IRONCHAD STOMPS THE COMPETITION | STAR CITIZEN
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 มิ.ย. 2024
- Algared and Execute share their thoughts on the Ironchad and IC Assault and what it compares too and where does it sit in the lineup?
You can support us on Patreon, helps us with new Equipment Etc: / inforunners
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @inforunners
Use this referal code and join Star Citizen and earn 5,000 UEC STAR-JM66-LWRV
Inforunners discord for your suggestions or just ask questions! / discord
#StarCitizen #Inforunners #Squadron42 #NoBullShit #PC #VideoGame - เกม
![LISA - ROCKSTAR (Official Music Video) REACTION [SHE'S BACK!]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QBxE30vavMQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![ความรักของยักษ์เขียว (ทศกัณฐ์) - เดี่ยว ไออุ่น [OFFICIAL MUSICVIDEO 4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yCCy-QVHqK8/mqdefault.jpg)
I wonder if the ship mobility of the Herculeses' ships will be significantly better in atmosphere. I could see that being a very big bonus in a combat deployment scenario.
The IA will probably be somewhere between falling with style and flying like a brick.
And their roles are very different, the C2 and M2 are both drop off and take off ships while the IA is a ship i see simply dropping into a hot zone guns blazing and just planting itself on the spot.
I agree with you both here, with these guys would look at all aspects of the different ship instead of just rushing to push their points.
Thanks to VTOLs the Ironclad should be able to not crash in atmosphere comfortably, but I imagine the Crusader ships actually fly by comparison.
Armor on the Ironclad, and Assault is fine, but You really only need to destroy the Command Module. (not armored)
This is a MAJOR weakness, and now that we can target individual components, EASILY targeted by pirates.
Yeah that’s a criticism Exe made the other day when we were discussing it and a point we just forgot. We were both fairly tired and and as with the nature of conversations some things get left out.
I think the C2 series are going to be very fuel efficient in comparison to the Ironclads.
Yep. My opinion here also is defensive ability. Anyone ever tried leaving atmosphere in a Cat? Pirates have more than enough time to take the ship. The hardest thing to stop is a Herc at full speed dropping more countermeasures than anyone has a hope of getting through. How much assault landing is going to be done compared to trading?
The Hercules are already way better than the Caterpillar for fuel effeciency - stupidly better.
I wish CIG would bring out more Ships out of the lore like they did with the Zeus, specifically the Crusader Ship Carrier in Lore, the Jupiter, even if it's a Jupiter Mk.2 or what ever a modernized one since the design is ancient it would be neat to see a Crusader take on some sort of Carrier, and since it was designed for Shuttles in lore they could get away with making a Snub Fighter or light fighter Swarm Carrier of sorts, maybe even design a Small Crusader Snub to go with it if you dont fancy any of the other snubs available
I literally just finished filming this same video lol time to edit! You guys are awesome!
Ill be sure to watch yours as well
I bought the ironclad assault to be a forward operating base / base establishment tool.
Something to live in and temporarily operate in an area to exploit resources away from a permanent home.
Or to use as a shelter while establishing a permanent home base, later acting as a defendable “Keep” at the centre of base and able to offer a huge amount of defensive support against ground assault. Provides component and vehicle maintenance when you might not yet have that online.
Also with the base built around it would be a super convenient ship to use to bring in supplies, no need to unload it and organise as it IS the base store room and strong hold.
I think Ironcla is referring to the war ships first introduced during the American civil war.
Can't wait to buy one of these! ... At New Deal
come back in 8 years it will be there.
Would new deal lower their standards enough to actually sell one though?
I do have a normal Ironclad CCU lying around but I'm mainly banking on CIG giving the C2 a tractor beam where the other two variants have their chin turrets, which would make it perfect for solo pilots since the C2 is fast, maneuverable and still packs quite a punch with its pilot controlled weapons.
I've just grabbed a CCU from an M2. The loaner is lackluster so my C2 will be in place until the Assault is released.
Maybe I missed you all saying it, but another point in the Ironclad to Valk is that the Valk is a 5 crew ship, and the Ironclad is 6. But so much more ship for only one extra body.
Also the Hercules is appealing due to needing half of the crew.
On the comment that the Ironclad is good value, it seems certain to increase in price prior to release. Popular ships seem to follow this pattern when comparing initial pledge prices versus on-release prices. Think of the 890J which started at $600, went to $890 and is now $950; or the Carrack which started at $350 and is now $600. There are lower-cost ships, too, like this: the Taurus jumped from $150 to $200; the MSR from $225 to $260; the Corsair from $215 to $250.
It does feel a bit like someone at CIG is a big fan of Drake, it's just so much more ship than the competition. I have CCU's for both variants but would give them up in an instant for a similar ship from another manufacturer.
I think the 4 large shields are with the shield re-work they mentioned with the Zeus concept so it's not as much a difference as it might seem. Still picked up a ccu to the fatterpillar
Great chats lads! I really think the Ironclad is one of the best concepts we've had in years, which was well timed because, I think the Star Citizen community was getting a bit tired of large concepts being added to a backlog. I'm not a Drake person but the Ironclad is great. I'm going to try and CCU to both.
Great video. I pick up the assault for the repair/ manufacturing bay and so glad the roof opens otherwise I would have melted and got the standard ironclad
Pretty sure the herc will be faster, more maneuverable, reliable etc.
Also the crew requirement is half the an ironclad and has way better pilot guns. With this in mind if you need to match the carry capability of the ironclad you could ditch the 3rd crewmember and with 2 crew per ship take 3 hercules in for the crew requirement of the ironclad assault, that means 6 tanks on the ground faster with much less of a chance of losing everything at once with the "eggs in one basket" approach.
Ill bet they will be able to get back out of the drop zone quicker and pick up another haul of vehicles in a much more efficient manner than the ironchads.
That being said, im getting both ironclads and the m2 so there.
One thing I always hate is people thinking bigger is always somehow better.
I like the idea of the assault, cargo, transport and repair.
The possibility of another Ironclad variant with a proper ship pad and repair/rearm/refuel capability is intriguing. It'd have to be taller to carry a Prospector or Vulture to be useful to industrial players, and that seems unlikely. But if can carry 2 light fighters or a light fighter and a snub then you have a budget escort carrier. It could keep a few fighters in circulation, plus a variety of turrets.
But of the choices available, I'd much prefer the Assault because it is more like a mobile base than a mere freighter, but is what the base model Ironclad is. A 25% reduction in cargo profits more than balanced by the versatility of the Assault, and I don't even care about moving tanks and other large ground vehicles.
I have an M2 and Liberator, and got CCUs to both the base Ironclad and Assault variant to upgrade my Caterpillar - still undecided on which Ironclad I'll upgrade to
At least you've got the luxury of time to decide. The more I think about it, the more I like the Liberator's blend of versatility over the Ironclad Assault. Just having that vehicle bay, ship landing pads, and retaining a dedicated cargo area all at the same time without compromising is really nice. The repair bay on the Ironclad Assault sounds good, but you give up so much to get it. This is not an easy decision... I do not envy you.
Hercules will arguably fly better in atmo, needs smaller crew requirements, are still armored. As a solo to 2-3 player group I’m gonna need to see what npcs can actually do before going to something like an ironclad. Not to mention the Hercules is a very comfy ship to fly regularly.
Yeah, I think it will be more enjoyable to fly in most ways. The two massive things against the series are the value of the Ironclad and moving large cargo sorta sucks in the Hercules. But if you need something on the ground quick the C2/M2 will be significantly better and it will be a more enjoyable experience doing it.
Bingo. For my it's hard to look at the Ironclad due to the crew needs.
@@hbutler2 we also need to see the tractor beams on ironclad they look top mounted from pictures so it is uncertain if they can load from the ground. If they can not aim at ground then you end up loading just like the Hercules through only one door instead of two.
I got CCUs to both of them. I am seeing a use for both, and want to see where they end up before committing to one or the other.
the hercules is not crushed by the ironclad in any sense of the word, the benefit is that the Herc handels really well in atmo for a ship of it's size, the ironclad will fly like a brick in atmo.
You are spot on and let's be honest the IC will be a missile magnet just like the Cat is and won't be dodging torps like the Herc can these guys are also very narrow minded on gameplay and can't think outside the box when it comes to how to use ships they look at a piece of art with tanks going pew pew designed to sell ships and focus solely on that. Add to that they are also using the new component stats matrix vs. the old stats that have yet to be updated for the 4.0 engineering gameplay which makes what they say a total mess.
Why is it that most content creators seems to miss this factor....?
unless it doesnt... lots of chungus sized engines might be able to power through the brick-like nature of the IC. It's also meant to stick around and act as fire support for ground units as well, which would lend itself to be at least adequate in atmo. so while the Herc will undoubtedly handle better in atmo, it isn't enough of a difference to offset all the other advantages the Chad brings to the table.
I picked up a CCU to both, and my org grabbed an Assault. I think I'll personally use an Assault more than the Base, though i might still use it. The Assault is just so much more versatile. For most of my hauling I still have a Hull C.
So much energy put into this imagination workshop of something we might not see for at least 5 years, im really surprised ppl buy full concepts at that price with no release date, i will stick to the 5$ ccu i got from the M2 for the Assault, did not even bother with the other.
Especially with a Caterpillar as loaner, it should be a Hull C or C2 at least.
Algared surprised as " Ironclad have 4 large shields....." it does not have any shield, it does not exist and by the time it comes to exist M2 might have 4 large shields as well, like the Retaliator jumped from 2 to 6 shields, the Freelancers got 3 out of older 2 shields.
Everything is subject to change, they will have to balance older ships and models, the new ships are always better on paper, when they come to existance the competitors will be updated to not be completely abandoned.
I regret buying an Ironclad Assult, after comparing to the Liberator it's just a better ship overall. Can fit more than 2k SCU cargo in the hangar (unsecured) + 400SCU dedicated storage and pads to ferry small ships.
I'd use it for the Misc Hull ships, ferry Argo SUV, MPUV and raft on the top pads.
Liberator imo is just better value for what your getting but these are my thoughts and I kinda felt ripped off with the price of the Ironclad price.
Honestly, I'm curious about the Assault and Titan suits. It seems like the Assault is the only drop ship that can service them.
I upgraded my C2 to the original Ironclad over the assault for now, but may depending on what comes out, upgrade to the assault instead...but as always thanks for your vids and input!o7🤙🏽
imo the liberator's niche will out do the ironclad by miles since it can carry larger ships and more vehicles. I expect in the near future for CIG to release a ground vehicle sized fabricator to fill out that niche and as an upgrade to hand tools and I would expect it to be as capable as the one on the Ironclad. similar to the nursa. Were that to happen the liberator immediately becomes entirely unaffected by the ironclads existence.
Also lib can fit 4 tanks on just the front landing pad. Conservatively it should be able to easily fit 12 tanks with roll on roll off capabilities possibly as many as 16 and up to another 12 tanks if you wanna use a tractor beam or risk driving on the front door to get them up on the top landing pads. The Ironclad is just not going to come anywhere close to the lib in terms of vehicle deployment.
I think you guys consider the ships from a solo perspective. The Liberator for me and my org is a piracy platform, I can bring a snare ship, two fighters and a medical vehicle. When we rock up to a choke point we have everything and having handled more cargo than most. Pirates know that the liberator as it stands has more cargo space than posted on the matrix.. all that space inside is cargo space.. you don’t need a grid.
While I appreciate the comparison, I'd be remiss to remind you that the M2 Hercules value lies in rapid deployment of assets; not just speed through the air, but rapid landing and unloading/loading. The M2 can do so while flying nap of earth or near so. It is also rapid to crew - in an emergency, a single pilot can egress a hot zone. Is it overvalued in the real world? Absolutely.
Also, in many cases, the show creates a comparison of the price of an available ship with the current price of a concept ship. Until that concept is launched, you are actually comparing the flyable ship with the flyable loaner. It is guaranteed that your $450 Ironclad will be a $450 Caterpillar until the Ironclad is flyable, at which point it will not be $450. Same for the Ironclad Assault.
But these are opinions - I have an M2 in my hangar over the C2 based on my play style and in game choice, knowing that the key differentiator, armor, is not there but the cargo is reduced artificially as if it is.
I kinda wanna use an assault Ironclad as a rally racing garage. I will absolutely use it to transport my racing vehicles to the "tracks". Great stuff, gents! 😉👍
I could see the Ironclad doing that. That was always how the Crucible functioning
@@algared6131 Can't wait to put that big boy to use either! 🤩👍
Liberator is a ferry for small ships and vehicles internally. Ica is more vehiclenor cargo oriented movment.
Requires a lot of crew, though. 2 crew C2 vs 6 crew Ironclad is already cutting profits in thirds. Compared to M2 in half.
The CCU is there to make up for it and then some. Larger operation = more profit.
But its efficiency is probably much lower than C2/M2 as well.
4 of those 6 crew are just on the Ironclad's turrets though, much as they would be if you could crew all the M2's turrets.
@@mattp1337 Nobody operates the Caterpillar with people in the turrets. Same thing for the C2 and M2. This will not change with the Ironclad. Most players play alone or in groups of 3-4 players.
@@TheIceJester When trying to argue your point, try not opening with an obviously false assertion.
I got both. The Ironchad is THE ship I always wanted but never thought they'd make: a 1000+ SCU internally stored cargo ship. I got the Assault to replace the Liberator as my race team transport.
Whoa Id be careful here. I think a lot of people are excited to replace the Lib with the IC. All I’m saying is be careful with this…. If you find the scale images of the Lib beside the IC you’ll see the Lib is bigger…. And one single Lib top pad would cover the entire opening for the IC. Which means….. there isn’t much space for ships. Sure you can jam things in there…. But when you do, that Lib can still carry 3 ships, an interior that also carries 4 vehicles and still has 400scu of cargo. Be very careful before you decide the IC can replace a Lib.
BMM has much more cargo, medical bay, landing bay, and stores.
@@charliemcawesome5012 No thanks. I'm all in on the Ironchad.
@@rooster1012 the BMM is gross.
@@serrethindustries9468ok… do you. I’m just saying be careful. I personally see these as very different ships that complement each other in similar rolls. When a lot of guys leaving atmo realize they can only do 90 while a Herc is doing 250+ and the pirates get you….. because Drake is know for its countermeasures….. that’s your issue. Go take a Cat to atmo somewhere…. You’ll get an idea of what you have coming.
wow, its stops the competition, i didn't even know it was flight ready, ill go buy one right now.
Thank you Exe and Algared,
i am with you here,
but as the height of the Cargo at the Ironclad and Assault is only 7.5m,
the Liberator still have a meaningfull exisistence.
Same with the Crucible, as she will be much more efficiency at repair and not limited in size of making parts, like the Ironclad.
Still both are very good Ships, as i like Drake anyway.
The Ironclad is superb but I hope it won't take 5 years to show up in game
I do feel like Execute isnt factoring in the speed, agility and crew. The Ironclad is a big ol target that won't have the Maneuverability to conduct a contested assault.
Feels to me that the ironclad is more of a FOB while the m2 is a hot drop type ship.
Love Crusader styling and the brand; not a fan of Drake branding. And yet... now have an Ironclad Assault lined up instead of an M2 based on specs.
Ironclad can easily transport large vehicles - it has three tractor beams. Pick them up through the roof. Drop them off anywhere in range of the beams.
Forgot to mention that the assult has 36 seats for troop transport as well
Herc series will have a massive advantage in terms of speed and agility. Not sure why everyone ignores this.
Did we muss somthing?
The M2 hast Armor and Engine to Survive with turrets aimed down.
The Base ironclad: 2 Layers FLEX tape dosent count as Armor. (Drake)
I didn’t like the look of liberator or Hercules series so I grabbed both variants. I’m very excited for their release in the next decade. (Optimistic time frame)
I snagged a $5 M2 to Assault CCU the first day. I'm debating whether to apply it. I've got a Liberator and Galaxy as well, so the M2 is kinda superfluous. One thing I do like about the M2 is the standard military components. Without knowing what the Ironclad Assault components and stats will be I'm probably just gonna sit on the M2 to Assault ccu for now.
But where is my Crucible after almost 9 years? CIG drive me nuts. Ironclap scheduled for 2033 imho.
The ironcrap looks good vs large ships but looks terrible vs capitals, Just like any other large ship.
If you are going to pay big bucks for a ship, get the Capitals.
If you like cargo, BMM.
If you like Cargo + combat, Vehicle transport, Idris.
If you want cargo, industrial/support vehicles, get a Kraken.
People are just hyped for the rooftop. LoL.
I love the liberator and honestly it almost ruined the dream a bit for me. The ironclad is damn good and fills some of the gaps I miss with the liberator. I got both now but I really hope the lib still turns out to be fun and useful.
I still think the lib will be far more useful for ship transit, including the pocket carrier roll with the ships being able to take off in the open and not have to navagate any structors for the most part like the ironclad will with the roof open. Im also interested to see what the repair facilites will have and how to use them to see if its even capable to fix ships, and not ground vechs like they showed the tank in the repair garage.
The roof on the ironclad bay severely limits the size of ship it can carry too. The Libby will remain the more versatile ship IMO
If I wanted a highly mobile ground assault force that I could resposition quickly, I'd choose an M2 over the ironclad assault. If I want to take and hold a position I'd choose an ironclad assault over the M2. If I wanted to reinforce a ground assault and take close air support fighter/bombers, I'd choose the liberator. Tools for the job.
I expect that the C2/M2 will be more fuel efficient and that they will handle a million times better in atmosphereic flight.
Yup I suspect you may be right. Although I’d expect hovering to be difficult for both. Flight should be easier for ships with more aerodynamic surface.
7:00 - which is why we don't have the Hull B. The value proposition is too high and they want to sell other things in that space.
What would you rather CCU to an Ironclad? M2, Catterpillar or Liberator? xD
caterpiller to fatterpillar. m2 and liberator are diff roles then fatterpillar, fatterpillar is same role as caterpillar just bigger and better.
@@aka-47k dont u think cater will get modules the iron wont get?
Do the ironclads have pilot weapons?
IMO, the Liberator is a better ship than the Ironclad and C2. Sure it has the least cargo out of the three ships but it has a dedicated cargo hold. The two other ships, the space is shared between cargo and vehicles.
The Liberator is also the only one of the three that can act as small mobile bases for either mining or salvaging. This is where the Liberator will excel. Get a small group of people, a liberator and either two prospectors or a prospector and expanse. Load up the cargo hold with supplies like empty ore bags and you are set.
I think at the end of the day each will have a place, each able to do the tasks with some better at certain aspects than the others
Crew, Armor, Fuel, Em signature, Size. Speed, Manoeuvrability... M2 is for mě king.
Iron vrs Assault - couldnt you just tractor beam the tonks to the ground?
CCU'd my C2 to an IC and then melted my Hull C to get a ICA.
Algared, you are looking tired brother im not trying to insult or make you feel a certain way but brother i hope you get feeling better.
I was tired, my throat was also really sore.
I have a C2 and a Chad, trying to justify or not justify turning my C2 into M2 and Chad into Chad Assault. Iv weighed the positives and negatives of both and cant make up my mind.
Seriously what dose it mean that CIG is getting better at making ships. But that gtting better kills "old" ships sold for real money all before"live". Is this a workable biz model??
I did pick up an ironclad. I think that the cargo amount is right. I tend to do a lot of salvage gameplay, so having the top down hang er cargo bay was was great. I was hoping that the cargo bay would be able to store a vulture inside of it. I think the idea of having the vulture be able to deploy from inside do some salvage put away. The cargo would have been great but it looks like the vulture is a little bit too big. I think that I will eventually trade up for the liberator, which is what I would have picked up this ilw had the ironclad not been released.
It feels very much as if everyone is grasping for reasons why x ship might have any niche at all relative to the Ironclad and Assault.
Part of the problem is the Caterpillar actually being terrible at ongoing pirate gameplay - hence the Fatterpillar.
Not the biggest fan of Drake ships, but picked up a CCU to the Ironclad because 1100SCU in a non-capital ship is a great practicality / value proposition
Q and A trashed some peoples opinions about the Assault. You know those who thought the top door wouldnt open, or that you couldnt repair ships
It doesn't repair ships it repairs and replaces components up to a certain size based on volume whether it be ground or space vehicles like the Carrack does, it does not have 3D structural repair arms like the Crucible.
@@rooster1012 So it does repair ships. Stupid people...
Hey my ship is damaged let me land and get it repaired. Thanks Iron clad repair bay for fixing my ships shields, or my ships power supply, or my ships avionics THEREFORE MY SHIP!!!
No one is dropping tanks in a cpmbat encironment. You drop your vehicles a few km out and let the tanks drive into the combar environment.
If I needed 4 tanks and a bunch of boots on the ground, I'm flying 2 M2s into a hot zone. If I'm just moving them to a forward base, the Ironclad will be okay. But that thing is going to be the biggest slowest target on the battlefield. M2 all the way.
We can be confident Herc will be a better flyer than Ironclad with much less crew. Not like that matters to everyone. Basically being a similar but, different size class.
It's going to be very interesting to see how these overlaps continue. I totally agree they will. Basically why I'm thinking I'll like something else more. Just hard to use the brig area lawfully, it seems to me. The internal turret isn't what I'd hope for function. Got a couple speculation ccu's. including one $5 one.
The function adds are really what makes the Hercs look bad, imo. Hercs dont really have a value add aside from basic traits.
Herc will own the chad in atmo.
Given the likes of the Liberator are still in concept 4yrs after they went on sale, I can’t see this ship being here before 2029, which is both sad and wrong.
I agree with @algared the 600i rework is now challenged by the Ironclad Assault. I would not be surprised if the Assault is a decent exploration ship.
Be keeping my pirate cat don't ever see myself upgrading that one
IMO a C2/M2 are a 1 or possibly 2 small system ship, specializing in planetary loading/unloading due to fuel range and lack of tractor beams. The IronVlad is the long haul, bulk cargo interstellar freighter, think large muti - systems. Crew size should also be taken into account.
Every ship has a place in SC. As the PU gets bigger, the ships will change to accommodate the Vastness of the deep black.
Choices. SC is all about choices
Crew size plays an important element of the selling points of the various choices
Be it time (to gather friends or hire NPCs) or money (to pledge for Extra Digital Downloads to self crew) there are hidden costs that should be a part of the conversation
This is the only ship besides the cat you will be able to shoot the cockpit off of
With the M2 you can put land vehicles in a warzone and get the land vehicles that need to be carried out much quicker
Only argument for the Liberator is you will be able to simultaneously deploy both ground and air forces. The lib also has the front and rear ramp like the Hercules. I’m holding onto my lib for now but I definitely went with the Base Ironclad, primarily for the practicality and price.
I have no idea how you are figuring that the Liberator is only going to carry 2 tanks... That is a wild take when based on current metrics it's easy to see that you can fit 4 nova tanks on JUST the front landing pad without even considering any internal storage. You can fit 12 tanks on the top pads as well so even if the internal parking space is 50% of the upper platform (which is obviously silly to even consider cuz you're just talking about basic geometry) you would still have enough space to easily fit 8 inside plus the 4 on the front pad and that's assuming you aren't using a tractor beam to lift those 12 more onto the top pads. Saying that the Iron Clad is even possibly going to hold more tanks than the lib is absolutely a ridiculous statement. The Lib will also be able to have up 2 medium fighters or possibly as many as 5+ light fighters comfortably. There is absolutely no way you're getting that sort of vehicle load out in side the Iron Clad. Your comparisons to the Cat are spot on but the big selling point of that ship was always the modularity and being able to swap those empty cargo bays out with other modules not just raw cargo capacity. The C2 and M2 I think are correct but are missing a big point which is speed and aerodynamic maneuverability and stability. The Ironclad is going to fly like a brick and that may not matter now but once we have mass effecting the flight performance as well as the real aerodynamic model the I think the atmospheric flight differences between the Hercules and the Ironclad will be night and day. The Ironclad will be great for delivering a lot of supplies to a rear backline position but I'd wager it wont want to come within 50 km of any sort of front line engagement where as the Herc will be happy to deliver armor nearly right up to that point of engagement.
I think you guys miss the perspective of just a normal joe gamer. I've never been able to consistently fill a five man dungeon group in any MMO. Sure I've been a part of a scheduled weekly WOW raid night, but just grabbing four other humans for content that lasts an hour or more isn't reasonable on a regular basis IMO. You guys have spent literally years building a network of org mates, hangers on, etc. that's not the norm for most players.
So the fact you guys didn't mention that an M2 needs half the crew of the ICA proves my point. The C2 is massively more appealing to me because I think it's silly to assume that's be able to crew the Ironclad.
Not really, I have always maintained the belief that AI blades (which with automate various functions) and NPC crew will mitigate the need for players. It is a reason I have several game packages on the account, because I do I tend to use NPC’s especially if those package granted NPC’s also make it possible for friends to temporarily assume the identity of one of the NPC’s. This was mentioned ages ago. And coined the phrase ‘agent smithing’. CIG have remained silent t on this for a while. I don’t expect NPC crew will fully replace player crew but they will make it easier especially with agent smithing for friends to help each other out. Of course I also think there is an upper limit of how many NPCs you could run before the expense and micromanager becomes too tedious. Guess I just have to wait and see exactly what CIG plan to do with NPCs and agent smithing.
Ironclad is a perfect name for a Drake ship. The misunderstanding with Drake is that people think that being made of cheaper materials equates to it being weaker, when often in lore and in game Drakes are listed as heavily armored. An ironclad class ship was made from relatively cheap materials, it was a wooden ship covered thick iron armor, which at the time was very difficult to deal with. Well armored but still easy to source supplies for repairs.
Old man Al is looking so pale...
Old man Al was feeling crook as a dog.
@algared6131 best wishes to you and your health. Hope to see more color in you soon.
I find it strange that none of you streamers question why the SCU is so high in the Iron Glad Assault ship. Don't any of you think that a drop repair ship like this shouldn't have the same capabilities to take over the role of a basic Iron Glad? There's 382 SCU between them!
Why on earth does no one believe there should be a proper distinction between what a cargo ship is and what an assault ship is? An assault ship shouldn't have so much SCU that it surpasses all other cargo ships, plus it’s better armored.
There should be a clear difference between trade ships and combat ships, etc.
It really gives me a headache that none of you question this.
The Ironclad Assault does not have tractor beams. For me, that makes the Assault version a non-factor because I highly value that feature for work in zero-g. It isn't about raw numbers or how a ship is categorized, it's all about use cases. For straight cargo hauling I don't like the Assault version (it would load and unload too slow), but as a landing ship specifically for vehicles or to act as a forward operating Base, I think it's great. Just because it carries a lot of cargo, doesn't meant it'll be the best choice for that job, or even particularly good at the job.
@@JL-rj9fl when you have mpu that can lift cargo in to it an you auto can load it do it get the same role as the normal one just with 382 less SCU
@@blodrush25 It's just that you'd be down to just 770 SCU on the Assault if we take away 382. That would be less than half of the standard ironclad (1536) which is really significant. For me, I'll be loading it in deep space and those built in tractor beams on the standard version will be extremely useful.
@@JL-rj9fl no its 1152 on the Assalut an 1532 on the iron Glad non assalut
the 382 is the garage on the Assalut an repair bay so its stil 1152 SCU
@@blodrush25 Understood, but you've still got to store the MPUV in the Ironclad Assault. You still lose too much cargo for zero-g work when you can just use built in tractor beams of the base model. At least that's how I feel. If you have a friend that can bring the MPUV in another ship that wouldn't be so bad.
Please bear in mind that this ship is NOT FLYABLE and will not be for a number of YEARS. Nothing to see here, sorry, please move along...
The IC's are just kit-bash, not dropping for at least two yrs, a couple of pancake ships that are as exciting as executes ADHD.
I'll believe "not for years" when I see it.
Wrong
The more you buy the more you save. ~~some CEO
@@AccidentalFriendlyFire Well, there is no time stamp on the cruddy BMM, works on halt, training up a new team, 600i rework is knowhere to be seen......and you think they'll bother with the ironclad when they have to release PU 1.0 by Q1 2025 as contracted, Pyro and Sq42, ans all the content and features before then...wake up and cut the ADHD