I would bet 1.1's probably going live more like Wednesday, but we'll see. Also, REC's starting to go online in the PTU (for the few people that can get into it at the moment): [t]https://i.imgur.com/frzFLH0.png[/t] Only one weapon, shield, and the Gamma are up yet, but that's proof-of-concept enough for testing. [URL="https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/4560174/#Comment_4560174"]James on the forums:[/URL] [QUOTE]Hey Everyone we are now looking at a couple more hours until the first PTU patch will be released. For clarity this is the patch to fix it for everyone who has already downloaded it on the PTU. If you have not done so by the release of this patch there will be a "fix all" patch later tonight to fix it for everyone. I hate sounding like a broken record but please believe me when I say we are very sorry, we hate that backers are unable to play, and we are working as hard as we can to fix it for everyone. Thank you all for your patience.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=archangel125;47270560][url=https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/238010/capital-ship-corvette-fighter-cover-interaction-relative-velocity]Made a post[/url] on the Game Ideas section of the RSI forums. I'd appreciate some input and/or support from my fellow FPers.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't expect capital ships to go faster than say 100

[QUOTE=krail9;47271887]I wouldn't expect capital ships to go faster than say 100[/QUOTE] Having a top speed of a hundred when you're at the helm of something over a kilometer long is going to feel extremely lame. It also makes no sense given the Bengal's role.

well I don't know about gameplay but it doesn't matter in terms of role... everyone travels the same speed in quantum travel