Star Citizen

For all your seizure inducing goodness!

Moderator: JediGuy

Message
Author
User avatar
Grand Templar
Posts: 1598
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 11:27 pm
Location: The Lowcountry

Re: Star Citizen

#31 Post by Ryusen » Sun Mar 29, 2015 2:40 pm

It's time for a new ship! Relentless Predator: The Aegis Vanguard!

Image
The A3G Vanguard is the United Empire of Earth’s dedicated deep space fighter. Initially developed as a bomber-destroyer, the Vanguard is a hard-charging bulldog of a ship which features extensive forward-mounted weaponry designed to tear through the shields and armor of other spacecraft. Four high-caliber forward laser cannons and a massive central Gatling gun give the Vanguard an unprecedented amount of sheer striking power. So-named because their multiple-jump range allows them to form the forefront of any military expedition, Vanguard have seen extensive service against the Vanduul.
The Aegis Vanguard is a unique fighter in a number of ways. Chosen by the community as a "twin engine, deep space fighter", it's been in the works for several months. Unlike the Hornet series, it's extended fuel tanks allow it to pursue targets across not just one, but multiple systems while still remaining deadly at close range. It has no small amount of firepower, and strangely, it has two shield equipped to help it survive combat (which, given the way shield work in this game, should provide some extremely interesting gameplay choices). Not only that, but is it a multi-crew craft, similar to the Super Hornet, and has the option to carry a passenger in a manned turret. It has been designed with durability in mind, and should appeal to an extremely wide variety of players who want a sturdy, well-equipped ship that doesn't afraid of anything.

While the pledge price seems a little high, I see this as a choice many people will go after once the PU hits. It should be an excellent escort fighter, and a mercenary's best friend. I definitely look forward to flying one of these in Arena Commander!
Envy 661 wrote:But that doesn't fix the problem. It just tiptoes around it. It all comes down to the poor control players have over their ship in combat that is causing the problems. Even veteran HOTAS players can't properly play the game because of the flight model, which is a flaw in the fundamental design itself, and they're kind of just... ignoring it. Which is disappointing.
What this system is designed to offer is options. Mouse/Keyboard players have an inherent advantage in precision, and nothing can change that; HOTAS players have a undeniable advantage in maneuverability. These are set in stone, and aside from intentionally breaking one of those systems, there is no way to keep them on completely equal ground. This makes sense in lore, as it should be more difficult/expensive to mount a pivoting gimbal to a weapon, or an auto-aimed or manned turret to a weapon slot rather than just setting a weapon in place. It may require more CPU power, more cooling, add more weight or complexity - many issues that would certainly justify using a smaller weapon. In combat, gimbals will always have an advantage over non-gimballed weapons, and having an issue like that will cause players to start min/maxing. By making gimballed weapons have a higher cost, this adds a great amount of balance to the game! Instead of "Oh, this is the highest class, most powerful gimballed weapon I can find, let's slap it on my ship!", we have a situation where you need to consider whether of not it's worth using a gimballed weapon over a fixed weapon. Is the added precision worth the loss in firepower? Maybe I actually want a fixed weapon to get maximum power, or maybe I want to make my turret auto aim? These are good, good things, because they introduce choice to the players, and let us tailor a loadout to our specific tastes, rather that just going with the BFG that has a gimbal.

And I don't know where you're getting the idea that HOTAS users are at some severe disadvantage. I'm not expert user, but I never have a problem playing the game using a stick. I don't always come in first, but occasionally I'll have a very good match and blow away everyone. In the end, this game relies much heavier on pilot skill than it does in input device. Any player that puts in time with a stick will become deadly with it. I don't know how E:D does their combat, but in SC this is really no issue, especially now with this current fix. Besides, what about those of us who just want immersion? I can't wait to pair a full HOTAS with the Oculus Rift during one of my trading runs! How cool would that be!
Envy661 wrote:Elite Dangerous gets a major update each month adding more content.
Things are really starting to ramp up with SC, as well. We just got the 1.1 Arena Commander release, which has been an absolute blast, including the massively needed REC system (which has been a monumental success!). Within the next month, we fully expect to see Star Marine, the FPS module, be released. Soon after that, we'll see the Planetside/Social Module. And now we have the pieces together, and will begin seeing the game really shine! Most of the foundation has been laid at this point, and not it's time to start building upwards. Keep an eye pealed :wink:
Envy661 wrote:Also, wasn't the release date for Star Citizen supposed to be this year? I don't see that happening.
We hope to see the single-player campaign, Squadron 42, at the end of the year. It being worked on by Foundry 42, and I believe Roberts just left to spend the next 3 months or so working with them personally to make sure it's up to snuff. The game that I'm waiting for, the PU, is planned to release late next year, with the alpha coming either late 2015 or early 2016.

You already own the game, so just sit back and watch things happen. We're seeing some very interesting things happening over the next few months, where major content is getting released, and that should let us know exactly how well CIG has been implementing their ideas. I'm certainly optimistic, but this is the year that everything will start to come together. If it's not your cup of tea, then feel free to check back in a couple of months when more content gets released. It sounds like you're really enjoying E:D, so why stop now?
Man can live 30 days without food, 4 days without water, and 8 minutes without air. But man cannot live a single second without hope.

User avatar
Envy x Banned Forever
Posts: 1566
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 10:50 pm
Location: Back in the Yamaku Dorms, cuddlin' it up with Emi where I belong.
Contact:

Re: Star Citizen

#32 Post by Envy661 » Sun Mar 29, 2015 6:00 pm

Ryusen wrote:
Envy 661 wrote:But that doesn't fix the problem. It just tiptoes around it. It all comes down to the poor control players have over their ship in combat that is causing the problems. Even veteran HOTAS players can't properly play the game because of the flight model, which is a flaw in the fundamental design itself, and they're kind of just... ignoring it. Which is disappointing.
What this system is designed to offer is options. Mouse/Keyboard players have an inherent advantage in precision, and nothing can change that; HOTAS players have a undeniable advantage in maneuverability. These are set in stone, and aside from intentionally breaking one of those systems, there is no way to keep them on completely equal ground. This makes sense in lore, as it should be more difficult/expensive to mount a pivoting gimbal to a weapon, or an auto-aimed or manned turret to a weapon slot rather than just setting a weapon in place. It may require more CPU power, more cooling, add more weight or complexity - many issues that would certainly justify using a smaller weapon. In combat, gimbals will always have an advantage over non-gimballed weapons, and having an issue like that will cause players to start min/maxing. By making gimballed weapons have a higher cost, this adds a great amount of balance to the game! Instead of "Oh, this is the highest class, most powerful gimballed weapon I can find, let's slap it on my ship!", we have a situation where you need to consider whether of not it's worth using a gimballed weapon over a fixed weapon. Is the added precision worth the loss in firepower? Maybe I actually want a fixed weapon to get maximum power, or maybe I want to make my turret auto aim? These are good, good things, because they introduce choice to the players, and let us tailor a loadout to our specific tastes, rather that just going with the BFG that has a gimbal.

And I don't know where you're getting the idea that HOTAS users are at some severe disadvantage. I'm not expert user, but I never have a problem playing the game using a stick. I don't always come in first, but occasionally I'll have a very good match and blow away everyone. In the end, this game relies much heavier on pilot skill than it does in input device. Any player that puts in time with a stick will become deadly with it. I don't know how E:D does their combat, but in SC this is really no issue, especially now with this current fix. Besides, what about those of us who just want immersion? I can't wait to pair a full HOTAS with the Oculus Rift during one of my trading runs! How cool would that be!
Amazing Mr. X wrote:Oh, the HOTAS argument? Envy, you should already know there's nothing more precise than a good flight stick. It's the ultimate flight-control standard method of input, and that's why every modern fighter plane uses one in its design.

Modern aircraft don't have their hydraulics directly attached to a stick like in the old days of flying. It's all linked through a computer system now. They could control planes with their eyeballs now but all you ever still see are sticks. That's not some kind of handicap or hold over. It's not about superior maneuverability. It's about being superior, period

Take CH flight sticks, for instance. Those sticks are repackaged sensors straight from the production lines on military aircraft, industrial vehicles, and construction equipment. When you see a twenty-story crane dropping beams exactly into place on top of a new sky-scrapper, you're looking at the precision of a stick in action. That's the same quality of stick you can buy for a PC to play X-Plane 10, Flight Simulator X, Elite Dangerous, or Star Citizen,

So if those sticks are performing poorly compared to mouse and keyboard in a game, it's either user inexperience or a case of the devs developing in favor of the lowest common denominator.
It is currently the primary complaint people have with the game. Implementation of the HOTAS in Star Citizen.
ɔıƃol ʎʌuǝ ǝsnɐɔǝq
Image
deviantART | Steam Account | Forum Sigs | Otaku Streamers
Message me for access to the Twokinds Unoffical Official Skype Chat!

User avatar
Master
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 10:32 pm
Location: South Africa

Re: Star Citizen

#33 Post by HeckobA » Sun Mar 29, 2015 7:18 pm

Hey, maybe mouse and keyboard IS actually better, but you try implementing that effectively for use in a shaky cockpit with g-forces pulling you here and there...
ImageImage
-~☼ Look! It's my Steam Profile! ☼~-

User avatar
newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 11:17 am
Location: France

Re: Star Citizen

#34 Post by kourbou » Sun Mar 29, 2015 7:33 pm

I'm sorry to say this but I think the in-game ships are overpriced for what they are.
Image
I made a helium joke twice: HeHe.

User avatar
The Imagineer
Posts: 1497
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2013 10:26 pm
Location: An infinite sea of salt

Re: Star Citizen

#35 Post by Myperson54 » Sun Mar 29, 2015 7:47 pm

kourbou wrote:I'm sorry to say this but I think the in-game ships are overpriced for what they are.
Image
Just pointing out: Those two hornets are the highest-tier hornets there are, and the base ship is already extremely powerful for a fighter. The other two are multi-man ships meant for multiple players. They also come with alpha access and access to the full game when it's released. Also, you only have to buy a cheap ship to get into the game - If you don't want to buy a more expensive one, just get it with in-game credits later.

The only ships I'd say are overpriced are the new fighters, and even then, they're specialized ships, so I don't know if I can complain. Expensive? Yeah. Overpriced? I'm not convinced.
Image

I am become salt, destroyer of memes

Join the Unnoficial 2k Discord Channel!

User avatar
The Experienced Virgin
Posts: 5018
Joined: Mon Aug 14, 2006 9:09 pm
Location: circling the drain
Contact:

Re: Star Citizen

#36 Post by Insomniac » Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:25 am

Envy661 wrote:
Ryusen wrote:
Envy 661 wrote:But that doesn't fix the problem. It just tiptoes around it. It all comes down to the poor control players have over their ship in combat that is causing the problems. Even veteran HOTAS players can't properly play the game because of the flight model, which is a flaw in the fundamental design itself, and they're kind of just... ignoring it. Which is disappointing.
What this system is designed to offer is options. Mouse/Keyboard players have an inherent advantage in precision, and nothing can change that; HOTAS players have a undeniable advantage in maneuverability. These are set in stone, and aside from intentionally breaking one of those systems, there is no way to keep them on completely equal ground. This makes sense in lore, as it should be more difficult/expensive to mount a pivoting gimbal to a weapon, or an auto-aimed or manned turret to a weapon slot rather than just setting a weapon in place. It may require more CPU power, more cooling, add more weight or complexity - many issues that would certainly justify using a smaller weapon. In combat, gimbals will always have an advantage over non-gimballed weapons, and having an issue like that will cause players to start min/maxing. By making gimballed weapons have a higher cost, this adds a great amount of balance to the game! Instead of "Oh, this is the highest class, most powerful gimballed weapon I can find, let's slap it on my ship!", we have a situation where you need to consider whether of not it's worth using a gimballed weapon over a fixed weapon. Is the added precision worth the loss in firepower? Maybe I actually want a fixed weapon to get maximum power, or maybe I want to make my turret auto aim? These are good, good things, because they introduce choice to the players, and let us tailor a loadout to our specific tastes, rather that just going with the BFG that has a gimbal.

And I don't know where you're getting the idea that HOTAS users are at some severe disadvantage. I'm not expert user, but I never have a problem playing the game using a stick. I don't always come in first, but occasionally I'll have a very good match and blow away everyone. In the end, this game relies much heavier on pilot skill than it does in input device. Any player that puts in time with a stick will become deadly with it. I don't know how E:D does their combat, but in SC this is really no issue, especially now with this current fix. Besides, what about those of us who just want immersion? I can't wait to pair a full HOTAS with the Oculus Rift during one of my trading runs! How cool would that be!
Amazing Mr. X wrote:Oh, the HOTAS argument? Envy, you should already know there's nothing more precise than a good flight stick. It's the ultimate flight-control standard method of input, and that's why every modern fighter plane uses one in its design.

Modern aircraft don't have their hydraulics directly attached to a stick like in the old days of flying. It's all linked through a computer system now. They could control planes with their eyeballs now but all you ever still see are sticks. That's not some kind of handicap or hold over. It's not about superior maneuverability. It's about being superior, period

Take CH flight sticks, for instance. Those sticks are repackaged sensors straight from the production lines on military aircraft, industrial vehicles, and construction equipment. When you see a twenty-story crane dropping beams exactly into place on top of a new sky-scrapper, you're looking at the precision of a stick in action. That's the same quality of stick you can buy for a PC to play X-Plane 10, Flight Simulator X, Elite Dangerous, or Star Citizen,

So if those sticks are performing poorly compared to mouse and keyboard in a game, it's either user inexperience or a case of the devs developing in favor of the lowest common denominator.
It is currently the primary complaint people have with the game. Implementation of the HOTAS in Star Citizen.
On the subject of Gimballed vs Fixed weapons...For lasers I'd go fixed except for turrets, because they travel at the speed of light. No need to lead the target. For guns though, I'd go gimballed all the way. As for Mouse and Keyboard over sticks...It really depends on the quality of the stick setup. For my part, I've never played a PC flight sim (or any PC game past Halo 1 for that matter), but I've spent time in actual flight simulators and done pretty well. I'm nowhere near trained, I don't have nearly the minimum eyesight quality to be even a civilian pilot, but still. That said though, I like to think the ideal flight stick setup for a space sim would be something spaceworthy itself, to maximize on maneuverability. But, take this with a grain of salt, since as y'all well know I don't even come close to having a PC worthy of any of these great games.
From the Sergals and Sergal Lovers channel of F-List's chat system (Beyond NSFW, by the way): Honey, you ain't the only abnormal sergal in here. We got three pink northerns, a fairy, and a dork with a talking sword.

User avatar
Grand Templar
Posts: 1598
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 11:27 pm
Location: The Lowcountry

Re: Star Citizen

#37 Post by Ryusen » Mon Mar 30, 2015 12:39 am

kourbou wrote:I'm sorry to say this but I think the in-game ships are overpriced for what they are.
You're right! What we see here are the fundraiser prices; this is literally CIG attempting to raise money to fund the R&D and running costs of the game. Pledging for a ship now is akin to making a donation to your favorite radio station for one of their prize packs. Sure, you get something out of it, but no one really expects to get a full return on their investment. In the same way, the ships here are overpriced compared to their final in-game price because it benefits CIG to allow players to pledge early. I get a small jumpstart in the PU, and they get some money to pour into the game.

If you want to pledge, there are plenty of packages for cheaper. If you don't want to put any more money towards the game, then know that every single ship will be available in game. You will be able to do the same things, in the same ships, with the same freedoms as everyone who decided to buy a ship with real money. There is nothing you lose by waiting for the game to come out. You could buy the game on launch, start with a base Aurora, and end up piloting some Super-Juggernaut Class Planet Destroyer with time and effort.
Man can live 30 days without food, 4 days without water, and 8 minutes without air. But man cannot live a single second without hope.

User avatar
The Unpronounceable
Posts: 3607
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:00 pm
Location: Stuck in a never ending hell of Asashio Class Destroyers.

Re: Star Citizen

#38 Post by y7h65 » Mon Mar 30, 2015 6:53 am

kourbou wrote:I'm sorry to say this but I think the in-game ships are overpriced for what they are.
In all honesty, if you wanted to get into Star Citizen, you can buy either the Aurora Starter Set or the Mustang Starter Set. Those two will get you everything: a copy of both the Online and Single Player game, access to Arena Commander, a basic ship, and some starting in-game cash. Literally every other package and pledge is just to show additional support for the Devs.

I mean, I could have just bought an Aurora or maybe a 300i. However, I liked what they were going for so I got the Hornet Ghost package instead.

Also, like Ryusen said above, all the ships currently available for pledge will available in game. I mean, hell, I probably will rarely break out the Ghost until I actually have made enough money to replace it in the event I lose it so I am likely to just end up buying a basic Aurora to putz around in once the PU comes out.
Local Type Moon Fanatic.
Image

User avatar
newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 11:17 am
Location: France

Re: Star Citizen

#39 Post by kourbou » Mon Mar 30, 2015 5:27 pm

Alright, rectifying my last posts. They are effectively expensive. What I hadn't realized is that is only for the crowd-funding and that these ships will be available with in-game currency. Now, I do want the game :mrgreen: but I'm crossing my fingers it's not going to end up in the pay2win microtransaction game category.
I made a helium joke twice: HeHe.

User avatar
newbie
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2015 11:17 am
Location: France

Re: Star Citizen

#40 Post by kourbou » Mon Mar 30, 2015 5:32 pm

y7h65 wrote:
kourbou wrote:I'm sorry to say this but I think the in-game ships are overpriced for what they are.
In all honesty, if you wanted to get into Star Citizen, you can buy either the Aurora Starter Set or the Mustang Starter Set. Those two will get you everything: a copy of both the Online and Single Player game, access to Arena Commander, a basic ship, and some starting in-game cash. Literally every other package and pledge is just to show additional support for the Devs.

I mean, I could have just bought an Aurora or maybe a 300i. However, I liked what they were going for so I got the Hornet Ghost package instead.

Also, like Ryusen said above, all the ships currently available for pledge will available in game. I mean, hell, I probably will rarely break out the Ghost until I actually have made enough money to replace it in the event I lose it so I am likely to just end up buying a basic Aurora to putz around in once the PU comes out.
Personally I'd go MUSTANG ALPHA. Look more sexy. :D~
I made a helium joke twice: HeHe.

User avatar
Templar Inner Circle
Posts: 3755
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 8:16 pm
Location: 不滅の神天皇の名の下に殺しグリーン大群の真ん中に!
Contact:

Re: Star Citizen

#41 Post by SirSlaughter » Tue Mar 31, 2015 1:05 am

I myself got the Avenger. I will be going for that Vangaurd when the game comes out. Myself and a friend will be selling our services as Mercenaries until we can get one.

My current goals are:

Get Gladius
Get Avenger
Get 350R
Get M50 Interceptor.

You will bet your [censored] I'll be racing that 350R and M50.

One thing I will say is that the design team for this game is top notch. They know the exact looks they are going for and everything fits so well. I love how much the M50 looks like an exotic sports car.

I mean seriously, LOOK AT THIS ENGINE BAY!

Image

So yeah, Mercenary/Racer will most likely be my thing. Oh how I really hope they don't [censored] this up.

User avatar
Envy x Banned Forever
Posts: 1566
Joined: Wed May 12, 2010 10:50 pm
Location: Back in the Yamaku Dorms, cuddlin' it up with Emi where I belong.
Contact:

Re: Star Citizen

#42 Post by Envy661 » Wed Apr 01, 2015 12:35 am

Eh, even though I don't like how the space flight mechanics are turning out, I still have faint hopes for everything else. I suppose my goals would be:

Aegis Vanguard
Origin 890 Jump
Idris-P
ɔıƃol ʎʌuǝ ǝsnɐɔǝq
Image
deviantART | Steam Account | Forum Sigs | Otaku Streamers
Message me for access to the Twokinds Unoffical Official Skype Chat!

User avatar
The Unpronounceable
Posts: 3607
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:00 pm
Location: Stuck in a never ending hell of Asashio Class Destroyers.

Re: Star Citizen

#43 Post by y7h65 » Thu Apr 02, 2015 12:18 am

kourbou wrote:
y7h65 wrote:
kourbou wrote:I'm sorry to say this but I think the in-game ships are overpriced for what they are.
In all honesty, if you wanted to get into Star Citizen, you can buy either the Aurora Starter Set or the Mustang Starter Set. Those two will get you everything: a copy of both the Online and Single Player game, access to Arena Commander, a basic ship, and some starting in-game cash. Literally every other package and pledge is just to show additional support for the Devs.

I mean, I could have just bought an Aurora or maybe a 300i. However, I liked what they were going for so I got the Hornet Ghost package instead.

Also, like Ryusen said above, all the ships currently available for pledge will available in game. I mean, hell, I probably will rarely break out the Ghost until I actually have made enough money to replace it in the event I lose it so I am likely to just end up buying a basic Aurora to putz around in once the PU comes out.
Personally I'd go MUSTANG ALPHA. Look more sexy. :D~
The Aurora is basically your every-man ship. It carries cargo, flies through space, and gets you from point A to B without being murdered by bandits. Maybe. Basically, it's the Toyota Corolla of Space. It's not the prettiest, fastest, most armored, or toughest ship out there but it's cheap, (probably) reliable, and gets the job done.

The Mustang Alpha, on the other hand, is like a low end sports car. Like an FR-S or something similar. It's fast, nimble, and packs some firepower but it's really lacking in cargo space. By that, I mean it actually has no cargo space. So if you want to run escort/raiding, it works better.
Local Type Moon Fanatic.
Image

User avatar
Templar Inner Circle
Posts: 3755
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2011 8:16 pm
Location: 不滅の神天皇の名の下に殺しグリーン大群の真ん中に!
Contact:

Re: Star Citizen

#44 Post by SirSlaughter » Thu Apr 02, 2015 3:22 pm

I have a grudge against the Toyota Corolla. I guess I'm gonna be keeping tally of how many Aurora craft I annihilate. I will destroy them.

User avatar
Master
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 10:32 pm
Location: South Africa

Re: Star Citizen

#45 Post by HeckobA » Fri Apr 03, 2015 5:50 am

I'll be the trader, the miner, the manufacturer and the occasional smuggler or explorer. I'm maybe gonna get a freelancer, later going for one of them big mining ships. I love me some mining.

...this is, of course, if I can get my new PC before the game becomes available to me.
ImageImage
-~☼ Look! It's my Steam Profile! ☼~-

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest