The Doom and Gloom over Master Modes | Star Citizen 3.23

Recently, CIG asked for feedback regarding Master Modes in 3.23 EPTU and the initial wave was negative. This is largely due to the tunings not being complete, balance issues, and some issues with people simply not understanding the underlying changes to the flight model.
As someone with tons of hours within Master Modes, both from the AC experimental tests and within 3.23. I wanted to take the time to talk about the feedback, and pick through what was valid and what I felt wasn't and just talk a bit more openly about the changes coming to Star Citizen and why I think it is a critically important change for the game.
TIMESTAMPS:
0:00 Intro
2:53 The clunkiness of MM
5:25 Non-combat perspectives
8:48 The sluggishness
15:26 How sentiment can skew perspectives
18:08 SC is primarily a PvE focused game
20:45 New weapon balance
24:50 My own experience with the old FM
26:45 Is MM actually bad?
27:48 Fun vs Realism arguments
29:24 The PvE vs PvP balance
31:31 Conclusion
33:05 Outro
~~~
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
#starcitizen #gameplay

[@HybridVAudio]

There is a lot more I wanted to talk about but the runtime was getting lengthy. For example, CIG has very generic tunings on a lot of ships currently in the PTU. This means that the Vanguard and Lightning both perform identically for example. These is not the final tunings of course as CIG just set a lot of ships to generic archetypes before they do further tuning passes later. And part of this is why people were mad as they did not realize their favorite ship was not fully tuned yet. So, if you were for example, a Lightning fan and tried it out in MM, you would be massively disappointed in how it performed. This is also the same for alien ships, which currently just have archetype copy paste jobs on their flight profiles as well. - MM is not perfect, nor will it ever be, much like the old model. But looking past that, you have to see the broader picture of what CIG is going for. One that I see a lot of people overlooking when defending the old flight model, particularly form a PvP-centric lens. Again, this game never was intended to be a primarily PvP focused game as CIG and CR has stated time and time again that AI will vastly outnumber players in the verse. And as a result, the vast majority of players will be interacting with PvE elements far more than PvP ones, and the model needs to cater to that necessity while still keeping things interesting. I know some people will say the old model did, and the reality is that it simply didn't, not unless you already knew what you were doing. Some would say that a proper flight tutorial would had fixed these issues rather than having to redo the model, but that same argument can be made in regards to MM as well, so this not really a strong argument here imo. Even so, there are hundreds of hours of guides both on Spectrum, Hub, and social media platforms like YT that covered combat in the old model and yet people still felt frustrated by it to the point that they would put it down just as fast as they tried to pick it up. - But beyond the initial negative feedback, there were still a lot of useful nuggets of feedback for CIG to comb through. For example, UI elements such as targeting can get lost sometimes when outside the periphery, which is not a problem with the old UI. Continuing with the UI, the icon overload can be an issue as well with lots of hostile targets floating around. It can be annoying picking through those targets at given moments. And lastly, as a multi-crew fan, it still has some ways to go. Currently, it takes only a second or two for ballistics to knock out turrets on larger ships, from ships firing at far ranges. Counter maneuvers can help a bit but you will just lose turrets quickly over time regardless. A lot of work still needs to be done on this front currently. One solution is to improve projectile speeds of turrets to deal with range cheese, but consider how low damage range cheese does anyway to moving large targets, a simpler solution is to strengthen turret HP and increase the dispersion of smaller cannons over longer ranges. Anyway, be sure to let me know your thoughts. I look forward to seeing what CIG does with this new model throughout the year and beyond. I'll see you all in the next one. o7

[@gyratingwolpertiger6851]

The hard part is the initial conversion. Now they can polish and tweak. While on paper similar I could swear the F8 has snappier handling than the Vanguards.

[@thx1137]

That is largely true. I made a few comments about how I disliked it and some features it really needed and a few patches later (EG: NAV FLT), they were in. Not because I wanted them, I'm sure, it just takes time for them to roll them out. All this means CIG could have avoided a lot of negativity if they did the base tunings before we got it of course. On the whole, we need MM, though a lot of people seem have said they loved it because of the new speeds. Something that we could all limit with the speed limiter before so I don't get that. It was the first thing I set in a fight. They also say that it will make PvPers not have such an edge. Which is rubbish. PvPers uses the same flight model we do. Good PvPers are just good at combat and they spend a lot of time learning to use the systems the best. I wish I was that keen. Some of my negativity still remains because we are more tactically constrained on entering the flight. We had near infinite options before. Now, with shields and weapons only on at SCM, it does limit it. Limit, not completely negate... It makes defensive strategies a bit easier. I still don't think we *need* the big switching delay, which is my pet dislike. But as always, I fly the model I'm given so I'll make it work just like every model before this one. Oh, yeah. CIG said in an ICS that it was to help combat circle strafing and BnZ in the old model. It was funny to hear in ICS that the new AI combat model now supports those two tactics. I don't get that either.

[@christoperblair5172]

pretty hard to listen to as quite often your resort to the same tactics as those "emotional" nay sayers. pretty much a white knight performance.

[@thedoctor5478]

The A1 vid just posted sums it up pretty well.

[@EdrickV]

I do not have enough experience with the old or new flight models in combat to compare them in any meaningful way, but there are things I do not like about how MM is being done. The first is their admission that they are treating combat focused ships and non-combat focused ships the same. When in combat, or there is the potential to get into combat, the objectives of the pilot and any crew would be very different, and the flight model should reflect that. The second is that everything that makes different ships fly and feel different, they just discarded in favor of starting from scratch with archetypes that bundle seemingly bundle together ships that currently fly very differently, and are currently only doing basic tuning for them. I expect that once 3.23 comes out, MM tuning will probably not be a priority, so it may take years to go through each ship. I also suspect that combat focused ships will get tuned quicker then non-combat focused ships. I'm not wave 2 though so I can't see how badly any of my ships will fly in MM. And I don't know for sure if they'll open EPTU/PTU up to all backers before 3.23 drops. I also have concerns about the ability of non-combat focused ships survivability in atmosphere when attacked by combat focused ships. (And potentially have concerns about how QED, distortion weapons, and maybe even EMP will work in MM, and I don't exactly know how they all work in the EPTU. Of course, I'm still not exactly how EMP is even supposed to work in Live, even though I have a ship with it.)

[@nebulus_wolfy2408]

the one thing that erks me about the keybind changes is they havent updated the keybind map and you have to go digging to find what the binds have actually changed to

[@HybridVAudio]

Yeah, they sorely need to update that ancient keybinds menu/map. I know Yogi said they will at some point. Soon can't come soon enough if you ask me.

[@j.d.4697]

That's a problem only casuals have who don't even bother customizing their keybinds.

[@1aatlas]

To be fair to solo players like me in relation to "multicrew" ships, there are supposed to be npc crew (Gunners) or AI blades to run turrets but these things are yet to materialise. We have been told repeatedly by CIG that this will eventually be the case. Hopefully once static server meshing comes and there is more free overhead for such things they will not be too far away.

[@jchacon103]

Certainly, as long as it's not forgotten that server blades/NPC crewmen will never be as good as other players helping you. Plus you will still need to pay for your NPC crewmen when you hire them. But yes, it will give you the freedom to "solo" multicrew ships. Hopefully we get new server meshing tests sooner rather than later.

[@TheAIKnowledgeHub]

​@@jchacon103keep in mind how bad some humans are. It will always be better than some humans

[@jchacon103]

@@TheAIKnowledgeHub what an appropriate name lmao

[@Qwarzz]

NPC crew is a must pretty much. Having players taking part of your profits is not worth doing for most professions. Can be worth it for mining and salvage for example as there more players means stuff gets done faster. If you're just travelling between places the other players are just dead weight unless you get in a fight. Maybe when you have to move all the cargo it might help to have more people to do it but then profits from trade have to go up quite a bit compared to current. Still a long way to release so these things will be balanced many many times.

[@mhmm4840]

@@TheAIKnowledgeHub While blades will probably help out a lot, I'm not quiet sure they will be better than actual humans. Coordinating fire and focusing priority targets will be the key to winning a fight that's more than a 1v1, and I'm not sure quiet how much control they are gonna give you over blades. Also I personally don't think your going to be able to hire blade pilots, its only going to be crew.

[@BadTactics101]

Since traders are the only people actually risking anything in this game, I only do it when I have auec to blow. I threw 25+ million auec at the Hull C before giving up. If I want to grind credits risk-free, I do combat.

[@MrSolLeks]

As a pvp pilot i hope we get back to the system where your ship gear is returned stock with bad componets when you get them from insurance, and that it takes longer. I want risk, as it is now i agree.

[@DavidLimaGoncalves]

If you are someone that spent 10 million uec worth of cargo, or spent the last three hours mining for quantanium, you'll probably want to avoid fighting as much as possible. Currently, in 3.22, one of the ways, if you were to encounter pirates, was to just throttle up and have your gunners shoot back while you try to spool and calibrate your QD. With these master modes, you can no longer do that. You are either forced to stay in combat, or will take massive amount of damage (and most likely soft death) before your ship even hits higher speeds. Like you said, if you are coming against a Hammerhead, and want to runaway, while your shields are buffering, they are also taking damage, and you are unable to shoot back... so why do I need gunners? And if I choose to stay and fight... well... a lot of SC player base don't really care for the PvP aspect. They understood there was that risk, but they were also comforted by the fact they had the chance the try and escape without having to engage in a dogfight, but rather a shoot and flee scenario that had as much chance to succeed as to fail. With this new approach, they'll basically be force to fight. And as basically your approach in the video is: "Just get good at dogfighting". Combat had a lot of issues... forcing you into staying in it, or massively hindering you when trying to escape it, is not the solution.

[@HybridVAudio]

I am curious if they are going to look at the turret behaviors for larger ships when enter QT mode. Because if ships can enter QT nav mode but still defend themselves, then this may make running a bit smoother for the larger ships. But also make combat interesting for those giving chase. Having tested multi-crew against these scenarios, we generally found it to not be an issue against smaller threats, but bigger threats like Ions and Infernos is a whole different kettle of fish.

[@DavidLimaGoncalves]

@@HybridVAudio CIG is trying to fix the "speed" issue by actually restraining your speed... and to me, that's not the solution. Arbitrarily taking control away from the player is not the same as giving the player a challenge. They could've made the targeting system become more inaccurate at higher speeds, or the shield recharge rate drop relative to speed, or having higher power fluctuations or overheat at higher speeds, they could even make the QD spool drop with each weapon hit. They could hinder adjacent systems the faster you go. This would encourage players to stay below SCM to have a fully functioning ship, but present them (on both sides) with bigger challenges when going faster. I just don't think this is the way to go. Combat balances seem to be ok, but still a bit more work. But forcing non-combat players to stay in combat because the alternative is even worse, will probably make people less interested in SC... until one day all we have are just pure PvP people.

[@brad433]

@@DavidLimaGoncalves Those are all legitimate methods to accomplish the aim of slowing things down. I don’t think they’re particularly better or worse than doing so arbitrarily by “mode.” The problem cases can be addressed in many ways under either method. Make solo industrial ships tougher or faster to improve that balance. Keep weapons but lose shields while spooling to allow turret use and maybe weapon strength declines with QT assisted speed. These can all be done and still under MM. It’s all arbitrary penalties however they pull them off. Idk, one could argue it’s too easy to escape from combat in the old model. Gotta find the right balance.

[@DavidLimaGoncalves]

@@brad433 I agree that it was way too easy to just escape, but "Escape & Chase" and Dogfighting are 2 different concepts, that require you to play differently. Right now, CIG seems to be imposing the latter on you, by, not only making the first one nearly impossible or heavily punished, but also removing the "fight your way out"... there is no fight in NAV mode... none... other than ramming other ships. And my issue is that both the wait times between MM and turning off shields and weapons feel like the game is taking control out of you (the player), for no other reason than: "You have to fight, there is no alternative, you either fight, or risk getting blown away before being able to reach high speeds". And add that to the fact, that it seems that ships like the Mantis not only will be able to prevent you from going into QT, but will lock you into SCM. So basically, if you are someone that accepts that PvP is in the game, but your tactic is to run away, well... you can't.

[@brad433]

@@DavidLimaGoncalves I’m hearing you, but not hearing you suggest any alternative. You agree it has been too easy to escape. Spool times and losing shields increases risk for running. It’s harder to escape unscathed. It’s a proper goal, and remember, any method they use is going to be an arbitrary limitation preventing you from just jumping away. So all we’re really talking about is balance. It should take some effort to escape. It shouldn’t be easy, and it shouldn’t be impossible.

[@Lerium]

Don't forget about AI crew members. Soloing big ships will be a thing with AI crew. (Probably in like 5 years though..)

[@Jakob3xD]

yeah and they always said it will be less effective then real crew... so what is your point?

[@Lerium]

@@Jakob3xD I think you read my point :)

[@polblanes]

or 10.. you underestimate how hard it can be to make good AI. Also it's an incredible design challenge if you're supposed to be able to communicate with them while you fly. I don't believe soloing big ships in combat will ever be a thing. Actually I believe AI crew will be limited to passengers, turret gunners (where an AI blade would work the exact same way) and guards if not totally scrapped altogether. Other than that and you're in the realm of having to design a command / input system to order your crew while you pilot that will probably be either very annoying to use or very overpowered. I wouldn't hold my breath for it. Right now, have the mindset that there won't be AI crew and you just can't fly a large ship solo. You want to fly a large ship? Hire some player to fly with, don't be awkward, it's an mmo.

[@JokeInstructor]

7:00 - The problem with the whole "hiring escorts" thing is and has always been that after two or three rounds of "paying escorts" I have no money left to trade at all.

[@andrenft]

if you pay more money for your escorts than the route will reward, im pretty sure it wont worth lol

[@palehorseriderx]

I don't have a problem when it comes to MM in combat, I just think nav modes need some form of shield for now, especially since armor isn't a thing yet. If a non-combat player in a non-combat ship gets ambushed when in nav mode, they're essentially defenseless. Switching to combat mode could take half a minute, and they'd be dead before that.Or maybe make the power triangle do some actual work. Putting power to shields would affect boosts, disable weapons, but make sure you survive in an ambush? IDK

[@mike_d_melb_music_fan5229]

Exactly! At least don't take shields away in nav mode !!!!

[@j.d.4697]

I agree cause it destroys non-combat ships that rely on speed coupled with big shields. But I think they will rather buff those ships than add shields outside of SCM, because one of the reasons for removing the shields from higher speeds is that they don't want people who committed to a fight to be able to just zoom on outta there whenever they feel like.

[@mike_d_melb_music_fan5229]

But SC tools says this about the new Pyro system: "Any improperly shielded spacecraft will sustain residual damage from Pyro's star while making transit through the system." So what does that mean for ships unshielded in Nav mode ?? 🤔

[@user-zr1tx8ts5y]

Seems like a massive fucking oversight to me 🤣

[@TheStorm357]

The reality is that until we can get NPC crew, you have to find players willing to work under me on my ship vs playing on the ships they payed for. Until those cargo loads are worth a flat stupid amount of cash. You cant afford to pay enough even if you could find people willing to do it every run for as long as you are playing, every time you are playing. It is just not going to work until we CAN hire on those npc crew when players just are not available.. which will be most of the time for most people. It is not a problem of it not working, it is a problem of it not working until we actually have to tools to make it work and we only have a screwdriver at the moment instead of the whole tool box. As it sits now, we end up with light ship pilots, a very few big org large ships fully crewed during prime time, and rapidly no one else as normal players get online and realize that they can no longer use the ships they own. I love the way things are going, but it just can not work yet. They need to pause some of this until we do get the rest of the tool box.

[@brad433]

That isn’t the reality at all. I play multi-crew the majority of my time in the PU. Nobody in my groups is “working under” anyone, and whose ship it is varies. It plays out like this: log into game, see some people your friends with, send party invites or join in discords to get together for multicrew. If they don’t join you fall back to smaller ships. The pay is high enough. Multicrewing a reclaimer has been one of the most profitable things in the game even after the split. People are just greedy and think they should make the same amount by soloing what’s intended to be multiplayer compensation. Well, hopefully that ceases to be as viable and maybe multicrewing can be the most profitable after the split, but not reliable solo. Personally don’t like the AI blade/crew concept as it works against multiplayer gameplay. If it ever comes, I hope it’s prohibitively expensive. Something to nerf the solo profitability. Player multicrewing should be more profitable per capita than anything else because there’s more effort to arrange and coordination involved.

[@JS-wt8vf]

The irony is, I haven't really been all that fussed about the MM change because I was flying when we did this before with Supercruise. It was one of the first flight modes and I liked it quite alot. In many ways for me, this is like comeing full circle or coming home. Yes, I know the two systems are very different but the sentiment is the same.

[@HybridVAudio]

I remember those days. After flying the current live flight model and thinking of ways CIG could fix stuff before they announced MM. I thought that they may need to bring back that old idea, it just made sense if they wanted to slow things down.

[@SpaceMike3]

I was thinking that too. We've seen a lot of changes

[@sulferix7265]

2.5 era is back baby! Welcome to the 2nd golden age of star citizen space combat

[@chrisandrews3979]

CIG is also going to have to realize the a large portion of the player base like to play solo and that's not going to change no matter now much CIG wants to push people to play in groups. If they make if too difficult for solo players to play then they will lose players. That said solo players will also have to realize they can't solo large ships by themselves and not expect their to be problems. A lot of people are riding on the fact that CIG can do a fantastic job with AI crewmates. I hope CIG comes through!

[@davedanter]

They can solo all they like in a single seater, yet living in denial over being able to solo a large ship is barmy. NPC's/AI blades are yrs away, cig will be in no rush to bring them into game, CIG have planned for $ spending backers manning ships, anyone with a double iQ should understand that much. Flying a large ship solo, will be near impossible and pointless, mastermodes/Engineering/Fire management and imposed redundant systems and weapons, will render the ship a eunuch.

[@chrisandrews3979]

@@davedanter Everyone knows where the money is. But you would have to be pretty stupid to ignore the wishes of a large portion of your player base. I'm not saying that single players should be able to solo large ships without issue, i specifically said that in my post. I am just saying that they need to make sure the game is just as fun and playable for the solo player as it is for the person who wants to play in large groups.

[@jasonp.1195]

@@davedanter With the new internal ship mapping systems I would suggest that a Captain's chair operator could control a big multicrew NPC crew much like a top down RTS game. They'd could be monitoring internal systems and while issuing orders to the NPCs (and human players) for power rerouting, fire extinguishing, turret manning and so on. I think this would be a good use for those captains chair stations. Piloting via an NPC might be a bit lackluster, but that might be one of the first stations to man with a live human once you've got one.

[@hollywoodguy70]

Wrong wrong and wrong. I've upgraded a giant fleet to multicrew sub-capital ships and corvettes, but there is no expectation from me for CiG to dumb down those ships to eliminate crewmember requirements. Those are whole game loops they're working on. If I can't find org members to help me crew those ships, I have solo ships. I also expect to keep those ships in storage if org mates need engineers (any subdepartment), gunners, medics, security, mechanics, etc.

[@rooster1012]

@@jasonp.1195 CR already stated that there will NOT be ai pilots on player ships he also said thing like shield management and engineering stations will require players. There are so many cubicle incels destroying MMOs and they simply won't be catered to in this game and that has been made clear for years.

[@sheetpostmodernist398]

I've been mulling over this for a few days as I try running Pirate Swarm in a variety of fighters, and I'm not even sure the issues I'm seeing are all directly due to MM. I think restricting combat to lower speeds has actually brought some other long-standing issues with combat to the forefront. Unfortunately, everything is changing all at once, and it's really tough to pick out a root cause. When speed wasn't capped by MM, I would go through stages of combat, usually uncapping my SCM speed for evasive maneuvers when I needed to get some distance, and coming back in before dialing it back down once I was in range. I had the ability to evade when I needed, and re-engage. Now, those evasive cycles just can't happen, and I'm realizing what's going on that made them necessary in the first place. If you go head-to-head with another target... you never merge. You just don't. You can gun the engines and boost all you want, but your target is going to back-strafe and slide all over to keep you in his sights. It doesn't seem limited to lighter craft either, ships just seem able to stay locked head-to-head for extended periods, and never cross paths or break off. It happens eventually, but it just feels unnatural how long something like a Reliant can just circle strafe while you try to approach it. The whole thing is making me question exactly why strafing thrusters are so strong. Why can't my main engine push me fast enough to close the distance with another ship back-strafing? I may be missing something crucial, but this isn't even against players, this is just AI doing this in combat. The worst part of all of this is that it came at the same time as a massive rebalance of every weapon and ship, to the point where it's really hard to pin down what's causing any of it. Too many variables all changing at once, and it's easy to blame MM for the lot of it, when it might only be a trigger that showed us _many_ broken facets. The ship rebalancing feels terrible though. I know they want heavy fighters to be less nimble than lights and mediums.. but when I'm having trouble outmaneuvering a Corsair in an F8 Lightning, something is _really_ out of whack.

[@mhmm4840]

Your first point is my biggest issue with MM. In a ship that is basically a gun with engines strapped to it, why am I not allowed to run away? Isn't running away admitting defeat, or is everyone just extremely bloodthirsty? If your just fighting to fight, then yea I can understand why you would like MM. But as someone who is thinking about objective based fights (eg. having air superiority over a compound that you have a bunch of guys raiding, protecting the cargo ship from pirates) jousting just means you lose. Winning isn't always about blowing the other ships up. These are my preferred changes to the CURRENT flight model/reasons why its not as bad as people think, just know I dont hate master modes. I just think it's trying to solve a problem that is only an issue because there isnt any objective other than blow up the other guy. -If they wanted to keep light fighters having ridiculous speed, why not just lower the damage they do? Force people that want to use fighters to have a SQUAD of fighters to actually do damage to larger vessels. Doing solo runs on a target shouldn't stop their shield from recharging, 6 guys doing runs should. -I've also seen lots of people put cannons on their ship and then complain about fighters, sir you do know cannons have slow projectile speed compared to repeaters? -Most fights are not going to be 1v1's in the future in my opinion. This is what most people seem to not understand because they want to play the game as a solo player. I get that because a majority of my time in Star Citizen so far has been solo, but if I want to go lock down Jumptown I can not do that by myself. Ideally we have some guys inside stacking drugs and making sure no one has sneaked past the "perimeter" made by the guys outside, and some ships flying overhead to keep other ships off the guys on the ground. If i joust with 1 fighter and end up not over Jumptown anymore, then I'm actively helping the enemy by "leaving my post". Keep in mind you can do this with like 6 people depending on what gets brought to fight you, 1-2 inside, 2+ outside shooting any nerds who get to close, and 2+ ships overhead protecting the guys shooting nerds. I just don't understand the fascination on 1v1's because outside of arena commander or group events, when is it going to be a fair fight? If I'm ever in a 1v1 situation I've already messed up, because I should always have someone in another ship watching my back (or at least a rear gunner, oh wait they are useless because I can just point myself at the enemy 24/7, please give us atmospheric flight, and make the main thruster actually feel like main thrusters) I'm always going to try and bring more people/more firepower than my opponents. Where will your honor be when your respawning, and I'm taking your loot? Not with your loot thats for sure >:) EDITS cause im bad at spelling :(

[@alexpetrov8871]

>having trouble outmaneuvering a Corsair in an F8 Lightning Allthough F8C is quite slow ship it's forward thrust speed right now is 450, Corsair backward thrust speed is 205. You doing something wrong ))) Do you neutralize side speed difference before approach?

[@DennisBLee]

The problem you're describing in being stuck nose to nose is what all the combat pilots are complaining about as well. In order to merge, you need to close the orbit and intersect the vector that your opponent is orbiting on. This is impossible or difficult to do when they can backstrafe/sidestrafe faster than you can move forward in a diagonal lead pursuit. As Hybrid mentioned in the video, strafing left or right while moving forward actually nets you LESS acceleration than just strafing in a single direction. This used to not be a problem because combing your strafes would let you tricord or bicord diagonally to cut across the orbit.

[@sheetpostmodernist398]

@@alexpetrov8871 It's not the strafing so much as the Corsair just seeming to have no trouble pivoting to face me, no matter how I try to get behind it. I'm not going to claim to be an expert, so it might be more about how I'm trying to circle around him, but even if I do get behind him, he has no trouble pivoting to face me again, pushing me back to evasive.

[@sheetpostmodernist398]

@@DennisBLee I wonder what the goal of this is then, and whether it's just a question of bad vector addition, or if they're reducing the thrust on purpose to simulate something else. So you're saying that two thrusters are adding together to give you less than their vector sum should amount to. That actually sounds more like they're treating thrusters as _ducted_ thrust from the main engine, rather than separate banks, and accounting for losses in total thrust due to the extra factors involved in routing. I can understand the engineering principle behind it, but I've also never gotten the impression that that's what was intended with the maneuvering thrusters in this game. That doesn't look physically possible with some of the smaller ships.

[@raven9ine]

28:35 the problem is, we could keep space flight authenticity and still make it fun. The issue witg MM is that afterburner exceed scm speeds and then make it slow down again, making it feel like pseudo-atmospheric flight. Also, why we draw the line at the flight model, I don't find taking the tram in cities over and over again very fun, what about fast travel? Also I don't find loosing all my shit on death fun. Tri-chording was only broken, becasue of the overpowered downward thrusters taht are necessary for taking off and overcome gravity. If tri-chording was implemented with the actual thrust thruster could output, it wouldn't be a problem, but support the space flight experience.

[@BlooJay.mp4]

I realize now after so many years without MM that i never properly utilized cover. I think the main reason is general engagement speed. Cover always felt more like something to watch out for and avoid hitting. Now with MM i find myself using obstacles as actual tools. I feel like maverick every time i drop chaff around an asteroid just to get a proper flank on my opponent. This was always technically possible before but only in the same way that sub 200 scm fights were always possible lol I am excited for what is coming next and what this will turn into. I dont think combat is in the best possible place it could be, but it certainly feels more fun than before. From here, we just need to tune and balance until its perfect.

[@nestorgomezlopez5844]

Maverick on a cessna

[@vast634]

Spool times etc: it makes sense for a developer to first implement the slowest or most inconvenient tuning, and speed it up/make it move convenient from there. The backlash would be bigger if they first have a fast spoolup time, and then reduce the time. Giving out perks is conceiver better than taking things away.

[@lordr1800]

i don't remember what i posted in mm thread, but i know my main concern with mm was more how it was working in game, not so much the mechanic itself. I've gotten used to switching and i actually used the more switched like brakes when i jump into a place (nav till 10k, scm till 1k from ground, landing gear till touchdown) it's fine. i think most of the people complaining about getting jumped are going to mining outposts without an escort. you can trade between stations and the main places and never be far from armistice and still solo it. you just won't be 'printing' money. i made 300k in 1jump with a c2 and never left armistice, so you CAN solo it. the problem is people wanting to make 1.5mill in 1 jump. don't pretend you can't afford an escort. youbgive 5 guys 50k show up and 50k safe arrival bonus you're still a millionaire with 2 loads. nobody should listen to rich people whining. mm is fine. the game is acting screwy tho in EPTU w mm, because it doesn't recognize (absolute) throttle position with the mode change, and seems to forget your speed. I've thought i was in scm and moved my HOTAS throttle and suddenly realized im in nav and it didn't speed me up, so i have the wiggle the throttle after a change. that's a coding issue, not a mm issue.

[@cprn.]

Most of this is plain bullshit. SC builds up to be yet another arcade game that suits only to flatter the egos of PvP gankers and has literally *nothing* to do with a sci-fi vision of the future. In that universe no company would ever send their cargo ship on a single route, because they'd need a guarantee that some ridiculous number of their cargo, like 99%, will always make it to the destination - otherwise there's no business in it. And CIG wants us to believe the way tech progressed 930 years ahead is by making ships defenceless while they spin-up their big escape-engines? Be real. If that was the issue preventing businesses from making money all of the Earth's researchers would focus on it and come up with stronger shields or automated turrets already. With this trend SC will end up having no haulers, no traders, no scavengers, no salvagers and no miners and the so called "pirates" will have nothing to pirate on but NPCs. They're looking for game loops where no game loop should exist - dogfighting in space, pirating by overpowering and outmanoeuvring huge cargo ships and their defences, sending players in risky scenarios where an AI could easily outperform any human with zero risks, denying drones and robots just so that players had an excuse to do things manually... It's getting ridiculous. The only good change lately is the new EVA system and it's still a big fucking question mark until it gets LIVE. And yet, people get excited beyond measure, whereas when you think about it, CIG didn't even solve the most basic issue when it comes to space - the question of infinite acceleration. It's a thing, it's science, it's a fact. But we have ships with *max speed* - wtf? So, yeah, a lot of players are having trouble adjusting to this system but not because of their "emotional investment" - it's because it makes no sense whatsoever. We have automatic cars outmanoeuvring human drivers right now. SC is fucking distant future and we still have human pilots? Girl, please... The real reason we can't have a general fun and deep gameplay is people like you, for whom CIG has to artificially keep the game loop in, making the game into Star Dogfighter instead of real Star Citizen, because skill-this and skill-that, while you don't even know what "skill" means.

[@MisterPotatoes861]

Completely agree but honestly warfare in space in a thousand years if it happens would be waged by AIs manning most systems launching guided missiles from across hundreds if not thousands of kilometers kinda like fighter planes mostly fight nowadays firing at targets beyond the horizon. The only place where classic wwii dogfighting may happen is if the pirates deceive and get close or if the missile fight failed through counter measure and now the ships are close. But most likely the fights would happen over like 20km apart at minimum.

[@cprn.]

@@MisterPotatoes861 They worry the game wouldn't be fun if they cut out dogfights but in reality it would make for tons of more creative opportunities, e.g. the goal wouldn't be to softkill a ship but to get close enough so that a person could EVA through the shields and gain physical access to the ship's panels or plant explosives, etc. I can imagine people coming up with strategies like using one ship to distract a turret while another one tries to drop troops behind the shields, or using several ships in line hiding one behind the next and switching places when the shields on the front one get depleted - that'd require some sick piloting skills - or maybe a stealthy approach where they'd slingshot themselves from afar with lights off and land on the cargo ship without ever being noticed. And then they'd have to cut through the hull with a torch to access system controls and disable the defences or force open cargo bay or just jettison the cargo into space to scoop up later on, or maybe even open a hatch without triggering an alarm and then silently board and take over the ship from the inside. Fully fetched space heists would be so much more interesting than just "shoot at each other, the one that survives takes the loot".

[@weok-doing-things]

I am worried about evasive maneuvres - for example I don’t have eye tracking or trackIR so using main thrusters to be more efficient in dodging meaning I can loose targets all the time :/

[@HybridVAudio]

Part of this can be resolved by improving the UI. Currently, the new UI can sometimes make it easy to lose a target that has gone out of your view. The older UI is easier to keep tabs on in comparison. This would be good feedback to send to the UI team in Spectrum for sure.

[@weok-doing-things]

@@HybridVAudio Avanger already made new video in his upcoming series where he mentioning eye/head tracking to be an advantage :)

[@andrenft]

@@weok-doing-things you really need to be aware whats going on around you, if you get on a bad position, MM wont let you live, you cant scape anymore and that is my main issue. Eye and head tracking will give you so much more advantage and you will be able to see bad positioning way more easily

[@svn6330]

@@weok-doing-things its always been an advantage. MM doesnt really change that. you see it all the time where a good pilot levels up because they get eye/head tracking and gain more spatial awareness. you can use the in-game padlock system to help, its far from perfect but it helped a lot before i had my head tracking

[@Lerium]

I really find it amusing seeing how people really believe that CIG is only focusing on multiplayer gameplay when it comes to these big ships.

[@weok-doing-things]

when people say that they can’t strafe as before - they probably don’t realist that strafe thrusters are much weaker and the more they have to move mass of the ship sideways the less effective they will be, regarding the speed. Plus if we talking about how things going in terms of engineering communications wiring inside the ship - the power plant is kinda split it overall energy output between thrusters, so for me new system sounds way more realistic and logical. And people who keen to realism for some reason don’t fly unbuckled mode all the time

[@jasonp.1195]

Switching to NAV mode resulting in defensive measures being dumped down the drain makes little world building sense. My non official suggestion is that the shields are being shifted to a forward focused Trek style deflector shield for Quantum travel. The new graphics for quantum travel look compatible with such an interpretation, even if unintentional, so that's what I'll pretend is going on. However, I cannot abide becoming an enforced loot pinata for the fighter folk with non shield countermeasures like flares and autonomously guided missile systems also going down. "Fun" is not multiplayer jammed into every corner when cat herding is needed to source players each session. Especially when NPC crew and armor are nowhere near.

[@HybridVAudio]

It would be interesting to see if they would be open to allowing counter measures when in nav mode. Maybe in Nav Flight but in QT mode you can't use it? Not sure. I'm curious to see what they end up doing with it in the long run as more data is collected from players using it in the verse.

[@Jendax]

does anyone know whats the ship in the thumbnail??? i feel like ive been searching for hours and still have no match

[@Devildog-9811]

Hull-C

[@IceCall]

I play the game since the 2.6 and I'm more a PVP AC player. I realy love the new MM. It feels more main truster oriented making the trajectories more what we expect from a space simulator game. All our space culture get from like Star War Films wasn't match with the previous legacy model imo. I truly have fun chasing target and I'm really exiting to experience a large PVP engagement (org vs org) to see how the team play in this MM is good.

[@subnautios7023]

What about people in a caterpillar? Either you stay in scm mode and get slaughtered by next to any ship in the game even with gunners in your turrets. It has blind spots and running is not an option. Then in nav mode, you're sluggish in atmosphere and slow in space, it outruns maybe three ships in the game, then it gets shredded. The cat needs more love. And MM felt like it was put in without consideration.

[@subnautios7023]

Also, let's not act like having fighter escort is an option right now. The game does not support the system of paying someone to help you yet. Even if Master modes is a good idea, it only works with a bunch of other systems that CIG hasn't put in properly yet. When I can have AI blades and some assurance my fighter escorts won't murder me for my cargo, then MM will be welcome.

[@emperortivurnis9161]

I'll only say. It seems like people are forgetting that CIG is fully planning on rebalancing master modes AGAIN for Maelstrom lol

[@davedanter]

Yep, and it'll happen like clockwork, as and when needed, rebalncing is awesome, without it you'd have anal retents running the verse

[@rtek777]

The solo vs multicrew thing will balance out when CIG get NPC crews and AI Blades into the game. That's still a ways off as last I heard them say they needed to get SM and RL v2 out and working first before even trying to put more complex AI into the game.

[@NozomuYume]

The idea that we have to use the quantum drive to consistently travel at speeds that most people have personally traveled at on a commercial airliner feels incredibly silly. The biggest problem is that CIG is looking at things in terms of arcade tournament sportsmanlike contests instead of creating a world that feels like you're actually living it, and all aspects of the game are getting warped to fit this one concept of creating "cinematic" arcade ship combat. The hugest problem with this is "cinematic" is a terrible goal for a first person vehicle combat game, because "cinematic" is achieved by camera trickery in films, with multiple angles and camera zoom. When you try to force this into a constant first person perspective you wind up trying to force the *one constant viewpoint* into having the most cinematic views, this by its very nature limits your movement to be stuck to what would normally be done with camerawork instead.

[@j.d.4697]

WTF are you talking about? What commercial airplane goes 1k-2k mph? You clearly don't even play the game. And you don't have to go into quantum mode to go max speeds, you go into nav mode, of which quantum is not the only one. "The biggest problem is that CIG is looking at things in terms of arcade tournament sportsmanlike contests instead of creating a world that feels like you're actually living it, and all aspects of the game are getting warped to fit this one concept of creating "cinematic" arcade ship combat." No, the biggest problem is that clueless idiots like you are the loudest when not even understanding wtf they are complaining about.

[@Lerium]

What happened to my comment? There was another guy that I was talking to in a comment on here and he kept editing his original comments whenever I would challenge him on something he said to make it look like its not what he said. I finally called him out for it and then I can't comment anymore and my comment got deleted.

[@skillatube]

Which head tracking system do you use? It looks fantastic. So smooth.

[@Ospray3151]

As a fellow evo, you know that spool timer are part drive and mostly set by the ship itself right? Even with the unifying of the QT drive spool timers, all industrial ships have a baseline that is longer than a heavy fighter, and the connie has around 20 second after the rebalance?

[@HybridVAudio]

I think part of the ship may play a role, but more critically it is the size of the drive and the type being used. There is also supposed to be a massive component rework/rebalance coming very soon I believe.

[@Ospray3151]

@@HybridVAudio I didnt run the number myself, but another evo checked the ships he could get access to, mainly small, medium ones on the server They found for small the ships spool timer is about 50% and for medium depending on the ship its 50-75% after the quick rebalance Many of the issue are due to design flaws and not fully thinking out the consequences These have all been pointed out, in some case directly conversation with the devs but whether they are able to do anything against the 'design vision' is another question For instance they have locked the switch between nav and scm to the drive spool timer, without realising that on exiting the diables the QT drive for a cooldown period, and after that only then can spool the drive This was originally intended to stop players from jumping away instantly but the new system added to the old only slow you down even more We do not know as cig hasnt said if cooldown timer will still be a thing with new QT drives So why not drop out and immediately go to scm mode? with shield and weapon up? CIG has confirmed that you will alway exit QT in nav mode by the design vision and will not change it So we are lead to conclude that if you exit from QT your supposed to be unable to move quickly and having to wait a timer out to be able to put up your shield and weapons for potentially up to 20 seconds? After every single even 10 second jump? (at least it is down from the 45-60 second for large ship now that they where shieldless/no weapon/max speed 80ms) No other game would drop you in a potential combat area with no defence and no weapon and limited movement until a timer ran down while allow anyone to shoot and kill you? Simply poor/bad design I'll admit the shield not coming back up after a QT jump until the cooldown and spool timers have run down even if switching to SCM might be a bug, so why not just exit QT in SCM then? That is before we get to locking scanning modes in mining to scm speeds while spreading out resource nodes at 10-20km or more I could continue to list all the design flaws/oversights but this would get very very long and that is before we even get to any bugs XD These aren't bugs, or edge cases, they immediately encountered after leaving the hanger and jumping anywhere, cig clearly hasnt thought this through

[@HybridVAudio]

​@@Ospray3151 It may, or may not have been thought through. Neither you or I are in their meeting rooms so we don't know for sure what their intentions are. That is on them to convey. Best to assume these are already known to them and is being worked on as the current design is not even being close to being finished. Furthermore, we know that Yogi mentioned that NAV will be the default all around (like it was changed to recently) and with the coming Q-boost and Q-drive changes, it stands to reason that this will be vastly different in the near future. But again, it is up to CIG to be communicative on that front. This is why the feedback has been that the transit modes are very clunky, and no doubt CIG is aware of this. Either way, with systems missing they have to work within the limitations they have imposed on themself, for better or for worse. But even so it is only for a short period of time since Q-Boost and much more is around the corner for this year.

[@Ospray3151]

@@HybridVAudio yes, it make you wonder why it was done this way It the worse of both systems then asking for feedback on it? You have a new system which makes travelling demonstrably worse, yet most of the people testing have spend most of the time travelling and don't even go into combat unless forced into combat against their will. So of course the replies are very negative Imo it would have been far better to introduce the new complete system than the hacked together one which serves only to annoy a percentage of the player base making the game more tedious and less far less enjoyable

[@sulferix7265]

I was there over 8 years ago. When 2.6 dropped. I was very invested in the 2.5 flight model. Was good at it and everything. Only for it to be gutted for a dogshit flight model that forced a 2 ship meta for 8 long years. So you can imagine how vindicated I feel now that we are returning to the glory days. Mm id basically identical to 2.5, with a bit more sluggishness. Needless to say, the losers who 'got good' at the current pile of stinking garbage excuse for a 'flight model' can get royally fucked for all I care. I'm happy that the flight model I'm good at is back in the game again. I'm already kicking ass in ptu. At least as much as I can at low framerates :p

[@Hav0k]

This is probably one of the most accurate takeaways from MM. It is DEFINITELY a return to the glory days of when the flight model felt better in 2.5 and below.

[@ksl-988]

One thing I always hoped for with MM is that it would end the meta-driven strategy that most players use. Some players are going to need to adjust to thinking for themselves on how to get better at combat, rather than reading a reddit thread on what the best meta is, plunk down $300 on whatever ship they decided on, and then have insta-skill.

[@nathanforrester5140]

C2 solo Trading is Fine you just need to be smart about what you are jumping into. You will have to plan your jumps so you do not jump into into a bounty zone or PvP hot spot. I know there are a LOT of people out there that Hate solo traders. No Solo trading will be fine but it will require people to play smart. In fact Solo trading will be the VAST majority of traders. When the new cargo comes in we will not be taking large ship to the small trade sites anyway. We will be going to the larger trade centers. little ships will go to the smaller places.

[@0Metatron]

The playing smart part is very true, there are many ways to avoid pilots but it takes extra effort and knowledge (learning the game) And it’s the same with MM, you now have to think about how and when to escape and not just pressing the run away button

[@nathanforrester5140]

@@0Metatron I totally agree man. People should learn a lot of what they need to know running the smaller ships as they work there way up to the larger stuff. Still you will lose a load from time to time but over all not having to split the profits makes it worth running solo.

[@MylesJacobSwie]

One chance I think will be hugely beneficial for larger cargo vehicles is the manual loading process. It will mean if players choose to hire escorts or gunners, they can save costs and time on loading by having the gunner assist in the loading process. This would give a reason for the support player to be there, even when no combat occurs. It also cuts the effective “cost” of the support down since their pay might have initially gone to NPC loading costs.

[@Commander_Hellfire]

With the new flight model, newer players won’t be able to get into as many different gameplay loops without having to pay for escorts. Do you think that a newer player wanting to try out cargo will be able to afford to pay for a reliable escort for the case that they get interdicted? Many people are getting screwed over unless they want to join groups to do basic trading when first starting out. This flight model makes it easier for those “pirates” (they don’t have enough honor for that title) who camp trade zones waiting for people who are coming in to sell or buy.

[@mhmm4840]

A new player doing cargo is going to be in a pretty small ship, making considerably smaller profits, as well as being nimble compared to a freighter. Someone in a C1 might be able to out fly their captors and escape, or only lose 1mil UEC. While someone in a Hull-C is not going to be able to escape at all, and have millions, if not billions worth of cargo on their ship. Also if your taking anything larger than a C1 down to pick up some cargo planetside, you're just asking for trouble. Cargo weight hasn't been added yet, so some of these larger vessels that can fly it atmosphere full of cargo are not going to be able to hold themselves up. Pirates will also most likely camp trade lanes between station either way. Disabling someones ship in atmo is just asking for it to explode when it hits the ground. On top of all of that, the prices for ammo, fuel, and everything is still on the cheap side so players can mess around in the PU. Flying around in atmosphere just hovering waiting for people is going to drain your fuel in minutes, if your maneuvering thrusters dont overheat and drop you to the ground first. Long story short, escort are meant for the large vessels that can escape themselves. Otherwise your just paying people to fly next to you essentially.

[@alexpetrov8871]

There is no sense to "escort" small cargo ships. You won't be able to protect them. They'll be just shot first.

[@Yo_Spoots]

I'm still traumatized when I watched you zip around SPK in that Fury while Venge tried to track you LOL

[@Cataclysmkingu]

What head tracking are you using wow ?

[@cfisk85]

When the enemy pops into SCM mode, quantum isn't the quickest way to escape anymore. Now you must switch to nav mode and actually fly away while their locked down to 200ish velocity. Then pop quantum to get further away

[@alexpetrov8871]

>their locked down to 200ish velocity Small fighters boost up to 600 in SCM, it may give them enough time to shoot off some critical component from unshielded prey. Probably best strategy for them would be to use distortion scattergun to cripple target.

[@cparty7790]

I just hate the shield power down for the nav mode transition. Should drop the power when you actually enter nav mode. But then that's probably a balance thing.

[@HybridVAudio]

I've seen some suggestions regarding that. Would be curious to see if that is something they may look into. It does seem silly that immediately you lose shielding before fully entering the mode. But when exiting you get full shields back before the transition even finishes.

[@MrFWStoner]

How does the ESP work for you now? I have the feeling it doesn't do anything in 3.23

[@HybridVAudio]

I have not touched it at all since they changed it to a generic strength slider. I usually keep my settings default in the PTU to establish a baseline before adjusting, and so far I have not felt like I needed to tweak it yet. Have you tried increasing the strength a bit in the settings?

[@MrFWStoner]

@@HybridVAudio Even on max I overshoot like crazy. Have the feeling it doesn't do anything. Corrected it a little by adjusting the sensitivity curves of my right stick

[@HybridVAudio]

@@MrFWStoner Yeah, stick level adjustments are key to get a good feel. I would recommend adjusting the curve at stick level. Turn down ESP to its extreme (either lowest or highest) and adjust to taste from there. Usually helps if you have a buddy that can be a target for you to adjust to.

[@KarlBarbosa]

Question: In master modes, do you exit quantum in scm or in nav? If you exit in scm, that's a problem IMO.

[@alexpetrov8871]

In NAV, but at 0 speed. So you have to speed up.

[@Ospray3151]

It's worse than that You exit in nav mode, with qt on cool down So you have no shield or weapon unless you switch, but you cannot move faster because the movement speed in nav mode is tied to having the qt drive spooled up! So you drop out slow and cannot go fast yet have no shield or weapons or flares either until the qt drive has cooled down and spooled up Many of the issue are due to mm coming out before the quantum travel rework

[@kookiespace]

The thing I find the weirdest is that this was even a priority. Tbh it feels like they were trying to fix a problem that didn't exist. Like... the game is so unfinished, wasn't there anything else that would have been better time spent working on? Anyway... I hope CIG listens to feedback (not the angry trolls), and hopefully something good comes from this

[@deceptiveanswer]

TBH, considering this is the first iteration of MM and knowing CIG, I am 100% sure all this is still very much subject to change. Personally I don't mind the new system.

[@doubledigital_]

melted all my big ships.. bah 1 and that so i can have my big hanger when the cargo patch drops.. as a solo player most of the time I see no point in having a huge ship. I rock all the tiny ones for cargo, mining and salvage. no point what so ever in having big ships for the solo grind tbh... Lets hope base building is a thing sooner rather than later.. all my wallet money needs spending lol.

[@Bland-79]

They need to make AI gunners and crew a thing soon. Really they should have made this a thing considering how difficult it is to get escorts and gunners.

[@vik12d89]

I've been playing on and off since 2016. I like Master Modes. I play on a wide screen with 2 flight sticks. The flight model is important to me.

[@novalis791]

Glad to see tricording curtailed

[@sky_dancer6821]

Unfortunately, they are not here yet but hirable NPC's and AI blades will someday still help to "solo" bigger ships

[@brianv1988]

So I feel like I hate something but I don't know what I hate cuz I can't figure out what the hate is cuz that's something that I hate I don't know what I hate sometimes I hate when I get confused that's how I feel when I see people that say I hate something but don't give an excuse

[@VolondM]

I really like MM, but it definitely needs some tweaking. Also AI Crew sould come sooner rather then later. I'm not worried though. This is a game in development, and things will inevitable change.

[@Qwarzz]

I'm just excited everytime things get changed in Star Citizen. It can rarely be any worse than the current system :)

[@AJ-em2rb]

honestly bounties shouldn't just appear in atmosphere. they should spawn roughly 500-1000KM above a planet's surface, then QT to the planet and then spline jump to the nearest POI and then fly to the intended combat zone manually not becoming hostile until they either reach the location or their hunter comes within 50km of them

[@_Anaklysmos_]

Regarding what you said at 10:30 : If you look at most of the spectrum comments - at least whenever I look on spectrum, which is almost daily - the people critcising Master Modes are usually already doing so in a highly construtive manner where they precisely explain what is wrong with the new combat geometry, weapon velocity, general speed, the feeling of space drag, one-vector thrust... the list goes on and on. We are already trying our best to provide our feedback for the past 6 months now, but CIG won't seem to listen. I get it, they don't want to throw away 2 years of development, but seeing as the fundamental issues with Master Modes (considering Combat as well as generally flying around in the Verse) it seems like abandoning Master Modes would be the better choice.

[@dean8367]

Elite Dangerous with Super Cruise makes more sense!

[@Canadain69Bacon]

For me master mode isn't to bad the two things that i don't like it ls that you slow to 30km when landing gear comes out i dont like that since i can slide around i did figured out a way to do it and the shaking of the ship when you are flying at high speeds i think thats point less if it was to just shake when on plant sure but in space shouldn't shake like its ready to fall a part thats what it feels like to me but i did find out in master modes the taurus flys really good best ship i found flys like a heavy fighter could just be me but i would give it a try

[@MILSPECMOM]

I completely understand learning something for 10+ years only to have it completely rug pulled from you is rather irritating however, if you can't adapt and overcome chances are you only care about said change due to an overactive ego rather than an actually legitimate complaint. Do I like MM? No. I feel it's watered down from what we're use to and we should be offered the option as to what mode we want top utilize ala DCS. On the other hand I strongly feel that this will make the sim more accessible to the average citizen. Not everyone owns a simpit and HOTAS/HOSAS and wants that sort of precise controls. Anyhoo, just my two cents. Thanks for all you do citizen. o7 Sgt. Alita Drummer, 1st Batt. Ret.

[@gyratingwolpertiger6851]

To be fair it's not been something they've learnt for ten years as we have had multiple flight models.

[@MILSPECMOM]

@@gyratingwolpertiger6851 Fair enough but my point still stands. :)

[@HybridVAudio]

I'm pretty much in agreement with you here. Me personally, I would love SC to be more closer to a hardcore sim like DCS in terms of complexity, but that ship sailed long ago as it became obvious over time that they wanted to plant their flag somewhere in the middle of being a sim and arcade to increase accessibility with some level of complexity. Once I came to that realization, I just went with the flow of things since I've still been having fun with my org regardless of what I personally wanted.

[@gyratingwolpertiger6851]

@@HybridVAudio As the devs themselves have said Take it to sim and dual it back to fun.

[@MishaDark]

@@gyratingwolpertiger6851 yep, hardcore sims feel like hard work to most players.. its only a small community that actually derive genuine enjoyment from a hardcore sim XD I'm one of those people that likes hardcore, but I can recognize that I am in the minority of gamers.

[@eltreum1]

MM is not even going to be the final model and combat balance but an overdue shake up. We have new atmo flight model, armor, ammo types, and engineering still waiting to come in and disrupt balance. Ships feel more substantial with room to give them more character now and some weapon variance. Pilots who train are always going to have an edge over lower skilled pilots no matter what they do with the numbers. There is room for more tactical combat now.

[@j.d.4697]

I like the master modes. But in terms of combat I am not experienced enough to say how things will change long-term, I can only tell there are a few things that don't make sense and might be bugs. And in terms of realism it's completely retarded. But at the end of the day I still enjoy the experience I get with the new system.

[@RYCOPZ]

Subscribed. I've seen a lot of improvements in MM between 3.22 AC and 3.23 EPTU AC. Smoother boost, better UI and the new weapons stats are all great. My main gripe is with nav mode. I find it to be needlessly clunky, unintuitive, intrusive and frustrating in the sense that it interrupts the continuity of the flight experience. I honestly think they should consider getting rid of nav mode completely and evolving the boost mechanic to handle the same speed range instead, by adding a simple ramp up cost to agility, stability, heat and component wear the faster/longer you burn. I.e how afterburners work in real jets at Mach 1+.

[@Mr_J112]

Honestly, MM is boring to me. I've started to play less knowing it's coming and that's fine. For me atmo flying is really boring, ugh. It's more boring than Microsoft Flight. The reason why I say that is because these are SPACESHIPS. There will be a lot of balance coming 😊👍, so fingers crossed to the release and future.

[@brad433]

What do you find boring about atmo flight in MM?

[@Mr_J112]

@brad433 Here's what I do like. Boosting feels better and has a smooth feeling to it. What I don't like is maneuvering. In a lot of ships. It's very clunky. I don't feel like you can pull off exciting tricks as much. Something about it is just boring. It feels catered to the Gladius or Arrow. Things will change 100% it's not the end of the flight model.

[@brad433]

@@Mr_J112 Can you tell me what sort of maneuver? I’m messing with low flying for a bit now. My take is it feels more like flight sims, where there isn’t much authority with anything but pitch and roll, particularly positive pitch. Are you trying to strafe? Do you play any flight sims? How does it compare to you?

[@Mr_J112]

@brad433 I do play Flight Sims. A spaceship shouldn't feel like an airplane. Arrow, Sabre, and Eclipse are the only plane like ships. MM is catered for Gladius and Arrow. CIG forgot about non combat and made a lot of them less fun. This game doesn't really have what would call Canyons, especially Daymar. Low flight is more meh and already was meh. Racing in atmo isn't as fun, unless in the MISC snub. And it will be adjusted before live I HOPE. But I'm just not a fan. I play but end up getting off a lot faster because I'm bored. I go back to PU. It just doesn't feel like you need skill for MM

[@brad433]

@@Mr_J112 I promise I’m not trolling you. I want to understand what you mean. What is it exactly you’re saying doesn’t feel right? What’s the basis for how a non-plane ship should handle? By non-plane, I assume you mean “brick” ships like a vulture. Are you saying that ship “should” feel good in atmo? What qualities are you describing as feeling good? What feels simplified to you? That seems like changing scope now. You’re saying things but not identifying why, which looks like you’re just parroting someone else (all due respect).

[@middleagedbaldguy6774]

It reminds me of the old upright arcade games I played in the '90s. Kinda garbage. Ive played about 4 hours in AC and I prefer the flight model we have now to this. Each to their own. I doubt I even bother with PVP going forward if this drops into the PU. My other concern is that tying ship functions to speed will make some of them useless for their intended "loops". A drop ship without shields at certain points in its mission? Barely moves with the gear down? Why? And who was asking for this? Seriously, who wants MM? Edit- and yes, upvotes is how an online community does in fact validate an opinion, for good or ill.

[@starbuck5728]

Pirates asked for it I guess. Pirating is implied game loop. I have no problem with current flight model honestly

[@middleagedbaldguy6774]

@@starbuck5728 me either. If they wanted to cut down on jousting buff missiles and folks will rush to jam the WEZ in a lightly shielded ship. In anything larger vs a light fighter I just move the Power Triangle to shields and putt along till I can jump away.

[@starbuck5728]

@@middleagedbaldguy6774 MM combined QED pretty much impossible to escape from

[@HybridVAudio]

You're asking the wrong question. It has nothing to do with who wants MM, but instead what does the game need to achieve the vision both CR and CIG have in mind for the game. The current FM just simply doesn't translate well to the close in, WW2 style of combat CR had in mind, where things are slower and much closer like you would see in traditional sci-fi media. This is also closer in line with his much older games he was famous for. This is the goal they settled on after years of trying to find the right way to hammer this model down. Trying twitch shooter like systems initially, then post 3.0 moving on to a slower accel but higher top speed system like we have in live right now with a lot more freedom of movement, and then finally now, after concluding that experiment, picking something much slower and deliberate (and closer to the older 2.6 model) and seemingly now sticking with it, now that SQ42 is on the horizon.

[@middleagedbaldguy6774]

@@HybridVAudio Hard pass then. It doesnt interest me. I got my fill of upright video games back in the 90's. I also think CIG needs to ask what its players want, not what Chris Roberts wants. He works for us after all, not the other way around.

[@christoperblair5172]

It helps to remember that this is not the first time CIG has asked for feedback, and that was only after over a year blackout on the details of MM. The latest feedback to a large extent offers up nothing new. What is frustrating for backers is when we are finally asked for feedback, then the feedback is largely ignored. It's much like the IC. You got a bug so you go look it up and voila, the bug has been previously reported and further more it is marked as archived. Wasting time as backers is just as frustrating, so Devs show some empathy. I would think that a few folks blowing off steam to a Dev is entirely predictable. Respect is earned. Asking us for feedback on a system that has already passed signoff and is slated for release is insulting. What is more insulting is that all the little problems that MM was claimed to fix, still exist. Yet we are expected to accept an arcadey FM. This isn't what we were promised.

[@svn6330]

I think overall theres a lot of negative sentiments because people are far too used to just getting away with 1 movement (trichord). Now i play in a decent level of pvp in SC and the fights in live be more dynamic if they were limited to certain conditions in a team fight like presetting speed limiters to 500m/s, while oyu could have incredible 1v1s if both pilots were capable and willing to push the other. MM dumbs a lot of that down and while it doesnt truly solve the issues you see in a lot of pvp engagements it helps in a lot of ways. MM is going in a good direction for the future of the game . if continued iteration on the FM is actually happening then we have a lot to look forward to as far as potential. I personally enjoy MM a lot, though i think im enjoying experimenting with guns again now that we have more than 1 viable option. to sum my opinions up, MM is going to be good for the game, load of people will not be happy and some may quit, but this isnt the first time CIG has done something like this with similar outcomes and we will see if this is truly the FM that sticks in time.

[@TheAIKnowledgeHub]

So the problem is he says you need to have escorts. But having escorts is a complete nightmare. We honestly need the ability to hire npc escorts or npc crew. With that being said it isn't really that hard to get away from nasty situations outside of you are landing or in thick atmosphere. All you have to do is boost hard and jump as soon as possible. Then kill the jump some distance away, figure out where you are, what needs to be fixed, and so on.

[@jchacon103]

Can you elaborate on why having escorts is a "complete nightmare"? And yes, currently in live the 3.22 allows you to go from 200 m/s to 1200 m/s in less than 2s. Which is great for needing to get out fast, but also makes dogfighting really obnoxious. Ignoring PvP, it also makes the pirate/lawful security/bounty hunter gameplay loops kinda pointless if your target is able to hard burn quickly and be out of danger in no time, severely impacting those gameplay loops.

[@DemiGod..]

That is antisocial don't you think?

[@TheAIKnowledgeHub]

@@jchacon103 it's a nightmare due to a number of factors. Finding another player, knowing if you can trust them, them not just bailing out or turning out to be a pirate, and a number of other things. Like keep in mind am escorts, 99% of the time they will be doing nothing. So this means you need to find someone OK with spending 3 hours basically doing nothing. I'm thinking a lot of the things that will fix this are a lot of things needed for npc crews.

[@Nemethon]

Prospector or Vulture with master modes, and quantum dampener with a 20km reach, you can't escape, are too slow and your weapons are too weak. The money you make is not enough to get escort. And even if you go out with other together, you are easy kills. So I stopping using this ships in the next patch. There are no fun anymore.

[@RobertFHarwood]

I am solo industry player. I agree with you, you are convincing me to leave Star Citizen. I hate combat.

[@nightfade9283]

I gave you a chance to change my mind but watching you spend for absolutely EVER trying to kill your target undermined every single positive thing you said about MM.

[@toymaker3474]

im probably the only person who likes the original flight model

[@TUROCK320]

👶🍼

[@HybridVAudio]

I remember being able to dodge from cover to cover in a fight because of the super high accelerations with the pre 3.0 FM. It was an exciting experience akin to a twitch shooter almost. But alas it clearly was not going to fit the final vision the game is going for, at least not at this point in the game's development.

[@Lerium]

The flight model right now needs work but it's way better than the flight model in Master modes.

[@andrenft]

@@Lerium i agree. I think the atmo flight expirence (microtech or hurston) was really good on current system. You are fast enought to desengage but you are not fast enough to fight 1 ship vs 3. The combats were closer and less boring than MM fights.

[@Storm-Cleaver]

My lack of interest in the (PVP) combat flight model is precisely _why_ I'm still feeling so salty about Master Modes. In no universe should a 400i, a Mercury, and a Corsair fly the same. But for the sake of "balancing" the "Archetypes" in 3.23 they do. In no universe should the 600i, Caterpillar, and Hull-C fly the same. But in 3.23, they do. That's fucked up. But Yogi is awesome and I trust him and his team to unfuck them. So, I'm confident that they will tweak the tunings of the S3-S5 ships so that they fly well and have individual handling again so that they're fun to fly. I'm just hoping it's soon and not Soon™. The changes to the guns sound cool. There will actually be reasons to think about what guns to put on _turrets_ now. High speed, high alpha damage but low magazine capacity makes me think the FL series will be a great turret gun. I'll have to sit down and look at all the stats once 3.23 goes live to decide what goes where. I might be going with the FL-33s on my MIS. And the Lightstrikes look like I might not be gimping my 325a anymore by using them due to how well they blended with the lines of the ship. I just might go back to using Lightstrikes on my 400i again with Attritions on the turret.

[@alexpetrov8871]

I do not understand what is the point to discuss is MM good or bad when right now in PTU CIG tune ships and weapons characteristics every 1-2 days and these changes sometimes are -+100% of value. There is simply nothing to discuss yet, nothing is finished.

[@Lerium]

You really think there is no point to discuss master modes right now? Why do you think CIG is making changes? It's from the feedback dude...

[@alexpetrov8871]

@@Lerium Yea, they read comments on youtube. Dude. have you ever tried to listen like 100000 opinions and come to some conclusion using this "data"? Feedback, sure )))

[@Lerium]

@@alexpetrov8871 CIG literally made a thread on spectrum for master modes feedback. Check it out and educate yourself.

[@alexpetrov8871]

@@Lerium CIG and any other gameDev uses server side statistics for such decisions. That thread is purely for PR purpose, because such a small number of players can't show what will million of silent casual players like )) Educate yourself.

[@Lerium]

@@alexpetrov8871 LMAO. You talk straight out of your ass 🤣🤡

[@Furnace2552-cz8iy]

For the solos or duos that just insist on being able to take big ships and go do stuff, your day will come back when we finally get NPC crew and AI blades you'll be able to do that but CIG has said multiple times that this is a multiplayer game. If you want to play solo take a small ship, You're playing the game how it was not meant to be played and then getting mad that it doesn't work the way it wasn't made to work.

[@KaryudoDS]

Kind of glad to see solo trading go, at least with the larger ships. This seems like one of many things to make doing that with a group more interesting. Just wish we had a good system for LFG. Someday.

[@Reaver-One]

Trading is barely profitable enough for a solo pilot. Splitting it across a crew, on top of increased risk from NPCs and freight elevators will kill the game loop entirely.

[@KaryudoDS]

​@@Reaver-One I don't get why you'd keep the pricing the same. That makes no sense. Though I can profit just fine right now, it wouldn't make sense to not adjust for that.

[@jchacon103]

​@@KaryudoDSabsolutely agreed. Some of the missions in eptu saw huge payout increases. I imagine the cargo missions will be very profitable when they come out.

[@ksl-988]

@@jchacon103 New features are always more profitable to promote players testing them. Then they always get nerfed.

[@BennettFamilyBasketball]

The game is (insert your opinion here) master Mode is (insert your opinion here) CIG is (insert your opinion here) To summarize (insert your opinion here) Get the point? Thanks for reading!

[@SpaceMike3]

There is SO MUCH fear and gloom over this. The language being used is so over the top. Let's wait till it's in. Test it as a huge community and watch in aww as the devs adjust it. Shocking

[@reynardtv1]

well since MM is around lets discus ZERO chance ships. In the following list of ships, you are dead in MM. All Freelancers, Vulture, Mole, 100 and 300 ships, Prospector, Connie or Corsair if you think you can fight before you run, Raft, cutter, Arora, Syulen, and Hull A. I left out the multi crew ships because they are multi crew. All the listed ships crewed or not will be wrecked by two fighters before they jump AI or not. The current shield interface does not work and the extended range on guns just gives small fighters a hit at range advantage. The full lack of a mechanic like quantum sneering and interdiction, Where CIG themselves have no idea of how it will fit within the current flight system. Yes, we have flight system with no consideration other than to make it look cool. Flight, wise it does not feel bad if you are in a small/single seat fighter, but your options have been cut down severely and with cannons what it is currently time to kill is like 15 sec. (that is by a bad pilot on a bad pilot). There are extreme holes that MM has where a lot of ships do not have a place. Without a true response of how these issues can be taken care of MM is a worse system than the current and I for one can't see where any of the above listed ships fit in MM. There is your feedback now give me real solutions within the MM flight model that will resolve them.

[@HybridVAudio]

I've tested the ships you mentioned in both in Pirate swarm and in the verse (prior to the laggy wave 1 and 2 releases) you can absolutely get away in them easily. But I wouldn't expect everyone to have the same skill set and flight hours as me being evo, so I can be in some agreement here. PvP is different because players are naturally smarter so there is a stronger argument to be made there for sure. It also depends on where you get jumped. If in atmosphere, most of those ships have a hard time getting away due to the nature of atmosphere. In space it is more trivial having tested these scenarios out myself. Ultimately, CIG has to look at the data and feedback and see if additional changes are needed. Undoubtedly so, but it remains to be seen what they decide in the near future.

[@weok-doing-things]

complexity and variability is what makes long-lasting games. easy to learn hard to master is the deepness we need. I hope CIG will not dial back their plans because of many newcomers or old players mad of them pushing changes and re-learning

[@Ospray3151]

Games that do well are easy to learn, hard to master and have depth of skill and systems involved When a game doubles the amount controls used and steps needed to simply to travel from a to b, and uses those systems to punish the unknowing instead of reward them then that is a flaw in design not an improvement And no it's not dark souls like, dark souls drops heavy hints as to what to do and can be played easily if following them This redesign add counter intuitive extra step for the reason of making travel slower and more tidious so others will have the chance to catch people travelling and prevent them simply flying away

[@weok-doing-things]

@@Ospray3151 I totally agree, the "jump" should be a straightforward grand thing with just two steps - select target, spool up and jump. Any debufs are quite cool actually - when you jump your shields down, etc. but things have to be straightforward.

[@tregar13]

NEVER think we don't have options.!

[@EeroafHeurlin]

ref AI ships having less health; this is one thing I do not like at all. It makes for a lot of baseless cheating accusations. Same for NPCs doing less damage. If CIG wants to make it easier for people to beat NPC ships those ships should be spawned in a damaged state so it's already obvious on scanners that these have "less HP" (or whatever the equivalen is going to be for maelstorm), have them be missing guns for reduced damage output etc. Making NPCs magically weaker (or stronger) by simply adjusting modifiers in the background is bad for everything; it hurts immersion, causes baseless accusations of cheating, etc.

[@CallmeRoth]

Saying SC is PVE focused is a bit short sighted. At present it exists this way but fast foward to a single server with 150k people in it and nearly everything with be primarily PVP, combat and non-combat related things. And you can be assured PVP will happen as a part of day to day life. The human element of the game is unavoidable and necessary in a 'sandbox' player driven universe environment.

[@attieable]

Statement "vast majority of players is not invested in the flight model"(no supported data). Then proceeds to say sentiments can skew perspective........do i need to point out the obvious?

[@HybridVAudio]

It works both ways. This is why I said repeatedly that CIG holds the data here and thus it is up to them on whether they want to disclose that or not. I can only speak from experience having played and covering this game for many years. The vast majority of people from my own personal experience are just not that heavily invested in the FM because they are more interested in the loops they want to take part in. Only a very small minority of individuals are highly invested in the FM and how that FM translates into combat related tasks such as PvP.

[@Lerium]

​​​​@@HybridVAudioSo wouldn't it make sense to listen to the people who actually know the flight model and have learned it and are skilled with it? Why would it make sense to listen to the people who don't care about flying around and only care about mining and cargo hauling and stuff like that?

[@brad433]

@@LeriumYou’re assuming they are not listening to the feedback of this very loud minority. There are competing requirements here, which is why they keep iterating and trying different things to find what feels good. One of those requirements competing with the opinions of the vocal minority, is to make combat more approachable, rather than dissuading players from combat because they still get their butts kicked in a 5 on 1 contest against a seasoned combat pilot. The old flight model is frustrating to new players, and even many not so new players. The balance is too far toward the aces. They should be better, but not the way it has been. Then add in their desire to reduce speeds for other reasons, like desync and actually being able to hit or unskilled players not uncontrollably jousting… or the arbitrary desire to have CLOSER combat to show off the pretty ships…. and ultimately you get a lot of counterweight to the opinions of the loud light fighter PvP crowd.

[@HybridVAudio]

​@@Lerium Because people who fly around and only care about mining and cargo hauling are just as important to the life blood of the game as the AC PvP sweat lords are. Not all interactions in the verse will be 100% combat oriented. There has to be some level of give and take.

[@Lerium]

@@brad433 why do you keep saying vocal minority? What makes you think it's only minority who doesn't like Master modes? If you go on spectrum (which on spectrum, there's more people that actually play the game then the commenters on KZbin) you can see that people are not liking master modes. If the majority of people did like Master modes there would be more upvotes on all of the positive comments. There may have been more now because of this weird campaign by all the streamers and content creators and people who generally aren't playing the game very much but are only agreeing with these people and supporting their opinions. I actually see a lot of people calling out the stuff that is wrong in master modes like the fact that it completely kills racing, 1v1 dog fights, and generally makes the game more unfun, amongst many other things. Hybrid v is right, CIG is the only one with the numbers. I'm just going off of what I am seeing. I have been with this project since 2013. I play daily and have put in thousands of hours. I want this game to succeed with every ounce of my being. This is my dream game and I want it to be the funniest for everyone. It's going to need to be challenging though. One of the games that was mentioned by Chris Roberts and compared to Star Citizen at the very beginning of this project, was Demon's Souls. People are going to need to get better and learn. People really aren't bothering to learn to fly.

[@j.d.4697]

Gee I wish there is something that could be done about the increased vulnerability of non-combat ships in nav mode. But things like increasing hull hp/armor have not been invented in games yet, so I guess whining is the only reasonable reaction.

[@phaedruseleusis]

Saying "solo is over" is just not correct. There will always be places and times players can solo, there will be a risk/reward aspects to that choice, and even limits - this follows the "player choice" rule. This is my 3rd flight model change, and I'm actually a fan of master modes - but no matter what the flight model is, solo will always be an option.

[@unlimitedslash]

MM Combat Mode feels as empty and boring as Elite Dangerous combat, possibly one of the most boring combat/flight models I've ever seen in a space game, for F sake, Freelancer was more fun, and that was over 20 years ago. All you do now is mindlessly circle around each other, there are no other options, might as well stay put and use the ship as stationary turret. It's completely focused on crappy dogfight, this makes ships like the Eclipse, straight up obsolete, it's a hit&run stealth ship, not a dogfighter, the same goes for many cargo ships, or dropships, they aren't made to dogfight, not only that, with that focus, literally makes any stealth focused ship sit in a limbo with nowhere to go, because as mentioned, they are usually hit&run ships, it goes completely against what MM is doing, how are we gonna use those ships? As sniper? a role they where never supposed to be in? I sure as hell won't be using the Raven or the Prowler as a fighter, they ain't made for that.

[@HybridVAudio]

You can still use stealth ships to their full potential. One way is to sneak in attack and then NAV FLT out. Do NOT use the QT NAV as that spikes your emissions. You can zip around and find a point where you want to strike, drop in close, hit them and then zip out again. The stealth ships are some of the more annoying ships to deal with right now. In our org we started using them as counters against sniper and missile boats since they can get in close and tie them up as those enemy types like to stay far from the fight doing damage and being annoying.

[@mstrzg]

i was in wave 1, it needs a lot of work but imo It takes a couple of days of playing to get used to the speeds but it has really grown on me. I think in a week a lot of people will be seeing it a little different. Also CIG's obsession with keymapping fubars is legend... most wave 2 people had to get used to the controls being screwed up and the speed slow down but after a week or two master modes feels better then the non MM iimo

[@SpaceMike3]

This community does this a lot. Who remembers the upset at the Scorpios Anteres? Quickly forgotten

[@ksl-988]

@@SpaceMike3 Another victim of the "where's the meta?" players.

[@deepop6045]

I agree with your outlook overall.. But you need to realize that there will be tons of time in this game where you will be doing things alone. You can not depend on the weekend warriors and the after work dads. Also a lot of people enjoy doing things solo, especially when it comes to making money. There is nothing wrong with risk. I am a pirate. My group has 100+ members. But you still can not rely on others every time you want to do something. There needs to be a balance.. like eve online has. And it will take you longer to do tasks on your own, but you get all the reward. Also good luck getting your org to pack boxes and do logistics... a small group of people will be the ones doing the heavy lifting.. like it is in every mmo. And the others just show up for the party. The greatest risks and best rewards are often from the mountains you conquer on your own. But maybe thats the difference in leaders and followers. CIG has also said many times that they realize the majority of their players do solo game play and they are going to make sure we can.. they literally just talked about this. No matter what you think, you will be playing solo.

[@Hav0k]

*sarcasm* Oh great, another CIG shill talking about how master modes is better and will be "even better in the future!!" *sarcasm off* Great video with great takeaways. I appreciate your perspective.

[@CaptainSF]

Flying is more interesting right now. I fly non combat ships often. I am not living in these ostensible moments where im always ambushed, needing to escape, etc. thats not my experience; my experiecne is being about my business and doing missions and hanign out with others and nothing has stopped that...i just need to think a bit more/differently about what im doing.

[@MSFTJustice]

7:08 Telling people they need to change the way they play and bore the heck out a defensive gunner for the off chance a player bounty triggers NPC ship spawning right on top of you is a bad take. Like that shouldn't even be a thing. Now if they fly into a hot zone or towards NPCs without a way to defend themselves that's on them. However, I had an NPC spawn right in front of me and we hit each other. No defensive gunner or escort was saving that one. Maybe your right, I need to change they way I play.

[@HybridVAudio]

This has always been the direction the game was going. This was spelled out years ago. You may think that bringing a gunner would bore them, but you would be surprised how many people are willing to do that as a job in the verse, regardless if there is action or not. Same as someone finding cargo hauling to be boring while others actually enjoying it. In the future, we'll have the ability to hire NPC gunners and install turret blades, but CIG have mentioned that they never will be as good as an actual player. A good stopgap, but not a rock solid solution if you expect heavy trouble, especially from hostile players.

[@MSFTJustice]

@HybridVAudio okay, also way not to read a comment. Again, for the second time, you are telling people to change the way they play and bring a gunner for the sole purpose of a random NPC spawning on top of them. not for any other reason, which is what the comment poster was speaking about was referring to. Would be boring as in they are not going for fights. So the person would sit there for what hours and possibly nothing comes of it. You should have used a better example and random NPC spawning 5 meters in front of you shouldn't be a thing. Everything else I am fine with but telling them to play differently where the game design shouldn't have happened. Again, bad take.

[@HybridVAudio]

@@MSFTJustice I don't think you understood my point. They can play any way they want. But if they get jumped and are mad that they cannot deal with NPCs in their solo multi-crew ship, then that is a consequence of their own decisions. Something that I've been warning people about for a while now. I'm not telling people they HAVE to change what they do. Only that they can expect things to get harder, and as such they need to be ready for it. And I've made my recommendations. You won't always have the luxury to avoid a fight, either from players or NPCs. I've been an advocate for getting people to play with others for a while now. It is not for everyone as some people just want to chill and do their own thing, but expectations need to be realized here as not everything can expected to be smooth sailing for solos and as such they will need to adjust accordingly. This is the same for any MMO out on the market today.

[@MSFTJustice]

@@HybridVAudio Understood, thank you for replying back and adding the additional insight.

[@whinstonsthlm]

You say ppl have to have escorts in the Stanton system because they get killed by NPC's with the new system. That would be true for a lawless places like Pyro. Stanton should be high security where you should feel safe as a new player. More like high sec in Eve online. The police/protection/crime systems have not improved over a long time and there is no real punishment's if you pirate. Crime stat is a joke atm.

[@ericsortzi5669]

The suggestion that players in large non-combat ships should start flying with other players and manning turrets makes no sense. The turrets cannot be used in Nav mode! So if you're trying to get away from a fight, you can't fight back. So what's the point of a turret gunner if the turrets can't be used to defend the ship? What's the point of multi-player ships at all at that point if the those ships cannot be defended? This is a problem that was fundamental to master modes even back to when CIG first laid out how it was going to work. Sorry. CIG has to build a system for ALL scenarios, not just for certain kinds of PvP players. And heck, master modes isn't finding a lot of fans in PvP players right now.

[@cookiebandit101]

The light fighter pilots that have an ego and are finally realizing they cant fly circles around gunships are the ones crying the loudest. My hammerhead runs on their tears. Ive patiently waited for my big ships to be more relevant. And before you hate. I own 2 light fighters and a glaive as well. I enjoy them equally but I find them op.

[@TheJack4000111]

05.00 "I'm Evocaty" You must be real special.

[@jurashi4014]

Some people think solo play as a whole should be removed completely which no won't be the case and is a foolish thought since many mmos today (which people want this to be) has an option between the two but are all still in the same boat game wise. Wow and 14 have their solo, 4man, 8man etc but they never force you to do one over the other unless you are looking for something specific equipment wise in a high level raid, you just wanna try it to see what the content is like, or you have to go for a dungeon which is attached to a storyline Going back to sc I solo in an m2 for cargo and noooo i don't plan to solo an idris ffs that makes no sense and the people that say that play for an hour and look at things from the outside saying wow you need an escort doing that. Let's be real If you are going somewhere with this size of a ship for a pick up that is in atmo.....you are most likely going for something risky like gold on microtech and that's on you for being bonked by npc or a guy that doesn't even want cargo just salt. Look at star citizen Jorunn's old video with 20 890 jumps gathering all in one spot. Do you honestly believe all of those people today are gonna have a crewed 890 jump ship? How many of them are solo? how many brought them with the intent of being in groups? Does the majority of money flow more based off grouped players, or solo players? 3.23 you can still solo ships at the size just don't do anything outlandish with it like 3.22 but nobody should think that solo play as a whole should be erased.....that's how most people came into the game in the first place. Who ever believes other wise just jumped in with their buddies and think that's how it was for everybody else that picked up the game which is unrealistic

[@intothevoid2046]

If players feel there is something wrong, then there is something wrong. In this case it's not the game, it's the developer. They are fishing in the mud for a flight model since 0.9. Over 10 years now. In 2.6 they already tried to make combat slower and players hated it. Now they are making the same mistake again. This fact alone shows the aimlessness or should I say helplessness of this part of the project's development, let alone other areas. They are still theory crafting. "We are discussing this right now" tm.

[@mike_d_melb_music_fan5229]

So if I cant conveniently and casually solo trade in my C2, how am I supposed to make the many millions to buy ships. Sucks to be me ?

[@BestShifty]

To all the people that are adamant about Master Modes not being for them because it´s too casual: Maybe Star Citizen isn´t for you. Try out something else, have a look at Hunternet Starfighter and see if that could be your jam.

[@_Anaklysmos_]

That's a good joke. As if Star Citizen would be a casual game. It has deep gameplay mechanics and many many time sinks. This game is made for a niche of gamers and always will be. the problem is if the deep gameplay mechanics (like Combat) get taken out and replaced by casual gameplay (Master Modes) while they keep the time sinks (like travelling times), then no one will play this game. The niche gamers will leave due to the simplistic and unrealistic mechanics and the casual gamers will never play this game because of the time sinks.

[@CitizenScott]

28:51 Realism and fun are not mutually exclusive. Nobody serious is arguing against fun, they're arguing that realism is more fun.

[@HybridVAudio]

I come from a milsim background playing games like ArmA and DCS. I know the arguments that realism can be more fun. But it is already obvious that CIG is more interested in a middle ground rather than going hardcore one way or another. Therefore there is some give or take that is expected. We could argue that they should go more realistic until we are blue in the face, but at the end of the day, they have already made up their mind on the direction they want the game to take. And at this point, I am inclined to agree with them.

[@gyratingwolpertiger6851]

A case of what has a bigger audience DCS or something that picks it's realism battles properly but has more mass appeal. Ie Realistic where it's fun, simpler where realism would just bog things down.

[@CitizenScott]

Sure, but that’s not what SC has ever aimed to be. SC is SC because it’s different, and that has brought CIG nothing but unprecedented success. Just sayin.

[@starcitizenaxion9956]

If you dogfight any faster than SCM currently - forget the update - you're bad and an amateur. So, the change is just forcing people to dogfight well. I LOVE taking advantage of people who joust full speed. I'll sit at 0 and wait for them to pass and just roll with them. At those higher speeds you literally cannot quickly maneuver. I'm glad they changed the warp speeds - because now people cannot just mindlessly make money without risk/reward. People have to ACTUALLY use their brain in an open universe where some players will choose to be pirates. The challenge is engrained in the system and speaks for itself. When things are far too easy, people fucking leave games - and this is ESPECIALLY true with MMOs. That adrenaline and potential loss is the entire fun of it. Trust me, when big orgs start PRINTING Idris ships because they can AFK mine and do cargo runs, then the same sheepish people who complained about the challenge will complain about how far behind they are to big organizations. Its the same shit every. single. time. and it kills these MMOS so I hope they don't cater to them.

[@nathanforrester5140]

I agree with you on master modes as a whole. It is a better system but needs time to mature to become really good.

[@gyratingwolpertiger6851]

Something to consider with those complaints about being jumped in atmosphere might be where they're choosing to run their trade as it were. If they're concerned about being jumped, maybe they should stick to space station and Moon related cargo routes As they say in the various cargo decks, your cargo is your responsibility. A big cargo ship is a big target