The Biggest FLAWS With Multi-Crew Combat In Star Citizen Currently

With the introduction of Master Modes in Star Citizen. We also go proper tuning for large ships that makes naval combat a reality now.
Despite the firepower large multi-crew ships bring to the game, there are still a lot of issues that CIG needs to address to close some balance gaps, particularly in PvP. In this video I cover these issues and talk about what CIG will be doing to address the problems going forward.
Watch my previous naval combat guide:
• Star Citizen FINALLY H...
~~~
Become a member and support the channel!
/ @hybridvaudio
Join the Discord!
/ discord
Looking for a disciplined, teamwork-oriented org to play SC with?
Apply to join The Forgotten Heralds today!
forgottenheralds.org
Interested in creating an account to play Star Citizen? Hold on there buddy! Be sure to use my referral code when you sign up and you will be given an additional 5000 credits which you can then use to buy extra gear for your character or ships!
Code: STAR-4L6V-VLWM
~~~
System specs:
GPU: RTX 4090
Mem: 64gb DDR5
CPU: i9-13900k
Storage: Gen5 m.2
TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 Intro
0:44 Current Misconceptions with Escaping
2:09 Weapon Tunings and Gunnery
4:18 Star Citizen Has Always Struggled With Turrets
5:22 Master Modes Has NOT Fully Address This Issue
5:51 Time To Kill Issues
6:33 Projectile Speeds And Weapon Specific Stats
9:13 ESP and Sensitivity Issues For Turrets
10:24 Why Are Weapons Being Rebalanced Again?
11:58 New Ship Weapons?
12:39 What Can Be Done To Fix The Problems?
18:15 Conclusion
22:55 Outro
#starcitizen #guide #forgottenheralds

[@HybridVAudio]

A note on turret ESP: There are some additional ESP tuning adjustments coming for 3.24 including new sliders to change them to taste. Multi-crew and naval combat has been interesting researching as a topic as of late. As you all know, I'm a big fan of multi-crew and naval warfare so it has been a blast seeing it shape up since the introduction of 3.23. Again, still some issues here and there, most notably with turrets but we will have to wait and see how CIG addresses the issues in 3.24 and beyond. Let me know how you have been enjoying multi-crew as of late. I recommend you check out my guide to naval combat in SC if you have not already seen it. kzbin.info/www/bejne/o4q5h6KYh9OmbKc Remember that teamwork is they key to long term success in such a complicated MMO like SC. If you are looking for a group of like minded individuals to take part in complex combat operations such as Naval Warfare. Be sure then to check out our Org The Forgotten Heralds. Visit forgottenheralds.org to apply today. - Become a member and support the show! kzbin.info/door/eSMtWcJwjm6Dj4GrWFngqAjoin Join the Discord! discord.gg/mRFMCANaCu See you all in the next one. o7

[@helloitsjay38]

Possibly unpopular opinion: soft death should be the normal death state for bigger ships and the should be repairable so there's an advantage to grouping up and coordinating. That wouls also making boarding more important.

[@bsquaredbundles]

Not unpopular at all I imagine. As engineering and maelstrom come into the game, hp-based ship deaths will be more and more replaced with system failures and ship disabling.

[@vik12D]

I think that's a pretty popular idea.

[@SakakiDash]

Its not unpopular

[@DeltaPhoenix180]

I've been saying they should bring back soft death the way it was initially. Didn't hard death immediately? Cool, now if you actually want to kill someone in there you're going to need to go in and kill them. Got a salvage ship? Cool, you can tear the ship apart around them, but keep in mind the salvage mechanics are very much early going and are likely to get more complicated.

[@astheworldlearns]

Agreed, however if I want to go in and rack up a higher crime stat by lobbing missiles on a downed ship to terrorize the crew inside, I should be able to.

[@vanguardgaming704]

I totally agree with that a single seater lone fighter should not be able to destroy a fully crewed bigger ship. ie. A single gladius destroying a fully crewed HH.

[@ddavis5442]

I'll second that but also add that a single gladious should not be able to kill a cat or other fully crewed multi-crew by staying far away. Or why have turrets? If defense was based on escorts, shouldn't all ships just not have turrets because there ineffective. Multi crew ships should have a modifier to out range any fighter class, all fighter classes should have gun range of 1k and below.

[@vanguardgaming704]

@@ddavis5442 I agree with this but small ships should still be able to out track big guns at close range. My issue is that one fighter being able to destroy a fully crewed bigger ship is just outlandish. Different weapons should have different rates of tracking. ie. repeaters should track better then cannons but cannons should out range repeaters if that makes sense. just my 2 cents :)

[@ddavis5442]

@@vanguardgaming704 I get when it comes to sts turrets, they should track slow, for example the Jav has both smaller and bigger turrets for each, the sts ones can't track fighters but the smaller ones can. Anything s5 and below should be able to track the nimblest fighter, honestly the only way a turret should be defeated is by overwhelming it. A turrets weakness is it can only track 1 target at a time. But yea s6 and above should be slow to turn. Anything less then that will just render turrets unusable, especially seeing the majority of large ships only have less than 5 turrets to defend its enormous size and bad field of view.

[@Casbelu]

I think you run into problems whenever you make absolutes like this. It obscures the question....WHO is in the multi crew, and WHO is attacking it. Crappy multi crew against an ace combat pilot? Combat pilot wins. Average multi crew against average combat pilot? Multicrew wins, of course. There should be no hard lines, everything should boil down to strengths and weaknesses. It would be like saying that in halo, you should never be able to kill a guy that has a shotgun up close using a dmr. Well.....thats a silly statement. Who are the players, and what is their skill with their respective weapons? The shotgun has the advantage, but if your really good with the sniper....watch out.

[@wafflesinsanity]

@@Casbelu I completely disagree. That's like saying a fishing boat with an M2 Browning and an ace boater should be able to take down a USN Destroyer (DDG). Not gonna happen. Once we get past size 3 ships (Cutlass Black, Freelancer, etc.) it's no longer about skill, it's about preparation and manpower. There is a certain point where it's no longer representative of your Halo example, because a DMR is still useless against a Scorpion. In this metaphorical Gladius vs a Hammerhead, skill expression on an ace pilot, against a ship literally designed to kill small fighter craft, would be taking out a turret so the torpedo from their Tali can make it in.

[@scribblescrabble3185]

"I don't need to kill you to win" something too many do not understand. If I complete my objective, it is a win. If surviving an encounter I didn't want do be a part of to begin with was my objective, running away is the win.

[@MrSolLeks]

I really hope there are some flack weapons with proximity fuses eventually, something that you can't put on a fighter, but will do a ton of splash damage too fighters which may not kill them but will ruin their components and weapons. I say this as someone who is mainly a fighter pilot.

[@undeadpeak]

Sometimes I feel old in this game when I remember the days that soloing a fitted hammerhead in a gladius was impossible with lasers as the shields regenerated faster then you could deal damage.

[@Dragon69FlyTeam]

hate to say it i liked the old days better than the sht we have now

[@arrclyde4325]

Who says that you should be able to pop a Cat with a Gladius, since you can't loot it anyway and there is no reason to ever attack a Cat with a solo Gladius. If you find that strange wait until physical damage and armor is in and small ships only having 1-4 size guns make even less damage to medium to large ships with a little armor. If people just want to pop ships for fun, there is AC for that. Everything else should have a reason and takes some effort. Like bringing the right tools for the job. And a solo Gladius is definitely not the right tool for a Cat.

[@user-tk5jx4ih4g]

A simple solution would be Turret version of guns or turret exclusive guns that can not be equipped on anything other than a turret. It's not even rocket science to do that. Giving turret weapons much faster projectile speeds or dedicated beams/pulse lasers that are hit scan would eliminate the problem of a single tiny fighter being unkillable for multicrew ships.

[@vik12D]

I suggested beams on Spectrum and a ton of people freaked out about hitscan. Spectrum was not a fan lol

[@user-tk5jx4ih4g]

@@vik12D I can already guess who the people are who are strictly against it. I personally don't see a reason not to have some amount of beams for anti fighter purposes.

[@simondolak6534]

Give turret additional perks for standard weapons. +(x)% to damage, distance, …. It do not need to create new weapon category

[@vik12D]

@@user-tk5jx4ih4g looks like a handheld beam weapon is coming with Pyro. Might lead to an antifighter version.

[@grast5150]

3:40 This is because all guns have built in dispersion or cone fire. This is just plain geometry. As I said below, small ship far away difficult to hit while same small ship can hit the large ship at the same range without much skill.

[@moppin]

I like the solution I've seen proposed to simply have turrets give their mounted weapons a buff to velocity and a buff to spread (better range and accuracy). Having bespoke "turrent only" versions of weapons is not a systemic solution and we'll see more "use the Idris CF-557s" type of issues if CIG goes down that path.

[@YourArmsGone]

I agree with a few exceptions. I think turrets should get a few dedicated weapons like Flak cannons.

[@Mike-zx7lq]

It makes sense to me that large ships can supply a ton more power for their turreted weapon systems than a small fighter can for its weapons, so there ought to be some kind of advantage gained from that -- more power per shot, more shots per unit of time. Maybe also the ability to more effectively resist "knockback" movement making the platform more stable (accurate). They could also apply the principle that turrets get way more power available to them, and just release some more unique weapons of normal sizes and abnormal power requirements -- so fighters can fit them too, but the requirements are very demanding for them making it less attractive, or requiring them to work the entire build around those weapons. Turrets could equip them without much concern, because their available power is simply huge.

[@harabecswurveweathers]

My biggest issue with Turret control is that the player's head moves faster than the turret when using a joystick, so you end up no being able to see anything if you don't use Mouse control for turrets. Its been an issue for a long time now and its kinda of kills the experience at least for me. I haven't been able to find a fix in the options.

[@herrmatthias4662]

you have to press freelook y (z) two times

[@wafflesinsanity]

You hit the nail on the head with many of these issues. I have a firm belief that none of this should be worked on until engineering and maelstrom are in play. Not to mention systems like Death of a spaceman as well. I think a lot of folks simply ignore features like those unless DIRECTLY related to ships and combat, but DoaSM will change how a lot of backers approach combat. More often people will engage only when there is more guarantee of victory or at least a guarantee of success in not dying. But CIG also has another issue, one you hit the nail on. Large ships still, despite all the changes, are destroyed too easy. No one is asking for something like the Caterpillar to be a warship, it's Freight first and foremost, same as the 'lancer MAX and other cargo ships. But what I don't understand is why something like the Caterpillar has less "hull points" than something like a Hull A. The "health" of a ship should be dictated almost completely by its mass, especially if we are to operate with maelstrom in mind in the future. It's wild to me that something the size of a Cat still has so few HP despite being an "armored" freight as originally proposed, (now that the Caterpillar MAX has been concepted, who knows.) The way TTK should work is simple. A ship with 8 people, should last 8+ times longer than a single person ship. A ship with 4 people should last 4 times longer, etc. Regardless of what people think about combat, unless CIG wants multicrew to actually be viable, they NEED to look at the TTK for larger ships. At a certain level it's not so much about "fun and engaging" combat as it is a respect for people's time. I mean, look at the game, no one in their right minds willy fly a Retaliator ever again now that it has less than 1/3rd the Hull Points and STILL needs 6+ crew. That is like asking your friends to waste their 2-3 hours playing. But that same number of players will more than willingly get into something like a Redeemer or a Hammerhead because it makes sense and has a chance, not a great change, but way more than a 'Tali, and this is coming from a Tali bag holder who had that ship for years dreaming it would become something better. (and it only got worse with modularity) Sure, there is some nuance to how this can be done, but anyone who has ever done multicrew combat knows how long it takes to get a crew together to man something like a Hammerhead and get it into a fight. Not to mention, after that Hammerhead dies, that is 6+ people who now have to reset everything. Unless they are up against another crew of 6+ players in ships specifically designed to take down a Hammerhead, (which means bombers and minelayers since a hammerhead should be nigh unkillable by a fighter squadron) the ship should be able to survive long enough just based on its size alone. Think of it this way. Once we get past size 5 ships, it's no longer about dogfighting. Those are naval ship to ship engagements. You will never see something like a USN DDG get taken down by a bunch of people in small fishing boats outrigged for combat. Honestly there should be some sort of weapon size limit on damage, like... a size 5 ship can only be damaged by a size 4 or higher weapon, let armor adjust that number up and down... Maybe tune it for shields, that a size 3 shield can only take damage from size 3 or larger. IDK, there are a million directions CIG can take this, but the short story is this... CIG needs to respect player time and investment. Larger ships should last (insert number of crew) times longer than (insert a similar number of single seat low investment ships)

[@Citizen-Nurseman]

We really do need a near hit scan, but low DPS weapon to pushish the fighters that sit at max range, wearing them down and forcing them away this would also be an idea anti-torpedo weapon We also need some better HUD work for turrets, e.g. targets outside of ur weapons range should be less bright Torpedos should have a different marker to missiles as a priority target We also should have markers showing if other turrets are targetting ur target The new gimbal modes were a fantastic addition to the turrets, but its only one part of the puzzle edit, we also need accross the board, but particularly for turrets, % loss of function with damage with turrets, that should be a huge HP pool, but as they get damaged have slower traversal rates etc rather tahn easily being destroyed additionally there need to be a solution for saving those turret gunners realistically, ideally at a certain point they should get incapped and automatically pushed back into the ship to get revived for example % damage = % function loss is imperative for the TTK to work, otherwise it'll always be a 'run away shields up and come back' game, each time that ship comes back it shoudl be less effective if you manage to do some damage to its power plant etc

[@smokeguru4107]

They could also deal normal damage, but just require insane power capacity to function, so fighters would only get a single shot or just straight up "not enough power" if you outfitted a ship like the F7C with just these weapons.

[@astheworldlearns]

There really doesn't feel like much you're doing when a gunner. It feels dull right now.

[@ashkelon03]

Weapons should be the same for ships or turrets, but, turret should have specializations, quick and snappy turret for anti fighter and point defense, slower turrets for cannons vs bigger ships. Size1 repeters in a normal poweret slot should have a optimal range of 500meters (just saying a number).. and the energy bolt disperse completely at 1,5k The same size1 repeters on a bigger ships with power to spare, could be configuret at the cost of more energy per shot, a more stable energy bolt, so a turret in this ships could engage at 2k for optimal damage, and interception of missiles and torps. This will generate bubbles of engagement, AA fighters fight at 1k bubble, medium size ships could engage with cannons at 5k and with repeters at 2k.. capital size should be engaging with cannons at 10k and repeters at 5k, yeah.. try to hit fighters at 5k.. but you could installs some flaks intest of cannons. (numbers are examples xD) But this should be an option, part of customization, not a inerint part of turret.

[@starkat70]

never played but quick question ..can you disable their engines by either shooting them or the area of the ship that controls the engines after loss of shielding if u have the ability to penetrate armor?

[@Amalgamotion]

While I'm pretty new still to the game compared to how long it's been out. I've had a easier time getting away in master modes. I was pretty worried about some cargo runs and it can be a trick to do it without taking much damage. But I bet there's a few gankers big mad I can just drop shield, soak a few shots and jump, what's a little torque imbalance on a big ship!? My starter was a Syulen! ha!

[@grast5150]

2:30 That is so wrong it is ridiculous. If you want multi-crew to be a thing, turrets have to be effective. Otherwise, we go back to 3.2 and before when turrets were useless, and everyone just drove their own ship. Let's not even talk about this opinion makes the Hammerhead a useless ships. The issue is geometry. Distance plus dispersion plus size of ships means the current dispersion cone for turrets is too large. A fighter can hit a hammerhead or large ship at 10K about 80% of the time. While a turret can hit a cutlass at 10K 15-18% of the time, and when you take into MM reducing speeds. A large or medium ship can never close the distance. This is the issue. CIG needs to make turret effective at range. So either project speeds of turrets combined with smaller dispersion needs to be a thing OR something in between. CIG already setup the fire rates meta for fixed versus gimbal. Why not make a special mode for Turrets which speeds up the projectile and lowers dispersion at the cost of Firerate. This would allow turrets to engage at the 10K ranges with a stable ship. In my opinion, If turrets are useless, then multi-crew is dead.

[@Bigpopp1]

How do you turn on the auto targeting when in a turret? Whatever it’s called. I’ve been trying to figure this out.

[@tron121]

Cycle modes with "g", same as when flying a ship. As he said though there is no display for this, you will have to feel it out via the resulting fire rate.

[@drivennale8551]

A hornet mk1 ghost and a mantis dropped my Carrack before I could even leave atmo. About a min of fire and I was doing the nose down tango with gravity. (this is on me, doing risky run solo. my bad) The biggest complaint I have with the nav mode system is that it leaves large ships slow cumbersome ducks for the taking, and there is isn't any comparable downside for smaller ships. I am looking forward to the adjustment that come in the future and how they will make multi crew ships more viable. current cargo runs out side the RMC runs don't make enough to justify hiring, or even trusting random players.

[@Power5]

Pretty sure multi-crew would not have helped since switching to Nav mode would make turrets useless. When engineering comes in, I guess your crew could try to repair as you are flying away otherwise they will just be sitting in turrets and watching the other ships destroy you.

[@novalis791]

I do think multicrew turrets should remain active while in nav flight mode/quantum mode before the jump

[@Oh_Foe_Sho]

I still feel the big multicrew ships are maybe just a touch too fast in combat modes and once CIG the give the turrets some weapon buffs they should slow the roll speeds on them to make it easier for turret gunners to maintain targets in their field of fire.

[@axm2689]

No, no, no. That is a pilot issue. Big ship mobility has been nerfed too far already.

[@ryanbird5142]

A light fighter should not be able to solo a caterpillar in the amount of time it takes the caterpillar to decide to get out of the AO.

[@reconraider707]

I’ve literally never had a ship escape from me? It’s so easy to interdict big ships. Also the mantis is a fuckin awesome ship. You just gotta know how to fly her.

[@RayHorn5128088056]

Why do ships have manned turrets if they are useless for defense?

[@Vidz0022]

They work, but get this. You have to actually know how to use them. This video clearly illustrates that this player is clueless.

[@RayHorn5128088056]

@@Vidz0022 Useless.

[@kVidStream]

The turret game is based on WW II type of vehicles. Imagine modern vehicles engaging with missiles over 50k

[@Power5]

CIG: We are forcing people to group up to move cargo, doing engineering, and combat. Also CIG: We are going to make it not work well at all. Have a slow ship with some multi crew turrets for defense? Simple, run away while that person shoots any ships following. But you cannot actually run away because if you switch to Nav mode you can no longer shoot, so just sit there until the pilot can jump the ship. Fun. So in reality, your caterpillar has to choose to run and take lots of damage, while the attacking interceptor squad of ships boost and fires to max SCM speeds, or stay and fight.

[@malkowitch]

1:39 Where on earth 1200 is smaller then 900. And you're not attacked by Gladius, Arrow, 85X nor C8X. You are usually attacked with Corsair, Cutlass or Vanguard.

[@Jamie-666]

Would help gunnery if big ships flew relatively stable and not try to dogfight all over the place.

[@parkerxgps8101]

Auto gimbals show some good potential. Perhaps engineering can add more power with the wrinkles of having to repair turrets. Always fun having that comm MFD that likes to DM anyone.

[@mcaddc]

You also have to deal with the upcoming engineering challenges that multi-crew ships will have to contend with.

[@Arkrilok]

Hey a creator who’s not all doom and gloom about master modes, nice.

[@FuriousImp]

The first 80% of the work requires 20% of the effort, the remaining 20% requires 80% of the effort.

[@RobertP-zk8vh]

need to switch out the panthers and rhinos for attritions

[@axelmousti5812]

the intended design combine QED, e-war, combat, boarding, crippling, repairing and maybe more. Trying to actualy balance anything with 70% of the game being not implemented always have been the problem, just my opinion tho.

[@j.d.4697]

The problem is that ships are too twitchy. It's also why they look and feel so unrealistic and lame.

[@vulcan4d]

Give me AI turrets and problem solved. I'm not going to spend a whole wack of time to organize a group of people to play multiplayer just for my ship to blow up for some stupid reason or a 5second fire fight before you even see the bad guy.

[@justinmw5113]

I have had the complete opposite experience

[@novalis791]

Well said Hybrid V

[@opaaaaaaaaaa]

Turrets should have larger guns than pilot controlled. The Connie for example should have size 2s for the pilot and size 5s on the turret. All pilot controlled weapons on all ships should be taken down a size or 2 to compensate. There are plenty of silly inaccuracies in the lore already so dont even worry about explaining the logic, just do it and having a crew will finally be a huge bonus.

[@YourArmsGone]

I agree, also power creep has gotten out of hand especially on small ships even heavy fighters shouldn't be able to mount anything bigger than a S4. Just give Light fighters S1-2, Mediums S1-3, and heavies S1-4. This would be simple and allow turrets to be a size above the fighters they are defending against.

[@hephaestion12]

Lol a bit of trumping there "i played allllll the patches folks" 😂

[@cbangbang7759]

PVE players loving this 😁

[@Casbelu]

A caterpillar should not just be unable to take out a "wing of seasoned fighter pilots", it shouldn't be able to take out a single skilled fighter pilot. It is literally a cargo ship.

[@YourArmsGone]

Yes, but a single fighter pilot shouldn't be able to take out a cat either. The turrets should be enough to keep a single fighter at a distance.

[@Casbelu]

@YourArmsGone I disagree. It's not a hammerhead, which is a combat vessel, it is a cargo hauler. The turrets should keep off mediocre fighter pilots, and the armor should buy it time to make an escape, but it shouldn't be a "unless I'm getting attacked by a "wing of ace pilots" I'm good. The defenses are just that....defenses, to buy you an escape, and a GOOD combat pilot should be able to make mince meat or them. It is not a combat vessel, against a combat vessel. End of story.

[@Casbelu]

Unless you also feel a gladius should be able to run at least 100 scu of cargo, and fracture rocks as long as they are not too big.... Obviously a cargo hauler shouldn't be a eggshell. It needs some defense, but that defense is to slow down / annoy attackers such that you can make an escape, not a turtle shell that makes you safe unless your being attacked by a whole wing of pilots.

[@YourArmsGone]

@@Casbelu I think this is where bombers and heavy fighters come in. A light fighter should simply not have the firepower to pose a serious threat. It's not a matter of skill it's about bringing the right tool for the job. That said the Cat is close to the weakest ship I would expect to shake off light fighters.

[@Casbelu]

Again....strengths and weaknesses, not absolutes. A bomber is a rocket launcher, a light fighter is a pistol. Both can kill you, but there is a big skill gap between the two. I fundamentally disagree with making an absolute "this ship wins" dynamic. It would be horrible. What if a horrible combat pilot shows up in an inferno, should you automatically be toast? Does his guns auto track you, and disable your nav drive, so you have no chance to escape not matter how good you are? Or, do you want to be able to get away. What if there is a mantis? Is it auto death for you? Or, do you want a chance to take out the mantis, and run for your life? I suspect you want a chance....but when it's the other way you don't want to provide a chance? Hmmm. It should all boil down to player skill. Bringing the right tool for the job allows you to maximize your potential, but if your a horrible pilot....I might win despite my handicap.

[@grast5150]

4:30 Disagree prior to MM, all ship weapons were basically limited to 4K. This means small ships had to close in order to actually be effective. Now with MM, they ranges are 12-14K depending on setup. MM did change gunnery for the worst. Oh and not even talking about the new sniping mode which makes it even easier for ships.

[@Blackburn6969]

All ships weapons are certainly NOT in the 12-14k range in MM?!

[@eavdmeer]

Turrets are already different from the same weapons on fighters. The capacitor is absurdly much larger. If you make turret weapons magically better, everyone is going to detach them from the turret and put them on a fighter. That puts you back to square 1. Thinking of Elite Dangerous, the station turrets are so effective and feared because they're real lasers, so hitscan. That would certainly make fighters think twice. ED balances this by having a severe damage fall-off.

[@EeroafHeurlin]

The point is (and what CIG has hinted at being something they plan to try) is that *turret* as a platform gives boost to the weapon, not that the weapon itself is different. So detaching it and putting it to a fighter does nothing. So far their tech does not allow for this kind of dynamic modification of the weapon stats.

[@astheworldlearns]

I hate to sound communist here, but the damage per shot of guns might benefit from being closer together in range for combat.

[@wafflesinsanity]

@eavdmeer That is exacly the opposite of how it would work. The power and capacitor is attached to the ship, not inside the weapons. Capacitor means nothing if the target is only in your sight lines for a moment. They really just need to allow turrets a weapon triangle specific to the turret, one that allows the gunner to swap between: more shots (for less damage), more damage (for less range), or longer range (with less shots). Allow gunners some skill expression of knowing when and how to change their tactic depending on the situation.

[@astheworldlearns]

@@wafflesinsanity yes! Make turret gunner gameplay sweaty!!

[@wafflesinsanity]

@@astheworldlearns i wouldnt say sweaty per say, but they should at least have a modicum of expression. They already got rid of needing to scan for internal component targeting (stupid change imo) so theres even less "skill" needed in at least "knowing" where and how to shoot a target. Gunning shouldn't be *completely* braindead.

[@Tekjive]

Weapons should be the same, regardless of platform, all for turret only weapons, or ship only weapons, but don’t go making different things of the same thing, doesn’t make sense, but hey to each their own

[@dimitrirouge5568]

the turrets problem is the auto aim assist shooting always where was the ship and not where he ll be. Auto aim is a so skill broken mechanic. Escape is not realy a problem in PVP but in PVE the NPC cheating :) and you can let them behind you. In reality all assist system is not good for me, I feel directly all is artificial for me. and should be horrible for the server calculation. why don't do something simple like he should be.

[@defiante1]

A lot of solutions to this, but it needs to be fixed. Multi crew should be the norm for a lot of things, SC is a multiplayer game, any ship larger than a cutty black really is not meant to be flown solo yet many do. A multi-crewed ship should be an absolute power house, there should be clear rewards and advantages for having many players fully crewing a ship vs a lone player with all their turret seats empty. Always saddens me how many play this game solo, they might be part of communities but they fly about solo in huge ships. Its a waste of potential and multiplayer experience.

[@user-uc7lx3el1b]

For me, a big issue of the implementation of the EMP and the Demper of the quantum jump, taking into account the separation of flight modes, at the moment in Nav mode, you can’t use anything of the above - respectively, how can we play the role of a bounty hunter or pirate? Everyone just fly away

[@RavingNut]

2:29 The whole point is that it is nere idiotic to take out a big ship with a small ship. Are you going to complain when armour hits and your size 2s will not harm heavy armour?

[@Sattorin]

Totally agreed on multicrew weapon stats. Here's my view on Master Modes perfection: 1. Drastically increase multicrew projectile speed and range to hit small ships easily. 2. Decrease the projectile speed and range of small ships so they can't snipe big ships. 3. Increase the speed/agility of small ships so they can dogfight and dodge each other's shots with a 6dof feel, but still get wrecked by multicrew shots. Chris Roberts made a big deal out of the flight system NOT being as limited as the Wing Commander flight model, and high velocity multicrew weapons allows us to keep that 6dof versatility AND keep fleet battles.

[@asog88]

“I enjoy master modes” ::subscribe::

[@astheworldlearns]

Turrets deserve to be on rails. I should be able to drive my turret around the hull of the ship - even if only left to right a distance, or just front to back. Either the pilot operates the set of guns, or the gunner takes them over completely. Here's the problem with the current gameplay loop in multicrew combat: Gunners are helpless, subject to the whim and skill of their pilot, who may even be fighting them for a shot on a shared target. It's not an equal division in the fight. What I am saying is allow the gunner to become one with the gun. If the enemy subtargets them so they have to hide behind shielded areas, or retreat lest they risk dying in their seat, taking precious crew away from the ship to revive them from death, or take their place in the gun seat. Now, large ship vs large ship battles can boil down to that sweaty COD fps shooter experience, where the pilot needs to now be more aware than ever of their ships shielding and damage status, pivoting to defend their gunner while crew is scrambling to keep the shields on and the ship from breaking - occasionally getting blown apart and costing their team manpower, machine, and the battle. There's no thrill to being a gunner right now. The pilot does most of the work, and the gun balance just isn't there yet. If I could ride my turret on rails around the ship, I would have a much bigger investment in the fight. Hiding behind the cover of the ship as it is blown apart while trying to secure another hit on the enemy. This is the secret recipe for making gunner gameplay even sweatier than small fighter dog fighting. And now with this, strategy and ship placement comes in! The enemy capital ship is trying to quickly get through your shields in one spot to take out your gunners and leave you crippled and defenseless. You're now pivoting and dodging to keep your shields while your gunners are fighting to do the same to them. Then the shields are popped, and now your small fighters must fly in and strike the weak point, but their gunners are aware of this. The gunners rotate around to attack the small fighter and keep them from striking, only to expose themselves directly to the small fighters guns.

[@astheworldlearns]

OMG what if I could swap a set of turrets out for a railed repair turret and patches the hull in combat??

[@gloirek]

Keep practicing, and You'll keep getting better. CIG shoudn't just keep dumbing down things forever. They need to leave a big room for personal improvement. The motto should always be: Easy to learn and HARD to master! I'm NOT saying that combat is perfect right now & needs no improvements at all; I'm saying that at some point we need to stop asking CIG to make changes so that there are no hard and long efforts on our part to master anything.

[@Khorsoro]

They need turrets to just be different guns. and a size 2 turret should be superior to a size 2 gun on a light fighter. Fire faster, do more damage, longer range, higher velocity. Etc. And bigger turrets, should have longer range, even higher damage, but very slow fire rate. So large turrets should only be fired at other large ships. Think that solves this particular problem.

[@crispy9175]

Most ships should have the pilot and turret weapons swapped. Turretsb should have bigger weapons on multi crew ships than the pilot guns.

[@tilemacro]

This is how i describe your video. "Nonsensical random noise."

[@Blackburn6969]

Very constructive, do better as a human

[@osuave7811]

​@@Blackburn6969Self projection.

[@wezzla]

The whole idea with capital ships in PU is flawed. Maybe they can create a separate epic space battle game mode in arena commander where you get action for the time invested. If you are gaming with your buddies, there are currently no incentives to man a turret vs take a second ship. There are no incentives for a small ship to engage in PvP battle against capital ship. Being the turret guy is and always will suck. The sooner CIG realizes that, the earlier they can redirect the dev effort to better things. And please, don't mention NPC crew. Currently they are dancing on the tables and will continue to do so many years from now.

[@EeroafHeurlin]

Stanton is a tiny system. With larger systems simply getting a squadron of lfighters from one side to another (not to mention to another system alltogether) is going to involve Logistics. With engineering etc for most ships there is going to be a lot more to do than just sit in a turret waiting for something to happen. Also not everyone is a great pilot, being an effective deterrent as a turret gunner *should* be pretty easy (with some headroom for player skill improvement to becoming an absolute terror to fighters or sniping at components on larger ships).

[@osuave7811]

​@@EeroafHeurlinPoint well taken

[@leoncantwelliii7946]

Clearly this man has never run full ballistic. You can melt an 890 in seconds

[@wafflesinsanity]

Which works well now, until you can no longer rearm without flying incredible distances away or asking for a local rearming drone from a friendly Vulcan.

[@osuave7811]

​@@wafflesinsanity🧐👍

[@ro-mon_gerrs_u-tube1944]

Sorry, I Totally disagree with time to Kill/Disable these are ships, not wet paper bags! They are a big investments! How would you feel if I could just Feather touch your car to make it totally fall apart & explode? Too many games today have "Shit" for Gear ( No durability whatsoever.) You'd hate to spend 30 mins preparing only get "One" (1) shotted, One (1) minute out of the gate. (And I have) Fights needs to be Epic! TTK should 5 minutes Not 5 seconds. If I wanted to get one shotted I'd go play World of Tanks. A Grumpy Grandpa 😖

[@JJS563]

CIG have no idea what they are getting into. To balance PVE and PVP is going to be a nightmare. There are AAA games that have entire teams balancing these two separate game modes, they don't do anything else. There is a reason why most games will keep those separate. But here we are, with more ships than CIG can keep up with, trying to balance PVP and PVE in the same universe, and with one dudes vision who seems so hell bent on making MM a thing. Now they want to make turrets on sub-capitals/capitals act different? AND add all those extra weapon types? On what timeline will this happen? Certainly not the current one we are living in because we are 12 years in and only now working on MM. But whatever it is what it is

[@paratrooperz1]

did anyone understand anything in this video? all i know is people who multi crew often have a leg up but those fighters that can orbit at 500 or less can keep out of your threat... im pissed that the game keeps changing so much that it generates a new learning curve then they realize no matter how many magic nerf walls they make it fails hard because they keep moving closer to console game design but flight simulators some how do a better job. we need to remove this magic speed limit bull shit because i cant understand how i can decouple then fly 800 in my tali then switch to combat mode and i rapidly slow down!!!! in SPACE...there is nothing realistic or fun about this!!!! if i do not apply an opposing thrust i should be able to drift at any speed im capable of. i dont own any small ships but i own all the bigger ships so until they add armor and armor resistance and shield resistance there should never have been any master modes and master modes should not defy physics master modes has been a good PVE experience for me even though i still at the core say leave it all alone till we get armor and alpha damage resistance.... at this time i will never have to worry about the small twitch PVP players because my smallest ships will still need size 5 guns or larger to even scratch the paint. when they make these ships flyable and bring resistance the PVPers will need to bring more preparation to a fight so they can handle players like me... i almost never find myself as a target but i do know it doesnt look real feel real or even fun to be in these ships i paid several hundred for just to lean back in my chair and wait the inevitable knowing not even avenger 1 can fight off a novice player in my ship choices.... i hate knowing it will get better but patch after patch see it get worse rewarding the twitch console players as us SIM players rendered helpless because we have no working AI crew and time to kill a large ship is to fast where it shouldnt even be possible

[@astheworldlearns]

I could imagine stations imposing hard limits on the maximum speeds ships can travel relative to their base as a safety precaution for both the station and the pilot. To me it makes sense that my combat speed is lower than nav, as I would rip the wings off my craft in atmosphere applying any sharp input beyond a certain speed, if not die from the sheer force of translating directions at hypersonic speed. Sound travels 343m/s so most ships are capable of going supersonic in atmo, but limited in space by the ability of thrusters to safely counteract relative speed in a safe manner.

[@corey1563]

@@astheworldlearns ya obviously there is air resistance in atmosphere. there would be a speed limit. But space should have no speed limit at all it doesn't make any sense.

[@BernhardMarchhart]

the solution is sooo easy. make a weapon: Range Medium- High / Firerate High / Damage Medium and give it an very low Mag size. so lets say an Corsair with full set have 3 shots......but a Turret have a way bigger Cap or in other words bring the Attrition back to live, give them less spread an the described damage gain when longer fireing a litle bit more range and increas the Energieusage. an the other thing orienting the waepons mor on the real world..... smal guns have smal range and low speed /Big guns have Longe range and high speed 9mm = 100m/~600m/s .300WM = 800m/ ~1000m/s

[@Vidz0022]

You have no idea what you're doing.

[@Czecher86]

its years from release, calm down..

[@jeremy6384]

whats your point?

[@Czecher86]

@@jeremy6384 it will all change .Its years from being at least somewhat 1.0 done...

[@jeremy6384]

@@Czecher86it will change based on feedback. This feedback has value. Your comment has some value but nothing is created or refined because of it.

[@osuave7811]

​@@Czecher86🧐👍

[@Blackburn6969]

Very constructive comment. Do better as a human Czecher.

[@TytusG]

Master modes are BS. star citizen is dead