Star Citizen Megathread - Star Marine isn't doomed after all! - Games

Have they ever said anything about depressurizing parts of the ship intentionally, especially in combat? There is no good reason to risk fire/explosions in breached rooms when it could easily be prevented.

[QUOTE=Why485;51394732]I'm just tired of doubling my monitor's brightness every time I want to play. It's like they go through all the effort to make these complicated detailed models and then they're so dimly lit you can't even see them.[/QUOTE]The hangars are well lit at least. [editline]19th November 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=FlakAttack;51394807]Have they ever said anything about depressurizing parts of the ship intentionally, especially in combat? There is no good reason to risk fire/explosions in breached rooms when it could easily be prevented.[/QUOTE]Answer to all those things according to Chris is "yes" afaik

[QUOTE=Why485;51394732]I'm just tired of doubling my monitor's brightness every time I want to play. It's like they go through all the effort to make these complicated detailed models and then they're so dimly lit you can't even see them.[/QUOTE] Ah, Eve syndrome

[media]https://twitter.com/banditloaf/status/799803483826204672[/media] lil tiny quantum spaceship confirmed

So did they confirm cat hangar ready by 2.6? Looks gorgeous.

I could've sworn sometime after the star marine kerfluffle that CIG said they weren't giving release dates anymore. And here we are looking at a December 8th date for 2.6(so more like June)

[QUOTE=Visorak06;51395963]So did they confirm cat hangar ready by 2.6? Looks gorgeous.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/XyfkT5X.png[/IMG] The sale suggests it's part of 2.6 release.

I'll be really surprised if it's flight ready, but maybe they'll pull it off. Also it doesn't seem like they're giving release dates, because those are target dates. They did say in the newsletter that those would be subject to change multiple times and to take them with a grain of salt. Still, more openness is great in my book regardless.

I like how they put the LTI token right next to them

is there anywhere where i can just get a writed resume of 2.6 feature and content?

[t]https://i.imgur.com/dKqSRnW.png[/t] This is about the best we've got for now, but according to the schedule 2.6 should be in the hands of the Evocati [I]now[/I] with non-NDA'd PTU due a week from Monday; this schedule might slide, but expect actual patch notes soon. The details I know of now: - Star Marine added with two new maps (Demien Station and Echo 11 or whatever it's called), multiple fps-specific gamemodes (control points, team deathmatch, etc.) - Arena Commander updates including a better lobby system and pickups for matches (missiles don't refill when you die in PVP) - Major rebalancing of the flight speeds to slow everything down, boost/afterburner now work a bit different - New ships and variants: Drake Herald, Origin 85X, Drake Caterpillar, Vanguard Hoplite, Sabre Comet, Gladius Valiant, Hornet Wildfire, Avenger Renegade - Improved camera system, better fps animations - Misc bugfixes as usual

I'm a little disappointed that the 85x apparently didn't keep this interior theme... [img]http://i.imgur.com/0u2EcR9.jpg[/img] [img]http://i.imgur.com/GJDMEaq.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;51396608][t]https://i.imgur.com/dKqSRnW.png[/t] This is about the best we've got for now, but according to the schedule 2.6 should be in the hands of the Evocati [I]now[/I] with non-NDA'd PTU due a week from Monday; this schedule might slide, but expect actual patch notes soon. The details I know of now: - Star Marine added with two new maps (Demien Station and Echo 11 or whatever it's called), multiple fps-specific gamemodes (control points, team deathmatch, etc.) - Arena Commander updates including a better lobby system and pickups for matches (missiles don't refill when you die in PVP) - Major rebalancing of the flight speeds to slow everything down, boost/afterburner now work a bit different - New ships and variants: Drake Herald, Origin 85X, Drake Caterpillar, Vanguard Hoplite, Sabre Comet, Gladius Valiant, Hornet Wildfire, Avenger Renegade - Improved camera system, better fps animations - Misc bugfixes as usual[/QUOTE] Are performance fixes coming in 2.6 or was that 3.0? I think it was something netcode related causing so much lag? I don't keep up with SC development too much, sorry.

[QUOTE=Lord Hayden;51399358]Are performance fixes coming in 2.6 or was that 3.0? I think it was something netcode related causing so much lag? I don't keep up with SC development too much, sorry.[/QUOTE] 3.0, and yeah netcode

Generally, every patch includes performance fixes. However, I'm pretty sure you're referring to the massive performance bottleneck in the Crusader map (the one with multiple space stations/etc. to visit), and that's something that isn't expected to get any better until 3.0 with StarNetwork 1.0 being rolled out. It's worth noting that StarNetwork 1.0 has not been promised to be the be-all-end-all solution to Crusader's fps issues or the CPU/netcode bottleneck, and it may not change the client-side netcode at all. They haven't [I]really[/I] explained to us what it is. However, at minimum, it should be a complete overhaul of the server-side netcode and should improve server performance, which should directly correspond with some degree of improved client performance. My personal hunch is that it's based off of [I][URL="http://gafferongames.com/2016/06/17/introducing-libyojimbo/"]libyojimbo[/URL][/I], a new [URL="https://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/4tz67n/libyojimbo_new_open_source_network_library_for/"]open-source netcode platform for creating secure server-client protocols[/URL] by [URL="https://www.linkedin.com/in/glennfiedler"]one of the guys responsible for Titanfall 1 and 2's netcode[/URL] among many other achievements. And my proof is that [URL="https://github.com/networkprotocol/libyojimbo"]CIG is listed as a gold sponsor for the project[/URL]; going by Glenn's Patreon, that's a $2500+ per month support tier, which implies they'd probably be getting him to give them at least a bit of consultation time. I think libyojimbo is what has caused Chris to be so bold as to say they want to try and knit instances together and enable "thousands" of players to be in the same space -- it is the "engine" that serves as a starting point for them, and it's open-source right off the bat, granting them the same level of source code access they have with CryEngine. And they have the cash to bring in the author to any of their studios for direct on-site consultation if they need to. I don't know if Chris will succeed with that goal, but by god he's trying.

[QUOTE=Intoxicated Spy;51399374]3.0, and yeah netcode[/QUOTE] Are you saying they are fixing the 20 FPS on Olisar in 2.6 or 3.0?

[QUOTE=Smoot;51400601]Are you saying they are fixing the 20 FPS on Olisar in 2.6 or 3.0?[/QUOTE] 3.0 most likely will fix it.

Does anyone know how they want to balance buying ships and insurance in the game when it comes out? With these fucking inflated ship prices it seems to me that it will have to be an enormous grindfest

[QUOTE=LennyPenny;51400819]Does anyone know how they want to balance buying ships and insurance in the game when it comes out? With these fucking inflated ship prices it seems to me that it will have to be an enormous grindfest[/QUOTE] It's hard to say how expensive a ship will even be in Star Citizen. I think the only number we got was the 60 hours solo to a Constellation from Chris Roberts like 4 years ago.

Buying ships is more like getting a little treat for your donation than buying an IG advantage for what it's actually worth.

[QUOTE=_Axel;51401011]Buying ships is more like getting a little treat for your donation than buying an IG advantage for what it's actually worth.[/QUOTE] ok thats good

[QUOTE=Hammernipples;51393313]I like the new Cutlass a lot more, though I think the turret looks really whimpy and I think the top gun mounts to the side of the cockpit are placed in a really ugly/silly place.[/QUOTE] going back to address this- [t]http://i.imgur.com/qxOH87N.png[/t] added 2x fixed weapons on top of wings, firepower is a bit more representative of its size also it appears the ship may actually be quite a bit larger than it used to be, so the turret just looks tiny because it just [i]stayed the same size[/i] while the rest of the ship grew [t]http://i.imgur.com/4XAGVAg.png[/t] alsoalso we now have confirmation on cutlass turrets, [url=https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/7256324/#Comment_7256324]2x S4[/url], not too shabby given those also looked pretty puny on the ship's body in the latest video, though again the body is MASSIVE so it's probably just a case of lacking a decent frame of reference. This is actually a pretty huge turret enclosure like it used to be in older concepts, so those weapons look tiny next to it. [t]http://i.imgur.com/YSwhCtT.jpg[/t] They grow up so fast [t]http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130903214543/starcitizen/images/c/cb/Cat-Model-Render3.jpg[/t] could almost reach up and touch the top of that front door originally, would be old cutlass style low headroom if that was split into two floors [t]http://i.imgur.com/yEs5KNr.png[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/KjwitId.png[/t] [t]http://i.imgur.com/RYnf8D4.jpg[/t]

I've seen people say that manning turrets isn't fun gameplay-wise, why is that? Haven't played the alpha since the launch of Arena Commander.

extremely clunky controls and a complete lack of aim stabilization, which in practice means you flail wildly everywhere and hit absolutely nothing

[QUOTE=the_killer24;51401412]extremely clunky controls and a complete lack of aim stabilization, which in practice means you flail wildly everywhere and hit absolutely nothing[/QUOTE] That's weird, why don't they just take mouse input with a rotation speed limit? Sounds like a simple thing to implement. That's what basically all FPSes do with turret sections. [editline]20th November 2016[/editline] Maybe an additional button press too to switch between rotation relative to the ship and rotation relative to a fixed referential so that your aim is stable even if your pilot is doing wild shit, kinda like those cool camera stabilizers.

a big problem with playing in a turret position isn't the ship itself (though it doesn't help most of the early turret-capable ships were fucking squirrely as hell), but the fact ship to ship gameplay (and therefore pilot mentality) is currently all about dogfighting. Pilots are blissfully unaware of how to fly [i]on behalf of[/i] their gunners, or just incapable of doing so due to the situation presented by dogfighting and having nowhere else to be. A great example people are sure to have experience with in the past few weeks is gunning for a bomber in battlefield 1. The pilot has a big, lumbering plane and focuses on his objective of doing bombing runs. A tail gunner has a smooth ride 75% of the time because your plane isn't flopping all over the place, and any plane looking to shoot you down naturally ends up flying pretty smoothly behind you, making it super easy to just lay into them. THIS is how turret gunning should be handled, as part of a chase, not a scrambling dogfight.

the main difference is though, even if your shooting platform [I]is[/I] flopping around a fuckton (read: attack planes) you can still keep your aimpoint more or less on target because the controls aren't ass

[QUOTE=dai;51401493]a big problem with playing in a turret position isn't the ship itself (though it doesn't help most of the early turret-capable ships were fucking squirrely as hell), but the fact ship to ship gameplay (and therefore pilot mentality) is currently all about dogfighting. Pilots are blissfully unaware of how to fly [i]on behalf of[/i] their gunners, or just incapable of doing so due to the situation presented by dogfighting and having nowhere else to be. A great example people are sure to have experience with in the past few weeks is gunning for a bomber in battlefield 1. The pilot has a big, lumbering plane and focuses on his objective of doing bombing runs. A tail gunner has a smooth ride 75% of the time because your plane isn't flopping all over the place, and any plane looking to shoot you down naturally ends up flying pretty smoothly behind you, making it super easy to just lay into them. THIS is how turret gunning should be handled, as part of a chase, not a scrambling dogfight.[/QUOTE] Having turret stabilization relative to a fixed referential would somewhat fix that issue though? That way the gunner isn't so dependent on the pilot flying in a smooth straight line.

definitely needs a toggle between ship and world-relative tracking (wrote this into an edit but hey replies). Ship-relative would be better for when you're not in combat but want to look around and enjoy the ride, world relative for when you're in less-than-ideal situations with your ship maneuvering all over, whether your target is stationary or moving a bunch. Really it's more of a convenience thing to just stop flopping around when you're not needed, heh. For prior reference, I'm pretty sure BF1 is world-relativewhen it comes to the plane's roll if you're looking to the side, but plane-relative for most of your looking-straight-forward/back experience Another point of disorientation is a lack of display telling you what direction your ship is pointing, what angle you're aiming up/down at (which can change easily without you realizing it), where the vertical limit of your aim ends (straight above you), and so on. a big ol' lat/lon or compass-ball-like tickmark set projected around you would be hella handy [t]https://media.autobarn.com.au/media/catalog/product/cache/2/image/500x500/9df78eab33525d08d6e5fb8d27136e95/A/C/AC01989_1.jpg[/t] [editline]e[/editline] older Battlefield titles have all had a little indicator when you were first person in tanks that showed you where the wheels of the vehicle were pointed in relation to your turret, and where your gunner was also pointed. just need a more three-dimensionally aware equivalent; would be handy to know where other gunners may be aimed, to better understand if a certain firing arc isn't being covered [t]https://gotgame.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/battlefield-3-tank-2-e1317752062478.jpg[/t]

[QUOTE=dai;51401562] older Battlefield titles have all had a little indicator when you were first person in tanks that showed you where the wheels of the vehicle were pointed in relation to your turret, and where your gunner was also pointed. [/QUOTE] it actually is in BF1 too, look at the seating diagram