I wanted to share my thoughts on Star Citizen's Master Modes with you guys here and throw my 2-cents into the important conversations surrounding this massive change to flight and space combat in the game. This became quite the ramble, and i elected a less edited approach. Also, my jab at the learning curve, while including A1's playlist, was not a jab at him at all! He and AVS have provided a *much needed* solution to some of the past model's problems, bringing thousands of people into flight and PVP. A1 and AVS' dojo will only continue to shine with new and interesting things to learn in the future of MM.
I personally love the new changes. It’s time we start moving away from the old system. I’ve been playing for 9 years and it’s honestly a relief seeing the game I love change. Change is good and if it means it’s easier for new players to enjoy the game then I’m all for it.
Agree with you 💯. It is too early to judge and avengers panic is quite funny. I get it that for people like him the ego means everything, but he does not realize that majority of people play this game to have fun. Yet I agree skill ceiling need to increase and some changes need to be made.
Great video! You covered all the important flashpoints I've seen with Master Modes so far. The one thing I personally really hope will also be included with MM is Soft Death being the final state of a destroyed ship (or alternatively make Hard Death "non-explosive"). With how much closer and deadlier MM combat is, I think losing a dogfight shouldn't always equate to an automatic death. Ships should only explode if the generator is intentionally overloaded manually, either by self destruct or boarders (I think it shouldn't be too much of a stretch that future space ships have many safeguards that prevent ships from spontaneously exploding after they take enough damage to be disabled).
I know what you mean, it will be hard to convince peoplet to get into light fighters regardless of the flight model during intense engagements when there's size 7 cannons and railguns flying around if every bad dogfight results in a death of a spaceman.
Until there is an Armour simulation, any discussion of flight models is moot imo. If a light fighters weapon cannot penetrate armour of a medium or above ship, all previous experience is redundant.
I agree, that's why I don't understand why CIG doesn't try to emulate armor with modifiers (for example -70% damage from size 1 against heavy armor, and so on). It's simple, easily tweakable and could be used right now
They already do emulate ship hull damage resistances (physical/energy), they're just shit and make no sense and no-one's taken any time to fill them in properly. Classic CIG.
I'm glad people are finally starting to calm down and see that MM is the right way to go. Don't take me wrong, it's not perfect, and some things could be balanced differently, but it's so much better imo then Live
IMO interceptors should be nimble, fast, hard to hit with weapons but easily killed with LOW DPS, however have ability to bring a ship out of NAV MODE rendering it inoperable for 15 seconds or so. This puts the INTERCEPTOR in the role of "intercepting". Using it's speed to temporarily tackle a high speed opponent who's kiting and hopefully allow an interdiction ship the time to provide hard tackle and prevent QT or DPS ships to kill it.
I like what you said about interceptors, at the same time I don't want them to be completely helpless vs light fighters, but the light fighter should be able to beat them with agility.
weapon balance: current system real quick off the top, 9 tiers + capital for the 10 11 12, so 12 total divided by 4, you get groups of 3: 1, 2, 3, C, switch to the same as shields, and go S1A here with 123 ABC of S1 so on and so on, same for missiles the twist, tweak the numbers only, so no weapon can do a substantial amount of damage against a shield 2 tiers above it, grade modifies this further, but won't magically give you loads of damage back.
I love A1 and his content and I agree that skill should be a big factor in the game, however I don't agree with his stance that a highly skilled pilot in an Aurora should be able to take out a less skilled pilot in a Gladius. That's like saying a noob in a F-35 has no chance against someone that is an ace pilot in the seat of a Cirrus Vision Jet Plane with machine guns strapped to it.... the performance difference between them is way different because they have been designed with different uses on concept. Now an Ace pilot in an Arrow against a less skilled pilot in a Gladius I get and understand and the skill there should shine through like the North Pole on Christmas. I am in almost 100% agreement with you in all aspect of this video with everything from the rock, paper, scissors to the buff to weapons based on what they are placed on. Now before people kill me in the comments about buffs to weapons, my stance is that weapons fire and are as accurate as the platform they are attached to. If a Panther is strapped to the wing of anything thats twitchy or unstable then so too should the accuracy. I'm not saying it should be unusable but there should be a cone that weapon fires within. However, a solid platform like a ship turret should reduce that cone, and a concrete base outside of a building/bunker reduce it even more. Think about it this way, if I'm running and gunning in real life with my M134 Minigun on a Segway, my shots are going to be all over the place.... If I mount that same M134 Minigun onto the back of a pickup, right away my accuracy is buffed.... now if I put it on a fixed rotating platform, its a killing machine that we may as well call the death bringer as its now at it's most accurate. I know these are real world comparisons "for a game" but as we play, thats what we make, real world comparisons and when things fail to cater to one argument more than the other, the first thing players will argue about it, "well thats not like real life!" Great vid though! Corbin
Nice vid... yeah for whatever reason in the legacy model I shred everything with the ghost in ATMO but in space its like trying to hit a mosquito with a bb gun the way the pips go all over the place lol.
One thing that I haven't really heard articulated. If we can only die 15-20 times before we have some sort of "death of a spaceman" type event. How much arbitrary PVP do we actually envision in the PU? If it's too easy to force combat then people are going to be able to kill people at will, and when those deaths start being impactful long term, then a high volume of people are going to be over it quick. CIG is either going to have to kill the concept of "death of a spaceman" or make it relatively difficult to die.
Frankly, that's what the law system is for, and that's a role that it has not yet been used for at all. Current laws, enforcement, and jail times are incredibly kid-glove-y right now, *INCREDIBLY* so. They will have to adopt relative realistic laws and enforcement regimes, such that petty crimes and misdemeanors are not nearly as heavily penalized as "capital crimes," such as murder. Like in real life, most criminals aren't murderhobos with as much respect for life as the average D&D party, they are people living on the margins of society just trying to get by -- violent criminals and organized crime and murder are the 1% of crime, and in a legal system that's even slightly justifiable they are treated wholly differently between those two very different classes of crime. (This is obviously an immense simplification and reduction on my part, and is setting aside the WIDE differences in legal regimes between even developed countries, with America and it's INCREDIBLY SHITTY legal system obviously being an exception because America likes to go out of it's way to treat ALL crime as if it's violent murderhobo shit instead of actually assessing petty crime as petty and in need of rehabilitation, not incarceration). Point being, most criminals should be heavily incentivized to *not murder other players* if they can at all avoid it, because being one of the "relatively harmless" criminals should equate to FAR LESS repercussion than wanton violence and mayhem, and subsequently make the job of being a successful criminal MUCH MORE PROFITABLE because you're not doing shit that's so brazen as to FORCE the attention of law enforcement authorities. Stay below the radar, minimize your collateral damage, and especially avoid murder, and you should be able to make a relatively profitable gig of piracy for example in the mature game (with all corollary features). Conversely, those players who want to make *killing people for little to no reason* their whole schtick, and who do it CONSTANTLY, should subsequently be semi-CONSTANTLY harassed by bounty hunters (of every legal and illegal persuasion) alongside NPC law enforcement with a bone to pick. So yes, they are going to have to make it "relatively difficult to die," at least in the context of being a victim of crime, by making the penalties for murder an altogether different class than that of petty crimes. Pirates should be incentivized to incapacitate you, to strip you of your weapons, but also to provide basic medical attention to keep you from dying and in turn keep themselves from having to run from a murder warrant (which, ideally, at least for PC's / "Citizens" should not be easily erasable from a station; perhaps there's a special, high-security bureau station in Terra system that handles capital crimes/Citizen violence or something, much harder to breach than Kareah). After all, most criminals IRL aren't murderers -- far, far from it. The alternative is to take the easy and far less immersive route out, and I frankly seriously doubt CR or any of the Directors responsible for SC are interested in taking the easy way out -- any easy way out -- given their track record of definitively doing the things that are NOT EASY 😂
I've mentioned on a few other vids of a consideration that gets left out of these discussions. This is a multiplayer video game and with that comes the limitations of a game. 1200m/s is not sustainable with current tech. On a server running 30 fps, you get more than a 20m jump in distance every tick at that speed. Bridging that gap means code to attempt to predict the location of the ship in the next tick. Leading to a lot of desync even at 30 fps servers, let alone the 5 fps ones we currently have. At 5 fps, 1200 m/s is 240m of travel every tick. At the end of the day, the speed HAS to come down for the game to function. Once Maelstrom is in and HP pools are gone, the scenario of the Buccs and the HH will go away. The only reason the Bucc can win is their cone fire can still plink away at that HP bar from outside the cone fire of the HH turrets. With Maelstrom 99% of those shots will do nothing because shooting through the HH cargo bay or crew quarters or hall ways won't do disabling damage and will effectively mean nothing. And that is not even accounting for whenever ship armor is introduced. I'm by no means a fighter pilot, so I have no input on how "good" MM is. The fact is speeds have to come down and there are other considerations coming to the game in the future that will throw balance far from where MM testing is currently. I don't know if CIG will get it right and make the top tier pilots and plebs like me happy, but I hope they can at least make it enjoyable for most. As always, great vid DTox can't wait for more org fun in the verse.
I've been arguing that, along with speed reductions, we also need to consider reducing G limits. When you cannot make such wild vector changes at the drop of a hat it forces you to think about whatever maneuver you are about to make. Which ALSO means that knowing when to do what becomes a very valuable SKILL. This would also tend to improve the feel of the lower speed ceilings by creating a greater sense of momentum interfering with your desired direction changes. Another option would be to impose cone of accuracy penalties based on 1) ship size - smaller ships having more penalty due to the less stable platform and reduced sensor capability compared to larger ships; and 2) G state - wild gyrations/or high deflection shooting also having negative effects on sustained accuracy. These sorts of changes would go a long way towards not allowing light fighter or interceptors to sit at maximum range and safely plink away at larger ships like the Hammerhead. In order to inflict damage they would have to get in closer - thus exposing themselves to real danger.
"Armour" is Maelstrom, or rather, Maelstrom is the underlying tech that enables armour. Physically speaking, "armour" is effectively just a greater capacity for a material to handle stress and strain, to effectively reduce and limit plastic deformation. Maelstrom is the entire system for those physics (going beyond just simple stress and strain, I might add -- they had like nearly a dozen variables in the system when they detailed it at CC) and for the consequent deformation and destruction (from exceeding stress/strain etc). Maelstrom and armour are quite literally the same thing; Maelstrom is the tech that enables it, and "armour" is when that system's content is tuned appropriately for every vehicle and relevant environment object such that they can and will deform plastically under the appropriate physics as expected. The only way to physically instantiate "ship armour" in a meaningful and accurate way is as I just described, through the Maelstrom system -- they are quite literally the same thing in every meaningfully relevant way, and that's why it's taken so long to get ship armour (a physically accurate plastic deformation model as detailed in the Maelstrom presentation is, to be blunt, not a simple, straightforward, fast, nor remotely easy thing to code and implement and test out thoroughly enough to confidently iterate on).
My biggest issue with Live combat model is *reality* is used as the excuse for the high combat speeds. But this argument falls flat when you take muzzle velocities into consideration. A ship moving at 1200 m/s is moving at almost 4 times the speed of a standard ballistic round, which is approximately 343 m/s or the speed of sound.
@@DTOXTV maybe but a realistic immersive experience is what CIG has promised for years. Any deviation from that is seen as a large threat to the core gameplay foundations.
Well reasoned. I still have concerns about MM but think Yogi and team need the space to deliver and tune the solution before everyone rushes to judge. Personally, I didn't like combat in the early releases but I'm coming round to it a lot more in recent iterations.
Why the hell is everyone complaining about "you can not force the fight onto one"?? This is exactly right. In a sandbox, you should have the option to run. Always. MM is "I want to fight and you can not refuse to fight". This inclusive sh*t will backfire, because the noobs will be seal clubbed on sight every time, because they can not run away, or try to fight and realize "No, I'm out."
But Nav Mode is the complete opposite of that? In live you just align your vector, turn off speed limiter and go to max speed in any direction. Nav Mode is a 10 second spool, where shields, weapons and countermeasures are dropped, and it can be countered by a whole other ship archetype/role.
@@DTOXTVI do not understand your reply. In live (no MM) you can flee (good) by aligning your vector, turn off speed limiter and go to max speed in any direction while spooling QT.. With MM, you have no way to flee (bad), because you have to wait and play sitting lame duck without shields, without countermeasures, without cover from your turrets if you have, until NAV is activated. So everyone can force any fight onto everbody. MM forces you to fight to the death every time you find yourself in weapons range of a hostile p(l)ayer. THIS IS WHY MM IS A BAD IDEA at least in the current state.
WW2 air combat was not about close range dogfights. That's faux hollywood ww2 combat. It was about positioning, situation awareness, keeping speed, keeping altitude as back up speed. That's how US plane reigned supreme against the Japanese. Training & speed.
It doesn't take long to find WW2 aerial combat footage that very much says otherwise. Of course Hollywood plays it up, but thats because its much more fun and palatable by mainstream audiences... Exactly why Chris Roberts always wanted WW2 in space, thats the SCI FI we all grew up on and loved, not shooting railguns at thousand of kilometre's away from each other like reality dictates.
@@DTOXTVmost of the footage that, doesn't take long to find, are footage of gun cams on kill. In these situation, they already have gotten the positional advantage and are setup for a kill. Before getting to these positions, is the process of fighters setting them up through situation awareness, understanding of energy disparity (speed & altitude difference), basic flight maneuver. All of these processes are not shown on film. Also guess what if the bf109 did a nice split-S & made the spitfire unable to follow therefore escape, they are now no longer in short-range & the spitfire have to re-acquire the target through observation. most likely they are not keeping that footage either. Overall, there's a selection bias to most of the footages out there. As to what SC should be? I refrain from discussing it in short. For it's too complicated a topic, and can not be solved by simply imitating either "faux ww2 combat" or "real ww2 combat".
True true very true. Especially the interceptor boosters being able to keep up with nav mode ships, but nerfing their shields etc. over all seems like an exellent idea. Very well done
I was hating on MM. but flying a light fighter and space and heavy fighter in atmosphere is a blast! Also getting up close is easier on my brain and very cinematic. I can actually see the ship in shooting at. Instead of a hit marker. To each their own tho.
Great take!! As I keep saying, give MM a year to be refined. AV1 and every making doom and gloom content before the general population tests it themselves is quite annoying. I don't do Arena Commander period. I enjoy experiencing it for the first time when it hits LIVE and then give feedback. I remember a guy in a fighter that was so damn good he killed everything that came in a range of Olisar before they removed Olisar. With MM, that can never happen for the hours he was there.
Watching the master modes clips is interesting because when hunting bounty ships like buccs, those tend to just look like tiny explosions. So in a way I appreciate the idea of being able to see the ship better and if it's more inclusive that feels like a good thing to me, but I also don't think that's entirely the point. Between things like death of a spaceman, insurance, non lethal bounties, I get the idea that we aren't supposed to die every time around but at the current speeds I really don't think getting your power plant sniped would feel good. I'm also not entirely sure if slower speeds is raising the floor when what you hit is becoming more important. Sort of? It's shifting the emphasis for sure.
If you're having a PVP battle and 2 wingmen pair off against 2 others they'll try to position on each other, but even veterans will find themselves accidentally leaving the AO at 1km/sec. You call for help from your buddy and he's 67km away... It lowers the skill floor by locking everyone into the same frame of reference during combat, which I think is a good thing.
The turn rate of light fighters is meaningless when backstrafing is unhinge. Another problem is the lack of limited resources: all capacitators recharge fast. So you switch to NAV mode, recharge and be back in 30 seconds while the poor dude who was chasing you wasted his boost.
@@DTOXTV Easily tunable except CIG did the exact opposite going from MM3.22 to MM3.22.1 and brought back PIP wiggling and the ability to reset fight risk free. And Yogi said he's happy with that direction and this is what 3.23 will feel like. I have been a supporter of MM for a long time. But all they are doing with it is a worse version of LIVE.
I have been having a great time in MM so far. I have a hundred ideas on how to tweak things to make them better, but this feels like a solid foundation.
I think it's just impossible to balance the game the way they SEEM to be trying to do. Mind you, I have 3200 hours in War Thunder (mostly realistic ground and air) so I'm used to semi-realistic but really arcade-y air combat games, and it just doen't make sense to try and balance the Gladius, AKA space F-16, and a Corsair Black, AKA the space Mi-24 hind trying to unload Spetznas to rob cargo or something. I feel the real trouble comes from the fact SC was developed as 2 games, one where you are supposed to be a top gun who saves mankind, the other a space MMO supposed to be deeply punishing where no single player is the protagonist. Frankly, I'd prefer they balanced this with economy and stimuli than with the flight model. Let Gladius rule the 1v1 dogfighters, just make flying one so expensive and risky it makes no sense someone would waste flying time griefing people in civilian ships other than as a part of an organized pirate heist or org war actions. Nobody expects to be robbed by an apache attack helicopter, and that's not because we can down them with rocks, but due to costs and availability (ant the availability ship has sailed, so costs it is). Even when we are taking into account the pure breed military ships and meaningfull group PvP, a lot of models and types make little sense - what MAKES sense is what was used in aeronaval war - light fighters, bombers, torpedo bombs and naval vessels. Some ships actually don't even have the role some people might be misled into believing - good examples are the retaliator and eclipse, they are NOT bombers, they act more like submarines if you think about the WW2 inspiration. Adding heavy fighters. I.E., make no sense, there is a reason those were not fielded by navies, they are larger for factors other than dogfight capacity - range, sensors, altitude, heavier weaponry to kill strategic bombers, etc. But considering they are already in the game, make them zoom N boom, so in this I kinda agree with your video. Specialist heavy fighters are ok exactly because people don't expect to win dogfights with them (looking at the Inferno and Ion here). I'll not even enter the discussion of multi crewing in combat - I bet those B-17s wouldn't have any gunners if each of them could just instead "spawn" their Mustangs as escorts, but this ie another discussion. And there is also the issue of hardware - a game where you can use eye trackers, etc, creates the huge issue of blatant P2W is combat is, ironically, more realistic. The higher the ceiling, more one can gain from investing in a prohibitive setup to most of the player base. Ah, and about people just running away from combat - just make missiles GOOD and people will have to bleed energy to dodge, allowing the guy in pursuit to reach them. It sure feels like SC missiles are just random, that doesn't help. TL,DR: This will be hell to balance.
Yep, some valid points my friend. Really, CIG made a bed full of fire ants and now they need to sleep in it. They've sold repeatedly "cooler" and "more powerful" ships without any thought about how they will balance or fit the mechanical landscape of the game, or before mechanics were ever close to being settled. It is NOT going to be easy to balance or make sens of all this, BUT... Master Mode's, in my opinion, is the best foundation we've had *YET* to even attempt to balance this mess, so I'm rolling with it, for now.
Greetings Master Lasher/Whipper DTOX!! Yet another brilliant vid from U has arrived! Perfect analysis for my taste! and I, as U know suck major when it comes to pilot skills within the Verse, and have to admit, that the master modes, after testing them a bit, are making me suck much less, så i am for the master modes when they get implemented into PU! ThanX agan for a great vid! Cheers!
For me the pvp should be as simple as "easy to play, hard to master". The pvp and the basic should be able to be understood by every player even the worst one but have enough depth so that a good player could be very good. With having hard and very difficult maneuver to master and which requires several hundred hours to master, a bit like with Quake and others...
What a wonderful video. I watched from start to finish. I loved it. You were fair, honest, and well presented. I am so glad you touched on objectives too.
I think the future of Star Citizen doesn't lie on the SUPER TRY HARD pilots... It lies as always on a more casual audience.. I think its nice to have skill and be able to use that! But bro cmon... I dont want to be flying 500000 hours just to be good enough..
The primary role of an interceptor is, as the name indicates to intercept. Meaning it is the first to arrive and interact with an approaching threat. But it is not there to brawl, it is there to gather information and potentially create some disruption/distraction of the threat until more capable help arrives. Like cavalry during the US Civil War, which would engage infantry, but only as a fixing force, and certainly not for very long without risking destruction. If/when support arrives they disengage and move to the periphery, providing support and potentially pursuing any stragglers or enemy that attempts to turn back towards safer territory. In SC interceptors should have higher top speed, but lower acceleration and lower G limits along with slightly weaker defenses relative to light fighters, but possible bettor sensors.
Thank you so much for your content. I would love to see a Ship matrix to know what conters what. I did not understand teh interceptors role, tbh based on Firepower and moveability. Do they fight of the fighter types and be contered by a gunship? Clearing a hard conter system would work but needs lots of thoughts.
It really isn't. There's tons of depth if you actually push through the pain of adjusting. Knife fighting has actually gotten more technical. When people stop kiting (which isn't as strong as people are making out) and start to push it feels much faster and visceral. Roles are clearly defined, teamwork is better and situational awareness is MASSIVELY more important. The moment you start watching your radar (which you never had to do in Live because you'd just trichord any third party hits while in a 1v1) and knowing exactly when to pick your moments to engage and disengage it opens up a whole new layer of depth that the old system never had. Just because it's easier to pick up it doesn't mean it's easier to master.
@@Super-id7bqno skill is really needed. because its so slow and easy to get a + on target, ships looks silly flying and fighting. if you cant see how flawed this FM is then good for you, and your claim you neva had to look at radar before kinda says it all, the dumdowns began with the new flight team in 3.0 before that SC felt awesome to fly. now its pretty much the worst flightmodel i ever played with, from hero to zero, it took the new flight team 7-8 years to make a cool space sim into a slow silly acarde game, ware ships throttle are akin to a car speeder. and yes its MM is mastered in a few houers, and it ends up being the same shit just slower with more restrictions on everything.
If Ship A and ship B both got a even reduction in their top speeds - its still Pilot A flying his ship vs Pilot B flying his ship. The biggest change is if my shields go down now i cant just insta-crank my throttle limiter to max and boost away at 1,000 m/s while my shields recharge. The safety rope is being cut.@@brianfury9790
As a moderately skilled casual I go for just being one of the better large ship pilots. I can never get into the ínsane light fighter metas. Also great video! I really enjoy hearing good talks about the potential updates of the game
A couple years ago I made a conscious decision to purposefully not pursue the sort of study and training needed to master the light fighter meta. Mostly because I knew I was never going to be motivated enough or have enough time away from adulting. But also because it has been readily apparent for years that not much, if anything, in this game is fixed in stone. I truly feel bad for the people who have sunk that many hours into building their mansion on a foundation of sand.
You put it into the words that i could not articulate. Thank you! I agree with this take wholeheartedly. And it beats the heck out of me just saying "screw those sweaty try-hards" 😅
Doesn't all of this mastermode controversy something we should expect? In fact, it just seems like there's a lot of people that are unhappy about a meta change. There's also the subtlety of nav mode to consider. Would you still have chaff and decoy available? What is the delay time? Plus, the testing mode in Arena commander has a sliver of the ships in game. I'd like to see way more variety of combos and see how those fights play out. If interceptors are the "finishers", then having one one the team would seem like a no brainer.
The top players want speed but not the speed we have now, like avenger one saying like 500 m/s. With MM the smaller ship tends to beat the bigger ship.(So light fighters beat medium, medium beats heavy)Also now we have to include non-combatant ships. They can't escape anyone, because now you have no choice but if you see someone on radar you have to leave. And if someone is trying to kill you their not even a 1 percent of you escaping. Also turrets are still useless. The only hope is armor.
We dont know how components will interact with master mode's/nav mode and/or industrial style ships yet. There is SO much room for components to react differently in master modes with different ship types and component classes. Industrial Class shields? Perhaps they don't instantly drop in Nav Mode and take longer to dissipate, but longer to recharge after exiting Nav Mode. Industrial quantum drive? Faster nav mode spool, but slower ramp up of speed, etc. They can provide room for non-combat ships to have better escapability/survivability, but under performance during fights. Turrets are not useless and easily fixed with some minor tweaks.
In 2.x I played a lot of Arena Commander PvP & loved it. I tried to get back into PvP around 3.18 in the PU, but I found it pretty off-putting - There was this bizarre sweaty duality where they would use meta ships and then trash talk you for not fighting within their own little bubble of codes and rules - which only exist as some sort of "gentleman's agreement" to bring the arena style combat to the open world, because the flight model doesn't work. I've never loved the 3.x flight model, it's always felt like a bunch of disassociated systems to me, even after a couple hundred hours it feels the same. It works, but none of it is very intuitive or interesting.
so if in the legacy FM both pilots need to agree to a 1v1, is it now true that any pilot can start a 1v1 without mutual consent? And won't that lead to more griefing? This idea that PVP players believe they can run around the verse and do anything they please sucks.
The first statement. These pilots will always excel in that role lost me. Total bullshit. Currently MM dumbs down the flying to you have no better chance no mater how much you fly or train than someone with 1 hr in the game. It is a straight DPS race no skill at all involved. Will they change it, maybe, but currently it totally sucks in MM. Live is not any better for players either. Live is 100 percent a flight model built for the guy that trains 4 to 6 hrs per week and I mean Trains. It totally sucks for the average player and is way off. MM goes in the complete opposite direction and is not worth a crap for the guy that actually wants to perfect the Dogfight. They need to meet somewhere in the middle. Can CIG fix MM, I dont know. Many of the suggestion have merit but currently the skill ceiling has been lowered way to much, there is no room to grow. The knee jerk was overboard and I currently hate it. If CIG doesnt get it right I guess I will just be let the account go and move on to other games, which sucks. I had hopes and dreams for this game and I feel CIG is now going from catering to the light fighter sweates to catering to the I will buy hacks because I want the easy way out crowd. This Video did have some ok points. TURRET BUFFS and Weapon Nerfs based on ship is a very very valid point. For all those that MM is awesome its the best. OK, WHY DONT I SEE YOU IN AC? I see the same people over and over and over. So you like it so much you never play it or its mastered in less than 30 mins. Got it.
The top pilots in LIVE are dominating in MM, just like before, but the people in the middle, or even beginners, can already feel a positive difference in fighter accessibility. It just feels more intuitive to them and easier to be useful, without requiring a 6 hour crash course on how to hit another ships pip. Its not perfect, but its a solid foundation to move forward from.
I understand a nerf for the the Bucc may be needed , But I'll be pretty upset if they nerf all interceptors into oblivion. Every video on MM I've seen complains about the Bucc and then states the need to nerf all interceptors. I love flying my 325 and its never been even close to being a good fighter. Hopefully CIG recognizes the huge differences between the ships that are in that one class and applies any nerfs in a fair way and don't slap the exact same nerfs to everything they stuck an interceptor label on. Not all Interceptors were created equal and they really need to take that into account when nerfing all ships. I guess what I'm saying is if your going to detune the 325 at least make the wings stay on a little longer so I'm not sent spinning through space the first time I take a hit. 😂
What percentage of people actually give a d*** about this other than the elite? Top people who have something to prove that the rest of us don't even care about. Personally, I want content enjoyable gameplay. Not ego ridden hot shots out there to show everybody how many hours they've invested into a video game. But you know they think it's all about them.
"You can have freedom of skill expression, but not at the cost of other players freedom of choice". You couldn't have said that better. This is entirely why I can hardly play any FPS anymore. There is no freedom of choice if you "want to have skill"
I initially thought mastermodes was a great idea! and I still like certain ideas of it, the ship the trichord limiter, the cone spread and even the category system. but the current speeds just make it boring, try flying it in MM squadron battles a few times, afterwords log back into live and its like coming home, its just way more fun. In the current live build you already have a solution to light fighters, Get a friend and hop into a scorp or hurricane and you can melt light fighters with ease, It requires a little bit of skill to get a good merge, but its not that difficult. Don't get me wrong, the current flight model is far from perfect and has some real issues to be addressed. But it feels like its less work to get the live model in a good place then to get Master Modes in a place where it actually is fun for years to come.
The live model might be less work to get us *back* to "fighter fun meta", but it *doesnt* work if we're going to encompass a hundred other ships, types and playstyles. That's the whole problem.
"...Rock Paper Scissors..." Oh man, that triggers the crap out of the Light Fighter META Mafia. the mere thought that there might be ships they simply cannot defeat from their single seat thrones really pisses them off.
I'm not a top pvper but I hate molasses modes because it feels fake and arcadey. I want to feel like I'm flying a cool spaceship that follows logical physics that make sense rather than arcade game sports "because it's a game" restrictions that take away my agency. Master modes feels *fake* and my dreams of being a spaceman are dashed and replaced with a constant reminder that "roles" and 'archetypes" like it's a hero shooter. It's the difference between playing a gritty immersive game vs an arcadey hero shooter like Apex or Overwatch. I don't want rock paper scissors unless you can beat someone head in with the rock, stab someone with the scissors so they bleed out, and have the paper guy just die horribly because paper beats nothing. No neat "rules", just CONSEQUENCES. How to balance light fighter supremacy? Scale damage of big guns so the TTK against LF becomes low and they just die from lucky shots. It makes no sense that you have to hit a light fighter dozens of times with a giant cannon. Model the actual energy, simulate it. The "running away" issue you mention can be fixed easily by making missiles actually work and be useful. Run out of gun range? You die by missile instead of dying by guns. Right now nobody dies by missile. i.e. model missiles that make logical sense as actual weapons of war that kill things. One hit, one kill, for missiles appropriately sized (e.g. size 1 missile is one hit one kill for light fighters). There are sensible solutions to all these issues that draw on logical consequences rather than trying to write sports-style made-up rules.
The ships have never followed 'logical physics' There have always been speed limits, decoupled mode is only partly Newtonian, the G forces allowed would not only kill the pilots but tear most of the ships to bits, and 'breathable' atmospheres like Hurston or Microtech and laughably shallow. It is a video game and always has been a video game.
@@ThomasD66 Every pre-MM flight model has felt MUCH more Newtonian and 'space-like', which is why I fell in love with the game in the first place. There are countless "airplanes in space" games, but only SC has that true Newtonian feel (so far).
@@Sattorin There is no point arguing with personal tastes. You like what you like and nobody can tell you otherwise. But what I can tell is is what you think is Newtonian isn't remotely so. EVERY rotational input in SC (pitch, yaw, roll) is 'inertially dampened.' But in a manner that just happens to mimic/model air flight. The game engine is not "Newtonian physics but turned down" it is an air flight simulator with a sprinkling of Newtonian physics WHEN you decouple. The best way CIG could give you back some of the feel you previously had is to dial down the G limits. They've reduced speeds but not G limits so ship behavior feels awkward as compared to what everyone is used to. They really needed to be adjusted together to maintain the same relative input response.
@@ThomasD66 Yes there have always been problems and technical limitations hurting the game, but it was still far and away better than most space games. However the problems are getting worse not better.
also, if skilled pilots can drag out fights against each other indefinitely, how is it that champions were crowned in the last atmo event???? there were the so called best fighters faced off against each other and guess what, some pilots lost and some pilots won.
@@DTOXTV You can’t even formulate an accurate sentence. How can what I said possibly be wrong when you called it an “opinion”, it’s by definition a personal judgement. Shows who master modes is made for. 😇
Everything in your argument was valid until you said "... are simply scared of losing a fighter supremacy they've enjoyed for so many years.". I'm neutral to the whole thing but when one side of the argument says the other side is just scared when they actually have valid concerns too, you lose some validity in your own argument.
I disagree. It was a single sentence in a 17 minute video where i tried to take a balanced approach. There is a minority of people who believe just that, but they would obviously never say it, and will try to use other scapegoats to justify their anti-MM agenda. There is a BIG disconnect between people who sit in a single seat fighter cockpit 99% of their time in Star Citizen, and the rest of the community, who see the gigantic scope and possibility of a better space game where protecting these players experience is no longer the priority.
@@DTOXTV I agree with you. I just think it could’ve been said better or your point could’ve been clarified. All that one sentence does is give (some) people one aspect of the argument to cling on to and it puts people against each other in an unproductive way. It’s like if I went to your comment section after listening to your whole well thought out and valid perspective and replied with “you just want dog fighting to be easier so you can compete with people like avenger one!!”. In my opinion, and I could be wrong, it’s unproductive to your side of the argument because instead of having your viewers try to understand the good reasons, they can be thoughtless and sum it up to “Dog fighters are afraid of change and a more accessible landscape” as opposed to all the other really great reasons for master modes to be implemented and improved over time. I enjoy your content, I thought this was a really good video, I also thought avenger one had a good video. I’m for the best of both worlds. Didn’t mean any insult by what I said initially. Although, my opinion stands.
You might be right, but i wanted to include my genuine thoughts on that part of the topic, with regards to creating a more accessible game for the majority. How people interperet that, without considering the overall argument, is there choice at that point. Lowering the skill floor means conceding some *parts* of the fighter skill ceiling in my opinion, which is a painful truth for some to accept. Thanks for elaborating, your measured response, and for enjoying my content!@@AkalaFPS
@@DTOXTV Yeah, not wrong at all. I appreciate your response as well. I just hope that CIG are open to all kinds of feedback and continue to improve master modes far into the future so the community doesn’t have to worry about stagnation.
Where I have issues with all this is the piling up of artificial mechanics in support of balance. Shields don't regenerate when shot. Introduced to make things more 'interesting'. It's the exact reason why light fighters are meta. The base mechanic is broken to force players to play in a certain way instead of trying to follow reality and decades of examples from real areal warfare. Every problem resulting from that is met with yet another artificial mechanic like limiting the countermeasures on an interceptor. Exactly the opposite of what would be the case in reality! They are missile magnets so they would have way *more* countermeasures. This cannot end in anything but arcade-level gameplay. Completely unrealistic and thereby not what I think would make Star Citizen what many of the backers are looking for
The trouble is, video games are built on 'artificial mechanics', except they're not 'artificial', they're just mechanics, or game mechanics. Their purpose is to produce a more fun, fair and engaging game, not necessarily one that reflects ultimate reality. Star Citizen is not a full simulator by any stretch of the imagination. In reality ships would not have wings in space and we'd all be firing railguns at 2000 kilometres away, with PDD's to shoot down missiles on every ship. You can't really denounce the game as 'arcadey' when a game mechanic doesn't suit you, when there's so many other unrealistic elements in Star Citizen let fly. If realism is the bar you set, you wouldn't play Star Citizen at all, because its completely unrealistic.
@@DTOXTV lol, couple of fair points there for sure. Nonetheless, my point is to be careful not to end up in a situation where you're just constantly plugging one hole with another. If big ship shields just charged constantly, a single light fighter would never overmatch its charge rate. A mob of light fighters taking one down is perfectly reasonable. The wolves take down the bison... Having them artificially not charging for no reason that makes any sense was a small mistake with huge consequences
Large ship shields not recharging constantly was a mistake, totally agree. Giving larger ship shields a constant recharge helps solve the whole problem of single fighters plinking away at large ships in live and in MM right now, at a range outside their guns, to eventually defeat them with no risk to themselves. @@eavdmeer
quite frankly, the pilots that are afraid of losing a PVP fight are in the minority simply because PVPers are a minority. and while you certainly address MM in terms of light fighter meta and such, this says nothing about the many other occupations in the verse and how MM adversely affects their gameplay. Truth be told the goals you enumerate could have all been achieved without a segmented FM that causes the rest of us more headaches than not. It is a shame that folks like you only address PVP wrt to MM. You are missing the bigger picture behind grandiose claims that everyone will embrace being part of a large fleet where everyone has a very specific and limited role. Isn't that just Eve Online???? Truth be told, MM as currently stands eliminates any resemblance of realistic space flight and as such, is not what we backers were promised, nor what what we enjoy coming back to again and again. MM is full of promises and very, very short of delivering on them.
So give racer ships higher boost pools and boost speeds, or adjust their capacitors to benefit a faster playstyle? Additionally, get rid of their guns. Racing ships should never of had guns in the first place, then we don't have to worry about their tuning in a combat situation.
I'm not an above average PvP player. I've basically never been a PvP player and I'm still not a big fan of what they're doing with Master Modes... At least CIG's unwillingness negotiate any balance of SCM speed vs Boost speed. And if say they're trying to make it "inclusive" I'm intentionally trying to politically load my language in a derogatory way... Not actually acting well intentioned. As a side note the Fight or Flight tournament at Citcon should really be proof that current flight model isn't nearly as sweaty this video is pretending. (Gabi has been only been playing the game for a few years and believe only really trained for PvP a few months all be it with a strong network of friends.) Not to say there isn't a lot to be fixed with the current model just that the "it take years and of studying and No-lifeing to participate" is greatly over exaggerated.
You literally just said "I've never been a PVP player", or acknowledged any effort at trying, but you have a firm grasp of what it takes to be at and stay at the top and that actually, the effort required is greatly overexaggerated? Gotcha.
I wanted to share my thoughts on Star Citizen's Master Modes with you guys here and throw my 2-cents into the important conversations surrounding this massive change to flight and space combat in the game. This became quite the ramble, and i elected a less edited approach. Also, my jab at the learning curve, while including A1's playlist, was not a jab at him at all! He and AVS have provided a *much needed* solution to some of the past model's problems, bringing thousands of people into flight and PVP. A1 and AVS' dojo will only continue to shine with new and interesting things to learn in the future of MM.
Disaster Mode Sucks, we need change but this aint it!
I think your two cents are worth quite a lot and very valuable. I appreciate most people, not all people's takes on the issue.
@@interstellarspacesolutions Disaster Mode 😆
I could not care less about your opinion, you are clearly shilling
@@stevieC11Hanworth You sound jealous or something. You clicked the video, so clearly do care. Thanks for watching! Dont forget to like and subscribe.
An excellent thoughtful take on a sensitive topic. Well presented in a constructive tone. Great editing. Thanks for elevating the topic!
Thank you buddy!
This felt pretty unbiased in such a heated topic atm.
A take from both sides in a respectful tone without the exclusion of anyone.
Thank you Sir.
Thank *you* for watching/listening.
I personally love the new changes. It’s time we start moving away from the old system. I’ve been playing for 9 years and it’s honestly a relief seeing the game I love change. Change is good and if it means it’s easier for new players to enjoy the game then I’m all for it.
Agree with you 💯. It is too early to judge and avengers panic is quite funny. I get it that for people like him the ego means everything, but he does not realize that majority of people play this game to have fun. Yet I agree skill ceiling need to increase and some changes need to be made.
Nice video, I agree. MM has been so much more enjoyable than LIVE already. It needs more tuning, but we're really going in the right direction here.
Excellent!
Great video! You covered all the important flashpoints I've seen with Master Modes so far.
The one thing I personally really hope will also be included with MM is Soft Death being the final state of a destroyed ship (or alternatively make Hard Death "non-explosive").
With how much closer and deadlier MM combat is, I think losing a dogfight shouldn't always equate to an automatic death.
Ships should only explode if the generator is intentionally overloaded manually, either by self destruct or boarders (I think it shouldn't be too much of a stretch that future space ships have many safeguards that prevent ships from spontaneously exploding after they take enough damage to be disabled).
I know what you mean, it will be hard to convince peoplet to get into light fighters regardless of the flight model during intense engagements when there's size 7 cannons and railguns flying around if every bad dogfight results in a death of a spaceman.
Until there is an Armour simulation, any discussion of flight models is moot imo. If a light fighters weapon cannot penetrate armour of a medium or above ship, all previous experience is redundant.
I agree, that's why I don't understand why CIG doesn't try to emulate armor with modifiers (for example -70% damage from size 1 against heavy armor, and so on). It's simple, easily tweakable and could be used right now
@@sablechaud3870 Probably because it's coming sooner than we think.
@@Birbuciferhaha Funny guy.
They already do emulate ship hull damage resistances (physical/energy), they're just shit and make no sense and no-one's taken any time to fill them in properly. Classic CIG.
Why the fuck wouldn’t they implement armor first if it was required to make the current flight system work. It makes 0 sense.
Great discussion, I like the interceptor boost idea to keep up with fleeing NAV ships
I'm glad people are finally starting to calm down and see that MM is the right way to go. Don't take me wrong, it's not perfect, and some things could be balanced differently, but it's so much better imo then Live
IMO interceptors should be nimble, fast, hard to hit with weapons but easily killed with LOW DPS, however have ability to bring a ship out of NAV MODE rendering it inoperable for 15 seconds or so. This puts the INTERCEPTOR in the role of "intercepting". Using it's speed to temporarily tackle a high speed opponent who's kiting and hopefully allow an interdiction ship the time to provide hard tackle and prevent QT or DPS ships to kill it.
I like what you said about interceptors, at the same time I don't want them to be completely helpless vs light fighters, but the light fighter should be able to beat them with agility.
What a brilliant illustration on how the interceptor role and other fighter roles should play out. Bravo!
Thank you! It's just a few suggestions, but I've asked the VET in the upcoming SCL to clarify the Interceptor role, lets hope they answer!
Great Watch! This is the first outlook that has actually got me excited about master modes.
Awesome video, I especially like your point of view on this controversal topic .
weapon balance: current system
real quick off the top, 9 tiers + capital for the 10 11 12, so 12 total
divided by 4, you get groups of 3: 1, 2, 3, C,
switch to the same as shields, and go S1A here with 123 ABC of S1 so on and so on, same for missiles
the twist, tweak the numbers only, so no weapon can do a substantial amount of damage against a shield 2 tiers above it, grade modifies this further, but won't magically give you loads of damage back.
I love A1 and his content and I agree that skill should be a big factor in the game, however I don't agree with his stance that a highly skilled pilot in an Aurora should be able to take out a less skilled pilot in a Gladius.
That's like saying a noob in a F-35 has no chance against someone that is an ace pilot in the seat of a Cirrus Vision Jet Plane with machine guns strapped to it.... the performance difference between them is way different because they have been designed with different uses on concept.
Now an Ace pilot in an Arrow against a less skilled pilot in a Gladius I get and understand and the skill there should shine through like the North Pole on Christmas.
I am in almost 100% agreement with you in all aspect of this video with everything from the rock, paper, scissors to the buff to weapons based on what they are placed on. Now before people kill me in the comments about buffs to weapons, my stance is that weapons fire and are as accurate as the platform they are attached to.
If a Panther is strapped to the wing of anything thats twitchy or unstable then so too should the accuracy. I'm not saying it should be unusable but there should be a cone that weapon fires within. However, a solid platform like a ship turret should reduce that cone, and a concrete base outside of a building/bunker reduce it even more.
Think about it this way, if I'm running and gunning in real life with my M134 Minigun on a Segway, my shots are going to be all over the place.... If I mount that same M134 Minigun onto the back of a pickup, right away my accuracy is buffed.... now if I put it on a fixed rotating platform, its a killing machine that we may as well call the death bringer as its now at it's most accurate.
I know these are real world comparisons "for a game" but as we play, thats what we make, real world comparisons and when things fail to cater to one argument more than the other, the first thing players will argue about it, "well thats not like real life!"
Great vid though!
Corbin
Great points Corbin, yes, what you're describing is basically the turret modifiers im arguing for. I'm all for it.
Great video.
Nice vid... yeah for whatever reason in the legacy model I shred everything with the ghost in ATMO but in space its like trying to hit a mosquito with a bb gun the way the pips go all over the place lol.
One thing that I haven't really heard articulated. If we can only die 15-20 times before we have some sort of "death of a spaceman" type event. How much arbitrary PVP do we actually envision in the PU? If it's too easy to force combat then people are going to be able to kill people at will, and when those deaths start being impactful long term, then a high volume of people are going to be over it quick. CIG is either going to have to kill the concept of "death of a spaceman" or make it relatively difficult to die.
Frankly, that's what the law system is for, and that's a role that it has not yet been used for at all. Current laws, enforcement, and jail times are incredibly kid-glove-y right now, *INCREDIBLY* so. They will have to adopt relative realistic laws and enforcement regimes, such that petty crimes and misdemeanors are not nearly as heavily penalized as "capital crimes," such as murder. Like in real life, most criminals aren't murderhobos with as much respect for life as the average D&D party, they are people living on the margins of society just trying to get by -- violent criminals and organized crime and murder are the 1% of crime, and in a legal system that's even slightly justifiable they are treated wholly differently between those two very different classes of crime. (This is obviously an immense simplification and reduction on my part, and is setting aside the WIDE differences in legal regimes between even developed countries, with America and it's INCREDIBLY SHITTY legal system obviously being an exception because America likes to go out of it's way to treat ALL crime as if it's violent murderhobo shit instead of actually assessing petty crime as petty and in need of rehabilitation, not incarceration).
Point being, most criminals should be heavily incentivized to *not murder other players* if they can at all avoid it, because being one of the "relatively harmless" criminals should equate to FAR LESS repercussion than wanton violence and mayhem, and subsequently make the job of being a successful criminal MUCH MORE PROFITABLE because you're not doing shit that's so brazen as to FORCE the attention of law enforcement authorities. Stay below the radar, minimize your collateral damage, and especially avoid murder, and you should be able to make a relatively profitable gig of piracy for example in the mature game (with all corollary features). Conversely, those players who want to make *killing people for little to no reason* their whole schtick, and who do it CONSTANTLY, should subsequently be semi-CONSTANTLY harassed by bounty hunters (of every legal and illegal persuasion) alongside NPC law enforcement with a bone to pick.
So yes, they are going to have to make it "relatively difficult to die," at least in the context of being a victim of crime, by making the penalties for murder an altogether different class than that of petty crimes. Pirates should be incentivized to incapacitate you, to strip you of your weapons, but also to provide basic medical attention to keep you from dying and in turn keep themselves from having to run from a murder warrant (which, ideally, at least for PC's / "Citizens" should not be easily erasable from a station; perhaps there's a special, high-security bureau station in Terra system that handles capital crimes/Citizen violence or something, much harder to breach than Kareah). After all, most criminals IRL aren't murderers -- far, far from it.
The alternative is to take the easy and far less immersive route out, and I frankly seriously doubt CR or any of the Directors responsible for SC are interested in taking the easy way out -- any easy way out -- given their track record of definitively doing the things that are NOT EASY 😂
I've mentioned on a few other vids of a consideration that gets left out of these discussions. This is a multiplayer video game and with that comes the limitations of a game. 1200m/s is not sustainable with current tech. On a server running 30 fps, you get more than a 20m jump in distance every tick at that speed. Bridging that gap means code to attempt to predict the location of the ship in the next tick. Leading to a lot of desync even at 30 fps servers, let alone the 5 fps ones we currently have. At 5 fps, 1200 m/s is 240m of travel every tick. At the end of the day, the speed HAS to come down for the game to function.
Once Maelstrom is in and HP pools are gone, the scenario of the Buccs and the HH will go away. The only reason the Bucc can win is their cone fire can still plink away at that HP bar from outside the cone fire of the HH turrets. With Maelstrom 99% of those shots will do nothing because shooting through the HH cargo bay or crew quarters or hall ways won't do disabling damage and will effectively mean nothing. And that is not even accounting for whenever ship armor is introduced.
I'm by no means a fighter pilot, so I have no input on how "good" MM is. The fact is speeds have to come down and there are other considerations coming to the game in the future that will throw balance far from where MM testing is currently. I don't know if CIG will get it right and make the top tier pilots and plebs like me happy, but I hope they can at least make it enjoyable for most.
As always, great vid DTox can't wait for more org fun in the verse.
I've been arguing that, along with speed reductions, we also need to consider reducing G limits. When you cannot make such wild vector changes at the drop of a hat it forces you to think about whatever maneuver you are about to make. Which ALSO means that knowing when to do what becomes a very valuable SKILL. This would also tend to improve the feel of the lower speed ceilings by creating a greater sense of momentum interfering with your desired direction changes.
Another option would be to impose cone of accuracy penalties based on 1) ship size - smaller ships having more penalty due to the less stable platform and reduced sensor capability compared to larger ships; and 2) G state - wild gyrations/or high deflection shooting also having negative effects on sustained accuracy.
These sorts of changes would go a long way towards not allowing light fighter or interceptors to sit at maximum range and safely plink away at larger ships like the Hammerhead. In order to inflict damage they would have to get in closer - thus exposing themselves to real danger.
"Armour" is Maelstrom, or rather, Maelstrom is the underlying tech that enables armour. Physically speaking, "armour" is effectively just a greater capacity for a material to handle stress and strain, to effectively reduce and limit plastic deformation. Maelstrom is the entire system for those physics (going beyond just simple stress and strain, I might add -- they had like nearly a dozen variables in the system when they detailed it at CC) and for the consequent deformation and destruction (from exceeding stress/strain etc). Maelstrom and armour are quite literally the same thing; Maelstrom is the tech that enables it, and "armour" is when that system's content is tuned appropriately for every vehicle and relevant environment object such that they can and will deform plastically under the appropriate physics as expected. The only way to physically instantiate "ship armour" in a meaningful and accurate way is as I just described, through the Maelstrom system -- they are quite literally the same thing in every meaningfully relevant way, and that's why it's taken so long to get ship armour (a physically accurate plastic deformation model as detailed in the Maelstrom presentation is, to be blunt, not a simple, straightforward, fast, nor remotely easy thing to code and implement and test out thoroughly enough to confidently iterate on).
Really really nice Vid! I hope many more Citizens will see this. Keep up the good work ❤
My biggest issue with Live combat model is *reality* is used as the excuse for the high combat speeds. But this argument falls flat when you take muzzle velocities into consideration. A ship moving at 1200 m/s is moving at almost 4 times the speed of a standard ballistic round, which is approximately 343 m/s or the speed of sound.
Reailty is one of the worst crosses to die on for Star Citizen.
@@DTOXTV maybe but a realistic immersive experience is what CIG has promised for years. Any deviation from that is seen as a large threat to the core gameplay foundations.
I really like the direction MMs is going and the changes it makes to how you approach engagements. Great video DTOX.
the only solution that makes sense, change the flight model per system KEKW
Well reasoned. I still have concerns about MM but think Yogi and team need the space to deliver and tune the solution before everyone rushes to judge. Personally, I didn't like combat in the early releases but I'm coming round to it a lot more in recent iterations.
Great vid
Loved this vid nice work Dtox
Why the hell is everyone complaining about "you can not force the fight onto one"?? This is exactly right. In a sandbox, you should have the option to run. Always. MM is "I want to fight and you can not refuse to fight". This inclusive sh*t will backfire, because the noobs will be seal clubbed on sight every time, because they can not run away, or try to fight and realize "No, I'm out."
But Nav Mode is the complete opposite of that? In live you just align your vector, turn off speed limiter and go to max speed in any direction. Nav Mode is a 10 second spool, where shields, weapons and countermeasures are dropped, and it can be countered by a whole other ship archetype/role.
@@DTOXTVI do not understand your reply. In live (no MM) you can flee (good) by aligning your vector, turn off speed limiter and go to max speed in any direction while spooling QT.. With MM, you have no way to flee (bad), because you have to wait and play sitting lame duck without shields, without countermeasures, without cover from your turrets if you have, until NAV is activated. So everyone can force any fight onto everbody. MM forces you to fight to the death every time you find yourself in weapons range of a hostile p(l)ayer. THIS IS WHY MM IS A BAD IDEA at least in the current state.
WW2 air combat was not about close range dogfights. That's faux hollywood ww2 combat. It was about positioning, situation awareness, keeping speed, keeping altitude as back up speed. That's how US plane reigned supreme against the Japanese. Training & speed.
Compared to todays modern flight combat. I think its safe to say that it is “close range”
It doesn't take long to find WW2 aerial combat footage that very much says otherwise. Of course Hollywood plays it up, but thats because its much more fun and palatable by mainstream audiences... Exactly why Chris Roberts always wanted WW2 in space, thats the SCI FI we all grew up on and loved, not shooting railguns at thousand of kilometre's away from each other like reality dictates.
@@DTOXTVmost of the footage that, doesn't take long to find, are footage of gun cams on kill. In these situation, they already have gotten the positional advantage and are setup for a kill. Before getting to these positions, is the process of fighters setting them up through situation awareness, understanding of energy disparity (speed & altitude difference), basic flight maneuver. All of these processes are not shown on film.
Also guess what if the bf109 did a nice split-S & made the spitfire unable to follow therefore escape, they are now no longer in short-range & the spitfire have to re-acquire the target through observation. most likely they are not keeping that footage either.
Overall, there's a selection bias to most of the footages out there. As to what SC should be? I refrain from discussing it in short. For it's too complicated a topic, and can not be solved by simply imitating either "faux ww2 combat" or "real ww2 combat".
@@gabor5079bruh everything's short range compare to modern BVR missile tossing battle.
True true very true. Especially the interceptor boosters being able to keep up with nav mode ships, but nerfing their shields etc. over all seems like an exellent idea. Very well done
I was hating on MM. but flying a light fighter and space and heavy fighter in atmosphere is a blast! Also getting up close is easier on my brain and very cinematic. I can actually see the ship in shooting at. Instead of a hit marker. To each their own tho.
MM isn’t in its final state. Not all the game mechanics are in. There are lots of things that are going to change
Great take!! As I keep saying, give MM a year to be refined. AV1 and every making doom and gloom content before the general population tests it themselves is quite annoying. I don't do Arena Commander period. I enjoy experiencing it for the first time when it hits LIVE and then give feedback. I remember a guy in a fighter that was so damn good he killed everything that came in a range of Olisar before they removed Olisar. With MM, that can never happen for the hours he was there.
Great video as always, DTOX!
Watching the master modes clips is interesting because when hunting bounty ships like buccs, those tend to just look like tiny explosions. So in a way I appreciate the idea of being able to see the ship better and if it's more inclusive that feels like a good thing to me, but I also don't think that's entirely the point.
Between things like death of a spaceman, insurance, non lethal bounties, I get the idea that we aren't supposed to die every time around but at the current speeds I really don't think getting your power plant sniped would feel good. I'm also not entirely sure if slower speeds is raising the floor when what you hit is becoming more important. Sort of? It's shifting the emphasis for sure.
If you're having a PVP battle and 2 wingmen pair off against 2 others they'll try to position on each other, but even veterans will find themselves accidentally leaving the AO at 1km/sec. You call for help from your buddy and he's 67km away...
It lowers the skill floor by locking everyone into the same frame of reference during combat, which I think is a good thing.
@@vorpalrobot Yeah I could see that as seriously helpful for sticking together too.
The turn rate of light fighters is meaningless when backstrafing is unhinge.
Another problem is the lack of limited resources: all capacitators recharge fast. So you switch to NAV mode, recharge and be back in 30 seconds while the poor dude who was chasing you wasted his boost.
All easily tweakable and tunable though. The sky is not falling.
@@DTOXTV Easily tunable except CIG did the exact opposite going from MM3.22 to MM3.22.1 and brought back PIP wiggling and the ability to reset fight risk free.
And Yogi said he's happy with that direction and this is what 3.23 will feel like.
I have been a supporter of MM for a long time. But all they are doing with it is a worse version of LIVE.
I have been having a great time in MM so far. I have a hundred ideas on how to tweak things to make them better, but this feels like a solid foundation.
I think it's just impossible to balance the game the way they SEEM to be trying to do.
Mind you, I have 3200 hours in War Thunder (mostly realistic ground and air) so I'm used to semi-realistic but really arcade-y air combat games, and it just doen't make sense to try and balance the Gladius, AKA space F-16, and a Corsair Black, AKA the space Mi-24 hind trying to unload Spetznas to rob cargo or something.
I feel the real trouble comes from the fact SC was developed as 2 games, one where you are supposed to be a top gun who saves mankind, the other a space MMO supposed to be deeply punishing where no single player is the protagonist.
Frankly, I'd prefer they balanced this with economy and stimuli than with the flight model. Let Gladius rule the 1v1 dogfighters, just make flying one so expensive and risky it makes no sense someone would waste flying time griefing people in civilian ships other than as a part of an organized pirate heist or org war actions. Nobody expects to be robbed by an apache attack helicopter, and that's not because we can down them with rocks, but due to costs and availability (ant the availability ship has sailed, so costs it is).
Even when we are taking into account the pure breed military ships and meaningfull group PvP, a lot of models and types make little sense - what MAKES sense is what was used in aeronaval war - light fighters, bombers, torpedo bombs and naval vessels. Some ships actually don't even have the role some people might be misled into believing - good examples are the retaliator and eclipse, they are NOT bombers, they act more like submarines if you think about the WW2 inspiration.
Adding heavy fighters. I.E., make no sense, there is a reason those were not fielded by navies, they are larger for factors other than dogfight capacity - range, sensors, altitude, heavier weaponry to kill strategic bombers, etc. But considering they are already in the game, make them zoom N boom, so in this I kinda agree with your video. Specialist heavy fighters are ok exactly because people don't expect to win dogfights with them (looking at the Inferno and Ion here).
I'll not even enter the discussion of multi crewing in combat - I bet those B-17s wouldn't have any gunners if each of them could just instead "spawn" their Mustangs as escorts, but this ie another discussion.
And there is also the issue of hardware - a game where you can use eye trackers, etc, creates the huge issue of blatant P2W is combat is, ironically, more realistic. The higher the ceiling, more one can gain from investing in a prohibitive setup to most of the player base.
Ah, and about people just running away from combat - just make missiles GOOD and people will have to bleed energy to dodge, allowing the guy in pursuit to reach them. It sure feels like SC missiles are just random, that doesn't help.
TL,DR: This will be hell to balance.
Yep, some valid points my friend. Really, CIG made a bed full of fire ants and now they need to sleep in it. They've sold repeatedly "cooler" and "more powerful" ships without any thought about how they will balance or fit the mechanical landscape of the game, or before mechanics were ever close to being settled. It is NOT going to be easy to balance or make sens of all this, BUT... Master Mode's, in my opinion, is the best foundation we've had *YET* to even attempt to balance this mess, so I'm rolling with it, for now.
Greetings Master Lasher/Whipper DTOX!! Yet another brilliant vid from U has arrived! Perfect analysis for my taste! and I, as U know suck major when it comes to pilot skills within the Verse, and have to admit, that the master modes, after testing them a bit, are making me suck much less, så i am for the master modes when they get implemented into PU! ThanX agan for a great vid! Cheers!
For me the pvp should be as simple as "easy to play, hard to master". The pvp and the basic should be able to be understood by every player even the worst one but have enough depth so that a good player could be very good. With having hard and very difficult maneuver to master and which requires several hundred hours to master, a bit like with Quake and others...
What a wonderful video. I watched from start to finish. I loved it. You were fair, honest, and well presented. I am so glad you touched on objectives too.
I appreciate that man! I've recently discovered and been enjoying your content and humour too! Thanks!
So after listening to buzzcuts explanation I have questions. When two light fighters are dueling does that mean they are scissoring each other?
😆
I would have never imagined that the bucc would be tier 1 for dogfighting.
For now. Ultimately, it shouldn't be! :D
I think the future of Star Citizen doesn't lie on the SUPER TRY HARD pilots... It lies as always on a more casual audience..
I think its nice to have skill and be able to use that! But bro cmon... I dont want to be flying 500000 hours just to be good enough..
I agree with your stale mate assessment.
The primary role of an interceptor is, as the name indicates to intercept. Meaning it is the first to arrive and interact with an approaching threat. But it is not there to brawl, it is there to gather information and potentially create some disruption/distraction of the threat until more capable help arrives. Like cavalry during the US Civil War, which would engage infantry, but only as a fixing force, and certainly not for very long without risking destruction. If/when support arrives they disengage and move to the periphery, providing support and potentially pursuing any stragglers or enemy that attempts to turn back towards safer territory. In SC interceptors should have higher top speed, but lower acceleration and lower G limits along with slightly weaker defenses relative to light fighters, but possible bettor sensors.
I fought in mastermodes ac yetserday for a couple of hours. I had a lot of fun with my buddies. No idea what all the buzz is around that.
I really like this thoughtful approach.
Much harder to crash if you can't go as fast..... ;)
❤
Love it. Great take. Excited to see how this unfolds
Thank you so much for your content. I would love to see a Ship matrix to know what conters what. I did not understand teh interceptors role, tbh based on Firepower and moveability. Do they fight of the fighter types and be contered by a gunship? Clearing a hard conter system would work but needs lots of thoughts.
No one wins! aka the Star Citizen experience in a nutshell. xD
Tbh, its been years of nerfs and dumdowns to the flight model, MM is just that more nerfs and restrictions to flight, wrapped in hype.
It really isn't. There's tons of depth if you actually push through the pain of adjusting. Knife fighting has actually gotten more technical. When people stop kiting (which isn't as strong as people are making out) and start to push it feels much faster and visceral. Roles are clearly defined, teamwork is better and situational awareness is MASSIVELY more important. The moment you start watching your radar (which you never had to do in Live because you'd just trichord any third party hits while in a 1v1) and knowing exactly when to pick your moments to engage and disengage it opens up a whole new layer of depth that the old system never had. Just because it's easier to pick up it doesn't mean it's easier to master.
@@Super-id7bqno skill is really needed. because its so slow and easy to get a + on target, ships looks silly flying and fighting. if you cant see how flawed this FM is then good for you, and your claim you neva had to look at radar before kinda says it all, the dumdowns began with the new flight team in 3.0 before that SC felt awesome to fly. now its pretty much the worst flightmodel i ever played with, from hero to zero, it took the new flight team 7-8 years to make a cool space sim into a slow silly acarde game, ware ships throttle are akin to a car speeder. and yes its MM is mastered in a few houers, and it ends up being the same shit just slower with more restrictions on everything.
If Ship A and ship B both got a even reduction in their top speeds - its still Pilot A flying his ship vs Pilot B flying his ship. The biggest change is if my shields go down now i cant just insta-crank my throttle limiter to max and boost away at 1,000 m/s while my shields recharge. The safety rope is being cut.@@brianfury9790
As a moderately skilled casual I go for just being one of the better large ship pilots. I can never get into the ínsane light fighter metas. Also great video! I really enjoy hearing good talks about the potential updates of the game
A couple years ago I made a conscious decision to purposefully not pursue the sort of study and training needed to master the light fighter meta. Mostly because I knew I was never going to be motivated enough or have enough time away from adulting. But also because it has been readily apparent for years that not much, if anything, in this game is fixed in stone. I truly feel bad for the people who have sunk that many hours into building their mansion on a foundation of sand.
You put it into the words that i could not articulate. Thank you! I agree with this take wholeheartedly. And it beats the heck out of me just saying "screw those sweaty try-hards" 😅
Doesn't all of this mastermode controversy something we should expect? In fact, it just seems like there's a lot of people that are unhappy about a meta change. There's also the subtlety of nav mode to consider. Would you still have chaff and decoy available? What is the delay time?
Plus, the testing mode in Arena commander has a sliver of the ships in game. I'd like to see way more variety of combos and see how those fights play out. If interceptors are the "finishers", then having one one the team would seem like a no brainer.
The top players want speed but not the speed we have now, like avenger one saying like 500 m/s. With MM the smaller ship tends to beat the bigger ship.(So light fighters beat medium, medium beats heavy)Also now we have to include non-combatant ships. They can't escape anyone, because now you have no choice but if you see someone on radar you have to leave. And if someone is trying to kill you their not even a 1 percent of you escaping. Also turrets are still useless. The only hope is armor.
We dont know how components will interact with master mode's/nav mode and/or industrial style ships yet. There is SO much room for components to react differently in master modes with different ship types and component classes. Industrial Class shields? Perhaps they don't instantly drop in Nav Mode and take longer to dissipate, but longer to recharge after exiting Nav Mode. Industrial quantum drive? Faster nav mode spool, but slower ramp up of speed, etc. They can provide room for non-combat ships to have better escapability/survivability, but under performance during fights. Turrets are not useless and easily fixed with some minor tweaks.
With faster combat speeds turrets are useless and large ships have no chance of taking down fighters.
In 2.x I played a lot of Arena Commander PvP & loved it.
I tried to get back into PvP around 3.18 in the PU, but I found it pretty off-putting - There was this bizarre sweaty duality where they would use meta ships and then trash talk you for not fighting within their own little bubble of codes and rules - which only exist as some sort of "gentleman's agreement" to bring the arena style combat to the open world, because the flight model doesn't work.
I've never loved the 3.x flight model, it's always felt like a bunch of disassociated systems to me, even after a couple hundred hours it feels the same. It works, but none of it is very intuitive or interesting.
noice!!!
I haven't tried MM yet, I wanted to know,.... Would a mantis keep you in SCM speed?
In theory yes, its dampener should be able to block nav mode/escapes within 2km, which i really like.
so if in the legacy FM both pilots need to agree to a 1v1, is it now true that any pilot can start a 1v1 without mutual consent? And won't that lead to more griefing? This idea that PVP players believe they can run around the verse and do anything they please sucks.
The first statement. These pilots will always excel in that role lost me. Total bullshit. Currently MM dumbs down the flying to you have no better chance no mater how much you fly or train than someone with 1 hr in the game. It is a straight DPS race no skill at all involved. Will they change it, maybe, but currently it totally sucks in MM. Live is not any better for players either. Live is 100 percent a flight model built for the guy that trains 4 to 6 hrs per week and I mean Trains. It totally sucks for the average player and is way off. MM goes in the complete opposite direction and is not worth a crap for the guy that actually wants to perfect the Dogfight. They need to meet somewhere in the middle. Can CIG fix MM, I dont know. Many of the suggestion have merit but currently the skill ceiling has been lowered way to much, there is no room to grow. The knee jerk was overboard and I currently hate it. If CIG doesnt get it right I guess I will just be let the account go and move on to other games, which sucks. I had hopes and dreams for this game and I feel CIG is now going from catering to the light fighter sweates to catering to the I will buy hacks because I want the easy way out crowd. This Video did have some ok points. TURRET BUFFS and Weapon Nerfs based on ship is a very very valid point. For all those that MM is awesome its the best. OK, WHY DONT I SEE YOU IN AC? I see the same people over and over and over. So you like it so much you never play it or its mastered in less than 30 mins. Got it.
The top pilots in LIVE are dominating in MM, just like before, but the people in the middle, or even beginners, can already feel a positive difference in fighter accessibility. It just feels more intuitive to them and easier to be useful, without requiring a 6 hour crash course on how to hit another ships pip. Its not perfect, but its a solid foundation to move forward from.
Soon … 12sec and you die vs HH
I understand a nerf for the the Bucc may be needed , But I'll be pretty upset if they nerf all interceptors into oblivion. Every video on MM I've seen complains about the Bucc and then states the need to nerf all interceptors. I love flying my 325 and its never been even close to being a good fighter. Hopefully CIG recognizes the huge differences between the ships that are in that one class and applies any nerfs in a fair way and don't slap the exact same nerfs to everything they stuck an interceptor label on. Not all Interceptors were created equal and they really need to take that into account when nerfing all ships. I guess what I'm saying is if your going to detune the 325 at least make the wings stay on a little longer so I'm not sent spinning through space the first time I take a hit. 😂
What percentage of people actually give a d*** about this other than the elite? Top people who have something to prove that the rest of us don't even care about. Personally, I want content enjoyable gameplay. Not ego ridden hot shots out there to show everybody how many hours they've invested into a video game. But you know they think it's all about them.
Sweet !
"You can have freedom of skill expression, but not at the cost of other players freedom of choice". You couldn't have said that better. This is entirely why I can hardly play any FPS anymore. There is no freedom of choice if you "want to have skill"
I initially thought mastermodes was a great idea! and I still like certain ideas of it, the ship the trichord limiter, the cone spread and even the category system.
but the current speeds just make it boring, try flying it in MM squadron battles a few times, afterwords log back into live and its like coming home, its just way more fun.
In the current live build you already have a solution to light fighters,
Get a friend and hop into a scorp or hurricane and you can melt light fighters with ease, It requires a little bit of skill to get a good merge, but its not that difficult.
Don't get me wrong, the current flight model is far from perfect and has some real issues to be addressed. But it feels like its less work to get the live model in a good place then to get Master Modes in a place where it actually is fun for years to come.
The live model might be less work to get us *back* to "fighter fun meta", but it *doesnt* work if we're going to encompass a hundred other ships, types and playstyles. That's the whole problem.
"...Rock Paper Scissors..." Oh man, that triggers the crap out of the Light Fighter META Mafia. the mere thought that there might be ships they simply cannot defeat from their single seat thrones really pisses them off.
With enough skill, not even a fully manned Idris can stand in the way of my Arrow.
@@DTOXTV Nailed it.
Yep, just scrolling through the comments and the 4 above yours were making rock paper scissors out to be the end of the world.
@@YourArmsGone You talking to me? If so your reading comprehension sucks. Really. Sucks.
I'm not a top pvper but I hate molasses modes because it feels fake and arcadey. I want to feel like I'm flying a cool spaceship that follows logical physics that make sense rather than arcade game sports "because it's a game" restrictions that take away my agency. Master modes feels *fake* and my dreams of being a spaceman are dashed and replaced with a constant reminder that "roles" and 'archetypes" like it's a hero shooter. It's the difference between playing a gritty immersive game vs an arcadey hero shooter like Apex or Overwatch.
I don't want rock paper scissors unless you can beat someone head in with the rock, stab someone with the scissors so they bleed out, and have the paper guy just die horribly because paper beats nothing. No neat "rules", just CONSEQUENCES.
How to balance light fighter supremacy? Scale damage of big guns so the TTK against LF becomes low and they just die from lucky shots. It makes no sense that you have to hit a light fighter dozens of times with a giant cannon. Model the actual energy, simulate it.
The "running away" issue you mention can be fixed easily by making missiles actually work and be useful. Run out of gun range? You die by missile instead of dying by guns. Right now nobody dies by missile. i.e. model missiles that make logical sense as actual weapons of war that kill things. One hit, one kill, for missiles appropriately sized (e.g. size 1 missile is one hit one kill for light fighters).
There are sensible solutions to all these issues that draw on logical consequences rather than trying to write sports-style made-up rules.
The ships have never followed 'logical physics' There have always been speed limits, decoupled mode is only partly Newtonian, the G forces allowed would not only kill the pilots but tear most of the ships to bits, and 'breathable' atmospheres like Hurston or Microtech and laughably shallow. It is a video game and always has been a video game.
@@ThomasD66 Every pre-MM flight model has felt MUCH more Newtonian and 'space-like', which is why I fell in love with the game in the first place. There are countless "airplanes in space" games, but only SC has that true Newtonian feel (so far).
@@Sattorin There is no point arguing with personal tastes. You like what you like and nobody can tell you otherwise.
But what I can tell is is what you think is Newtonian isn't remotely so. EVERY rotational input in SC (pitch, yaw, roll) is 'inertially dampened.' But in a manner that just happens to mimic/model air flight. The game engine is not "Newtonian physics but turned down" it is an air flight simulator with a sprinkling of Newtonian physics WHEN you decouple.
The best way CIG could give you back some of the feel you previously had is to dial down the G limits. They've reduced speeds but not G limits so ship behavior feels awkward as compared to what everyone is used to. They really needed to be adjusted together to maintain the same relative input response.
@@ThomasD66 Yes there have always been problems and technical limitations hurting the game, but it was still far and away better than most space games. However the problems are getting worse not better.
also, if skilled pilots can drag out fights against each other indefinitely, how is it that champions were crowned in the last atmo event???? there were the so called best fighters faced off against each other and guess what, some pilots lost and some pilots won.
wannabe "top" player dont matter.
the normal player matters
fighters move way too fast - unreaiistic
Master modes sucks ass for anyone with a brain and a will to spend 5 min learning.
Nice opinion. Shame its wrong. 🤣
@@DTOXTV You can’t even formulate an accurate sentence. How can what I said possibly be wrong when you called it an “opinion”, it’s by definition a personal judgement. Shows who master modes is made for. 😇
@@rp2974 I literally made the video you watched, what are you talking about? 😅 Also, the opinion thing being "wrong" is the joke.
Everything in your argument was valid until you said "... are simply scared of losing a fighter supremacy they've enjoyed for so many years.". I'm neutral to the whole thing but when one side of the argument says the other side is just scared when they actually have valid concerns too, you lose some validity in your own argument.
I disagree. It was a single sentence in a 17 minute video where i tried to take a balanced approach. There is a minority of people who believe just that, but they would obviously never say it, and will try to use other scapegoats to justify their anti-MM agenda. There is a BIG disconnect between people who sit in a single seat fighter cockpit 99% of their time in Star Citizen, and the rest of the community, who see the gigantic scope and possibility of a better space game where protecting these players experience is no longer the priority.
@@DTOXTV I agree with you. I just think it could’ve been said better or your point could’ve been clarified. All that one sentence does is give (some) people one aspect of the argument to cling on to and it puts people against each other in an unproductive way. It’s like if I went to your comment section after listening to your whole well thought out and valid perspective and replied with “you just want dog fighting to be easier so you can compete with people like avenger one!!”.
In my opinion, and I could be wrong, it’s unproductive to your side of the argument because instead of having your viewers try to understand the good reasons, they can be thoughtless and sum it up to “Dog fighters are afraid of change and a more accessible landscape” as opposed to all the other really great reasons for master modes to be implemented and improved over time.
I enjoy your content, I thought this was a really good video, I also thought avenger one had a good video. I’m for the best of both worlds. Didn’t mean any insult by what I said initially. Although, my opinion stands.
You might be right, but i wanted to include my genuine thoughts on that part of the topic, with regards to creating a more accessible game for the majority. How people interperet that, without considering the overall argument, is there choice at that point. Lowering the skill floor means conceding some *parts* of the fighter skill ceiling in my opinion, which is a painful truth for some to accept. Thanks for elaborating, your measured response, and for enjoying my content!@@AkalaFPS
@@DTOXTV Yeah, not wrong at all. I appreciate your response as well. I just hope that CIG are open to all kinds of feedback and continue to improve master modes far into the future so the community doesn’t have to worry about stagnation.
@@AkalaFPS definitely. We want this to be the best it can be!
Where I have issues with all this is the piling up of artificial mechanics in support of balance. Shields don't regenerate when shot. Introduced to make things more 'interesting'. It's the exact reason why light fighters are meta. The base mechanic is broken to force players to play in a certain way instead of trying to follow reality and decades of examples from real areal warfare. Every problem resulting from that is met with yet another artificial mechanic like limiting the countermeasures on an interceptor. Exactly the opposite of what would be the case in reality! They are missile magnets so they would have way *more* countermeasures. This cannot end in anything but arcade-level gameplay. Completely unrealistic and thereby not what I think would make Star Citizen what many of the backers are looking for
The trouble is, video games are built on 'artificial mechanics', except they're not 'artificial', they're just mechanics, or game mechanics. Their purpose is to produce a more fun, fair and engaging game, not necessarily one that reflects ultimate reality. Star Citizen is not a full simulator by any stretch of the imagination. In reality ships would not have wings in space and we'd all be firing railguns at 2000 kilometres away, with PDD's to shoot down missiles on every ship. You can't really denounce the game as 'arcadey' when a game mechanic doesn't suit you, when there's so many other unrealistic elements in Star Citizen let fly. If realism is the bar you set, you wouldn't play Star Citizen at all, because its completely unrealistic.
@@DTOXTV lol, couple of fair points there for sure. Nonetheless, my point is to be careful not to end up in a situation where you're just constantly plugging one hole with another. If big ship shields just charged constantly, a single light fighter would never overmatch its charge rate. A mob of light fighters taking one down is perfectly reasonable. The wolves take down the bison... Having them artificially not charging for no reason that makes any sense was a small mistake with huge consequences
Large ship shields not recharging constantly was a mistake, totally agree. Giving larger ship shields a constant recharge helps solve the whole problem of single fighters plinking away at large ships in live and in MM right now, at a range outside their guns, to eventually defeat them with no risk to themselves. @@eavdmeer
So basically, people want easy mode, and don't want to have to work to be good, they just want it handed to them on a silver platter.
quite frankly, the pilots that are afraid of losing a PVP fight are in the minority simply because PVPers are a minority. and while you certainly address MM in terms of light fighter meta and such, this says nothing about the many other occupations in the verse and how MM adversely affects their gameplay. Truth be told the goals you enumerate could have all been achieved without a segmented FM that causes the rest of us more headaches than not. It is a shame that folks like you only address PVP wrt to MM. You are missing the bigger picture behind grandiose claims that everyone will embrace being part of a large fleet where everyone has a very specific and limited role. Isn't that just Eve Online????
Truth be told, MM as currently stands eliminates any resemblance of realistic space flight and as such, is not what we backers were promised, nor what what we enjoy coming back to again and again. MM is full of promises and very, very short of delivering on them.
Go watch a race in mastermodes compared to live and tell me that's better. Molases modes is a giant L in many areas.
So give racer ships higher boost pools and boost speeds, or adjust their capacitors to benefit a faster playstyle? Additionally, get rid of their guns. Racing ships should never of had guns in the first place, then we don't have to worry about their tuning in a combat situation.
Why the hell you would turn the game into arcade shit
I'm not an above average PvP player. I've basically never been a PvP player and I'm still not a big fan of what they're doing with Master Modes... At least CIG's unwillingness negotiate any balance of SCM speed vs Boost speed.
And if say they're trying to make it "inclusive" I'm intentionally trying to politically load my language in a derogatory way... Not actually acting well intentioned.
As a side note the Fight or Flight tournament at Citcon should really be proof that current flight model isn't nearly as sweaty this video is pretending. (Gabi has been only been playing the game for a few years and believe only really trained for PvP a few months all be it with a strong network of friends.) Not to say there isn't a lot to be fixed with the current model just that the "it take years and of studying and No-lifeing to participate" is greatly over exaggerated.
You literally just said "I've never been a PVP player", or acknowledged any effort at trying, but you have a firm grasp of what it takes to be at and stay at the top and that actually, the effort required is greatly overexaggerated? Gotcha.