Star Citizen Live Q&A: Master Modes
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 03. 2024
- We're back with another Live Q&A style episode as our developers answer your burning questions on all things Master Modes coming in Alpha 3.23.
------------------------------------------
Roberts Space Industries is a spacecraft manufacturer within the persistent-world game "Star Citizen" and its companion single-player spaceflight sim, "Squadron 42." RSI is also your portal for information, updates, and purchases of your very own spacecraft with which to trade, plunder, and protect the citizens of Star Citizen.
Follow us on your favorite platform for the latest Star Citizen updates:
/ robertsspaceindustries
/ robertsspaceind
/ robertsspaceind
/ starcitizen
/ starcitizen - Hry
Questions/Time Stamps
7:24 How will Master Modes have a substantial effect on how non-combat pilots and ships operate in the verse?
15:16 Can you explain in detail how Quantum Dampeners and Quantum Snares will work on ships in nav mode?
17:31 Will we be able to stay in Nav Mode and travel everywhere avoiding combat? What are the planned limitations of Nav Mode?
22:17 How do Master Modes, especially Nav Mode, work in atmosphere?
22:47 Are there any plans for the SCM and Nav Mode transition times to differ between ships?
24:40 Why is there no UI and HUD update coming with the Master Mode update in 3.23?
33:31 How do the devs feel about all the discourse surrounding Master Modes?
39:17 What do you guys have to say to people who say that this is lower the skill ceiling?
40:52 How will Master Modes make racing viable when SCM speed is too slow and the ship ain't agile enough with Nav Mode?
46:04 What is the intended effect of changing to Nav Mode with respect to other players in a multi-crew ship?
47:36 How does the power triangle relate to Master Modes?
52:40 Are there any changes to generalized stealth mechanics?
53:43 If this work is completely separate from Resource Network or if this work overwrites does the archetype mean we can no longer tune our components?
55:23 What are your initial thoughts on what we can do to make Master Modes work for players who want to specifically catch up and capture?
58:32 What are your red lines in term of balance? Are there any parameters you're simply unwilling to adjust?
1:02:34 After 3.23 goes live, what metrics will you be watching to determine which portions of Master Modes are successful and which may still need additional tuning?
PIN THIS GUY
MVP
Thanks
I was a little over halfway through writing it out today when I accidently hit the play next video button instead of play and was like " NOOOOOoooooooooooooooo" and had to restart lol 👍Thanks for all the appreciation everyone.
Thank you, tyller :)
I’ll support their decisions. I love the game but I really hope they listen to players too if it’s a lot of negative feedback
“Wouldn’t trust anyone who was” -Jared. Wise words from a wise man.
😂
As a new player (60-70h on game time) i really dont understand why that master mode is a thing. Why is the power triangle isnt working for this, am i missing something? Why is speed a problem? Isn't blacking out already a limitation? Cuz i feel it doesn't take much on my gladuis to pass out if i push it too hard
Literally this, it just feels like dumbing down engineering, before we even get it in its full form?
One of the big things for me is that it makes no sense for your shields to have to be down in any mode. Never mind a mode where you would be traveling at faster than normal speeds, where you would definitely need shields up.
Unless they set it up that they need the power that is going to shields for the engine/thrusters in order to reach such speeds. So power management in the end.
Now I am not sure how it is done. But I hope that the percentage of the shield is going down is going to the increase of speed. Not just waiting for shields to be fully down and then the increase in speed.
Because if shields are up in Nav mode then you would never be able to get intercepted in any meaningful way without an entire group of pirates with quantum snares there.
@@Billy-bc8pk Thats like saying soldiers should walk with their heads above the parapet so the enemy has a chance to shoot them. It makes more sense pirates would be using snares and ambush tactics than just penalizing the prey to make them easier sitting ducks.
Shields have never been intended as a 24/7 always active component, they just haven't had the resource network/wear systems ready to make it happen yet.
CIG has always wanted those 'red alert, shields up!' immersive moments.
They have a fundamentally erroneous shield model and have no idea what shields might look like if they really existed. Instead of making the classic, and most logical model, in which shields absorb ballistics, but are damaged by energy weapons, we actually have just a mess in the interaction of ballistics with shields and a complete lack of meaning and specific difference in the type of damage (ballistic or laser etc.).
ref naming as the old joke goes: There are 2 hard problems in computer science; cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors.
Those are definitely 4 really difficult problems to solve.
I see what you did there :)
I count 3 things in your statement not 2. Is that an inside joke?
@@cidhomerimperialpneulemen2107 The last one is off-by-one errors, which is when a number differs from what it should be by 1
@@cidhomerimperialpneulemen2107 That's the off-by-one -error and indeed that is the joke.
I hope we get an option to change the cockpit crosshair back to 3.22 version. I don't like the look of 3.23. Giant box on my screen and a tiny little pip circle that I'm squinting to see.
for racing:
it would make sense if raceing ships/vehicles could enter a "component safeties unlocked racing mode"... basically similar to "mining/salvage" mode for industry ships. (basically a near illegal very unsave component configuration)
maybe in that mode ship components would degrade (wear/tear) at an increddible rate and would have a very increased performance... like 300-500%. could even make them fly faster than interceptors in nav mode.
(imagine i.e. a formula 1 car... your components are basically good for a few races and then need to be replaced or atleast repaired to last 1-2 more races if you cant afford buying new good components.)
then the current special raceing spec components would work with that too... they are specially made to endure the "unlocked component safeties" modes of raceships... where civillian grade components maybe not even last one race... the special race components can endure 3-5 races maybe before completely failing. designed for short (race) time overtuned performance and not for hours of flying at max power.
for normal spaceflight the racing components might even perform lower than civilian modules, maybe around 80%.
and they would break really quickly in combat, so interceptors with civillian modules would have the upperhand against racing ships fighting, simply just that the racing components are so fragile they break/degrate quickly when taking damage.
maybe we can even get thruster/engine components at some point... or even different companies... i.e. one raceing component manufacturer has increased agility with their thrusters/engines... another has higher top speed... another has high acceleration... or longer boosting.
this actually makes a lot of sense, as long as it cannot be used in combat or would be weak in combat or have some other serious drawback for non racing situations
I like this solution, it solves the problem in a way that also makes racing ships uniquely good at what they should be good at, while also making them not good at things they are not supposed to be good at.
Would also make PitStops a thing. I like it
Hi...i am one of those pvp streamers (albeit not a very well known one). I totally understand the need for lower combat speeds and support what you guys are trying to do. I thought I'd give my feedback on master modes. In its current iteration it has an overriding feeling of 'fighting in a small goldfish bowl'. When the speed's hit their max both parties end up being nose on nose with no room for deflection. This needs to be addressed, my potential solutions are to make the percentage of boost to normal speed lower (raise the SCM Limit and lower the boost band)- its too high atm where I'm having to keep the boost button pressed permanently to get any sort of advantage/speed/drift, conversely my opponent is doing exactly the same so we end up having a nose on nose boring dps fight with no deflection or avoidance. I would like to see boost make the flight interestering and different so use it as a short powerful blip boost that has to be used in short bursts tactically throughout the fight (this i know has an implication on backstrafing, but see my thoughts on that below). Also make the last 10-20 of the boost taper off this but when boost is pressed its impact is significant, these mechnics should make fight more interesting, tactical add deflection and hopefully go someway to prevent the goldfish bowl syndrome we currently feel. To stop the toxic backstraffe mechanic, enable a main boost taper so when you come off the throttle the main booster stays on and decays to off in 3-5 seconds. I would also like to see the weapons range reducing down to 1000m, this will make duels much closer. The current SCM speed does not allow for enough drift in decoupled mode,, when you turn into the drift the ship just stops this does not feel right, with a further additional 50-100 SCM (the SCM to boost ratio mentioned above may sort this) the ship continues its drift nicely until the thrusters catch up and arrest the momentum. I'm sure with tunning you guys will get there. If you need any help or further constructive feedback please get in touch.
I'm so glad they're letting Jared set people straight more often
The edgy behaviour, entitlement and sometimes outright rudeness of some people towards people who are actually involved in development, testing and balancing and actually facing the complications coming from that is pretty revolting. "YoU'd ThInK TheY WoUlD HaVe TeSTeD X BeFoRe Y LMAO" grow the F up.
@@SvalbardSleeperDistrictSadly the community consistently proves why other developers don't have open development.
I just love that they have, pretty much always, just let Jared be Jared. In both the sense of him being a complete goofball, and in the sense of letting him be candid and open / honest.
@@Billy-bc8pk Not only that, but the toxicity of discussion between players has also been terrible on Spectrum. You get the kind of behaviours you'd expect from a teenage playerbase of an FPS game, with constant edginess, snark and contentless responses dragging down the quality of discussion in threads.
Yeah chat was being cringe. I’d be embarrassed acting like that.
Jared is the most durable soul in all of game development. Youre amazing man. Good job keeping these cats herded. Even when folks are extra challenging. ❤
Wrong best pilot is Wedge Antilles, Lando was just along for the ride!
I really appreciate the volume of work going into making sure MM’s work. I know you guys will figure it out in a way that’s enjoyable for everyone.
I have to say that I love the feeling of “going fast” in the PU. I love the x1 at 200, I feel like my c1 needs to be much faster as a base. When I’m flying 200 feels slow. 400-600 feels fast
you just need to fly closer to stuff - CIG
@@iseeNobody yeah that reply made me cringe. No Yogi… i want a space game, not podracing
Cig is right though @@alexparris7769 you won't feel fast because no matter what speed if your away from stuff, because you'd lack anything moving past you to give your mind a frame of reference for movement.
If you want to see what I mean try flying 200m/s in the pitch black with nothing around, then do it in an asteroid belt then atmosphere then
Then do it on the ground in a flat plane then on the ground in a rocky place
Same speed different places different feel.
Please, go try it I implore you all to go see in game what he meant
@@iseeNobody terrible gemeplay choice that will kill the game. Let uc choose to PVP and leave. get rid of this master modes.
REMAKE THE TRACKS? ARE YOU SERIOUS. Do you want this to be a pvp game or a pvepvp game.... what are you guys doing... LOL
Good job, Jared! On calling out horrible chat assumptions! There is A LOT discussed around tables during the scrum dev process. Thank you
Since QD determined nav mode capabilities does that mean snubs and ships without QD are going to be stuck in scm speeds? If so that will make merlins completely useless
I came looking for this exact question, they have designed and sold several racing snub ships that lack a QD.
I think this was a core part of the question they were asked but they didn't address it
My gut says it will make them useless and then they will say the fix is coming later. Basically the same thing they need to do for racing and everything else.
@@markreiffel807 "I think this was a core part of the question they were asked but they didn't address it"
Yeah. A whole lot of that, this episode. A lot of skirting around the actual questions.
@@IrisCorven I think we would all prefer the answer they gave for the QI, it's an issue, it's being discussed but we don't have a solution this patch as X is the priority.
They don't have to do these shows, they are being more open than most others but I think it's an easy thing to coach their staff on before the show.
Limiting players options is not fun and organic gameplay. Prohibitions suck for most players.
Not limiting is also not desirable because the kicks a meta which makes only those ships playable without handicapping yourself
Roles of ships is practically useless then might as well take the strongest ship
This is the most pointless, low-IQ statement possible with regard to master modes or really just any game design in general. You honestly should be embarrassed for being dumb enough to say it out loud. A game is nothing more than an organized activity with an agreed upon set of rules. Your tiny and perfectly smooth brain can think of a set of rules as a set of limitations. If there are no limits / rules, then there is no game. Wow.
Since it's important to respond to this video, here's my feedback.
As a preamble, I'm not a PvP player and I have no ambition to become one in Star Citizen. I love the game for its global aspect of professions and especially for the Quantum aspect that players will be few compared to AI and that you'll have to make a place for yourself in this immense world. And working a lot, I'm a fairly active gamer but I don't have the time to try hard or play a game for thousands of hours, and sometimes the casual aspect is nice too.
As for MM, I looked at quite a few positive and negative reviews before thinking about publishing this feedback. First and foremost, given the diversity of players you have, it will be impossible to satisfy everyone! You have to make decisions and stick to them. On the other hand, you've created a wonderful tool in the shape of the Commander arena, so take advantage of it to test player requests just for the sake of trying, provided you have a wide enough range of player archetypes without targeting a Pvp Pve community or any other.
I think Star Citizen aims to be a fairly faithful simulation of what we imagine the future to be like in space, by arcadizing the time constraints and little fun of this aspect.
As a result, if I'm not mistaken, for me it's important that battles should be at least a little long, and that the outcome in most cases should be to block my ship without destroying it, and above all without causing the death of my character!
So any aspect that improves this is good, and I think MM contributes to this. My first impressions of it are excellent. Battles are much more interesting, much more cinematic, and much more fun for a player like me who doesn't try hard. It's much more in line with MY expectations. The mechanics are easy to understand, the battles are closer together and the differences between ship classes are more balanced.
On the other hand, the difference between ships in the same category is no less glaring, and I understand the criticism levelled at MM in this respect.
Besides, unless I've misunderstood, I don't really understand why the issue of ship armor hasn't been around for so many years. It seems to me that it's a ship characteristic that would allow us to better take into account the differences between ships and that's missing to be able to give complete feedback on such an important aspect of the game?
Apart from that, for me, MM works well and brings a real benefit to the game! But even if I'm not a PvP player, I also understand the criticism levelled at it and the fears it engenders for the game's long-term future.
In terms of the criticisms, I can make:
- the speed is too low, because even though I love it from a casual point of view, in the long term it limits the player's skill too much. They need to be adapted and differentiated for each ship to make them more unique in their category.
- Aim assist makes no sense for this type of game in the long term. And I think that's the most negative thing about MM. We need the mode for casual or new players, but we need to go back to the old Fix/Gimbal version in order to make it easier to use.
I think you've created everything to make the player's skill aspect more important and rewarding. And before giving my ideas away for testing, I thought about the fact that I could never be a try harder gamer, nor be perfect in combat skill. But I don't think that's a problem, as in real life, I have qualities, strengths, faults and weaknesses. It's no big deal if a hardcore PvP player comes across me in the game and neutralizes me. I've got the weapons to try and escape, and if I miss, it's no big deal, because that's what Star Citizen is all about. Everything is designed to play the way I want and need. So I don't think there's any point in trying to reduce players' skill or over-casualize. You need a healthy base for new players to get to grips with the game, and that's what MM is all about, and making sure that the more hardcore players can get their skills up to scratch.
But the good news is that you've created everything to ensure that this is the case. There's the capacitors and soon the engineering aspect. Thanks to this, you can improve all aspects of combat (and other professions) as you learn the game, without penalizing anyone.
- The speed aspect too low? capacitor could 100% thruster could add + 100 m/s on top of the basic 200 of SCM mode. The engineer aspect could also add 100m/s by overclocking our components to the detriment of component durability? Plus, it would be in line with the player's RP to try and boost his ship as much as possible, depending on the situation. He could stay with "safe" components in most cases, but in certain situations overclock them. A potential speed between 300 and 400 might be worth testing.
- I don't like the aim assist aspect, and it should be kept for new players, then switched to fixed mode but with more damage.
Given that the projectile cone is, I think, a great addition, we need to nerf the rotation speed of the gimbal mode so that the player's fix and skill prevail to get a better DPS.
And yes, some players will be better than me in combat, thanks to their skill and knowledge, but that doesn't really matter, I might be better at mining, salvaging, exploring, repairing, medical, ....
This is not a commentary, but a feedback for CIG, I'm not trying to convince but just to give the most honest and thoughtful feedback, having put together my expectations of the game and the criticisms I've seen on MM.
Thank you for this magnificent game and for allowing us to participate indirectly in its development! It's unique and magnificent!
Wait, so you get punished for NAV modeing OUT of a situation (shields, practically speaking, disappear. You take hull hits.) But you get buffed for NAV modeing INTO a situation? (your shield buffer puts shields back up *quickly*)
So lets say me and the m8s jump into a fight, and we are ready and raring, allowing us to use jumping in to be an alpha-strike move, but if i'm damaged and want to tactically withdraw, or not even wanting to PVP in the first place, I have to drop my pants before having a chance to escape.
Can we just not mess with shields at all? NAV mode doesnt even sound like a trade off - it sounds like a tool/mode. Like switching gears in a car.
I dont think the whole change is doom and gloom, but as a non PVPer in a permadeath MMO, I've been feeling punished, specifically about the shield mechanics with this MM (mastermode) change.
Yes you are being punished for playing casually, yes you are being used as a feed for pvp pirate players, they will be the eternally paying customers while casuals already gave them their money a decade ago.. Star Citizen is not being made for me and you, thanks for participating.. 😒
What i remember they have said that the shields stops recharging going out of in to nav mode but they are still up. So think you need to shoot through shields first. They just dont recharge.
They did say shields stay up, slowly recharging, but we all no you can drop shields or use ballistics pretty quick if you have the right setup. They really should implement the armor system they tried to prop up a while back but seems to be just a thought. @ablazedguy said it right. It feels like they are picking up the pvp players that wouldn't play with all the bugs are playing more and they need to cater hard before losing the grasp on those players. Check out their pirating vs greifing official release from CIG. They reward pirates and punishment solos now to keep the new "fun" up. But hey, you can avoid people just the same, just exclude yourself for non solo friendly areas.
Your pant are down but your the Flash..your still easily out distancing your attacker's guns. He would also have to sw modes thereby having to stop firing in order to pursue.
If shields stayed up in NAV, then people would keep switching back and forth between NAV and SCM during battles, which would defeat the purpose of MM.
Running away in NAV should be easy, because you'll be able to fly several times faster than anyone in SCM.
What happens when you arrive in nav mode and ships are waiting on you? Especially with big ships with shields that charge very slowly.
coming out of nav mode shields don't have to "Charge", they re-engage from the buffer. Enter nav mode with full shields, leave nav mode with full shields and as yogi stated, nothing can interrupt the shield buildup coming out of nav mode.
I could be mistaken, but I think they kinda addressed this when they said that shields are still "charging" in the background in NAV mode (ie charging a capacitor or something) and this charge is quickly transferred when entering SCM .. Could be mistaken though.
Yeah they answered this. Sounds promising.
Questions start at 7:24
When it comes to enabling Bounty Hunting as a profession with Master Modes, they should account for opportunistic pirate-style encounters and deliberate bounty hunting encounters.
Attacks of opportunity would function as present with it being relatively easy to evade attackers by swapping to NAV mode.
Deliberate planning for a bounty hunting attack could incorporate information running gameplay to allow others to scan for ships with bounties, provide an exact EM signature of their devices/ship, and provide that information to a bounty hunter who has a distortion weapon now calibrated to that ship's particular signature allowing them to track and disable the ship more easily.
In this way people who don't want to engage with PVP are able to avoid it and those who are interested are still competitive.
Then how is piracy suppose to happen ?
For Quantum Interdiction and Nav Mode: Most solutions are going to make one side, or the other (pirate vs. carebear, so to speak) very, very angry. And possibly rightfully so, on both sides.
Pirates need the ability to stop their prey from escaping.
Carebears need at least some realistic option to escape in this scenario.
SO - Quantum Interdiction should not *prevent* QD escape. It should drastically increase spooling time, and should fade in strength due to both distance, and time passed since hit by it. It should not disable boosting nor disable nav mode as an option. Want to slow a ship down so far as actual speed-from-main-thruster, use a tractor beam or distortions to disable engines.
This creates a race on both sides. The pirates need to disable or destroy the ship in the limited window provided by the QID. The target needs to move as far away from the point where they were interdicted, and the pirates, as quickly as possible, while not being shot to pieces.
The target has a choice; go nav mode and hope speed will save them? Or stay in SCM and hope shields hold until QID fades?
Tweak numbers on how quickly QID fades until things feel more or less "even" or right to both players in that situation.
Similarly, distortions disabling ships needs to be a thing, but you need options to counter them. And that should probably be in the engineering gameplay, or via say some shield emitters being better vs. distortions but worse vs. everything else (ie. reason to use the sub-par generators.)
QID should also have some relation to target ship size / QD strength or whatever, such that ships are interdicted for appropriate amounts of time compared to how long it would take to shoot them up. A large ship should take longer to escape than a smaller one with less shields / hull, basically.
Also, you need a way to prevent just chaining the QID; make it so QID causes the target's QD to enter a hardened state and be immune to QID hitting them again for at least some reasonable time after the first fades - but that shouldn't be too long, so there is at least the option of keeping them interdicted. That should just be difficult if you haven't disabled them by that point.
For 1v1 fix: Make transition to nav mode less binary. You switch to nav, your shields don't immediately turn off, weapons do but don't immediately lose all energy in mag for energy weapons - instead shields start slowly fading and not recharging. Switching back to SCM, it takes a brief moment for shields to start recharging and for weapons to come back online and start charging if applicable. This means fighters can flutter nav mode on and off for those positional advantages, but need to be careful since this will *quickly* drain shields and also take a few seconds after to fill them back up and be able to shoot. But larger ships get less benefit from this fluttering, due to spool times / acceleration, etc.
The countermeasures need to be active in nav mode. Makes no sense. Yogi says they want to rely more on your maneuvering in nav mode to avoid missiles, yet he clearly stated that our maneuvering is hamstrung in nav mode. Wtf… everything about nav modes is unnecessary contrivance after unnecessary contrivance.
Seriously. You're not going to be able to outrun/outmaneuver missiles, no shields means significant damage on anything higher than a size 2 missile on most industrial ships that are solo centric, and not having chaff/countermeasures is just the cherry on top. This is going to utterly kill enthusiasm to play for solo players.
Whether CM can be used in nav mode or not should be separate from whether weapons are powered on or not, right now if weapons are powered down then countermeasures are not available either this is IMO wrong.
Ballistic weapons being powered down at all is bordering on brain dead, so them missing that glaring issue seems apropos
@@alexparris7769It's not that ballistics are powered down, it's that the systems that POWER the ballistics are powered down. You still need electronics to control the firing.
@@alexparris7769in NAV mode or when weapons are powered down ? I was talking about the case of CM being tied to weapon power *currently* being a problem. And as others have said, you still need power for targeting, fire control etc and in the end one can have whatever handwavy reasons to disable things in search for game balance.
My current MM experience as a relatively new player:
MM Pros:
+ Increased Ballistic Ammo Count
+ Cone Fire / Saturation Fire
+ Longer Weapon Firing Ranges
+ Closer Squadron Battles
MM Cons:
- Ships feel sluggish
- Skill Ceiling decreased significantly
- High ammo count on lasers, large shield & boost pools further lower the skill ceiling and further reduce the importance of capacitors
- The side with more ships,. or bigger ships have a significant advantage, favoring ships over individual skill
- Being ganked is now more difficult to escape
- Automatic lock on feature, while convenient, take away from manual input which is a small thing but takes a bit away from having that fighter jet feeling
I have allot of concerns regarding the longevity of the competitive scene, as the current fight model, with the skill ceiling currently being high is attractive to those wishing to continuously improve their skills.
To combat the skill floor, I would argue adding combat tutorials, as we currently have to rely on 3rd external tutorials.
With that said, I am hopeful that MM will address all these issues, there is allot of interesting aspects to it, but watching this video, I did notice that MM is effecting everything, and messing with already good and established systems, such as racing, snaring, combat, everything really, and not necessarily for the better.
As I have said many, many times (and Yogi also said) the feeling is speed is all relative thus just changing the race-tracks will bring the feeling back 700km/h is not slow. And combat is not actually *good*, there's way too much desync.
@@EeroafHeurlin What has Desync to do with if it's good??. That will be fixed over time so how is the combat when between the desync!.
@@marcusvalerius7663 desync cannot be solved when we have both high speeds and high accelerations/rotations even if server tickrates were at 60Hz. OTOH We could right now with 4Hz tickrates have ships going at several km/s in straight line as long as they cannot change vectors enough to cause predictions based on current vector going forward about 500-750ms (2-3ticks) to be wrong more than half a ship in whatever direction.
And desync absolutely ruins ship combat, you can't know where or especially in what orientation the other ships are.
edit: with 60hz tickrate the ping of the participants becomes the dominating factor with 50ms pings the predictions still need to work near perfectly 100ms into the future and very well for 200-300ms. So either capability to change vectors is limited or everything is fully server authorative and you won't change effects of your stick inputs locally before server has acknowledged them (which would suck)
@@EeroafHeurlin Ah Now i understand how that can ruin your ship combat.. :D
I'm excited! Without any kind of quantum dampening combat is completely optional for traders and industrial players. Not sure the pirates will feel the same though... 😉
EM missles are WAY overpowered right now. chaff and flares should have a decent amount of success. you want us to be evasive but if there are multiple people spamming 4 em missles at you at a time you can't even use your guns to fight them because your too busy running away and trying not to die.
it's space missiles are the way to go once you are out run
@@il_vendicatore there is zero skill in that which makes for horrible gameplay other than torp ships
@@cjbagginsit just need longer ranges and then evadin and eletronic warfare and seed
The most important portion of this is when they talk about the stale 1v1 issue where a 'dogfight' in 6dof turns into what I call "Turrets in Space" combat. I saw this was going to be a problem during the first iterations of AC because when you have true 6dof, it's nearly impossible to avoid this without some artificial mandates. I saw the same thing happen often during fighter combat in Planetside 2. IMO, the best advice I have for coming up with iterative solutions to this problem would be to look at, and play, other games that have aircraft and spacecraft combat. With combat in its current state, the only thing keeping Turrets in Space from happening is the extreme velocities and acceleration discrepancies currently present. But, of course, this introduces other problems like we're currently seeing.
Other games, like Elite Dangerous, solved this problem pretty effectively (at least in PVE from what I saw). The way they did it was to limit the rotational rates and thrust of ships in different directions and at different speeds, whether 100% physically accurate to space travel, or not. If I recall correctly, things like when you're sitting still the ships don't rotate as fast as they do at their version of SCM. Also, every ship's yaw speed is MUCH slower at all speeds, forcing ships to maneuver more similarly to how aircraft do in atmosphere. I.e. ships bank then pitch, rather than just having the freedom to point the nose in any direction and rotate extremely fast at will. The yaw speed change having a tangible positive effect on the feel of dogfights is why I've always disagreed with the choice to change the default behavior of how HOTAS controls work in Star Citizen away from every other stick-based flight control in the world, and why I don't personally use the default scheme in SC. There's a good reason left stick is roll, not yaw, for example in real life aircraft. And pushing a rudder pedal or twisting a stick to roll makes no sense, and contributes to inevitably turning a dogfight into Turrets in Space when full 6dof is present. Limiting combat velocity with MM just heavily increases that tendency.
Another change Elite Dangerous made was, like Star Citizen, to make 'boost' or afterburners increase rotational aircraft speed as well as acceleration, but said acceleration should NEVER be slowly brought on as stated in this video. The unpredictability of a sudden burst of acceleration is about the ONLY thing adding to maneuver variations in combat at all. Remember, slowly building acceleration isn't the same as slowly building speed. You want to limit how many Gs, and therefore, also how much thrust, a given maneuvering thruster can produce. Not total speed. I personally believe that letting a ship continue at the top speed attained with afterburners until changing direction would be an improvement for mastermodes, possibly lessening how locked-in to Turrets in Space the ships feel in a dogfight, but that's just me.
Essentially, changes need to be made to effectively ENCOURAGE forward flight tendency WHILE TURNING over pure rotational and strafing movement. For a good dogfight feel, ships need to be strongly encouraged to CHASE each other, and try to maneuver in ways to achieve circle-turning fights (single and 2-turn), rather than pure strafing + DPS + HP competitions, making the winner be the person who gets their pursuer to overshoot. You have to limit lateral and yaw movement in-order to even have a situation like "a bogie on your tail..." even be possible. Also, with a limited yaw speed, roll speed can contribute to who outmaneuvers who in a dogfight. My advice would be to play other games like Elite Dangerous and flight sims or consult DCS dogfight experts, to see how this inevitable reality of 6dof combat has been solved in the past. Rather than just testing in-house and the current player-base then incorporating feedback. If you want to make dogfights actually feel varying and nuanced like dogfights do, you might think about playing games that actually have dogfights present.
Maybe it's my imagination Jared but you sound really tired in this one. Let me just tell you that I love this show, I love you hosting, and you are doing a great job.
A great IRL example for relative speed is pro-kart racing and F1. Both feel insanely fast and require incredible skill, but operate on drastically different literal speeds.
Another angle is how it feels to ride a motorcycle with a high ride/seat height vs a lowered motorcycle. Doing 30 mph on a slammed Honda Shadow is a wild experience, and nothing on an adventure bike
All of tue vehicles including ground feel sooo sluggish even though they’re moving faster than most irl planes or ground vehicles. It’s weird. They really need to fix that. And I hope they increase speed of SCM too
"Nothing, and I mean nothing is ever fixed..."
Indeed
30:11 I have not been lied to more than this comment. MM lower speeds effects HF more as they are a sizeable percentage of the 200m/s velocity. All we do is fly HF (Scorpius) and we eliminate LF all the time on account for the higher speeds. WE specifically addressed this issue and it seems like yall are avoiding it completely and/or changing the narrative to justify your dev time.
So I was right. All industrial/cargo ships are just loot piñatas while flying in atmo.
Look, I apreciate all the work you guys have put in on this. And, I'm sure it works flawlessly for SQ42. I just think it is missing the mark for the PU. Its trying to solve a problem of light fighters, that will likely get solved when Maelstrom and Ship armor are added.
Exactly!!
So hire fighter escorts.. as the game has always intended 😅
@@moondogg_monte that is not game balance. The small and medium freighters won't be able to afford it either.
@@Roboticus_Prime_RC.........what.. im sorry but how is that not balance? If you are a cargo ship.. a cargo ship by nature is a flying piniata as you put it... what you think you should be invulnerable to attack and should be able to fight back..as a cargo ship? Im struggling to understand what on earth you're getting at.
If you're flying big loads of cargo, the type of cargo that could attract piracy.. THAT IS GAMEPLAY... you are not the hero in the PU, its not a single player experience.. getting an escort to help with cargo is an extremely fun gameplay experience to need to include
I dont understand why everyone is being so dramatic about master modes.. honestly.. it really does look like its going to be a much better experience as a whole
I notice the majority of people that winge about it are those who are solo players
“Im through with standing in line at the new deal terminal”
I thought Anakin was supposed to be the best pilot. He still went out killing in his fighter as Vader.
Hearing about the shield buffer while transitioning between SCM -> NAV was really relieving to hear. Glad to hear that combat based systems aren't just toggled completely off when you've got to zoom away. Having weapon capacitors and shield pool recharge at a slower rate even is NAV mode has completely shattered any doubts I had about MM
20:20 CONFIRMED. It ain't over.
"The game is not finished."
Bring in the tidal wave of 3.23 goodness and beyond. I’m ready! o7
I feel bad for all the people who spent time to practice the game and get good at combat to then have the devs just put training wheels on your ships and give out participation trophies to “balance” the flight model
Tru
While making it much less believable and immersive
Anyone who expected the flight model to not change when it has been said for years that it *will* and then starts crying that "they changed the model and now my old skills are no longer relevant" is being dishonest at best.
The skill ceiling will be brought back up by tuning but the power fantasy of lone light-fighter taking on a anti-fighter corvette (and some escorts) needs to be gone. Armor should always have been a flat reduction not percentage and back when large shields had constant regen so there was at least a dps gate (armor is going to be an effective alpha-gate so even swarm of LF with light weapons is not going to get through) to keep LF from simply kiting and killing the corvette with a million mosquito bites.
World war 2 in space.. lol.. @@ablazedguy
It literally has to change. If Star Citizen wants to make enough money to be sustainable, so that you can play it for many years, it has to attract casual players. That's how MMOs are, and even moreso for one as big budget as Star Citizen. They won't be selling ships when the game releases, that has been exclusively for funding development. SC is not DCS Flight Sim.
I can't believe the lack of planning around QD and QI. Its currently a massive part of the PU for pirating, bounty hunting and PVP alike. NAV mode seems like a get out of jail free card
I want to see Star Citizen to become the biggest video game ever. One that which transcends the computer screen into the movie and tv screen. Does CIG have any plans to get tv shows and movies created in the SC verse?
You should make it realistic to where u keep on gaining speed until you slow yourself down
Oh boy , this comment section is gonna be great !
This doesnt make sence. SO i wont be able to fly at 1000m/s in an eclipse and fire a torpedo... i have to drop out of SCm speeds down to 250 and fire it... then spool and fly to 1000m away again? thats not very stealthy..
I love Jared just being so done with the complaining lmfaoooo
Imagine being a dev seeing the bullshit that is on spectrum all the time
@@vampericspectrum is just such a sad place of bad takes from people who have no idea what game development entails it's painful for me to read, I can't imagine being a dev and trying to read it without having a stroke.
@@crispy9175 In my experience a official forum of any game is shitfest hellhole.
@@vamperic spectrum is 99% sweaty BOIS. you cant have a discussion or bring up anything meaningful before its flooded with try hard's and down voted to oblivion.
@@vamperic its everywhere sadly people dont like change... im optimistic
I still highly dislike not having shields up while in Nav Mode... that literally makes going into Nav-mode mid-fight to even 'try' to escape = death.
I feel like quantum interdiction should have never been added to small ships.
I need to be able to test MM in a PU setting. just flying around in a box on AC is not cutting it at all. also, it would be amazing if more ships were added to the MM test pool.
ALL ships will have MM in 3.23.
@@dukedirtywork620 Go to bed, grandpa.
Ref bounty hunting while target is in ship, ATM you either completely surprise the target and have absoluytely overwhelming firepower or you bring a QED. Without QED an aware target is always able to escape. So nothing new here.
Nice episode. Thanks to the team!
I've had the thought since master modes was detailed enough for me to understand that if the default SCM is going to be lower than when in Nav mode the non-QT speed should be somewhat higher that the current max reachable in SCM. Instead of ships reaching the 1,000 to 1,400m/s range (atmosphere depending) they would reach 1,500 to 2,000 range in the new Nav mode before ever entering QT.
Also that shields should stay up to some degree during Nav, something like 25% or so of max?
As a competitive DCS PvP enthusiast I am vey much looking forward to the implementation of Master Modes in Star Citizen. The real world fighter aircraft in development are taking the step towards a single Combat Mode, getting rid of the separate Air-to-Ground/Air-to-Air modes. Instead sensors and displays adapt to which weapon type is selected, enabling the simultaneous employment of A/A and A/G sensors and weapons systems.
In the 1990's we saw the implementation of Targeting Pods on fighter aircraft. These specialized Electro-Optical Sensors are now integrated into the airframes of fighters in development today. So it stands within reason that most combat capable ships in Star Citizen would have targeting systems of similar capability in order to manually search for and designate targets. It would enable precision bombing, and possibly even manual detection of ships that are flying in a dedicated stealth configuration.
I think the Targeting Pod feature is necessary for SC, in part because of the reconnaissance value of being able to zoom in on a specific location of interest but primarily because of the precision targeting it would enable. The whole spectrum of data filters could be applied to this Targeting Pod, I know from previous CitCon presentations that your game engine is capable of generating a large number of different filters such as EM, UV, IR etc.
Data Networking & Sensor Fusion are features we would love to see implemented in SC, it is reasonable that we should see that further down the road in the development of combat related features.
So master modes are pure chaos, and are going to take a lot of depth out of the game?
For racing and PVP?
Where on earth did you get that from lol, don't be so dramatic
JaredIsMyHero69420 😂
Sounds like archetypes are for vehicle specific responses in different environments that need to be individualized down the road are from not environmental flight models but ship specific. They seem to create them to fly how they want not fly through the verse how they want. But they would mean they'd have to actually fix ships and work on physics for adding control surfaces and actual atmospheric flight instead of just hampering performance "as you'd expect".
All i want to know is where does the hot dogs come from
38:50 if you guys want us to be open with feedback it needs to be made easier to do. I tried mastermodes and had feedback, but to jump through hoops just to figure out you need a forum post somewhere but the link wasn't working properly. Most of everything information wise we have to get from forums or CZcams videos from contnet creators. The new form of communication is cool but like the idris event this "public" inclusion is more so special groups, evocatti first, then top forum orgs, and then itll trickle down to us public players.
around 42:00 the racers and fighter cant anymore quickly evade.... so he just said that people say, you killed the high flight skill advantage over casuals.. thats basically killing the competitive field, cos you cant anymore do something you had to put in effort to master, so casuals can compete with you that is the worst solution ever.. its like balancing a game when 1 team is Real Madrid (soccer) and 5 teams are U16 teams and you try to prohibit any skill based moves, so the pro's cant do things that the U16 players cant.
they have put in the many hours to master that technic, but cos they are so good, that "normal" people cant just do, would have advantage... well they should have advantage.
Agreed. It’s mind boggling that this was the route they went. My $10k of pledges never felt like a waste but as MM gets closer it feels more and more so. Thought i was funding a game i would want to play…
well i do suck at dogfighting, but i know people who are really good, and i would feel bad if i with my low level could have any chance against them.
@@alexparris7769
You still have to put in many hours to master techniques. So it's a moot point.
My idea about mastermodes is it shouldn't be a switch based system but a gradual system that forces you to make choices between having power for weapons and shields or shifting that power towards the engines. So having the lower speeds like the devs want but still able to go faster if we need to but obviously that would mean we'd have to sacrifice other aspects of our flight characteristics. For example you speed up to like 500 m/s but with that your weapons and shield drop in efficiency start draining or start regenerating slower. At faster speeds your turn rate could diminish somewhat. This would make it a tactical choice rather an arbitrary button push. I get they want to gamefy SC more but I think limiting speeds is not the answer, limiting available ship resources is. Make shifting power matter more during flight.
Someone refill A1's salt jar. He needs more to dump out after this.
The millennium falcon was highly modified. Attacked several times by light fighters and interceptors and even bombers, had malfunctioning systems and still came out on top. That thing's not a cargo ship, that thing's a frigate. Lando wouldn't have agreed to fly it if he didn't think it was mission capable lol. I don't know if I can give him best pilot, but I know he can certainly be argued in favor of.
the Falcon is slightly shorter in overall length than the cutty black, and it's a light freighter. definitely not a frigate.
I'm excited about the idea of bounty hunters using distortion weapons anyway to knock out quantum drives and main drives because there should be a HUGE financial incentive to bring back the target alive (like at least a 4:1 if not a 10:1 bounty).
This Jared guy seems pretty cool.
Reclaimer HP pool increase finally?
I hope CiG are not entrenched too far that if this new mode doesn't work that they can get rid of it and try something different.
Although it doesn't look good in my opinion, I'm willing to give it a try.
RIP
Oh boy are you sure you guys want to do this LOL
I love the Honesty and Transparency of Jared in this one and his roasting of stupid comments. The BEST!
Excuse me sir... The Aurora LN is a fighter :)
Master Modes is a lazy solution to a problem that we already had a mechanic to solve. The power triangle. Create minimum power requirement for the 3 components (thrusters, weapons, shields), say 10% each for them to function at a basic level, give the pilots/engineers the remainder 70% to mess with. This would give tuners, better components, etc a lane to increase that 70% of power headroom.
This is universally the most disappointing change to the flight model I and my fleet have seen so far. Very disappointing.
Do any of these devs talk to each other? Is there actually any wider plan they are following?
Dragging legacy...you mean broken bits?!
Game design?
Never seen any
I'm calling light fighters "small wiggle ships" from now on.
MM Feels Like Space Turret
No. That was the previous model before what we have now. It’s less turrety but it has issues
And this is how you remind me
I love the Nickleback comments, we are on the same level 😀
Man I really hope that u guys figure a LOT of thoses questions uptill 3.23, else, I think the PU will suck hard. Dont take me wrong, I like Mastermodes, but not having answer to a lot of the questions this close to launch, yeah, this is not going to end well. But I will wear my Hopium mask.
I give SC permission to suck in live for a while, it's still alpha. I don't want it, but it's happened before.
@@rhadiem I agree, but I still hope they fix those things
Hi Star Citizen i buyd a Prospector frome store and after some time I lost my bags so I cant anymore to mining.Claiming rep dosen't fix the issiue.
MM was concerning at first, now it's scaring me.
Edit: Scaring me, but not enough to leave.
I'm really glad seeing how eager are the guest devs to answer the questions, both devs in pairs starts speaking at once ^_^
Thanks for all your work, folks! Keep it up💪
I'm fairly sure there is some precedent to why someone might be not be "chill" about the idea that you guys just ignore the most upvoted questions, and so don't really OWE you guys the benefit of the doubt.
o7 Citizens.
Still wishing for crew bed log 😢
can i has the f8c for sale again plz?
I guess my main question is what is the point of the engineering triangle, let alone dedicated engineers, if master modes lock us into narrow operating boundaries? This feels like a massive dumbing down of what we already have & love?
Also, missiles should be able to lock at current fighter jet ranges at the very least, we should just have countermeasures effective enough that they force you into dogfights, due to a low chance to hit, over long distances.
it will never not be weird that theres a speed limit in space, acceleration speed yes, in atmos yes, but a hard speed cap with zero drag, is just wrong.
if you decide to keep accelerating your fully loaded c2 to 8000+ m/s, you should be punished by extreme break time and zero maneuverability.
i was kind of hoping for this in mm, but i guess "master" mode is just, arcade mode?
The network team explained that it's not possible to accurately track entities at those speeds, which is why they have caps on how fast you can go. It creates even more server desync. But if they did implement it and it caused even more desync, the comments would be inverted, complaining about how janky everything is at those speeds and that it's just not fun.
@@Billy-bc8pk bs, they are already adding these speeds to nav mode, they call them mini qt's and desyncs will be history with server meshing. keep up....
@@DecanFrostThat's not a mini-QT, it's called quantum boost mode, and it works just like quantum boosting but in limited capacity. You aren't flying around at 8,000 m/s, you're moving along splines and only outside of atmosphere. Right now quantum travel speeds are locked to per-frame travel to reduce the very issues I talked about in the previous comment.
51:30 The truth of the moment - The F8C will only be available when you've played through SQ42. - Oh no our salesnumbers in August 2023 are bed - let's sell the F8C...
Great job Jared et al. I really appreciate the clarifications, and Jared's injections of humor. :)
Looking forward to a bounty hunter lifestyle 2.0, 3.0 and higher
My Biggest Fear is that an Constellation will be Overpowered.
Because a Freelancer has so much less Shield and Hull, and less Firepower, and is not really Fast enough to Outmaneuver a Constellation a bit. So i think a Constellation will just Spray and Kill every Medium Sized Ship, and even Heavy Fighters.
They interestingly covered a lot of bases here and let us know that they are nor putting things together and doing everything in a vacuum. They are looking at everything. Which is really good to hear. Not one voice will drown out everything from making things as fair and making things work as best as they can with the lest amount of problems and with the least problems as possible. And it is good to know it will never be perfect because that would be a boring game.
where do we get the drake tape?
900 years into the future
and a ship cannot have Shields up just to go slightly faster on a straight line?
Go look at Star Trek..if you want to go fast you have to lower shields and Weapons..same thing in X-wing all power to engines means shields and weapons get powered down or as low as possible. You have 100% divided by 3x ( and that them simplifying it as they could also add all the other systems.) You basically want everything at 300% God mode Hacks and that no fun at all.
@@AlbertoMartinez765 Tell me where it says that CIG is copying Star Wars or Star Trek logic for their game as well
@@AlbertoMartinez765 SC isn't Star Trek or StarWars or any other space IP. Using them as examples doesn't validate any points you are trying to make. Nobody is asking for god mode. Not having shields up in nav mode or being able to drop counter measures is asking for easy kill mode.
@@madphantompixels6478 i believe CR has said before that he envisions ship fighting to be star wars style. definitely dont quote me, but its been said before. just google a bit.
Power management will exist as long as power generation exists.
Force Ghost of Qui-You-Know Jinn 😂
Get 'em Jared!
Pfft, Wedge is the best pilot.
When will Nickleback be added to the game? Please don't push it back again, we can't wait any longer.
Due to inflation over 900 years they’re now called 50000uecback
Soon™
THIS is how you remind them?...
I heard Nickelback was writing the score for the second Squadron 42 game, should be integrated into the PU sometime in 2025.
Jared prefers Creed
DRAKE TAPE!!
How about. Let us keep the ability to fire chaff or noise... just for visual reasons. i want to not feel limited, such as how limited it feels to not fall, and perfectly enter your ship in eve2.0 every time. I was to go 2000m/s and pop chaff just over a buddy for visual effects.. whats wrong with that? What if we make chaff not as effective at those high speeds.
I like MM for the way its more engaging to fight in. Chasing a reticle at break neck speeds was not enjoyable. Combat feels like a fast paced boxing match, a commentator couldn't describe to a live audience.
I think with maelstrom and armor coming up, and time to disable all being a factor to consider, any outcome should be possible with any of the varied components and tuning we should have to work with.
With those systems, the right round of ammo in the right place can end a fight in seconds, and speed had nothin to do with it.
All of us seem to be focused on what we have now and playing, with time to destroy.
I like what possibilities MM can offer for future balance and custom tuning.
The love it or hate it doesn't do much for imagination.
But this closed mindset from so many, including the devs of "NO" "not gonna happen" shuts down any potential possibility, and is concerning.
Why not an industrial shield generator having the capability to have some amount of shields available in NAV mode.
Or a power plant that can allow for some CM's to work also.
Updated and tuned engines to gain speed at the cost of fuel.
Thruster for improved trichording.
QD's that can counter QI at different ranges.
I can come up with dozens of combos and ideas for component balance, that could make two identical ships feel or play differently. And if fine tuning components with sub gear is available, engineers can have field day creating the desired outcomes for pilots and owners.
We now have flight and systems divided into categories to balance and play with.
But to hear "not gonna happen" really feels like I'm wasting my time thinking about it.
Master Modes is a bait and switch. Be impatient with the complaining all you want you big baby, doesn't change the fact that you fleeced your most dedicated backers.