• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Star Citizen: Chris Robert`s new space sim (the Wing Commander guy)

Page 267 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

TechBoyJK

Lifer
Oct 17, 2002
16,701
60
91
So, is this game going to be on the scale where people with custom setups (much like the ones in this thread) will have an easier time than people who just have a keyboard and mouse? This is looking to be similar to an old Genesis mech game that was almost $200 because it came with its own custom controller.
The setup I posted, dual sticks, is much more immersive than a gamepad or key/mouse. I feel 'closer' to the game, and I can have more intuitive reactions with my setup. That said.. using a mouse gives users a pretty huge advantage with nose gimbals. Some of the best pilots in the AC leaderboards are using key/mouse.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
The setup I posted, dual sticks, is much more immersive than a gamepad or key/mouse. I feel 'closer' to the game, and I can have more intuitive reactions with my setup. That said.. using a mouse gives users a pretty huge advantage with nose gimbals. Some of the best pilots in the AC leaderboards are using key/mouse.
Well, it's kind of split among the BR top pilots. You have guys like Goloith and Tempelman who kick ass with HOSAS/HOTAS, and guys like Hydro who run with gimbals M/KB. I think ATM there are more HOTAS/HOSAS guys at the top than M/KB, but it's actually split pretty evenly.

IMO, the best pilot who has ever played SC is a guy named BravenTooth. He's HOSAS, and he's the guy that turned me on to it. The only reason he's never at the top is because he doesn't play META. He flew a 315p all the way up to 2.0....even flying a Mustang when it didn't have a chance. He's the only pilot I've flown against that I felt like I might as well throw in the towel any time he engaged, because if it were a game of chess, he was always 2 moves ahead.

That's also the thing with the leader boards - they're really deceiving. So many of those guys are just META seal-clubbers. I think it's almost best just to ignore the boards (I honestly don't care if I ever get up there).

You can't get up there without META unless you're a prodigy or a seal-clubber. There's a LOT of seal-clubbers up there. ;)
 
Last edited:

Stg-Flame

Diamond Member
Mar 10, 2007
3,127
299
126
Well, it's kind of split among the BR top pilots. You have guys like Goloith and Tempelman who kick ass with HOSAS/HOTAS, and guys like Hydro who run with gimbals M/KB. I think ATM there are more HOTAS/HOSAS guys at the top than M/KB, but it's actually split pretty evenly.

IMO, the best pilot who has ever played SC is a guy named BravenTooth. He's HOSAS, and he's the guy that turned me on to it. The only reason he's never at the top is because he doesn't play META. He flew a 315p all the way up to 2.0....even flying a Mustang when it didn't have a chance. He's the only pilot I've flown against that I felt like I might as well throw in the towel any time he engaged, because if it were a game of chess, he was always 2 moves ahead.
Is this how console users feel when they read a PC hardware topic? I didn't understand a goddamn word you just said.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
Is this how console users feel when they read a PC hardware topic? I didn't understand a goddamn word you just said.
Interpretation: Don't worry about leaderboards and so-called "Aces." Play the controls that = the most fun for you, and you'll do just fine. :)
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
That's also why I kind of love the current flight model - there's really a lot more to it than most people think. Example: last time I played BR, I noticed this guy named Shayde that I knew was a top M50 pilot, but he was flying a Warden. I went straight for him every time, because I figured "Hah...I'll bet he's just going to throw me in a circle with my 350R and try to DPS me like a noob..." My normal MO is to let that happen, then AB straight at them with some vertical-down strafe and get into a knife fight (which a Vanguard will NEVER win against a 350).

Jokes on me though....every time we would start the circle, he would kick in a reverse strafe, and I could never close the gap on him. He shredded me within seconds every time and I couldn't figure out a good disengagement. I was frustrated as hell, but I loved it! That's how you play a ship's strength. There's all these complaints about the flight model, but they're all from people who haven't taken the time to see the beauty of it. It really lets you play the ship's strengths if you spend time with it.....and you just watch the good pilots fly anything they gets their hands on and do awesome with any of them. That's CIG's intent....skill based success. A good pilot in an inferior ship can take down a bad pilot in a superior one.....I watched it play out so many times. I just hope they don't ruin that dynamic.
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,407
44
91
I started to apply some upgrades to begin building my "fleet". It is far from final, but right now I have:
  • Non-LTI Aurora LN - the ship from my game package. Right now it does not look that I would keep it (maybe only to be quickly sold in-game after game release). Could "upgrade" it (for $0) to a Dragonfly, or maybe to a Mustang Beta (depending on which other ships I will have). Since it does not have LTI, no more than that.
  • LTI Mustang Beta (upgraded from an LTI Argo Cargo). This will be further upgraded at least to a $65 level ship - Reliant Kore/Mustang Delta/315P (I already have all CCUs up to Reliant Kore), but maybe even to a Cutlass Black or Freelancer. But not yet, since I want to have more ships to test for a longer time in PU (rented ships no longer work in PU and you can not buy ships in-game yet).
  • LTI Dragonfly (I have a loaner P-52 Merlin for this now, since Dragonfly is not flight ready). Maybe I will upgrade this, or maybe I will melt it and use the $35 to upgrade the above ship.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
I started to apply some upgrades to begin building my "fleet". It is far from final, but right now I have:
  • Non-LTI Aurora LN - the ship from my game package. Right now it does not look that I would keep it (maybe only to be quickly sold in-game after game release). Could "upgrade" it (for $0) to a Dragonfly, or maybe to a Mustang Beta (depending on which other ships I will have). Since it does not have LTI, no more than that.
  • LTI Mustang Beta (upgraded from an LTI Argo Cargo). This will be further upgraded at least to a $65 level ship - Reliant Kore/Mustang Delta/315P (I already have all CCUs up to Reliant Kore), but maybe even to a Cutlass Black or Freelancer. But not yet, since I want to have more ships to test for a longer time in PU (rented ships no longer work in PU and you can not buy ships in-game yet).
  • LTI Dragonfly (I have a loaner P-52 Merlin for this now, since Dragonfly is not flight ready). Maybe I will upgrade this, or maybe I will melt it and use the $35 to upgrade the above ship.
I'm going to throw out a vote for the Avenger. :)
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
Well, it's kind of split among the BR top pilots. You have guys like Goloith and Tempelman who kick ass with HOSAS/HOTAS, and guys like Hydro who run with gimbals M/KB. I think ATM there are more HOTAS/HOSAS guys at the top than M/KB, but it's actually split pretty evenly.

IMO, the best pilot who has ever played SC is a guy named BravenTooth. He's HOSAS, and he's the guy that turned me on to it. The only reason he's never at the top is because he doesn't play META. He flew a 315p all the way up to 2.0....even flying a Mustang when it didn't have a chance. He's the only pilot I've flown against that I felt like I might as well throw in the towel any time he engaged, because if it were a game of chess, he was always 2 moves ahead.

That's also the thing with the leader boards - they're really deceiving. So many of those guys are just META seal-clubbers. I think it's almost best just to ignore the boards (I honestly don't care if I ever get up there).

You can't get up there without META unless you're a prodigy or a seal-clubber. There's a LOT of seal-clubbers up there. ;)
Braventooth still posts to the CIG forums on occasion. I read every word he's willing to share.

The Leadersboards are irrelevant for one major reason: they're optional. I know, for a fact, there are several really good pilots who have opted out of them....choosing to stay off the radar until the game launches and things are "real".

But don't try telling the seal clubbers that.....they don't want to hear it.
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
I'm going to throw out a vote for the Avenger. :)
I miss my Avenger. The Reliant is cool looking, but hard to get used to flying. And the lack of cargo space sucks too. Still hoping that CIG give the Reliant some of this "Xian technology" it's supposed to have that makes the ship either agile, fast, strong, efficient (pick one - right now it's none of these). Because right now the Reliant's only Xian tech is the fact it kinda looks like a Khartu-al in some minor ways. Pure design. No real tech.

CIG could change/fix this via the components that come with and work with the Reliant.

But I'm not holding my breath.
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,407
44
91
I'm going to throw out a vote for the Avenger. :)
Titan is not an option for my LTI stand-alone ship (because of the discounted upgrades that I already have). Stalker could only be an option as a third ship. And Warlock is a specialized ship.

I could spend another $15 to upgrade my Aurora LN from the game package to an Avenger Titan, but I would rather spend real money on LTI ship(s).
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
The Leadersboards are irrelevant for one major reason: they're optional. I know, for a fact, there are several really good pilots who have opted out of them....choosing to stay off the radar until the game launches and things are "real".

But don't try telling the seal clubbers that.....they don't want to hear it.
Amen.

I miss my Avenger.
IMO, the Avenger is the one of the best single-seat designs (maybe THE best) in the game.

Awesome cockpit visibility
Bed for logout
Nice cargo area for various options (holding cells, EMP generator, or..well...cargo)
Powerful loadout for a non-dedicated dogfighter (wish they would let you swap the nose gun, though)
Big 2D radical radar
Good maneuverability - able to hold its own in a fight

It's one of the few designs that I don't think needs much of a rework. There's some wasted space in the living area that could be converted to some more livability options / lockers, etc....but that's about it. For as small as it is, it makes excellent use of space.

I drop in the CIG forums every now and then (I used to spend more time there). I also enjoy reading BravenTooth's posts. He has an excellent one on his journey as a pilot - from the humble beginnings to where he's at now. He seems to be a genuine fellow who is willing to share everything he's learned, and always seems to have objective, intelligent ideas on the game's development and mechanics.

Titan is not an option for my LTI stand-alone ship (because of the discounted upgrades that I already have). Stalker could only be an option as a third ship. And Warlock is a specialized ship.

I could spend another $15 to upgrade my Aurora LN from the game package to an Avenger Titan, but I would rather spend real money on LTI ship(s).
In that case, maybe wait until the 300X rework (or the Cutlass rework, for a bit more....depending on what you want to do with it).
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,407
44
91
In that case, maybe wait until the 300X rework (or the Cutlass rework, for a bit more....depending on what you want to do with it).
Yes, I am considering both. Until recently, I kind of ignored Cutlass, I think mostly because of so many bad opinions I read about it. But after I used it for some extended time, I began to like it. The re-design could (and should) make it even better.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
Decided to spend a little time in BR tonight. A few observations:

Broken ESP makes life difficult.
Everybody is flying Hornets.
I'm flying a Gladius, and it's cool. The way this ship flies makes me smile.
When all those Hornet pilots see a Gladius join, they ALL bee-line for it. :)
Gladius still has an issue with shields. A few shots from behind and the thrusters die. Really annoying. 90% of my "deaths" were ejections because my ship was disabled.
Hornets are very hard to kill. I ended up top-3 first round and only had a single kill. I feel like I'm shooting BBs at those things. Lots and lots of BBs.
 
Last edited:

Sabrewings

Golden Member
Jun 27, 2015
1,942
35
51
Everybody is flying Hornets
I like Free Flies for the publicity it can offer to skeptical potential backers, but I don't like playing in ones like this. At least it breaks up the Sabre meta. I genuinely love flying it, but I don't like facing only other Sabres either.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
I like Free Flies for the publicity it can offer to skeptical potential backers, but I don't like playing in ones like this. At least it breaks up the Sabre meta. I genuinely love flying it, but I don't like facing only other Sabres either.
Yeah, I like to see more variety in AC. Back in 1.2-1.3, you had Avengers, 300s, Gladii, Deltas, M50s all in the mix with the Hornets, and a lot of them doing well.

I don't mind the Sabres as much, as they can actually be killed. It just seems like the Hornets have abnormally high health. I don't mind them being a superior fighter - that's what they're designed to be, but when you can pound them forever with another dedicated dogfighter and get nowhere, I think an adjustment should probably be made.

Of course, that "dedicated dogfighter" has a loadout weaker than just about everything besides snubs and M50s, but that's another issue. ;)
 
Last edited:

GoodRevrnd

Diamond Member
Dec 27, 2001
6,800
581
126
Is everyone in all sorts of Hornets or is it just Super Hornets everywhere? Haven't really played much at all but I got a Super Hornet back in the day because I wanted a big, bruising, long range capable, superiority fighter with a seat for my buddy. It makes sense that the F15/F22 of the universe is sort of the "best," but disappointing that a dedicated dog fighter can't take one down. I would expect a dedicated dogfighter to be smaller, faster, more agile, and fragile, with a limited weapon set that packs a wallop but probably lacks the power plant to sustain fire on targets. A skilled pilot in something like that should be able to smoke a Hornet but Hornets would likely cut through seas of those things if flown by subpar pilots.

I'll also add that I think part of the problem is everyone can just buy everything. A ship like the Hornet should probably be disproportionately expensive compared to other craft. Perhaps they can also help balance this by making its systems upgrades more expensive than the same tier of upgrade for other "simpler" craft.
 

rivethead

Platinum Member
Jan 16, 2005
2,635
106
106
Is everyone in all sorts of Hornets or is it just Super Hornets everywhere? Haven't really played much at all but I got a Super Hornet back in the day because I wanted a big, bruising, long range capable, superiority fighter with a seat for my buddy. It makes sense that the F15/F22 of the universe is sort of the "best," but disappointing that a dedicated dog fighter can't take one down. I would expect a dedicated dogfighter to be smaller, faster, more agile, and fragile, with a limited weapon set that packs a wallop but probably lacks the power plant to sustain fire on targets. A skilled pilot in something like that should be able to smoke a Hornet but Hornets would likely cut through seas of those things if flown by subpar pilots.

I'll also add that I think part of the problem is everyone can just buy everything. A ship like the Hornet should probably be disproportionately expensive compared to other craft. Perhaps they can also help balance this by making its systems upgrades more expensive than the same tier of upgrade for other "simpler" craft.
Yes, I think it'll come down to the components each hull is equipped with. Right now, all the ships have place holder components and they don't fully work yet as intended. When they finally do roll out hull components, tweaking, overclocking, etc. I think we're going to see a big shift in the balance of power among ships. For example, the Hornet Ghost is supposed to be a stealth ship....but stealth isn't even in the game yet. Put a super high efficiency cooler in a Ghost and you might not even be able to see it until it's right up on top of you.

We need those components.
 

Stringjam

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2011
1,871
33
91
Yes, I think it'll come down to the components each hull is equipped with. Right now, all the ships have place holder components and they don't fully work yet as intended. When they finally do roll out hull components, tweaking, overclocking, etc. I think we're going to see a big shift in the balance of power among ships. For example, the Hornet Ghost is supposed to be a stealth ship....but stealth isn't even in the game yet. Put a super high efficiency cooler in a Ghost and you might not even be able to see it until it's right up on top of you.

We need those components.
Indeed we do. We'll also have proper shields / armor / and damage going into place as well, so it isn't really too big of a concern before we get there. Like you mentioned, stealth may be a big one too - - and one reason I like to keep the Ghost around to see where it goes.

We also can't *really* judge performance based on current AC. For instance, yes, it takes a lot of doing for me to kill a Hornet in a Gladius (it's a lot easier in a PU situation when a bunch of other Hornets aren't on your tail during the fights), but I also don't use missiles in AC, and the Gladius has a big loadout of eight S2s. In the PU, I'm more concerned about my persistent life and I'm going to throw the kitchen sink at those things to win a fight.

Balance is a tricky subject though. The Gladius is fast, maneuverable, and its slim profile makes it a much tougher target to hit than a Sabre or Hornet, which are both like shooting at the broad side of a barn if you get under / over them. I think once shields and damage are fixed, it may not be in that bad of a place.

Of course, I would love to see it get a full S3 loadout, or at least S3 wings and an S2 nose. It would still have less DPS than a Sabre or Hornet, which it should to remain balanced.....both of those ships should have several areas of superior specs to the Gladius due to their development purpose and history (and apparent price).

I envision it a lot like the GoodRevrnd discussed. A good pilot in a Hornet is likely going to massacre bad pilots in a Gladius. It's lighter, more fragile, and has weaker firepower. BUT the Gladius gives a good pilot the ability to run circles around a bad Hornet pilot, and also play the ship's strengths against a good one. If they can balance that equation, then there will be adequate reason for people to fly both of them depending on which flight / combat style they prefer.

It's funny - I have a Sabre, and I almost never fly it. It's awesome - - massive firepower, speed, and handling, and (eventually) advanced sensors and stealth, but I still prefer the Gladius. It just has that low-tech, scrapper, on the edge feel (what I view as more of an F-15). With the Sabre, I get more of an F-35 vibe - bleeding edge technology and pilot systems. It's cool that we have both options.

It's harder for me to pin the SuperHornet to a fighter-jet counterpart. Its slower speed and maneuverability don't really lend itself to the F-15 interceptor type of flight, but it's huge firepower and tankiness remind me more of an A-10 Warthog (if something like the A-10 were designed for ACM).

I really like all these ships. I've been flying my Hornet a lot lately in the PU and it just feels really cool, and IMO is one of the best ships to accurately aim with for some reason (the Gladius is definitely more difficult). Plus, the redesigned Hornet just looks amazing.

 
Last edited:

GoodRevrnd

Diamond Member
Dec 27, 2001
6,800
581
126
I envision it a lot like the GoodRevrnd discussed. A good pilot in a Hornet is likely going to massacre bad pilots in a Gladius. It's lighter, more fragile, and has weaker firepower. BUT the Gladius gives a good pilot the ability to run circles around a bad Hornet pilot, and also play the ship's strengths against a good one. If they can balance that equation, then there will be adequate reason for people to fly both of them depending on which flight / combat style they prefer.
Beyond that the Hornet strikes me as something that should be more expensive to maintain and upgrade. If you're not a boss pilot, that's definitely one of your apex fighters, but it's gonna cost you to operate it.
 

Seba

Golden Member
Sep 17, 2000
1,407
44
91
Plus, the redesigned Hornet just looks amazing.
You know that it is not clear if the current Hornet owners will get the redesigned version or will be stuck with the old version?

CIG did not said yet which will be the case. But they did say that the old Hornet (along with old 300 and old Aurora models) will be kept in game , with minor adjustments (mostly to damage states).
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY