Support NeoGAF

[Geist-]

That won't change the mouse commander controls on smaller ships though... CGI had a lot of time to give more importance to flying, I hope it is not too late.

They have a great physics engine, nothing I've seen makes me think that the current dogfighting system is anywhere near finalized. Especially since they haven't yet implemented 64 bit floating point into the system and the final speed limits/acceleration values.

Also, noticed no one has been posting the latest videos:

10 for the Producers Episode 5

Transcript

Lots of awesome questions, especially love the last one about speed. Hopefully that implies a universal speed limit and ships will be defined by their acceleration instead.

Meet the Devs: Lisa Ohanian

She has an amazing resume, she worked with Blizzard on Diablo 3 and CoD: AW. Once again CIG is getting top level talent.

 

[Pomerlaw]

Its been how long since the release of AC? The flight model has not changed much since then. They tell us the are quite advanced on SQ42, to me all this sounds like we won't get a lot of changes to the model now.

They seem afraid to make mouse players angry.

 

[Geist-]

Its been how long since the release of AC? The flight model has not changed much since then.

AC in general hasn't changed much, the only real additions are racing and capture the core.

But there have been a ton of changes behind the scenes, all getting ready for 64 bit floating point and much, much larger maps. There has to be some changes when that is finally implemented into maps.

 

[Dictator93]

Its been how long since the release of AC? The flight model has not changed much since then. They tell us the are quite advanced on SQ42, to me all this sounds like we won't get a lot of changes to the model now.

They seem afraid to make mouse players angry.

Um, what do you exactly want them to change about the flight model? It being physicalized lends to its current properties.. and they have added to the physicalization over time with more complex thruster types and more unblanced loads in the ships (so it has changed over time contrary to your statement).

Do you mean the control model? Because the problem with mouse is not a flight model problem, it is a balance issue regarding how controlls are translated to the IFCS.

AC in general hasn't changed much, the only real additions are racing and capture the core..

As someone who plays AC every other day... I can definitely say the ships I have used have changed radically over time in how they feel when flying due to physicalization tweaks.

 

[AJLma]

After playing a ton of Elite I wasn't sold on the SC flight model until I tried it with a HOTAS. If everyone who played this game used a HOTAS or Controller the speed of the game and customization I feel would create a decent skill ceiling as it is.

Having to account for mouse players completely throws that out the window though.

 

[Houndi101]

I'm sure this isn't the most unbiased of places to ask but at this point Elite Dangerous or Star Citizen pre-alpha?

 

[AJLma]

If you want to start playing a space sim with at least some progression right now, Elite.

 

[Zalusithix]

I'm sure this isn't the most unbiased of places to ask but at this point Elite Dangerous or Star Citizen pre-alpha?

If you have to ask, then get Elite. Star Citizen is more for those that are sold on its potential, not for what it is currently.

 

[Pomerlaw]

Here is a guy playing AC with a tablet and a pen, and getting kills.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfpcTrbsRuo

Um, what do you exactly want them to change about the flight model?

- Instantly moving ship (instant acceleration)
- Yaw way too powerful
- Gimbals

Edit these 3 things and flight would become more important, not just turn and aim.

As for the mouse, you are right, its a control issue, but a really important one.

 

[Zalusithix]

Here is a guy playing AC with a tablet and a pen, and getting kills.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfpcTrbsRuo



- Instantly moving ship (instant acceleration)
- Yaw way too powerful
- Gimbals

Edit these 3 things and flight would become more important, not just turn and aim.

As for the mouse, you are right, its a control issue, but a really important one.

Acceleration is a function of thruster power and ship mass, so there's plenty of room for tweaking there. I doubt the yaw rate will be touched. They already like the idea of yaw turns being superior to roll/pitch turns. There's also not much reason yaw shouldn't be powerful from a flight model standpoint. We're in space, so control surface area isn't a factor. Gimbal wise, they've already nerfed them. Short of outright removing them, I don't see how you'd tweak them any further.

 

[Teknopathetic]

Still not on the same page with you about yaw. Main controls being pitch/yaw is perfectly fine in space sims. I do agree about Gimbals and I think the way boost works isn't all that great, either.

 

[staticneuron]

I'm sure this isn't the most unbiased of places to ask but at this point Elite Dangerous or Star Citizen pre-alpha?

It depends. If you are really ok with playing a game in a pre alpha stage there is some fun to be had with SC. But you are comparing something that is fully released with something that is in pre-alpha, so it is up to you

 

[-SD-]

Inside CIG: Foundry 42 Germany is up.

So nice to see Alex again. He was a good Crytek community manager in the Crysis days. I wonder why he chose to speak German since his English is perfectly fine.

 

[Pomerlaw]

Well yaw being that strong, you will always end up with some kind of turreting, since in all directions you can move really fast to point at your enemy. Which makes flying pretty irrelevant in getting the upperhand...

 

[Teknopathetic]

"Well yaw being that strong, you will always end up with some kind of turreting, since in all directions you can move really fast to point at your enemy. Which makes flying pretty irrelevant in getting the upperhand..."


I think you're drawing the wrong conclusion as to why turreting exists. Turreting didn't exist in Freespace or Wing Commander or X-wing vs. Tie Fighter and yaw was just as strong in those games.

 

[Dictator93]

Still not on the same page with you about yaw. Main controls being pitch/yaw is perfectly fine in space sims. I do agree about Gimbals and I think the way boost works isn't all that great, either.

Indeed it is.

I think boost is a bit confusing in AC only because we dont have a good understanding of how fuel is and will work. Having to manually boost to increase acceleration rates is fun for me (I enjoy putting on the afterburner when banking and feeeling the ship rock), but it would be nice to know the persistent universe stylization of these mechanics.

So nice to see Alex again. He was a good Crytek community manager in the Crysis days. I wonder why he chose to speak German since his English is perfectly fine.

It is a showing of solidarity for all the German backers I think (of which there are lots). From my own experiecnce, the german community for this game is massive and passionate, them egging them on and paying a wee bit of deference with tiny stuff liek that is what CIG seems to be about.

 

[Zalusithix]

Well yaw being that strong, you will always end up with some kind of turreting, since in all directions you can move really fast to point at your enemy. Which makes flying pretty irrelevant in getting the upperhand...

Upper hand in 1v1. Makes you a sitting duck if you have anybody else targeting you.

 

[REDSLATE]

It doesn't make for a fun game mechanic. For a "space sim" set a thousand years from now it seems my biggest problem with running around in a space suit using a microwave gun will be how long I can hold my breath.

I don't understand... Are you holding your breath while running, while wearing a spacesuit, or both?

Either way, you're doing it wrong...

 

[SmartBase]

I don't understand... Are you holding your breath while running, while wearing a spacesuit, or both?

Either way, you're doing it wrong...

My point obviously went over your head, I was trying to illustrate how silly a breathing mechanic sounds in a game that's set in a fantasy land a thousand years in the future.

When the FPS module finally releases I'm hoping we might actually see how it works in practice.

 

[staticneuron]

My point obviously went over your head, I was trying to illustrate how silly a breathing mechanic sounds in a game that's set in a fantasy land a thousand years in the future.

When the FPS module finally releases I'm hoping we might actually see how it works in practice.

The game is science fiction not fantasy, and if everything were going to be fantasy based they wouldn't bother with the complex physic system underlying the game. It is set in the future ( Hence UEE: United Empire of Earth) and despite it being hundreds of years in the future it is painfully obvious due to breathing apparatuses and design of the ships that humans still need to breath air. There is no telling what the armor is made out of and what exact toll on the human body it takes to wear.

 

[Zalusithix]

The game is science fiction not fantasy, and if everything were going to be fantasy based they wouldn't bother with the complex physic system underlying the game. It is set in the future ( Hence UEE: United Empire of Earth) and despite it being hundreds of years in the future it is painfully obvious due to breathing apparatuses and design of the ships that humans still need to breath air. There is no telling what the armor is made out of and what exact toll on the human body it takes to wear.

It's also more of a retro future. Some things are far more advanced, but other things are behind even current tech. Manned turrets, manual targeting, etc.

 

[staticneuron]

It's also more of a retro future. Some things are far more advanced, but other things are behind even current tech. Manned turrets, manual targeting, etc.

I would imagine that it would be practical reasons. Such as even if they had the ability to auto identify friendlies and auto target everyone else, you might want to hold of on the hostilities until a sentient being can confirm so there isn't a start to another intergalactic war. There are a race that is described in the lore that humans have not seen yet (the enemies of the Xi'an) and I would imagine just like Star Trek deferring to the judgement of the hominids on board may be the default in most encounters by law. I would have to do more research on that though.

 

[Zalusithix]

I would imagine that it would be practical reasons. Such as even if they had the ability to auto identify friendlies and auto target everyone else, you might want to hold of on the hostilities until a sentient being can confirm so there isn't a start to another intergalactic war. There are a race that is described in the lore that humans have not seen yet (the enemies of the Xi'an) and I would imagine just like Star Trek deferring to the judgement of the hominids on board may be the default in most encounters by law. I would have to do more research on that though.

Eh, however they weave it into the lore, I don't mind. It's rather easy to hand wave away. IE: Humans created more and more advanced AI until {bad event} happened and then a blanket ban on all AI beyond the most rudimentary forms was enacted. Or decent AI exists, but laws were put in place that prohibited them from connecting with weapon systems. Regardless of how they decide to rationalize it lore wise, it serves the purpose of making the game more fun. Wouldn't be much point to flying if we had advanced AI on board.

 

[staticneuron]

Eh, however they weave it into the lore, I don't mind. It's rather easy to hand wave away. IE: Humans created more and more advanced AI until {bad event} happened and then a blanket ban on all AI beyond the most rudimentary forms was enacted. Or decent AI exists, but laws were put in place that prohibited them from connecting with weapon systems. Regardless of how they decide to rationalize it lore wise, it serves the purpose of making the game more fun. Wouldn't be much point to flying if we had advanced AI on board.

I imagine no matter how we program it in an AI would take a firm stance on an unknown entity. But you know what. You are right. In 500 years I would imagine AI to rival or surpass human intelligence so that would be an interesting concept there. Maybe we should throw that question to the lore devs at CIG. I am not sure how they handled the concept of AI or artificial life.

The Carrack is supposed to have an advanced AI on board. An advanced AI would let you pilot LARGE ships without needing as much crew. I want to see some halo/starcraft level stuff here.

EDIT:

RESEARCH +1

AI concern has been addressed already

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/spectrum-dispatch/12977-News-Update-WILL-WE-NEVER-LEARN

With few exceptions, each generation is more advanced than the last, and so we believe that we cannot possibly err in the same fashion as our parents did. So here we are again. ArcCorp’s new AI intiative, which has been roundly debated since their announcement two weeks ago, again seems to be running towards the same pitfalls as our ancestors.

We can’t possibly make the same mistakes.

Sometimes, it isn’t even our fault that we forget. It took nearly ten years of media investigation to wheedle the truth out of the government that maybe, possibly (sarcasm mine) the AI in the terraforming project had been at the heart of the Mars catastrophe of 2125. By then, nobody wanted to hear about it.

Of course, even that wasn’t the first AI disaster. The so called “Lemming Car” incident in 2044 Tokyo holds that honor. But less than 100 years later, the government decided that it had worked out the kinks in AI systems and shipped one off to Mars. Of course, they didn’t tell us about it, just in case they were wrong.

They were.

And then just over 100 years after the Mars catastrophe (are we seeing a trend here, people?), came the Artemis. Janus. Even with the vast spectacle of the launch, somebody somewhere had to be nervous that we were still treading the dangerous road of artificial intelligence. But this time, they were sure they had gotten it right.

Admittedly, we’re not certain that the disappearance of 5000 people was entirely the AI’s fault, but it certainly had to have played a part.

It seems the lore includes a series of negative events surrounding AI's.

and ofc

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/1741525/#Comment_1741525

...there aren’t really AI in Star Citizen that will fly your ship (Janus is an exception). While you can set your computer to rudimentary auto-pilot and to handle other basic functions, flight computers are there to assist the pilot, not take control themselves. Realistically, space flight in the 30th century would probably be handled by computers or AI that are capable of making calculations and flying at a level vastly superior to human control and space combat would probably happen with drones and between two ships on opposite sides of a system. We’re making a stylistic decision to forgo that for the rush of close ship-to-ship dogfighting.

 

[REDSLATE]

My point obviously went over your head, I was trying to illustrate how silly a breathing mechanic sounds in a game that's set in a fantasy land a thousand years in the future.

When the FPS module finally releases I'm hoping we might actually see how it works in practice.

If that was your intent, it wasn't "over [my] head." It was simply poorly communicated on your part. Holding one's breath has little to do with running. Also, I wouldn't describe anything in Star Citizen as a "fantasy" (outside of the artstyle perhaps, ie. sounds in a vacuum, broken laser beams, etc...).

 

[staticneuron]

If that was your intent, it wasn't "over [my] head." It was simply poorly communicated on your part. Holding one's breath has little to do with running. Also, I wouldn't describe anything in Star Citizen as a "fantasy" (outside of the artstyle perhaps, ie. sounds in a vacuum, broken laser beams, etc...).

I am not sure what you mean by broken lasers but there is no sound in the vacuum. What you hear in the cockpit of a ship is simulated per ingame lore.

 

[Blizzard]

I am not sure what you mean by broken lasers but there is no sound in the vacuum. What you hear in the cockpit of a ship is simulated per ingame lore.

Also, if it's anything connected to the ship, sound could be transmitted through vibration, correct? I recently watched a NASA video where an astronaut was moving a GoPro around outside the space station. You could hear sound when things would bump against it.

 

[Zalusithix]

AI concern has been addressed already

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/spectrum-dispatch/12977-News-Update-WILL-WE-NEVER-LEARN



It seems the lore includes a series of negative events surrounding AI's.

and ofc

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/1741525/#Comment_1741525

So the {bad event} along with decoupling from the weapons systems. Serves the purpose as well as anything.

Also, if it's anything connected to the ship, sound could be transmitted through vibration, correct? I recently watched a NASA video where an astronaut was moving a GoPro around outside the space station. You could hear sound when things would bump against it.

Yes, vibration in the ship structure would be transferred to the air within the ship and produce a noise. This sort of noise would be mostly muted low frequency stuff though.

 

[Danthrax]

So in Star Citizen, "Avengers: Age of Ultron" would be considered a historical cautionary tale.

 

[staticneuron]

So in Star Citizen, "Avengers: Age of Ultron" would be considered a historical cautionary tale.

Indeed but Aegis (who succeeded Stark Industries) would point to the Vision as the intended success of a troubled project.

 

[REDSLATE]

I am not sure what you mean by broken lasers but there is no sound in the vacuum. What you hear in the cockpit of a ship is simulated per ingame lore.

Broken as in a non-continuous beam. I don't recall anything about "simulated" sound in Star Citizen. It's always been an artistic decision as I understand it.

 

[epmode]

I don't recall anything about "simulated" sound in Star Citizen. It's always been an artistic decision as I understand it.

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/4674361/#Comment_4674361

Some great points raised, this is an interesting topic for us. At this point in development we are wanting sound in space, but simulated (to a high quality) with non-realistic and cinematic flourishes here and there. We plan for the simulated sound to be affected by damage, that is, to cut out and introduce audio artifacts and corruption. This should help remind the player what they are hearing is simulated and a sensitive computer system at that.

A distinction between being comfortable in your ship, taking damage in-ship and on your last legs whilst EVA is important to us. We want to expose the silence of space and highlight the in-spacesuit foley occasionally (gravity style). That's the kind of detail that excites us, but it is implementation-heavy and so, we have held off on this on our current sound engine (fmod) whilst we transition to our new engine (wwise).

I have had a pre-visualisation task of how this might work on my 'to do' list for months and it's something I will be getting to in the coming weeks.

We can't wait to get this aspect fleshed out and see what you all think

edit: forgot to include the fact that as this is a ship computer system, you'll most likely be able to turn it off in-cockpit.

 

[Dictator93]

Broken as in a non-continuous beam. I don't recall anything about "simulated" sound in Star Citizen. It's always been an artistic decision as I understand it.

It is indeed simulated.

 

[staticneuron]

Broken as in a non-continuous beam. I don't recall anything about "simulated" sound in Star Citizen. It's always been an artistic decision as I understand it.

Seeing a laser beam in the vacuum of space is an artistic choice as well. One that should raise flags first before the talk of a continuous beam vs an intermittent burst. To be more specific using lasers as weapons also is firmly in the fiction side of sci fi so I am glad sci fi doesn't take things too seriously.

 

[Zalusithix]

Seeing a laser beam in the vacuum of space is an artistic choice as well. One that should raise flags first before the talk of a continuous beam vs an intermittent burst. To be more specific using lasers as weapons also is firmly in the fiction side of sci fi so I am glad sci fi doesn't take things too seriously.

Pretty much. A real laser would be invisible outside of the point that it hits. Even then it'd still be invisible to the naked eye since any real laser system is going to be emitting in the infrared range and not the visible spectrum. You'd pull the trigger, and depending on the power of the laser, either the opposing ship starts to glow and melt under the heat, or it simply vaporizes at the point where the beam hits. Technically there's the third option too - pull the trigger and nothing happens because you missed. No light. No noise. No nothing. You'd be hard pressed to tell you even did anything.

Good thing science fiction is more fun than reality.

 

[Burny]

To be more specific using lasers as weapons also is firmly in the fiction side of sci fi so I am glad sci fi doesn't take things too seriously.

It's firmly in the science side. Lasers as weapons are already being tested, although they're less pew-pewy than sci-fi would have you think.

Edit: Provided this is not a fake of course.

 

[staticneuron]

It's firmly in the science side. Lasers as weapons are already being tested, although they're less pew-pewy than sci-fi would have you think.

Edit: Provided this is not a fake of course.

Did you take a look at the comments? Normally youtube comments are low quality but there is alot there that talks about why this an interesting test but not very viable.

This kind of weapon requires a lot of power and a delicate reflector. But being on the end of a missile strike, anything is "delicate". One of their biggest drawbacks is that they require tremendous amounts of power, thus making the power source large and bulky. That works on a ship, but even then it cannot be fired continuously.

Due to propagation losses range is limited by the laws of physics, and thus it can be nothing but a point defense weapon, basically limited to less than ten miles. So any smart pilot sits outside of ten miles and fires their air-to-surface weapons. Then the laser attempts to take not the aircraft but weapon down.

All any enemy attack aircraft has to do is stand off outside it's range of ten miles and fire ground-to surface missiles that follow a vertical path in it's final trajectory. Coat the missile warhead with ablatives and thus we have a lot of high explosives traveling at mach 3, and they cannot be detonated or deflected. You can burn away the airframe and guidance system, but it's still a lot of nasty dropping on your head.

Simple arithmetic, at Mach 3 you have 15 to 20 seconds to identify, track, and defeat the attack missile. The laser has to recharge, and if you co-ordinate 5 missiles coming in all at once, the odds are against the defender.

Weapon design is a game of chess, for every move there is a counter-move. Against a modern and determined enemy this laser can be defeated, but it is more effective against much older weapons (Exocet, Styx) and light attack boats (such as suicide speedboats the Iranians have). But against weapons such as the BrahMos or even worse, the Kh-41 Sunburn, I wish you lots of luck.

The reason why I point out using lasers as weapons being more fiction is not because it cannot be done but more to the fact that it is horribly inefficient. By the time we spend the time to create a decent size power source that can provide the amount of power required for lasers to be effective, we would have simply designed a more effective and practical weapon that is more flexible. But it is in sci fi alot because laser weapons "look" cool and not to accurately reflect what we will be using in the future. Such as previously discussed, the idea of dogfighting in the far future most likely would be considered primitive.

 

[Zalusithix]

Hull sales are up finally. Rather pushing the "Friday" envelope lol... Not that I plan on getting one currently. Hull E sure is massive though.

 

[Shy]

Im really tempted to get the hull C, i would have to melt my M50 to do it though.

 

[Kabouter]

Cargo capacity comparison:
-Hull A - 75
-Hull B - 600
-Hull C - 4800
-Hull D - 21600
-Hull E - 153600
PLEASE NOTE: The Hull series measures carrying capacity in Standard Cargo Units, or SCU. The SCU value for previously released ships can be determined by dividing the total capacity by four. The stats page will be updated with proper SCU data shortly. For more information in cargo interaction in Star Citizen, check out today’s design post !
permalink

So does that mean the Freelancer MAX has a capacity smaller than even the Hull A?

 

[Zalusithix]

So does that mean the Freelancer MAX has a capacity smaller than even the Hull A?

By the looks of it, yes. Makes sense though. It's a small ship with a lot of external cargo capacity, and nothing else to show for itself. The Freelancer MAX is faster, better armed, and the storage is internal. The Hull is a better value for pure cargo hauling around safe routes. The Freelancer is better for when things take a turn for the worse.

 

[kutthoat5150]

The design post for Cargo Interaction is up here https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/14677-Design-Cargo-Interaction

the amount of detail they're going for just manipulating your cargo is absolutely insane, but I guess we should have all expected this. I think I want to be a hauler just to try out these systems.

 

[-Deimos]

The design post for Cargo Interaction is up here https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/14677-Design-Cargo-Interaction

the amount of detail they're going for just manipulating your cargo is absolutely insane, but I guess we should have all expected this. I think I want to be a hauler just to try out these systems.

Absolutely insane is an accurate description.

 

[Kabouter]

By the looks of it, yes. Makes sense though. It's a small ship with a lot of external cargo capacity, and nothing else to show for itself. The Freelancer MAX is faster, better armed, and the storage is internal. The Hull is a better value for pure cargo hauling around safe routes. The Freelancer is better for when things take a turn for the worse.

Hmmm, then I'm definitely going to consider melting my max down for a hull B, and spend the portion left over on a nice hangar, since the hull B doesn't come with one and the SelfLand hangar sucks

 

[Dictator93]

Guys,
space truckin!!!

The Hull series are actually really awesome looking ships.

 

[Kabouter]

Guys,
space truckin!!!

The Hull series are actually really awesome looking ships.

Power creep like hell with those capacities though.

 

[viveks86]

Guys,
space truckin!!!

The Hull series are actually really awesome looking ships.

I know, right? Really cool stuff!

https://player.vimeo.com/video/125956083?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0

 

[KKRT00]

https://player.vimeo.com/video/125956083?title=0&byline=0&portrait=0

:OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

[Zabojnik]

With all these complex systems, it's gonna take YEARS to iron out all the bugs, but I guess with Star Citizen, it's all about the journey. Fuck the haters.

 

[Zalusithix]

With all these complex systems, it's gonna take YEARS to iron out all the bugs, but I guess with Star Citizen, it's all about the journey. Fuck the haters.

Elite has 400 billion star systems; Star Citizen has 400 billion gameplay systems. The journey never ends.

Edit:

Power creep like hell with those capacities though.

I don't think it's really a power creep. They have way higher cargo capacities than the previous ships, but at the same time they're a lot less versatile to compensate. Combat is barely an option by default, and evasive maneuvers are going to be hell when laden with cargo. Even putting the inertia from cargo mass aside, remember the whole internal ship forces thing? Try putting a lot of torque on that spindle. A high G turn will likely snap the larger ships in half.

They say you can potentially outfit the larger ones with extra turrets and such for additional defense, but that comes at the expense of storage, and you're still going to have to play the porcupine strategy in combat. Sit around and hope your ship lasts long enough for your turrets take out the aggressors - all the while hoping that the attacker doesn't manage to blow off one of the thin and delicate mast arms holding a substantial amount of cargo to the ship. (In the case of turrets attached to those arms, you'd be simultaneously losing your defensive abilities as well.)