I NEED TO SAY THIS [StarCitizen Master Modes 3.22]
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 พ.ค. 2024
- Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @avenger__one
JOIN US ON TWITCH: / avenger__one
OR ON DISCORD: / discord
OR ON TWITTER: / aonettv
TOBII DISCOUNT CODE: AVENGERONE
PREDITOR MOUNTS DISCOUNT CODE: AVENGERONE
Be sure to check out the "CORE SKILLS PLAYLIST" for your first steps into PVP
and welcome to the most active PVP skills channel for StarCitizen. Now get your ship ready
and lets put in our 1% improvement ethos to work, and make a killer pilot out of you. - เกม
![TOBII vs TR5, What is better [My opinion] StarCitizen PVP](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zoDG1L927hY/mqdefault.jpg)
![TOBII vs TR5, What is better [My opinion] StarCitizen PVP](/img/tr.png)
I just really dislike how artificial it feels.
Why am I slowing down after boosting?
Why can't I move backwards as quick as forwards?
I dont see why CIG has to force space flight to be the same as atmospheric flight.
thanks for the insight, flight has to be both easy to learn and hard to master.
sounds amazing the way you put it but impossible! like teaching sharks to use toilets.
the only way to learn is time and experience for elites and for the poges they learn to avoid.
@@paratrooperz1 Honestly no , even tho it's not at all the same type of game , Look at league Of Legend , lots and lots of champion are really accessible like it's quite to easy to reach 50 to 60% of the champion's potential but it gets harder and harder as you try to master the champions and all its mechanics. I feel like all games should be like that. Easy access and hard to master
@@Koscharak the only resemblance of the 2 games is its on planet earth so i dont know where to begin... you made it to hard debate apples and hammers. i think im sticking with my original thought unless you have something better
legally filed and patented as a SIM begin there....
your like modern day politics.. if it sounds nice make my imagination real CIG... im a math person if you cant show the work and how its possible i hold my professional observation in contrast to your good wishes.
A1 was basing his entire opinion on the balance of fun longevity... i disagree because people play more easy games more than hard games. only a small population of players enjoy more complex games like me the harder it is the deeper i go. a SIM already complicates to a top degree now try to balance something no one has ever seen or done before with developing tech....
you. this game has no levels or anything to advance difficulty.... it begins difficult and your saving grace is in high security you play on easy mode where you often get to choose your battles but in pyro you will see a whole new game!!!!
@@paratrooperz1 No need to be condescending. The fact that the 2 games are not in the same genre is not relevant here I was just stating the fact that easy to access is not incompatible with hard to master and explaining it with a proper example in the videogame industry. You can see it aswell in Hell Let loose , a WW2 FPS game where you can quite easily understand how the game works , in 30 to 40 minutes you'll be able to play properly but it will take you hundred and hundred of hours to master every small detail of it making the gap between a new player a more experienced one huge. The experience for a new player shouldn't be too demanding, elitist or w/e I feel like within the few first minutes of your gameplay (which will be deciding if you will keep playing or not) should be somewhat rewarding and encouraging for you to keep playing.
@Koscharak I think the thing that is being expressed is simply the view that the gap between the noobs and the ace pilots is now only a matter of a few hours to weeks, and really dependent on how much DPS you can bring to the fight. Having a game where that gap is a little larger is better for the long term health of the game.
i support testing amongst various states to see what the players like best. this is kind of the point of an open alpha/beta where the devs want our feedback.
Hope they just don't want to bring new people by over simplifying this game. SC was trying to be what nobody else tryed, if they lose this to accommodate casual players we are fucked up.. because we lose SC for what it is.
Making PvP more accessible means more people to fight and more people that enjoy fighting.
Iirc the Devs themselves said BR was removed temporarily due to the lack of players in that mode as an example.
@@riccardoboom3618
I do think light fighters are OP, but the balance and performance of this game is so out of wack, not many hang on that notion.
However, now that they are rebalacing this game into a point and click arcade game, ships actually scale in performance-per-dollar.
@@SSHayden exactly.
@@SSHaydenI'd very much disagree with that.
Had a master mode Squadron battle with two mates the other day. Two of us being hornets one of us a gladius versus 3 Wardens.
Super Hornet is about 100 USD cheaper than a warden and the Gladius less than half of the Wardens price. With a roughly 300 USD cheaper group of fighters than our opposition we managed to come out on top due to better coordination.
That moment when the meta changes but you commited your life to learning it 😬
*insert "first time?" meme here*
He gives a good argument as to why this is in actuality removing skill from the game. Lowering a skill ceiling is not the same as meta shifting. As a game yes more numbers for interaction are good, but this was crowed funded, Almost made to order and touted physics based combat, and to change now is kinda dishonest.
@thomasorourke8065 You people need to get it through your fucking heads that this is not a pure combat game. It is a space life sim. Combat is only like 1/10th the content. This shit just dropped, and no one has even given it a chance to discover any skill based tricks. People are just crying because the broken ass light fighter meta is in danger. No more solo harassing people just doing cargo runs in your stupid ass Arrow. Get some friends and use a Mantis. This game's design goals will work perfectly fine without the pvp hungry crowd. It will not survive without the player driven economy.
You feel better now that that's off your chest? Apologies for @ you I was aiming for the meta shifting comment.@@BionicBurke
@@thomasorourke8065 Honestly no, I do want a high skill floor in the combat.. and I understand people's current complaints. I am just sick of all the ridiculous takes about "game can't survive, the combat is trash!"... Honestly, and I don't want it to be arcade shooter 9000, the game has a much higher chance of surviving without pvp sweats harassing everyone doing pve than it does the pve crowd being run off by the pvp sweats being unescapable.
The HP system is doing away sometime in the future so that should help negate DPS as the be all end all. We'll also see armor added to the game which according to Dev's will make some sizes of weapons ineffective against certain armor grades. Ships should then in theory become dead hulks in space more so than spectacularly explode. That should mean that ships can reenter the fight even after being knocked out of it. On a sidenote, missiles and especially torpedoes need to become the ALPHA strike that they aught to be in the future. We also don't know how formation flying will work in future but the current system today seems to note work well with that mentality with each pilot really just flying 1 vs 1.
I like BIG explosions. Dead hulks for certain conditions but hitting with missiles and core breaches need BIG BADa BOOMs
@@IStripesI Exactly. They are not big picture thinkers. Their only ideas are to be of benefit to themselves and no one else. When PvPers dictate game development, it stagnates the game for non-hardcores and ruins the longevity of a game.
That sounds much better. Imagine a Hammerhead being worried about a freaking Arrow because it can make it blow up in a few minutes, with its mosquito weapons.
Also big guns should pop small ships in barely any hits.
I expect different kinds of armor too, like plasma resistant, or laser resistant, armor that resists distortion damage and emp blasts. That should make for more interesting engagements too, specially in events, that could help players choose a specific kind of armor depending on the enemies they're gonna face and which weapons they use.
It would be cool to see you do a sit down and talk about MM with the other PVP orgs like R4M, Pax, SM etc and have a gentlemen's discussion.
but not liberties reapers because fuck them
And whats the point? First: the game isn't about PvP. Not firstly, not foremost. PvP has close to zero impact on the universe. What Avenger__One does is basically playing Arena commander, the mode where ist all about fighting in little fighters. As CIG has said: Star Citizen is not planned to be and will not be DCS in space. Period.
Second: the game is not all about combat. Its a universe where the center of your gameplay is your character, not your ship. So its more a life simulation in a futurstic universe.
And third: mastermode is only the first half of a big change. AV1 is right when he says that you are hitting ithers to easy and its near impossible to evade. BUT, that will change wgith physical damage, drastically.
People always moan about "large cross sections". But with physicalised damage, your cross section becomes irrelevant. Your target you need to hit is a lot smaller than the ship and is tucked away behind different strengths of armor. With phsicalised damage its itrelevant if you "just hit the ship anywhere", it doesn't do anything if you do not damage the right parts. Your wings and body hull can look like swiss cheese but your ship is still 100% operational if no vital components are damaged.
@@arrclyde4325 Unfortunately they have said it should be WWII dogfighting in sapce. Which is also ridiculous. Actually the game is kinda all about combat. Even the haulers and racers and transports and miners have guns on them. When every ship has guns, it sends the message that combat is the big thing. Physicalized damage doesn't the change how easy it is to hit your enemy. It will be more relevant to hit the right spot, but it's not irrelevant to actually hit your target wherever it may be. You might get a lucky hit on a fuse or something. So cross sections will absolutely still be relevant.
@@latjolajban81 that is a misconception and argument on a elementry school level, every ship has guns..... every car has bumpers, that does NOT mean you should run into or over things. Every ship has life rafts, that does NOT mean you should sink the ship.
And yes, that is exactly the reason for physicalised damage. Most people i see talking about basic stuff like easy to hit larger ships, totally overestimating their own skill and vastly underestimat8ng what the game is doing for them in terms of aiming and hitting. As AV1 said, you have a cone that makes you spray and pray. Most hit the ship and do damage. But with physicalised damage, most hits won't do anything, because you need to hit the right spots. In terms of a Corsair for example, only 15% of the ship hits can be vital. And it gets less and less the bigger the ship is. Even parts breaking off will change with that, and things only break off if you destroy the connection. You can fire all you want at a wing, if you hit the same spot over and over again, your bullets go through without doing anything. So the cross section has efficiently shrunk.
Yes, SC is planned to be way more Star Wars than The Expanse, which is a good thing. The vast majority of people loves Star Wars Battles, while the vast majority finds The Expanse Space battles boring and mainly watches the series for the stpry and the outstanding characters.
People have gotten the term "space sim" wrong and mistakenly thought about "space flight sim" or "soace combat sim". But that is not what they simulate in SC. Because "space" seem to be misleading a good few people, they now refere to SC as a "universe sim". They are simulating life of people in a futuristic universe.
So if you are only here for the space combat, which is about 15% of the game, they have you covered: Arena Commander.
@@arrclyde4325 "While the vast majority finds The Expanse Space battles boring and mainly watches the series for the stpry and the outstanding characters."
Where the fuck in your ass did you pull that from?? First of all, this is just factually incorrect. I can clearly tell you're making your argument in bad faith, using contrarian garbage to bolster your points.
The damn show ORIGINALLY became famous for its space battles, attention to realism, and ACTUALLY having stakes, where it isnt star wars. Thats all people were talking about in the beginning. Look at literally EVERY SINGLE TH-cam COMMENT on expanse videos, every reddit post, and twitter post about space battles. Look at scott manley's videos. Look at people talking about starfields space combat. All you ever hear is "i wish space battles were done like this everywhere."
There is not a single person who watches both and genuinely thinks star wars space combat (of all things...) is more tense/exciting than the expanse.
The space battles are some of the most tense combat you see in media in general, not just sci fi. Showing the actual effects of g forces, not being able to accelerate where there are no thrusters, venting the ship to stop fires, ambush tactics, and on and on. You're not invincible. All of these would also be great in a game. Cig devs themselves love the show's space battles, which is why they're implementing many of its features. Many in the community want multi crew to be somewhat more like the show.
Everyone who even hears about the expanse and watches a single battle scene wishes every other space show/game did battles like this. I havent seen ANYONE say its "boring," literally ever.
Assuming people dont like depth because they havent yet been exposed to it is a key failing. Just like A1 says.
My main concern is that MM is only being tested and finetuned in AC where everyone files combat ships. What is the impact of MM going to be on a Hull A, a vulture or a C-1? Is it going to be game over for anyone not in the meta combat ship, or will industry ships be able to just avoid any fight? Either of those would be bad.
Honestly not much if you think about it. Even yogi answered that, a hull a or industry ship will still fly slow and stupid compared to a dedicated combat vessel. Flight is flight, how they tune each ship will come down to scm speed, boost capacity, roll /pitch and durability.
Maybe they will make industrial qt drives more resistant to shutdown and quicker to spool, maybe component choice may matter. Maybe the c1 spirit gets a boost to qt spool time, scm speeds and higher boost than say, a slow stupid Zeus MK II CL that thinks armor will save it.
It's all numbers, in the end the ships will be affected similarly, but fighters and racers probably have the most dramatic consequences. I doubt the Mole, hull C or Carrack will have much change in feel overall other than needing to drop shields to go fast.
@@schlagzahne6741 they still need to see how different scenarios play out for balance. Most fights wont be duels between fighters - the fighters will be protecting an objective or attacking one. We need scenario maps in AC to test - which include a protect the catapiller mode etc.
@steventickle6218 that seems like a better viewpoint than caring about what an individual ship does.
Big question I had was for snubs as they don't get quantum boost, thus can they possibly not chase as well as you want?
@@schlagzahne6741
If you could know without testing it, then we wouldn't have tests like this one.
@@schlagzahne6741 Snubs will probably have the highest combat speed if that is their role, to escape in MM means powering down your shields, leaving you at risk to damage from the snub, at least thats how i understood it. That could be used to stop people just running away from them? I will finally get to test it in a few days after the christmas chaos so will have a more informed opinion then!
MM is a significant improvement to the game. It finally breaks the light fighter meta. Fast ships should not be invincible to every other ship just cause you use a pip wiggling macro.
I’m pretty sure once the mid and heavy fighter meta is there ppl will want the LF meta back, because in heavy fighters the ace pilots melt big ships even faster.
@@teahousereloaded No we want the rock/paper/scissors gameplay CIG have always claimed was the goal. Where different classes of ships are countered by other classes, and there is not one single "I-win" class of ship. Lights die to mediums, mediums to heavy, heavy to lights. Gunboats counter all fighters, but die to bombers. Bombers die to fighters. Etc.
@@Damiv A heavy dying to a LIGHT is fucking stupid. A heavy dying to light(s) makes more sense, not just one light. Like cmon, use a bit of common sense here.
@@nigeln1874 If light's are only ever effective as a swarm then they become useless as player owned and operated ships.
@@Damiv No they don't, just have lights as support roles to break/destroy components on a heavy I.E engines ? Shields ? etc ? No light alone should be able to take down an ENTIRE heavy, that's nonsense.
I can see where you're coming from but something you don't notice is how tuning is not just the one thing, in your case SCM speed. You're correct when you say it is too easy to get your nose on target and that has always... always been the problem. It is a matter of rotation in conjunction with speed, so it is not an isolated thing; It's at least two. So naturally what needs to happen for a working flight experience is that when speeds come down, rotations need to come down too. I can't stress this enough! When speeds come down and rotations follow, you will have the same relative flight performance as before but with lower speeds and distances.
This! Top linear speed cannot be taken in isolation of rotation speeds. Opponent's turn rate relative to your top speed & acceleration is how you force yourself out of the opponent's reticle, not just your speed.
I believe CIG should tune master modes that combat will be as engaging as it could be for both fighters and the planned naval combat multicrew ships.
If fighters are too slow the dogfight gets too easy - if fighters are too fast the turrets on the bigger ships will lose effectiveness drastically.
Thats just a sweetspot CIG has to find and test (preferably with all their changes in mind)
I think they should keep the skill ceiling high, and I say that as someone who isn't even close to reaching it. I like having something to train for.
but the current ceiling is not high, you have a very small amount of things to learn. The combat hasn't evolved in any way for years, it's actually in stagnation. Any pvp video you watch you will notice that it all comes down to corkscrew, aim and energy management, and this all comes with experience. This happens because there is nothing to develop, this is the most and probably only effective strategy
@@LocalAlphaso many words to just be wrong
@@ronja99 atari can also be difficult and have a high skill ceiling, but no one plays them anymore.
@@LocalAlphaand somehow your piloting still sucks though
@@k1mfor the only thing that sucks in this comment thread is the amount of your brain cells. Why have a game where you can develop in many ways? Nah, let’s learn 2 sweaty moves and that’s it. Pvp combat is not the only thing that stagnates, obviously we should add your intellectual development to the list(
I appreciate your perspective. I agree that boost should not increase speed unless used in the forward direction. I won't comment on the top speed numbers themselves, but I agree with your sentiment.
Can't we not at least get Xian Ships that boost in all directions. ;-)
San'tok.yai by design has it's main thrusters working as maneuvering ones, so I would expect it to be able to do so, and that is actually the only way to make Xi'an unique@@Traumglanz
maybe they could simply give boost a LOT more power
@@Sowta then everything will fly like flies and mosquitoes and it will look silly. Plus, it will bring the combat to where it is now
I agree that there should be a high skill ceiling. But I do think that there needs to be a minimum threshold for beginners. I hope that Master Modes can put us on course for that.
I started playing a month ago and I’m against mm. Just take the time to learn and reach out to better players for tips
I would wait to tune master modes until we get something like a conie or a hammerhead that way we can see how it affects turret game play as well
we have a super hornet and a vanguard to test with
@@charlottevixen9222yeah I think it’s also a case of super hornet and vanguard are still fighters and you fly them like fighters, a Connie starts to lean into large ship territory and a HH it’s the beginning of cap territory, cause if we maintain the current system where a capital ship can get soloed by a light fighter caps will be DoA since they’ll not be worth the hours of work just to field them.
@@undeadpeak ahh fair point.. i can't wait for mm to be open to all ships atleast in AC
@@charlottevixen9222 definitely I’d like to see them increase the engagement ranges on heavy fighters and large ships get the 0 dmg regen delay back to get that proper rock paper scissors action going with LF are strong against HFs as the HF can’t turn fast enough to fight LFs but have the firepower to kill l corvettes but corvettes have the shield power and effective turrets to kill LFs but can’t outrange HFs.
Incites proper fleet comps as a corvette may be completely safe from LFs but will get taken out by HFs if it hasn’t brought the correct complement of LFs to defend it from HFs.
This means almost nothing... If your fastest ships are too slow, it won't make a difference if you start tuning the slower ships or not... You have to decide what the fastest fighters limits will be before you can even start to tune the bigger ships speeds. Since you have no point of reference. Yogi and the folks doing MM chose correctly to tune the fast ships first... Because it makes sense to tune the upper limits first.
Rather than boost, would a direct mapping of ship speed to energy allocation solve any of the issues with boost?
I absolutely can understand where you're coming from. But you have to remember that many aspects of combat aren't properly implemented yet. As some other comments have pointed out, armor is a big thing that will most likely change the whole field again.
Imho master modes in it's current iteration is just to bring the system into the verse. There is no point in fine-tuning it yet, because there are at least 3 big components of combat, that aren't there yet at all or are not working as intended. These being armor, failure of components / 'engineering', and properly working missiles. You could add the balancing of weapons to that set, as well as working stealth components, working heat / overheating etc. But the first 3 are the main thing.
I'd much rather they focus on finishing or at least improving those points before they lose themselves in fine-tuning a system, that will change anyway. I know it's a big team and if they have the manpower 'left over', by all means, fine-tune away. But I very much doubt that is the case.
That being said, if it so happens that nothing changes even with the implementation or completion of other parts of the combat, there needs to be change. But that's a bridge I'd cross when it comes down to it.
What should happend to Santok'yai with boost only forward? For the Santok / Karthual etc strafe etc is the same thrusters as forward
If CIG's hearts are set on the limitations, then you'll just have to ignore the problem, and work with what you get... If forcing forward meta is what they want, then you'll have to deal with not getting a more balanced 6dof power in a few of the ships. (Honestly, if they get this stuff balanced at all, I think we can put up with a few discrepancies)
"dont just complain, provide a solution." i approve of your message, i also think long-term approach is the best way. i hope they dont stop iterating on the flight model. power management should be a huge counter/strategy that allows players to adapt and also customize the ships handling to their playstyle, not just a few more rounds in the mag and a quicker boost recharge.
What do you think would happen if they increased projective speed in the current flight model?
If I could agree more than 100% with the sentiments you've expressed, I would ...
I think it may be early to pass any sweaping judgements but it is a prime and important time to give feedback like you've given. The hopium is that it's more accessable and hopefully fun for everyone to tune up from an easier mode than making DCS in space and making it easier.
My take is MMM make mass and momentum matter. There should be pluses and minuses for both going very fast, and also pluses and minuses for going slow. .. Going fast should dramatically increase the turning radius and risk overshooting the target. Go slow and you can turn like a duck in the pond, but you're also a sitting duck when the pond gets a sudden shower of hot lead(lasers). A fully loaded Hull C would need to think early and learn to turn and burn to arrest the enourmous mass. Sweaty min/maxers might find a gladius with a single panther, no missiles and half a fuel load gives them the edge. As you suggested this is mains focused. Weapons speeds should be considered a lot in this. You shouldn't be able to out race a cannon round, out turn it sure, but not out pace it. A cargo ship certainly shouldn't outrun a torpedo.
All of this hasn't even broken to the PTU yet, and is very far from settled.
Game being in development for forever... Cultist be like "iTs sTiLl EaRlY dAyS gIvE iT tImE"
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😅😅😂😅😂😅😂😅😂😅😂😅😂😅😂😅😂😂😂😂😂
The amount of extra equipment needed for competitive pvp is also kinda a factor
I remember on Levelcaps video the first thing you asked him was "do you have sticks" not to mention the other pieces of real life equipment needed such as tobii or pedals ect you end up with a small pcs worth of hardware just to pew pew in a space game its not viable to the average consumer
The average consumer is not going to keep SC alive in the long run.
@@RexAnothership That really depends on how they plan to monetize this game post-release.
Some of the higher tier pvpers use MKB as well. I have heard of one that is mkb with keyboards at his feet for roll left and right.
Equipment is nice but learning how to work with what you have is a better option. Sticks give immersion and feel. I played and cello for years so I am happy to use the keys and there is very much tap dancing on the wasdqe, space h j and I'm ok with it. Most expensive peripheral I bought was a razer Naga for my other keybinds and sure, headset but that's hardly a factor in a ship fight.
Do I want sticks and pedals for immersion factor? Yes. First things first though gotta get a better rig than a laptop
@@RexAnothership1000 dudes with sim pits certainly arent.
When I think of Star Citizen I think of Microsoft flight simulator for DCs those guys aren't playing simulators with a controller. And to have a Precision joysticks doesn't mean you have to spend a lot of money some of the best Pilots use some of the cheapest sticks you can buy. But for immersion purposes if you're playing a simulator invest in a racing wheel pedals or a flight stick if you're flying.
Question: If you run ax throttle (500m/s) for an extended period, at what point do you overheat (how long before you overheat)?
It sounds like your biggest problem with master mode is just speed, and most of the other changes are good?
I do wonder if they are playing with master modes from a single player perspective, so if you are playing squadron and 42 on easy these are the speeds we would be looking at. If you were playing on hard then we would get speeds that you are talking about.
I honestly don't have enough experience with any of the flight models to have an actually informed decision
Awesome video. Can only agree with the critisism.
His solutions are interesting. They are very reminiscent of Elite. I would love to feel these.
- Higher speed limit is great, of course (400, 550 with boost).
- Forward-only boost sounds like a fun experiment, though I would wonder if it should affect only speed, or also acceleration. I would still want it to be a manual duration, and not end up with Elite's fixed duration.
- PIP changes sound fun.
I still feel awkward about a higher speed limit only when going forward, because I personally like the jousting element involved in 6 DOF space combat, and the need for the ace pilot to try and negate the novice forcing an incoming joust.
But again, it would be a fun test. I hope CIG gives this a spin.
It's great to hear with other words what I've been trying to say about the skill gap compression.
1. Novice pilot has it easier.
2. Ace pilot cannot excel as much.
3. DPS trading happens, and combat gets stale.
Ive been having a hard time learning to be an effective fighter pilot, but the challenge is what keeps bringing me back, over and over again. I tried master modes the other night, and absolutely hated it. Way too easy. It was like they just handed to me, what I was practicing to achieve, and then I didn't want it anymore. Also - I really like the Fury right now. Winning in a Fury, after master modes? No chance.
Why can't you win in a Fury in Master modes? is it too fragile?
Well said. Flying any ship should require learning and practice. I do not want this handed to me. SC player characters are extremely homogeneous,. Name tags and skill are literally the only way to tell one character from another. If practice and experience in a particular ship doesn't separate me from other people who are not putting in the work then what's the point?
@@user-np8iq2qp3c - the Fury flies apart like paper if subjected to even a little damage, and even less than that will pop a thruster, causing your engines to apply uneven forces to the ship, which usually takes the form of an unrecoverable spin that leaves you dead in the water. The only thing that keeps a Fury pilot alive is skillful maneuvering, and master modes feels real light on that currently, imo.
@@user-np8iq2qp3c Imagine you are a squirrel and everyone is hunting you with a shotgun. ;-)
So it's not only the lack of speed, we get on top a huge weapon spread.
@@Traumglanz I see. That image gets the message through. :D
First time I'm not agreeing so much with you. Not only because a pilot not being able to win 2v1 fights makes total sense to me, even versus not so good players but also about players that will get bored. SC is much more than the flight model and has much more activities to offer. If people get bored of the flight model and leave, well, they are not experiencing SC but just a pseudo combat in space game. I'm not good at pvp, not bad neither, and I love the current model as it feels more impactful on the opposite of feeling like a ballet with noise pointing like before. It's my opinion of course. But I doubt that people will get so easily bored, on the contrary, ease of access will make people play for a more casual and relaxing experience, which is to me, a good thing in the long run.
And yes, I don't like to be able to 1vx in MMOs, same goes for SC for the same ship classes.
Couple of thoughts:
- a single light fighter shouldn’t stand a chance against a hammerhead or other multi crew ships.
- a super high skill ceiling doesn’t make much sense. When the game releases you’ll have an influx of new players joining and trying to compete with people who have been playing for a decade, having no chance isn’t engaging.
- hopefully they add enough to the PU that the only thing keeping people engaged isn’t a high skill ceiling for flight combat
The boost only forward might be an issue as it is also used as "space brake". The higher SCM speeds are ok, but maybe the current feeling will change once armor, mass and flight control surfaces are in game?
We have a space-brake button, just make it so that the space-brake overrides the boost lockout on the other vectors.
Flight control surfaces will only work in atmosphere. In space it will be all about your maneuvering thrusters ability to counter momentum.
Everything you said is what I felt when I was playing the master mode.
Current master mode would be great for the single player experience, it really reminded me of an arcade shooter like Everspace 2.
I love the skill ceiling of what we have now in the PU, just needs to be fine tuned and what they are doing now is way to drastic in the wrong direction.
I really hope CIG takes your feed back and at least give it a shot.
Yes they are butchering the game! Star Citizen is slowly becoming a terrible space game, and master modes are going to kill it.
Give your feedback in spectrum guys. We need it there. Every voice counts
Out of curiosity, does the closer, slower engagements make scatterguns remotely viable?
The speeds are still quite a lot above WW2, especially once you hit the afterburner, but even without. The issue is here is that the rotational rates make it super easy to follow your target on those lower speeds. So more speed seems like a good solution as I don't think slower rotational speed is desired.
Outside of that, I think the old system with speed in the 1000 to 1500m/s is so cool and it would be sad to lose that amount of fun. But to be honest, I am not in the camp who disliked the old guns either. Not a fan of having a huge spread. Feels not really good to be honest to do that tiny amount of damage at long range.
I'm still new to the game , but isn't tuning the game to focus on 1V1 being good and rewarding bad for the game overall since the target is more focused on mass pvp ? Like Org battles and stuff. Having the flying itself getting easier can help more people to get in those massive battles which are the (again if i'm not mistaken) the main focus of the game in terms of PVP
The problem is that when you put so much focus on numbers advantage to the point where individual pilot skill becomes irrelevant you create a very stale and unrewarding gameplay experience. The game is gonna be about ganking others or being ganked by a group. In the PU people will only take fight where the numbers are equal or in their favor. That's a huge regression from LIVE
for a solo player i can see how that would be the case. but when you have an org, i mean numbers and winning sounds good to me. I know there are some ultra complex things people do in the PVP realm to exploit/leverage 6DOF and takes trillions of hours to master and it sucks losing that, but it was an alpha all along and I think a NEW realm of combat is emerging and people just don't want to start over learning it. BUT it was an alpha all along and it's implied that though the course of development everything could change drastically.
Face tanking in 6dof is lame its boring to watch and so is jousting. and while people look to spice it up . current master class gameplay in live is basically jousting and then 6dof spin face tanking with pushing diagonal vectors (as said by A1 himself) so its just not exciting to watch either. Armor and damage system changes i feel like at this point are critical path to MM making more sense.
Need more paths for evasive maneuvers. (Counter measures + Boost if you ask me that combo sounds logical....but the balance of that would need a change too) @@I_Ronin_I
It's not because it's "too hard for casuals". sure, that might have been a factor, but it's been an absolute mess for them to balance any of it, and the goal is to make something they can actually balance in any reasonable way.
We've got 4 ships, and each ship has 1 set of weapons. We have a plenty of time to get this dialed in, and nothing currently needs to be final.
Also, one of the big things they have to do is have blind tests. Remove all numbers from the HUD and test a bunch of speeds, have a bunch of community tests with the devs and hanging out in the public discord and spectrum chats so we can get it dialed in as well as we can
they did this. thats acutally how they got to some of the speeds and things initially dialed. and the devs say they increased the speed a little higher than the blind test groups favored speeds which was in the 120-150s!
I will say personally myself when some mates and I were doing squadron master modes battle and we were bobbing and weaving around the station chasing or being chased by the opposition present speeds felt pretty nippy when you were in very close proximity to the station@@miestermind
@@miestermind they did internal tests, but I'm thinking they need to do some more widespread ones
Honestly I think they slowed things down because they can’t get desync under control. The slower the movements the less jumping around they do. Instead of fixing or changing ships flight characteristics they are just going for an easy fix. But hey, I might be wrong and thats ok too. Keep doing what you’re doing.
I wonder if there would be a path forward with decoupled mode having higher speeds allowed and a higher skill ceiling. I always thought decoupled was a little bit more interesting and more accurate to space flight. Might be a way to give skilled players something to practice and excel at while still giving a chance to casual players.
Then that leaves people using decoupled being impossible to fight if you aren’t also using decoupled.
On the biplane note; 410 m/s is about mach 1.2 and then below that for the hornet. They are realistic combat speeds compared to modern day engagement speeds (whenever its not BVR which is rare)
It feels a lot faster in an atmosphere scenario they showed off due to the lack of depth perception in space. One of their remedy's for the *snail* feeling is the FOV effects they showed off during citcon. I'm at a weird middle point opinion with it because I do like the speeds of the Live build, but I kinda sense the direction they are going. Almost a more "realistic" Star Wars squadrons/WW2 battles in space, which to be fair is something CIG said they wanted for a long time. They've got a lot of time to iron it out, but I also will say that following the flight tactics of live is just not meta now. I find playing to chases, using obstacles, using maneuvers that I would use in a flight sim (non-space) works out much better, and honestly "space drifting" for tighter shots. I'm still hitting shots at targets behind me, but you can't hold it long due to the focus on forward thrust. I found focusing my corkscrew using forward thrust in a defensive manner was just more effective to keep you alive. (Angling off-target to slightly widen and speed up my corkscrew) and even "rate fighting" which isn't something you can really do in LIVE
With higher ballistic counts gone way up to the thousands, and them piercing shields you can stack up damage over time rather than trying to get all DPS for as long as possible trying to outstrafe the rollrate of your enemy (which just doesn't work well anymore) and even trying to blow pieces off to gain an agility advantage. I have no idea how "meta" these things I am doing are for MM, I just find it much more effective than trying to replicate maneuvers from the live environment. I do hope for some speed adjustments and the capacitor improvements they showed (and the new batteries for the capacitors for an even bigger kick)
*edit: I will say this, I am finding myself trying to do a LOT more maneuvers than what is effective for me to do in live; in live every fight ends up very samey AKA corkscrew, trichord, corkscrew, trichord. Rinse and repeat. MM so far feels much more varied in my engagement tactics. But that may also be because the Meta for the live flight model is abusing the game physics to gain more G's than should be possible (along with the fact that corkscrewing let's you avoid near 100% of shots above 500m away) and I mean this with no shame as it's the games fault for not teaching the intricacies of flight, but 90% of players aren't the greatest in the LIVE model, they are very low on the skill curve, so most realistic PvP encounters are either the person trying to joust you or if its someone that knows how to simply trichord/corkscrew they will win 100% of the time VS the average player.
The difference in combat skill between the "average" and the "good" (not the great players or ace players even) is nearly a noob-pro level difference
I think that's something a lot of people are struggling with.
They're trying to fight, engage and disengage and go evasive using tactics they know from the existing flight model.
Seems to me at least under master modes every ship has its own preferred way of flying engaging in disengaging and attendantly every opponent should have its way that you need to engage it or treat it in order to come out ahead.
Overtime I think people will figure out how to be evasive, how to position to get the best shots, etc. It will just take time
This was kind of what I got from the master mode test, I think it should be a good deal faster but I also don't think it's as hamstrung as a lot of people are saying. I do think that a lot of our fighting from now on will be done around cover like mountains and asteroids and bigger ships
I completely agree it should be a high skill level because in real life being a fighter pilot is hard
In real life even flying a single engine aircraft is hard. People who want that level of difficulty and immersion choose MS Flight or similar. Likewise in real life G forces matter a lot more, and would most certainly be a limiting factor in space combat. So realistic space combat would look NOTHING like combat in SC and Chris Roberts has insisted it never will. The majority of people who play video games do not do so for extreme realism, they do so for enjoyable escapism. Skill should matter in any game. Mostly because otherwise boredom sets in quickly. But the ceiling is inevitably going to be lower, much lower, than reality.
@@ThomasD66 inertial dampeners
@@ThomasD66 also there are a bunch of chill easy games out there You eat dangerous no Man's sky starfield we don't need another game like that we need the best damn space sim there is
@@ThomasD66 Yeah. Some folks have put too much time and effort into "mastering" a half baked flight system and they're not going to like any change as a result.
@@GlxyEntertainment SC it is most certainly NOT a sim (KSP is a sim), and it never will be. Chris Roberts has made that abundantly clear. Planets are unrealistically small for their respective gravities, atmospheres are tissue paper thin, and the list could go on forever. Expecting "realism" in a particular narrow focus while ignoring all the rest is silly. Compromises will be made everywhere for the sake of "enjoyable" game play that appeals to the largest audience possible.
Master Modes feel better than what we currently have. It’s not perfect but the first rendering is not bad. Lots to work on but it’s getting there. For the small fighter club it’s a reality check for sure which I agree with. Flying at crazy speeds and battling is not good at all and unrealistic hence why most of the ships are designed around older avionics like the WW2 era.
CIG needs to eliminate reverse flying completely, and limit LRUD straff to feed off of boost meter. Increase under thrusters to second most powerful, to be used as primary brake in turns to reduce drift, but cannot be fired by pilot manually. Now you have an artificial, but physically simulated, dog fight in space flight model.
So I've been backing since the Kickstarter, but I tuned out 2016 or so. After the Squadron 42 deadline came and went. I've only booted it up like twice ever until a couple weeks ago.
Anywho, having little if any prior experience in the normal flight model and not knowing what Master Mods were until like last week, I would say that the reason we're getting Master Modes is that they're just more fun. Master Mode flying makes me feel like a spacefighter and the normal one makes me feel like a self-propelled hockey puck. Or some sort of weird Newtonian jouster. I tried everything I could to get into a dogfight situation and people literally just come to a dead stop and shoot at you, then fly directly at you, no matter what you do. It feels stupid. It's certainly not what I'm looking for from the guy who made wing commander.
It seems to worry you as you are a full time pilot enjoying high skillcap flight in a light fighter meta. Which for someone like me that is very mediocre pilot and with only few hours a week time to train is impossible to get into. I pop in and out of star citizen every 6 months or so to check what has happened and where the game is. Current flight model gives me absolutely no chance to get anything done nor does it encourage me in anyway to stay in the game for longer than to understand that "yep, I cant land a single hit". Skill based combat is important but this is an important and needed step down from elitist light fighters doing 1vs5. Seems like the 1% of pilots that actually do this for living aren't enjoying the changes but for me as a casual the master modes flight mode gives a bit of hope that maybe this could be the game for me later on. Great videos, keep em coming!
This is exactly what the problem is. PVP elitists demand the game be tailor made for them.
Ever since they talked about Master Modes, even before it got its name they were clear: we need to slow down the fights. It was years ago. Everyone was 'yes we need that'. And now somehow people are surprised? It was known years ago. At the core of this new flight model was bringing speeds down.
So now lone ace cannot win against 2,3 5h experienced pilots? And that's a problem? Ok. :)
Okay, just ran the Master Modes Vandul Swarm (solo) several times, and because of the limited time i have to devote to playing, and because i spend more time in other game loops, i am a mid pilot on my best day (so, probably the demographic they are catering to with MM,) and well, i just could not miss. it felt more like an arcade game than a space combat sim. In my final run-through, in the Buccaneer, i hit wave 17 before dying for the first time, due to a collision. If i were someone who devoted the kind of time it takes to REALLY become a skilled pilot in this game i would be mad as hell right now at the watering down of space combat master modes is bringing in its current state.
ok, although question: you mentioned how this effects light/medium/heavy, although how would these changes effect interceptors? isn't their whole deal is that they have a faster SCM speed then regular fighters and to act as chasers. Surpose a trial using your suggestions is put on a test, what would the interceptor's balance pass be? since at base, it has to be faster then every fighter base level SCM to fulfill its intented role.I believe they said they tuned the buccaneer to fit the role of the interceptor, so at what speed would it be at? ultimately, I can only go on what I've seen and, as a mainly large ship pilot who avoids pvp like the plague, there isn't much I can comment on, only that I'm not sure how MM current function with the intended role tests. Basically, how heavy fighters are meant to be sluggish, but dish out damage and take a beating, light fighters are more swift and agile, but are more frail in combat, where medium fighters are meant to fit somewhere in the middle. Plus the interceptors that chase down fleeing ships. I'd liked to know your opinion in regards to each type of fighter as it stands and each could be tuned to fit the role they are meant to have (so a break down on interceptors, then light fighters, then medium and then heavy)
We also should keep in mind that Master modes is brand new! It took time for the current flight model to get to where it is. Let them cook lol
Sounds like you haven't been paying attention. Since they brought up MM and showed us their view of it we all knew that this mess as it is now is what they wanted with it. I saw the writing on the wall from the start. It's a mess that will dumb down the flight model. Maybe good for a single player game for like a brain-dead person to jump in and have fun then jump out. But for more advance flyers who prefer real flight simulation flying this is the nail in the coffin.
how about in atmosphere the mm modes stay roughly where they are now and only void fighting is at the 450-ish rate ?
Excellent insight ! I agree with you on everything you mentioned. you were very rational and knowledgeable! Bottom line for me is we will never be able to please everyone. Limiting disadvantage is fine but to extremes like this . No way! I'm sure they will be tweaking it here and there over time. I hope for the better.
Thanks for posting this. I think fighters should be regarded as advanced ships that have a steeper learning curve, rewarding those who spend time improving. But other types of ships could be easier to learn, just like in real life. CIG could steer newer players towards piloting freelancers and Spirit C1s to start off having fun in the game, and then move to fighters when they want to take on the challenge.
I also think the fighters should be meaningfully faster than other ships.
Under the simplistic arcadey current version of the game, you're right, but that's not the direction CIG is taking the game. It's going to end being the complete opposite.
Larger ships should NEVER be easier to handle and should be massively more advanced simply because of the broader spectrum of things they are capable of handling and the larger superior equipment they carry, not to mention the complex logistics and other fiscal considerations just to keep maintained, armed, and flying.
You cannot tell us with a straight face that managing a full flight-deck carrier will be easier than a single-seat fighter. That would be absurd to the extreme.
Agreed, its been made so slow that its starting to feel arcadey, need at least 400~
We had that that almost pure endless joust
@@RichGallant exactly what I thought. All the complaining about jousting is what got us this crutch of a flight model
Endless jousting was only a problem if you didn't know how to counter it. @@RichGallant
It’s hilarious when people try to joust in MM because it’s now way easier to counter.
@@UraiTheSmoke Countering jousting was not hard, but the endless dps creep started there, as well some nerfs. People jousted because they bought an I win ship, then whined when someone who could actually fly killed them.
Oddly enough I watched a documentary about WW1 air combat and the narrator made an interesting point movies and sci-fi games are not trying for WW II combat they are trying for late WW 1 combat. Where most kills require pilot or engine kills and most shots were taken from 6 o'clock.
Are they tuning it so that fighters won't be able to consantly kite the bigger ships from a distance? Do you think it has something to do with aligning the fighters so that the turents on big ships will be able to move fast enough to hit them? If the fighters are moving to fast they will be able to midigate the damage with speed perhaps?
I just started getting heavy into Star Citizen about 3 weeks ago. I love combat and flying. Bounty Hunting has become my main thing I do. I'm looking forward to Star Citizen being very Role Play heavy. Just like I don't think everyone should be able to go out on a mining expedition and rake in millions, or go out salvaging or become a medic, or an engineer on a whim, I don't think people should be able to just hop in the pilot seat and start taking out targets left and right. Every role should have it's own deep well of knowledge and skill to excel. Being a good pilot should come with a badge of honor. I think power and system management can definitely be a big part of reaching that next level. Beginner pilots can get their feet wet by just tugging on the stick and squeezing the trigger, but knowing how to micromanage the ins-and-outs of the ship's systems during combat should be a requirement to become an Ace pilot. And for larger multi-crew ships, that should involve knowledge across multiple roles - Pilot flying, co-pilot managing systems from a macro-level and sending orders to the crew, engineers repairing downed systems...and for things like Capital Ships - Light Fighters docking for repair before redeploying, etc.
You are right. I’m not good at fighting and need to avoid it and enjoy other aspects of the game. But I don’t want to see it nerfed. I look forward to one day getting some joy sticks and getting good at fighting. The nerdy joy of flying my space ship is what attracts me to Star Citizen but it would not be fun for long without deep game play.
@Avenger_One did you link your spectrum post?
My first thought on the boost going from symmetric to asymmetric was from a realism standpoint why should it matter what direction the ship is traveling when you boost? But...if we say that boost only goes to main thrusters (or doesn't provide anywhere near as much to maneuvering thrusters, think 10% vs 100%) then it does make sense, boosting backwards with maneuvering thrusters should not allow you to kite a ship in pursuit that is oriented towards you...since they would be able to get 100% boost using main thrusters and you would only get 10%. I think it still works out even with being de-coupled, you might be able to get above SCM and stay there while firing backwards but your maneuverability should be much lower given they have access to 100% boost and you have 10%...or whatever they decide you could get without main thrusters. Might cause an issue for new people with braking though, I think a lot of us splattered on the space stations before learning the space-brake + boost when we realized we were coming in too hot. Maybe adding an emergency brake feature with a cooldown would alleviate that.
I think part of the issue is the faster speeds causes more desync. Meaning a bullet can “phase” through a ship from one impact detection to another. Slowing down the combat means you have more chances for the game to calculate an impact and keeps the combat closer. A compromise would be increasing the SCM speeds to around 300 M/s but slow down the maneuverability slightly so it’s not a DPS race. Remember Mastermodes were developed with the single player game mode of SQ42. It always favors the player and needs to be a lower skill ceiling than a multiplayer game with PvP. That is what they are combing from. Now is when we need to be voicing our opinion so that Mastermodes can be tweaked and adjusted for a better PvP experience which will make PvE better too. One of the things I always loved about SC is how it is skill of the user not a cookie cutter experience. I don’t want Starfield space combat.
You are using a bit of a fallacy argument here and there. Many of your videos early points boil down to "Master Modes can ruin advanced game play for the entire game", but you are stuck on PVP fighters as "the entire game". When making your argument, and to be taken seriously, please keep your points on topic towards the PVP community, and don't attempt to give your argument authority by saying your concerns affect "the entire game".
Yikes, who pissed in your cheerios today 😆
@Avenger__One Interesting take, but that's not what happened. I'm trying to keep you honest, not crap on you. As someone who is very high profile in the community, and you know you're also taken seriously by CIG, you deserve to have feedback on your messaging that isn't just fan-boy hype. Also, I am a fan, but it doesn't mean I have to agree on how you presented your message.
I'm not mad, or upset because my Cheerios were spoiled. I just think that you damage your hard earned respectability when making a statement about one aspect of the game (ACE pilot PVP) equating to the entire game for all players. That is how you presented your legitimate MM concerns, within the first 7 minutes of this video.
I wish you nothing but happiness, and I do always look forward to your content. My intent is only to try to point out a misstep in your message.
@@Avenger__One That was just basic criticism, and *legitimate* criticism at that. Idk where you sensed hostility in that guy’s post.
1_Prime isn’t wrong, and although Avenger_One is usually one of a few of my goto sources for PvP info, that’s it, PvP, which is just 1 of the many aspects of this game, and why sooo many are still staying and/or coming into this sim/game and why after 10+ years of even Alpha soo many still play.
Im not saying anything new or something you don’t already know, but taking criticism, especially constructive, with a bit more “understanding” will help keep you at the level many players regard you as. Last thing you want is to drive away a player base over good criticism.
My 2 cents but I’m just a random newb in this ‘verse so, hope to see more content I can learn from and it’s good to see your opinion start to evolve on certain aspects in the newer vids. I don’t know why I’m spending so much time trying to convey all this, guess it’s just something I’d want if it was me 😅
I get FPS PVE but most if not all players do PVE bounty missions to get to ERT, not because they exclusively enjoy fighting NPC ships. Killing NPC ships is not satisfying or engaging, to suggest that there’s a community of players that focus solely on PVE ship combat and avoid PVP altogether is a massive stretch. Outside of booting the game up for the first week, nobody enjoys PVE ship combat.
Lol, speed withdrawal. They are making the change just for that reason because it was too easy to maneuver out of a fight. When you get in danger run away get distance then re-engage. Now in order to do that you have to switch modes at the cost of shields, but if you dont have shields anyway then why not. It will be the ace pilots wrapping their head around the fact that they can't fight the way they used to which causes the most pain.
Do we have any idea how the eclipse will be balanced with Master Modes? Really enjoy it as a solo pilot at the moment but worried it won't be solo friendy in the new flight model
Solo friendly Eclipse makes no sense. But I agree with you, they do need to balance the eclipse, by nerfing the heck out of it.
@@NobodyhearsU What doesn't make sense about it? I think solo pilot stealth bombing is a real world scenario and even an inspiration for the Eclipse with the B-2.
Simply looking at the live vs master modes LIVE LOOKS MORE EXITING AND ENGAGING. And IM NOT A PVP PLAYER . Besides lower skill ceiling means less opportunity for non pvp players to get away cuz everyone can just wreck with 3 days of training
Master modes are a big step in the right direction, more accessible for the majority of active players rather than just the top 1%
I’ve seen enough games die because they only focus on the hardcore PvP players or “pros”, rather than being accessible for new players
look at wow as an example of the opposite when they started to drop the skill ceiling the game started to lose players , the further they went the worse it got and most of the old big servers were almost empty and they had to merge them together , and then they erase 10 years of patches which finally got players back with classic .
It is really hard to get to grips with the old flight model, when i first started if felt really sensitive. A short button tap would drive you in a driection and some really high speeds. I had to get joysticks and pedals and wipe ten years worth of dust off my trackIR to get into the swing of things. I cant say i mastered it but the feeling of control is amazing. Im afraid of losing that feeling with Master modes.
I'm hoping these speeds are all just placeholders. They went look a p-51 goes 710kph or 197m/s we can make the fighters go around 200m/s. A b-17 goes 138 m/s so the bigger ships can go that speed. Hopefully they will work out that ww2 in space doesnt really work.
I believe Master Modes is shaped to reminds us of the old Wing Commander flight model. Master Modes is for Star Citizen what "no yaw" is for Elite Dangerous, it is a reference back to the history of the game. I think Master Modes is good for Squadron42, but Star Citizen has gone so far beyond the old Wing Commander games that it is truly able to go full Newtonian physics. I believe the reason Master Modes drops the skill ceiling so dramatically has a deep reason: It is because the natural world is much more complex and interesting than any system humans can invent. Master Modes is a limitation of the possibilities of the natural world and when you limit the complexities of nature, the skill ceiling drops. A core goal for Master Modes is to bring combat closer, however speed is unrelated to distance, especially if you fight decoupled. In decoupled, circling a rock in space is identical to circling a ship going straight and at fixed speed, *regardless of speed*! Try it! (The experience will also make you a better fighter.) You need to twist your mind into disregarding the lies of your instruments and space dust, but once you make the mental adjustment you will see that in decoupled circling a ship flying at any speed is the same as circling a rock standing still. Note how this means that decoupled makes the top speed totally irrelevant; absolute speed in itself becomes totally irrelevant. The only relevant instrument you have is the relative speed of your target. Decoupled also removes "friction in space", so what we find is that the most engaging and interesting flight model is based on decoupled, which means no top speed and no friction in space. This is simply what real space is like!
Vector locking after boost is what feels the worst imo
yeah that really shouldn't be a thing. even in the PU you're vector locked if you're moving fast and reduce your speed limiter to below your current velocity and it's annoying. i feel like you should still be able to use the sideways thrusters even if your ship is using the reverse ones to try and slow you down, you know?
This.
Great analysis, - I realise the area of your focus, but if you step outside of the PvP bubble your comments are also very relevant to the PvE players too.
I think you’re right, it’s tweaks and tuning that need refined. Were early days with master modes so this kind of feedback I hope is seen as valuable.
Great video, Star Citizen player! I really enjoyed your insights on Master Mode. It's refreshing to see someone dive deep into the mechanics and share their thoughts. I agree that the current tuning might not be delivering on the promise of Master Mode, but I'm curious about your take on the weapon balance. Do you think the weapons are too powerful or too weak in their current state? It seems like a higher skill ceiling could lead to even more satisfying gunplay, but I wonder if the balance needs adjusting first.
I started playing this week and I agree with everything said. Star field doesnt need to appeal to everyone in THIS aspect, people will LOVE to actually LEARN and enjoy something that takes more time and dedication.
This game currently caters to people with the right peripherals (for example sticks).
Don't forget head trackers
I very much disagree, you are in my opinion going to have more fun with sticks, however, in the AC racing the #1 ranked in the majority of the race tracks flys with mouse and keyboard.
this is very true for sticks because back in 2.6.3 it wasnt such a chore to get better at combat and it wasnt a if you have sticks you have a clear advantage over a m&kb player which most stick player will say its only for the feel but its a whole lie. And master modes certainly evens the playing field for m&kb and stick players movement wise because the current system is unfair af just no one with a platform will ever speak on it because the white knights will smite tf outta them lol.
nah man its a day and night difference in combat with m&kb vs a stick player like trying to hit someone in the current system is nearly impossible because the pip is all over the place but in the master modes system the shots actually hit as intended just like the 2.6.3 flight system. The digital inputs kill the pip for KB&M players like if you look at that guy he was shooting at in the hornet thats how KB players look in the current system almost like they arent moving. Im saying this from playing both sticks KB@@TheLoneLlama
12:15
This... actually kills games. Basically every game that implements this level of depth dies, and dies fast. It sounds great for you having gotten in early, but if you create a night infinite skill ceiling, there is no way for late additions to join the PVP scene, and new money always matters more for the survival of a game than money they already spent 10 years ago.
That's something buzz cut psycho covered in one of his videos on the topic.
Making PVP accessible isn't a bad thing. After all, it being accessible means more people engage with it and you have more people to fight, i.e a healthier, larger population
So, master modes.
I just tried this out in AC and I will split my thoughts into two sections; combat and general flight.
Combat: I think this is a downgrade. I wasn't 100% behind the current system, there was alot of room for improvement but it felt fun. The new MM system is just alright. If they up the speeds I could live with it.
Navigation: What the F**K! Just over 400m/s! In a F**king Gladius! I spend 95% of my ship time in SC just flying around. When I am going to a location on a planet/moon I often QT to the closest OM and then just fly down to my destination, just because I love to fly my ship.
I know people will say "but you can quantum boost," but I don't want to use quantum travel unless I am going further than about 500km (though the option is there if I want it).
I WANT TO FLY MY SHIP!
I noticed that one of the other comments mentioned elite dangerous and I agree. Flight in elite dangerous got boring after a while, and then I stopped playing. I had around 500 hours in ED.
I must have several thousand hours in SC, and was looking forward to many thousands more. I have stuck with CIG from March 2013, through all of the delays and bullshit, because I had faith that they would eventually deliver and get it done right. If this is the way flight is going to be then I have zero faith at all.
I could use ships just as a means of getting from A to B, and focus on FPS, but they are also increasing TTK there as well.
The sad part is, I was so excited after CitCon, seeing that things are starting to come together. This could well be game over for me.
Sorry about the incoherent rant, but CIG have seriously F**CKED up with this.
I'm in the same boat. been a backer for 11 to 12 years and MM comes in then I might be out. The freedom of its flight simulation is what pulled me in to help kickstart this game. I like it as it is and how it is. Its state of flight mechanics is what sold me. I hope they don't go this route because I'm a wing commander level, I guess the jokes on me. I kickstart this game because I knew Chris was in control and not some triple A company. This kind of change is what we see from those kinds of companies that dumb down and ruin games.
I am ok with anything that finally kills the Light Fighter Meta
repeater projectile spread and increased projectile speed alone would have fixed that, especially for S5+ weapons
As someone who sucks at flight combat, I love how difficult and complex it is. It adds so much depth to the game. It is enjoyable even when I fail because of how realistic it feels. I poured money into the game when it felt like a simulation. Now, with massively increased TTK on the ground, and a weird, unrealistic flight mode being introduced, I regret the money spent.
Master modes is a necessity for ensuring ships like corvettes matter and don't get overwhelmed by fighters. As is, you can just swarm in, do a load of damage, and then break off, there's minimal risk with a half decent group of pilots.
If I understood right the issue to be resolved is the AMPLITUDE of speed between the ideal for dogfighting and manoeuvering. And this amplitude has been reduced too much. Maybe the boost or the overall amplitude could get a little higher ? I think master modes are a good idea and the upcoming tunning could be done much more easier to balance the game.
Fuck. I thought master mode was to create more variety to combat and actually make it more like flying an aircraft in atmosphere
I'm afraid that if SCM speed while flying backwards was 400, and boosted forward was only 150 higher, the chaser would close in much slower than in current master modes, while being an easier target to hit, and using large amounts of boost. While the passive kiter, could be more evasive, while using no boost, and be a huge advantage.
However if we had elliptical SCM speeds, like the elliptical boosted speeds, you would kite in reverse slower, while still being able to have higher SCM maneuvering speeds, and even be able to close in on a target without using boost.
Thanks for the analysis! Love it.
HI Avenger. I am no ace pilot, but I completely support your point of view. I would like to play this game for years and years and still be working to improve my dogfighting skills. At this stage I know just enough to get out of a fight alive. 😜 However, I can understand that for the Sq42 single player experience, that you would want new players to quickly reach a level of competency that they are able to progress through the campaign at a reasonable rate. To achieve both of these goals, CIG may need to establish different tunings for the 2x games. OR perhaps have difficulty settings for Sq42, where a new player can set it to EASY, and enjoy a more forgiving flight model...
Out of curiosity, what is the win/loss ratio when an experienced player is engaging a rookie in the new system? What percentage of the fights is the rookie winning?
He's just sad he can't tricord away from everything to reset fights and then people pretend they are good when it's really just the insane levels of GeForce our pilots can handle but the speeds the servers don't like.
Something that has been pointed out by an org mate that MM supports team and wingman play more than just being the best solo fighter ever and I think a lot of people who learned to play the current system to their advantage in 1v3 1v4 fights are sad because they can't survive through trichord and high speed alone.
@@schlagzahne6741"he is just sad"
You can say that all you want but it doesn't make it true.
What avenger says is something that many other people say too and these people aren't aces.
So get up and go play noman's sky
Honestly, I'm curious about this as well as I get the impression that the slower SCM speeds help with the current server performance issues and as such average pilots on less capable systems. Thus, until whatever server update required arrives, the slower SCM speed may even out the playing field?
@@Paradox3713 , Yes, the lower speeds are intended to help server stability... And A-One isn't even suggesting changing that... Because 500m/s is fast enough, and it's basically the top speed once you account for the absurd arcade boost tuning that is currently in MM.
I don't think that's the reason we're getting master modes. I think the game doesn't play as cinematically as they would like it to and I agree with the change
The reason is to make it more attractive to S42 purchasers and Consoles who they will eventually try to sell it to. CIG said it themselves in an SCL they created MM specifically for S42
Have you tried flying with MM?
@@luciddaze248 Are you asking me or the OP? Because if you’re asking me, yes I have played it many times and I absolutely hate it as it stands.
I hate the no movement after letting boost go (which will be changed)
I hate the oversimplified power management (which thankfully will be changed)
I hate the punishment for tri chording (which again will thankfully be changed)
So we will see how things go in January when the changes are implemented.
But as it stands it feels like I’m playing No Man’s Sky baby flight model and not a proper grown up sophisticated one!!
We already had this slow crap in 3.8 it SUCKED!
@@0Metatron it seems like you already made up your mind that you didn’t like the mode before it even came out
Good video and good feedback, thanks for deciding to make this video. Like you stated, MM is in a hugely transitory state currently, and they need all the quality feedback they can get. Yogi and crew have stated that "almost nothing is finalized in MM yet", and that they want to "lower the skill floor but not the skill ceiling." They want a high skill ceiling, so I believe we will eventually get MM to that point, where it is easy to learn but hard to master. There are still many systems that are not fully realized in the game that will need continued tweaking to balance out the combat, it will be an ongoing endeavor for quite some time.
they said that first implementation of master mode does not have a fine tuning, it will be more a every size of ship with the same tuning, and after they will come tune ships individually. So your feeling is right, but not a problem.
My honest issues with master modes at the moment is, I'm a noob for the current flight model, so it feels pointless to study a flight model that may be obsolete in a year
That's one of the reasons why I'm playing as much master modes as I am at the moment. Whilst no ace under the current flight model, I'm at least passibly experienced and I am enjoying the ever living crap out of master modes in comparison to the current flight model.
So I guess you could say I'm playing master modes as much as I am for several reasons number one because I personally enjoy it far more than the current flight model.
Number two in order to provide feedback from someone at a moderate skill level rather than only the 1% giving their feedback. After all, arena commander isn't the totality of combat and star citizen, nor Star Marine the totality of FPS combat and star citizen. An example of this is the recent, complaints on time to kill from the star marine inside of the player base when on the PU side of things it makes a lot of sense because after all we do have a medical gameplay loop that needs to come into action.
Armor is going to change things even more than the modes. A1 is HEAVILY (as in near entirely) invested in the light fighter meta and he is now seeing the tip of a very large iceberg in his path.
@@ThomasD66 Not only that, the flight model has gone through dramatic changes several times before and it feels nowhere near done. We don't even know if they are taking into account, or atmospheric density. This change seems to be focused on space combat only.
@@ThomasD66 something that I realized early on when I started to the group fight with master modes is that the importance of an individual pilot skill is increasingly secondary versus their ability to work as part of a team.
A group of zergs is able to be picked apart. A group of coordinated players though is far harder.
So I guess you could say it could be a little bit of culture shock where the 1v5 light fighter Aces are realizing they're not necessarily the top of the hierarchy anymore.
After all this is an MMO. An individual pilots skill is one thing. Their ability to fight in a coordinated manner is quite another.
I really don’t get this argument, it only takes like five to ten minutes of flying mastermodes to be really get it. It’s not a huge time commitment.
Does anyone remember the ESF fighters from Planetside 2, their flight mechanic had a really good feel to them, there was both a simplicity and depth to their style. It was easy to learn but difficult to master. I think finding a balance similar to that is best.
im an old NC pilot. The current MM gives me the drop tanks AA setup feel to be honest, using boost to dodge, and having to manage that. Maybe that is why I disagree with A1 on MM being bad lol. No it's not perfect yet, or near perfect, but I can def see it being really good. I also kind of like the slower speeds as it makes energy management, along with power triangle management and boost management a thing, you don't get to run away when your shields are low, and for fights with groups, you actually have to peel off enemies now instead of just running away.
What I find interesting though is the fact that he is complaining about it being "too easy" to dump an entire mag on someone. I train with my org in MM, there are a few pilots who when I first started learning MM I could not touch, and now it takes me about 2 lives to down them if they don't reset in a dual. it's much more of a movement and maneuver game while managing your ship imho, not just going so fast that your character would splat.
Really spot on feedback to CIG man! and I don't know if there is a way to promote this somewhere on spectrum, but you should definitely submit it to the forum (if not already), and people will vote.
The only item is slightly disagree, maybe due to lack of knowledge / pvp practice, is the forward thrusters boost. Why not all directions? It just feels like this could be limiting in a way, specifically towards alien alike ships and technology.. for example fury has these fancy spinning thrusters that shouldn't really care which direction you'd like to accelerate therefore should be allowed regardless of the position. But for more conventional ships, like gladuis or arrow this makes complete sense to lock them to a forward thrust rule.
One off the wall opinion I have; lose pips with the way MM is running now. With the adjustments to ammo and the firing you mentioned, you can fight without them effectively-I know mostly because I think I keep hitting the wrong button and my PIPs disappear (I assume its something to do with locking or gimbals). It's not a "this fixes everything" but it adds nuance to another aspect of combat. You can still spray and pray and land hits, but honing that accuracy will conserve ammo and give you better TTK.
Agreed completely on the speeds. We need enough space to maneuver at a high level, especially in team environments. MM SQB feels like a numbers game. Top pilots who put in the time and dedication to understand all aspects of flight should be a force to be reckoned with on the battlefield, not completely constrained by resources and speed barriers.
They have to do something because the space flight model has a speed exploit and the tricording jousting meta is lame. People are not going to fund a game they have no chance to win unless they train like esports pros or get shredded by Arrows no matter what they fly. Those hardcore fans are not all hardcore duelists. EvE stifled its growth and ran into the ground being too hardcore. People need to play it more and give feedback if they want something workable when it lands.
You answered your own concern...
"Most people are not going to train like esport pros"
Theodore there is no reason to change anything... Because "Most people are not going to train like esport pros"
So you are fine. 9/10 you are battling someone who is going to be just as bad as you are...
Master Modes is like saying, "man chess is so hard... lets change the rules because it takes so much time to learn and become good"
Imagine how terrible modern chess would have been if they followed the same mentality...
There is no "trichording jousting meta"
Trichording is how you get better turn rates, so that you can lead your targets faster, and never have to joust.
Jousting is what happens when the speed differential between two ships causes them to fly past one another over and over again, only shooting as they fly past.
I think you're just parroting rhetoric, and you don't really know what you're talking about.
Not every game loop is for everyone. If you don't want to sit down and learn the loops of pvp dogfighting there is tons of pve content and other gameplay loops available
Jousting is there because the freedom is there to do it, its the nature of the flight model. Taking away that freedom to think outside the box while you pvp is not good for the game. Taking away the skill from flying will just dumb it down. Get better at flying and learning how to counter it instead of thinking it's a good idea just to dumb it down.
@@TheNefariousFox Tricording is how you exploit the flight model to get more speed than you are supposed to have. Devs said it's an unintended exploit in the current model and why we are going back to gearshift speed modes but this time you can't disengage without impunity of you make a bad bet.
fun fact. mach1 is about 340m/s so current scm in master mod is not even close to mach1
that just makes no sense
of course you have basically no chance to go too fast to turn so end up FEEL you have better control of you ship, but that should be a skill difference from player to player.
I agree 100% went from skill gap and death of a space man, to arcade shooter and insert coin.
This looks like it would be good for in atmo. But I agree that at least in space speeds need to be increased by about half? One third? not too much, but enough to matter. But also remember that Chris Robers wants combat to be 'WW2 in space'. So, there is a good bit of limitation in what can be done within that vision.
Had a 3V3 the other night and the furball that developed pretty much matches that aim. It was a blast bobbing and weaving, chasing and being chased.
The situational awareness you need in a furball like that is something I think people will need to work on if the current flight model is the bulk of their experience.
Master Modes is so much worse than what we have. The first fifteen fights felt promising, but dozens of fights in, the depth isnt there. All the fights feel the same. It is not dynamic.
fifteen fights against the same ship with the same loadout was always going to end up feeling the same. Obviously I don't know yet since we don't have it yet, but I'm hopeful that when weapons and components get differentiated, it'll feel a lot better.
@@monty58 it's available to play with 4 ships right now.
Also in PU whenever the game releases. Pvp fights wont be in every corner.
Yes, exactly.
Its like Elite, the fights are terrible... So far Star Citizen can brag because it really is the BEST game so far when it comes to space battles.
But that's about to change because Master Modes are TERRIBLE in their current implementation. There's got to be a way for ships to keep being as fast as they are right now. I don't know what CIG should do, but this ain't cutting it.
@@monty58on that topic what are cooler for? Right now they do nothing.
Just want to say how much I respect you for putting in the stick time and highlighting those non tangibles that can only be experienced by flying to the edge and not regurgitating spec sheets like every other Star Citizen content creator.
There is a reason they don't use F1 race cars for drivers tests.
Master Modes are for people that think race cars should be slower because they personally can't handle more than a Toyota Corolla.
once again we are in a spot where things look bad but we also still dont have ship armor physicalized.....
That still creates a DBS based system where good movement means nothing
Been playing off and on since 3.17 and I've always been in awe of watching pilots like yourself in pvp - 100% agree there needs to be a depth to skill that newer players can aspire to and I hope CIG takes note of this video and message and there's a compromise made that keeps all happy over the long term
Okay i have a few thoughts on this.
Personally im hoping for a greater degree of customization to the ships. For example thrusters which can be chosen based on their attributes. Examples would be, a simple high power thruster with no boost. A heavy and solid lower speed boost enabled thruster which can in theory boost forever.
I'd also like to see things like allowing us to add an additioal boost tank into another component slot. (Like replacing a second shield generator or something like that.)
I'd also like to see diffrent engines. Eg. ion engines which use argon and electricity instead of hydorgen. They would have much less thrust, but use very little fuel, and have very high max velocity, boost is possible but damages the engines due to arching. Or nuclear engines which are inherently fast but can't boost. Etc... I would be great if they actually spoke with NASA and real fighter pilots on this.
I'd also like to see things like boosting builds up heat, damaging the engines, and requireing better coolers. Im hoping that this will help solve the issues you are facing.
I just want to see ships as customizable as the player who flys them. Right now ships are more or less throw aways. ( Part of sc's clutter problem. ) So, very little of this applies right now. Though, I do agree that ships need some speed tweaks so that its challenging but not too easy. Both the current system and master modes.
I'm hoping the tuning now is preliminary to see how the main fighter archetypes fit together, and is overtuned towards the heavier fighters as much to make them feel like they have a place. Greater speed differences between the classes of ships would be welcome, though. With the caveat that anything about what's planned for SC's future is heavily influenced by one's own head canon interpretration of what they say, I've been hoping that master modes and engineering gameplay would create more of a spectrum where fighters on one extreme have an incredible ability to maneuver and are dependent on it to sustain themselves in a fight, while gunships on the other extreme have tankiness (with weak points) and robust engineering gameplay to weather constant fire. It would be less about which is better and more about which strategies, alone or in groups, are more effective for ships along that spectrum, but they would need a wide differentiation in tankiness and speed to separate those styles of play.
I'm by no means an ace, or barely even an ok combat pilot. That said, the master mode, has definitely been a let down. It just feels wrong. The boost speeds reducing when boost runs out is maybe my biggest issue. The speed reduction is also boring and doesn't make combat any easier in my opinion.
I suspect with squadron 42 being feature complete that these changes won't happen.
That would quite literally kill the game for a lot of us, so lets hope your wrong.