Star Citizen: Ditching Taurus for Starlancer?

[@Stakar0gord]

The Connie now has more QT fuel than the SL which was heavily nerfed in QT capacity and is no more a deep space/ Long Hauler - hope this gets corrected by CIG

[@Orginal_Sinner]

I said the same thing, but we gotta test it first. The connie didn't have good jump range before they buffed it with the new scu system. If the misc efficiency is anything like the hull a/c it'll still be able to jump far.

[@schlagzahne6741]

And next patch it will nerf the Connie's range and increase sl, then next patch will nerf both, then bother will increase.. then they will remove the lower guns from the SL pilot and give them to the co pilot. And the cycle will continue

[@fetlix]

Loved my Taurus Connie, But i changed to Starlancer Max a few days ago and i absolutely love it. Shared my screen on discord with some friends and made a walkthrough on the ship and two of em bought ships just to join me on this absolute beast. Never had this much fun in Star Citizen and it's all thanks to this fantastic ship.

[@Durion7]

Why a modern cargo ship does not have a tractor beam is beyond me. Thats insane... next bring a drop shop without drop seats and a medical ship without med beds.

[@dragonchild_SC]

Agree. Sometimes I think the MAX was originally planed as the exploration variant, and then sold as Cargo, because exploration is still not in the game. The Fury hangar of the TAC became 4 big bedrooms. That would be great for exploration but not on a dedicated Cargo hauler. And in the rear the cargo grid does not cover the entire space - there is always room for a vehicle - just like an explorer would need it. Just my 2 cents.

[@Sentan555]

and how would u make that work with this ships design???

[@XxXDOMINIONXxX]

also.. my cargo ship doesnt need a fucking armory, or 4 full size crew bunks taking up space designed for cargo. this ship is kind of a fail as a cargo hauler. for its size.

[@Sentan555]

@@XxXDOMINIONXxX the starlancer is designed for hauling long distance and being out in space longer. It also doubles as an explorer ship

[@XxXDOMINIONXxX]

@@Sentan555 it doesn't matter. it can still do all those things while maximizing cargo space. the fact that an entire SCU of space exists above the bomb bay that is not snappable is absurd. And the max should also have a snappable vehicle grid so you can choose what to put there. the size of the ship is poorly represented as a cargo vessel. Diesel trucks in the real world have all the same features as a starlancer max without half the trailer being taken up by a pool table that will never work.....cargo ships, ferrys, etc.

[@ThatAerospaceEningeer]

I personally did go from the Taurus to the Starlancer and I would say it depends on how you play. The Taurus is better for solo and higher chance of combat because of the 4 S5 and smaller size. The Starlancer seems to be more towards if you got friends or are in safer districts as the pilot doesn't have as good of a weapon array so you need the turrets to make up for it. I personally made the move because I liked having the the large vehicle bay in the back and the living quarters for the crew. I like having it look more like a place I would want to live in.

[@essentialasa]

I play solo and dropped my Taurus for a Starlancer. It really is just about play style. I'm more into rp and the SL is better for it

[@arenomusic]

Connie has a tractor beam, Starlancer doesn't Thanks for watching!

[@captainglume]

The SL MAX has plenty of space near the two elevators for an ATLS or two for moving cargo. I quite like the design myself and did pick one up.

[@Dracounguis]

My first pledge back in 2013 was the Freelancer. So as you can guess I'm really liking the Starlancer. 😆

[@Woobieeee]

Taurus is still objectively better for solo play.

[@ViPinedaR]

100% agreed. I still have my Taurus as pledge, the only pitty thing about the connie is the very outdated interior. But still, with the 4 size 5 (for now) and cargo size, I think overall, the Taurus still on top for price / what you get. (plus, you have a tractor beam).

[@Woobieeee]

@@ViPinedaR yeah i imagine those size 5s are going away any day now. Im not a huge fan of flying the taurus around, the mfd update helped a lot though. Still the best ship for solo pve play.

[@jimrussell4062]

@@ViPinedaR Taurus has speed (200 vs 115 SCM) and Size 5 vs Size 4 for the pilot. That's it. Everything else is Starlancer. However, to be fair if I wanna play a Connie I usually take out the Phoenix (even has a PDC so it's just as good at bounties) and if I wanna do FAST cargo I have a Zeus. So I don't find myself using the Taurus anymore. I still have a Connie, just not the Taurus....and not for hauling.

[@ViPinedaR]

@@jimrussell4062 Well, yeah, I also fly the Zeus (ES) as daily multiporpouse ship (and I LOVE IT). But for someone who´s thinking of buying a "mid size" hauler, to me, in my very humble opinion, Taurus still a better choice than SL. Anyways, I don´t do cargo anymore for now, changed my style of gameplay for a bit and mostlikely I will change the Taurus for something different now at the AIE, not sure yet. Don´t get me wrong, Starlancer is a great ship, BUT for time that engieeniring comes, it will be hard to fly solo and that is a plus for Taurus, basically due to the size. Again, this is just my opinion.

[@Fotomoloman]

@@ViPinedaR When engineering will come into play even the Connies won't be so good anymore for solo players just like every ship with (bigger) interior will be as you'll have to hop out of the pilot seat to walk around and fix stuff. But i guess SL will be even worse bc of its multi lvl design and obstructed pathways along the ship.

[@goodss2730]

"Why not both" - Said every concierge ever

[@innominatecitizen]

lol! I was trying not to imply it!

[@ThatAerospaceEningeer]

@@goodss2730🤫

[@arenomusic]

True, but I still don't understand why people do this lol

[@dimitrilax3612]

​@arenomusic that is an easy answer! They have the money to spend. There money there choice.

[@durtyred86]

​@@arenomusic you'll find out once systems start opening up. You're basing your thought process off of Stanton only. Arguably a poor decision in the grand scheme of things.

[@ericlewandowskivlogs]

I'm for sure parking my pickup truck and atlas in mine for hauling. It's such a cool ship. I can't frickin wait. The Taurus is badass though. Im going to miss the tractor beam and 4xs5 weapons.

[@barcidstudios]

No tractor beam = not even trying to walk 400 yards for a box

[@RobinHartJones]

What do you mean? I park the Starlancer tail-on to the elevator and use a Maxilift to move crates straight from the elevator to the belly bay in one move. I then duck under the fuselage and do the same on the other side. Even if I parked it side-on then it would only mean standing by the tail and moving 64scu of the cargo to the far side of the belly bay which would involve walking perhaps 40m at worst.

[@barcidstudios]

@RobinHartJones the Cutlass and Zeus tractor beam means you don't need a helmet, don't need to carry a tractor beam, don't have to leave the safety of your cockpit, save time. It's just really convenient among other things and I don't see it being a difficult add on, even if it only supports loading for one hold.

[@jimrussell4062]

I don't think the tractor beam on the Taurus works at 400 meters either.... where are you that you're that far away from your cargo in the first place?

[@jimrussell4062]

@@barcidstudios But you have to go buy the cargo and open the doors/etc right? Unless you have someone else doing it for you...which then they could just do it. The Zeus has an even better tractor beam to be fair.

[@Mud61]

I keep my Taurus but I melted my Corsair for the SL Max ...... with pain tbh.

[@innominatecitizen]

I hear you. Corsair situation has left us a sore spot!

[@quartzar]

Good video, great commentary! Only criticism is the music is too loud & overpowering in tempo/beat, it is a bit too much for "backing" audio and sounds like you're talking over a video that you didn't choose the audio for. Love the outro, that's super clean! Earned a new sub

[@innominatecitizen]

I agree! Thanks for watching and the sub!

[@DanteSerrano007]

I love how you begin with a reality check with the Starlancer going down in flames!!! However, I would point out that loading and unloading cargo with the Starlancer is not "effortless." Right now, it's a horrible chore! Once cargo fills the grid, getting it off is almost impossible in the PTU. It looks like this is a failing in the design where CIG didn't allow for adequate "side space" to shift the boxes on the end "away." In the cradles, the cargo has to come straight "out" if the entire cradle is full. However, if you have experience moving cargo, you'll know that boxes not on the end of a pile but buried in the middle are nearly impossible to move. Same problem here. I tested my Taurus and had no such problem. Loading the Taurus isn't difficult if you know its grid: four 24 SCU boxes, one 16 SCU box, and fourteen x 4 SCU boxes. Further, the Starlancer's crew area is wonderful but-at present-completely dead weight! Multi-crew bed-logging isn't a thing right now, and we don't have a clear timeline for when CIG will implement it (or if they'll even keep the same "thou shalt lie down to log out" system). So, the Starlancer Max is, to me, a ship that isn't "better enough" to warrant changing my fleet and a sorry excuse for my Galaxy not being in my hangar, ready to fly. Or my 600i rework. Or my Orion. Or my Reclaimer rework... ;)

[@SendySenderson]

I'm planning to pick up the SL Max until the BLD makes its way to us. It just makes me happy, even if I end up soloing at times. I definitely want the Taurus, though, and will work for that in game.

[@justinrohrer1228]

Don’t forget when the Taurus gets its gold standard it will have the fastest unload of any ship in the verse. You’re supposed to be able to hit a button and dump the cargo out the bottom, that said I am going to the Stancer Mac’s.

[@David-Kynaston]

I'm looking forward to the Polaris myself. Crew dependant players do not understand how non-combat solo players think. The SL-Max is an awesome ship if you fly and use it like a non-combat solo player should.

[@RobinHartJones]

Weird that you recommend the Connie Taurus for people who want a more agile ship when the MAX, despite its size, is slightly better in every axis. Where it does beat the MAX though is SCM Speed as the MAX is very slow. On the subject of the built-in tractor beam, I have been testing the MAX for a few weeks now and I honestly don't think giving it a tractor beam would help it as much as it helps the Taurus. If CIG did give it one then I doubt I would use it. I can load 128scu into the belly bay using a Maxilift in just under 4 minutes and I can load the the whole 224scu in 12 minutes though I am seriously thinking it is better to just stop after the first 192scu is loaded as putting the 8x4scu crates into the tight gap in the rear bay accounts for at least 4 minutes and does not seem worth it for 32scu.

[@innominatecitizen]

You're right! It's just the low SCM gives the impression of sluggishness! But agility means different things to different pilots. The buttommline is it is a hard choice. WHo knows how we feel after the novelti wears off with SL AMX! O7

[@jimrussell4062]

It's not worth loading the rest in 90% of cases. Just load the 192 and go... 6 boxes loaded an zoom. Too easy.

[@ronnieo9571]

I don't really compare these ships. The Taurus has part of its cargo area hidden behind doors so its really not 174 its 168. The way the Grid is set up you can't carry cargo and a vehicle while retaining cargo space. This limits the ships use. I really consider the Taurus as a limited Andromeda gunship. It gets a useless tractor beam, loses a weapons turret, and some missiles, and a gets a bit more cargo space. On the other hand its still a good gunship (4xsize5) if they don't change things. It will always be better for fighting. The Starlancer always better for Hauling both cargo and vehicles. I melted my Taurus for a Starlancer, but I am keeping an in game purchased Andromeda. I just can't stand the idea of not having a Constellation of some kind in the Hanger. It's relatively easy to buy in game.

[@HitmannDDD]

4 S5 guns under pilot control, perfect for solo ERT bounties. I've never filled a Taurus on a single ERT. Can't see myself buying a starlancer.

[@Daemn13]

I'm just going to stick with the taurus and cross my fingers for the connie update

[@Dr4g0n36]

Good video. Intro music? forgot the title

[@edenyan7237]

no connie owner whom has a right mind would trade the connie for a SL, to lose military grade armor and 4 size 5 cannons just for pitiful 120 scu is insane. anyone who has played the game for a while would have a common sense that in this game, weapon level 1-4 is one group, but level 5 is a totally different group. you don't trade in your size 5's, especially if the size 5s are pilot controlled, and the ship is solo-able. from the look of how CIG design their ships, new ships will be very hard to have pilot controlled size 5s, connie has it only because the design itself is super old.

[@machoalright]

i rather have more cargo.. and the option to put in vehicles :P but i guess noone thinks like that anymore.. Taurus objectivity easier to load. its an hassle to load the starlancer. altough i like the form better. other than that its speed and all is way better. Starlancer is fine.. as long they dont put an cargogrid on the back, i dont see extra uses than the Taurus. Taurus is the best option on this amount of freight.

[@Rift_131]

SL Max is my new daily driver, 100%.

[@viscounttudon68]

Imo the only reason the StarMAX isn’t perfect externally is the rear landing gear isn’t massive struts from the engine nacelles. Are there probably technical limitations why that’s bad? Certainly. Would it be dumber? Of course. But damn, would it add to that solid squat look while on the ground.

[@asog88]

I’d switch just for the enjoyment of walking around my ship

[@Haru-wd8rh]

I have play Star Citizen for years. I have always wanted to find a ship that i can call home but not too expensive. At the moment i saw the Star Lancer Living Quater and Room i know that it the ship i was always looking for and i bougth it.

[@cbangbang7759]

Traded my taurus forvthr starlancer max for only $25 with the warbond and couldn’t be happier

[@SICARiO_H88]

Sorry, Taurus not replaceable .. is a beast. Better for CIG don't touch it 👹

[@novachannel1981]

Melted my freelancer Maxx for the starmax can't wait to fly mine

[@cygnus6623]

This is what I did. I got the Taurus for $150 and upgraded to the MAX for an additional $25. Couldn't pass up. It will be interesting to see how much the MAX is in a few days...???

[@Kakeyoro]

Sad to see CIG rebalanced the quantum fuel tank size to 3scu from the original 8.5... waiting to see how the quantum drive rebalance will make this a "deep space" hauler where the Constellations now hve 3.5scu vs the SL Max's 3...

[@AK-lo4bd]

Vergessen sie bitte nicht die beiden fehlenden Holo MFDs beim Piloten. Und das Holo Radar ist auch sehr schlecht

[@Fotomoloman]

@@AK-lo4bdFalsch. Das Radar sitzt nun (wie bei eig. allen anderen Schiffen auch) direkt vor dem Piloten und ist somit endlich gut sichtbar. Der Wegfall der MFDs ist allerdings doof!🤷🏻‍♂️

[@mariomarques1507]

Taurus >> Starlancer MAX It's amazing how people want to say how Starlancer is better than the Taurus without making a test loading with both. Because if you do that, you will see that the Taurus is way better. You will realize that the tractor beam in the Taurus DOES HELP. You will see that to make full use of the Starlance MAX cargo hold, you will need to use its garage. And it's hard to load two different cargo holds. So, yeah. Starlancer MAX is a worse cargo ship than the Taurus.

[@Poxtor]

Got alot of ships, but im sticking with the Taurus as a solo player over the SL, reasons being : Taurus is smaller (better for engenerring damage repair and a smaller target to hit allways nice) Taurus has better weapons (and i do not think they will get nerfed, look at the old description of the connie as to why) Taurus have scan proof cargo for smugling. Taurus have a really good Tractor turret, really nice when getting cargo floating in space. As a solo player i do not need so many rooms waste of space imo. The Taurus as well as the other connies will get an "gold standard" pass some point in the future they will prob only get better. And for people who think the connie series will get its S5 guns nerfed, well i do not think so, reason being the connie allready got looked at not that long ago regaurding weapons and they only buffed them, the turrets went from S2 to S3 and that was that. But you never know they and all other weapons might get nerfed, CIG can balance as much as the want. And lastly the Taurus was the first industriel/millinial falcon vibe ship in the game, i fell in love with it when it first came into the hangar module back in the days, where the PU was but a dream ;) yea im an oldie hehe But to those who have the SL well it is a nice ship you wont regret it (untill something more interresting come that is hehe) and i got an wb upgrade for the SL just in case i change my mind ;) for the ccu game :p

[@AnitaPOE2]

Man i love the starlancer! I already bought three for my org, because i'm sure that THAT will contribute to an even faster and more streamlined development of the game. An bite me if im wrong!

[@arenomusic]

It WILL help CIG pay for some stuff, the money never hurts. Why an org would need one person to donate three different Starlancers is beyond me

[@Staticsceptre]

Dude are you the only one contributing ships to your org? You must have at least 12 players to crew that many, and im sure everyone in that org has their own ships. Dont you think thats a little excessive?

[@AnitaPOE2]

@@Staticsceptre Uuuuhm, dont tell anybody ok? I was being "sarcastic". i dont give CIG a single cent. I purchase all ships with aUEC i buy from ebay ;)

[@Staticsceptre]

@@AnitaPOE2 oh sorry that flew right over my head. But also doesn’t auec get wiped? So your paying real money for ships that arent even permanent?

[@AnitaPOE2]

@@Staticsceptre yes. Because its still way cheaper. 80€ gets me 100.000.000 aUEC. So for the price of a cutty i get to buy any ship i want. I personally dont buy THAT much aUEC because then i would have nothing to grind for. But if there is a wipe yes, i pay 10€ for 10mill to get my conny and start playing

[@tylertiffin9067]

I got rid of my Taurus before the Starlancer MAX was announced. I upgraded it to the Corsair. I ended up getting the Zeus and the Starlancer Max, tho. And I kept my Corsair, for now.

[@innominatecitizen]

The pre-nerf Corsair was a beast of a ship.

[@corwyncorey3703]

Never liked the Corsair even before the "it should be a turret but isn't" nonsense. It's those wings; they completely break my immersion, because physics and aerodynamics don't agree with them.

[@tylertiffin9067]

@corwyncorey3703 yeah, only got the Corsair because it gave me Star Wars vibes lol

[@AK-lo4bd]

Unfortunately, they took away more than 60% of the Starlancer MAx's quantum fuel. And what's a much bigger disaster (for me) they took away the two Holo MFDs on the pilot. The two lower MFDs are not an option (for me).

[@crudbasher72]

Nice video! I changed to a Max from an MSR. Hey @innominatecitizen what is the music you used in the opening? Is Star Citizen soundtrack?

[@innominatecitizen]

Yes, it was featured in the recent citizencon.

[@sleepyplays7607]

I would agree with you if I could guarantee a Multi Crew Experience. But so far my current gameplay has consisted of 90% Single player. And for the single player I cant recommend the upgrade to the Starlancer. I need those pilot controlled guns to execute my escape from players who enjoy killing for fun! In other words the jerks!

[@madgiecool]

Starlancer is a confused ship. It wants to be an explorer (due to the crew area). A cargo focused ship would well... focus on the cargo. Taurus (for me) has better functionality and is a better price.

[@aiur1645]

I still kind of prefer the taurus but it definitely needs a rework, even though the starlancer is more practical im not really a fan of misc ships

[@Blue-Mystic]

LOL, NO! NEVER!!!! The Firepower of the Taurus!!!! The StarLancer is a sitting duck for pirates, anyone who had play the game knows the Manned turrets mean nothing if not crew.

[@bobklk51]

Gotta love that new car, errr ship smell.

[@innominatecitizen]

Lol. Should have used the appropriate Star Trek soundtrack here.

[@briangueringer3673]

The Connie is actually in a really good spot in alot of ways and gold pass will mak it better (probably). As a solo the Connie is better for me. It would eat a SL for lunch combat wise and has a much higher scm speed. I cant stand thw cockpit view of the SL. To each his own though😂 The Connie has withstood the test of time and I really dont see the SL dethroning it for solos. Hell eve for combat crewed I would still take the Andromeda now that MM is here and maneuvering isnt as much of a factor. I think the SL is a "social ship" for cargo pretty much. Which is kind of odd because yeah you can carry more cargo but then you would be splitting profits. Then no tractor beam is kind of a killer to. Not an absolute game breaker but a pretty big oof. So I guess its fine but for solos Connie is sitting just fine . Its just not new anymore, I get it but there is still a lot of work to be done on it. Even in this state it is a stronge competitor against the SL amd wins in the combat category outright. If the make any further improvements on the ship it will just pull further away from the SL. Connie = 8.0 out of 10 SL= 6.5 out of 10 (For solo)

[@jimrussell4062]

You can take 3 times the cargo in 32 SCU boxes, which makes it three times as efficient for a solo player. There's nothing comparable for ease of loading until you get to the Hercules. Now granted you can do 2x32 and 2x24 and get a bit more for the Taurus, but that's 4 box moves for 112, compared to 6 moves for 192 so that's still a bit more efficient for the SL Max and you can haul more in one trip. SL Max even has the same QT drive class so you don't even save money per trip. It'd end up being quite a bit more expensive to run (in real life and in lore) than the Taurus...which for me playing as a hauler (and RPing it up) just makes economic sense. Taurus as I said only makes sense if want SCM speed and bigger guns which.... aren't really anything to do with hauling and other ships do it as good or better. Having said that I do have a Connie Phoenix that is still fun for that, and I love RSI design so I use the Zeus all the time for fast deliveries. The MISC SL is just that "sweet spot" for a mid-range hauler between the Freelancers/Connies and the Hercules.

[@briangueringer3673]

@jimrussell4062 Yeah pure hauling SL is better. If you take the daily driver angle and everything else the Connie is better in my mind. I thought I kind of pointed it out. For the price range it's a getter hauler but it falls behind in every other category. I'm sure it's good but I have no interest in it. I already have an M2 so no point really . I also think they will nerf it's maneuverability later on. The SL is overall and average ship to me. The Connie , I think excels in more categories.

[@Fotomoloman]

@@briangueringer3673 I have a Taurus myself and i love it as a solo player, you can do pretty much everything with it as a solo player from VHRT/ERT to decent hauling. But as stated it is just too good (especially for a solo player) for the actual ship lineup. Just look what they did to the Corsair, it was just too big of a powerhouse for single players. Following their goal of pushing multicrew they won't be good with the fact an old solo suitable ship is overall better than their newcomer SL!🤷🏻‍♂️

[@briangueringer3673]

@Fotomoloman But it is lol. They would have to nerf it in the future which would lead to an uprising lol. It doesn't have the cargo of the SL, so it already has a trade off built into it. I don't personally see a need to downgrade it. The Corsair needed to be nerfed, it's how they did it that is the real problem I think.

[@kuzerov2123]

i love the look of this ship but i hate it for its design, big living quarters whats use are this for players not much more like dead space in my opinion, good turrets for protection what use are those if they can't cover half of the ship wich is one of the slowest in the game, and lets not speak about the cookpit, the fest cargo loading/unloading thats great.

[@Fotomoloman]

Yeah for now living area and crew quarters are just eye candy but you can see it as an investment in the future when there will be much more mechanics implemented to socialize like making food in the kitchen for eating, playing cards and pool and so on. It may be in the distant future but it shows the way of multicrew gameplay CIG is aiming at.

[@vulcan4d]

Nope, too much love for Taurus :)

[@TheLevitatingChin]

I hate MISC. Such bad cockpits.

[@Trampus10-4]

Taurus needs a living quarters remaster. I would like to place things on flat surfaces and not all the surfaces are accessible or work with placed objects. Storage lockers don’t store anything…

[@RisenKaiser]

So... i still dont know you're not showing grid design comparison? loading process? some interiors comparison? landing process from pilot to terminals? combats? flying capabilities. Is one better ? sry but i dont see the point of this video if your not giving a proper look to both of the ships instead of some cinematic shoots of the max.

[@innominatecitizen]

Thanks for the feedback! I'm glad you watched it!

[@Patch1xo]

The Taurus is better for me. I hope they do a Mark II

[@aciid5081]

the connies are already mark 4/5

[@user-bh6hi6cr5h]

The Connie Taurus says MK IV on it.

[@papadross]

It needs a gold pass. Not another Mark version.

[@RedDwarf1]

Taurus nimble and maneuverable? It flies like a cow FFS!