Having stock ships putter around at 200 m/s running into kitted out ships going 1000 m/s is just silly. I heard the same thing Farrister heard regarding the speeds but there's no way that's going to work out in practice if that's the range in speeds we're dealing with. Speeds should definitely be different per ship and components (a capital ship should not accelerate like a fighter), but not an 800 m/s delta.
Makes sense imo, for example a large capital ship in Star wars is completely outmaneuvered by fighters but also has the gun power, manpower, it's own fighters on board to protect it etc. I feel like a big slow ship is important for diverse gameplay
@@latjolajban81they also said master modes will stay, yet here we are. Seriously, by the time crafting is in who knows how the flight model will actually look like...
I think you guys have valid opinions, but as I am a salvager as well, and I do dabble in some PvE combat, and I absolutely suck at PvP combat, I can say, from my opinion, without a doubt, that the current system needs to die, that is Master Mode. However, it is not just the mode that needs to die. It's the expression of flight and how it feels to fly a ship through space. That's the part that truly feels bad and needs to change. Speed is part of it too. I do believe it should be raised.
What exactly sucks in your opinion? I hear people complaining without ever giving a proper explanation of why it sucks. In master modes people had to make a decision. Prepare for fight and thus put up shields and power weapons or try to flee and thus trade shields for speed. Depending on where you got attacked you at least have had a chance to escape. The current issue is, that without shields a Prospector is basically a one or two hit and thus requires way more armor to take a hit. In its current form it is simply a target dummy and nothing more. With the new system they proposed now I don't see any chance for the Prospector, Vulture or other industrial ship to escape ever. The attacker basically can chase you the whole distance and while doing so use its weapons on you while you dropped shields for speed. With players gaining hands on components that problem will even multiply as such fighters might have easier access to such speed, scanner and/or weapon improvements. Bringing escorts with you is also not always an option and that escorting player might then die out of boredom after a while. As SC basically curry favors to all kind of players, they probably can't use a flight model that's to difficult to learn. Just look at X4 where complex systems to operate basically shy away so many potential players. The model needs a certan level of being dumbed down with some illusion of being simulation-esque to give players who prefer the latter playstyle to join the SC "community". In the end, most people look for fun in the game. Some consider blowing up other ships within seconds as fun, others look for a 3-5 minute fight others just want to move boxes from A to B and others just want to have story stuff in the game.
@@Kessra "It's the expression of flight and how it feels to fly a ship through space." I believe he said. The difficulty the the speeds of the old flight model SC is with 6 degrees of freedom in space. It takes quite some time time to get your head around it but what also made it quite enjoyable to fly, even for people who don't do much pvp.
Not only do I love this channel, but farrister is my favorite go to for ship reviews and he's so factual, to have both in one video has made my week!!!
the paladin has of course been added to my fleet, it offers enough. What surprises me is that if there is a wish for a new ship, no one expresses the wish for a ship that is desperately needed. a small repair ship, a kind of terrapin, that patches up your armor, even in an environment that is still dangerous. For the Polaris there was already an example of someone who repaired it with a hand repair tool, thus reducing the repair cost at the station from 1.4 mil to a fraction of that price. a small ship would be better than a hand tool, and can be transported more easily than vulcan. even a small snub repair with 2 SCU repair cargo would be very nice. no drones, just a repair tool, which is of course larger than the hand tool, somewhere at the front of the ship.
great idea imo. they always talk about having different tiers of equipment with all the gameplay loops so hopefully we get a small repair ship. Seems like something that would fit perfect in the line of MPUVs from Argo
@@TheRealMrMotorboat The MPuv Tractor Snub has 16 SCU cargo, and can easily change containers . Replacing the front tractor beam with a repair beam would certainly be a ship that I would buy immediately. Obviously this will be in a new version of that ship, and they will not choose to allow us to switch the tractor beam to the repair beam. but it would be nice if they did that, and just sold a version for 10 euros or dollars more, where you get the front tractor beam, and the repair beam and can choose which one you can fit at any time. I am even in favor of them making a more expensive version that can perform both jobs, depending on which tool you use. excellent choice for the ship you would choose
There are repair ships. They're still in concept, though, since Repair isn't in the game yet. The Vulcan appears to be the ship that you're describing.
master modes, with each submode that one could cycle through (if available) >operator: speeds up to 750m/s with boosters - combat - missile - minelay, etc >navigator: shields off/quantum engines on. mix hydrogen and quantum fuel for higher speeds up to 2000m/s with boosters [This would technically be the Racing mode] - travel - current suggestion of what they call quantum boost, 80% quantum, 20% hydrogen fuel because you are using maneuvering thrusters - cruise - current on rail jump from A to B, quantum fuel only - jump - gate/wormhole travel, quantum fuel only >specialized: weapons offline, speeds vary per submode, typically slower for precision - scanning - mining - salvaging - hacking, building, fueling, etc This is in no way thought out thoroughly, just cookin while at work watching the vid
It qaa never meant to have the pilot control the guns that was an afterthought after backers were mad and no one bought it. Now it makes zero sense to run it with more then 2 people unless one of those were an engineer. It makes more sense to have 2 in this then anyone else take a second ship.
@@COMMANDERHAWK22 The expectation for many is that having an engineer is always mandatory on anything bigger. Making them have purpose beyond that seems like a good idea, so making this ships more flexible seems like a good idea and maybe something they could adopt to more multi-crew ships to finally make them worth to run with more than just one guy or even at all.
@COMMANDERHAWK22, to me, it makes sense for the turrets yo be controllable by other people. Sure, it's optimal to use 2 ships, but if you want to take some friends to do a ground operation, you can all pile in.
I agree we need a medium-ish sized salvager. Something maybe the size of the Argo MOLE, with like 80-100 SCU capacity and able to print 8 SCU boxes. Sounds pretty perfect to me and Im a combat guy lol
Coming from elite Dangerous, master modes felt familiar to me. Mind you I came back no more than two weeks ago so I don’t know how much master modes have changed since they released. I will say that the fact that we leave ourselves super exposed when in travel mode is uncomfortable, but it hasn’t genuinely affected any major gameplay for me at least.
From my layman's perspective the change from pre MM to MM is the last flight model was like driving a F1 car and we now have a Prius with a blown transmission and a flat tire. F1 cars go fast and need practice to drive but the car we have now barely moves with out a push. It felt smoother to fly but was harder to control because you had the full range of thrust between 0 and +1km/s.
@@heavymetalsazabii just spent the other night in AC testing ships out and the flight model. My arrow danced around ships at 400 m/s, and the fury was like a wasp on crack. Idk where you get this idea that MM is slow.
I love the idea that the Anvil Paladin can fire EIGHT weapons forward, then turn around and continue to fire EIGHT behind them at potentially the same target. Double strafing run.
the paladin is similar in role and crew size like a an rsi constellation. the legacy ships are usually left out of the conversation with the new ships in their class. that size ship is the bridge between solo/buddy play moving into group play before you get into deducted multicrew.
I used to defend MM. The time it takes to have the q-drive spool and get that extra speed boost is just too much. If you're reacting, then you'll always be too late and giving the advantage to the chase. I also hate the loss of speed from the change.
from my understanding Blast Shields are armor plaiting for the cockpit yes the glass is as strong as the hull but not as strong as a hull with armored plates
I think a frame for component, weapon or ammo (missiles) storage would be something you can produce with the crafting in a salvage unit. You select the size of thing and the thing type and it produces a crate framework with holds just for those things... that would actually be nice and reduce issues with instability.
I agree with Farraster 100% about everything Salvage. 1.0 is literally many years away so reporting which ships will come out before or after 1.0 is irrelevant.
I hope updates to salvage and it's associated ships are waiting on the implementation of maelstrom. I really want the physical cutting and ingestion of ship parts. Tractor beams to hold, stop pieces from floating away and insert small pieces into the grinder intake. A medium salvage could have (assuming maelstrom): 2 Tractor beam operators (Pilot + 1) with 3 beams total Beam 1 to steady a piece/ship and maybe an option to tow (weaker than Argo, zero G only and not in QT) Beam 2 to hold and maneuver a severed piece into the grinder intake Beam 3 to remove and guide components into the cargo hold 1 Cutting arm operator Larger buffer than Vulture but smaller than Reclaimer 2 cargo holds, one for grinded stuff and the other for components.
About the topic of SC being more main stream. The idea of 'SC' being some kind of super space sim honestly stooped being viable a looonnnggg time ago. The problem with added complexity is you need every system to have the same level of complexity or people will feel left out. In CIGs vision if 1.0. we can fly we can craft, we can trade, we can mine, we can fight, we can shoot, we can explore, we can repair, we can heal, we can maintain, we can reduel, we can manage, we can command, we can hack, we can drive, we can assist, we can research, we can build, we can decorate, we can customize. All these things need to gave a similar level of complexity because CIG wants to allow people to specialize into these things. But with so many roles to fill and ultimately finite resources its unrealistic to want high complexity in all things but deny that they (CIG) cast a "wider net" to attain more resources. The only other way is for each backer to spend more. And 12+ years into the project, that native community is at its limit.
I love when people start making a video about a ship but don't know the facts yet! It carries a vehicle right?. Nope. It has a cargo bay right? Nope. It's a troop transport right? Nope. 😆 I mean I glanced at the brochure for a couple of minutes and already knew all that.
The Paladin and Valkyrie share no hull peices at all, they are completely different designs on different chassis. Even the cockpit is wildly different, the Pally able to sit pilot and co-pilot side-by-side whereas the Valk is a single seat, fighter style cockpit only. They share some similar design cues but that's it, not one panel is shared between them.
@@Nemoticon did you read the lore? just because it looks very different the lore covers how this ship came about. should see my house before the remodel halls gone walls moved more bathrooms removed part of the garage for the RV. your telling me because it has 4 seats in bridge it cant be refit? yes they are very different but they are still very same. part of me makes me wonder if they will do something different to the valk upon gold standard
@@Nemoticon my company refits rockets to carry people then refit it to carry a satellite or refit it to carry supplies for the space station. they all look like very different hulls but really refit or duplicated from a same hull but different build
@@paratrooperz1 Irrelevant... the lore is one thing, but looking at it is something else completely. There is nothing on the Pally that matches up with the Valk, all the bulkheads, all the hull panels, the floor layout, literally EVERYTHING is different. And no amount of material written after the fact can change that.
@@paratrooperz1 If they really wanted, CIG could write lore that says the 890J and 400i are actually the same ship, lol, despite the obvious and blaring differences. You don't need to be a genius to identify the obvious, I don't care what your company does, it has no relevance when talking about simple common sense.
Salvage constellation makes so much sense... Replace the lower turret with a salvage operator, limit the cargo bay with a salvage processing unit. Even allowing to load small salvage and work inside the bay.
Hopefully Farister gets his wish we'll see the MISC Fortune Soon™. We've already had the files and stats leaked. If we get the Fortune, my Vulture is in danger. Since the Fortune is suppose to have two material processors, I can't see it being smaller.
@@SpaceTomatoToo CIG. From Pyro being totally different 5 years ago now at CitizenCon 2019 to ToW to the Hangar App and Hacking supposedly coming a few years back to changing the flight model, to ruining how looting works to HEX code and I could go on and on. They've shown off fire propagation now for almost 5 years! And where's the game play? Personalized hangars and changing how cargo works isn't new game play mechanics. It's merely changing how an existing system is handled. It wouldn't shock me to learn that flying through a wormhole to Pyro from Stanton is an instance like being on an elevator in Mass Effect was or pressing a button to shimmy through a rock crevice or tight area is in God of War, Tomb Raider, Jedi: Fallen Order, and Horizon is. All of this screams "Long Con" to me and anyone who has followed this game's development even a little over the years can see that Chris moved the 1.0 goal posts to 2030+. Do you really believe we'll get SQ42 in 2026? He's moved the goalposts so many times I don't believe a word he says because he's created ZERO accountability for himself.
Yes, while there's a lot of confusion around which part is flight model and which part is "Master Modes" I specifically disliked the "modes", having a ship behave the same at all time is a big improvement. Hope this also gets rid of the horrible "landing mode" slowdown. Whether replacing just being able to slam the throttle like in pre-MM with "Quantum Boost" is actually solving anything will remain to be seen, but it seems like speeds will be going up, at least compared to MM, so I remain hopeful.
if there was a vulture with 2 to 4 times the cargo size and ejecting size 2 boxes it would be great for professional scrappers. price can be high as you want everyone that likes this gameloop would buy it
All i want is a ship with odst style drop pods or a proper enclosed carrier something like the anvil longbow. The endevor and the star liner are the only 2 ships confirmed from a post 1.0 release and that was years ago.
little disappointed tho, they said the same thing for the Corsair and took it away, I wont trust them until its out but even then, they could take the guns away from the pilot, honestly they need to just balance the corsair properly and downgrade the weapons and give it back to the pilot
I can't see fuel becoming a major factor in gameplay to be honest. I can see the meta shifting to gear and ships that have enough range, but not people flying around with ships that run out constantly while doing their favorite gameplay loops.
To me. This ship feels like the link between heavy fighter and gunship. It amalgamates various fighter designs, Vanguard, Scorpius, Hornet with a sous on of Valkyrie. In my mind it’s a super heavy Fighter, a defender. Matches the name Guardian better than the Guardian seems too? To be a gunship, it really needed 2 more double turrets once CIG announced the twins slaved to pilots. If it ever gets blades, this thing will be nuts. It’s going to need massive affective movement (360 degree domes) in those size 4s to warrant an extra gunner.
There are already enough single player ships in game, and more will be added regardless. This is a ship ment for the whole MMO part of the game. This is for friends to fly around and have adventures in. This is the "type of ship" most people will probably be playing in with other ppl.
Medium to large salvage ship idea. Take the Starlancer TAC and replace the two lower turrets with salvage heads. Edit: Also the Vulture isn't exactly small. It is about the size of the Cutlass.
After all the nerfs after the fact im not using ANY new cash i just melt ships and use credit for new ships i wanna try. The redeemer and corsair nerf made me say enough.
My theory is that the wing turrets on the paladin will have a slight pitch angle, perhaps 20 dgr or so and then a 360 degr turn, giving them a sort of inverted hourglass range of fire, this would mean they can not fire directly to the left/right of the ships reference of plane but most other angles
i think the top turret will get around 40 degrees of angle, all turrets are nerfed thar way, ig you wanna know how the side turrers will operate, just check the side polaris, they have a very limited arch back and forward and extremely limitid arch up and down
Pilot and gunner is the most efficient. You only need 2 extra gunners to cover the sides, mostly defense instead of offense. One extra for engineering, maybe.
With the paladin, what is the point in having more than 2x crew when the pilot has control of guns? Any "additional" crew would be far more useful in additional fighters, as opposed to staying on board and turret gunning.
Yeah, need more force multiplication in general for multi crew, especially on these pure combat ships. That goes for many others, redeemer since it got heavy handed, retaliator basically has no use other than torps. Military ships need badass turrets unless the pilot DPS is already very high.
Multicrewing vs Multiple ships has always been talked about. Why have a fully crewed x instead of x numbers of ships. I think at that point, its more about what kind of gameplay and "fun" you want vs being simply efficient and "min/maxing". Is a fully crewed Polaris ever gonna be more efficient than 10+ smaller ships focusing on one Polaris? I doubt it ...and you can't balance a game thinking that way.
@@olivierpelletier9643 Fair enough, I think there's a certain point where it's not necessarily about what does the most damage, but what ship do I want to play in for immersion, or simply having fun.
The other 2 crew can aim and fight in 2 other degrees as the Pilot you can Only fire forward. You Lose 50% of your coverage the sides when the pilot has the guns.
@@AlbertoMartinez765 You lose more than 50% coverage if the pilot is unable to gimbal that far. Head tracking is the only way I know to gimbal that far
If they made a list of ships to be released befor and after 1.0 they wouldnt sell as many of the ships that will release after 1.0. I think a upgrade from the Paladin would be the Hammerhead.
As far as fuelling goes, why isn't there an option to have scu containers of fuel and a way to manually refuel? Make it take longer than a refueling ship but why couldn't someone keep an scu of fuel in reserve, like those little red gas cans we use today?
It would be cool to see a Salvage equivalent to the ROC. I do think that balancing 5 tiers of components is going to be awful its either going to be small enough of a bonus that 2-4 are useless or big enough that 1-4 are useless. The only idea i can come up with is you get a random 10% bonus to a stat on a component and each tier gets a separate roll on a new stat. (power/cooling/stability/ect.) So my shiny new T5 gun has 10% less power draw 10% less required cooling 10% faster energy recharge 10% fire rate 10% recoil reduction. This is way less imbalanced than a flat 50% less power draw or 50% damage and wouldn't limit you to a t5 is the only option and play into the mmo aspect of the game. I still think the High Quality crafting model FF14 and now WoW use that makes crafted stuff have a chance to have better stats than baseline is far more manageable.
I would design the Argo SCORP, looking like a scorpion (animal), with an upper cargo door on the back (like a hangar door, or the Ironclad one). Scraping on the pincers, tractor beam on the tail. So you can use the tail to tractor beam components from the front of the ship directly into the cargo hold. Crew of 2-4, with place for an engineer that while salvaging can EVA on board the scrap and extract internal stuff.
There's an empty area in the back at the top but I can't see it being cargo or vehicle bay given the 4x s5 turret track wraps around the back, under and over. Nowhere to get anything in.
Oh Farrister hasn't heard that the rambler quantum fuel is getting nerfed for 'reasons'. Now the intrepid is the ONLY starter that can make it to Pyro, definitely not scummy marketing by CIG once again.
1:17:00 - that's what i also want for SC. But it should get increasingly difficult with shipsize. So a starter or any ship below lets say 200 Bucks or whatever shouldn't have any form of startup procedure, but stuff like a Polaris or Galaxy etc. should definitively get Startup procedures for pilot / Engineer.
YES a medium salvage ship. I whod like to see a Valkyrie frame we got torrer sets for controls (co-op) and the ground floor, the jump set and mand turret is removed for a salvage compactor 1 SCU containers in the midel and intarnal store on left/right sid off it
They should not allow the pilot to control those guns. It really does say we nerfed Redeemer for this ship, as well as it makes it so you don't need redeemer. This even out shines a fully crewed hammer head. Hh has what 1 pilot, 1 engineer, 6 turrets, quad size 4. With this you can have 4 paladins, 4 quad size 5 and 4 quad size 4.
I'd keep it like it is and give the Redeemer the maneuverability it should have for its size. Make it more of a "super heavy fighter" and this a "mini gunship." Although we also can't leave out the newest entry, the Starlancer TAC which promises to be better than either of them at more roles. Cargo, med beds, drop seats, snub fighter.... the TAC will honestly take jobs from both Redeemer and Paladin.
"don't worry, crafting will fix it"...ah yes, totally trying to balance tens of thousands of combinations is something CIG can do given their stellar track record
They just need to lower the straff acceleration of large ships, increase the max speed of ships and leave fighters being the ones that still have the straff accelerations and rotation rates. Think battles like in battlestar
Personally this is what i think they should do, from teh Vulture s2 size ship they should go to a s3 or 4 size ship take the front canopy and move it forward and replace it with a bar claw we now know we don't need the tuning fork from the vulture with latest technology. have two floors top with retractable roof for detachable's. bottom floor for boxes, and have up to 4 scu boxes two high or so, both with floor grid size so that could be 96 scu top and bottom, or 124 top and bottom. and have a dedicated rail mount tracker beam. so on this rail it could eather go stern to bow or circle the ship to get at points to get detachable's to the top deck. so solo yes multi crew able yes i would say at least up to 5 ppl with pull down seets with copilate tractor operator box puller and nother puerson that isn't pulling boxes out to the other ship pulling coponets.
I don't think SC will ever go to console...at least not anytime soon I guess. I don't think it'll play like COD, either. I think it's more headed in the direction of similar space games that try to make themselves easier to grasp. It's a bit watered down, but space COD is a stretch.
Im not sure that letting people keep their weapons while in the high travel speed mode is a good idea. For example, if your in a ship that is trying to flee an encounter, it doesnt matter to you if your weapons work, you only care that you lose your shields when trying to quantum. The attacker now however, can chase you in your escape mode with their weapons active and will now have an even easier time killing you because your shields are gone.
The Paladin is for people that now have a toaster oven instead of a Redeemer or Corsair. Cig really is the greasiest company out there Step 1: Advertise ship as super op Step 2: Profit Step 3: nerf op ship Step 4: Sell a slightly better ship for just a little more money Step 5: Repeat step 1-4 for as long as this content emaciated whale club is willing to take it.
"The turrets on this look like they can't swivel and pivot much on the sides". Mr. Tomato, we have no reason to believe the side turrets are somehow nerfed in articulation when gunner controlled. Unless CIG says otherwise you should treat those as normal turrets that have full articulation unless pilot controlled when they switch to work like forward facing gimbaled guns. I have no idea why you would assume otherwise.
I see you and I raise the pilot controlled turrets on the Freelancer and Starlancer. (Yes, I know they don't have options to be remote controlled. It was depicted as being able to do broadside fighting in its (Freelancer MIS) release commercial.)
@P3rcival97 I'm confused. Your example confirmes what I said. You had no reason to doubt the commercial until it turned out wrong. Unless they say or show us that those turrets can't fully articulate when gunner controlled there is no reason to assume they can't. They are normal remote turrets and even look like they fully articulate. It's still okay to mention weird limitations as a possibility, my point was that making it the default assumption is just wrong unless you want imaginary brownie points just in case you are right.
it feels like i’m constantly spamming chat in-game to try to find anyone that’s interested in being crew for ships, only for no one to even respond. With the implementation of PDC systems on the polaris, i really hope blades are coming soon… we really need them
That's wild, seems every server I join has people either asking to be crew/gunner or it's a pilot looking for a crew/gunners and they always seem to succeed.
I think part of the problem is instability. I would love to be a crewmember on a big ship, but in almost every case, it takes time to meet up and half way through whatever you are doing there is a 30k or bug that explodes the ship. When you can log on and play without issue for hours at a time, I think that is when multicrew will shine.
SCM needs to be a touch faster than current, and speeds SHOULD be ship type dependent. A superfast travel aught to be some sort of Quantum travel WITHOUT being Quantum Travel, which should be reserved for intra System Travel. Like from Microtech to Hurston but between Hurston and it's Moons you use the Superfast Travel that is like Quantum, but is not ITSELF Quantum travel.
Turret range and Turret tracking should be matched to higher attack speeds that fighters and gunships might employ, thus cancelling out any advantage other than the skill of the Fighter Pilot v the skill of the Turret Gunner. As for Fighter v Fighter, well speed shouldn't ever be the advantage, but manoeuvrability and the skill of the Pilot aught to be the advantage.
If the Paladin turns like a whale you'll want people manning the two side turrets. Pilot control doesn't really matter if the pilot can never get a target in front of the ship.
I like the exterior design and the concept.. not the interior design nor the idea of those two gunners station being in there own cockpit down there.. just to have that it require a long corridor around the central stairs... and the stair casee to there for what benefits? they gonna be looking through the camera of the remote turret!!! as I said they could have reversed the stair case to have a frontal acces right under the bridge... place the gunners stations on the sides in the rear of the bridge... and remove the whole lower floor or limit it to a airlock with suit locker in the front... and an engineer onr at the back accessible with a ladder from the upper level. that would have reduced the height and mass of the ship... but then even the staircase... WTF? it's a military ships? way such a luxury for a military ship of 4!!! if it was a oirigin ship it would make sense... I would remove the central stair and place ladders... if needed.
This is alpha, beta or the more correct wording, in active development. So CIG trying different stuff, use the data collected and iterate is the way to go IMO. Anyway, its up to Chris Roberts, and as far I picked his vision for Star Citizen is that he want to make it fun. So hopefully his fun is close to most of us. SQ42 flight model, I think will give us the feel of what he want. But thats a singleplayer game.. We see :) Im here to test and give feedback so they can find the flightmodel path they want.
Almost every person that really loved the game prefers the old system. They might tolerate the new system, and admittedly some do like it for some reason, but it wasn't broken. I don't understand the constant need for CIG to take something that is working fine and change it. How many of us understand the item terminals and the concept behind CIG wanting them to exist, and at the same time prefer the old system because even though it had its own issues it functioned? How much more of our time is now spent running two terminals to get items or needing to call up items in an occasionally working cargo elevator? Master modes didn't make the game better and if you're not making the game better then what the heck are you doing? Stop fixing things that don't need to be fixed and focus on the things that do. That is almost of us are asking and I think it's a perfectly reasonable thing to say.
The way I interpreted what they were saying is that base will be close to default SCM and boost will bring it up to nac speed and higher more seamlessly than we have now. And I don't think crafting will ever make the ships go in scm mode to nav mode speed, I think were talking like 50/s increments. Like base is 300, tier 2 350, tier 3 400 etc. Also general sense I get is people are way overthinking this, MM wasn't a perfect step in the right direction but definitely a needed one and the data seems to back it up. I really believe this benefitted the greater part of the community, even coaches say that their students get a better sense of contribution to team battles, and that they can no longer just kill 17 people by themselves by controlling where the fights take place. I think it's just a very vocal minority led by the types like avenger one that blast at mm and create this artificial sense of animosity towards it. You know the guy who today was griefing players trying to do phase 3 of save stanton because he wants to make some weird point about how everyone should be ready to pvp like him at all times, by gatekeeping the events rewards he already has. Yes let's please listen to this guy, he sure sounds like he wants the game to be better and more fun.
Even a lot of non-pvper are saying they don't like the flight model. As for Avenger one, he is offering some real solutions. If you really are interested in SC being the best it can be, you should probably actually check out what those suggestions are before you make broad sweeping statements about people based on your own personal like and dislikes. A lot of people quite like the guy and what he has to say.
@@tibitzu365 I have heard a lot of a1s content. I'm a pvper as well. Have you watched his talk with yogi on tomatoes channel? He was bodied super hard because he comes up with these makeup scenarios and game analogies that don't make sense and yogi hits him with facts and data from the actual game he is helping develop. His "solutions" are just bad for game longevity and he creates these "problems" like he keeps going on about this "geometric" issue that you parrot here but bet cant even say what it is without going back to his video to check out. None of it even makes sense in the long term when considering a lot of game mechanics that are coming into the game. Dude goes on and on about interceptors and the buccaneer and get bodied by random dudes in alien fighters in championships. He has no fkin clue what hes on about but people follow him in a cult like manner. I would suggest the jonathan winters channel if you like to see people who actually understand the game, don't cry about it every day and are not toxic griefers who want to force pvp onto people.
@@AlexeiX1 Yeah, I know Johnathon Winters. He's great, partly because he's easy to understand. Avenger one is not easy to understand and that is mostly due to a difference in communication skills. However, Avenger ones ideas are good, lowering light fighter weapons ranges 10 under 1000m, increasing the velocity of multi crew ship guns, a compromised speed of 500 base SCM. The geometry is about making sure that slower, bigger ships are able to engage smaller, faster ships and still be able to hit them/ How ships fly through space in relation to other ships. These are good ideas. As for "griefing", piracy is an intended gameplay loop "forcing other players to PvP". The only person I hear whining like a little b and toxic as f is the guy I'm talking to now. Who are you to say that I'm parroting someone without any idea of the concepts discussed, how dare you imply that I'm following someone without any brain activity like some cult member. Get a grip on yourself man, stop pointing the finger at other people and have a good look in the mirror. Unfortunately, we haven't had a video from Johnathon Winters for almost a year which is the entirety of master modes in the PTU, so we don't know what he thinks about it. But as far as I can tell, he's not playing the game either. You talk about "data"? Half of regular players through 2023 are not playing it in 2024. That's what CIG is listening to, the silence is deafening.
@@tibitzu365 Jonathan Winters discord is thriving still, with good pvp minded people who aren't whining. All avenger does in his channel is whine and get proven wrong over and over again. Yes you are parroting, bet you went back to his videos to be able to try and explain that nonsense, that again, don't even make any sense given we don't have half the mechanics that are supposed to come into play. especially for bigger ships. Pirating is ok btw, one of my favourite creators is Voidy, and his pirating videos are amazing. The difference is in intent, avenger wants to ruin peoples days, he wants to punish people for not staying in arena commander 48 hours a day like he does. He attacks people for the sole purpose of attacking them, he doesn't want to pirate, he has no goal in mind. Bro is attacking people doing server wide events. He gets called out on it and he comes out with that bs that everyone should be prepared to pvpI guess its how he gets satisfaction since he cant beat anyone thats barely skilled like we see in the championships. And he only does that right now cause the mechanics that are supposed to be in place to curb that behaviour arent yet. But if it was pyro, then sure, go nuts. But server wide events that give out rewards he already ahs and gate keeps? His videos aren't hard to understand because he's good at it, its because hes just full of s... And its ok if you're into that, follow your cult leader. And brother you came into my comments to whine about how you're not the only one whining, and you want to say that i'm the whiner? XD
@@AlexeiX1 You came into my comment first and started insulting me, now I'm coming into your comment and insulting you. I haven't heard one thing from you about the solutions avenger one has offered, the only thing you have had to say is that he's full of shit. Sounds personal to me, did he have sex with your mother? Aww diddums. "Brother", all I've heard from you is whining. In Sc, combat can happen anywhere, that's from the devs. I'm no cult member, I have a brain. You should try using yours too by actually arguing your points, because "he doesn't know what he's talking about because I say so" doesn't cut it. Have an argument to support your speech or STFU.
CIG needs to focus on getting the starter ships, sub 75$ up to gold standard.
Especialy for the Aurora/Mustang and the might king of recommendations the Titan.
Should they? They expect you to use those ships for about a week ,Then move on. None of the starters are in a bad place right now.
also battling feature creep. The Drake Caterpillar legit has 0 purpose compared to the C2 Hercules.
Fully agree. The new player experience is key
Yeah mustang broke the new player experience for me. Luckily I got extra money to upgrade to cutter. Cutter is the ship that made me stay.
Having stock ships putter around at 200 m/s running into kitted out ships going 1000 m/s is just silly. I heard the same thing Farrister heard regarding the speeds but there's no way that's going to work out in practice if that's the range in speeds we're dealing with. Speeds should definitely be different per ship and components (a capital ship should not accelerate like a fighter), but not an 800 m/s delta.
I think the whole range should be around 600 m/s +/- 100 m/s depending on the size of the ship.
Makes sense imo, for example a large capital ship in Star wars is completely outmaneuvered by fighters but also has the gun power, manpower, it's own fighters on board to protect it etc. I feel like a big slow ship is important for diverse gameplay
this is never gonna happen. Its most likely gonna be smaller 50m/s increments on each tier maybe even less.
@@AlexeiX1They did say a kitted out ship will be close to current nav speeds.
@@latjolajban81they also said master modes will stay, yet here we are. Seriously, by the time crafting is in who knows how the flight model will actually look like...
I think you guys have valid opinions, but as I am a salvager as well, and I do dabble in some PvE combat, and I absolutely suck at PvP combat, I can say, from my opinion, without a doubt, that the current system needs to die, that is Master Mode. However, it is not just the mode that needs to die. It's the expression of flight and how it feels to fly a ship through space. That's the part that truly feels bad and needs to change. Speed is part of it too. I do believe it should be raised.
Absolutely
What exactly sucks in your opinion? I hear people complaining without ever giving a proper explanation of why it sucks. In master modes people had to make a decision. Prepare for fight and thus put up shields and power weapons or try to flee and thus trade shields for speed. Depending on where you got attacked you at least have had a chance to escape. The current issue is, that without shields a Prospector is basically a one or two hit and thus requires way more armor to take a hit. In its current form it is simply a target dummy and nothing more.
With the new system they proposed now I don't see any chance for the Prospector, Vulture or other industrial ship to escape ever. The attacker basically can chase you the whole distance and while doing so use its weapons on you while you dropped shields for speed. With players gaining hands on components that problem will even multiply as such fighters might have easier access to such speed, scanner and/or weapon improvements. Bringing escorts with you is also not always an option and that escorting player might then die out of boredom after a while.
As SC basically curry favors to all kind of players, they probably can't use a flight model that's to difficult to learn. Just look at X4 where complex systems to operate basically shy away so many potential players. The model needs a certan level of being dumbed down with some illusion of being simulation-esque to give players who prefer the latter playstyle to join the SC "community". In the end, most people look for fun in the game. Some consider blowing up other ships within seconds as fun, others look for a 3-5 minute fight others just want to move boxes from A to B and others just want to have story stuff in the game.
@@Kessra "It's the expression of flight and how it feels to fly a ship through space." I believe he said. The difficulty the the speeds of the old flight model SC is with 6 degrees of freedom in space. It takes quite some time time to get your head around it but what also made it quite enjoyable to fly, even for people who don't do much pvp.
Not only do I love this channel, but farrister is my favorite go to for ship reviews and he's so factual, to have both in one video has made my week!!!
Yay!
Always a joy talking to Farrister!
the paladin has of course been added to my fleet, it offers enough.
What surprises me is that if there is a wish for a new ship, no one expresses the wish for a ship that is desperately needed.
a small repair ship, a kind of terrapin, that patches up your armor, even in an environment that is still dangerous.
For the Polaris there was already an example of someone who repaired it with a hand repair tool, thus reducing the repair cost at the station from 1.4 mil to a fraction of that price.
a small ship would be better than a hand tool, and can be transported more easily than vulcan.
even a small snub repair with 2 SCU repair cargo would be very nice. no drones, just a repair tool, which is of course larger than the hand tool, somewhere at the front of the ship.
great idea imo. they always talk about having different tiers of equipment with all the gameplay loops so hopefully we get a small repair ship. Seems like something that would fit perfect in the line of MPUVs from Argo
@@TheRealMrMotorboat The MPuv Tractor Snub has 16 SCU cargo, and can easily change containers .
Replacing the front tractor beam with a repair beam would certainly be a ship that I would buy immediately.
Obviously this will be in a new version of that ship, and they will not choose to allow us to switch the tractor beam to the repair beam.
but it would be nice if they did that, and just sold a version for 10 euros or dollars more, where you get the front tractor beam, and the repair beam and can choose which one you can fit at any time.
I am even in favor of them making a more expensive version that can perform both jobs, depending on which tool you use.
excellent choice for the ship you would choose
Good point tbh, I could see them making a repair MPUV quite easily with existing tech
We should start a pool and take bets on when and what will get nerfed with this ship
There are repair ships. They're still in concept, though, since Repair isn't in the game yet.
The Vulcan appears to be the ship that you're describing.
i'm glad people like Farrister are around in the community, great dude
@@The75thsoul too kind!
master modes, with each submode that one could cycle through (if available)
>operator: speeds up to 750m/s with boosters
- combat
- missile
- minelay, etc
>navigator: shields off/quantum engines on. mix hydrogen and quantum fuel for higher speeds up to 2000m/s with boosters [This would technically be the Racing mode]
- travel - current suggestion of what they call quantum boost, 80% quantum, 20% hydrogen fuel because you are using maneuvering thrusters
- cruise - current on rail jump from A to B, quantum fuel only
- jump - gate/wormhole travel, quantum fuel only
>specialized: weapons offline, speeds vary per submode, typically slower for precision
- scanning
- mining
- salvaging
- hacking, building, fueling, etc
This is in no way thought out thoroughly, just cookin while at work watching the vid
I love that you can run it with 2 people but also with 4. It's nice to have flexibility
It qaa never meant to have the pilot control the guns that was an afterthought after backers were mad and no one bought it. Now it makes zero sense to run it with more then 2 people unless one of those were an engineer. It makes more sense to have 2 in this then anyone else take a second ship.
@@COMMANDERHAWK22idk about that tim
@@COMMANDERHAWK22 The expectation for many is that having an engineer is always mandatory on anything bigger. Making them have purpose beyond that seems like a good idea, so making this ships more flexible seems like a good idea and maybe something they could adopt to more multi-crew ships to finally make them worth to run with more than just one guy or even at all.
@COMMANDERHAWK22, to me, it makes sense for the turrets yo be controllable by other people. Sure, it's optimal to use 2 ships, but if you want to take some friends to do a ground operation, you can all pile in.
@@keeperwings1 ppl are underestimating how well this ship will operate w a 5 man crew
IF Farrister doesn't have a real epic mustache like that in real life.... I'm going to Riot!
@@KingCobraStunts it's a modest moustache, I would say
I agree we need a medium-ish sized salvager. Something maybe the size of the Argo MOLE, with like 80-100 SCU capacity and able to print 8 SCU boxes. Sounds pretty perfect to me and Im a combat guy lol
100% designed first to fit into NPC security fleet
I 100% agree with a medium sized salvage ship. Maybe something Argo can do, we need more usable Argo ships
Based Farrister with the great points. Generally agree with what he says.
I think the Paladin is more akin to a smaller Hammerhead than a Perseus.
Coming from elite Dangerous, master modes felt familiar to me. Mind you I came back no more than two weeks ago so I don’t know how much master modes have changed since they released. I will say that the fact that we leave ourselves super exposed when in travel mode is uncomfortable, but it hasn’t genuinely affected any major gameplay for me at least.
I came from ED back in May and yeah MM is so familiar it's like cheating.
From my layman's perspective the change from pre MM to MM is the last flight model was like driving a F1 car and we now have a Prius with a blown transmission and a flat tire.
F1 cars go fast and need practice to drive but the car we have now barely moves with out a push.
It felt smoother to fly but was harder to control because you had the full range of thrust between 0 and +1km/s.
@@heavymetalsazabii just spent the other night in AC testing ships out and the flight model. My arrow danced around ships at 400 m/s, and the fury was like a wasp on crack. Idk where you get this idea that MM is slow.
@@CarlotheNordit’s slower than it was, and your comment is the reason no one is in agreement. It’s fine but people miss what they used to have.
I agree Farrister , I'm just waiting for a medium RSI Salvage ship 😢
Med to Large Salvage ship would be awesome !!! I'm all for it.
I love the idea that the Anvil Paladin can fire EIGHT weapons forward, then turn around and continue to fire EIGHT behind them at potentially the same target. Double strafing run.
the paladin is similar in role and crew size like a an rsi constellation. the legacy ships are usually left out of the conversation with the new ships in their class.
that size ship is the bridge between solo/buddy play moving into group play before you get into deducted multicrew.
I used to defend MM. The time it takes to have the q-drive spool and get that extra speed boost is just too much. If you're reacting, then you'll always be too late and giving the advantage to the chase. I also hate the loss of speed from the change.
from my understanding Blast Shields are armor plaiting for the cockpit yes the glass is as strong as the hull but not as strong as a hull with armored plates
Redeemer with a New Skin. So get out of the way Redeemer, here comes the real gun ship.
I think a frame for component, weapon or ammo (missiles) storage would be something you can produce with the crafting in a salvage unit.
You select the size of thing and the thing type and it produces a crate framework with holds just for those things... that would actually be nice and reduce issues with instability.
I agree with Farraster 100% about everything Salvage. 1.0 is literally many years away so reporting which ships will come out before or after 1.0 is irrelevant.
100% we really have no idea.
The ship they blacked out for misc, I believe is a salvage prospector
I'm excited about ship upgrades being meaningful and providing real change depending how I spec it.
I hope updates to salvage and it's associated ships are waiting on the implementation of maelstrom.
I really want the physical cutting and ingestion of ship parts.
Tractor beams to hold, stop pieces from floating away and insert small pieces into the grinder intake.
A medium salvage could have (assuming maelstrom):
2 Tractor beam operators (Pilot + 1) with 3 beams total
Beam 1 to steady a piece/ship and maybe an option to tow (weaker than Argo, zero G only and not in QT)
Beam 2 to hold and maneuver a severed piece into the grinder intake
Beam 3 to remove and guide components into the cargo hold
1 Cutting arm operator
Larger buffer than Vulture but smaller than Reclaimer
2 cargo holds, one for grinded stuff and the other for components.
About the topic of SC being more main stream. The idea of 'SC' being some kind of super space sim honestly stooped being viable a looonnnggg time ago. The problem with added complexity is you need every system to have the same level of complexity or people will feel left out. In CIGs vision if 1.0. we can fly we can craft, we can trade, we can mine, we can fight, we can shoot, we can explore, we can repair, we can heal, we can maintain, we can reduel, we can manage, we can command, we can hack, we can drive, we can assist, we can research, we can build, we can decorate, we can customize. All these things need to gave a similar level of complexity because CIG wants to allow people to specialize into these things. But with so many roles to fill and ultimately finite resources its unrealistic to want high complexity in all things but deny that they (CIG) cast a "wider net" to attain more resources. The only other way is for each backer to spend more. And 12+ years into the project, that native community is at its limit.
I love when people start making a video about a ship but don't know the facts yet! It carries a vehicle right?. Nope. It has a cargo bay right? Nope. It's a troop transport right? Nope. 😆 I mean I glanced at the brochure for a couple of minutes and already knew all that.
the paladin is an heavier version of the hurricane or the scorpion that uses the valkery hull
The Paladin and Valkyrie share no hull peices at all, they are completely different designs on different chassis. Even the cockpit is wildly different, the Pally able to sit pilot and co-pilot side-by-side whereas the Valk is a single seat, fighter style cockpit only. They share some similar design cues but that's it, not one panel is shared between them.
@@Nemoticon did you read the lore? just because it looks very different the lore covers how this ship came about. should see my house before the remodel halls gone walls moved more bathrooms removed part of the garage for the RV. your telling me because it has 4 seats in bridge it cant be refit? yes they are very different but they are still very same.
part of me makes me wonder if they will do something different to the valk upon gold standard
@@Nemoticon my company refits rockets to carry people then refit it to carry a satellite or refit it to carry supplies for the space station. they all look like very different hulls but really refit or duplicated from a same hull but different build
@@paratrooperz1 Irrelevant... the lore is one thing, but looking at it is something else completely. There is nothing on the Pally that matches up with the Valk, all the bulkheads, all the hull panels, the floor layout, literally EVERYTHING is different. And no amount of material written after the fact can change that.
@@paratrooperz1 If they really wanted, CIG could write lore that says the 890J and 400i are actually the same ship, lol, despite the obvious and blaring differences. You don't need to be a genius to identify the obvious, I don't care what your company does, it has no relevance when talking about simple common sense.
Salvage constellation makes so much sense...
Replace the lower turret with a salvage operator, limit the cargo bay with a salvage processing unit.
Even allowing to load small salvage and work inside the bay.
Hopefully Farister gets his wish we'll see the MISC Fortune Soon™. We've already had the files and stats leaked. If we get the Fortune, my Vulture is in danger. Since the Fortune is suppose to have two material processors, I can't see it being smaller.
They have no idea what they are doing and it keeps becoming more and more evident with each year that passes.
Who do you mean by they?
@@SpaceTomatoToo CIG. From Pyro being totally different 5 years ago now at CitizenCon 2019 to ToW to the Hangar App and Hacking supposedly coming a few years back to changing the flight model, to ruining how looting works to HEX code and I could go on and on.
They've shown off fire propagation now for almost 5 years! And where's the game play? Personalized hangars and changing how cargo works isn't new game play mechanics. It's merely changing how an existing system is handled.
It wouldn't shock me to learn that flying through a wormhole to Pyro from Stanton is an instance like being on an elevator in Mass Effect was or pressing a button to shimmy through a rock crevice or tight area is in God of War, Tomb Raider, Jedi: Fallen Order, and Horizon is.
All of this screams "Long Con" to me and anyone who has followed this game's development even a little over the years can see that Chris moved the 1.0 goal posts to 2030+.
Do you really believe we'll get SQ42 in 2026? He's moved the goalposts so many times I don't believe a word he says because he's created ZERO accountability for himself.
@@SpaceTomatoToo I'm assuming they mean CIG, and probably in reference to the flight model changes in the past year and the planned changes.
Having to switch modes constantly for combat or travel is just clunky. It is one of the main reasons I don't play anymore.
Yes, while there's a lot of confusion around which part is flight model and which part is "Master Modes" I specifically disliked the "modes", having a ship behave the same at all time is a big improvement. Hope this also gets rid of the horrible "landing mode" slowdown.
Whether replacing just being able to slam the throttle like in pre-MM with "Quantum Boost" is actually solving anything will remain to be seen, but it seems like speeds will be going up, at least compared to MM, so I remain hopeful.
R.I.P. BDSSE
2012-2024
Still here enjoying it, though.
if there was a vulture with 2 to 4 times the cargo size and ejecting size 2 boxes it would be great for professional scrappers. price can be high as you want everyone that likes this gameloop would buy it
All i want is a ship with odst style drop pods or a proper enclosed carrier something like the anvil longbow. The endevor and the star liner are the only 2 ships confirmed from a post 1.0 release and that was years ago.
little disappointed tho, they said the same thing for the Corsair and took it away, I wont trust them until its out but even then, they could take the guns away from the pilot, honestly they need to just balance the corsair properly and downgrade the weapons and give it back to the pilot
I can't see fuel becoming a major factor in gameplay to be honest. I can see the meta shifting to gear and ships that have enough range, but not people flying around with ships that run out constantly while doing their favorite gameplay loops.
To me. This ship feels like the link between heavy fighter and gunship. It amalgamates various fighter designs, Vanguard, Scorpius, Hornet with a sous on of Valkyrie. In my mind it’s a super heavy Fighter, a defender. Matches the name Guardian better than the Guardian seems too?
To be a gunship, it really needed 2 more double turrets once CIG announced the twins slaved to pilots. If it ever gets blades, this thing will be nuts.
It’s going to need massive affective movement (360 degree domes) in those size 4s to warrant an extra gunner.
There are already enough single player ships in game, and more will be added regardless. This is a ship ment for the whole MMO part of the game. This is for friends to fly around and have adventures in. This is the "type of ship" most people will probably be playing in with other ppl.
Medium to large salvage ship idea. Take the Starlancer TAC and replace the two lower turrets with salvage heads.
Edit: Also the Vulture isn't exactly small. It is about the size of the Cutlass.
Was hoping for a salvage ship bigger than the Vulture and smaller than the Reclaimer, too.
After all the nerfs after the fact im not using ANY new cash i just melt ships and use credit for new ships i wanna try. The redeemer and corsair nerf made me say enough.
My theory is that the wing turrets on the paladin will have a slight pitch angle, perhaps 20 dgr or so and then a 360 degr turn, giving them a sort of inverted hourglass range of fire, this would mean they can not fire directly to the left/right of the ships reference of plane but most other angles
i think the top turret will get around 40 degrees of angle, all turrets are nerfed thar way, ig you wanna know how the side turrers will operate, just check the side polaris, they have a very limited arch back and forward and extremely limitid arch up and down
Pilot and gunner is the most efficient. You only need 2 extra gunners to cover the sides, mostly defense instead of offense. One extra for engineering, maybe.
People in the star citizen community freak out so easily over any change or tweak. Relax people just play and see how it goes
It is tradition
With the paladin, what is the point in having more than 2x crew when the pilot has control of guns? Any "additional" crew would be far more useful in additional fighters, as opposed to staying on board and turret gunning.
Yeah, need more force multiplication in general for multi crew, especially on these pure combat ships. That goes for many others, redeemer since it got heavy handed, retaliator basically has no use other than torps. Military ships need badass turrets unless the pilot DPS is already very high.
Multicrewing vs Multiple ships has always been talked about. Why have a fully crewed x instead of x numbers of ships. I think at that point, its more about what kind of gameplay and "fun" you want vs being simply efficient and "min/maxing".
Is a fully crewed Polaris ever gonna be more efficient than 10+ smaller ships focusing on one Polaris? I doubt it ...and you can't balance a game thinking that way.
@@olivierpelletier9643 Fair enough, I think there's a certain point where it's not necessarily about what does the most damage, but what ship do I want to play in for immersion, or simply having fun.
The other 2 crew can aim and fight in 2 other degrees as the Pilot you can Only fire forward. You Lose 50% of your coverage the sides when the pilot has the guns.
@@AlbertoMartinez765 You lose more than 50% coverage if the pilot is unable to gimbal that far. Head tracking is the only way I know to gimbal that far
I thought the Liberator was going to be the answer for the "medium" salvage ship by expanding the Vultures storage
Travel mode needs to have navigational shields or the little bits of meteor will wreck and destroy the ship.
If they made a list of ships to be released befor and after 1.0 they wouldnt sell as many of the ships that will release after 1.0.
I think a upgrade from the Paladin would be the Hammerhead.
Regarding the caterpillar. How hard would it be to put 2 or 3 landing pads on top?
They have hinted that the 2x 2 s4 turrets will be able to be pilot controlled.
As far as fuelling goes, why isn't there an option to have scu containers of fuel and a way to manually refuel? Make it take longer than a refueling ship but why couldn't someone keep an scu of fuel in reserve, like those little red gas cans we use today?
It would be cool to see a Salvage equivalent to the ROC.
I do think that balancing 5 tiers of components is going to be awful its either going to be small enough of a bonus that 2-4 are useless or big enough that 1-4 are useless.
The only idea i can come up with is you get a random 10% bonus to a stat on a component and each tier gets a separate roll on a new stat. (power/cooling/stability/ect.)
So my shiny new T5 gun has 10% less power draw 10% less required cooling 10% faster energy recharge 10% fire rate 10% recoil reduction.
This is way less imbalanced than a flat 50% less power draw or 50% damage and wouldn't limit you to a t5 is the only option and play into the mmo aspect of the game.
I still think the High Quality crafting model FF14 and now WoW use that makes crafted stuff have a chance to have better stats than baseline is far more manageable.
I have some insider info... Farrister doesn't wear a mustache IRL.
@@theg0z0n bad info - it's real!
@Farrister new reports coming in. Scans are reporting it is real, and the word glorious keeps getting used.
Lolol
I sure was way too easy to solo ERTs before master modes. Now I have no idea how to survive the hammerhead :)
That's the Anvil "Moneygrab"....i mean Paladin...and reason why the Corsair and Redeemer got nerfed...
How? Like even with the nerf with 4 people the Corsair is better. Has more guns, the same shield, and can fit an ursa in the back
I would design the Argo SCORP, looking like a scorpion (animal), with an upper cargo door on the back (like a hangar door, or the Ironclad one). Scraping on the pincers, tractor beam on the tail. So you can use the tail to tractor beam components from the front of the ship directly into the cargo hold.
Crew of 2-4, with place for an engineer that while salvaging can EVA on board the scrap and extract internal stuff.
Considering the weapon sizes of the Paladin it's not made to go after fighters
Ah shit, here we go again. Now I want a Medium Drone Salvage ship..
There's an empty area in the back at the top but I can't see it being cargo or vehicle bay given the 4x s5 turret track wraps around the back, under and over. Nowhere to get anything in.
Oh Farrister hasn't heard that the rambler quantum fuel is getting nerfed for 'reasons'. Now the intrepid is the ONLY starter that can make it to Pyro, definitely not scummy marketing by CIG once again.
@@OutlookJonas oh no!!!!! Tell me it isn't so!
@@Farrister hahaha.
1:17:00 - that's what i also want for SC. But it should get increasingly difficult with shipsize. So a starter or any ship below lets say 200 Bucks or whatever shouldn't have any form of startup procedure, but stuff like a Polaris or Galaxy etc. should definitively get Startup procedures for pilot / Engineer.
*cries in f8c
6:35 turrets on rails is dumb. Just fly upside down. Combat in star citizen is so dumb sometimes
@@805Peej I think it's more useful in atmosphere, eg attacking bunkers
Why is Farrister referring to Redeemer having drop seats, thus being half gunship, half dropship, while it does not have any. Am i missing something?
YES a medium salvage ship. I whod like to see a Valkyrie frame we got torrer sets for controls (co-op) and the ground floor, the jump set and mand turret is removed for a salvage compactor 1 SCU containers in the midel and intarnal store on left/right sid off it
I’d love to see a 3 man salvage ship with drones.
They should not allow the pilot to control those guns. It really does say we nerfed Redeemer for this ship, as well as it makes it so you don't need redeemer. This even out shines a fully crewed hammer head. Hh has what 1 pilot, 1 engineer, 6 turrets, quad size 4. With this you can have 4 paladins, 4 quad size 5 and 4 quad size 4.
I'd keep it like it is and give the Redeemer the maneuverability it should have for its size. Make it more of a "super heavy fighter" and this a "mini gunship." Although we also can't leave out the newest entry, the Starlancer TAC which promises to be better than either of them at more roles. Cargo, med beds, drop seats, snub fighter.... the TAC will honestly take jobs from both Redeemer and Paladin.
@jimrussell4062 the tac is pretty large and not very manuverable. Also from the look of it those larger turrets only seems to aim at the ground.
"don't worry, crafting will fix it"...ah yes, totally trying to balance tens of thousands of combinations is something CIG can do given their stellar track record
29:00 You mean the Vulcan?
They just need to lower the straff acceleration of large ships, increase the max speed of ships and leave fighters being the ones that still have the straff accelerations and rotation rates. Think battles like in battlestar
Personally this is what i think they should do, from teh Vulture s2 size ship they should go to a s3 or 4 size ship take the front canopy and move it forward and replace it with a bar claw we now know we don't need the tuning fork from the vulture with latest technology. have two floors top with retractable roof for detachable's. bottom floor for boxes, and have up to 4 scu boxes two high or so, both with floor grid size so that could be 96 scu top and bottom, or 124 top and bottom. and have a dedicated rail mount tracker beam. so on this rail it could eather go stern to bow or circle the ship to get at points to get detachable's to the top deck. so solo yes multi crew able yes i would say at least up to 5 ppl with pull down seets with copilate tractor operator box puller and nother puerson that isn't pulling boxes out to the other ship pulling coponets.
For me its absolute betrayal to pitch a pc spacesim and end up with doing console space COD.
I don't think SC will ever go to console...at least not anytime soon I guess.
I don't think it'll play like COD, either. I think it's more headed in the direction of similar space games that try to make themselves easier to grasp. It's a bit watered down, but space COD is a stretch.
Im not sure that letting people keep their weapons while in the high travel speed mode is a good idea. For example, if your in a ship that is trying to flee an encounter, it doesnt matter to you if your weapons work, you only care that you lose your shields when trying to quantum. The attacker now however, can chase you in your escape mode with their weapons active and will now have an even easier time killing you because your shields are gone.
It does say in the write up "Two dual remote turrets safeguard the Paladin’s flanks, preventing dead spots and ensuring an all-round firing arc."
Nav mode should only be used for quantum travel. Speed in nav and scm should stay the same.
The Paladin is for people that now have a toaster oven instead of a Redeemer or Corsair. Cig really is the greasiest company out there Step 1: Advertise ship as super op Step 2: Profit Step 3: nerf op ship Step 4: Sell a slightly better ship for just a little more money Step 5: Repeat step 1-4 for as long as this content emaciated whale club is willing to take it.
You bring on a mix of creators I like/dislike. Farrister is firmly in the like area.
@@XMathiasxX too kind!
They really need to finish all the previous concepts before creating new ones
"The turrets on this look like they can't swivel and pivot much on the sides".
Mr. Tomato, we have no reason to believe the side turrets are somehow nerfed in articulation when gunner controlled. Unless CIG says otherwise you should treat those as normal turrets that have full articulation unless pilot controlled when they switch to work like forward facing gimbaled guns. I have no idea why you would assume otherwise.
I see you and I raise the pilot controlled turrets on the Freelancer and Starlancer.
(Yes, I know they don't have options to be remote controlled. It was depicted as being able to do broadside fighting in its (Freelancer MIS) release commercial.)
@P3rcival97 I'm confused. Your example confirmes what I said. You had no reason to doubt the commercial until it turned out wrong.
Unless they say or show us that those turrets can't fully articulate when gunner controlled there is no reason to assume they can't. They are normal remote turrets and even look like they fully articulate. It's still okay to mention weird limitations as a possibility, my point was that making it the default assumption is just wrong unless you want imaginary brownie points just in case you are right.
it feels like i’m constantly spamming chat in-game to try to find anyone that’s interested in being crew for ships, only for no one to even respond. With the implementation of PDC systems on the polaris, i really hope blades are coming soon… we really need them
That's wild, seems every server I join has people either asking to be crew/gunner or it's a pilot looking for a crew/gunners and they always seem to succeed.
Well there are orgs to join, and they said at citcon they're essentially making orgs in game and adding an MMO style group finder.
I think part of the problem is instability. I would love to be a crewmember on a big ship, but in almost every case, it takes time to meet up and half way through whatever you are doing there is a 30k or bug that explodes the ship.
When you can log on and play without issue for hours at a time, I think that is when multicrew will shine.
Freelancer DUR has massive fuel processing space
If you work in salvage, you are a salvor, not a salvager. (pronounced Sal-ver). Salvors work on salvage ships.
@@jimskaven5963 I love this little trivia tidbit!
SCM needs to be a touch faster than current, and speeds SHOULD be ship type dependent. A superfast travel aught to be some sort of Quantum travel WITHOUT being Quantum Travel, which should be reserved for intra System Travel.
Like from Microtech to Hurston but between Hurston and it's Moons you use the Superfast Travel that is like Quantum, but is not ITSELF Quantum travel.
Turret range and Turret tracking should be matched to higher attack speeds that fighters and gunships might employ, thus cancelling out any advantage other than the skill of the Fighter Pilot v the skill of the Turret Gunner.
As for Fighter v Fighter, well speed shouldn't ever be the advantage, but manoeuvrability and the skill of the Pilot aught to be the advantage.
The Paladin seems to be a Fat Hurricane to me and would be used the same way.
If the Paladin turns like a whale you'll want people manning the two side turrets. Pilot control doesn't really matter if the pilot can never get a target in front of the ship.
I like the exterior design and the concept.. not the interior design nor the idea of those two gunners station being in there own cockpit down there..
just to have that it require a long corridor around the central stairs... and the stair casee to there for what benefits?
they gonna be looking through the camera of the remote turret!!!
as I said they could have reversed the stair case to have a frontal acces right under the bridge... place the gunners stations on the sides in the rear of the bridge...
and remove the whole lower floor or limit it to a airlock with suit locker in the front... and an engineer onr at the back accessible with a ladder from the upper level.
that would have reduced the height and mass of the ship...
but then even the staircase... WTF?
it's a military ships? way such a luxury for a military ship of 4!!!
if it was a oirigin ship it would make sense...
I would remove the central stair and place ladders... if needed.
This is alpha, beta or the more correct wording, in active development. So CIG trying different stuff, use the data collected and iterate is the way to go IMO. Anyway, its up to Chris Roberts, and as far I picked his vision for Star Citizen is that he want to make it fun. So hopefully his fun is close to most of us. SQ42 flight model, I think will give us the feel of what he want. But thats a singleplayer game.. We see :) Im here to test and give feedback so they can find the flightmodel path they want.
Honestly I hope the lib comes out in the next 2-3 years. Cause if the kraken comes out before the lib would make no sense.
Valkyrie and Hurricane had a baby
who is it for: Redeemer owners 😂😂😂😂
Paladin is perfect for one person with an npc buddy. Han solo/Chewbacca style
Bwforw I watch this just gonna say. This ship has stairs which means you might be able to store bikes inside.
Tis for me, my dear Tomato! Tis for me.
You need to switch because different speeds which you be able to operate.
Farrister is correct about the new flight model. Study up Mr. Tomato!
Almost every person that really loved the game prefers the old system. They might tolerate the new system, and admittedly some do like it for some reason, but it wasn't broken. I don't understand the constant need for CIG to take something that is working fine and change it. How many of us understand the item terminals and the concept behind CIG wanting them to exist, and at the same time prefer the old system because even though it had its own issues it functioned? How much more of our time is now spent running two terminals to get items or needing to call up items in an occasionally working cargo elevator? Master modes didn't make the game better and if you're not making the game better then what the heck are you doing? Stop fixing things that don't need to be fixed and focus on the things that do. That is almost of us are asking and I think it's a perfectly reasonable thing to say.
I think people are getting tired of the ever expanding list of concept ships.
The way I interpreted what they were saying is that base will be close to default SCM and boost will bring it up to nac speed and higher more seamlessly than we have now. And I don't think crafting will ever make the ships go in scm mode to nav mode speed, I think were talking like 50/s increments. Like base is 300, tier 2 350, tier 3 400 etc.
Also general sense I get is people are way overthinking this, MM wasn't a perfect step in the right direction but definitely a needed one and the data seems to back it up. I really believe this benefitted the greater part of the community, even coaches say that their students get a better sense of contribution to team battles, and that they can no longer just kill 17 people by themselves by controlling where the fights take place. I think it's just a very vocal minority led by the types like avenger one that blast at mm and create this artificial sense of animosity towards it.
You know the guy who today was griefing players trying to do phase 3 of save stanton because he wants to make some weird point about how everyone should be ready to pvp like him at all times, by gatekeeping the events rewards he already has. Yes let's please listen to this guy, he sure sounds like he wants the game to be better and more fun.
Even a lot of non-pvper are saying they don't like the flight model. As for Avenger one, he is offering some real solutions. If you really are interested in SC being the best it can be, you should probably actually check out what those suggestions are before you make broad sweeping statements about people based on your own personal like and dislikes. A lot of people quite like the guy and what he has to say.
@@tibitzu365 I have heard a lot of a1s content. I'm a pvper as well. Have you watched his talk with yogi on tomatoes channel? He was bodied super hard because he comes up with these makeup scenarios and game analogies that don't make sense and yogi hits him with facts and data from the actual game he is helping develop.
His "solutions" are just bad for game longevity and he creates these "problems" like he keeps going on about this "geometric" issue that you parrot here but bet cant even say what it is without going back to his video to check out. None of it even makes sense in the long term when considering a lot of game mechanics that are coming into the game.
Dude goes on and on about interceptors and the buccaneer and get bodied by random dudes in alien fighters in championships. He has no fkin clue what hes on about but people follow him in a cult like manner.
I would suggest the jonathan winters channel if you like to see people who actually understand the game, don't cry about it every day and are not toxic griefers who want to force pvp onto people.
@@AlexeiX1 Yeah, I know Johnathon Winters. He's great, partly because he's easy to understand. Avenger one is not easy to understand and that is mostly due to a difference in communication skills. However, Avenger ones ideas are good, lowering light fighter weapons ranges 10 under 1000m, increasing the velocity of multi crew ship guns, a compromised speed of 500 base SCM. The geometry is about making sure that slower, bigger ships are able to engage smaller, faster ships and still be able to hit them/ How ships fly through space in relation to other ships. These are good ideas. As for "griefing", piracy is an intended gameplay loop "forcing other players to PvP". The only person I hear whining like a little b and toxic as f is the guy I'm talking to now. Who are you to say that I'm parroting someone without any idea of the concepts discussed, how dare you imply that I'm following someone without any brain activity like some cult member. Get a grip on yourself man, stop pointing the finger at other people and have a good look in the mirror. Unfortunately, we haven't had a video from Johnathon Winters for almost a year which is the entirety of master modes in the PTU, so we don't know what he thinks about it. But as far as I can tell, he's not playing the game either. You talk about "data"? Half of regular players through 2023 are not playing it in 2024. That's what CIG is listening to, the silence is deafening.
@@tibitzu365 Jonathan Winters discord is thriving still, with good pvp minded people who aren't whining. All avenger does in his channel is whine and get proven wrong over and over again. Yes you are parroting, bet you went back to his videos to be able to try and explain that nonsense, that again, don't even make any sense given we don't have half the mechanics that are supposed to come into play. especially for bigger ships.
Pirating is ok btw, one of my favourite creators is Voidy, and his pirating videos are amazing. The difference is in intent, avenger wants to ruin peoples days, he wants to punish people for not staying in arena commander 48 hours a day like he does. He attacks people for the sole purpose of attacking them, he doesn't want to pirate, he has no goal in mind.
Bro is attacking people doing server wide events.
He gets called out on it and he comes out with that bs that everyone should be prepared to pvpI guess its how he gets satisfaction since he cant beat anyone thats barely skilled like we see in the championships. And he only does that right now cause the mechanics that are supposed to be in place to curb that behaviour arent yet. But if it was pyro, then sure, go nuts. But server wide events that give out rewards he already ahs and gate keeps?
His videos aren't hard to understand because he's good at it, its because hes just full of s... And its ok if you're into that, follow your cult leader.
And brother you came into my comments to whine about how you're not the only one whining, and you want to say that i'm the whiner? XD
@@AlexeiX1 You came into my comment first and started insulting me, now I'm coming into your comment and insulting you. I haven't heard one thing from you about the solutions avenger one has offered, the only thing you have had to say is that he's full of shit. Sounds personal to me, did he have sex with your mother? Aww diddums. "Brother", all I've heard from you is whining. In Sc, combat can happen anywhere, that's from the devs. I'm no cult member, I have a brain. You should try using yours too by actually arguing your points, because "he doesn't know what he's talking about because I say so" doesn't cut it. Have an argument to support your speech or STFU.
Paladin needs a couple cryopods
For bounty hunters