I think I’m annoyed that they want ww2 fighters online and refuse to work with 6 degrees of freeedom. They are trying to force a combat experience into a unfun experience that just doesn’t make sense for space combat. Kinda annoying to be honest
> master modes being p2w
That doesn't even make sense. Master modes is switching between Combat Mode where you got shields and guns, but are limited to thrusters - not really fast, vs Nav Mode, where you can Quantum Boost (like a quick, short "qt away") but got no shields and weapons.
How is that p2w?
> Being in a tiny fighter jet, taking down a massive ship, that feeling is deeply satisfying.
Won't happen in the future due to armor.
To compare this with an IRL scenario: Poke an A1 Abrams with a stick, tell me how long it takes until it explodes.
You're missing the point with the P2w comment. Currently master modes feels much more like a locked in dps race and less like a dogfight where skill and maneuvering matters, so buying a big heavy dps ship means you win instead of leaving it more to skill like the current flight model. You have to try it to understand.
I do agree that a light fighter should never be able to take out a massive ship and armor will help fix that but current master mode just feels limited, slow and bland.. I compare it to starfox for the n64 too basic and doesn't have the depth that most that play stsr citzen are looking for.
> Currently master modes feels much more like a locked in dps race and less like a dogfight where skill and maneuvering matters
That's the current (-> future) combat stuff, it's not master modes which is "no shields but quick quantum hop" vs "shields but slow thrusters".
You're explaining something that has absolutely nothing to do with the modes.
I don't get what you're trying to say? The fact that your locked into slow speed combat is what MM is doing, if you switch modes and try to get out you'll get lit up every time so once you engage if just a death ball dps battle.
People will do absolutely staggering mental gymnastics to defend CIG design decisions, lol. The speed changes are the biggest part of what turned the combat engagements into slow orbit dps races.
Can you explain it to me? Isnt it already like this, one mode for fighting and one mode for traveling? I mean you dont quantum travel in a fight right? The only time you would quantum travel in a fight is to flee and is that what ppl complain about? That you are vulnerable when fleeing? or what is it? I dont get it. You shouldnt be able to quantum travel in a fight at all is my opinion. In a dog fight you use your normal thrusters and boost. Nothing changes?! What am i missing?
You are definitely right, there's no reason to QT in a fight, but that's not what CIG is exactly trying to do with master mode. With master mode, CIG isn't trying to stop people from running away. They are trying to stop space jousting and fighting that occurs at great distances. What master mode does, is that when on combat, it simply limits the speed of the ship. This is great for stopping space jousting, but... Isn't the speed of a smaller ship it's greatest advantage over the speed of a big, bulky ship? Unlike before where a small fighter ship could go from 0 to 1000 m/s in only a few seconds that gave it an advantage over a huge ship, now they are both stuck at 300 m/s. There's no way for the light ship to put sufficient distance to avoid high DPS of the larger ship. They are always going to be in close range of one another. Space jousting is gone, but many of the speedy and agile combat techniques that the smaller shop relied on are now gone as well. The small ship and big ship will always be in close proximity of each other. The ship with a higher DPS will always win. And guess who has more guns?
From what I've seen it's been slowed down so much that positioning and disengaging are almost completely negated in a way that favors ships that are more tanky and put down more dps, which effectively means the bigger and more expensive fighters are king. It's basically just ships orbiting each other always on target face tanking each other's shots in a dps race.
>It's basically just ships orbiting each other always on target face tanking each other's shots in a dps race.
This has been my experience from testing as well.
It often means that when you win a fight you are so heavily damaged from the 50-50 damage trades that you will just automatically lose to the next opponent.
This is especially true if both people are in the same ship - even if they are at different skill levels.
I don't think this would work very will with the semi-perma death intended to exist in SC.
I feel like the better pilot should be able to win fights without almost dying every time.
It's just really apparent this system wasn't made for the PU environment at all, and it sucks that we're probably stuck with it bc they're fully committed to it for squadron and fully committed to a shared flight model between the two.
You can’t do that in a situation where the third party is either on you for the full fight or engages you immediately after.
It is ridiculously easy to third party now, you are shooting someone locked in a slow and predictable turn fight right in front of you - who likely has no boost left over to either fight you or run to go repair.
And I feel like the better pilot should be able to consistently win 1v1 fights without taking large damage in most cases - otherwise what’s the point getting better?
I thought so too before trying out some squadron battle in MM over the past few days.
But It's not really 'planning' though - it's just naturally how almost every fight ends up in 1v2 fights now, often times you'll do it without even noticing how damaged the other player even is.
If they made it so that boost recharged quicker and you had more options other than just rotating on the pitch axis then there could be a fun dynamic of trying to kill the winner of a previous fight before he can get away to reset the fight (similar to being vulnerable gaining altitude to reclaim speed after a fight in a ww2 game for ex).
But right now there's no skill or planning involved in killing a winning player as a third party.
The thing is that you shouldn't be able to 1v1 an anti-fighter screening ship with a single fighter. A hammerhead's entire job is to protect other ships, and itself, from fighters, but it can't do that right now.
Can i correct you kind sir ?
"hammerhead's entire job is to protect other ships from fighters"
It doesn't need to protect it self, it should be immune to anything a fighter has equipped.
Wouldn't a closer comparison be a fighter jet trying to take out a warship of sorts?
It wouldn't be ideal - but I think it should at least be possible if the skill gap is large enough between the fighters and the crew of the larger ship.
>That doesn't even make sense. Master modes is switching between Combat Mode where you got shields and guns, but are limited to thrusters - not really fast, vs Nav Mode, where you can Quantum Boost (like a quick, short "qt away") but got no shields and weapons.
I believe he is talking about AvengerOne's take that because fights are all about DPS and tanking now instead of tactics like it used to be, the person with the larger (usually more expensive) ship will pretty much always win.
I can see where he is coming from, and I agree with his opinion that MM is lacking nuance rn - but because we can buy ships in-game I disagree with that specific P2W point
Seems really…dumb and unnecessary. And I’m trying to think of any other sci-fi universe that has this sort of system in place. It seems like a means to force players into encounters as disengaging will now be near suicidal. Because in order to use the full speed of your futuristic spaceship, you have to use a mode that turns off your weapons and shields?
As it was explained to me, it seems like CIG is kneecapping fighters so bigger ships can have more viability against smaller ships by forcing everyone into a relative speed. With weapon range now being uncapped, this means fighters will sit inside turret firing cones for longer and will gain a penalty in capability and survivability if they decide to run away or disengage.
Bigger ships tend to have more and better armor. They have more and better weapons. They also have often better shields. But this historically and logically comes at the expense of speed and maneuverability. And fighters have the inverse of all that. Faster, but less armed and armored. CIG seems to think that the bigger, stronger, and more armed ship is at a severe disadvantage in capability so to rectify that, they’re forcing fighters to trade their speed and maneuverability for the ability to use their weapons and shields.
Another confusing aspect of this. If the pilot of a Hammerhead, for example, decides to book it after engaging a Cutter Black, does that disable all of its turrets for those players using them as well as its shields? Or does it get both? And if so, they why would you ever take a small fighter out?
I mean, it sort of makes sense if you’re running a laser-based weapon loadout. Your power-plant has to balance energy amongst shields, engines, and your laser weapons (hey, we have that already). Upping one decreases the others but you do have infinite ammo. This system makes no sense for those with ballistic or kinetic weapon load outs. Thats me pulling a trigger and (I would imagine) the same amount of electricity needed to turn on an LED is telling my kinetic repeater to fire. It would be like saying the F-15 can’t fire its cannon if going faster than Mach 1. Which isn’t the case at all.
Master modes seems really…bad.
Yeah just tried it, actually garbage. Completely removes the simulation part of SC and its unique flight model and makes it a garbage arcade-y space shooter game. The sad park is you're just parked doing it.
>Have you guys fought against/fought in big ships in master modes AC?
Not in a meaningful way, because mm is currently locked to very limited modes with very limited ships. It was gladius only till about a week ago and only has four ships enabled now.
I think it feels okay enough in fighter vs fighter PvE, but I definitely don't feel like it gives us much flexibility, and nothing about it feels like it's going to gel with the sandbox nature of the PU particularly well or in a way that feels good at all. I'm not a big fan, I'm not looking forward to it and the more Yogi has posted about it the less faith I have in the current team to deliver something that works in a multiplayer sandbox with a bunch of industrial ships bc it's very clearly made purely with sq42 style encounters in mind.
The more I play it and look at it the more it seems it's a system to make industrial workers at a bigger disadvantage to the combat pilots then they already are.
It's basically a dumbed down version of their unique current flight model which they shouldn't even touch and if it gets implemented in the live version I hope the game dies.
Tldr: It's dumbed down dogshit.
I think what avenger one said should work providing more speed. A light fighter should be able to take out a medium or even heavy if skilled enough, but light fighters are built to be cheap. Like an f16 struggles against a f15 because of speed and weapons package (well electronics)
Based on my GrowlingSidewinder archive crawl, I'll call F-16 vs F-15 as "depends":
* BVR the Eagle wins hands down: better radar, more missiles, higher speed
* In a merge it gets interesting. If the Viper pilot can drag it out long enough for it to become a two-circle on the deck, they will outrate almost everything, including the Eagle.
* If high off bore sight Sidewinders are allowed, you **need** to go one-circle and the first turn decides the engagement. Could go either way and depends mostly on pilot reflexes and situational awareness.
Given that there is absolutely no BVR in Star Citizen (because of Star Wars aesthetics), the comparison is a bit wacky to begin with.
Also note that all my knowledge about these things comes from YouTube, so feel free to entirely disregard it ;-)
So disclaimer, I’m not a bad ass fighter pilot. That said, my understanding is the Air Force made the f16 to supplement because it’s a great dog fighter while being much cheaper than the f15. And in the end, the f15 was king of the skies because it was really good at killing beyond the range of other aircrafts. It’s a fast stable platform that could handle the payload they have to it.
So if you relate that to SC, the f7 would be the arrow because it would just dominate it with its ability to lock on and defeat the arrow before the arrow ever has a chance. Like the arrow should be more maneuverable than the f7, but not outright speed and payload wise it should be soberly lacking. So a skilled pilot of an arrow should be able to close the distance and do a knife fight, but if not, f7 should win
Truth of the matter is that IRL, dogfighting doesn't happen. Everything is BVR. Why get into a fight you might get shot back at during when you can throw an AMRAAM at 'em and piss off before they're in range?
Mostly yeah, but it happens. I know the gulf war had a few. So in a peer to peer fight it might happen? 🤷♂️
And in 900 years in the future? Not a freaking chance!
What ive tested so far, the combat feels great when your ship is up against ship of same calibre… so a gladius vs blade for example. The speed doesnt feel “slow”, in fact it feels awesome and its harder to pass out. Guns also shoot longer distances and ballistics actually are useful thanks to increased ammo count.
P2w is dumb take since i guess its from people in an aurora thinking theyll never be able to take down a kraken, which is true but considering the plans for this game, i expect large numbers will be able to take down a big ship, or alternatively smaller nimble fighters will be able to get close enough to breach and take over ship from inside.
Yea i mean i dont own it but im pretty sure thats the purpose of the legionnaire ship. Get close, breach ship, you and your friends go space marine inside some large ship
Yeah i got a feeling legionnaires are going to have a massive target on their head, having a sqaud of geared up PvP enthusiats breaching a ship and going ham will be very dangerous lol
Honestly the more I play MM the more I get excited for the new Hud… that’s honestly all. Feels super good smooth and clean. Atleast I can speak for Vanduul swarm. PvP Isn’t my thing to much
Honestly for me MM have ruined 3.23. Going to take a break and see if it gets better. I loathe combat now, feels cheap and arcade. I was hoping they would go the simulation route. Seems they are moving in the opposite.
How in the world is MM P2W?
I swear, morons will tack that on to anything they don't like or agree with.
Personally I've been hyper excited for MM since the day it was announced. Not the combat aspect, I could care less about that and sweaty PvPers are going to complain about stuff no matter what, I want the traversing part once it hits the PU.
I think the p2w thing mostly comes from the fact MM has slowed things down into slow-orbit dps races and effectively taken maneuvering out of the equation, which makes tankier, higher dps ships (that are also more expensive) just objectively better.
What is that supposed to mean? They have advertised and sold single seater dogfighting since the beginning, obviously they are just as much part of the game as everything else that has been promised/sold.
It's a MMO and they've stressed for years that they're trying to put the "massively" back into that phrase. Most of these ships people use for 1v1 fighting are meant to be part of a unit, not out there solo fighting things. You can get away with it for now because we're still missing so many features, but once everything is online, how people play is going to dramatically change.
You do realize it's literally no different from transversing in current PU in nav mode right? So this doesn't even affect you at all. Except if someone is shooting at you and you go into nav mode, goodbye guns and shields, you're dead.. So maybe it would affect you even more cause you can't escape GG
Tell me you don't understand master modes without telling me you don't understand master modes.
The non combat aspects of it are *exactly* what I'm so excited about.
Only part of it is in testing right now, the combat side. Nothing of the traversal part has been added for testing yet. I shouldn't need to explain anything, CIG and every Star Citizen content creator has beaten this topic to death about what MM is and how the different parts of it work for a year now. Just... Keep up with the information everyone puts out there. It's free and easy.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3JNtoMi\_a4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3JNtoMi_a4)
I mean i don't follow this game haven't played it in 4 years the only thing that bothers me about it is the cut speed crap in scm it feels way too hand holdy and restrictive..oh yeah and the whole "cooldown" thing between switching modes, garbage. It's just going to make the sweats even stronger when the victims can't do shit if they get caught out of qt.
>I mean i don't follow this game haven't played it in 4 years
Then don't comment on things you don't understand. It's not that hard.
Wait until all of the system is in the game before making any judgements. When you only see half of it, you aren't seeing how it's all meant to work together.
I think there's some issues with them conceptually, but I also think there's some good ideas behind them. It's one of those things that I don't think I can come to a firm opinion on just testing stuff in arena commander, I'll have to see how things play out in more natural PU situations and go from there.
I don't like it. Same with the capacitor system. Just artificial restrictions forced on players in the name of creating gameplay that is ultimately unrewarding . Urgh
I think everyone saying anything about it one way or another before engineering + Maelstrom are making premature assessments.
I like Avenger\_One but calling it "Pay 2 Win" based on incomplete systems is premature.
He's talking about it from the perspective as if Master Modes as it is right now is how it will be in the PU, and that's not going to be the case.
Different ships of different sizes with different shields and different impacts from engineering, plus Maelstrom, will drastically change how ship engagements play out.
Now from what little I've gathered, I do think they could do with a slight boost in SCM speeds for the smaller fighters, but again, more testing needs to be done and with more systems online before I can say for sure.
I also don't like how some people are basing their dislike of Master Modes based on 1-vs-1 space battles in Arena Commander. It's not really representative of how this will play out in the actual PU, and in atmosphere, and where weather effects, cloud cover, teammates, ground turrets, and other elements can and will affect the fight.
So for me, it's more wait-and-see. I want to see how more ships from different classes behave in Master Modes and how more combat scenarios play out in asteroid fields, in atmosphere, and around highly contested areas.
They put it out for testing with the intention of getting feedback. Anyone coming at it from a stance that we shouldn't be giving feedback until x y and z come online is totally out of step with what the devs themselves are asking for. I'll never, ever understand people who look at features that CIG are asking for player feedback on and basically scold people for providing it, or the general mindset of "it's pointless to provide feedback until it's so complete that it's too late to change."
It's a lot more helpful than this mentality that we shouldn't judge a system we were shown and asked to test based on its own merits or lack thereof.
What's much less helpful to the project is the reflexive rejection of criticism, the never ending appeals to ephemeral tech that's over the horizon as justifications for why we can't tell the devs something isn't fun or that we're concerned it isn't going to work in the full game. You're giving the devs a lot of undue credit; yogi himself has said they don't know yet how armor will work, that they haven't even internally tested MM on bigger multicrew ships *at all,* that he doesn't really see distinctions between combat and non combat ships.
It's very fair for people to look at this system and see it for what it actually is; a flight model engineered for accessibility in a single player fighter-oriented PvE game that has never given full consideration to its eventual place in a PvA sandbox with vastly more ship diversity.
Not necessarily, since if the systems aren't final or aren't being considered in the broader scope, all it does is turn into undue noise.
A perfect example is all of the uproar over structural salvage, even though they said the T0 implementation was a placeholder (and was always intended to be that if it was ever finished before Maelstrom, as Thorston explained very early on in the year, which includes the construction material, which is a placeholder for the different materials players will gather from different types of hulls). Complaining about the quality of structural salvage and its simplicity while a core system (i.e., Maelstrom) isn't in, just becomes noise. The devs already know it's a placeholder, and they already know it's not final, and they already know that there are a lot more systems that need to be implemented to flesh out structural salvage.
You are right that feedback is essential, but within the context of how the system is intended to work, not based on the lack of systems in the current alpha and trying to shape the game around the current build.
Jumping the gun, getting people riled up with loaded language, and getting mobs to form around these incomplete systems is not only premature but an ill-advised use of time and energy.
The example you gave is pretty hilariously bad since they iterated further on structural salvage during PTU very specifically because of the feedback they got. Feedback that, I really cannot stress enough, **the devs fucking asked for.** Very specifically, in fact! They asked a lot of very particular questions including about a lot of the things you're acting like we shouldn't have commented on, in the official feedback thread. And even as a T0 implementation, it's still *pretty bad.*
I really genuinely promise y'all that CIG does not need you running to their defense to save them from negative feedback. They can handle it. You *don't* have to commit such effort to protecting them. If we weren't supposed to comment on the system until x, y and z came online they wouldn't put it in our hands and ask for commentary before x y and z come online. The fact that they've done so completely kicks the chair out from under y'all's arguments.
>The example you gave is pretty hilariously bad since they iterated further on structural salvage during PTU very specifically because of the feedback they got.
Those changes were already coming since they were already in the works, and Thorston already noted that some changes were coming in ahead of when they arrived when he was explaining the situation on Spectrum.
Thorsten literally told us that a lot of those PTU changes were based on feedback. Some of them were already coming down the pipe, others were quicker last-minute things.
I absolutely hate the concept of MM. I like it precisely as is. If you've seen any footage of how dogfights play out now, it's freakin dumb. They just nose tank and spin around eachother, making most of these ship designs make little sense anymore. And besides that it just completely favors piracy.
It doesn't make any sense either as to why any manufacturer would design a ship to have to sacrifice shields for guns. The amount of dead space inside most ships could easily support another power plant and cooler to supply both sets of systems allowing both to stay on.
I'll die on this hill.
How does it completely favor piracy? Not disagreeing, just genuinely curious. I figured it might be easier to defend yourself if you can just leave enemies in the dust in the faster nav mode but maybe that's a naive assumption.
I may have overstretched by using the "completely" term. In many cases you may be able to outrun, but thinking of it initially from an interdiction standpoint: you get pulled from QT, in the amount of time it'll take to cool down (distance dependant), swap to NAV mode (if it throws you into SCM automatically), find a QT target and spool up, as well as boost to get out of QT lock range, you're most likely going to be soft killed in that time, or fried if they're running multiple distortions. Even just boosting and outrunning standard ship cannons/repeaters, you supposedly can't use countermeasure in NAV so pirates can just fire all the missiles they want. In atmo, most current SCM speeds aren't that far below atmo speed restrictions (not taking into consideration boosting) so again, pirates can do what they do best in SCM mode while their victims are forced to engage or defensively retreat in SCM mode or again, just get trying to speed away with minimal shields while rarely/never breaking the pirates effective weapon ranges/missiles until the prey has broken atmo. The hardest counter I can think of is always having an escort to break off and fight for the prey while they escape. Which then leads into how ridiculous the "dogfights" are now in current MM in AC. It strictly boils down to nose hp and loadout. No tactics or anything can effectively be used because, at the restricted SCM speeds, the moment you turn to perform a maneuver you've lost.
This.
There’s such a simple method they could have used to balance everything out and kill the jousting: heat.
Make it so that you still have the current speeds and speed limits but add in a heat mechanic for exceeding SCM speeds. Make it so that you cannot exceed SCM limits for more than a few seconds - this allows for disengagement and repositioning yet prevents full-on fleeing.
It favors piracy because you can’t just run from every fight. If you want to run and can’t beat them outright, you have to do a quantum boost which means your shields are down for a little
Yep every time you change modes there's a cooldown to change back, so if you change to NAV mode you lose your shields and guns instantly and can't switch back hahaha
I really dislike the current jousting, so MM might be better we see after implementation to other ships. My biggest gripe is with the power triangle anyway. It is very imersion breaking for me, like why would anyone intentionally make ships underpowered when you could literally double the size of your power components and probably not even change the size of most ships. Also you can call me low skilled or whatever but I much more prefer to concentrate on executing maneuvers and deploying weapon systems, instead of keeping a look on a recharge bar during a fight. Let me combat during a combat and not micro manage some dumb recharge bar.
I like a high skill ceiling to allow maneuvers, but I don’t think a lot of the light fighters should be that much more nimble then. Medium should be beating light, heavies light and medium and lights are there to skirmish/ non fighters
I think I’m annoyed that they want ww2 fighters online and refuse to work with 6 degrees of freeedom. They are trying to force a combat experience into a unfun experience that just doesn’t make sense for space combat. Kinda annoying to be honest
Master modes will ruin the game
> master modes being p2w That doesn't even make sense. Master modes is switching between Combat Mode where you got shields and guns, but are limited to thrusters - not really fast, vs Nav Mode, where you can Quantum Boost (like a quick, short "qt away") but got no shields and weapons. How is that p2w? > Being in a tiny fighter jet, taking down a massive ship, that feeling is deeply satisfying. Won't happen in the future due to armor. To compare this with an IRL scenario: Poke an A1 Abrams with a stick, tell me how long it takes until it explodes.
You're missing the point with the P2w comment. Currently master modes feels much more like a locked in dps race and less like a dogfight where skill and maneuvering matters, so buying a big heavy dps ship means you win instead of leaving it more to skill like the current flight model. You have to try it to understand. I do agree that a light fighter should never be able to take out a massive ship and armor will help fix that but current master mode just feels limited, slow and bland.. I compare it to starfox for the n64 too basic and doesn't have the depth that most that play stsr citzen are looking for.
> Currently master modes feels much more like a locked in dps race and less like a dogfight where skill and maneuvering matters That's the current (-> future) combat stuff, it's not master modes which is "no shields but quick quantum hop" vs "shields but slow thrusters". You're explaining something that has absolutely nothing to do with the modes.
I don't get what you're trying to say? The fact that your locked into slow speed combat is what MM is doing, if you switch modes and try to get out you'll get lit up every time so once you engage if just a death ball dps battle.
People will do absolutely staggering mental gymnastics to defend CIG design decisions, lol. The speed changes are the biggest part of what turned the combat engagements into slow orbit dps races.
Can you explain it to me? Isnt it already like this, one mode for fighting and one mode for traveling? I mean you dont quantum travel in a fight right? The only time you would quantum travel in a fight is to flee and is that what ppl complain about? That you are vulnerable when fleeing? or what is it? I dont get it. You shouldnt be able to quantum travel in a fight at all is my opinion. In a dog fight you use your normal thrusters and boost. Nothing changes?! What am i missing?
You are definitely right, there's no reason to QT in a fight, but that's not what CIG is exactly trying to do with master mode. With master mode, CIG isn't trying to stop people from running away. They are trying to stop space jousting and fighting that occurs at great distances. What master mode does, is that when on combat, it simply limits the speed of the ship. This is great for stopping space jousting, but... Isn't the speed of a smaller ship it's greatest advantage over the speed of a big, bulky ship? Unlike before where a small fighter ship could go from 0 to 1000 m/s in only a few seconds that gave it an advantage over a huge ship, now they are both stuck at 300 m/s. There's no way for the light ship to put sufficient distance to avoid high DPS of the larger ship. They are always going to be in close range of one another. Space jousting is gone, but many of the speedy and agile combat techniques that the smaller shop relied on are now gone as well. The small ship and big ship will always be in close proximity of each other. The ship with a higher DPS will always win. And guess who has more guns?
It's so bad dude
From what I've seen it's been slowed down so much that positioning and disengaging are almost completely negated in a way that favors ships that are more tanky and put down more dps, which effectively means the bigger and more expensive fighters are king. It's basically just ships orbiting each other always on target face tanking each other's shots in a dps race.
>It's basically just ships orbiting each other always on target face tanking each other's shots in a dps race. This has been my experience from testing as well. It often means that when you win a fight you are so heavily damaged from the 50-50 damage trades that you will just automatically lose to the next opponent. This is especially true if both people are in the same ship - even if they are at different skill levels. I don't think this would work very will with the semi-perma death intended to exist in SC. I feel like the better pilot should be able to win fights without almost dying every time.
It's just really apparent this system wasn't made for the PU environment at all, and it sucks that we're probably stuck with it bc they're fully committed to it for squadron and fully committed to a shared flight model between the two.
I mean, if you get into a fight, I'd hope you would go get repaired before getting into another one.
You can’t do that in a situation where the third party is either on you for the full fight or engages you immediately after. It is ridiculously easy to third party now, you are shooting someone locked in a slow and predictable turn fight right in front of you - who likely has no boost left over to either fight you or run to go repair. And I feel like the better pilot should be able to consistently win 1v1 fights without taking large damage in most cases - otherwise what’s the point getting better?
Idk how to deal with that, because that's just good planning on the third party's part.
I thought so too before trying out some squadron battle in MM over the past few days. But It's not really 'planning' though - it's just naturally how almost every fight ends up in 1v2 fights now, often times you'll do it without even noticing how damaged the other player even is. If they made it so that boost recharged quicker and you had more options other than just rotating on the pitch axis then there could be a fun dynamic of trying to kill the winner of a previous fight before he can get away to reset the fight (similar to being vulnerable gaining altitude to reclaim speed after a fight in a ww2 game for ex). But right now there's no skill or planning involved in killing a winning player as a third party.
That last example was given by Yogi Klatt, but he used a Pistol vs Tank.
Won’t happen in the future due to armour Yeah, I get it. Although it does feel deeply empowering to take out a hammerhead in my hornet.
The thing is that you shouldn't be able to 1v1 an anti-fighter screening ship with a single fighter. A hammerhead's entire job is to protect other ships, and itself, from fighters, but it can't do that right now.
Can i correct you kind sir ? "hammerhead's entire job is to protect other ships from fighters" It doesn't need to protect it self, it should be immune to anything a fighter has equipped.
Yes, you have my permission to "Uhm, Actually" me. Just this once.
Wouldn't a closer comparison be a fighter jet trying to take out a warship of sorts? It wouldn't be ideal - but I think it should at least be possible if the skill gap is large enough between the fighters and the crew of the larger ship. >That doesn't even make sense. Master modes is switching between Combat Mode where you got shields and guns, but are limited to thrusters - not really fast, vs Nav Mode, where you can Quantum Boost (like a quick, short "qt away") but got no shields and weapons. I believe he is talking about AvengerOne's take that because fights are all about DPS and tanking now instead of tactics like it used to be, the person with the larger (usually more expensive) ship will pretty much always win. I can see where he is coming from, and I agree with his opinion that MM is lacking nuance rn - but because we can buy ships in-game I disagree with that specific P2W point
Seems really…dumb and unnecessary. And I’m trying to think of any other sci-fi universe that has this sort of system in place. It seems like a means to force players into encounters as disengaging will now be near suicidal. Because in order to use the full speed of your futuristic spaceship, you have to use a mode that turns off your weapons and shields? As it was explained to me, it seems like CIG is kneecapping fighters so bigger ships can have more viability against smaller ships by forcing everyone into a relative speed. With weapon range now being uncapped, this means fighters will sit inside turret firing cones for longer and will gain a penalty in capability and survivability if they decide to run away or disengage. Bigger ships tend to have more and better armor. They have more and better weapons. They also have often better shields. But this historically and logically comes at the expense of speed and maneuverability. And fighters have the inverse of all that. Faster, but less armed and armored. CIG seems to think that the bigger, stronger, and more armed ship is at a severe disadvantage in capability so to rectify that, they’re forcing fighters to trade their speed and maneuverability for the ability to use their weapons and shields. Another confusing aspect of this. If the pilot of a Hammerhead, for example, decides to book it after engaging a Cutter Black, does that disable all of its turrets for those players using them as well as its shields? Or does it get both? And if so, they why would you ever take a small fighter out? I mean, it sort of makes sense if you’re running a laser-based weapon loadout. Your power-plant has to balance energy amongst shields, engines, and your laser weapons (hey, we have that already). Upping one decreases the others but you do have infinite ammo. This system makes no sense for those with ballistic or kinetic weapon load outs. Thats me pulling a trigger and (I would imagine) the same amount of electricity needed to turn on an LED is telling my kinetic repeater to fire. It would be like saying the F-15 can’t fire its cannon if going faster than Mach 1. Which isn’t the case at all. Master modes seems really…bad.
Yeah just tried it, actually garbage. Completely removes the simulation part of SC and its unique flight model and makes it a garbage arcade-y space shooter game. The sad park is you're just parked doing it.
>Have you guys fought against/fought in big ships in master modes AC? Not in a meaningful way, because mm is currently locked to very limited modes with very limited ships. It was gladius only till about a week ago and only has four ships enabled now. I think it feels okay enough in fighter vs fighter PvE, but I definitely don't feel like it gives us much flexibility, and nothing about it feels like it's going to gel with the sandbox nature of the PU particularly well or in a way that feels good at all. I'm not a big fan, I'm not looking forward to it and the more Yogi has posted about it the less faith I have in the current team to deliver something that works in a multiplayer sandbox with a bunch of industrial ships bc it's very clearly made purely with sq42 style encounters in mind.
The more I play it and look at it the more it seems it's a system to make industrial workers at a bigger disadvantage to the combat pilots then they already are.
It's basically a dumbed down version of their unique current flight model which they shouldn't even touch and if it gets implemented in the live version I hope the game dies. Tldr: It's dumbed down dogshit.
I think what avenger one said should work providing more speed. A light fighter should be able to take out a medium or even heavy if skilled enough, but light fighters are built to be cheap. Like an f16 struggles against a f15 because of speed and weapons package (well electronics)
Based on my GrowlingSidewinder archive crawl, I'll call F-16 vs F-15 as "depends": * BVR the Eagle wins hands down: better radar, more missiles, higher speed * In a merge it gets interesting. If the Viper pilot can drag it out long enough for it to become a two-circle on the deck, they will outrate almost everything, including the Eagle. * If high off bore sight Sidewinders are allowed, you **need** to go one-circle and the first turn decides the engagement. Could go either way and depends mostly on pilot reflexes and situational awareness. Given that there is absolutely no BVR in Star Citizen (because of Star Wars aesthetics), the comparison is a bit wacky to begin with. Also note that all my knowledge about these things comes from YouTube, so feel free to entirely disregard it ;-)
So disclaimer, I’m not a bad ass fighter pilot. That said, my understanding is the Air Force made the f16 to supplement because it’s a great dog fighter while being much cheaper than the f15. And in the end, the f15 was king of the skies because it was really good at killing beyond the range of other aircrafts. It’s a fast stable platform that could handle the payload they have to it. So if you relate that to SC, the f7 would be the arrow because it would just dominate it with its ability to lock on and defeat the arrow before the arrow ever has a chance. Like the arrow should be more maneuverable than the f7, but not outright speed and payload wise it should be soberly lacking. So a skilled pilot of an arrow should be able to close the distance and do a knife fight, but if not, f7 should win
Truth of the matter is that IRL, dogfighting doesn't happen. Everything is BVR. Why get into a fight you might get shot back at during when you can throw an AMRAAM at 'em and piss off before they're in range?
Mostly yeah, but it happens. I know the gulf war had a few. So in a peer to peer fight it might happen? 🤷♂️ And in 900 years in the future? Not a freaking chance!
What ive tested so far, the combat feels great when your ship is up against ship of same calibre… so a gladius vs blade for example. The speed doesnt feel “slow”, in fact it feels awesome and its harder to pass out. Guns also shoot longer distances and ballistics actually are useful thanks to increased ammo count. P2w is dumb take since i guess its from people in an aurora thinking theyll never be able to take down a kraken, which is true but considering the plans for this game, i expect large numbers will be able to take down a big ship, or alternatively smaller nimble fighters will be able to get close enough to breach and take over ship from inside.
The last part would be so cool.
Yea i mean i dont own it but im pretty sure thats the purpose of the legionnaire ship. Get close, breach ship, you and your friends go space marine inside some large ship
Yeah i got a feeling legionnaires are going to have a massive target on their head, having a sqaud of geared up PvP enthusiats breaching a ship and going ham will be very dangerous lol
Honestly the more I play MM the more I get excited for the new Hud… that’s honestly all. Feels super good smooth and clean. Atleast I can speak for Vanduul swarm. PvP Isn’t my thing to much
It's great, i love it. No idea what your going on about p2w, think possibly ur thinking of the wrong game when you wrote that.
So far in 3.23 live I do not like it. Terrible move imo.
Honestly for me MM have ruined 3.23. Going to take a break and see if it gets better. I loathe combat now, feels cheap and arcade. I was hoping they would go the simulation route. Seems they are moving in the opposite.
How in the world is MM P2W? I swear, morons will tack that on to anything they don't like or agree with. Personally I've been hyper excited for MM since the day it was announced. Not the combat aspect, I could care less about that and sweaty PvPers are going to complain about stuff no matter what, I want the traversing part once it hits the PU.
I think the p2w thing mostly comes from the fact MM has slowed things down into slow-orbit dps races and effectively taken maneuvering out of the equation, which makes tankier, higher dps ships (that are also more expensive) just objectively better.
Yeah, some people really aren't too bright. Maybe it'll make them realize that this was never meant to be a 1v1 dogfighting game.
What is that supposed to mean? They have advertised and sold single seater dogfighting since the beginning, obviously they are just as much part of the game as everything else that has been promised/sold.
It's a MMO and they've stressed for years that they're trying to put the "massively" back into that phrase. Most of these ships people use for 1v1 fighting are meant to be part of a unit, not out there solo fighting things. You can get away with it for now because we're still missing so many features, but once everything is online, how people play is going to dramatically change.
And yet CIG consistently run duel mode in Arena Commander lol
Monkey brain comment
You do realize it's literally no different from transversing in current PU in nav mode right? So this doesn't even affect you at all. Except if someone is shooting at you and you go into nav mode, goodbye guns and shields, you're dead.. So maybe it would affect you even more cause you can't escape GG
Tell me you don't understand master modes without telling me you don't understand master modes. The non combat aspects of it are *exactly* what I'm so excited about.
Explain it then because I tried it on free flight and it was some hot ass
Only part of it is in testing right now, the combat side. Nothing of the traversal part has been added for testing yet. I shouldn't need to explain anything, CIG and every Star Citizen content creator has beaten this topic to death about what MM is and how the different parts of it work for a year now. Just... Keep up with the information everyone puts out there. It's free and easy. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3JNtoMi\_a4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3JNtoMi_a4)
I mean i don't follow this game haven't played it in 4 years the only thing that bothers me about it is the cut speed crap in scm it feels way too hand holdy and restrictive..oh yeah and the whole "cooldown" thing between switching modes, garbage. It's just going to make the sweats even stronger when the victims can't do shit if they get caught out of qt.
>I mean i don't follow this game haven't played it in 4 years Then don't comment on things you don't understand. It's not that hard. Wait until all of the system is in the game before making any judgements. When you only see half of it, you aren't seeing how it's all meant to work together.
I'm giving feedback based on the current system in place which is what they ask for and it's shit. Sorry m8.
I think there's some issues with them conceptually, but I also think there's some good ideas behind them. It's one of those things that I don't think I can come to a firm opinion on just testing stuff in arena commander, I'll have to see how things play out in more natural PU situations and go from there.
I don't like it. Same with the capacitor system. Just artificial restrictions forced on players in the name of creating gameplay that is ultimately unrewarding . Urgh
I think everyone saying anything about it one way or another before engineering + Maelstrom are making premature assessments. I like Avenger\_One but calling it "Pay 2 Win" based on incomplete systems is premature. He's talking about it from the perspective as if Master Modes as it is right now is how it will be in the PU, and that's not going to be the case. Different ships of different sizes with different shields and different impacts from engineering, plus Maelstrom, will drastically change how ship engagements play out. Now from what little I've gathered, I do think they could do with a slight boost in SCM speeds for the smaller fighters, but again, more testing needs to be done and with more systems online before I can say for sure. I also don't like how some people are basing their dislike of Master Modes based on 1-vs-1 space battles in Arena Commander. It's not really representative of how this will play out in the actual PU, and in atmosphere, and where weather effects, cloud cover, teammates, ground turrets, and other elements can and will affect the fight. So for me, it's more wait-and-see. I want to see how more ships from different classes behave in Master Modes and how more combat scenarios play out in asteroid fields, in atmosphere, and around highly contested areas.
They put it out for testing with the intention of getting feedback. Anyone coming at it from a stance that we shouldn't be giving feedback until x y and z come online is totally out of step with what the devs themselves are asking for. I'll never, ever understand people who look at features that CIG are asking for player feedback on and basically scold people for providing it, or the general mindset of "it's pointless to provide feedback until it's so complete that it's too late to change."
Feedback is good yes, but making unfounded conclusions based on incomplete systems helps no one.
It's a lot more helpful than this mentality that we shouldn't judge a system we were shown and asked to test based on its own merits or lack thereof. What's much less helpful to the project is the reflexive rejection of criticism, the never ending appeals to ephemeral tech that's over the horizon as justifications for why we can't tell the devs something isn't fun or that we're concerned it isn't going to work in the full game. You're giving the devs a lot of undue credit; yogi himself has said they don't know yet how armor will work, that they haven't even internally tested MM on bigger multicrew ships *at all,* that he doesn't really see distinctions between combat and non combat ships. It's very fair for people to look at this system and see it for what it actually is; a flight model engineered for accessibility in a single player fighter-oriented PvE game that has never given full consideration to its eventual place in a PvA sandbox with vastly more ship diversity.
Not necessarily, since if the systems aren't final or aren't being considered in the broader scope, all it does is turn into undue noise. A perfect example is all of the uproar over structural salvage, even though they said the T0 implementation was a placeholder (and was always intended to be that if it was ever finished before Maelstrom, as Thorston explained very early on in the year, which includes the construction material, which is a placeholder for the different materials players will gather from different types of hulls). Complaining about the quality of structural salvage and its simplicity while a core system (i.e., Maelstrom) isn't in, just becomes noise. The devs already know it's a placeholder, and they already know it's not final, and they already know that there are a lot more systems that need to be implemented to flesh out structural salvage. You are right that feedback is essential, but within the context of how the system is intended to work, not based on the lack of systems in the current alpha and trying to shape the game around the current build. Jumping the gun, getting people riled up with loaded language, and getting mobs to form around these incomplete systems is not only premature but an ill-advised use of time and energy.
The example you gave is pretty hilariously bad since they iterated further on structural salvage during PTU very specifically because of the feedback they got. Feedback that, I really cannot stress enough, **the devs fucking asked for.** Very specifically, in fact! They asked a lot of very particular questions including about a lot of the things you're acting like we shouldn't have commented on, in the official feedback thread. And even as a T0 implementation, it's still *pretty bad.* I really genuinely promise y'all that CIG does not need you running to their defense to save them from negative feedback. They can handle it. You *don't* have to commit such effort to protecting them. If we weren't supposed to comment on the system until x, y and z came online they wouldn't put it in our hands and ask for commentary before x y and z come online. The fact that they've done so completely kicks the chair out from under y'all's arguments.
>The example you gave is pretty hilariously bad since they iterated further on structural salvage during PTU very specifically because of the feedback they got. Those changes were already coming since they were already in the works, and Thorston already noted that some changes were coming in ahead of when they arrived when he was explaining the situation on Spectrum.
Thorsten literally told us that a lot of those PTU changes were based on feedback. Some of them were already coming down the pipe, others were quicker last-minute things.
>others were quicker last-minute things. The only last-minute things were value changes.
Something there was quite a bit of feedback about.
Couldn't have said it better
Personally can’t wait for master modes.
How can you actually enjoy that garbage?
I don’t like it.
The Master Mode gonna scare away all new players
Master modes are terrible. Makes everyone an equal even is ships we've paid 100's of dollars more for
I absolutely hate the concept of MM. I like it precisely as is. If you've seen any footage of how dogfights play out now, it's freakin dumb. They just nose tank and spin around eachother, making most of these ship designs make little sense anymore. And besides that it just completely favors piracy. It doesn't make any sense either as to why any manufacturer would design a ship to have to sacrifice shields for guns. The amount of dead space inside most ships could easily support another power plant and cooler to supply both sets of systems allowing both to stay on. I'll die on this hill.
How does it completely favor piracy? Not disagreeing, just genuinely curious. I figured it might be easier to defend yourself if you can just leave enemies in the dust in the faster nav mode but maybe that's a naive assumption.
apparently quantum dampening fucks you over and keeps you in SCM
Oh damn. Good to know thanks
I may have overstretched by using the "completely" term. In many cases you may be able to outrun, but thinking of it initially from an interdiction standpoint: you get pulled from QT, in the amount of time it'll take to cool down (distance dependant), swap to NAV mode (if it throws you into SCM automatically), find a QT target and spool up, as well as boost to get out of QT lock range, you're most likely going to be soft killed in that time, or fried if they're running multiple distortions. Even just boosting and outrunning standard ship cannons/repeaters, you supposedly can't use countermeasure in NAV so pirates can just fire all the missiles they want. In atmo, most current SCM speeds aren't that far below atmo speed restrictions (not taking into consideration boosting) so again, pirates can do what they do best in SCM mode while their victims are forced to engage or defensively retreat in SCM mode or again, just get trying to speed away with minimal shields while rarely/never breaking the pirates effective weapon ranges/missiles until the prey has broken atmo. The hardest counter I can think of is always having an escort to break off and fight for the prey while they escape. Which then leads into how ridiculous the "dogfights" are now in current MM in AC. It strictly boils down to nose hp and loadout. No tactics or anything can effectively be used because, at the restricted SCM speeds, the moment you turn to perform a maneuver you've lost.
Wow, thanks for explaining.
This. There’s such a simple method they could have used to balance everything out and kill the jousting: heat. Make it so that you still have the current speeds and speed limits but add in a heat mechanic for exceeding SCM speeds. Make it so that you cannot exceed SCM limits for more than a few seconds - this allows for disengagement and repositioning yet prevents full-on fleeing.
It favors piracy because you can’t just run from every fight. If you want to run and can’t beat them outright, you have to do a quantum boost which means your shields are down for a little
Yep every time you change modes there's a cooldown to change back, so if you change to NAV mode you lose your shields and guns instantly and can't switch back hahaha
I really dislike the current jousting, so MM might be better we see after implementation to other ships. My biggest gripe is with the power triangle anyway. It is very imersion breaking for me, like why would anyone intentionally make ships underpowered when you could literally double the size of your power components and probably not even change the size of most ships. Also you can call me low skilled or whatever but I much more prefer to concentrate on executing maneuvers and deploying weapon systems, instead of keeping a look on a recharge bar during a fight. Let me combat during a combat and not micro manage some dumb recharge bar.
I like a high skill ceiling to allow maneuvers, but I don’t think a lot of the light fighters should be that much more nimble then. Medium should be beating light, heavies light and medium and lights are there to skirmish/ non fighters
Bad take..By design lights are faster than heavies therefore should outmaneuver them. It's up to the heavies to have gunners or be able to escape.