@friendlyspacedragon7250 I am surprised by the locations of the PDCs and the logic too. Of course, PDCs should prioritize big threats like torpedoes and ignore small missiles if fired at the same time. However, it was very refreshing to see CIG actually doing this :).
@@Camural I would prefer the system to have priority for nearby targets or capacity before reloading - so it would be possible to drag it out by launching a swarm of small missiles or bringing a squadron of fighters closer to the target.
As it should be. Would be too easy to destroy cap ships if we only had to fire missles and torps to destroy them. Needing to destroy pdcs before torps can land on cap ships is a must imo otherwise cap ships would be useless.
Amazing job. Thanks a lot. You covered all the scenarios that came to my mind. Whenever I though something like ".. but what if you fire from 2 sides?" , that was exactly what you tested next. Thanks so much to you and Flicka for all the time and work you put in making these videos.
They changed that because PDC were going for missiles and failing to hit the torps, that means they changed the prioritization logic, since thats how you kill 890j or other polaris, by combining missiles with torps
That is impressively efficient usage of weaponry from CIG. In all honestly, as of now I’d prefer overturned PDC and instead of nerfing accuracy, instead keep them in line via engineering, power requirements. But will see where it goes.
PDC should be ballistic. That way just like IRL you can deplete a ship's PDC ammo and eventually be able to use missiles and torps. Having them be laser is a bit OP. They should be able to take down any missile fired at them, but cant also have them be unlimited ammo.
I hope they change them to be wildly inaccurate but with the same high firerate, this would do several things; First it would just look much cooler Secondly it would become more of a defense through saturation (like the Phalanx CIWs) Finally it would give a chance for missiles to get through, thus making volleys instead of singular missiles more likely to hit, promoting the use of volleys
If only the Vanguard Sentinel had working EWAR jamming capabilities, or if there were “decoy missiles” that were able to look as threatening as torpedoes to the PDS. Unfortunately, I don’t think CIG has enough creativity for that.
Another test to do would be to launch the S10 torps before some S9s and see if it ignores the S9 torps in order to focus on the S10s. Could also do it with S5 torpedoes too.
Fun fact pdcs can't defend against bombs. Tested last night and 2 s10s delete a polaris and 1 well placed bomb from the a1 will erase the polaris engines rendering it useless. Was a fun experiment
@@Liopleurodon they already fixed it, PDCs now will fire and dumb torps, dunno about bombs tou, but it makes sense they would fire to bombs, since base defense is coming soon
Need do get along the sides. decouple, then dumb fire, just before you get in thein LOS on in either end. It's not easy. It will also take several attempts. Thanks!
Awesome work thanks again, maybe it targets the first targets picked up? it would be interesting to see how well it deals with faster size 9 or size 5 torp volleys
I want to see it's effectiveness against fighters and how fast can fighters armed with ballistics destroy those pdts, what we see here is not necessarily a bad thing, it can be the reason to not try to 1v1 capital ships, combat in this game should aim to be combined effort so if fighters (or heavy fighters) can easily take down those pdts we can finally be looking at well designed system :O Also being able to lock small missiles/s5 torps on specific subsystems would be great
Also why do those turrets have to shoot RICE like all weapons do? Can't we get some beam/plasma/flak or anything different so fights would be more interesting?
@@dawidziobrowski1726 beam weapons are planned and actually the Idris K upgrade package actually has a size 10 lazer, and for plasma/flak we actually saw the vanduul using a flak but it was plasma which makes sense. now that i think about it there is a size 4 ballistic cannan that behaves like flak, the shell will detonate near your target as well its called the C788 Size 4 cannons.
Until they give us armor that negates smaller size guns and continuous shield regen like the HH used to have a fighter can easily kill any ship in the game 1v1. (1 fighter vs any fully crewed ship)
I think the reason the PDC ignored the size 3s was that the torps were fired first based on how it looked in the vid. regardless it still makes the PDCs super op and torps as expensive waste against ships with good PDCs. I know the Connie phoenix has a single PDC in the rear but that one is useless as it is a laser cannon not repeater thus shoots to slow and has bad firing arcs due to location. Hopefully these PDCs will get proper balance in the future but think that wont happen for awhile
Nope, firing a volley of 2x4 torps and then firing 2x4 S3 missiles was the tactic to saturate PDCs and clear the way for torps, now they changed the PDCs logic and they will ignore the lesser threat, going straight for the torps
Are these PDCs the default loadout of the 890 Jump, or do they need to be customized? Are PDCs a new feature? How can I find out which ships can equip them?
@gamsc PDCs are new on the 3.24.3 PTU. They cannot be customized, yet and are automatic if your ship has power to guns in the MFD power settings. PDCs are default load out. Right now we have these player ships with PDCs: -Phoenix 1 PDC -890 7 PDCs -Polaris 7 PDCs
@@Camural Nice, thanks! Its a bit confused because that Idris K kit has 4 PDCs, right? That means paying $300 for an Idris K kit gives fewer PDCs for the Idris than the standard 890 and Polaris models has in default loadout.
Every release gets more rediciolous. 2 dedicated Military Capital ship with weapons made to kill capital ships.. cant kill a civilian cruise ship. Amazing Ballancing and quality Management. Looks like we need the Polaris MK2 to kill other targets...
Dw. the cig will "discover" this "totally unintended" anti-everything system by sheer "coincidence" and immediatly "balance" it. RIGHT AFTER the IAE sales are over. 🤣
Maybe I didnt see correctly, but did you also test if the PDC logic is any different if you fire the Firebird s3 missiles before you fire the Polaris s10 missiles?
@lucasvb4372 the Firebird size 3 missiles arrived before the size 10 torpedoes. The Thunderbolt size 3 missiles were ignored when size 10 torpedoes were approaching behind the size 3.
@Camural they arrived earlier yes, but they weren't fired earlier. Maybe the pdcs lock on to the first missile that targets the ship, which in the case of your tests would be the S10.
@@Camural Apparently taking the Polaris into Vanduul swarm solo you can get to like wave 90+, and while that's pve, still makes me think the PDC will do more damage than you think to players fighters in actual practice
@@Ace-Brigade will need to coordinate in the future with a few fighters to take down the big ships, fighter kills the point defense then torps are fired. this is why half the polaris is a fighter bay.
Sorry for the question. But i don´t understood PDC und who is shooting against the torpedos ? NPC in the ship which are controllung the weapons in 890 ?
@Alexander-z2m8m PDCs are new in 3.24.3 PTU. They fire automatically as long as guns have energy in the power distribution MFD screen. No NPCs required. Player ships with PDCs right now: -Phoenix 1 PDC -890 7 PDC -Polaris 7 PDC
@@Camural Thanks for your answer. But is it really such a good idea to defend such a ship fully automatically? Maybe CIG should let the players with flys fighter ships also automatically attacking and then the pilot can leave the pilot's seat and have a beer somewhere.
@@Camural Thank you for info! Would you guess other vehicles will be getting those to or is it just some few ones. Would be nice to be able to attach them to most ships above fighters.
Can fighters target the pdcs? If so, that makes it a reasonable strategy to attack ships that have them by destroying those first and then using the hard hitter missiles. Some ballistic weapons go a long way to achieving this
@schlagzahne6741 we tested this, we cannot target PDCs yet. Sub targeting PDCs doesn't work either. You can try to hit the little things shooting blindly and hoping for the best. They get destroyed but it takes forever, without being able to target them.
@Camural so seems like cig needs to allow this and then we have viable strategy to bringing smaller fighters to hit weak spots and knock out pdcs to allow for more dangerous things to show up
@Camural yep just tried it out and thought you can destroy them, they are so very tiny like you say .... though I bet some pilots are crazy enough to learn how to destroy those. That being said the inferno seems very desirable for such a thing except the fact the ballistic speeds are so slow a ship could rotate and you'd miss
Is no one going to mention the bullshit discrepency between the Polaris, and 890? 890 has 2 times the shield hitpoints 890 has the same number of PDC's 890 has more hull Unless anything has changed recently that I'm not aware of... what's next? They give the hammerhead 8 PDC's with 4x4 manned turrets, 3 capital shields and 3 times the hull of the 890? They just can't stop fucking us Polaris owners can they? And people wonder why I hate the 890. I have a profound loath for it. I would go out of my way to destroy one, even if I have to ram it with a Javelin.
@Fluke2SS 1. Polaris has now the same shield hps than an 890: 908,000 shield hps 2. Polaris has 25.8 times more structure hit points than an 890 Polaris: 3,947,100 890: 153,200
Hey hey.... Don't be picking on the 890 now.. It's a great ship with little defenses, why you gotta bash the little it's given 😂. It looks like the commercial cig made with the explosions out the window 😁
For a ships automated defense that resembles real life this kind of makes sense, but in a game that requires balance it needs to be designed to fail lol I would have no idea how to do that exactly and make it ‘correct’.
we didn't see it's effectiveness to battle fighters, we are used to fly ships alone and to fight only npcs and only solo, this change can actually encourage people to team up and to use fighter escorts
what happens if you fire without locking it ? if friend fire torpedo beside of your 890 ... lot of question ... and again why 890 should have this protection system and not military ship ... it's again non sense of CIG !
Based off of your data, I personally think that the pdc's should stay as lethal and accurate being how futuristic, how far into the future we are. However, once we can subtarget them, this would make ions and infernos, significantly more useful as they should be able to be precision. Weapons destroying PD CS additionally emp weapons. The p d c control system you should have a weakness against emp attacks. That should then also assist, so the emp should shock the pdc control system and the actual also make hacking and the emps also more valuable since right now, they're not, but if you can use them to target pdcs, it would make the gameplay good and there's no need in my opinion. To nerf the pdc's dude, but to add mechanics to mitigate them
And now they fire on Ships, too! But it's not player-controlled, so it's OK, right? CIG sure knows how to skirt their own design promises. What a joke!
Would be interesting to see how the PDS reacts while the ship is rolling and/or while moving, if the target reprioritizing and aiming works as fast as it should. Es wäre interessant zu sehen, wie das PDS reagiert, während das Schiff rollt und/oder sich bewegt, wenn die Neupriorisierung und Ausrichtung des Ziels so schnell funktioniert, wie es sollte.
It looks like they put a lot of thought into the PDS system, and it totally wasn't a last minute rush job to balance out a single ship... On a serious note, I wonder how much of an effect motion (non stationary) combat would make on the accuracy of the PDS.
Classic CIG. "Hey guys, here's a ship with capabilities we've promised for nearly a decade! Awe, you love it? Welp, here's some newer, barely hinted at stuff that completely neuterised the long-awaited thing you love that we just dropped. Now give us more money." I don't mind PDCs. I like the idea actually. But 100% incerception rate vs Torps, AND they shred fighters? (Aren't turrets with AI blades supposed to fill that role?). IMO, a volley of 4x S10s should be extremely dangerous, and while PDCs knocking down around ~2-3 seems fair, you should still have to dodge/shoot/spoof at least one. In its current state, Polaris is basically just a supersized Hammerhead/Hercules hunter (its PRIMARY function was high speed large torpedo delivery), and who knows when PDCs will pop up on those. A lot of people waited so long for this, and in true CIG fashion, screwed it up with feature creep. *rant over*
So, pdc are working as intended. None of these tests have been put to the combat test. Plz have other ships attacking the capital ship while torp are being fired ans the cap ship is trying to evade. Pdc are working like the would in rl. You have to get small fighters to attack the pdc. So no they are not op
Actually, everyone being stationary makes it *harder for the point Defense system,* unless you fly into a salvo. You would try to run away from a thread not fly into it, though. 1. If the PDS is already so successful with stationary ships, there is no need to test moving ships. 2. The speed of the shooter is not added to the speed of the missiles. Nothing inherits the speed of the mother ship in Star Citizen because the game has almost no physics. Undock a Merlin at full after burner speed from an Andromeda = Merlin is at zero speed. Fire missiles/torpedoes from a moving ship = missiles/torpedoes are at their own speed. 3. Running away from a thread, the most likely scenario, would give the point defense system a lot more time to react. Again: Why even test this when the PDS is already so effective when the target is stationary? 4. Feel free to do this test with moving ships, I expect no difference. 5. We cannot target or sub target PDCs yet, we tried.
@@Camural you need to add other elements as intended like small fighters taking out the pds. Even in real life they work this good. It shouldn’t be that easy to take down a cap ships.
@mrragnarokk7415 yes this would be fun: 1. Destroy the PDCs first, using small fighters 2. Go for the kill with torpedoes However, like I wrote, we cannot target or sub target PDCs yet. You can try to hit such a small target blindly and it works, but it takes forever to hit it. I hope we will be able to sub target the PDCs in the future.
Thats what the high pen size 6s are for, pick off pdcs before u fire torps... A pro pilot with a second machine to point blank dumb fire the torps with his toes can still probably own cap ships solo 😂
@@andreasliveras6 Why are people constantly saying 'pick off PDCs'? You can't target them, and you aren't going to hit that small a target manually, especially when it's moving. This is the 'Wait till armor' argument all over again. Also, dumb-fire torps are now targeted as of yesterday's patch notes so.. That's out the window now, too. Torps are useless now.
@@bladehawk232 until sub system targeting is fully in... its not hard to focus your fire on areas of a ship where pdcs or turrets are. Also try point blank dumb firing if you want cheese. As a polaris owner, I'd be extremely disappointed if I could just spam torps and missles at larger cap ships and overwhelm the pdcs, game would become boring very fast.
Camural you are right on many things regarding SC mismanagement but you completely miss the mark on others. 890J has no attack abilities obviously and given its role it must have formidable defenses otherwise it would be just a flying coffin...a proper attack to 890J must have fighters in the mix to destroy the defensive turrets! Your problem is not the number of Polaris but using the wrong set of tools against a ship that is all about defense! In this account your are completely wrong IMO!
@FAAMS1 did you even watch this video? If so, please tell us where I have said, anywhere in this video, that the 890 should be easier to hit. I said, right now the PDCs cannot be saturated, unless you fire maybe 20 - 40 missiles/torpedoes at the same. We also cannot target the PDCs, cannot sub target them. There will be balance changes in the future for sure.
@@Camural move to minimum torp distance, and have both attack from the rear and you will easily kill the 890. The Polaris can also kill the 890 with turrets.
@Mullins23 no, minimum distance of size 10 torpedoes is 2800m, of size 9 torpedoes is 5000m Since Star Citizen has almost no physics, missiles and torpedoes reach their max speed at once. The PDCs start to engage at roughly 1500 - 1700 m. Firing at the minimum distance doesn't change anything. If you have done this and it changes the result, please show us your video :)
@@Camural I am not here for a fist fight I like you, love most of your videos, just stating that you have seemed to imply in the latest videos about Polaris vs 890J that 890J is invincible and the Polaris sucks...not my opinion and I explained why! Other then that we're good have a nice day and see you around!
Damn.. and they said that PDCs are going to shoot fighters if no missiles are around.. Next time bro try doing that while moving... that would be the 100% accurate test!
Actually, everyone being stationary makes it *harder for the point Defense system,* unless you fly into a salvo. You would try to run away from a thread not fly into it, though. 1. If the PDS is already so successful with stationary ships, there is no need to test moving ships. 2. The speed of the shooter is not added to the speed of the missiles. Nothing inherits the speed of the mother ship in Star Citizen because the game has almost no physics. Undock a Merlin at full after burner speed from an Andromeda = Merlin is at zero speed. Fire missiles/torpedoes from a moving ship = missiles/torpedoes are at their own speed. 3. Running away from a thread, the most likely scenario, would give the point defense system a lot more time to react. Again: Why even test this when the PDS is already so effective when the target is stationary? 4. Feels free to do this test with moving ships, I expect no difference.
@@Camural Moving while being shot at puts you in a disadvantage because you are most likely going to blindside a few PDCS... Also rolling and turning takes more time to PDCs to regain target.. I just wanted to see the test not to read a book :D .. imagining things and testing are not the same. Everyone on the video Polaris Vs Idris here on youtube was criticizing me HEAVILY because I said those missiles would not JUST land on the idris without resistance.. Well I was right. I just wanted to test :D since they have the crew and make videos.. Why not right?
@@RED--01so I tested while moving and doing mock fights with other Polaris from my org. And really nothing changed compared to being stationary. Polaris has an issue if the torps being fired at your port/starboard side. The bridge PDS will shoot through the ship and destroy the torps.
Actually, everyone being stationary makes it *harder for the point Defense system,* unless you fly into a salvo. You would try to run away from a thread not fly into it, though. 1. If the PDS is already so successful with stationary ships, there is no need to test moving ships. 2. The speed of the shooter is not added to the speed of the missiles. Nothing inherits the speed of the mother ship in Star Citizen because the game has almost no physics. Undock a Merlin at full after burner speed from an Andromeda = Merlin is at zero speed. Fire missiles/torpedoes from a moving ship = missiles/torpedoes are at their own speed. 3. Running away from a thread, the most likely scenario, would give the point defense system a lot more time to react. Again: Why even test this when the PDS is already so effective when the target is stationary? 4. Feels free to do this test with moving ships, I expect no difference.
![⭐️( ลอยกระทง 2024 ) Ver. แดนซ์ Remix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rMWOLhgXUHc/mqdefault.jpg)
The coverage and priorisation logic seems unusually good for CIG.
@friendlyspacedragon7250 I am surprised by the locations of the PDCs and the logic too.
Of course, PDCs should prioritize big threats like torpedoes and ignore small missiles if fired at the same time.
However, it was very refreshing to see CIG actually doing this :).
I beleive that it's a bug...and it's not intended that way...Just wait!
@@Camural I would prefer the system to have priority for nearby targets or capacity before reloading - so it would be possible to drag it out by launching a swarm of small missiles or bringing a squadron of fighters closer to the target.
it'd be great if we could customize their prioritization behavior with AI blades
Maybe it's a bug.
As it should be.
Would be too easy to destroy cap ships if we only had to fire missles and torps to destroy them.
Needing to destroy pdcs before torps can land on cap ships is a must imo otherwise cap ships would be useless.
Yeah, this was very good to see from CIG.
i am actually more impressed that the PD works this well...
Amazing job. Thanks a lot. You covered all the scenarios that came to my mind. Whenever I though something like ".. but what if you fire from 2 sides?" , that was exactly what you tested next. Thanks so much to you and Flicka for all the time and work you put in making these videos.
:)
Fantastic work!
and give Flicka a hug 🙂
That Ending! Need someone in there next time recording to see where it goes! LMAO 🤣
wait they actually placed "turrets" with full coverage? No some weird as spoiler to block a PDC turret? what madness is this?
They can make all our ship turrets AI controlled at this point but they just wont do it
They changed that because PDC were going for missiles and failing to hit the torps, that means they changed the prioritization logic, since thats how you kill 890j or other polaris, by combining missiles with torps
That is impressively efficient usage of weaponry from CIG. In all honestly, as of now I’d prefer overturned PDC and instead of nerfing accuracy, instead keep them in line via engineering, power requirements. But will see where it goes.
PDC should be ballistic. That way just like IRL you can deplete a ship's PDC ammo and eventually be able to use missiles and torps. Having them be laser is a bit OP. They should be able to take down any missile fired at them, but cant also have them be unlimited ammo.
I was waiting for this, thanks!
You da man Cam, good work. Not that I'll ever get an 890 but still interesting.
I hope they change them to be wildly inaccurate but with the same high firerate, this would do several things;
First it would just look much cooler
Secondly it would become more of a defense through saturation (like the Phalanx CIWs)
Finally it would give a chance for missiles to get through, thus making volleys instead of singular missiles more likely to hit, promoting the use of volleys
I would like to see six Polaris all fire at the same time on the 890 Jump.
Organize it
This is good balance. The Polaris can do 2 things and easily kill that 890. First GET CLOSER and second use the size 6 guns!.
Moral of the story, just keep an 890J hovering around to defend against Polaris torps
I don’t think they protect other ships yet.
Sounds like this giant, expensive, dumb, useless ship finally has a good gameplay purpose then lmao
I would have expected Origin to have done something to pretty them up when they aren't actually firing.
If only the Vanguard Sentinel had working EWAR jamming capabilities, or if there were “decoy missiles” that were able to look as threatening as torpedoes to the PDS. Unfortunately, I don’t think CIG has enough creativity for that.
Another test to do would be to launch the S10 torps before some S9s and see if it ignores the S9 torps in order to focus on the S10s. Could also do it with S5 torpedoes too.
Fun fact pdcs can't defend against bombs. Tested last night and 2 s10s delete a polaris and 1 well placed bomb from the a1 will erase the polaris engines rendering it useless. Was a fun experiment
Interesting to know
@@BGIANAKy it only works for active lock-ons, so nothing indirect, like bombs or dumbfired missiles, torps etc... at least for now.
@@Liopleurodonalready addressed by cig. unusually fast
@@Liopleurodon they already fixed it, PDCs now will fire and dumb torps, dunno about bombs tou, but it makes sense they would fire to bombs, since base defense is coming soon
Need do get along the sides. decouple, then dumb fire, just before you get in thein LOS on in either end. It's not easy. It will also take several attempts. Thanks!
Just in time for it's limited ship sale.
pretty sure the Polaris doesn't have a sale limit
@liamseven1604 the 890 does
Awesome work thanks again, maybe it targets the first targets picked up? it would be interesting to see how well it deals with faster size 9 or size 5 torp volleys
Didn’t I read that the point defense turrets would also target small fighters now as well?
I want to see it's effectiveness against fighters and how fast can fighters armed with ballistics destroy those pdts, what we see here is not necessarily a bad thing, it can be the reason to not try to 1v1 capital ships, combat in this game should aim to be combined effort so if fighters (or heavy fighters) can easily take down those pdts we can finally be looking at well designed system :O
Also being able to lock small missiles/s5 torps on specific subsystems would be great
Also why do those turrets have to shoot RICE like all weapons do? Can't we get some beam/plasma/flak or anything different so fights would be more interesting?
@@dawidziobrowski1726 beam weapons are planned and actually the Idris K upgrade package actually has a size 10 lazer, and for plasma/flak we actually saw the vanduul using a flak but it was plasma which makes sense.
now that i think about it there is a size 4 ballistic cannan that behaves like flak, the shell will detonate near your target as well its called the C788 Size 4 cannons.
Until they give us armor that negates smaller size guns and continuous shield regen like the HH used to have a fighter can easily kill any ship in the game 1v1. (1 fighter vs any fully crewed ship)
@@liamseven1604 you made my day
Perfection ...
I think the reason the PDC ignored the size 3s was that the torps were fired first based on how it looked in the vid. regardless it still makes the PDCs super op and torps as expensive waste against ships with good PDCs. I know the Connie phoenix has a single PDC in the rear but that one is useless as it is a laser cannon not repeater thus shoots to slow and has bad firing arcs due to location. Hopefully these PDCs will get proper balance in the future but think that wont happen for awhile
Nope, firing a volley of 2x4 torps and then firing 2x4 S3 missiles was the tactic to saturate PDCs and clear the way for torps, now they changed the PDCs logic and they will ignore the lesser threat, going straight for the torps
Wrong its a laser repeater and works well if server is okay.
They will also target ships if they are close
If the ship has swarms of fighters targeted by PDC, wonder if they are higher or lower priority than torps. Maybe a way to overload defences?
I suspect the server will die first.
@@narfash-yt probably 😆
Are these PDCs the default loadout of the 890 Jump, or do they need to be customized? Are PDCs a new feature? How can I find out which ships can equip them?
@gamsc PDCs are new on the 3.24.3 PTU.
They cannot be customized, yet and are automatic if your ship has power to guns in the MFD power settings.
PDCs are default load out.
Right now we have these player ships with PDCs:
-Phoenix 1 PDC
-890 7 PDCs
-Polaris 7 PDCs
@@Camural Nice, thanks! Its a bit confused because that Idris K kit has 4 PDCs, right? That means paying $300 for an Idris K kit gives fewer PDCs for the Idris than the standard 890 and Polaris models has in default loadout.
Every release gets more rediciolous. 2 dedicated Military Capital ship with weapons made to kill capital ships.. cant kill a civilian cruise ship. Amazing Ballancing and quality Management. Looks like we need the Polaris MK2 to kill other targets...
NUMBER ONE TESTER. HI FLICKA ITS EWOK LOL
Dw. the cig will "discover" this "totally unintended" anti-everything system by sheer "coincidence" and immediatly "balance" it.
RIGHT AFTER the IAE sales are over. 🤣
Maybe I didnt see correctly, but did you also test if the PDC logic is any different if you fire the Firebird s3 missiles before you fire the Polaris s10 missiles?
@lucasvb4372 the Firebird size 3 missiles arrived before the size 10 torpedoes.
The Thunderbolt size 3 missiles were ignored when size 10 torpedoes were approaching behind the size 3.
@Camural they arrived earlier yes, but they weren't fired earlier. Maybe the pdcs lock on to the first missile that targets the ship, which in the case of your tests would be the S10.
Would be nice to do a test with fighters, I'm curious how much damage the PDC will do to the fighters
@MrPesht little damage. Missiles and torpedoes only have 12 - 100 hit points.
Even a size 12 torpedo has only 100 hit points.
@@Camural Apparently taking the Polaris into Vanduul swarm solo you can get to like wave 90+, and while that's pve, still makes me think the PDC will do more damage than you think to players fighters in actual practice
Cig doing something right for a change?
So now it 890 jump is invulnerable? The torpedoes on the Polaris are completely useless? I'm not sure I follow this change?
@Ace-Brigade you can use guns. 890 only has 153,200 hit points.
@Camural okay then what is the point of the torpedoes then? You can't use them on small ships and you can't use them on large ships.
@@Ace-Brigade will need to coordinate in the future with a few fighters to take down the big ships, fighter kills the point defense then torps are fired. this is why half the polaris is a fighter bay.
@@wraithdino1217 so a fully-crewed Polaris is not enough? Wow they really made this about as useless as they can while still giving it use.
I wonder what future ships will get PDCs? I would think the caterpillar would have got some, will the Ironclad get any?🧐
@Royaltea_Citizen I think only CIG knows :).
Right now we have these player ships with PDCs:
-Phoenix 1 PDC
-890 7 PDCs
-Polaris 7 PDCs
@ thank you ☺️
@@Camuralidris M from the mission has 11 pdcs
Sorry for the question. But i don´t understood PDC und who is shooting against the torpedos ? NPC in the ship which are controllung the weapons in 890 ?
@Alexander-z2m8m PDCs are new in 3.24.3 PTU.
They fire automatically as long as guns have energy in the power distribution MFD screen.
No NPCs required.
Player ships with PDCs right now:
-Phoenix 1 PDC
-890 7 PDC
-Polaris 7 PDC
@@Camural Thanks for your answer. But is it really such a good idea to defend such a ship fully automatically? Maybe CIG should let the players with flys fighter ships
also automatically attacking and then the pilot can leave the pilot's seat and have a beer somewhere.
They will probably nerff that and implement calculated mistake…. To let thru every 6th torpedo…
what's cig's statement on blades ? Will we be getting these soon ? or 1.0 ?
No, they said it will be after 1.0
Camural what ships can attach the PDS so far beside the 890? only capital ships?
@The_Real_bubbazaneti player ships right now:
-Phoenix 1 PDC
-890 7 PDC
-Polaris 7 PDC
@@Camural Thank you for info! Would you guess other vehicles will be getting those to or is it just some few ones. Would be nice to be able to attach them to most ships above fighters.
Can you subtarget the PDC with guns or missiles before launching Torps?
Nevermind you answered that you can't
@S7upidity well I hope we can in the future.
How many does the Polaris have? Either way, im sure their placement isnt as good
Can fighters target the pdcs? If so, that makes it a reasonable strategy to attack ships that have them by destroying those first and then using the hard hitter missiles.
Some ballistic weapons go a long way to achieving this
@schlagzahne6741 we tested this, we cannot target PDCs yet. Sub targeting PDCs doesn't work either.
You can try to hit the little things shooting blindly and hoping for the best.
They get destroyed but it takes forever, without being able to target them.
@Camural so seems like cig needs to allow this and then we have viable strategy to bringing smaller fighters to hit weak spots and knock out pdcs to allow for more dangerous things to show up
@Camural yep just tried it out and thought you can destroy them, they are so very tiny like you say .... though I bet some pilots are crazy enough to learn how to destroy those.
That being said the inferno seems very desirable for such a thing except the fact the ballistic speeds are so slow a ship could rotate and you'd miss
So whats the point of having a Polaris if big ships are inmune to torpedos¿
Gonna need some fighters to destroy the point defense turrets first. ❤
Why is space so green???
dumb question, but if the torps blow up too close to each other, will they damage one another?
th-cam.com/video/WUECkGR_5WA/w-d-xo.html
@@Camural ah, I missed that part. thanks
And just like that your Polaris was nerfed.
Can you please testing EMP then fire Torpedoes?
Is no one going to mention the bullshit discrepency between the Polaris, and 890?
890 has 2 times the shield hitpoints
890 has the same number of PDC's
890 has more hull
Unless anything has changed recently that I'm not aware of... what's next? They give the hammerhead 8 PDC's with 4x4 manned turrets, 3 capital shields and 3 times the hull of the 890?
They just can't stop fucking us Polaris owners can they? And people wonder why I hate the 890. I have a profound loath for it. I would go out of my way to destroy one, even if I have to ram it with a Javelin.
@Fluke2SS
1. Polaris has now the same shield hps than an 890: 908,000 shield hps
2. Polaris has 25.8 times more structure hit points than an 890
Polaris: 3,947,100
890: 153,200
This system doesn't need to be balanced in anyway
Hey hey.... Don't be picking on the 890 now.. It's a great ship with little defenses, why you gotta bash the little it's given 😂. It looks like the commercial cig made with the explosions out the window 😁
@stefensmith9522 please reminds us where I "bashed" the 890?
No nooo, I like PD on my 890 . I paid for PD
For a ships automated defense that resembles real life this kind of makes sense, but in a game that requires balance it needs to be designed to fail lol I would have no idea how to do that exactly and make it ‘correct’.
It doesn't need to fail just be overwhelmed
we didn't see it's effectiveness to battle fighters, we are used to fly ships alone and to fight only npcs and only solo, this change can actually encourage people to team up and to use fighter escorts
These PDC's aren't as effective on smaller and faster missiles which makes them more of an Anti-Polaris defense than anything else.
@Sams911 anti torpedo defense and this is how it should be.
Im not mad about it. And i dont even own an 890
what happens if you fire without locking it ? if friend fire torpedo beside of your 890 ... lot of question ... and again why 890 should have this protection system and not military ship ... it's again non sense of CIG !
@dimitrirouge5568 Polaris has 7 PDCs too: th-cam.com/video/JtcE_0BEFV4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=RFR9fV7GXl_bjjjE
I think I like the 890 over the Polaris
Based off of your data, I personally think that the pdc's should stay as lethal and accurate being how futuristic, how far into the future we are. However, once we can subtarget them, this would make ions and infernos, significantly more useful as they should be able to be precision. Weapons destroying PD CS additionally emp weapons. The p d c control system you should have a weakness against emp attacks. That should then also assist, so the emp should shock the pdc control system and the actual also make hacking and the emps also more valuable since right now, they're not, but if you can use them to target pdcs, it would make the gameplay good and there's no need in my opinion. To nerf the pdc's dude, but to add mechanics to mitigate them
And now they fire on Ships, too! But it's not player-controlled, so it's OK, right?
CIG sure knows how to skirt their own design promises. What a joke!
You’re firing again at a stationary target from a stationary target. If the 890 is moving does that change the results?
It does not change at all. The PDS will immediately snap to the next target.
@tetragerbera yes PDCs are moving very quickly.
@ I’m not worried about the pdc not tracking as much as how desync will impact it.
Would be interesting to see how the PDS reacts while the ship is rolling and/or while moving, if the target reprioritizing and aiming works as fast as it should.
Es wäre interessant zu sehen, wie das PDS reagiert, während das Schiff rollt und/oder sich bewegt, wenn die Neupriorisierung und Ausrichtung des Ziels so schnell funktioniert, wie es sollte.
It looks like they put a lot of thought into the PDS system, and it totally wasn't a last minute rush job to balance out a single ship...
On a serious note, I wonder how much of an effect motion (non stationary) combat would make on the accuracy of the PDS.
Classic CIG. "Hey guys, here's a ship with capabilities we've promised for nearly a decade! Awe, you love it? Welp, here's some newer, barely hinted at stuff that completely neuterised the long-awaited thing you love that we just dropped. Now give us more money."
I don't mind PDCs. I like the idea actually. But 100% incerception rate vs Torps, AND they shred fighters? (Aren't turrets with AI blades supposed to fill that role?). IMO, a volley of 4x S10s should be extremely dangerous, and while PDCs knocking down around ~2-3 seems fair, you should still have to dodge/shoot/spoof at least one.
In its current state, Polaris is basically just a supersized Hammerhead/Hercules hunter (its PRIMARY function was high speed large torpedo delivery), and who knows when PDCs will pop up on those. A lot of people waited so long for this, and in true CIG fashion, screwed it up with feature creep.
*rant over*
would have been cool if they popped up out of the ship looks kinda ugly lol
So, pdc are working as intended. None of these tests have been put to the combat test. Plz have other ships attacking the capital ship while torp are being fired ans the cap ship is trying to evade. Pdc are working like the would in rl. You have to get small fighters to attack the pdc. So no they are not op
Actually, everyone being stationary makes it *harder for the point Defense system,* unless you fly into a salvo.
You would try to run away from a thread not fly into it, though.
1. If the PDS is already so successful with stationary ships, there is no need to test moving ships.
2. The speed of the shooter is not added to the speed of the missiles. Nothing inherits the speed of the mother ship in Star Citizen because the game has almost no physics.
Undock a Merlin at full after burner speed from an Andromeda = Merlin is at zero speed.
Fire missiles/torpedoes from a moving ship = missiles/torpedoes are at their own speed.
3. Running away from a thread, the most likely scenario, would give the point defense system a lot more time to react.
Again: Why even test this when the PDS is already so effective when the target is stationary?
4. Feel free to do this test with moving ships, I expect no difference.
5. We cannot target or sub target PDCs yet, we tried.
@@Camural you need to add other elements as intended like small fighters taking out the pds. Even in real life they work this good. It shouldn’t be that easy to take down a cap ships.
@mrragnarokk7415 yes this would be fun:
1. Destroy the PDCs first, using small fighters
2. Go for the kill with torpedoes
However, like I wrote, we cannot target or sub target PDCs yet. You can try to hit such a small target blindly and it works, but it takes forever to hit it. I hope we will be able to sub target the PDCs in the future.
@@Camural i thought they added sub targeting to this dumpster fire of a game? Did CR lie about that too?
@mrragnarokk7415 Star Citizen has sub targeting, but we cannot sub target the PDCs, yet.
Polaris torps look very useful
890J must now be the new meta
Thats what the high pen size 6s are for, pick off pdcs before u fire torps...
A pro pilot with a second machine to point blank dumb fire the torps with his toes can still probably own cap ships solo 😂
@@andreasliveras6 Why are people constantly saying 'pick off PDCs'? You can't target them, and you aren't going to hit that small a target manually, especially when it's moving. This is the 'Wait till armor' argument all over again. Also, dumb-fire torps are now targeted as of yesterday's patch notes so.. That's out the window now, too. Torps are useless now.
@@bladehawk232 Nahhh, come on, they're not useless! Surely you can still roflstomp caterpillars at outposts or reclaimers around Yela, right?
@@bladehawk232 until sub system targeting is fully in... its not hard to focus your fire on areas of a ship where pdcs or turrets are.
Also try point blank dumb firing if you want cheese.
As a polaris owner, I'd be extremely disappointed if I could just spam torps and missles at larger cap ships and overwhelm the pdcs, game would become boring very fast.
To be fair even rsi aurora would destroy 4 size 10 tops, they fly so slow.
Camural you are right on many things regarding SC mismanagement but you completely miss the mark on others. 890J has no attack abilities obviously and given its role it must have formidable defenses otherwise it would be just a flying coffin...a proper attack to 890J must have fighters in the mix to destroy the defensive turrets! Your problem is not the number of Polaris but using the wrong set of tools against a ship that is all about defense! In this account your are completely wrong IMO!
@FAAMS1 did you even watch this video?
If so, please tell us where I have said, anywhere in this video, that the 890 should be easier to hit.
I said, right now the PDCs cannot be saturated, unless you fire maybe 20 - 40 missiles/torpedoes at the same.
We also cannot target the PDCs, cannot sub target them. There will be balance changes in the future for sure.
@@Camural move to minimum torp distance, and have both attack from the rear and you will easily kill the 890. The Polaris can also kill the 890 with turrets.
@Mullins23 no, minimum distance of size 10 torpedoes is 2800m, of size 9 torpedoes is 5000m
Since Star Citizen has almost no physics, missiles and torpedoes reach their max speed at once.
The PDCs start to engage at roughly 1500 - 1700 m.
Firing at the minimum distance doesn't change anything. If you have done this and it changes the result, please show us your video :)
@FAAMS1 I am still waiting for you to show us where I have said in my video that the 890 should be easier to hit.
@@Camural I am not here for a fist fight I like you, love most of your videos, just stating that you have seemed to imply in the latest videos about Polaris vs 890J that 890J is invincible and the Polaris sucks...not my opinion and I explained why! Other then that we're good have a nice day and see you around!
Damn.. and they said that PDCs are going to shoot fighters if no missiles are around..
Next time bro try doing that while moving... that would be the 100% accurate test!
Actually, everyone being stationary makes it *harder for the point Defense system,* unless you fly into a salvo.
You would try to run away from a thread not fly into it, though.
1. If the PDS is already so successful with stationary ships, there is no need to test moving ships.
2. The speed of the shooter is not added to the speed of the missiles. Nothing inherits the speed of the mother ship in Star Citizen because the game has almost no physics.
Undock a Merlin at full after burner speed from an Andromeda = Merlin is at zero speed.
Fire missiles/torpedoes from a moving ship = missiles/torpedoes are at their own speed.
3. Running away from a thread, the most likely scenario, would give the point defense system a lot more time to react.
Again: Why even test this when the PDS is already so effective when the target is stationary?
4. Feels free to do this test with moving ships, I expect no difference.
@@Camural Moving while being shot at puts you in a disadvantage because you are most likely going to blindside a few PDCS... Also rolling and turning takes more time to PDCs to regain target..
I just wanted to see the test not to read a book :D .. imagining things and testing are not the same.
Everyone on the video Polaris Vs Idris here on youtube was criticizing me HEAVILY because I said those missiles would not JUST land on the idris without resistance..
Well I was right.
I just wanted to test :D since they have the crew and make videos.. Why not right?
@@RED--01so I tested while moving and doing mock fights with other Polaris from my org. And really nothing changed compared to being stationary. Polaris has an issue if the torps being fired at your port/starboard side. The bridge PDS will shoot through the ship and destroy the torps.
@@RED--01and the PDS will immediately snap to the nearest target
@ thx!
this makes sense because none of the ships are moving, I feel like the whole test needs to be done again while all ships are moving and in combat
Actually, everyone being stationary makes it *harder for the point Defense system,* unless you fly into a salvo.
You would try to run away from a thread not fly into it, though.
1. If the PDS is already so successful with stationary ships, there is no need to test moving ships.
2. The speed of the shooter is not added to the speed of the missiles. Nothing inherits the speed of the mother ship in Star Citizen because the game has almost no physics.
Undock a Merlin at full after burner speed from an Andromeda = Merlin is at zero speed.
Fire missiles/torpedoes from a moving ship = missiles/torpedoes are at their own speed.
3. Running away from a thread, the most likely scenario, would give the point defense system a lot more time to react.
Again: Why even test this when the PDS is already so effective when the target is stationary?
4. Feels free to do this test with moving ships, I expect no difference.
"moving" or "stationary" should be meaningless in space. "Maneuvering" would mean something.