Star Citizen Megathread - Star Marine isn't doomed after all!
5,001 replies, posted
[QUOTE=archangel125;49361915]If gaming was Dark Souls, and Facepunch was the Sunbro Covenant, then Something Awful would be the Darkwraiths. Does that put it in perspective?[/QUOTE]
Uhh no, it's more like
You have the white collar workers, blue collar workers and then there's the dementing old homeless lady on the sidewalk yelling at the air
[QUOTE=MendozaMan;49361949]Uhh no, it's more like
You have the white collar workers, blue collar workers and then there's the dementing old homeless lady on the sidewalk yelling at the air[/QUOTE]
Fine, but... Which one of those exactly are we?
Is it worth getting the Super Hornet for some 2 player coop fun yet?
...Or is the second player in the turret going to have a bad time?
the SH turret, when manually controlled, is a gigantic heap of shit
[QUOTE=archangel125;49362148]Fine, but... Which one of those exactly are we?[/QUOTE]
White collar would be reddit and other big groups too busy circlejerking eachother to actually enjoy the game
Blue collar would be facepunch since we do what we like and don't give a shit about opinionated bullshit
And the old lady would be SA, trying to throw cats at people hoping they stumble into traffic so they can have a laugh
until pilots have a reason to fly in one direction and not squiggle around in a tight dog fight, turret play will remain a rough ride. For the price, you're better off getting a connie taurus (150) and coordinating some turret play through that, since you HAVE to fly slow and steady instead of flying tight maneuvers
I also hope there's the choice between the stabilized mode turrets currently have, and a relative mode so the turret doesn't auto-adjust. Would make just riding along for the view a lot more comfortable
[QUOTE=dai;49362883]until pilots have a reason to fly in one direction and not squiggle around in a tight dog fight, turret play will remain a rough ride. For the price, you're better off getting a connie taurus (150) and coordinating some turret play through that, since you HAVE to fly slow and steady instead of flying tight maneuvers
I also hope there's the choice between the stabilized mode turrets currently have, and a relative mode so the turret doesn't auto-adjust. Would make just riding along for the view a lot more comfortable[/QUOTE]
That's not what he's referring to. He's referring to the fact that the ball turret on the Super Hornet and the manned turret on the gladiator act all kinds of fucked up when they're being used by a copilot - They traverse and track EXTREMELY slowly. Like, WWII heavy tank slowly. Like, it'd probably take you around thirty seconds to make a full revolution-slowly.
Edit oops, [URL="https://my.mixtape.moe/ljqxki.webm"]off-topic[/URL] accidental post.
Star marine really took a turn for a different style in the past few weeks
Wait... How the fuck did I post it here. I meant Gneral Ingame media, sorry
[QUOTE=dai;49362883]I also hope there's the choice between the stabilized mode turrets currently have, and a relative mode so the turret doesn't auto-adjust. Would make just riding along for the view a lot more comfortable[/QUOTE]
I think that's a desired feature because it's already half implemented. In some turrets, I forget which, if you press Ctrl-G, it'll toggle between stabilized and non-stabilized.
[QUOTE=archangel125;49361847]Something Awful forums Star Citizen thread. It's like a louder, more obnoxious, and frequently dumber version of FP.[/QUOTE]
For the game section at least, as with every forum there are variety of different groups. The hobby section is absolutely great, awesome projects to see and a wealth of advice up for grabs.
[video=youtube;MHLwAuM1J8c]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MHLwAuM1J8c[/video]
[QUOTE]04:01 – Additional Star Systems
06:46 – Hornet History
08:09 – Rigging
10:40 – New Merchandise
11:43 – Mechanics
13:19 – Anchoring to an Asteroid
14:40 – Griefing
17:18 – Streaming in Game
20:33 – Kill Boards
21:22 – Star Citizen Play Time[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/307916"]2.1.0a has been pushed to PTU. [/URL]
We passed $101mil and 1.1mil accounts several days ago, too. :toot:
They don't seem to have fixed the Freelancer's afterburner speed or its infinite boost fuel bugs in 2.1.0a, I wonder why.
goddamn those 4 s4 ballistic cannons
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNbQuO1kTsw[/media]
commercial wasn't too far off
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vO7RxsZpcKc[/media]
Wow, that's... Vanduul fighters are especially fragile, right?
Scavengers die easy, but not typically in 1-2 shots. However, the Freelancer's not a light fighter, it's the next tier up of ship, into the low multicrew range. A 'Lancer versus a Cutlass is a more interesting comparison.
You know, people say that the flight model in Star Citizen is bad, and combat is worse. I don't really understand them. I use a gamepad to play, because it gives me more axes to manipulate to simulate 6DOF flight. Now that main thrusters have greater authority, and now that jerk and afterburner boosting are a thing, the Hornet suddenly feels fun to fly again - My only gripe about its handling now is that it has too small a pool of boost fuel by far. It can maintain decent maneuverability and keep the enemy guessing for the first few seconds of an engagement, but if it fails to kill its opponent after that time, or is facing multiple enemies, it's a sitting duck and gets torn apart.
Anyway, I digress. I love the feel of Star Citizen's flight model, as a Hornet pilot, because engagements for me turn into strafing battles. Fights are no longer the jousting matches they once were in earlier builds of Arena Commander. A pilot now has to keep several things in mind to stand a chance of staying alive and winning.
1: [B]Situational awareness.[/B] Even the most skilled fighter can meet an untimely end by splattering into the panels of a station, hitting an asteroid, or getting flanked by your opponent's canny wingman. Learning to know where everything around you is without needing to waste precious moments looking is a great boon. Given how much the Hornet drifts, you're going to spend most of your fights sliding up, down, or sideways - That is, if you're doing it right.
2. [B] Fly with Comstab off, and G-safe, too. Master decoupled flight and combat if you can.[/B] You'll lose very little speed when making maneuvers, so long as you can manage your angular momentum. You'll also be harder to hit, as you can change your vector *just* enough by applying boost and vertical or horizontal thrust that you curve away from your enemy's tracer before they hit you. Assume they have you zeroed at all times. Never boost directly towards or away from an enemy, or you're as good as dead. If you fly past an enemy, before turning to re-engage, orient yourself in a direction lateral to the position of your opponent, gun your afterburners to hit a high speed, and then turn to start shooting. Your engines will automatically give your trajectory a curve, since you're facing your opponent, and make some of their shots go wide - Provided there's a distance of around two kilometers between you.
If you're fighting an opponent in a slow, unwieldy ship, you can punish them overshooting you by flipping over, closing the distance, and hammering them with all your guns. Don't try this with a faster, more agile ship, or it'll turn into a jousting match. You'll start taking damage you can't afford to.
3. [B]Pulling too many Gs and blacking out.[/B] Self explanatory. Do this, and unless you're fighting a Vanduul or your human opponent has a sudden, convenient seizure, you are almost certainly dead.
To my complete surprise, while 1.3 was a terrible experience for me, I find myself taking on multiple players in 2.0 (Including other Super Hornets, Gladii, M50s and 325as), with my less-than-ideal Quad Badger/Dual Bulldog loadout, and just slagging them. Most of them jumped away before I could deal the final blow, too damaged to continue fighting, and I remained king of the hill. Maybe I'm not so terrible at this game after all. Or maybe they all just sucked.
If people don't like the way flight in Star Citizen feels, they ought to fly a heavier ship. And CiG needs to tweak light ships so they feel even heavier, but have well-balanced engines. Some fine-tuning to jerk should go a long way.
Combat in Star Citizen gives you an adrenaline rush when it gets tight, but you've got to keep your hands rock steady to land shots on target. I played some Vanduul Swarm tonight and realized around wave 14, with both my wingmen dead and facing a cloud of Vanduul Alphas, that I could feel my heart hammering against my ribcage. The gameplay feels stupid when you don't know what you're doing. Once you start to get the hang of it, however, you feel like a hotshot pilot.
Elite's slow turning battles feel like a yawnfest after you've mastered them. And that doesn't take very long. I can't comprehend the people who would rather Star Citizen's ships flew like the ones in Elite.
So the Freelancer wrecks shit.
[video=youtube;zw7baEjWtMY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw7baEjWtMY[/video]
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49366700]Scavengers die easy, but not typically in 1-2 shots. However, the Freelancer's not a light fighter, it's the next tier up of ship, into the low multicrew range. A 'Lancer versus a Cutlass is a more interesting comparison.[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/15056-The-Shipyard-Sharpening-The-Cutlass"]The devs have said that the Cutlass isn't supposed to go toe-to-toe with the Freelancer.[/URL] I'm expecting the Caterpillar to be the 1:1 fighter.
[quote]It is not designed to go toe to toe with the regular multicrew ships like the Connie, Tali or Freelancer who dwarf the Cutlass not only in size but also weaponry and crew size. The Cutlass sits in a role that can bridge the single seater and low end multicrew ship roles and function in either camp or somewhere in the middle.[/quote]
[QUOTE=FlandersNed;49367483]So the Freelancer wrecks shit.[/QUOTE]
Jesus no kidding, what gun mounts ARE those? Some kind of heavy cannon?
I really, really hate ballistic shield penetration in this game. Remember the Tarantula cannon meta?
[QUOTE=archangel125;49368130]I really, really hate ballistic shield penetration in this game. Remember the Tarantula cannon meta?[/QUOTE]
Something is needed to make ammunition-based weaponry worth taking over the infinite ammo lasers, however.
If they couldn't penetrate shields, they would need to be more powerful, longer range, or faster which would contribute to the same problem.
I guess they could impart momentum on the ship and shake it about, but this game already has too much screen shaking crap.
[QUOTE=Saber15;49368473]Something is needed to make ammunition-based weaponry worth taking over the infinite ammo lasers, however.
If they couldn't penetrate shields, they would need to be more powerful, longer range, or faster which would contribute to the same problem.
I guess they could impart momentum on the ship and shake it about, but this game already has too much screen shaking crap.[/QUOTE]
But they already have way more advantages. When shields are down, they do more damage to hull than energy weapons. They have a much lower heat signature and a lower power draw. Their only drawback at the moment is the fact they require ammunition.
Really, the best balancing I can think of for ballistic weapons is the same that other games use, like Elite, or that old shooter on the Xbox, Halo. Energy weapons are less effective against hull but drain shields faster, ballistic weapons are less effective against shields but do more damage to a ship's hull due to greater armor penetration.
[QUOTE=Visorak06;49368100]Jesus no kidding, what gun mounts ARE those? Some kind of heavy cannon?[/QUOTE]
They look like the Combine Ballistic Cannons that are available in the store (and have been since PTU 1.3, i believe).
They are size 4, and you can mount 1on a hornet with a special mount, though in the current stable version, they fire 3 round bursts.
It absolutely wrecks everything when you manage to hit. The rounds seem very glitchy in a laggy environment, in that hits won't register hits most of the time (from my experience at least)
Currently, I'm running a super hornet with 1 combine ballistic (size 4) and 3 size 3 broadswords.
This loadout is a lot of fun when you're not on the recieving end
Question, btw: In early builds of Arena Commander, when I took damage I'd sometimes lose a maneuvering thruster and have that change reflected on my flight model.
I don't think I've seen that happen even once since Arena Commander 1.0 - At least not to me. Did they cave in to the complaints and take out that feature?
that's a good question, I've taken considerable damage and body loss and still been able to maneuver well, until I'm suddenly just a drifting husk. Avenger used to just turn into a brick the instant it lost a thruster, I think that was pretty bad and deterred from the fun of gameplay.
If we had vastly larger health pools and components took a decent chunk of damage to ever get knocked out, it could be manageable, but we die too fast already, let alone when we can't outmaneuver incoming fire or stop from drifting into a debris field
on that note though, it would be fun if NPCs were more liable to lose thrusters or otherwise have a short in their systems that causes them to spin out and smash spectacularly into a wall
[QUOTE=dai;49369192]that's a good question, I've taken considerable damage and body loss and still been able to maneuver well, until I'm suddenly just a drifting husk. Avenger used to just turn into a brick the instant it lost a thruster, I think that was pretty bad and deterred from the fun of gameplay.
If we had vastly larger health pools and components took a decent chunk of damage to ever get knocked out, it could be manageable, but we die too fast already, let alone when we can't outmaneuver incoming fire or stop from drifting into a debris field
on that note though, it would be fun if NPCs were more liable to lose thrusters or otherwise have a short in their systems that causes them to spin out and smash spectacularly into a wall[/QUOTE]
Aye, it was essentially a death sentence on the Hornet, too. I actually liked that feature, but I agree, much more component health is needed to make it viable.
I think that they should use the same sort of philosophy on ship health that you heard from tales of planes like A-10's barely landing with a blown engine, turning flaps damaged, over a thousand bullet holes through the main body, and etc. That shit makes for epic stories.
Granted too much core damage in the wrong place is still gonna make your reactor go boom in a spaceship, and then you're just specks of metal scattering into the void.
I'm sorry but "turning flaps" has me giggling
The A-10 has triple redundant systems and the entire thing is designed around durability. Including the arrangement of the control surfaces, engine nacelles, and the structure of the cockpit. It's quite the impressive beast, even if it is sadly obsolete nowadays. That sort of durability would be hella neat though
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
