All Busywork, No Benefit: Star Citizen Multicrew Ships Don't Work

[@Chris_Gerbracht]

Absolutely agree. CIG generally requires too many crew positions, usually as "balance" for bigger ships. Why does the C1 Spirit require a second crewmember? Because one button, the one that activates the rear tractor beam, is deliberately out of the pilot's reach. That's the basis of their multicrew design right there. If your ship is bigger, we will add artificial problems that require you to bring additional crewmembers to solve. You don't get benefit for additional crew (aside from turret gunners because clearly we can't have automated turrets or turrets just locked into firing forward), you get them as a power tax payment. As long as they stick with that design philosophy multicrew won't get any better or rewarding. The only thing it really has going for it is "more fun with friends" but that doesn't count because pretty much everything is more fun with friends.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I am going to pin this comment I love it so much.

[@Gary_The_Metro]

Don't forget the neat part where all missions we have are also punishing you for working together with other people by reducing your pay by... 50% or 75% or 87.5% or you get the idea. mission payout is already abysmal, and going with other people makes your already garbage pay, even worse.

[@piedpiper1172]

Any role in a “multicrew” ship that can be entirely filled by connecting a usb switch to a laptop and taping it to your desk near your knee is not a multicrew role, it’s a guerrilla marketing tactic for those $30 2x1 KVM switches you can get from Bezos. Looking at you Scorpius A. Why would anyone fly this ship? A mantis and a hornet is twice the dps, twice the durability, and a wingman is an insane bonus in advantage in a 1v1. The base Scorp is the closest we’ve ever come to a genuinely worthwhile multicrew ship, and it is still a dps loss vs just brining two F7C’s. The Scorp A turret position should gain the Scorp’s guns, and the Scorp’s turret should get +1 to their size. The proposed buffed Scorp A should still lose to the F7C and Mantis pair if those two pilots coordinate, but now it’s a close fight. SC have gaslit us and themselves into thinking of multicrew ships as individual ships and routinely “balances” them as though they were actually single seat fighters. But they aren’t. A human’s time doesn’t become less valuable because they sat in a different playable chair in the ship.

[@piedpiper1172]

@@Gary_The_MetroThe wildest part is the reputation reduction. A couple or pair of buddies can grind missions together and not really suffer that bad on AUC, since they can pool for the next ship. But they can’t “pool” their reputation, so they still get this endless nerf to progress because they’re stuck at each lower-earning tier longer.

[@Gary_The_Metro]

@@piedpiper1172 "Any role in a “multicrew” ship that can be entirely filled by connecting a usb switch to a laptop and taping it to your desk near your knee is not a multicrew role," THANK YOU. The scorpius Antares is legitimately just the most garbage addition to the game.

[@karma_cardinal]

as players and community we really need to start pushing CIG to play it's own game. and they need to show that to us how they gonna deal with that. i want to see a reclaimer fully crewed by CIG lead designers doing full gameplay loop on live server. from log in to selling last container. only then they will understand our frustration and will do something about it

[@dean8367]

You would think that we as the backers have some say in what this game is.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

They do not play at all and it shows. I hate that the most. I really do.

[@Leptospirosi]

The worst offender here is Chris Robert: he want to micromanage everything in the name of the "Rule of Cool" but he doesn't play the game himself: he thinks he's the Movie Director and thinks all he wants is a spectacular disaster movie: it doesn't have to be realistic or engaging for the actors. He just wants to have fun as a spectator.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

@@Leptospirosi i loved those little Tribble things from that game

[@snowmind]

One hundred percent with you on the matter. Also to add on top, that as everyone is wearing a suit and armour all the time, that makes the introduction of oxygen (or lack thereof), temperature and to an extent gravity completely superfluous, just by changing from your civvies to your everyday shinies, with the extra benefit of arming and protecting yourself. In layman's terms, 1) your suit has enough oxygen to last you much longer than your average play session (assuming you survive the "alpha" state that long - and magic hip helmet storage is just a keybind away in an emergency, if you're caught snacking), 2) fire apparently does no damage to the player, so no need to worry, other than... 3) fire raising the area temperature, which can be mitigated by wearing your bulky two-piece suit, and in the worst cases, a refreshing shot from your medgun, 4) gravity... well, what can be said about this feature, when empirical evidence shows a vehicle and/or any unstowed cargo/items/person stay glued to the floor while flying upside down in atmo... suit thrusters and eva should be sufficient, at least in space - mag boots perhaps a thing. pfft started small wanting to say I agree with you, ended up with a wall of frustration - can't be arsed going back and shortening, possibly due years of evo frustration or most probably lack of oxygen due to the heatwave (alt-h does not work).

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I actually never even thought about how everyone is always in a suit. Why wouldn't they be? What is life support going to do? Holy cow, it is just so normal at this point I never gave it thought. I am probably going to use what you said one day for a video. I will give you full credit too. How on earth do we have oxygen and life support systems when everyone is always in a suit at all times?

[@TheSpoonalot]

The only way that Oxy pens will ever have consistent use in this game is if we suddenly have O2 tanks that last about as long as the Klesher Prison suits (which is the only real time I felt the novelty of carrying a pen would be nice but not required.) After the second or so time winding up in Klesher I started to carry one at all times. I've used it once. One single time (that I can remember).

[@snowmind]

@@TheSpoonalot What a great idea, although it was mentioned that O2 was also used as fuel for EVA actions, so not sure how that would factor in - choose life or freedom in space? 😱 EDIT: In the old days, when helmets were still not mandated, I recall that 1x medpen and 1x oxypen were part of your undersuit setup - for those unfortunate enough to exit their elevator and go through the station atmo shield (anyone remembers those??) and make a dash to their ship on the pad, all the while cursing that they, once again, forgot to bring a helmet along. Good days.

[@justsomewhitewolf]

Agreed. Of course there's some sort of appeal to being that one skilled fighter pilot who's able to take down a huge capital class ship all by yourself (something you'd expect to see in Star Wars perhaps)... but that gameplay belongs in single player games, not multiplayer games. And I'd argue for multiplayer games, it can be even more fun for both sides, large multi crew ships as well as a fleet of single seat fighters, if larger ships were more difficult to take down... IF, like you said, your ship wouldn't immediately explode when you get hit, and you'd have the chance to limp back or get yourself fixed up by a repair drone. Who knows, maybe they will change all that once the dedicated repair ships get their gameplay, but that's the all familiar "what if" territory when it comes to star citizen. Potential, but that's about it.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

All SC is is "what if" territory sadly. At this point I am fine with bigger ships ignoring lights and lights ignoring them. That can only be done if they are not threats to one another. I would even accept that if they cannot figure out this balance, as crude as that sounds.

[@alex31461]

my friend stopped playing with me in my deemer because his corsair makes more sense to run and i cant disagree.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

It is sad and I am sorry for the both of you

[@LuckyAJC]

yeah friend group fully crewed a hammer head and were killed by 2 fighters. we wouldn't have lost if we were all in our own ships.

[@mattstephen7494]

You're absolutely dead right about the current situation with multicrew. I'm hoping two mechanics currently in the works will drastically change this paradigm. 1. Ship armour should make larger ships mostly invulnerable to light fire. Except for weak points, which hopefully can be repaired via engineering. Large ships should feel like being in a tank taking fire from a small calibre rifle. 2. New ammo types. Large ship turrets should be given access to flak to be able to counter anything with light armour effectively. Turrets should also be given a huge buff in general.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I think even something as simple, for now such as making S3 shields constantly regenerate and weapons mounted on turrets fire more accurately and at higher velocities could right now fix some of the issues we have.

[@strongback6550]

I personally think that every single turret in Star Citizen should be given AI control option which can be designated by the co-pilot. Essentially, you ought to be able lock on to a target and give the command from a radar UI as to which ship to target and the ship tries to automatically gun the target down if it enters within view with questionable accuracy as well as choice of simply pointing guns at a direction, which functions as a killzone where turret camera fires on any enemy spotted at that arc, but the turret will not track outside of it. This would be good for ground strikes. This should also include an anti-missile defense mode which needs to be manually activated. Basically, give the co-pilot more to do than he can handle and reward him for his time with capabilities that the pilot couldn't handle on his own. Make ships so tough that so long as they have supplies on board, they can repair them. Give multi-crew ships internal reload mechanics that let them load as much missiles, torpedoes and ammo as their cargo has room for. Every crew member should be constantly making choices on what action not to take and what action to take with each having powerful rewards that contribute to the fight. Hell, I would not mind if you could manually go down to the shield generator and bring those shields back up so fast that it's effectively impossible for smaller fighters to do damage to your ship with energy weapons because your goons keep juicing up the generators indefinitely. I also think eclipse needs to be given a different role. It is way too powerful conceptually speaking. Maybe have cripple big ships on a surprise attack instead of killing it, forcing the vessel to drop what it was doing and tend to repairs immediately. Instakill on 5 guys or more should require more than 1 guy pulling a fast one on you.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

You know what? I agree with, and, one of my more controversial takes is that turret gunning is a stupid "multi-crew" feature and should be handled by an AI being ordered by a gunnery officer like you mentioned. There are so many more fun, multi-crew things you can do other than gun. Adding gunners to the mix just adds more to the requirements to make the ship function.

[@mehrunez4838]

Use the Endevour or a designated Radar ship to provide a better fire control solution as well. One that can take control of turrets in the same Org to direct fire. Adds another role but also an important "overseer" role as well.

[@El1qt]

Surely that would just make something for the copilot to do, but it would still be as boring as sitting in the seat doing nothing

[@Stormyy6310]

among the best idea(s) I've ever heard, there is no way CIG will ever do that since they have no idea what they're doing, they don't know how to balance things and like to put as much tedium as possible but if that were the case multicrew ships would actually be good and things like boarding could make sense

[@strongback6550]

Turret gunning only makes sense when the turret itself has capabilities beyond a single fighter, such as multiple ammunition types and essentially having giga long range artillery weaponry (even then with manual point defense options being possible). If it doesn't have those capabilities, it really stops being worth bringing a crew to do that over a fighter, so you need to link it with other guns for value. This is why batteries of small guns ought to be something you can command as a co-pilot. If the ship doesn't have enough turrets for that, add some cheap 1xS1 point-defense mounts that are easily destroyed.

[@SaintNyx]

The crazy thing is that an F8 can literally just solo a crewed Redeemer at close range. Now imagine 5 F8s vs 1 crewed Redeemer. Multi-crew is a joke.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I remember a video of you pooping on them with bullet cannons

[@PursauntYapper]

That's the thing isn't it, for almost every part of the game they designed, sold and built ships with zero clear idea what the game will look like. Now they have the task of trying to somehow shoehorn it back in, scrap a bunch of work or piss off masses of their audience when they make the necessary changes (like what fucking muppets thought the F7A Loadout was a good idea)

[@Gary_The_Metro]

@@PursauntYapper >like what fucking muppets thought the F7A Loadout was a good idea The same muppets that thought the F8C loadout was a good idea.

[@XAPACCMEHT]

That's cuz master modes suck very hard and doesn't help to fix the fighter problem at all... F8 sucks now too. Even 1 Avenger or Bucca can deal with Redeemer much easier.

[@PursauntYapper]

@@XAPACCMEHT I wouldn't say that's true at all, the Titan or buc will fall asleep before they manage to kill that thing. It's insanely tanky and if they use the shield exploit it's basically invincible

[@crispy9175]

If they just boosted turrets...

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

It would go a long way for now. Honestly.

[@TheGlassSword]

One thing we can do to balance out single fighters is basically reduced their capabilities to travel, long distances and for multi crew of course we have armor coming, so we still need to add that to the Mix

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Totally correct. but I been hearing about armor a long time ;)

[@TheGlassSword]

@@BuzzCutPsycho soon TM Also great talk with Tomato 🍅 really liked the conversation

[@godmodeiddqd]

I'd like to see hydrogen fuel reduced for military fighters too. It would limit a military ship's engagement time before refueling. The Glaive used to be like that back in 3.4. Speaking of refueling; it would have a purpose if military fighters needed to refuel often. On full AB, an F-16C without bags has about 4.5 minutes of fuel.

[@Gary_The_Metro]

Meanwhile F8C has all the advantages of other heavy fighters AND long distance travel. It's ridiculous. Unless a fighter is a specialized long range fighter, they should have abysmal range. It's a fighter ffs.

[@Henkums]

@@TheGlassSwordthat one did not stay for long, tomato took it down

[@godmodeiddqd]

Yeah, multicrew needs some help. I totally agree. I remember back in 3.4 when a crewed Hammerhead could bully an entire server. Now it's a punching bag. True facts about Sea of Thieves. SoT does every aspect of multicrew better. Gunnery, navigation, repair, dousing fire, etc.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

And it is an old console game!!!!! Mind blowing.

[@GunShocka]

They really will need a buff especially if their plan is to use the Malestrom destrtuction model for ships eventually. That would make laser weapons ripping throught the ship if shields drop set the ship on fire. But even then the turrets on bigger ships need a faster turn rate to keep up with smaller ships. and or revise some ships turret placements I honestly think a large ship with a defensive emp pulse would actually be pretty neat since it could eliminate small single ships from just circling a ship. Hopefully they figure something out.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

My biggest concern is the foundation isn't even present yet. I know everyone talks about armor and all that, and I get it, trust me I do. But when I do not even see the functional basics I get worried. And I am worried. EMP pulse would be mint though!

[@unbless3242]

@@BuzzCutPsycho just make smaller size weapons (particularly repeaters) have faster bullet velocity / ROF and wider / more accurate gimbals. especially when it comes to turrets.

[@teahousereloaded]

@@BuzzCutPsycho There's always the next thing that is missing. As fire heavily relies on Maelstrom, either they come together, or we never see fire again.

[@klas_gg]

They have no idea what they are doing. It’s “early days”

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

it's been "early days" for 10 years 🤣🤣🤣

[@klas_gg]

@@thechroniclesofcriss942 exactly and they have nothing meaningful to show on big ship gameplay/loops. If they did they would show it.

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

@@klas_gg word

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

As the others day, early days for a decade brother.

[@johnforrester2574]

Ugh. Cig needs to hire real game designers. Time sinks does not make interesting gameplay.

[@Brian-us2xz]

Oh the Connie, I want to love it, but it needs to get a major face lift. The idea a crew of 5 people has less dps than a mk2 hornet a... lame. But yes, first, they need to make actual turret weapons that can only be used on manned turrets, and yes these guns should be a "Oh sh◇◇" moment for a fighter seeing it deploying... rather than the "oh, looks like I need to lazily circle and maybe if I am feeling spicy, I will kill the guy in the turret first." Anycase...

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Hey you can always fly 3 Connies in formation. Cover each other with those size 5s and pretend that the turrets aint there

[@eldarionmarchombre4568]

But for that, they would need to make turrets much more deadly and better in their usage. Even the remote one. As an example, my Reliant Tana is even less relevant and reliable when multi-crewed. 🤷🏼‍♂️

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

YT keeps eating my comments to you for some reason

[@eldarionmarchombre4568]

@@BuzzCutPsycho lol, YT can really be annoying. I do lose a lot of comments to others too. But from your statement, I suppose that you can't even find your comments in the moderation section? That's a big problem IMO. 🤔

[@AankerStoneshield]

Yeah this message needs to be hammered home, teamwork should be synergistic, as a single player in a fighter you shouldn’t even *contemplate* going up against a larger fully crewed ship. They want WW2 in space - and that means the power levels need to be adjusted so that a single F4U Corsair isn’t enough to sink the Yamamoto, or even a destroyer

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Careful making too much sense. Morons will say "WHAT ABOUT A BF109 VS A B17" and ignoring your pacific war analogy.

[@AankerStoneshield]

@@BuzzCutPsycho I don’t think the B17 analogy is that bad, albeit applicable only to the bomber/’cargo plane’ archetype of SC vehicles, and not really the big ship analogues… But we’re talking about a cinematic interpretation of WW2, so the B17 analogue would still be very tough for a single fighter to destroy. In gameplay terms, I think the lighter bombers offset their weakness to enemy air with destructive capability, whereas the cargo ships simply aren’t meant for air to air engagements. But a hammerhead? It’s obviously intended to be an anti-fighter platform and should be as effective as an AA Cruiser

[@stephenkelly8312]

This is undeniably true. If they can’t figure out what you’re talking about, the other solution is NPCs to crew your ships as a solo player. That way you and your three buddies can bring 4 fully crewed Redeemers, A2s, whatever. It wouldn’t be as good as proper balance, but it would still be better than present state multi crew.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

NPC crews are at this point a complete must for me. It is the only way to make it work.

[@artlife9563]

As usual, you have the right take on the state of the game. The problem is the $45 light fighter crew is very vocal but the several thousand $ multicrew people are pissed. Even it out CIG.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

The $45 light fighter crew is very numerous and they want their own game. At this point, I would be happy with my big ships being unable to hit them and their little ships being unable to hurt me. Keeps us away from each other.

[@JagHiroshi]

People don't care, because they're all having such a great time with Master Modes.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I know I am

[@NINTHSKULL]

Single seater can have 4xs3 meanwhile most turrets are just 2xs3. Single seaters have flight, countermeasures, scanning, and guns, meanwhile a whole player is being spent in a turret just to have 2 guns that can only see one side of the ship.

[@NINTHSKULL]

The single seat ship should be equivalent to 1 infantryman, where a multicrew ship should be equivalent to an IFV or even a tank. Thats the order of magnitude difference that would reward multicrew.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

YOU GET MORE FIREPOWER IN SINGLE SEAT SHIPS AHHH YOU'RE RIGHT. WHY IS IT THIS WAY?

[@pavlovaling7691]

Really like ur videos and thoughts! Some of the things they improved in the 3.23 resource management test gameplay are actually just like what you said in your video, just like a "traditional" MMO. In the current multiplayer ship, your health is 100, so if you are hit, you will lose health, and there may be debuffs such as poisoning and burning (just like the fuse is destroyed and the hull is on fire). But from the test mode, the structural health of the ship, especially the large ships, will be increased by several times or even dozens of times, and more damage will occur to the components. Having damage control is like having a "nurse". You take 100 damage, but you can recover 90hp through magic beam. In this way, the health can be much more than that of a single-person large ship. I think what they still need to work on is how to make the damage control experience as interesting as the pilot or gunner, rather than using beams at generator components in a small room all the day.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Damage control parties can be a fun mechanic and are a bit like an MMO healing mechanic, as you mentioned. DCP (damage control parties) is one of the things I love about Sea of Thieves and other games where you can heal/repair a vehicle during combat. It is a skill and style of play that many players would enjoy, and do enjoy. I’m glad you like my videos! Nobody ever has to agree; I don't expect that. But I do enjoy the comments, especially ones like yours. It was a great example of written thought and discussion, which I myself appreciate. (I don't mind magic beams though, I am sorry!

[@sulferix7265]

This fire system is the perfect example of a useless system that only introduces pure tedium. It only serves as a visual eye candy that deliberately inhibits gameplay. All this will do is force people to run their ships atmosphere fully vented to space. If this was in a single player game? Yeah It would be cool. But not in this game.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

High fidelity slop designed to catch eyes to sell ships

[@mehrunez4838]

My issue is with multicrew ships and the current game. It's slower to make money and rep when multicrew. I am confident this will be remedied in the future. It's the onyl reason I'm not as upset about the Merchantman being delayed after I bought it.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I hope for your sake the BMM comes out. I feel for you brother.

[@joesgotmore]

I think the problem started with having so many single seat ships "punch above their weight". Too many guns on small ships. If I had any suggesting to help I would have multi crew ships one have armor that negates a certain amount of incoming damage. Where size one guns do no damage and size two barely does any, etc, etc. Also, give turrets an increased zoom and range forcing smaller ships to risk the gauntlet of fire just to get close enough to do any damage.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

"Punch above their weight" is a terrible design and I am glad you mentioned it. If these smaller ships were limited to size 1-2 weapons, not 3-4 you may actually see better balance on that front. Right now, these smaller ships, can DESTROY bigger ships with ease. Especially with cannons. Punch above their weight is terrible for game design.

[@georgeburistor3551]

Thank you for voicing out the state of multicrew in SC, and I genuinely hope CIG can see this video

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I hope CIG does too. Nobody ever speaks about multi-crew or why it sucks. Ever.

[@BigSneed404]

I simply don't think certain kinds of weapons should be able to hard kill certain sized ships at all. The size of your weapon should have a large overmatch of your intended target in order to score a hard kill. For example, a S3 weapon can hard kill small ships like single seat fighters, but they can't hard kill a heavy fighter as those require at least Size 5s to hard kill. Medium ships like the Connies, Corsair, MSR etc require at least a size 7 to hard kill, and sub capitals need at least size 9 weapons to hard kill. They don't have to use that specific classification, but that's the sort of system I'd suggest. Small weapons like those found on single seat fighters can only hard kill other small ships of their own size, and we'd go from there working up the sizes.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I want to imagine that is what the magic armor system we hear so much about is going to do. The endless "punch above their weight" ships with near endless capacitors able to mount laser CANNONS on their small frames is not helping either.

[@matuto1986]

As always, nice vid! I believe I`ve made this exact same claim in one of your prior videos. It just does not make sense! Currently, If you are fighting 10v10 and you want to win, you just show up in 10 F7 Hornets. Anything else is just wasted manpower! If you need to haul cargo (pirate), you show up in 9 Hornets and 1 C2. Again, not much brainpower needed! Another thing that someone else also mentioned, it does not make sense to have most of the guns slave to the pilot. Take the Corsair, for example, the gunners controls 2 size 2s each, while the pilot controls 4 size 4`s and 2 size 3`s. How dumb is that? Why would a team multicrew a corsair instead of bringing more ships? It`s inconceivable that this never crossed the mind at anyone in CIG

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

You did make that point and it was correct then and correct now! There is NOTHING that they are doing, or adding, that will make you combine manpower to multiply it (force multiplier) as opposed to just putting all your guys in their own individual ships. You're spot on brother, SPOT ON.

[@Cpt_Kakashi]

Damn! A star citizen content creator, not in cig's payroll! Thats a rare thing to see!

[@Ogata123]

Whats worse is, a lot of them aren’t on the real money payroll, they are emotionally invested (fueled partly by massive monetary investment) to the point accepting the negatives and the harsh state of the game is too much to accept. They take it as an attack upon their own self when these issues are pointed out.

[@Cpt_Kakashi]

@@Ogata123 you describe 80% of sc discord! Creators get paid and their ships are from referals or cig promo shit! A small portion are stupid enough to buy them with real money.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I am certainly not on CIG payroll and they don't do any favors for me. Sometimes I worry some may hate me. But that's fine. I love the game, love the dream, but I love it enough to stand up and call things out that I personally think are issues. This being one of many.

[@Cpt_Kakashi]

I love the game and want it to be a success. Ppl defending every stupid decision cig makes is the cancer of the game. Keep up the good work. You got my respect sir!

[@mcdowntrend]

I think at the very least they need multi-crewed ships to be much more durable than solo ships. Maybe they could even find a way to make the ship deal more damage per shot. Engineering has to immensely boost a ship's stats for it to be desirable, at least as the game currently plays.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

they survivability is a terrible thing and has been for awhile, so bad that for the test the a2 needed to be buffed by 500x for HP

[@PursauntYapper]

Then how boring is that gameplay? Just hammering away for 30 minutes against a slow moving ship the poses no threat.. hardly sounds fun to me

[@grygaming5519]

Everyone wants to be Han Solo with their best friend being Chewie. What really irritates me with CIG is the fact the team is more focused on implementing window dressings instead of actually putting in Armor/shield/damage 2.0. That's pretty much what needs to be done now, not later....we need armor, shield and damage to come in right now and be reworked. Without those aspects in the game currently everything else just feels like busy work and tedium. Its also the major issue with multi-crew ships in general. You have Space craft armor for fighters and Space Craft ship armor for multi-crew that should be thicker and more resilient to small arms and light fighter weaponry (Tier 1), with Tier 2 armor doing medium level of damage + medium level of pentation for kinetic, T3 and higher should do in theory more damage. There's just a lot of core issues with the game on its damage models that should be addressed before engineering. Engineering should come directly after the new damage models are updated.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Everyone wants to be Han Solo with Chewie but CIG thinks we all want to be Luke Skywalker. For me? It's Russel Crowe from Master and Commander.

[@grygaming5519]

@@BuzzCutPsycho Eh... for me John "Starkiller/Nuk'em" Sheridan.

[@grygaming5519]

@@BuzzCutPsycho Oh I wanted to add a bit, CIG is too busy with their WWII in space idea that a lot of their systems fly in the face of what our current tech is doing in the modern world. I am talking about automatic fire suppression systems that are on super carriers right now in the pacific...that's 1980's technology. Even in Sci-fi shows there's both manual and automatic systems. Guess what goes on first, the automatic its only when that fails will a fire team actually go into action. To me it makes more sense to have Hull breaches be the first primary multi-crew function for the game. As that's far more dangerous to a crew vs a fire that can be snuffed out by opening the air locks and vacating the O2 in the area. Again these instances feel more like....promotional videos to license off the star engine vs implementing meaningful gameplay mechanics into the game itself. A hull breech mechanic would be a ultimate want for SC on multi-crew ships. It also gives a reason why wearing your space suit and helmet in a ship. Especially during combat because you never know when a piece of your ship is going to get ripped off and the pressure change is going to suck you out into the void.

[@I_Am_Empyrean]

After the new server meshing tech, there's absolutely no reason for them to not implement AI blades and/or NPC crew. At least all of the remote turrets in the game should be AI controlled which significantly reduces crew requirements. You can't tell me something like the Corsair or the newly released Starlancer is genuinely designed for 4 crew members when you have to wrestle with engineering and firefighting.

[@hamitron]

Totally agree. I may go even further and make 1+1=10. Combined with making the bigger ships fly more like boats, huge armour and shields, maybe even make a shield hp relation to surface area. I only own small single pilot ships, but really want to feel like forming a group will be more advantageous in terms of gameplay (as well as fun factor).

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

I argue that 1+1 should equal 2.5 or 3.5... if 1+1 equals 10, noone will use single- or dual-seat fighters anymore. that would also be the case if 1+1 equals 5.

[@hamitron]

@@thechroniclesofcriss942 I'd still think a small ship could be used for taking out subsystems and tackling, even if not destroying.

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

@@hamitron you'd have to get past the shields first, which for S3 shields that should be a real challenge for a single fighter. after that, I'd understand being able to damage the main thrusters... but not much beyond that.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

At this point I would be happy to see small ships face small ones and big ones face big ones. Wouldn't bother me any.l

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

@@BuzzCutPsycho if the big ones can't deal with small ones and small ones can't deal with big ones, that's fine by me. that would still make it so fleets have to be comprised of all sizes of spacecraft.

[@JustSumGuy]

Basedcutpsycho

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

thanks brother i try to be based

[@XquizitRush]

I agree 100% with everything you said. I hope CR & Co hear this as well. I have 3 Capital Class jpeg's right now; The Polaris, The Orion and a BMM. The damage to Star Citizen's reputation will destroy SC if they don't make a move to do something to prevent our Capital ships from being huge loot Pinata's. The other way to quickly ruin Star Citizen would be to botch the economy where everyone can afford a Capital Class ship with only a few months of gameplay.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

You, as a Capital class ship owner are the most neglected of backers. I mean that. You have had NOTHING for over 10 years now. Not a word. And I hate it. I am sorry and I want this game to be good for you as well as everyone else.

[@TKanal3]

i agree, but another aspcet is that rn fighter ships have massive range, it seems clear that cig will massively limit the range of fighter jets, making it basically impossible to operate outside of certain ranges/without a pocket carrier (making it multicrew based too in the end)

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I will believe fighters get a limit when it happens.

[@TKanal3]

@@BuzzCutPsycho i understand that 😅

[@unbless3242]

I think the much larger ships will be mostly okay. the mid size ships (connie, tally,redeemer cutty warden ETC) will REALLY suffer. Unless they equip the pilot with the ability to vent the atmosphere and put out fires, i see mid size ships as becoming VERY quickly redundant. lets hope the economy rework will lean into compensating the mid size ships in terms of what the power of mid tier ships can accomplish with minimal or solo crew.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

The funny thing about the ships you mentioned is that they are going to be in a weird spot where they aren’t as nimble as a heavy fighter or as tough as a bigger ship. Effectively, they will occupy a confused medium fighter position that usually ends up sucking due to their versatility, lacking any true power in one field.

[@unbless3242]

​ Maybe their only saving grace is speed to completion in PVE. LOTS of pilot dps : no real need to split income. Larger ships WILL need a crew. Smaller ships might lack dps / time to kill.

[@qutatron]

I think that in CIG each department does its job locally, creating new concepts and features, but there is a lack of more global project management. Evidence of this is the poor ship balance, as if it was written on the fly. Master modes were introduced as a new mechanic and ship statistics were quickly changed, so that it doesn't hold together. If there was some deeper, strategic management, multi crew ships would already be OP and the creators would start nerfing them with mechanics like fire or engineering.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

You're probably right and it shows big time in the design of the game. And it sucks, sucks major. That is my main worry and control.

[@grygaming5519]

All roads lead back to the Marketing Department and the VP of marketing.

[@qutatron]

@@grygaming5519 marketing team needs to play SC at least 2h daily.

[@sidewithwerewolves]

A point to start balancing multi crew is that it takes 1.25 gladius to a fully crewed multincrew to kill it. So for a Connie they would want 3-4 [pilot+ 2 gunners + 1 engineer]. If you don't have enough crew then it is easier for smaller ships to kill you. Also a turret should always be able to put range a fighter, ramp up the damage and range of turrets to 2x or 3x dps of the size guns. Why? Big ship big power. Also armor is absolutely necessary and it baffles me there is none or a significant hp buff to multi crew. A freelancer feels more thin skinned than an arrow.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

The turrets being so bad is a major part of the issue here. They are so terrible that having one actually puts you at a disadvantage. It has been this way for years now and I cannot stand it.

[@essentialasa]

I think the easiest way to fix this is to make manned turrets the most powerful guns on the ship. They should be 2 sizes up from the pilot guns. That makes every manned ship a terrifying encounter and makes fully staffing those ships way more attractive.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

100% - Turrets should be the main feature and what you want on these ships, Things like the Connie and Corsair go against that and it is a crime against design.

[@mabutoo]

TBH, I was only half listening at first but your argument was so compelling it drew my full attention. Well said and I hope CIG listens better than I did. Going to rewatch.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Well that is flattering. Glad I was compelling enough to bring you back to focus.

[@johnwayne4911]

hopefully they figure this out because I'm definitely not playing STAR CITIZEN for single seat fighters...........

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I do not think a lot of people want to.

[@rtek777]

Bigger ships need to be able to tank more damage. Their shields need to be able to absorb enough incoming damage that 1-5 single seat ships aren't enough to break through the shields. The bigger the ship, the bigger it's shields and the more incoming fire it can sustain. One of my favorite space shows is Stargate Atlantis. I always loved the space battles. If 1 fighter was shooting at the Daedalus, their shields would hold and they'd either knock out that fighter with their railguns or send out a couple fighters to engage it. If they slugged it out with a Wraith cruiser, they're shields would hold for a while but not forever. If a Wraith hive ship shot at them, their shields would only last so long till they'd either have to warp away or disable the hive ship's weapons. The Daedalus was smaller and more nimble, so they'd usually move around in a fight to reduce hits on their shields. Incoming damage, damage sustainment should all be relative to the size of ship in the engagement. Right now, 1 small ship taking down 1 large ship is poor balance at the core.

[@rtek777]

@buzzCutPsycho this is one of those battles I was talking about. kzbin.info/www/bejne/o3mlg5upmdiqesU

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

How do you feel about S3 and above shields always generating shields? No matter what, never stops. So to break them you have to truly overwhelm them with firepower. It used to be that way, and it was great. Ever since that change they suck.

[@rtek777]

@@BuzzCutPsycho Shields should regenerate but at a set speed per size and grade of emitter. Like in EVE, shields regenerate at whatever hp per second. I'd be cool with S1+ regeneration as long as it's relative to its size and grade.

[@user-sf8du]

The issue with more shields is that ballistics go through shields, last time I played combat roles(which admittedly has been a long time) ballistics could wreck a lot of ships with a single large ballistics weapon. In a PvP setting, with a couple fighters there's no real reason to have energy weapons unless you're looking for sustained fights. Even in a single fighter, Caterpillars are reliable to kill with ballistics equipped. I imagine with the right pilot any ship is reliably killed with a single ballistic fighter. You could have infinite shields and the ttk wouldn't change much, because everyone would swap to ballistics. My thought is that armor is actually the key to balancing larger ships. With armor ships won't have health pools. Instead you'll be trying to hit specific parts of a ship. Your shot will have to go through the armor, and actually hit something to matter. There's a good chance when armor comes some weapons will not even do damage when hitting armor unless hit in the same spot more than once. I wouldn't worry too much about ship balance right now, the way ship damage is handled will be completely changed eventually.

[@rtek777]

@@user-sf8du I personally think ballistics should not penetrate shields. They should weaken them over time but not go right through. Ship collisions should also be protected by shields.

[@Scenethroughalens]

Ultimately it comes down to this. Ship prices in the pledge store. They want to sell lots of new ships regardless of what it is, and they can't sell single seat fighters for more than a freelancer, cutty black or whatever unless it can take these ships out single handedly. CIG love to espouse immersion, but ship sales trump all. And as for content and multicrew? Who cares as long as they sell the promise of the idris, kraken, merchantman, odyssey, etc. And why would they want to sell one multicrew ship that multiple players can use when they can sell 5 single seaters that each cost more?

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I get they wanna sell ships but the big boys cost the most and sell out fast. How about some love for em right?

[@123TheCloop]

What you are describing is a result of CIG just going "big ship sells" without any thought behind how to balance them beyond splitting the actual usable tech on said ships so the pilot isnt able to do all functions from his/her seat. what we are seeing is CIG now realising just how bad they are at game design. they sold these big ships without this thought in mind and are now only just thinking about it. SC is a game design mess, ranging from LFs being the dominant ship class to MM's being a band aid fix to that problem and now multi crew roles. Christ i couldnt care less for fire, I want to see actual gameplay loops being finished, instead if you want to dip your toes into mining or salvaging well get ready to cough up about £130+ for a ship capable OR you spend hundreds of hours grinding the money to buy one in game with your starter package. Now that they have all these big ships, they are scrambling to get these ships to "work" in a balanced manner for the current state of the game.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Those big ships make massive cash yet nothing is even in the game to support them at the most basic level. Not even conceptually.

[@AlexTamayo.]

As someone with no intention to fly multi-crew, I couldn't agree more with you. I think that it does make for better gameplay if I see a multi-crew ship and my immediate thought is "I'm out of here as fast as possible" instead of "Hmmmm, I think I can take it". I think CIG should model their ship battling system more after naval battles than air battles and you bringing up Sea of Thieves is quite pertinent to that point. Large multi-crew aircrafts are typically bombers, cargo or some kind of support craft and can typically be relatively easily taken down by single seat fighters, specially nowadays with modern missiles and there's very little they can do to prevent it. However, that does not make for a particularly fun experience in a game, especially if you're in the multi-crew ship and you're just canon fodder. I think the naval way is far more enjoyable in gameplay, in which there's no single-seater boat that would even think about trying to take on a carrier/battleship/cruiser/destroyer because it would be obliterated immediately. Perhaps give the single-seaters a clear advantage in atmosphere as they're more aerobatic and harder to target, but in space there's no gravity or air, so despite bigger ships being super slow, it would still stand to reason that they would be able to over-power single-seaters with their overwhelming fire power, like battleships could do to a propeller boat.

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

so what you're saying is we should delete fighters from the game?

[@AlexTamayo.]

@@thechroniclesofcriss942 not at all. Like I said, I have no intention of doing multi-crew, so eliminating fighters would be detrimental to myself. Fighters would be fantastic against ships in a similar class or, like BCP said, if an overwhelming amount of fighters go against a multi-crew, just like in real life an insane amount of fighter jets could actually destroy a carrier. I think that BCP is right, as it is, multi-crew is not fun or well balanced.

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

@@AlexTamayo. but what you're suggesting is that fighters be absolutely worthless compared to 1 ship unless you have enough fighters to equal the crew count of an Idris. you might as well delete the fighters from the game and just have one Idris.

[@AlexTamayo.]

​@@thechroniclesofcriss942 I think your take is quite exaggerated, mate. Even assuming your math (balance) just because you may need an equal amount of fighters as you would the crew of an Idris to take down an Idris, that doesn't mean that fighters should be eliminated from the game. It would just mean that if you're by yourself in a fighter and you find an Idris, go the other way. If you're 1 guy and 5 guys want to fight you, will you take on them? And mind you, I have trained to take on multiple fighters and I would still try to avoid that situation if I can and even with my training the likelihood of me succeeding in that particular situation isn't high, real life is not like in a fight gym. That doesn't mean that I by myself have no use, I can easily take on 2 people at a time or 1-on-1, but if I see 5 guys, I'll try my best to bail out. So in SC, it would be something like that. If that still doesn't make sense to you, I can't make a better argument.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

You should, if interested, dig around my channel for an older video about combined arms and ship roles. I forgot the name, but I said a lot of what you said. WW2 naval combat. Good stuff here man.

[@Casbelu]

Agree. Surprisingly enough...probable the first BuzzCut video I've watched where I wasn't facepalming the whole video. Nice change of pace :)

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

That means that you are growing as a human being. I congratulate you on this milestone in your journey to mental acuity.

[@Casbelu]

@@BuzzCutPsycho 🤣

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

setting the internals of a ship on fire should be really hard, especially for a single fightercraft. I don't see how that's happening in a way that gunners have to exit the turret seat(s) and fight a fire so much that a single fighter will pose that much of a threat - especially /IF/ CIG perform optimizations and implement ship armor mechanics. (while at it, change S3 shields recharge so that they recharge a little slower but have zero delay on it) also, carrack should have more S4 guns on each turret. change my mind. maybe 3 per turret? 4 tops. also also: coni and corsair should have smaller pilot guns and bigger turret guns.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I am sure all of that was done in the video for demonstration. I do not think they would allow smaller to do that much damage. But the concept is more of what I am hammering in on, these downsides and gimmicks of multi-crew are all fine if the multi-crew is a very powerful part of the gameplay. They serve as a way to keep them in check and prevent people from solo crewing them. Lord knows I hate solo tanks in squad. Also, yes 100% to S3 shield recharge, and a bigger yes to nerfing guns on connie corsair and up gunning the turrets.

[@chevystyle32]

I agree with you about bringing more ships than crewing a single. overall they keep adding so many aspects that will penalize you. the issue with it is it is implemented to the point that it is overkill.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

These systems are fine, but without the power and buffs to the group ships I do not see how they will keep them in line. You're spot on, it is overkill right now, but will they actually make these ships powerful enough to offset this extra work?

[@VFW-Mayer]

I think the Game NEEDS to decide that Single Crew can only fight Single Crew or Drones. 3 Fighters VS a Coni with a Pilot and 2 Turrets should almost be even. Add a 4th and 5th to the Coni Crew for Engineering and Science to boost the ships suitability and it would be no contest vs 3 fighters. The 3 Fighters must also bring the Right Kinds of Fighters. A Coni can easily escape if no dampener. A Coni will never be crippled if you do not have enough Missiles. I do not think that CIG has any clue about group makeup and power scaling for MMO's. I think they are just creating it as they go with no good QA in place to point out the obvious flaws in how they are building this game.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I been saying what you said at the start here in our Discord. Until CIG decides that fully crewed ships are "OP" against single seat fighters we will never, ever get the balance or gameplay we need. Right now selfish gameplay outweighs everything else.

[@Zodaxa_zdx]

it took over 7 minutes of me just thinking "Yeah SoT absolutely sweeps for it's multi crew" and then you mention it out right, I love soloing the massive mega ships for literally no reason other than I can

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

SOT is a prime example of what SC should be for that imo

[@grigorkyokuto7546]

put the fire shit on small ship as well then

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Agreed

[@rickdeckard2622]

Besides stability and game performance, NPC Multicrew and Dark Vision for ships are on my top 3 wishlist.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I bet we get NPC multi-crew before night vision, HAH!!!

[@paulb36utube]

Totally agree with everything you’re saying. Got rid of my Connie for that reason ages ago. Could see things panning out like you mentioned. Just going to stick to smaller ships.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Until things change that is your best bet. I don't even think 4.0 will make them better until their weakness is understood by CIG.

[@AChungusAmongUs]

The video I've been waiting for! There really does need to be a power re-balance. Turrets should always be impactful. And some of those fighters need to be knocked down a peg. The Hornet, for one, is absurd. It looks like something I would have dreamed up in second grade math class. Yes, multi-crew gameplay really needs to be better. I was thinking of games like Bomber Crew/Space Crew for inspiration. Make the engineer run around patching power conduits and performing hotfixes on components (turn it off and on again?) to keep the ship running effectively. They should be patching hull breaches and putting out fires. Repair kits and materials should be standard equipment for all multicrew ships. Maybe require the engineer to make changes at his station when the captain wants to adjust power allocation rather than allowing pilots to do it with the push of a button. Require power adjustment from the engineer when switching between SCM, salvage/mining and Nav modes. The danger of fires should be damage to power systems and oxygen depletion, not the risk of your entire ship going up like a book of matches. I 100% agree about the death state of ships! Soft death should be the final state instead of the ship just going, "poof!" Continuing to shoot a destroyed ship should just result in more holes in the hull. Crew in flight suits should be mostly safe unless they take a direct hit or run out of O2. That would play into the "death of a spaceman" dream and support roles like medical rescue, salvage and towing. With the addition of physicalized cargo, fire and engineering gameplay, the need for NPC crew is starting to get real. I think we need to move away from the idea that multicrew player ships will generally be 100% player crewed. That should be a fun option, but not an expectation.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

What people do not get is that turrets need to be "OP" for them to be respected. You are taking something which often has less firepower than the ship it is meant to counter and putting a player in that. It has no maneuverability, since it is a turret, and no way to escape. Yet, they are just flat out inferior. There can be no room for compromise on this. Turrets MUST be over powered.

[@grumpyeagle7955]

after watching your vid. i can only agree. One thing came to my mind: What if Turrets overcharge given weapons on them. -> a turret mounted s5 shoots faster, projectile travels quicker, does more dmg and so on. I think that would also trickel down into the fighter space and make things like the hurricane stand out more compared to the other best in slot single seaters. What do you guys think?

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Turrets must absolutely behave differently than weapons on regular ships. At the minimum they need higher cap, higher velocity, and more accuracy. That is essentially like an overdrive you mentioned and would be passive.

[@grumpyeagle7955]

@@BuzzCutPsycho Unfortunatly most only look for alpha dmg and dont't concider other metrics

[@ZaneDragonBorn]

From what I've learned from CIG communications and from other posts that are reputable throughout my years is this: The goal of player ships is not just a side vehicle that gets you from A to B. Ships (specifically ones with an interactable interior) are a form of player home or "basecamp" so to say. They provide you will a set of functionalities that you engage in to further your SC career (rep, UEC, and gear). Because these player homes are what is basically the most important part of this space sim that star citizen is, they need gameplay attached. Yes, this gameplay is Piloting, gunning, Engineering, and more. Its just like playing Sons of the Forest and maintaining yourself with food and medicine. That level of detail and even more is their goal. But its just extra work! Why not just take a squadron of Light fighters instead? For now? yeah, CIG has not balanced these ships enough to let us see their angle... But the end goal is for things like armor and weapon calipers to make a difference between whether a Corsair is a unbeatable foe to a gladius, or if that gladius is a thorn in its side. Most light fighters on the average day are only kitted out to handle fellow light fighters because the ammo to handle heavy fighters is more pricy. Not to mention the price of the fighters replacements would be just enough that you might aswell upgrade to a larger ship. Think about it. The gladius is 2mil UEC to own. If you wanted to handle killing a ship such as a Constellation knowing you need an ammo pool of high enough caliper to take it down. You are probably going to invest in around 6 of these light fighters to tackle it even with the improved ammo. Thats going to already be 12mil to 13mil in maintanence and ship purchase. That Connie however? Its only 12mil to buy it on its own... That means by the point you invested in all of those gladi that are very prone to damage, you could have gotten on equal footing with that enemy and didn't need to train up professional fighter pilots so they avoid getting blown up in 10 seconds. This is why it will be better. What does the Multi-crew benefit though? Can't I just ignore it? Ignoring the engineering and other multi-crew elements will lead to your ships survival in a battle shrinking tremendously, especially if the other ship is on-top of it. Not paying attention can cause fires, components that you could've saved can be blown to bits and rendered on savable, and more. Knowing it is important but exhausting. What is to stop me from just letting it die, respawn, and make a new ship? This probably will change in the future aswell. Your ship is a home, or base. If you loose it would be a major loss. Think about the food, fuses, cargo, ammo, missiles, and more that your ship HAD to get stocked with so you are deployment ready at a fast speed... Logistics will and is a pain after 3.24, and will only start hurting more areas. The need to store more resources on your ship will grow and losing a ship will delay you much more than 10 minutes. My personal Opinion: Right now, multi-crew has yet to show its full colors. Judging the worth of it in its current state is meaningless without armor, bullet penetration, maelstrom, and the many other tech features that impact ship combat, these additions alongside balance changes will take our current thoughts and throw them out the window. It's too early to declare the systems flawed.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

The reason I judge its worth right now is because the foundation isn't even present. There is nothing to build on after years and years of it not being present. Fighters have had may years of functionality and a culture has formed around it. There is no culture around multicrew ships. No voice and nothing to build on. That is why I harp on it. You ain't wrong. Not one bit. But when I see the complete lack of basics and understanding on simple ways to make them work now get concerned.

[@sircastic959]

Agree, and we have not even talked about the missile problem yet. Single multicrew ships are missile magnets and most lack the flares to counter them in sufficient volume. Meanwhile you can spam down one, maybe two of those four fighters. It´s so bad that the agressor can just ad a mantis to cut off escape and even being forced to fight that multicrew ship one man down, so let us say, a crewed redeemer with four being assailed by an Ion, F8c and Hornet Mk2 will still have them come out on top while the mantis hangs back. That is also with a laser loadout on the aggressor, ballistics would make this even more unfair. We need to come to a point where larger ships have better protection against masses of smaller weapons, especially ballistics. And the ballistics should knock out systems TEMPORARILY, so that those systems, if fixed repeatedly on time, would absorb more ammo than even the Inferno carries. Repair capacity has to outstrip ammo capacity.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Dude small ship have MORE MISSILES THAN SHIPS HAVE FLARES and I totally forgot about it until YOU brought it up. Thank you.

[@sircastic959]

@@BuzzCutPsycho This was at least SOMEWHAT remediated when missiles got different signatures. Before it was comically easy to throw smaller missiles with the same tracking at a target and then slip an eclipse missle in when you see them run out of flares or see them holding back on them because they expect small missiles. This still works. But yeah missiles make this entire thing even worse.

[@ruud1025]

I agree with your thinking. Maybe CIG will balance multicrew ships to be more durable and also have bigger firepower buffers (less wep overheat, more rpm). Just think of the xeno idris, they made it have insane turret projectile speed and rpm.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

those are how turrets should be!

[@Ogata123]

What happened to the interview you and space tomato did? Cant find it

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Homie believes random stuff he reads on the internet over his personal experiences with somebody whom he spoke to for over an hour. Dont worry video will come back.

[@518UN4]

My hope is that they'll start buffing bigger ships now and that they only waited for engineering gameplay and fire to come online to prevent them from being too powerful in the current environment. I can say that playing the engineering mode was one of the most fun experiences I had in game, both as part of the crew and as a Gladius pilot. It can enrich all aspects of space combat if done right And 1 + 1 already equals 3. 1 player = 1 big bug/hour 2 players = 3 big bugs per hour

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

LOL okay well your equation on 1+1=3 makes far more sense than mine in terms of SC. Once again Fran has corrected me.

[@asog88]

Preach!

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Whoa! I never saw one of these before. Thank you, but remember this is 100% for fun, information, and a hobby. YT is not my job. But thank you anyway, I'll pick up a drink with it. :)

[@asog88]

@@BuzzCutPsycho 100% I figured it was more impactful than “🙏”

[@sudonix5923]

I still listen to and watch your content, bud. I like your take on SC. Anything outside of that is moot to me. Dont ever stop being you.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I been me for a long time. Aint ever gonna change brother. ;)

[@dean8367]

It feels like they're trying to run before they can walk then we pay the bills and we eat the dirt when it falls flat on its on face.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

They need way more money and it shows.

[@DeepRunner1-y1l]

From what I understood of listening to CIG was eventually small fighters would be almost harmless to bigger ships,via damage put out to armor and shields of larger ships not being able to be damaged enough by small ships and the larger size guns have devastating consequences to smaller ships.So in essence a size one or two or even a three would do damage but it would be negligible to the armor and regeneration rate of larger shields remember armor is not really in the game now and every ship has armor but in differing amounts,small ships little to none.Example Carrack against a Arrow or Titan avenger,The weapons literally won't be able to pernitrate the hull armor and the damage output can't get past the energy shields.100k shields verses a small ship putting out what 1800 to 3200 dps now subtract the armor from the dps might be as high as 50 % or more,your shields regenerate faster than the damage they can do,So this mean larger ship engagements with multi crew ships to take down bigger ships that's not to say 15 small ships can't hurt the bigger ship but it will be like fleas on a dog,irritating but little to no real damage over time,but three shots from a size 7 gun to your Arrow and your done.An idris won't even notice tiny fighters later in the game,but 5 hammerheads will get there attention or a Polaris.Great topic BTW thank you for the video,we will see what the future holds and I can't wait for it.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

You're correct and the idea is they may essentially be harmless eventually but it hasn't been that way In over 10 years now lol

[@bjordan429]

9:25 - As a Redeemer fanboy, I can only imagine that it would be disheartening. As it is now, I havent gotten anyone to crew the turrets for well over a year. Small ships can ruin my day since the shields still dont seem to cover my tail fins.. Its the first thing to go....like a Challenger canopy in Elite. When ever I fly it with friends, its because I want a challenge or practice, and its me solo'ing it in a group anyways (lead by a solo'd Corsair, funny enough). This is better survival for me as we become multiple large threats, and the Corsair can cover my tail. Also, when I did have a crew, ballistics ran dry before the first fight was over because my crew couldnt hit anything and had poor trigger control. And earning the money for Galdereens took some time. 9:45 - Not optimistic that this will happen...They added sniper glint, then followed with a video about how important effort v. reward is. I think it's all compartmentalized in their balance dept. Personnel weapons are balanced to personnel weapons like CoD; Fighters are balanced against fighters; and multicrew are not balanced, and just there to fund money. I see no concept of combined arms in decision making. The area denial of the Ballista isn't there. And hell, we still have that quote by Jared where the team unironically didnt understand why people are asking for vision assist at night. I genuinely wonder if they hire anyone that understands warfare, and I predict EW, and hacking will just be dropped form the promises in the future because of it. 10:00 - I wasnt excited for the firefighting video. I ran a fire team on a US Cruiser...there was a lot that worried me. I commented in that video if there was a go fund me to send the team to a 2-day shipboard fire trainer. Their comments told me that none of them have dealt with fire; probably not even a campfire. It's all Hollywood, and agree with you, it looks VERY taxing. Your opening lines were perfect; watching CIGs video, all I could think was that they are still being shot at. So do I hire someone whos job is to just sit? Or are they going to make this so common that you question how the human race made anything seaworthy in the future? It's like a Dnd buddy of mine whose only experience with fire was media when he was in California. We soon traded out all our fire spells and never even used torches, as everything lead to a forest fire killing a city. But at least he could understand why we needed darkvision...

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

1. Corsair or Connie in formation covering each other is very powerful and sadly better than any redeemer. 2. So as somebody who did damage control on a real ship I can see why this all looks so insane to you. Its another case of cig fluff and graphics over good gameplay. 3. I don't hold out for the balance either. Honestly this point multicrew is so bad I would settle for ai crew to handle the boring crsp

[@supraeric]

Cig needs to step up and give these ships a bump in power

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

They will step up and make us pay for new ships that is for true. ;)

[@sebastiancoar1991]

CIG needs to implement a player job board, for players looking to hire other players to crew their large vessels. I feel that right now CIG's main stumbling block is their lack of cooperative & competitive multiplayer mechanics/content.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

That would be great and something that this game needs. Player job postings would help a lot.

[@lordseptomus441]

no.1 redeemer fan here. I fully agree with all this.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

based

[@Stormyy6310]

I 100% agree, when they said fires would be coming in 4.0 my reaction was "great, multicrew ships are going to be even harder to efficiently play with now" and I'm glad you share this sentiment, truthfully I think some elements of this playerbase (namely the ones who've spent a lot of money on big ships) do not actually look seriously as to what will happen if CIG doesn't act (ie everyone in a light fighter dumping on big ships cuz it's the meta and boom you have E:D 2.0 and a broken game) and are stuck believing in what the concept is and not what the reality of the game is. As a Polaris owner I know some people are going to be very disappointed when it comes out even if they fully crew it, I personally will not be because I know what I'm getting into but I'm willing to bet there will be a lot of people with a shocked pikashu face when they get their hands on it

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

As a Polaris owner you are pretty mature to understand their position. The best thing for those of us who do not have orgs or a lot of friends would be NPC crews. Yet more Jesus tech.

[@Stormyy6310]

@@BuzzCutPsycho exactly, npcs are potentially the solution (potentially because in reality this doesn't fix the issue that multicrew ships are not force multipliers and are very weak) but they aren't coming in a very long time since CIG barely talks about them. I think the best and permanent fix would be adopting the ideas presented in strongback6550's comment (the copilot target lock guy) however there's no way CIG actually does any of this since it requires a functionning game and it would alleviate too much of the tedium, oh well I got side-tracked...

[@Arias1101]

Playing in a group of two people in Star Citizen right now indeed feels like playing with half the fire power, for half the rewards... Having at least twice the fire power would be a good start.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Yup, force multiplication would go a long way. Instead you are just fodder for solo ships. A free multi-kill.

[@1scrub2]

So much will change wildly. They are working along parallel development streams. Armor and shield scaling and immunities aren't in, Maelstrom, engineering and meshing isn't in, tying it together. When it's done a hammerhead will be a terror for even a squadron of fighters. That's the stated goal. So multi crew ships interiors and activities can't really be evaluated, it's still on the assembly line.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

But you would think the absolute core basics of what makes multi-crew alluring would be in. I get it, it isn't all in, but that isn't an excuse not to have some functional and effective version of it in now. A simple turret buff would go a long way for example.

[@MoonshineAnimations]

I don't know who this number 1 redeemer fan is, but I wanna know him. I wanna be friends with him.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

They may show up in the comments. They have an anime avatar like you too.

[@MoonshineAnimations]

@@BuzzCutPsycho oh! They are my kin ahhaa

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Love your animations btw. I'm very envious of your talent and think you're blessed to have the ability and drive to do that.

[@MoonshineAnimations]

@@BuzzCutPsycho thank you ahaha. It's what I do for a living. Thank you for all your SC tutorials. It's helped me and my friends alot!

[@laughablehalo6202]

Ships like the Idris or Polaris showing up should make the player think "shit i need more ordinance, not maybe after 15 minutes of power to guns i can kill it." Turrets should be terrifying to any fighter, and the addition to armor in the game should prevent fighters from punching to far up in their respective weight class.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Preaching to the choir brother

[@kevinm3751]

What I dont want to see is metal burning like wood and that is exactly what we are getting! Coming from a military background and firing hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammo, hundreds of grenades and other ordinance I only saw one time where a rocket launcher caught the wood pallets on fire. NEVER once did shooting any gun EVER start a fire on the wooden bunkers we made to train on. Yet here in this game all it takes to start metal on fire is a few random placed rounds! This does not even relate to the worse arcade game! So much for the game based on reality and physics that Chris promised us!

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Does this mean quantum fuel melts steel beams?

[@hb7of9]

Have not even watched it, but I already agree!!

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Oh well I still value your opinion even if you DID NOT agree. :)

[@silverslime_]

totally agree, just commenting to participate in making your voice louder

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Much appreciated. Going to do one on the redeemer changes next.

[@silverslime_]

@@BuzzCutPsycho and I just watched 3 of your vids on master modes and am going to do it again on each one, I'm waiting for that redeemer vid cuz I don't know what happened to it but I'm interested

[@Henkums]

Very good take, fully agree. They need to nerf single seat fighters, especially the F7 and F8, they are way to powerful for the good of the game and then buff multicrew ships but at the same time remove the access to the main armament from the pilot. Maybe give them 2xS2 guns and that's it so they can atleast defend themselves a tiny bit. The big guns have to be gunner seat only or else they will be too powerful. Conny example:pilot 2xS2, maybe S3 and the gunners get 2x S5 each but with damage buff and drastically increased range 5km minimum

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Agreed. I wanna see pilots get less firepower and turret gunners get more, better firepower. With guns that ACTUALLY HIT.

[@matthewfletcher4627]

What you're saying, is bring more people to make your ship better, don't bring more people to stop it from being bad. Turrets being stonk!!! = more people in turrets Increased Torpedo success if you have a dedicated torpguy who can do tracking gameplay to bypass the countermeasures

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

That is a good way of putting it. I am going to use your example from now on and give you credit. Bless you.

[@hiphopgrinch]

Corsair is the upper limit of a "multi-crew" ship that's worth it. All the pilot controlled firepower actually makes it viable. It's why I pledged for one as soon as I saw it, I had to have it. Otherwise, I stick to single seat ships.

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

what a shame that all the turrets on the corsair are peashooters in comparison to the pilot-controlled guns.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I love the Corsair but for all the wrong reasons. It is the only one that "works" but it is, as the cat man stated, due to the forward firepower.

[@thechroniclesofcriss942]

@@BuzzCutPsycho so I am now known as "the cat man"... this is funny to me. 👍

[@blamsmith]

Unfortunately we just gotta wait, at the moment their working on tech. Eventually when all the bits and bobs are in the game we can hope they balance it all. Just an aside... Vent the air from your ship before combat; no fire to put out.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I get waiting. And ship venting is totally what people will do. No point to fire.

[@TKanal3]

i dont get why they cant just make turret based guns way stronger. It makes perfect sense lorewise too (EVENTHO THAT DOESNT EVEN MATTER)

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

They can. And should. But have not. They should have more range accuracy and velocity.

[@LucidStrike]

The CIG devs working on engineering / fire emphasized that they held back on the complexity because all the complexity in the game can compound and potentially get out of hand in any given moment otherwise. And it's already been communicated that they're focusing on making multiceew much more formidable. So..., yeah, they already know. Gonna be in fits and spurts tho, so full of awkward phases.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

S3 shields regenerating at all times + turret weapons being higher velocity and more accurate would help for now imo

[@Karackal]

Nothing to add, you said it all already.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Well I still appreciate the comment.

[@machoalright]

I absouluutly is worth it. Its gonna enhance the gameplay. people always complain there is nothing to do and not you can do something in your ship. or let people check the compoments. And after the armor is in, you might rethink about the fighters be able to kill a big ship. now you need another big ship to kill the other. But people still have to come to this realisation that is comming as well. Unfortunally people can not see that far ahead.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I am all for the stuff you mentioned I just want the multi-crew to actually be powerful to offset the extra work.

[@machoalright]

@@BuzzCutPsycho Ok, where does the concern come from? I mean the fire seems legit to have some hands on for the crew. you know there are people actually waiting for this stuff? Same goes for enginereing. maybe you dont like it, but the good thing in star citizen, there are many people who do. And that goes with all the professions in star citizen. Anyone who even thinks DOAM is not comming, is fooling himself. This because we have those spacedoctors ingame. And what use do they have if we can just respawn without any concequence? And that goes for all the other professions. There must be an need to make it work. And for now, SC is now concentrating on combat. Either we like or not. That has imo to do with this SQ42 that should come out soon-ish. But for me i am looking forward to do besides all the turret also other jobs onboard. And they do have impact. but i would rather see this armour come in first before the fire and engineering. that are my 2 cents on this. sorry for the long letter :)

[@takealready]

First, I agree with you 100% @BuzzCutPsycho. HOWEVER! What does Chris Roberts think? I think Chris Roberts' rule of cool is causing gameplay mechanics to conflict with each other. Just because it looks cool doesn't mean it should be in the game. If everyone in a 400i is busy fighting fires and doing engineering gameplay to keep the ship operational, who is shooting back at the attacker?

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I am totally fine with the CR rule of cool if the cool is tied to the balance and fun. I do not think they need to be mutually exclusive. And I am sure CR has no idea who I am sadly.

[@MagnaRads]

Same reasons they want an online game with every player in their personal hangar 😂

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

hey cant get camped in those hangers right

[@taxtilion2229]

I am commenting before ive even seen the whole video but i think some ship armors just negates shots from small craft which will be the point of the big ships.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

At some point that may happen. Maybe.

[@asog88]

Turrets need a huge buff. They need to move faster and their auto aim needs to aim way quicker. Multi crewed ships should be frightening. And THEN the needed maintenance of the ships will even them out

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

100% THIS

[@piedpiper1172]

Literally all it takes is adding flak as exclusive to crewed turrets and increasing all current turret weapons by 1-2 sizes, that’s it. These two changes would transform the game over night and finally put us in a place to begin seeing how all of the ships in the game interact. From there a few pilot systems need to be tuned down (Corsair pilot guns down 1 side, Sentinel EMP moved to turret control, etc). But literally all we need is flak and turret upsizing to get rolling. The 3.24 notes show serious uses of the armor damage reduction factor in combination with hull HP buffs, so they can clearly get the ships to a straight forward #players x (standard 1 seat eHP value), and balance from there. Perhaps the most infuriating part is their change to weapon dispersion in 3.24. They clearly recognize that dispersion is the secret to balance for their game, but they’ve used it to…. Make single seat fighters even better at kiting and defeating large multicrew ships. Give us flak before the community demands you utterly kill my beloved fighter gameplay. The most valuable resource in a multiplayer game is human time. Everyone’s time is precious and everyone’s time should be treated as such. We have numbers to quantify this-one player brings a certain average amount of dps and shield/hull-just apply that scale to multicrew ships, with a slight premium. Imo, the premium should go up as more crew are required. Ex: Let’s take as the gold standard for 1 player’s worth of DPS, Utility, & Survivability. A Vanguard should have ~2.1 that, when crewed. (+.05 per crew premium) A Zeus ~3.25 (+.08 pcp) A 4 person Redeemer ~4.4 (+0.1 pcp) A 7 person Hammerhead ~8.0 (+0.125 pcp) It is literally just numbers in a spreadsheet. The only “difficult” part is adding a visual for flak explosions (which they have from movies and apparently faked demos now almost 12 years old!) and coming up with some conversion to convert “agility eHP” into “shield/hull eHP.” But, they really, really should already have a rough equation for that considering they already have agile and slow ships in the game. Literally all we need to get the game into a semi-viable state for all ships is flak, turret upsizing, and a few more edits to eHP values. It’s not hard. It doesn’t need new systems. It doesn’t require reworks of any ships or major new assets. It’s just values in data tables they’ve already got. They constantly tell us “it’s an alpha” for why things are jank, but never use that to just… try things. It’s an alpha-that’s why our new flak cannons have the same visual model as normal cannons. Tier zero implementation. It’s an alpha-that’s why the guns in crewed turrets are visually too small for now. Tier zero immune ration. It’s an alpha-that’s why hull, armor, shield, and mobility values are receiving pretty frequent and large value adjustments.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Flak would 100% help, as would having turrets just fire more accurately and at higher velocities!

[@piedpiper1172]

@@BuzzCutPsycho An in-game demonstration of how the pip is confused by rolling would also improve the player base’s gunnery by about 2x. Too many people aim right at the pip on long shots, but the pip can’t predict roll, so unless you take a guess at the enemy’s movement you’ll never ever hit them. Higher velocity would help some sure, but unless you make them hitscan, it won’t solve it at kiting range. Hence me eternally beating the flak drum. Flak is a weapon they promised to add, it’s the only fundamental element of their WW2 sandbox that’s missing, and it’s literally the direct solution to their problem. It’s okay for the pip to miss a little if you fire exploding rounds. The better you are at leading the target, the more flak will hit the fighter. It raises the skill floor (aiming at pip will still generate some hits) but preserves a skill ceiling (correctly leading the pip will generate more hits).

[@baileyspringer1896]

Eventuality we will get ai, but for optimization reasons it will be people try to feild the most ships. I think we need ai and fighter weaponry to not work on large ships or be extremely ineffective. I would also like cig to stop making crew positions that are just hitting one button just to punish the large ship

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I hope my AI crew also stands on chairs

[@baileyspringer1896]

@@BuzzCutPsycho preferably in the T position or they are going out the air lock.

[@JohnFromAccounting]

Multicrew seems like it will work well at scale. Having a fully crewed Idris would be a great evening for everyone. Having 3 people on a Cutlass Black? Absolutely not worth it. Medium size ships are going to be mostly dead by release. Supposedly, when armour will be released, lower sized weapons won't actually do damage to high tier ships like an Idris. This provides value by being practically immune to the most common form of threat. Medium ships will never have this benefit, and will therefore be the most vulnerable and the least scalable.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Those medium size ships will never compete with the smaller, more agiles, or the bigger, more durable. It's a bad design. Oh well.

[@novalis791]

People get caught up into PVP vs PVE gameplay, but for me the real problem is single seat ship gameplay versus multicrew gameplay. I feel like there are many solutions for multi-crew gameplay; but CIG is still afraid to flip the switch against rule by single PVP fighter. Simple fixes center around the co-pilot style seat; if someone is sitting in a second ship seat they should be able to greatly increase the shield strength, energy weapon strength, and turn on AI defenses (the capacitors on larger ships should have advantages). It shouldn't take ace skill to ward off a lone fighter chasing behind a multi-seat ship; using rear facing turrets. It should be a dumb move for most lone fighters to chase a multicrew ship with turret gunner(s). Fighters should be more fragile to ballistics; small shields should have a lot more wear and tear once they get depleted or overcharged for minutes. Fighters should have their range greatly reduced; increasing their dependence on carriers or having to rule only a small area. I'd be OK with fighters allowed to abuse multicrew ships as they do today if refuel/repair options were much more scarce on planets/moons/stations. Allowing pirates to repair/re-arm at mining stations should be prohibited in Stanton; unless they get out on foot and take over the location. Grim Hex should be their only refueling station outside another ship's help. This alone would bring weight to choices; and improve the use of tactics and strategy. Example: a fighter might be able to reach Microtech from Grim Hex; but won't have the range to get back home, or berserk a long time and continually abuse folks. Eventually there should be a cost to all the easy abuse; like running out of resources without ship-to-ship help. Gangs of gank fighters should take a long time to refuel by Starfarer; not 10 seconds at a mining station.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Think CIG favors the single seat fighters more than the big ships due to SQ42 being fighter focused?>

[@kyelsavage6296]

Why would an engineer design a space ship with such highly flammable materials? This just seems stupid to have a fully engulfed ship. I can understand components possibly being somewhat flammable. Maybe some types of cargo, or large amounts of ammo. But seriously?

[@hamitron]

@@kyelsavage6296 I'm gonna suggest heat insulation, just to try keep it feeling real 😉

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

No idea. I think it is just for gameplay reasons. Realism left the game ages ago.

[@melsy2]

Wow wow wow, slow down there! You're making too much sense. These concepts will make the Devs heads explode. God forbid if they make this alpha fun, and stop feeding us hopium.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I will never slow down. I must continue on.

[@P5ykoOHD]

Agreed, the only reason a ship should explode is if it's fuel tanks get hit by something that can ignite them, or if it get's a massive size torpedo up the rear. Look at the war in Ukraine footage, that's the only reason tanks are exploding.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

Yup. And even for gameplay purposes I would make those explosions rare!

[@andrewkok3467]

CIG will continue with the status quo. They have never mentioned the god mode of unlimited power plants WITH agility/speed. MM did not affect power plant output, so multi-crew experience is not improved.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

They are obsessed with "punching up" and it shows. Your comment has hit the nail on the head with that in more or less words.

[@KaybeCA]

Hey man, quick note: CIG devs have, on numerous occasions, stated that large multicrew ships are currently much too weak vs smaller ships. They've stated that the end goal is to make large ship shields and armor WAY stronger than they are currently. So in the end, I think there will be one significant difference in gameplay between small single pilot ships and large multicrew ones: single pilot ships will have to content with more *external* threats, whereas multicrew ones need to ensure the *interior* remains in good working shape. So single pilot ship skill is in their ability to dodge and fly, whereas large multicrew ships will be about maintaining relays and dealing with fires. Of course, that is what I WANT to see, but hey, it's CIG we're talking about, right?

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

They can say it but the most basic change to fix it would be to buff turrets right now. Most absolute basic. And make S3 shields regen even under fire. That is simple code change.

[@KaybeCA]

@@BuzzCutPsycho Buffing turrets is indeed easy. Make sure they keep their full rate of fire while in gimballed mode ... and more importantly, considerably lower scatter to make them more precise. Turrets that can't reliably land shots at more than 500m distance are useless. I disagree with making S3 shields recharge constantly, but I do believe both shields and hull should get a strong resistance modifier against smaller weapons. Big ship shields should require big ship guns.

[@dimitrilax3612]

i welcome the fire in the game Especially when it takes a serious beating after a Thrilling fight! but, i can already see the kamikaze pilots Ruining my day on my 600 i or Connie Taurus. the ship shield and armor for those size needs to have a major buff ! I'm talking about if they ram me the hit the shield only and need the turrets automated which i honestly think they will screw that up with their theory "computer think slower then humans in this universe making them dog water to kill anything."

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

The ramming is, has been, and seemingly always will be a problem. Enjoy getting slammed by an Arrow only to have your ship combust!

[@Mace1000S]

Micromanagers, and yes men game developers that sole focus is to make something different in every aspect. It’s looking worse as the years roll past. Slow, tedious, clunky with what seems to be missed by CIG is many others before them have figured out the best, fastest and most fun way to do some in game things in a game. But the scary thing is that they can’t seem to make anything work smooth. Or fix anything in a solid way. Years and years of game breaking bugs with very little true game content and no real fixes that stick. Systems that come and then go along with systems on top of each other. You can hope, want and wish but if you stand back and look at it all it’s iffy at best.

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

The drive to be different at all costs and reinvent the wheel is the biggest issue here. One of, anyway. I am glad I am not the only one who feels that way. Sometimes the best thing to do is learn from others.

[@eldersoul9694]

Honestly, even Star Wars Galaxies Online "Jump to Lightspeed" (way older than even SoT) offered a better Multicrew experience than SC does now. It's a shame... cause it's all already been made, and better. It's not a sin to sometimes copy existing gameplay, CIG. You don't have to re-invent every single detail for your "game".

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

I heard a lot of that. SWG did a lot right, and people don't get that these days. SWG was king.

[@noneplaceholder9975]

The Retaliator pilot being unable to fire torpedoes is unimaginable to me. I already find it scandalous that it doesn't have forward facing guns it just doesn't make any sense from a design standpoint. Not being able to fire ordnance on top of that would make the experience that much more painful for the pilot. Now I agree completely with the fact that CIG has no idea how to make multicrew fun and relevant. Also onboard computing when ?

[@BuzzCutPsycho]

If the game had more depth with multi-crew mechanics, the pilot wouldn’t mind not having the ability to perform the simple task of locking on and firing. Control, positioning, evasion, and countermeasures would be sufficient for them. Star Citizen isn’t that game. This is similar to why people enjoy driving tanks (not just gunning) in Hell Let Loose or Squad, or the Warthog in Halo. Multi-crew gameplay has to be fun and rewarding; right now, it isn’t. And let’s be real-launching missiles in this game is pretty bland too. ;)

[@noneplaceholder9975]

I agree with you on a gameplay standpoint. But in terms of design it doesn't make sense for a ship to have like 5 or 6 turrets and no guns for the pilot. Truth be told I wouldn't mind so much only being a pilot for the ship if having more people onboard made me more useful but the fact of the matter is that it doesn't. Even with a competent and coordinated crew multicrewing isn't that good except in niche cases. And making a comparison to Sea of thieves, even though I dislike the game, is pretty damning for Star Citizen and its multicrew experience.