Inside Star Citizen: Masters and Blasters
Vložit
- čas přidán 31. 05. 2024
- How will the introduction of Master Modes ensure that each vehicle provides a unique experience going forward? Join us as we explore the upcoming changes in Alpha 3.23 that'll transform the future of combat forever.
------------------------------------------
Roberts Space Industries is a spacecraft manufacturer within the persistent-world game "Star Citizen" and its companion single-player spaceflight sim, "Squadron 42." RSI is also your portal for information, updates, and purchases of your very own spacecraft with which to trade, plunder, and protect the citizens of Star Citizen.
Follow us on your favorite platform for the latest Star Citizen updates:
/ robertsspaceindustries
/ robertsspaceind
/ robertsspaceind
/ starcitizen
/ starcitizen - Hry
I am loving the early ISCs. I can watch them instead of doing my job :)
Same, bro. Same. 🤜🤛
We all do😂
you're not alone ... 😏
he just like me fr
That's right! lol
Im with everyone else worried about non combat ships. They only talk about tuning for combat and combat categories. We have only been able to test combat in Arena Commander and everything so far has been tuned for Squadron 42 which is combat focused.
I would really like to hear more about non combat ships and master modes
It's painfully obvious that you're just going to be a sitting duck in your industrial ships.
@@Roboticus_Prime_RC that's exactly how I feel. The fact that there are no shields and no countermeasures, a fighter can zip ahead and drop to scm mode before my qt drive is even spooled up is concerning.
We will mostly be flying in Nav mode which at the end they touched a tiny bit on. Basically you will have you full speed unlocked at all times with your quantum always spooled so they won't be able to catch you nor will they have time to switch to Nav mode before your already gone.
@@hawk2086 I hadn't even thought of that. My scenarios were all around the approach to atmospheric landing zones where your ship is forced to slow down.
@joeswanson420 quantum snares and atmo will slow you down. You won't outrun the volley of missiles, and you won't be able to drop noise.
I am still very concerned with the immediate deceleration after nav mode is deactivated
Master Modes feels very wrong in a lot of ways, it feels like by reverse thrusters are set to automatically spend energy on actively fighting my interests as a pilot in many situations. I'd punch the engineer after returning to hangar.
It needs to be a replacement worth celebrating, not a degradation that makes us mourn what we had.
@@TerkanTyr
Anybody notice yogi's job title P.V.P
Principle Vehicle Programmer 😅
🤣
It makes sense that he is ignoring us industrial players.
@@Roboticus_Prime_RC clearly not ignoring. more like making easier to target, so he has an easier time with his "pirating". (hes not good at pvp).
@@Roboticus_Prime_RC He's not just ignoring industrial. He's ignoring the majority of the player base.
It's also weird the devs think master modes allow them to fly formation better. Flying formation is hard, but the ships have speed limiters, if you want to fly formation, you just all set your speed limiters to a lower number (slightly higher than you want to fly) which gives you more throttle fidelity. You don't need master modes to do this.
Flying formation is also much different when you have control surfaces in atmosphere vs true space flight. To fly formation in atmosphere you frequently only need to pay attention to bank angle and throttle management, not so much about stick pitch pressure. In space you always need to be working the pitch as well, so zero g formation flight is much harder because of the physics of it. This is the fun part, we don't need our devs to make it 'easier'.
That might be true for when you're flying with people you're on comms with but one thing I've noticed a huge difference in with MM Squadron Battle is everyone immediately falls into nice tight formations as the match starts and then groups are able to stick together much more easily, even without comms.
@@Super-id7bq For sure, but that's just because everyone is at max power, i.e. all the same speed (sloooow). Mil power and formation speed should not be equal... and is a very good illustration as to why this new model ,makes battles boring. Max power should not feel comfortable formation flying, and if you can only battle at formation speed, that severely limits the high skill ceiling that makes any game interesting for more than a week.
@@Stephen_Newport💯
Until you engage in combat and everyone scatters out while jousting, making formations useless. That's the whole purpose of flying in formation in a combat wing, to stay close and defend each other.
The moment of bullet-time: 14:55
Moment of bullet perfectly sidestepped: *"...nnnnNOPE!"*
Please go into more detail on how you see non-combat ships fitting into this new landscape (more than a single throwaway line at the end anyways). As of now it seems like an extreme detriment to commercial players. Not being able to have shields up in transit makes the already weak non-combat ships even more vulnerable.
It's not even just no shields. You don't even get flares or noise. Complete sitting ducks.
@@Roboticus_Prime_RC Somehow they did a 15 minute video on master modes, but only spoke about the combat side of it. Something is fishy here
Honestly the way I see it is just that being in transit already will make you quite hard to actually hit or slow down. You’re able to accelerate to 1km/s when most fighters will struggle to hit 400-500m/s, and as you’ll already be in the Quantum Travel Mode you’ll be able to activate Quantum Boost/Jump quickly to get out of any hairy situations. The hardest part most likely will be when you are trying to land or take off, as it will likely require you to first enter the combat mode.
However, also worth noting is that most ships made for things like Freight have turrets, and those will only be even stronger in Master Modes due to the lower speeds. So overall it’s a wait and see situation, but I can imagine that the way most people play won’t change drastically.
@@NormanGaming196 fishy? yeah they're conspiring to oppress the whales😂
@@NormanGaming196 also 13:00
My only problem with Master Modes right now is that without the ship Armor re-work the ship trying to run without shields is an easy target. After the armor rework then it will be even field as most of the hull is just empty space and getting hit willean little to nothing unless the attacker can hit precise areas only.
Per Yogi shields are part of the flight model and armor has nothing to do with the flight model.....
Why would non-combat ships be in SCM mode? They have no reason to.
@@Billy-bc8pk what if they want to mine, or just not have thire ship tow/salvageable via shields...
@@unicaller1Then mine. But if you're in mining mode right now you still get popped easily before you can do anything. Literally nothing changes with Master Modes.
@@Billy-bc8pk Right now I can try to run away, soon I really can't. Seems like a change to me.
Playing fast and loose with "Frigate" and "Corvette" classifications in this video.
Mark my words this will destroy the PvP community
Basically ruined the game before it's even released lmao, I honestly dont see the point in continuing, let alone buying anymore absurdly pricey ships if they're just going to ruin the core of the game for arcadey dogfights you can get in plenty other games.
Will there also be non-combat archetypes like light/medium/heavy freighter with their own benefits etc?
They'll explode in different colors
what benefit?
Is this trolling? Or are you just bickering because combat is getting improvements and you dislike combat?
@@lunamaria1048 what comment are you reading? FreakGame doesn't seem mad or trolling, is just wondering about ships that don't fit a combat prototype, of which there are many. It's a good question, honestly. Prospector shouldn't handle like a fighter, and it probably has an archetype of some sort assigned to it.
@lunamaria1048 Where in my comment did you read that I dislike combat? I'm just also interested in other types of ship archetypes that are non-combat related.
Or is that too much to ask for in your opinion?
I love how Master Modes has made flight easy and an arcade game because a bunch of whiny sweatlords were mad people could run away.
So I shouldn't feel bad that my C1 only has 1 shield generator because it'll never be up anyway since I always be in nav mode?
Anyway a lot of components are going to change too, they talked about it and ships will loose a shield to get a bigger one 😉
I cant wait to test out the more industrial / commercial style ships and how Master Modes will handle with cargo ships, mining, salvage.. etc. - Its going to be fun developing the check lists and Emergency plan A/B/C if interdicted, ambushed.. etc. - Master Modes and Engineering will be like relearning the game all over again.
I strongly feel shields should still be active in navigation mode. If the whole idea is that non combat ships should never really be in combat or what not I don’t really see the point of having shields in the first place? The gameplay certainly looks more “Star Wars” esc instead of what you would actually expect to see in space combat which I assume is what they’re going for.
So this is how good space fighter combat dies, with thunderous praise from the devs.
And crying from the pro jousters and tricorders 🎻
All I see is crying from people who cant handle high octane combat & want to play arcade dogfighters, fml, 10 + years for this
Another friendly reminder that there's supposed to be cargo, passenger, exploration. Kind of concerned that no one at CIG remembers this, between this and "distribution centers" which are really just more combat maps.
If your concern is that cargo ships won’t stand a chance, then good. That is a good thing. Because their purpose is not to engage in combat. Their purpose is to move boxes from point A to point B. Reason I say this is a good thing is because it gives other professions like escorting and security (my kind of gameplay) more purpose. Now there are legitimate reasons for people like cargo haulers to hire someone to keep them safe. I only charge a 10,000 AUEC deposit + 10%-15% of the profits from cargo + 30,000 auec/player kill. That last one is for the purpose of time spent having to deal with a possible CS after the fact. Price is negotiable. In the event I can’t keep you safe from a pirate attack (does not include you crash accidentally or on purpose), then I would refund the deposit.
Distribution Centres are explicitly primarily for cargo, passenger, and related and un-implemented gameplay loops, with combat missions a secondary (infrequent) complication. That frequency will obviously be very high and likely near-constant when they are first implemented and whenever PvP-related changes and additions are made to the content (implementation of raids and successive iterations on that content), but that is by no means representative of normal gameplay in a post-alpha environment and there's no reason for you to pretend otherwise. You aren't playing a game, you have the privilege of playtesting an alpha, and that's going to remain the case for quite a few quarters yet; act accordingly.
@@RosscoAW If you actually think that combat isn't going to be a constant thing there, then do I ever have an Origin style bridge to sell you. 😁
@@MidnightWolfSDJ nobody is going to hire escorts.
@@MidnightWolfSDJ You suffer from a critical misunderstanding of how combat in this game actually works - and how it will work under MM - if you really think this is going to kick off some kind of new era where hiring escorts is actually useful. Also, your rates are ridiculous. You're already getting a significant cut of the cargo profit, but you also want to be paid per kill when the whole reason you're being given a cut of the profits in the first place is to kill aggressors? That's hilarious. What a joke.
So, this is all good and nice, but as other have stated, can we please also get another ISC regarding the MM-experience for non-combat-ships? From this video alone it feels like the entire focus is on combat, and everyone else is left behind
The funniest part is that it completely disregards the combat community, as well.
It feels like the entire focus is on combat and everyone else is left behind because that's exactly what's going on here.
Ruined combat & leaves non combat vessels, just as, if not more in risk lmao
Disabling shields for players wishing to defensively run from a bad situation: DUMB
Ships that stand no chance in a fight need to be punished for trying to run away from that fight, and what better way to punish them than by taking down their shields so they're even easier to kill? CIG has to pander to the murderhobos, after all.
Master Modes are not the way.........
How to make SC Combat better:
Don't introduce Master Modes. Keep current system. Tune current system. I don't think I've ever been less excited for a major gameplay change.
current system has far too many problems to make it a useable system..
@@yulfine1688 like?
@@skatman3278 speed. MM is all about speed. Making combat fun and not light fighter exclusive while keeping normal travel enjoyably and not to slow.
@@RasakBlood there's nothing wrong with the speed. Being able to control your speed is a skill and separates good pilots from bad pilots.
Frankly, speed is one of the biggest issues with MM and it fails to give enough separation between inexperienced and good pilots.
@@skatman3278 yes there is actually everything is just about fly at max speed which shouldn't be possible considering gforces etc for one and two it just allows people to burn away recharge and comeback or just leave wehenever there's no real engagement and it's a mess to manage, the more skilled pilots know how to abuse the system and that's why only certain ships are even useable.
The aircrafts shouldn't be able to even maneuver very well at 1000m/s and it goes against the older style of combat they're wanting anyways which is world war 1-2 as if it was todays combat it would be fire a missile 50kms out and you'd never know until you're dead which wouldn't be long as missiles would travel that distance very quickly.
This is just the bare bones of the system its not even completed and won't be for 1-3 years probably.
Also the current TTK is just too high even for light v light, ontop of backstrafing is far less of an issue with MMS and most pvpers that complain can't just easily seperate people from a group or boost 15kms away in 2 seconds which doesn't even make sense.
Also most people complaing about MMS are whining about not being able to easily 1v5 people in an arrow.. its always light fighters pilots complaining... one of the other main complaints is not having as much string out gameplay. That's a good thing because in reality numbers generally win unless you have an op fighter the 22 is able to shut down 35s and f16s in a group easily due to how good of a fighter plus the pilots are because of mainly stealth and the maneuverability and yet its not perfect a mistake can cost them.
Back strafing is still an issue though and many pvpers have said this and that is hard to honestly fight against in all honesty. It is far worse currently but it's still a problem, the new targeting is more skilled based and this is coming from a day ago video from some of the more active pvpers and top pvp players.
Some issues is currently they said the gladius is lacking forward strength currently and that's one ship so there's a lot of other balancing this is going to be happening for other fighters and the gladius isn't an inceptor fighter so Im not sure there.
Some ideas are to lower weapon speed but this is going to cause more issues than fix, so I agree like most players scms speeds do need to be bumped a bit i am not against it. I don't think they should be at 700+ but I think 400 or so should be fine to sit around for light fighters depending.
Most of the complaints are once again about 1v1 battles not groups and many people agree with that so they mentioned that here its an issue. Positional fighting has returned and is more of a factor on the field.
Again even top pvpers aren't sure on how to fix wiggling and back strafing, lag pips don't really help but maybe if they worked correctly its possible?
There were buffs to shields and so on as well, as they said shields drastically increase absorption now and weapon recharge and mag capacity is better along with engine turn rate acceleration.
I think some mentioned there's an issues with dodging I assume the quick boosts for movement are a bit of an issue at times.
Regardless no one seems to have any better idea right now and MM are mostly positive but there's a lot of tweaking to take care of, and with the larger ships I am interested to see what happens there.
Why bother trying to balance it when there's no armor and no non-combat ships.
Because CIG loves to put the cart before the horse.
I've played with it and I always feel annoyed by the application of spacebrake when going into SCM or combat mode.
I wish the thrusters lost power in the top end without forcing reverse thrust as you turn power to shields and weapons, it would be way smoother. I hope to see smooth transitions between QT and NAV too, but that has always been stop and go.
Idk if fast initial engagements can be balanced for properly, or if repeated use can be discouraged by having a heat buildup each change from NAV to SCM. I kinda just know I'm a bit bothered by the transition.
I'm not thrilled with component targeting. I want to target components with out zooming in.
you can by litterally just shooting.. but the chances you hitting on a smaller fighter certain systems while they move around is not going to be easy
you heard? more limitations and less freedom are fun and you gotta like it.chainging the core idea of a game...
So, to clarify:
The Carrack is a Frigate - the same archetype as a friggin Idris? But thats not a classification based on size, rather based on.. tunings?
What's a tuning? A tuning can be durability, or maneuverability, or role? Does tuning even mean anything if it spans thrusters, power, health, and roles? If we can change tunings, can we tune a gunboat to a corvette?
you dont do the tuning, they tune the ships to fit in to the subclasses in the main roles and make each ship unique, carrack will obviously have a different subclass than an idris even if they are considdered the same main class
@@anon4662 So CIG stock tunings vs the actual engineering mechanic known as tuning? Got that...
You mentioned subclasses. Did they mention that or are you merely speculating?
"Not be able to mount fixed guns anymore..." How is this going to work on ships like the Vanguard where it has nose guns that can't be gimbled?
they come with fixed guns that can not be swapped so they are fixed, they are not replaceable aka "not able to mount fixed guns" because you dont mount them yourself. Same goes for Ares Inferno/Ion aswell as Idris Railgun, those will remain fixed
Why did they change the 3D ship markers, that we had for almost 10 years now? You can't tell the position and direction of the ships anymore if it's just a simple 2D square.
1v1 will never be balanced enough between two different ship classes. I don't think we should waste too much energy on it.
It's like asking to do a "Balance Pass" on the A-10 vs the F-16. They are different vehicles for different roles and both have great strengths in certain areas, in a 1v1, all other things being equal, it's clear who will win.
If anyone of you say the A-10 wins, you are the Aviation version of a Katana-obsessed weeb.
Its not about what ship is best. Its about flight model changes that effect how all of them fly.
You're looking for our opinions ? There you go.. I think Master Modes is a terrible approach. And to be fair I'm also convince it will be a huge failure and you'll probably get back from it, after having wasted months of development for nothing :(
Actually nothing looks alright about that, neither in terms of game balance (aggressors vs victims who don't wanna fight), simulation (i would say "lore"), gameplay...
Let me start with the realistic lore-ish part of it... I don't understand how you would like to explain that a linear accelaration requieres more energy than a boost (that you can easily do in combat mode) ? Already in the game today when you boost you can see your emissions going crazy and requiering lot of energy allocation to regen, which is absolutely LOGICAL. Your engines consumes a lot to take you from stop to max speed and once you're closing it they're almost idle, like in real life, like in your game, like anything being LOGICAL. So why low demand on engines would force your shields, weapons, to turn off ? I'm sorry to say but that's a none sense here. I also have the feeling of adding a very "videogame"/arcade approach to a very natural existing model. That reminds me of Elite dangerous where you have 3 speed modes and you feel anything but being into a simulation...
Game balance now... well, first of all... I've heard things scaring me , like you take ships that have absolutely no problem today, like snubs, racers, you convert them into this MM, then you find out they can't race anymore (lol) so you add them small quantum drives so they can do small quantum boost ?! woow.. guys, sorry.. but coming from simracing i thik you have missed a little part of it, when racing this is not about difficult inputs, you drive a F1 with basically 2 inputs, pedals and steering wheel. Racing planes too are really easy to fly but insanely hard to be good/fast with! So if you want people to have some fun and progressively master it, the last thing you want is to add some limited/false quantum drives on ships that shouldn't have one because your new artificial flight model prevent them from doing things they were meant and designed to !
Big ships. And shields. Let's say i exit quantum with my Hull C full of cargo. If I correctly understood it, I'll come with no shields. What will happen to me if I get ambushed ?! the actual logic wants me to fly with max out shields so if i have trouble i can try to set an escape route.. But, if I quantum with shields off and find some company at quantum exit ? Will you make shields to instantly turn on ?! I mean, even on 100m long ships ? I mean.. those capacitors in Master modes are meant to be unable to provide engines, weapons and shields at same time, but 100% shields instantly ?! Or maybe i'll just be a sitting duck.
Still big ships, but let's say in atmo.. A Reclaimer, in Nav mod, trying to join space. How fast will it go ? 300m/s ? And how about fighters in combat ? 350 ?. Maybe you'll let big ships fly atmosphere faster ? so a reclaimer flying by at 1Km/s above New Babbage ?!
At the end of the day, the community you are targeting with these Master modes is maybe smaller than you think. You have tons of industrial players, wich are definitely aware of the risk of flying alone, but DON'T WANT TO BE FORCED to fight because you turned it in such unbalanced way just to please a few hand of PvP players that can still have fun in AC. These Master Modes are definitely creating TONS of problems that in my opinion are way worse than the initial issue you planned to fight against, and the only fix you'll be able to add wil be very artificial, unatural and all but logical when you consider the engineering part of it.
I would be REALLY interested into a star citizen live or even better ISC, about "Master Modes : Non Combat Edition" and share with community all the options you have been thinking for all those backers who are not looking into fighting all day but just enjoy the game in their very unique way thanks to the numerous gameplays you have been working on and still will in future !
Please don't let your excitment preventing you from seeing and hearing your community concern about game balance and overall fun ;)
I completely agree. Based on how CIG has communicated MM, its like they didn't factor in that 90% of SC PU players are industrial.
I hope the pilot turrets like those on the MSR get a bump in size, since they didn’t have the option of being fixed and going up a size. It kinda feels like a nerf to those ship designs that had a pilot controlled turret.
Well, with the mentioned "benefit only for turrets", the Freelancer, Mercury, Spirit, and similar nose turret ships should get a leg up in accuracy to make up for the weapon size possibly.
you should call 3.23 the "jumping the shark" update.
the more i see the more worried i get.
You should
I've been saying this since the day they revealed Master Modes, and people kept saying "Wait for more information, it's a new system we don't know much yet"
And every thing they revealed just made the dread worse and worse. At this point, I've uninstalled the game and will not install it until Master Modes is removed. They put an FPS dev in charge of a flight model, and the players have to pay the price in the form of poorly thought out mechanics, handwaved physics, and a complete and utter lack of care for non PvE combat players.
PvP players voiced concern about the lowered skill ceiling: "They just don't like change"
Miners voiced concern about their lack of defenses: "They just don't like change"
Salvagers say the same: "They just don't like change"
Racers, the people who engage with flight at the deepest and most intricate level, voiced concerns about the lack of control, the jarring transitions, and the dumbing down of the physics: "They just don't like change"
It's frankly disgusting to see a developer shrug off genuine concern about a complete rework of a core system as if it were meaningless.
Same feeling. :/@@anidiot9831
exact opposite for me, Chris's space games, always have had a WWII style of combat. these master modes reign in the high speed slingshot gameplay what we have now to the much more tactical WWII style, which imho is much more fun.
@@anidiot9831 lol core system, there was no "core system" it was atrocious high speed slingshot joust gameplay where yaw rate was king. it needed to be slowed down so all the other systems and tactics in your ship can be used like shield balancing, repair priority, etc. there is a balance required. if combat is too quick it becomes very unbalanced.
I feel like this is is going to be the deciding factor for people with this game. The current flight model has issues but at least you feel like you are in space and i know that there is a speed cap already but i feel like you can have it base of the tri power setting we have instead of having mastermodes. Really we need 6 things to make mastermodes irrelevant, 1(Armor, so we don't die after losing shield and that will fix the issue with having a small fighter being able to kill a larger vessel because the level 1 through 3 guns shouldn't be able to pierce through the hull of the bigger ships.) 2(Fixing missiles so they are actually good and can take out a ship) 3(Make ship guns more devastating so when you do get up close, you can just shred any ship, but you do not want to get up close because of the ship weapons being so devastating so you would use missiles) 4(Have the quantum drives be power hungry so when you turn them on you shouldn't be able to do anything else because the ships power is being used up by the quantum drive.) 5(Keep the same flight input because the thrusters already work as they should. the maneuvering thruster output less then your main one in the back. If i call for full thrust left, i should have the maneuvering thruster try there hardest to go in that directing but they only have so much thrust they can output. Have it be off of ship thruster not some stretched oval.) 6(Also why can i deploy countermeasure when i am in the travel mode, they don't use that much power, so it doesn't make sense.)
(Also tri-cording is just physics and in the future when your thrusters can overheat, it will be bad to use those extra thruster because they can break and overheat so you would want to use your main engine more.)
"you feel like you are in space" have you ever been in space in order to claim that?
To be honest, the reason why master modes is the way it is is because it gets the game closer in feel to ww2 ship / plane fights or star wars movies. If you want realism, nothing about master modes or the current system is, it doesn't "feel" like space because that's not how space works. Your idea of space is just what you have constructed from the media and from playing star citizen and other space games for as long as you've played.
Real life space combat would feel more like submarine combat over tens of thousands of kilometers and with little to no change in direction because the relative speeds of ships would be in the thousands of kilometers per second, especially if FTL travel exists. No space game or movie ever apart from the expanse in some scenes is like that.
So just stop talking about realism and physics etc when complaining about master modes and just say why you truly don't like it. When you design a game, gameplay dictates the in world logic, not the other way around. So try not to talk about "real world" logic when arguing about gameplay and to use gameplay oriented arguments that are not just "the player would be more powerful and have to make less choices if this happened so I want it".
@@PolBlanesCebrian my dude. don't be that mad.
I for my part would rather have a somewhat believable space-experience with the implied physics that this fully arcade experience called master mode. it's litarly COD in space at this point.
@@timobertschmann350 Not mad, you just misunderstood. Believable to you doesn't mean realistic or believable to everyone.
To me, any kind of space combat that is happening at less than 20000km is not realistic. Dogfighting in space is not realistic. None of it "feels" believable. And it's not trying to. It's trying to evoke classical sci fi space combat and that's what the designers intend.
The idea of COD in space doesn't make any sense. DCS in space would also not be realistic in any sense, and having to disable components on the other ship instead of zooming and booming and just spraying until one explodes sounds less arcade to me. The point is your argument is out of place. Just make better arguments and not such a shallow one as "it's like cod" or "I want to be able to do everything at once" or "this shouldn't happen in a game because reality isn't like that, but other unrealistic things are fine".
Master Modes don't make the game less realistic or more arcade, I'm sorry. It just makes the game less the way you personally think it should be for no real reason. And that's why I say you should give arguments based on gameplay and what you think would achieve the gameplay the game needs.
SC ships have to be like ww2 planes / modern combat planes / helicopters / naval ships.
Or they could be like real spaceships would be: extremely fast but slow to accelerate and slow down, using gravity to slingshot and trace their trajectory, unable to take off from a planet without burning through 98% of the fuel, unable to land safely without parachutes, completely designed to detect moving objects at 100000km and shoot guided missiles at any range whatsoever since the missiles would only need fuel to change course not to keep their speed. etc.
Started playing Halloween last year, this is the first time i've seen someone actually explain what the Master Modes are, and I have seen a lot of discussion on them in that time...
they had an hour presentation on it during citcon , and there is a mastermodes 'test' in arena commander where you can try it yourself. lol. Kinda just seems like you arent particularly paying attention
You know you can go play and try it out right now...?
Ships don't just sit still so you can select what part of the ship to target. It would be nice if the co-pilot on ships like a Constellation could do that for the pilot and gunners. Co-pilots definitely need more gameplay so there's more incentive to have one on ships that will accommodate one.
Some are complaining that master modes are creating more distance instead of bring ships closer together since weapons have such a greater range than before. Perhaps fire dispersal at longer distances should be increased and accuracy at range should be incremental based on weapon size.
What also bugs me are the claim that they listen to and wants to please the players.
Well, the players testing MM, that likes to play AC are the pvpers, not the pve/industrial players, that i claim are the big majority of players in SC.
So balance combat around players that dont do combat is what you're suggesting?
@@twostangs81 No, of it stays in ac fighter to fighter, fine.
But all testing and responses only counts towards that, not against slow industrials.
I hope it will balance a bit when in live, but for now i am mostly negative against MM as an industrial player, and with recent years progress only pleasing whiny ac players my hope for that are at bottom.
But i realy hope im wrong 😉
@@robrider3290Because it doesn't matter. Industrial ships are supposed to run or have escorts or copilots/crew on turrets to help them get away. There is no scenario where a solo industrial player is going to be out-fighting a solo ace pilot in a dogfighter.
@bc8pk Excactly, and with MM they are sitting ducks with no shields, where fighters have no problem catching up to a big slow industrial before it can get away.
@@Billy-bc8pk and small fighters are supposed to be carrier-borne without the range to jump from a moon to its planet and back again ... if you listen to what CR said on video 8 years ago.
How will precision targeting play with mouse and keyboard? It looks very messy and finicky using a kb/m so zoomed in it is.
it looks horrid.. and that passes for cinematic, its sad times
RSI, please add remote control access to the ship so i can open from a distance while being chased by sweaty players
The company is CIG. RSI is a fictional company in Star Citizen that CIG named their website after.
Robert Space Industries, isn't that the website that lets you download the game??
@@Mr.Knight007 That's literally what I just said. The game development studio _Cloud Imperium Games (CIG)_ named their official website _RSI_ after a fiction aerospace corporation of the same name within _Star Citizen._ In summery - they are called CIG, not RSI. "RSI" won't be adding anything to the game since they're not real.
Master mode force player to stop shield 🤡
GG you made grieffing even more easy, just wait at QT exit and fire T9
Btw lot of good infos
Don't even need a T9 now. Just hit em with a spread of Rattler II's.
I know no one reads these, but no Yogi @10:00min in, it is a cheat. If everything's a gimbal its now all about how big the aim assist bubble is. We've had this for a while, but it feels like there is a need to make this stronger.
We are slowing ships down, i would have liked to have thought that would be enough to help with desync issues, and to make turrets relivant.
Percision targeting, so you can lock on to bits and chew them off is... arcadey.
If anything what you should be doing is making a skill issue of using dumbfires, and rockets to hit the vulnarable spots on a moving evasive target at range, instead everything is autoaimed.
You had Lag-Pip. You had component targeting. That stuff was good and took skill.
The Percision mode overlay is nice, make thr player scan to get it, not sure we need an entire OTHER vision/targeting mode for it.
Should honesty call Percision mode Tunnel-Vision mode, or Turret mode. Makes sense on the Ares which is a brick shithouse, but not on the lights this is ment to help keep relivant.
That new precision aiming mode looks so awful. Every time they show it off, they have really bad aim and the crosshair is just flopping around. Zero situational awareness during a dogfight, what was wrong with sub-targeting?
People at CIG don't seem to understand such simple things.
Useless views are celebrated as innovation. And it's best to present the whole thing as if sub-targeting had never existed in Star Citizen. Although the system already existed and the system was easier to use. 😅
Keep it up guys, excited to try this out!
@Yogi, you say you want our inputs so you can make this "SPACE COMBAT GAME" better together. CR did not pitch a space combat game to us. He pitched a diverse universe with PVE and PVP, combat and a lot of non-combat activities, with the possibility of being attacked at any time. But the devs have been moving toward it being all about combat. The video announcing salvage missions mentioned a timer to trigger hostiles and showed a Vulture out salvaging and then an tali and 4-5 small fighters rushing past and blowing it up with a size 9 torpedo. You introduced forced combat into the DC and cargo missions. The only future of PVE I can see is that an Endeavor owner can plant peas in his biodome, but I bet beyond the shadow of a doubt as soon he drops seedlings into the dirt that it will automatically trigger hostiles to attack and blow up his ship, because in your own words, this is a "SPACE COMBAT GAME."
That's splitting hairs, he clearly didn't mean the entire game is only combat so don't over think it. Also it's a huge part of the game. The entire premise of the lore is you're a citizen because you were in the military (that's how you get citizenship). The entire single player campaign is about fighting. Pretty much every keynote demo they ever did involves some form of combat. 99% of the ships literally have big old guns on them (not something you tend to see in the real world on a truck hauling cargo down the M62). The very first module they added was a combat module and the original kickstarter was all footage of combat. It's honestly wild to me that anyone has been following this game for all these years and still believes they were selling you the idea that you could literally avoid combat at all costs. CR has also constantly spoken about competing for resources and Todd Pappy always talks about there being a "tension" in the verse. And despite all that it's still ridiculously easy to avoid combat completely in this game if people aren't lazy and make some very small corrections to their behaviour to avoid it. The space is absolutely massive - with just a small amount of situational awareness you can go weeks without running into a fight.
If these mastermodes mean that something like a Polaris or Perseus's point defense turrets don't work while in the Maneuver mode that will be idiotic.
really can't wait to hear more music within the game. The recent music I have heard on ISC has been so lovely.
looks still way to arcady and slow not at all like a sim anymore , its not system i would want to invest hundreds of hours into , it looks like something made for a 20h singleplayer game and not for really suited for a sim-mmo .
I agree, really hope they make some major changes, and not release mm in this awful state
Use me for a no master modes button.
The flight model might not be perfect but MM is a total slap in the face. EVERYONE who actually dogfights hates it.
Still skeptical about Master Modes. Have you tested them with non-combat ships yet? Do we know how difficult it is to get away from an aggressor in a Vulture, Freelancer, or SRV? Master Modes work great for all the combat testing you've done. Richard said, "...this isn't a game just about combat," and yet, we don't know anything about the survivability of those of us that want to opt out and flee. No one is addressing the elephant in the room, and Yogi said, "I don't think there's a lot of difference between combat ships and non-combat ships in Star Citizen."
They have definitely not tested MM with non-combat ships yet. Aside from an early mention of "you'll need to be in NAV mode to use your mining lasers and your salvaging tools" there's been zero discussion of non-combat ships under MM at all. I honestly don't believe they've even considered non-combat ships in the first place, and so we're going to get this new flight system that was designed specifically around solving the problem of light fighters going too fast in combat.
if your in nav mode with your mining laser out then your , mining with no shields ?? that makes no sense to me at all makes you just real easy pickings if someone comes across you while your mining no flares noise or shields before you try to run, even worse if you have a overcharge accident with no shields
Wasn't the whole point of master modes because a pilot in a Prospector fought off the typical griefer move from a poor pilot in a Gladius that gave himself enough time to escape? That won't happen anymore. No shields, no warning, just dead. It's a sad day for emersion and any chances for realistic ... sort of ... game play. Now it's just another run of the mill fantasy game.
The full affects of Precision Targeting Mode should be achieved through scanning gameplay. Not to make it complicated but to be able to target or even highlight specific parts on enemy ships should be through a quick targeting scan from the pilot or copilot. It would kind of feel like cheating if you could take out someone's thrusters before they even knew you were close; if you could take out their thrusters without PTM then you've earned it.
I can wait for squadron 42. But these ISC's can't come early enough on my favourite day of the week! o7
their comments about the zoom-in mode being the only way to not "spray and pray" or master modes finally making formations possible (????) reveal more about the skill of the team responsible for balancing combat than they seem to realize. i'm all for lowering the skill floor but the casualification of star citizen to the point of lowering the skill ceiling is a concern i hope they're in-tune with.
my other hope is this communication is all being dumbed down for our sakes and there's actually much more to the interpretation of player feedback than "i see the ships closer-up on streams now so it's good".
all in all i was hoping this ISC would alleviate my concerns and instead it heightened them pretty severely. framing MM as essentially a pvp toggle is also disconcerting in terms of philosophy.
this here. I bought 450$ slight stick for this game and now everyone who understands flight models is sounding the alarm
My concern is that it's space. Why would you want to be close to your opponent? That seems like the least space way to approach combat. You would 100% want to be at distance.
Of course they frame MM as a PvP toggle. Otherwise the complaints that non-combat ships are getting shafted will ring all the louder.
@@Hydracloneamen... its already a pain in live PU that you often crash into debris fom just killed enemies, it is even worst in the MM test modes. And with component gameplay it will be even quadrupled because there will still be a complete ship right in your flight path.
@@LiopleurodonThe problem is that the only other way to do component damage is automated laser-guided systems -- like Star Trek. That really dumbs the combat down even more as you're just keeping your distance and tapping the fire button and the weapon systems do all the work for you.
Yogi's passion always comes accross, good work to the team. Looking forward to seeing these in .23!
hes looking real happy about this im happy for them... this mustve been a helluva undertaking to completely change the game... and its paying off i love it for them and us haha
now imagine if he had more than passion and actual competence on making a game for people with other playstyles than his.
but nope.
Yeah, too bad his leadership put him in this no-win situation.
Yes they finally replaced all that was once cool about SC now we finaly have the slowest and silliest space arcade ever made. noobsters rejoice
I would have liked the issue with swapping between nav/scm modes beeing adressed here. I can easily go through an entire squadron battle without dying just by hitting the nav button whenever my shield is getting low.
Also coming out of nav basically instantly slows you down and this makes merging incredibly easy.
I hope this issue is addressed for pu.
what i learned is that i must live in the mirror universe , its odd that CIG said were getting all this positive feedback mentioned here over and over . which is contrary to my own experiences in the streams and circles i orbit who say the exact opposite about MM its weird . i feel that this is going to be hover mode all over again where CIG ignored inital feedback then felt the backlash after it went to live and abandoned it
Yeah I have a very similar feeling.
i think so to sadly
Maybe you're in the bubble?
i've watched the spectrum(CIGs-forum) since the introductions of mm and its far mostly positiv , it actually splits the community right now and almost everyday there is a new post complaining about MM .
@@Nonpain from what ive seen its been hardly mostly positive from streams , to discord discussions to even spectrum , in the orbits i hang in its not at all mostly positive , at best its very mixed with it leaning tof people very not happy with what we have seen , and see alot of issues with it of how it would work in a PU environment not just in a AC or SQ42 environment . its clear they made this for a single player game and trying to shoe horn it into the MMO which doesnt take into the account of skill based play and focuses on a very overly starfield type of experience
ALL SHIPS WILL BE ASSIGNED AN ARCHETYPE!
Great. You've just removed each ship's individuality. To replace said ship's individuality you now have to make yourselves lots more work. Thankfully you guys said ships will be assigned an archetype five times. Didn't sink in for the first four repetitions.
PRECISION TARGETING IS ALL ZOOMY-INNY!
Previously it wasn't and components could be selected with a single keystroke. Now we have to be zoomed in all the time and blind to our surroundings / scanner.
NO MORE FIXED WEAPONS!
Great. You just removed all the skill from combat.
So what did we learn this week? CIG like making work for themselves. And us. Unless you suck at combat. Thanks.
not sure you watched the video or understood the changes at all.. perhaps go test things in arena commander and then come back
If ships have individuality now, giving them an archetype won't change that. You'd be giving extra characteristics to the ship that are shared with some ships but not with others. It's like you're saying if 2 ships have the same power plant they're they lose their individuality, no, a ship is the sum of its parts and the archetype is just one of the parts.
There's nothing wrong with precision targeting having drawbacks.
No fixed weapons means you won't be able to mount weapons without a gimbal, it doesn't mean you won't toggle gimbal on / off, you can already do that if all your weapons are gimballed. To be fair the explanation for that was very badly worded.
@@PolBlanesCebriando you know by turning gimbals on does it just rotate the weapons first at the target and than ship? (Like the weapons move faster of course rather than waiting for the whole ship to turn?) Idk cause i have always used fixed ones on my titan
@@RangerxTurbo I think turning gimbals on just gives your pitch and yaw a deadzone where your input doesn't move your ship. If you offset your crosshair by more than a certain amount then the ship starts to turn just as fast as if you were in fixed mode. That basically means it probably feels less reactive and it could justify turning gimbals on and off depending on what you're doing.
Another advantage of gimbals is you don't have to care about your guns being too far appart to all hit your target.
I just Hope we will still get sniper weapon to have more range because fighting is not always about been close to each other
Especially in space. There is no reason to be so close to each other in space. "So you can see the other ship" is frankly the worst excuse they've ever given for a change.
@@Hydraclone There kinda is. It's a video game. It needs to be playable. But more importantly, for the physicalized damage they want to do, wherein disabling a ship will be all about targeting specific ship components, you need to be able to see what you're shooting at.
They say that weapons no longer have limited range, so you can fire at ships from a lot longer range with Master Modes, but it comes with spread. Basically, you will have to find a weapon that reduces spread or learn to get good in precision mode with long range firing. I can definitely see ship sniping becoming a bit of a meta for really good players who know how to maximise their loadout.
Kinda seems like the role larger, bespoke, fixed weapons will play (such as Ares Ion), especially with the new zoomed cam. But we will have to wait and see
smaller ships will be closer battles because real life currently wouldn't be very fun since missiles can shoot 20+ kms away and with current tech not even know in some cases, next larger ships they said will be like real life naval battles.. which means much father combat etc, its a video game theres only so much you can do..
It's not clear how non-combat ships fit into the archetypes. What type is the Drake Vulture, or the MISC Hull A, or the Aegis Vulcan?
Archetype of "run away as soon as possible".
Loot pinatas, that is how they fit in.
If you think logically about it, are fighters intended to be more or less agile than non-combat ships? Depends on size of the ship right? A Hull A isn't going to out-fly an M50, but it will outfly an Idris. Scale and role will fall in line as they have already. Smaller = More Agile. Fighter = More Agile. You live in the real world right? A bicycle is more agile than an Oil tanker. An F-15 is more performant than a basic Cessna. But an Aerobatic civilian aircraft is more agile than a C-130. We have indicators that give us clues how things will work in SC.
Go go 13:00... It is made VERY clear that there is a mode for non combat ships to get from point A to B "without getting harassed as much"..... Non combat ship = non combat mode. A mode for everyone
I don't understand what more CIG could do to please the non combat crying
@@lunamaria1048 yes... as I said, the non-combat archetype is "run away as soon as possible". Full speed, no shields, good luck. I'm ok with that btw, and I'm a hauler 90% of the time.
MM is a shell of a flight model we used to have. It's ww1 (not ww2) planes pretending to "fly" in space with limitations and 'physics' that don't make sense and are counter-intuitive. It is not a step forward for Star Citizen. I understand that CIG try to make flying the ships more accessible. But I also know that not everyone should be a combat pilot. Those that want to be will need to learn anyway and get some basic skills, you can't expect to be Luke Skywalker in your first pvp fight. I'm not saying gitgud, I'm saying you can't effectively mine rocks or haul goods with profit before you know the basics behind it and execute on your knowledge. Does it mean we need to make mining have 0 zero skill checks and make auto-mining beam like in EVE? Same with combat.
no fixed weapons means no satisfying feeling when you actually land your shots , cause the ship(game) already does all the work , this sounds terribly boring to be honest .
> "[Formation]... If we can see each other and we're not accidentally shooting each other."
Well that's better than my friends and I.
News from CIG is very combat centric. Non combat players would like how their ships and gameplay are impacted. Could we be given a bit more time and consideration, or should we correctly assume we are just moving targets for combat? Really beginning to wonder...
After this much time since the initial mention of MM, it's safe to assume that anything which isn't explicitly a Fighter (or equivalent) is just a moving target for the Fighters.
My biggest concern with MM is, and always has been as a non-combat player. My prospector is intended to run away. It is not meant to turn and fight. However, it looks like to run away, my shields get disabled, and just about every fighter is faster than my prospector is, even when they are in SCM.
Better hope you can make a stealth build for your prospector or have some deep pockets to pay off those scoundrel's.
That has been my concern with MM up until now as well. Sometimes it feels like the guys at CIG are neglecting non-combat roles...
Sounds like when your in Nav mode, nothing in SCM mode will be able to catch you. Not sure where you are seeing that a fighter in SCM is faster than a Prospector in NAV mode.
IMO CIG will have to put some real thought into which ships get armor and what level that armoe will be.
Cig appears bad at their own game and whoever they are listening to has an agenda. If you are out in a prospector and you get jumped by players you are done. Unless you are so fast at running before they loose some missiles you will be dead every time.
Put as much effort in developing the core game as you do for the game's store.
Literally this.
I hope the turrets gimbals will work on the freelancer like in the advertisement!
That way those two back seats will have something for their operators to do.
Can you please fix the refinery consoles?
The games that've lasted the longest are those with high skill ceilings but are intuitive to jump into (think Halo, Counter-Strike, Dota, etc). So for Star Citizen to have spent so much time and effort into building such a high-fidelity universe and then dumb down its core combat system is downright outrageous!
The trouble with combat flying is that it's inherently a high-skill-floor profession that requires a mastery of kinematics, 3D spatial awareness, and the vehicles' systems. Hardly anyone comes into it with an intuitive understanding. And It's no wonder that newbies who just jump in end up feeling like a fish out of water. With proper training and effort anyone who wants to engage with the combat aspects of the game should be rewarded with a fulfilling experience. To me Master Modes feels like giving an average joe a pogo-stick so they can compete in an Olympic high-jump. I don't feel accomplished, and its both embarrassing and disheartening for those who know better.
And not everyone wants to be a combat pilot. That's perfectly fine! The core draw of Star Citizen is that there are a large variety of professions available to all kinds of gamers. They all complement and support each other, and that makes for a far more engaging experience. I love that mining and logistics have fleshed out mechanics that are games within themselves. But if the devs are gonna dumb down the combat profession, then they might as well just make mining be "press button to auto-collect resources," or engineering, "hit wall with wrench to fully heal ship." Why bother with extensive systems if we're just gonna cater to the lowest common denominator? We already have that - its called Starfield - and I stopped playing after 4 hours! For the game to have a diverse array of professions each one should be fully developed to cater to those who want to fully engage with them. Not doing so is a disservice to both the players and the game.
The most unfortunate thing is that Master Modes seems to be a reaction to the current situation in a game that isn't even finished yet. We don't have all aspects of ship systems in place -esp. armor and engineering - yet the devs are pushing a solution to a problem that hasn't fully been explored. Instead of setting a broken bone, they're giving us painkillers to deal with it. The problem is just gonna come back later in a worse way. The most powerful solution to a high-skill-floor profession is effective training. The game currently has NONE.
Now, I'm nowhere near a competent fighter pilot, so I don't have my own gameplay solutions, but I feel the ones Avenger__One is suggesting are logical and more in line with the game's Spirit than what we're given with Master Modes. I really hope the devs listen or we're just gonna get another "soft-modern" game that runs dry within weeks of exposure.
And for any devs that read this, please don't take any of this the wrong way. There are aspects of MM that I DO like - esp. gimballed turrets and component targeting. My sharp words come from a place of love. This project is so monumental and unique, I've been hooked from the start. And the passion you have shines brightly through all you're doing for it! Follow through on its potential and you'll have an industry-changing product with an unprecedented lifespan!
Afterall the money we've spent & a decade of development its came to this...
14:55 Thanks Jared. I spit my lunch on the desk. 😆
I was going to say the same thing lmao.
Is there a way to get that big green box in the persistent verse?
Really curious how these changes will affect the Ares. Yeah yeah yeah, only target large ships bs bs bs, point is there are fixed gun ships in the game so curious how this is going to apply to them. Never been a fan of gimbals thus far and haven’t really enjoyed the lack of lag pip / shot data etc in master modes. Guess we’ll see where it goes.
They have specifically stated in previous ISCs and Star citizen lives that weapons that are a fixed mount such as the Ares cannon and nose weapons on Vanguards are not gimbaled
@@Thisunknownguy what this guy said, I think the 3 examples they gave were the ares, vanguards and idris, and the inverse is true. Freelancers have an advantage because the side guns are turret mounted.
there is lag pip in master modes. there was a whole section in the citcon expo about how targeting pips will adjust based on distance and velocity (of both ship and gun) as well as spread. Not sure what you mean about shot data though. If you simply mean "knowing where my shot lands" than that is already present in the target viewer MFD, the hit component or part of the ship lights up when hit, and between that and the new targeting cam, it should be pretty easy to tell where/what you're hitting. As far as fixed bespoke guns like Ares go, It'll probably work like fixed guns always have. Maneuvering/positioning will be more important insofar as aiming goes, and again with the addition of the new targeting cam we may even see fixed guns function kind of like "snipers". But that last part is just speculation from me.
i actively hate gimbals.
it feels like it takes control away and handholds you like some infant who couldn't do it yourself.
games like that are the lowest tier of arcade trash.
maybe try it before you make up your mind or conjure forgone conclusions. I generally dont like gimbals either but they dont feel the same in every game, and SC's gimbals aren't as bad as some other games. Not to mention, with the update theres no telling exactly how it will feel till you play it yourself. Besides; there will still be fixed weapons if thats really your thing and you end up not liking the gimbal changes (Ares line for example) @@the_babbleboom
This feels like leaning the game further into fighter plane combat and away from space ships...
god youve summed it up. "we're listening" so theyll hopefully see the outcry and show some countermeasure for industrial/pacifist players. Perhaps the shields are only dimmed and can be brought to full near instantly, or, far in the future, npc intervention will exist for those within peaceful systems against random slappages
@@---uc8sx for the record, I'm not even talking about industrial ships, I do want pvp, but I want more space World of Warships and less space Ace Combat.
As far as I'm concerned anything remotely larger than a medium fighter ought to have gimbals on by default with zero penalty. Ships have firing arcs, not strafing patterns. If it's big enough to be classified as a ship instead of a manned fighter, it's big enough that this MM style no longer fits.
That's kinda always been the idea. Chris Roberts, much like George Lucas, quite likes the WWII style combat.
@@showalk well.. boo.
Admittedly I'm new here, but I may not have bothered had I known that going in.
@@lordmalachi6 I'd take both those gameplays over Avenger 1 constantly trying to get the devs to turn this into space DCS.
Any bets how long it will take to get rid of those "master modes"? They were removed once already, in 2.6.0 (2017). But it looks like CIG loves to rebuilt everything several times. Three for the charm?
They are probably hoping people forgot it didn't work before
Perhaps someone at CIG really likes this idea and wont give up on it
What was the definition of madness again?
Since these are the speeds the game was designed to handle, and squadron 42 has committed to this flight model, I'd say there'll be some tuning but overall this is what we get from here on out
@@why9541 not when to much people leave at the end the game is crowdfunded and with less players there is less money .
and also with the game not being tied to another platform people can easily sell their accounts.
@@Ospray3151 CR wants the WW I dogfights style. But the team is unable to find any other way to implement it.
I liked the very first flight model, with really real physics. But most people called it unplayable flying out of Arena boundaries all the time. That could make people to slow down without artificial limitations. Control the speed or meet the ground, or overshoot the target.
@@why9541 and i thought i would be able to put a size 3 Omnisky to the Origin 315P. "nothing is put in stone" as they say. Just couple more years and they will rebuilt it again.
I don't want to look at transparent "boxes" of ship components through the ships hull, it looks bad and unimmersive. Maybe highlight them when they are actually in your field of vision, or don't highlight at all.
That ending reminds me of the old FanLando films.
sadly barley anything of this will work in the long run and is basically dead on arrival... don't think MMs are gonna see the advent of 2026 as pointless as they already are made by other changes.
Not sure how MM will affect the feel of dogfighting, is it just shooting each other in the face while wiggling around? This is really scaring me that they are dumbing this game down for consoles.
Targeted 'all gimbals' mode with outlines feels like a skill-less 'press X to be ace pilot' also console-ish.
Nice a Vanduul holding a penguin!
i just hope that solo players who like to play big ships don't get too much punished for playing alone
yes you will be... that's the point of larger ships not to be managed alone... sort of the entire point.. it needs a set amount of crew to actually function properly
I do. It's been a stated goal from the beginning that the bigger the ship the more crew you will need to fly it effectively.
CIG when you give to Carrack an central elevator for ground?
Or at least let us open the pods from the side or something :'D but yeah extending the back elevator to the ground would also help alot with getting medicals into the medbay (also turn around the entrance for the medbay so we can access it from the big elevator instead of going around with someone who needs medical help)
@@NekoSteamBoy I would happily trade the idea of the pods being deployable for a ramp/door on each so we can load larger boxes.
We all know the pods will open up and deploy soon@@NekoSteamBoy
Thé Carrack is just so horribly outdated, it's quite sad
@@WpGaming1 I just hate that we have like no access to the storage area :'D i loot bunkers and sure i can keep my boxes in my vehicle hangar or in my hangar on top but i would like to snap them on the grid. Or give us at least 1-2 grid slots in the main area behind that little Shield you can popup
I know 45's were effectively "an accident", but I swear I prefer 45s more than pitch for fastest turn rate. You can see more because of the shape of our screens.
Pure pitch kinda feels like I'm balancing on a tight rope while turning.
Use head tracking, and "look" up... pure pitch will become your favorite immediately.
actually i think it might be the rolling in a gladdy thats frustrating me
@@mauryhatcher
so what about stealth ships?
I've always loved being able to zoom in with my ship to aim, but for it to be more accurate and really built for doing it now will be so nice
its so gamey and acarde it hurts.
@brianfury9790 seems like it will feel similar to how it is now for me in game, but better. I'm excited to try it
No tricord makes no sense. It defies physics
Yea this def needs alot more details released. I feel like this rework is just being thrusted upon me.
Still ignoring everything apart from pvp combat. Solo Haulers and solo miners are doomed with master modes. They acnt run and they can't fight. Awesome.
We made this new set of flight modes......that are pretty much the original flight modes that we discarded 4 years ago....now that everyone has forgotten, we've brought them back....kinda?
We're rebalancing ships into a single archtype, and then making adjustments to the ships from there.....That's what we did with the ships after we left the old version of mastermodes, why are we re-treading known steps?
Another mastermodes video that touches only on combat almost exclusively on fighter craft. Still no thought towards industrial and commercial? It really feels like all cig cares about is the combat side of the community sometimes.
THIS
is the easiest to build
That’s partially because Squadron 42 is still the priority right now, and we’re getting the fruits of that first.
They did touch on it at the end: if you are in an industrial or commercial craft, then you should be fleeing from fights or running with escorts/crew, it's as simple as that. If you're trying to dogfight someone in a heavy fighter using a mining ship, you're doing it wrong.
You know how it is. If the ship combat PvPers don't get their egos stroked in every video they go over to spectrum and cry everywhere and insult everyone in sight.
What about industrial ships or cargo ships "archtypes" or are they SOL?
The fact that we're this close and CIG has yet to say a single word about any ships other than fighters aside from "you need to be in NAV mode to use your mining laser or salvaging tools" really indicates that any ships which aren't explicitly designed for combat are SOL. The total silence surrounding them makes it seem a lot to me like anything not explicitly a light/medium/heavy fighter wasn't even considered when MM was designed.
conspiracy theory @@alvatoredimarco
buzzword @@mndeg
The question is how are you gonna chse down ships that dont have figh mode on?
This master mode is trying to make the combat more arcade game like. Its taking its toll from realism… please consider alternatives like relative speed lock.
1- what is causing the speed limit in space?
Is this visible
Totally agree on that 💯
I'm not a fan of removing fixed weapons.
They aren't removed. You can still use them in fixed mode and get a benefit for doing so.
MM is bad. stop destroying basic physics please... remove spaceair & it will be kinda ok I guess
Spaceair?
@@Billy-bc8pk slowing down in decouplet when letting go of boost & 100G braking with fronttrusters when switching nav to scm
can we have that if we use are multytool with tractor beam or the bigger tractor beam and tractor like boms of the c1 or other ship and drop then when we let the beam go and when the bom hits the grond it explode instead of just laying on the grond
Looking forward to this, gonna grab a coffee and relax for a bit!
hello
Try not to upload 4 videos on this :)
@@WpGaming1 Or even better: "Summarise" a 15 min video in a 10:04 minute video lmfao. Either dont at all or make it 4 min
Naa Bored...this is gonna be bad....for start the F8C, which should be the best fighter in the 'verse (as per SQ42 video) is going to become a brick...and if not treated correctly...meh....
Another thing MM will do is going to greatly lower the base skill needed to dogfight...speed is too low....
Also we risk that each class of ship could only go up against its own class....
Remember Flight Modes (aka IFCS 2.0)? We are back to 2015
Looks like the decision to bail on an immersive and realistic style of game play has been made. ( no fixed weapons ... lols.) Wondering why? Have too many testers decided the game was just to skills based for them and didn't want to bother anymore. The games original " your ship is your character" thing has morphed into this overly complicated mess that probably won't attract the numbers of players that games like W.O.W, EVE or any of the GT games did. The game looks pretty and all, kudos to those earlier developers for the level of fidelity, but the current and future of the actual game play seems to be suffering. Kinda getting the feeling that the marketing team is taking over game development, dumbing it down for the masses. Isn't the owners wife Sandy in charge of that? Has she decided to replace CR's boxer shorts for panties. JK heh heh.
did you update your 4k camera? looks terrific.
How many years will it be before we can rent sailors for our ships?
We Need full Server meshing for advanced ai, which is patch 4.0
Zoom mode is a big red flags for space awareness, not very liking this
It's optional.
@@gk.4102 it the only way to decrease the spread so not really optional .
@@Nonpain Which makes sense. A sniper rifle without a scope has less precision than one with scope. That's what ships' precision targeting is trying to mimic. In exchange for precision, you lose spatial awareness and context. So you pick your poison.
@@gk.4102 no it doesn't , a rifle isn't more precise just because you slapped a scope onto it , it's just something to help you see . Have you ever used one IRL ?, cause when you start it's actually easier to not use scopes since they need to be calibrated for the user .
And you have two eyes right ?, and you can use the scope just with one so you aren't ever completely unaware of your surrounding while shooting .
i don't know what this mode is trying to mimic but its certainly nothing real .
@@Nonpain Of course it's not 100% like a real sniper, it's a game after all. But the point remains, a sniper without scope has less precision and thus will miss more shots compared to one with scope. That's what precision targeting is trying to give you. And besides losing spatial awareness, your rate of fire also gets reduced. So it's not all roses... definitely optional.
There any guns in SC other then blippy red lines?! Compare to ED where there are pulse lasers, beam lasers, pack hounds, plasma guns, clouds, balls, and all sorts of all different colours. SC guns are so dull in comparison
Just remember these are some of the same "VET" s delivering the updated ground vehicles and physics. Nuff said
Ground vehicle physics are awesome. You can actually rock crawl in the Tumbler Cyclone. The suspension articulation is pretty awesome, very similar to MudRunner. The only people I see complaining about this are people who have not actually played with all of the ground vehicles after the update.
The initial delivery was busted but they fixed most of the issues. It's only the tanks that need work as they are on the old arcade system still and are horribly busted. Vehicles like the Cyclone have come a really long way though - literally drove a full 30km to JT last time it ran and we had no issues at all, and that was on a moon.
@@Super-id7bq Yeah I think the Storm is the one in need of the biggest amount of tweaking, but the other ground vehicles are pretty spot on.
@@Super-id7bq I haven't tested the ground vehicles in a bit, do they still slide/drift around like they're on ice and constantly spin out?
@@Billy-bc8pk thanks for your superior judgement billly