Drake Ironclad and Ironclad Assault Review with brand new info Star Citizen 3.24

[@Teejay82_]

The "Command module" on the IC Makes zero sense and should be removed IMO.. The IC has a proper brigde per consept... make a very small 6-7seater ala pieces escape craft and place it right behind the brigde instead of having that terribly placed tumor on the side

[@RedJay]

Agreed

[@heathmorris6100]

The command module/escape craft its just super forced and contrived. Theres zero reason why we shouldnt be able to use the command deck and tractor beam room to fly and command the ship

[@RedJay]

I feel the same way. It wouldn't be an issue for me if it had pilot station in the Command Deck mid-topship.

[@rooster1012]

There is 1 major reason and that is that CIG said you can not.

[@MatthewGleed]

CIG seems to hate the concept of a sandbox game and love contrived design choices. At every turn they are forcing their players to play the game and use things the way they want you to.

[@Teejay82_]

@@MatthewGleed They can only force you if you let them :) If you dont like it, dont play it and dont fund it.. Thats the most effective way corporations are forced to change

Honestly think it's one of the coolest features... imagine you get pirated and manage to get away with the command module. They cannot move the ship, which makes it suuuper dangerous for them to stick around. You could get back there with reinforcements or just have reinforcements go straight there. You could even tell the whole server they can have the cargo if they can get it. Also you could get stranded with the command module. Either way I think it creates a real sense of danger, which makes for some very interesting game play opportunities imo.

[@Pappy_1775]

I'll be honest, this might be the first ship in SC I buy two of. I can see good and very different uses for both the Cargo and Assault versions.

[@RedJay]

They nailed concept on both ships and made a true variant that is different enough in capability and role that it makes backers have to choose - and that's tough for us especially when everyone has to be thinking into the future.

[@robertcaie8157]

I picked up a base IC during ILW. I like the concept, maaaaaybe upgrade to the assult, but i'll hold off until it's closer to the end of development

[@RedJay]

Understandable - guarantee a ship this large and with all the high speed revisions it has had it will change at least a bit more by time it rolls out down the line.

[@recoandmidnight1555]

What’s funny with the ironclad is that if it’s in concept why is it soooo in depth then others? Hmmm 🤔 just saying. Cause it looks like it’s more finished than what it should be. Just saying but it’s my opinion.

[@RedJay]

It probably is - the ship is going to be used as a kit to work on the Kraken and parts of the Cat pass. Not sure if it's a this year thing, but certainly sooner then anticipated is possible.

[@asideoftoastgames]

really excited for this ship. i almost dare say it may be a better multicrew ship with your friends than the carrak. more vehicles, more room to do weird things, lots of cargo that's usable! like you said this with an ursa is a fantastic combination. i also agree with you that the firebird was a waste of resources, there's already so many fighter ships in the game did we really need another?

[@bestLetsplayer]

if only the bridge werent so small, that breaks it for me

[@RedJay]

Command Deck space needs to be the bridge. And I think CIG missed a neat opportunity here for multi-role seats as in the tractor beam seats can flip a switch and become co-pilot and engineering seats while underway not working close up on a wreck etc.

[@mur4s4m3]

Somewhat "hangar"... 7.5m height, you won't put much in that. Love how ppl say it's "Liberator killer" when Lib does what Ironclad doesn't and inversely. Not my shit tbh, aesthetically looks like a brick. Feature-wise, it's a bigger Caterpillar. Agree with u Assault wins it. Have maintenance, more firepower, still some cargo capabilities. Only downside is the sheer amount of crew required to have optimum use of it. Didn't get it for that very matter. Already considering ditching the Polaris for that very reason (waiting until release + Engineering/Resource Management to assess)

[@RedJay]

Ironclad Assault brings most to the table overcoming the ships shortcomings. Crew honestly is going to be around 3-4 regardless if that is optimum or not, and that is just based on average Orgs and folks willing to crew ships together numbers I see time and time again... but that does not mean it won't be supporting a few other ships in a fleet to do contracts or fight other Orgs etc.

[@First_Chapter]

Went for an IC Assault to complement, hopefully, a Crucible and Liberator for vehicle-moving and repair, not with an eye to container cargo. It's a "hopefully" here because all three ships are years away and current designs can change.

[@igamewhenimbored7696]

Crucible is definitely years away. Ironclads and Liberator will come way before. Respectively, it's a box with thrusters and a platform with thrusters. They just have to finish focusing on RSI ships :/

[@RedJay]

Lib will be needed for Pyro, but who knows how soon it will be out post Pyro. Polaris is just entering deeper parts of ship pipeline and new target release is at or pre-IAE this year which should help with the RSI ship deliveries (much like Ironclad is being used for larger multi-crew Drake ships as a kit, Polaris parts are being used for other larger RSI ships).

[@g8trdone]

Man. Leave it to Drake to build the verse's whaler of choice. These things catching dead whales dropping out of the sky, itll be a massacre. Space whales extinct in 3 months.

[@RedJay]

If there will be an whaling vessel, trust Drake to make it haha. FWIW I'll be hunting potential whalers alongside Crusader Security because Stormwals are neat. CIG - this is the kind of gameplay players want for ship PVP - not reheated events...

[@omnipresencetv8929]

ironclad is gonna be the load/unload king because you can't beat the old "THATS RIGHT IT GOES IN THE SQUARE HOLE" method beacuse it looks to me you can just throw it in the ship like a bucket

[@TemplarGuardian]

A little conflicting info in JumpPoint. They shared the sizing in the Q&A yet talk about putting a 400i into the cargo area

[@RedJay]

Welcome to my evening. I did my best to take the details from Jump Point filtered by Q&A and some specs info to compare it to. It's... a complicated ship in details in this early stage.

[@TemplarGuardian]

@@RedJay I’m really just looking forward to an operating base for a vulture and both this and the Liberator may fit that but it’s impossible to tell for now, but it’s smaller than the 400i

[@RedJay]

@@TemplarGuardian Lib has easier geometry to fit ships on its top deck, but they are more exposed and Lib has less turrets, espeically if you do not count the PDS turrets

[@TemplarGuardian]

@@RedJay It seems like the Vulture is very technically not going to fit on a standard XS landing pad, but the gear does, so I remain hopeful it will stick!

[@buhatkj]

i dunno man, i don't see the attraction of the sabre raven... Ive never had a ship with an EMP, is it really that good? Im not sure why the firebird wouldnt sell well, apart from perhaps the lack of flexibility with the missile loadout. Id have like to be able to swap out the racks for different sizes and types of missiles.

[@RedJay]

It's the lack of flexibility on a missile boat with such weak missiles in capability and size along with the fact everyone was expecting a Sabre Raven with body kit and ended up with its EMP stripped for missiles. The EMP it packs is incredible tool against ships with size 1 power plants.

[@FoxVelox222]

This was the first I've heard of someone not liking the firebird. I really enjoy it. Its fast and brings a little variety in missile boats.

[@RedJay]

When everyone was expecting a Sabre Raven with a bodykit, it was a letdown for those who wanted a Sabre Raven with a bodykit. Does not help missiles continue to be in a rough spot right now especially when the server FPS is low.

[@mur4s4m3]

Your Firebird point feels very biased. Objectively, selling an almost 200$ low effort variant to people that can't afford a Raven is a revenue success, period. CIG has already stated focusing on (imho lower effort, hence higher income to time spent ratio) variants and vehicles: first one is just modifying existing base. Second is making a tiny vehicle which production time is far lower, but historically showed concrete value doesn't justify the actual sell price (even more so when checking in-game prices for these) Out of that, more or less half the ships (both concept and flyable) are combat-oriented. Adding another one changes nothing People will just mald because "WHERE MA SHIP, REEEE" At the end of the day, aside from releasing the game, a company goal is to make profit. Otherwise, the actual game will never come to fruition You make profit by saving time and resources. Along with this (variants and vehicles), factorizing the assets of a manufacturer to release a capital + associated subcapitals (RSI), missions reworked into "reusable blocks" If you ever developped, it's writing a function or a lib instead of copy-pasting bespoke code over and over. Even for stuff like Engineering / Resource Management / Life Support / Master Modes (where you have to do a pass on most if not all existing ships) it makes sense to limit the amount of new flyable ships and heading towards that direction

[@RedJay]

CIG uses small vehicles and ships as projects to train up new Devs. For better or worse there is big spikes in backer funds that come in the door for a new ship concepts or straight to flyable. I don't think backers only respond to combat vessels, but there are niche indy ships that by their nature make less of the community interested in overall, but we do need at various sizes to realize gameplay loops. Many multi-role ships that can be used for combat, logistics, and/or pure industry at different times are extremely desirable for many backers. WB on Firebird is 170 USD and 185 USD credit, while we do not know how much it will be buyable for in game eventually it is good to keep in mind for how much of a fleet value is tied up in a single fighter/determine value. For most it will be a CCU chain mid-point for near term fun.

[@davewills6121]

Not sure their an attractive pair, they do look thrown together, not that im complaining, yet like the majority of ships dropped of late, are just tacky cash-grabs, they'll appeal to a few, yet very little be be enthused about or to put on any ones bucket list. IC kitbashed....as are many, and at least 2 yrs away, we'll have all moved on by then.

[@RedJay]

For many it will be a buy in game or CCU later too ship and that's not a bad option. That being said concept sale had some good deals, in particular the 5 USD CCU on the Assault from the M2 on day one, that would help many to hold onto unapplied unless you like the ships loaners.

[@davewills6121]

@@RedJay Yeah, grabbed a couple myself along with the cargo, long way off though, CIG has far to much on their plate atm, especially with the Q1 deadline for SC. lets face it, the Liberator might as well not exist, not a single word, that is far more interesting imo. Kudos

[@paratrooperz1]

they will not ever sell a raven if you dont have one now you NEVER EVER have one they are not tradeable sellable or giftable. the raven is a tackle/stealth interceptor now they have a stealth missile launcher and lastly they will make the best ship, the stealth ship with a dampener and snare.

[@RedJay]

The Sabre Ravens with a body kit filling in the middle is what we are talking about here, in my eyes they are the same if they have same capabilities. Crewe said in SCL Live the variant they are teasing is the one community sas expecting. How close that statement will be to what we get is debateable as yes it glows green instead of thr bluish activation and color scheme traditional Intel Promo only Sabre Raven was setup with.

[@paratrooperz1]

@@RedJay what are you saying? your eyes mean nothing its the eyes of intel and its lawyers that matter. they cant sale a name of raven! this ravens description covers its loadout and look. they are already taking risk and pushing the envelope by having such a close look alike.... the fact they share stealth speed and agility i would sue a company that has made over 700 million and bring in about 600k a week. you wont get a ship named raven and it wont have an EMP for sale ever . every card has a promise printed with the code to claim. so not only do they break the contract with intel but also with every owner of a card!

[@simondolak6534]

No need to sub. It always show up somewhere for free

[@RedJay]

That's fair if your just interested in the publication - especially if you are not into PTU access, or already have Wave 1 access in another way, and do not feel the freebie each month adds enough value.

[@kratiz9418]

Great useful information, thanks ❤

[@RedJay]

Glad to help, enjoy your weekend!

[@Army2willis]

Set the record straight. Lets start with the ironclad. It has 6 crew quarters on the main deck with a bathroom and eatery the eatery follows the design that the cutter and Corsair have. The top room is the captains quarters ( it literally has a bathroom locker, and a bed. Complete with two large windows. I think a desk is needed to fill out the rest of the space. The command module ifbits anything like the cateripllar will ckme with an additional two minimum beds, a lower deck with view, bathrooms, small eatery, and small engineering spot as well. Being this game ne is almost twice the length of the cat's command module i think an additional two beds will be in this as well bringjng crew max to ten.( 6+4) As for the engine room there is nk way to get to the very bottom so either a ladder or a automatic fire suppression system is needed if things go awry. From my count, i saw 3 computers, two coolers, a battery, 2 powerplants, a jump drive( titled Jump Tech), a quantum drive, a radar, and a shield gen. Im assuming since all of these are blocks that the area will further be designed for the 4 separate shields etc. i believe there will be more components littered at the front as well as in the mule area as well requiring engineering to move about the ship. Based on the well designs of the Cutter, Corsair, ironclad(concept) kraken(concept) the Cutlass and Caterpillar living quarters are in deep need of redesign. Those 6 spots are also jot escape pods (drake dont do those) they are actually suit lockers and armory for crew like on corsair.

[@RedJay]

Right, I think the 6 slots are suit lockers next to the airlock due to Drakes interesting take on personal escape pods and also their argument will be Command Module with its regular seats and Jump Seats will act as an escape pod. Yes I believe Deck 4 is a Captain's Quarters as well - and it is a double edged sword as that takes away a lot of crew and services space but does of course raise the habs on board to 7 and give the ship owner a nice space with good view. Command Module on the Ironclad series is described by CIG to be limited range and capability, but some documentation is saying it is interchangeable with the Cat Module and multiple folks I've talked with describe changing out the module with the Cat model for different layout and capability. I do stress Ironclad is sold as more armored then the Cat, and I wonder if the modules also will have less hitpoints/armor when implemented though.