The Starlancer max just destroyed the competition!

[@L-vs7fp]

I'm going to be honest here. I just love the Starlancer. The size, the interior, the cargo bays, the vehicle space and the fact that the pilot has control of 4 S4 guns is a nice ship to hang out in. If I'm not bed logging in the Polaris, I'll be spending 25% of my time when I want to just hang out, in the Max. I'll spend another 15% with the Polaris, and the rest of course, I'll be spending time being reckless in a fighter.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Heck yeah! I'm am gonna do exactly the same thing lol

[@blackmamba___]

I won’t be surprised when this ship gets nerf.

[@ronelicabandi9706]

Mirai guardian. Can't wait haha but still love my eclipse and firebird. Love it when it gives people heart attacks when I unleash torpedoes or s3 missile barrages.

[@Jeddingfry]

Has pilot controlled 4 S4 guns for now....until they sell the next ship in this class

[@vasilizaitsez7455]

Epic comparison and analysis of the SL-MAX, Thank you. I was working on a video like this but yours goes much further than I was.

[@a.j.6832]

craaazy. CIG's latest ship for sale is better than anything you could have in the same range!

[@Leptospirosi]

There is nothing else in the same range, except, possibly a 600i. don't even think you can do in a Starlancer what you can in a Constellation: it is more in he ballpark of a 600i or may be a Starfarer when it comes to manoeuvrability, barely better then a Reclaimer.

[@eddiemarohl5789]

​@@Leptospirosiexactly it's a different class of ship from what's being compared. It's a jump between a taurus and a hull b.

[@imperatorz7062]

Zeus ? :-D

[@heathmorris6100]

The starlancer is honestly in a class all its own. Its clearly larger and meant to be much more capable than a corsair, Connie, and redeemer but not even close to an A2, C2, C2, or anything else that size or larger. Imo it's in a perfect spot and the tac is the exact ship I was looking for

[@Jeddingfry]

I honestly don't like it's spot. Corsair/Connie is about as large as you can go solo or duo and still be an ok daily runabout. I want to love the Starlancer, but it's just to big. Might as well go to a C2, Caterpillar, or Galaxy at this point.

[@DanyF02]

"Here's a HUGE hangar where you can place all of your things! All this area is YOURS!" ... "No wait you're not supposed to put anything further than a few feet from the walls. This whole area in the middle? It's for your bicycle and nothing else!" This is the Valkyrie all over again.

[@OO7BOND11]

Boo hoo, just wait until bases. Hangars are the first iteration, it's supposed to be a hangar anyway.

[@grayven]

MSR was changed and has a large shield as well now. It also has fuse boxes in the tunnels, but that’s a different story

[@EricWilliamsCG]

Ugh, those tunnels are such a waste of space.

[@lordfraybin]

@EricWilliamsCG sounded cool on paper though....

[@P5ykoOHD]

I'm still hoping they one day decide to redo it. Too much wasted space and doors, a stupid 2m elevator ...

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

Sad they put fuse boxes on such a small ship. Forcing multiplayer gameplay in that ship.

[@luvit579]

Thanks for pointing this out. I didn't realize how wide the space between the rear grids is and it'll be cool to see what will fit. Almost looks like a Razor or something like that may fit, but we'll see probably in the next week or so when it's in the PTU.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Yeah when it hits PTU I'm excited to see what people try to fit lol

[@jedi_drifter2988]

Since the Nerf of the 400i, I melted it. CIG took out most of the redundant systems to downgrade it severely. I can't fit much of anything in the cargo, plus the quantum fuel is very limited, for a ship with a mapping table. I store credited a Starlancer Max W/400i UEC, for those long distance adventures in the deep black ...

[@forcommenting1017]

Not to mention the terrible turrets. Connie was the only ship that has turrets that actually make sense and they are so small compared to the main guns as to be essentially pointless. Starlancer is looking like it solves that.

[@ninetalesxyo8842]

You do know, they do this on purpose. It wont be long until they manipulate you again, and ONE-UP the starlancer next year. With the next ship sale. This game will never see a release this decade if you keep melting/ upgrading your ships.

[@jedi_drifter2988]

@@ninetalesxyo8842 Except, I am Not spending any New cash ...

[@Stormyy6310]

define "the deep black", as in define "deep space", what do you mean by deep space, what are you going to do there ? Are you even going to go there ? How ??

[@The_0G_Chad]

They do this on purpose. They sell ships that they promise are going to be amazing or are op or best in class like the Aris, Inferno and ion, A2 bomber, lightning, corsair, redeemer… then they Nerf the crap out of them, saying they are over performing then get people to melt them and upgrade. I wish we would all as a community stop doing it. But everyone is afraid they are gonna get left with a bad ship. It really is so dishonest.

[@monty58]

I'm still dubious about the idea that the rear grid is a 3 stack, and there might be a 32 in the middle of the bay, but even if there is, there looks to be space for a 4th 32SCU container and a pair of 16s, so it'll be pretty good for off grid cargo no matter what

[@gravy9280]

I can't wait to see how many Furies I can fit in it.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Oh me too :)

[@schakTheNerd]

It looks like you'll be able to get 3 on each elevator and at least 6 more in the back. What I want to know is if a Guardian will fit in the back. This IAE is going to be huge for MISC/Mirai.

[@durtyred86]

I don't think it should be considered "off grid cargo." Mainly because the vehicle needs to be safely stored as well so it's not being tossed all over the compartment. So basically, it can... SHOULD be able to be used as either vehicle storage OR cargo storage. Very similar to that of the Arrastra, where it can store both mining cargo and regular cargo on it's port/starboard sides and/or internally. This is a win for the Starlancer.

[@ethancampbell2422]

The Valkyrie has shown that a cargo grid can be a vehicle grid, but a vehicle grid is not necessarily a cargo grid (even though we won the fight and got a 30 SCU cargo grid).

[@durtyred86]

@ethancampbell2422 is that a bug or a stated fact? Now that I think about it, can the Carracka vehicle storage double as cargo storage? If not, I think that proves your point as well. 🤔 I personally feel like they should work interchangeably though.

[@ethancampbell2422]

@@durtyred86 As it started the Valkyrie was sold with a vehicle only grid but the community argued vocally that a military dropship would also be able to transport cargo, supplies etc... So CIG caved and gave it a 30 SCU cargo grid. This isn't a bug, this was intentional, and the first and only instance of a vehicle-only grid I can remember, anything after that is either a cargo grid or unsecured vehicle space. Keep in mind that this all happened before the current cargo grids and tractor beams.

[@nerdglider]

That’s a ton of space between the cargo grids, with an elevator in the front I wonder why they didn’t just make the whole area a grid?

[@Astelch]

Probably wanted people to have a reason to upgrade their Starlancer into a c2 or something. If it had a full cargo grid in the back then maybe it would give people less incentive to upgrade.

[@Vioblight]

Yep that’s why I got one… new is best always sadly. Only down side is the exposed belly. But having a normal to load cargo grid is a dream to me. Elevator and ramp to load however you prefer with a handheld tractor beam or ATLS. I’m down losing a bit of dps and having larger turrets 10/10 excited for my first MISC ship

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Hope you enjoy it! can't say I'm not excited for this ship :)

[@Civilunit]

I think compared to allot of other ship Chassis the Starlancer Max is the most flexible, its on paper stats are good but its off paper stats leave allot of wiggle room. It's biggest plus is of course how compatible it is with 32 SCU containers. Able to grid 6 of them the only other ship that can do this is the C2 Herc. However without too much trouble you can easily slide an additional 3x32 SCU boxes in the back with still room to spare. I am sure people fit even more but I try not to make moving boxes a hassel and at the end of the day saving you hassel is what the StarLancer is all about. Now in saying that I must admit I am wondering if ANYONE at CIG loaded and unloaded the middle cargo racks much because this area is both easy and a little silly. The middle walk way is in the way, preventing you from loading both cargo racks from one side. They even have small rails that fold UP to block the cargo from moving one side to the other. Now you CAN float smaller boxes over the ramp with a tractor beam. 8 SCU boxes are not too hard but with the support lines from the ceilings doing it with 16's might be a stretch and you can easily raise the rack to make it a bit more easier to lift them slightly because you do have a wee bit of head room and move them to the other side, otherwise your playing volley ball with them to toss them over the walk way to the other side. This kinda sucks for cargo missions that deals with allot of smaller boxes, making you juggle and slide the boxes about but its not hard however it feels like this should not be required. When it comes to transporting the 32 SCU containers I give them a break because while its a pain to move over to the other side of the ship to grab the boxes, you only have to do this twice and the front of the ship is tall enough to slip them under the nose. if your 2 manning this and one guy is in an atlas you could completely load or unload this ship in like 3 minutes....which is amazing. Second key point is our chunky boi is a bit better at combat that we were lead to believe. Power management wise she has enough extra power to DOUBLE her weapons systems potency and allow the pilot to just hose whatever poor ship unlucky enough to be in front of her and with a turret gunner cut her larger cargo sisters in half in record time. Parapet seems to be the preferred shield option and while not great she has enough hull HP to take a few lumps if needed. All in all, it does have more options than meets the eye which is a special thing about some Star Citizen ships.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

this was a flawless break down man could not have said it better myself

[@AsreiMurasame]

The only issue with this is if you're planning to low man the connie is better. That is going to be a massive deal breaker with ships just keep that in mind. Once engineering is live bigger ships won't be operable by one person and if a component goes out during a fight or a fire starts on the ship, if you're solo you're going to have to abandon your flight seat or even combat with another ship because those fires can destroy other components which can (and will) lead to the eventual destruction or possibly soft death of the ship. One of the big points with the connie is most of the components are easy/fast to reach.

[@eddiemarohl5789]

Aren't a bunch at the butt of the connie? Tbh though for hauling you could still rock solo so long as you play it safe.

[@ONI09100]

Niver will the Conny but yeah their are a lot of factors to consider

[@libertybelleeve]

Good insight into the rear cargo area!

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Glad it was helpful! :)

[@MeatSalad84]

honestly, starlancer is really a great deal!

[@Acklend]

my shipping ability is now complete, i have small to large but nothing in the middle till now i was thinking on what to do till this dropped. ^.^

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Yeah It fits in a good place now

[@cml524]

Things are going to continue to change, and change, annnnnnd change again. Love it LONG time. As new ships and new features come out, and as QOL aspects advance, there is going to be a TON of tweaks and changes. There are SO many features that are planned for the future and the devs don't even know exactly how it's all going to be balance out and they WON'T until all of the main features are released and TESTED... by all of US mostly. It drives me nuts that people STILL treat this like it's a fully developed game. Also, yes, there is a large monetary factor involved and is completely understandable considering the CGI is not a multibillion-dollar company with near limitless resources and time like Rockstar, Valve, Bethesda, CD Projekt Red, etc, etc... Even though I have spent quite a bit of money over the years, I am mostly looking forward to release where we can start fresh and build our way up. Even if I was offered every single ship for free, I wouldn't take it. Why? Because what is the purpose at that point? Especially when full wipes are a thing of the past. We need to be able to keep playing without essentially maxxing out and then eventually get bored. There needs to be a perpetual sci-fi space-sim experience to keep people playing as long as the game exists. I REALLY hope they add ship building at some point because that would give us TONS of ways to personalize our gameplay and our journey throughout an eventually ENORMOUS space sandbox sort of game. Their goal is to eventually complete the world that the "Star Map" portrays. For anyone that hasn't seen the actual Star Map, I urge you to find it and look around. It's going to be amazing if they pull that off within the next decade. They have said, periodically, that they plan to eventually have somewhere around 100 star systems to play on. Imagine that and then imagine all the different ships and what kind of changes are going to come into play. That too may change to include more... or less. By the time we have a dozen or two Star Systems, we aren't even going to recognize what the game looked like "back in 2024". It's great to see how quickly they are developing now since they've expanded so much since the beginning over 12 years ago. Back then, it seemed to take FOREVER to get simple changes and bug fixes. But, as the company grew, we started getting REALLY exciting patches completing important milestones only every couple of years. NOW, we are getting FAR more content in every patch. The patches are only getting bigger and becoming far more frequent. So, eventually we'll be looking back to years like this one and will say the same thing - "Wow, look how slow things progressed back around 2025". Again, we are testers still since the game is still in the alpha phase. This game is going to be ENORMOUS in so many ways and we are going to see amazing things happen to the gaming industry BECAUSE of it. Take "Server Meshing" for example. CGI pioneered this concept, and I remember when they first started talking about it when they didn't even know if it was even a possibility for the near future. Now look at what's happening. We are going to see it implemented pretty soon and this is a HUGE milestone. Not just for Star Citizen and CGI, but also for the gaming industry as a whole. Imagine what other MMOs will come from using this technology and they will have CGI to thank for it. Imagine this game and, for example, war games with 5000 or 10000 people playing in one, enormous game world! They took the risk, and they are succeeding. It's already running smoother than any of us expected. We are experiencing exciting times in the gaming industry. So, kick back and enjoy the ride. (***Also, I just wanted to say good job on the video... definitely a thorough breakdown)

[@fireye3]

Thing competes with stuff over 100$ more than it. crazy shit.

[@fredashay]

I bought a Starlancer MAX. It gives me _Firefly_ vibes! I might CCU it to a BLD in the future.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Oh yes I see that comparison for sure, good vibes!

[@EdmundRobinson]

😂 Every new ship destroys the competition because CIG nerfs the existing ships to secure the new ships advantage.

[@Jay-xv1jd]

It's called practice, which makes perfect.... elementary fine, sir.

[@Kakeyoro]

How did they nerf the Starlancers competition...? If anything, the Taurus recently got a buff in it's 4x size 5 guns. Don't always assume malice.

[@StoneCoolds]

​@@Kakeyorohe is talking about the Corsair

[@The_0G_Chad]

Exactly. The course air Nerf was straight up in game usage rates. The course air was cheaper than the Connie and the star Lancer tac needed Sales.

[@Stormyy6310]

@@Kakeyoro ??? Corsair ?? Redeemer ??? Just a month ago ?? Very "convenient" timing

[@justbuyintime5157]

Something that confuses me about this ship is people constantly bring up its combat abilities. Like the ships is a cargo hauler not a dog fighter, it like expect the 600i to dog fight its stilly it’s not the point of the ship, the turrets are there for defense but not to pick a fight. Now I understand a bit for the TAC but the TAC is more of a ground pound ship than a ship to ship combat vessel. It’s like a AC-130 gunship or a large A10 rather than a gunboat like the Perseus

[@justbuyintime5157]

@@Raptorman386 ok chill, I’m not saying it won’t still kill things it definitely will,I’m just stating people should stop expecting every ship they like to be the best combat ship in the game.

[@xiuhtezcatl8161]

i did the upgrade. thx

[@T0ghar]

The Taurus was great value at 150$.

[@mcbrite]

Just looked it up, I bought it for 105! I thought it was 150 or more and STILL kept telling people it's my best "value for money" ship! (pledged Taurus soooo long ago and never ever considered melting it...)

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Oh thank you! Would love too see it, I've been looking at what every content creators has been saying since the con, to see what the community thinks about everything that's going on.

[@Parts1234]

The sides are shorter then the middle meaning you might be able to stack 2 32 scu crate on top for a total of 6 32 scu and another 32 scu on 4 scu box's for a total 224 scu in the back

[@ZyvhurStudios]

I can't wait to see what people try in this ship!

[@drksideofthewal]

As boring as the Constellation interior is, it remains very practical. All that cargo space and pilot DPS in a relatively small ship. The Starlancer Max is a lot bigger, but it doesn’t do a lot more than the Taurus.

[@heathmorris6100]

Solo the Taurus is a much more practical ship but if you can hire some crew (the entire point of ships this large) then the starlancer is definitely more capable and it should be. Its quite a bit larger and requires more crew to fully realize it's potential

[@lordfraybin]

@drksideofthewal Relative though.. The Connie interior "was" amazing in the early days. Now that we have 170 new ships since.. They have improved interior design considerably.

[@drksideofthewal]

@@lordfraybin Don't get me wrong, the Constellation interior is still very impressive compared to other games, even the rare space games that do have ship interiors. But yeah, the interiors in Star Citizen have gotten so much better.

[@TemplarGuardian]

I think this is more telling for the TAC since it will keep the same trunk. Still great for the MAX but this will mean the TAC can carry 192. But, I'm just being a bit bias towards the TAC, but maybe the MAX will grow on me over the TAC.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Yes it makes the TAC incredibly versatile

[@Kakeyoro]

Good review and very insightful. Keep in mind though, the MSR now has a single large (size 3) shield.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Yeah I really don't like that, and I does seem to be getting worse

[@charactersmoreorthree]

I melted to get the MAX, but I changed my mind and went for the TAC because it better fits my gameplay.

[@northshoreroller9559]

I cant wait for the Starlancer i have the Max And the Tac , I think Im more excited for the Max than I am for the Polaris

[@ZyvhurStudios]

LOL I would certainly use the max more often than the Polaris

[@jamesmcnabb951]

Great video.. Keep em coming.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Thank you!

[@derjadebaum9159]

Modern Gaming: Pay2Win CIG: We will never do it like all the others Also CIG: Selling the next op ship

[@Stormyy6310]

it is literally p2w, in its worst form, the whole game is buying better and better ships, the grind is extremely long and there are frequent wipes so you don't know if you actually should grind or if your efforts will be all nullified in a month BUT if you spend hundreds of dollars you can skip that process of having to grind entirely, while all the others will be stuck with the base aurora you are going to make cash with the reclaimer or just straight up have an 890J, the endgame and have little to no reason to play at all, but yeah "iT'S aN alPHa"

[@caseytwill]

...and then nerfing it when the next op comes to market

[@briangueringer3673]

110 SCM lol😂 nope. That thing is going to be food for everything. Maybe there is some kind of case for multi crew.. but for solos its still the Taurus. That thing is going to move like a Reclaimer 😂😂

[@vulcan4d]

Have you flown a Freelancer? If that flies like a space cow you can only imagine how this thing flies. Specs can be great but if it is not enjoyable to fly this is where I pass.

[@Treecko8O]

I personally love how the freelancer series flies.

[@Leptospirosi]

True but from the specs released by CIG, the Starlancer is barely more manoeuvrable then a Reclaimer... It is that bad!

[@Treecko8O]

@@Leptospirosi Cargo hauler's don't need that much maneuverability you are going in a straight line usually anyway.

[@1ApeinSpace]

@@Treecko8O Until your trying to get away from those pirates'.

[@Treecko8O]

@@1ApeinSpace Then you just jump away, if they are blocking your QT then you are screwed anyway and you wont outrun them since CIG loves pvpers over everyone else so might as well surrender and hopefully they wont kill you after they steal your cargo.

[@terrymatlock5872]

i actually upgraded my andrameda to this ship. It seems like it will be nice to load and unload fairly quickly. I am excited to fly it and try it out.

[@JL-rj9fl]

I'm still operating under the assumption that unsecured cargo will cause problems in transit by damaging the ship or cargo itself. Maybe it won't matter, maybe it will, I really don't know. I like the MAX a lot, and I have a CCU to one which I'm likely to apply; however, I really like the ability to load cargo easily in zero-g environments with the Taurus. If I was in the situation where I could have just one ship, the versatility factor of the Taurus makes it the one I'd take. You could also operate it a little easier solo and with a smaller crew (one extra person) since the top turret has full 360 degree coverage. All this being said, CIG really should make the entire vehicle section of the rear cargo area a full cargo grid like others have suggested. It seems like a silly and arbitrary limitation.

[@MisterFlagg]

To be clear: Is it a fact that the rear compartment contains cargo (96 scu) AND a vehicle grid... or is the AND an OR? Does CIG confirm an AND or am OR ?

[@The_0G_Chad]

The ground vehicle is the only reason you would have medical beds to respawn. Also any time you have to stack boxes close to the ceiling it’s a nightmare and takes a long time. Especially since they’re weakening tractor beams. Salte mike did a great overview of actual usable cargo space. Have to ships in game rely on four and two SCU boxes. Those are not worth the time unless they are drugs. This might be good to store small boxes for base building or crafting of different materials but as a hauler , it’s much better to simply save and use an A2 or save for an Iron clad. Even the elevator cargo containers might be a pain in the butt.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

I agree not sure why its only on the sides but maybe it was originally and they thought it would be too OP so they just made it a garage area.

[@Bland-79]

When gravity is a thing that can be turned on or off in the game it will be much more risky to have that extra cargo off of the cargo grid. Also the ship changing direction will shift cargo in the future also.

[@OmnipotentJC]

Great analysis.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

thank you! o7

[@shckr17]

Do you think a Ballista will fit back there?

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Ooh possibly

[@AKA_Mufasa]

Given the current state of the PU I doubt you would survive a trip to anywhere with loose cargo jumping around in the back, I have been here for 7 years and I have never seen it so bad. But thanks for the heads up I hadn't realized the size in the back.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

The poor live servers :(

[@azntactical4884]

I only got the starlancer max and tac is because i like the freelancers. Plus, the starlancers look cool. I probably won't use the tac much since I'm mainly a solo player. For sure, I will be using the max more.

[@StarUnionPrime]

Feel there is going to be a Connie Mk2

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Oh I really hope so that would be cool!

[@olmecultra6588]

Nice analysis. Thanks.

[@ronelicabandi9706]

For cargo purpose only max will win. Combat taurus all the way. Daily driver I'll choose taurus cause its going to be more maneuverable. Came up with this conclusion after flying freelancers, connies, corsairs and starlifters. Edit: also visibility will be better with taursus. Sure there are a lot of struts but its better than a slit view. Edit 2x: seems i was wrong with maneuverability its as agile or better than the taurus. But still when it comes to fire power and size profile taurus will win combat. Lancer max here takes the cake to cargo, it even has space for ground vehicle without consuming 96 scu at the back. I just wish they mag lock it and gave max a tractor beam.

[@-NateTheGreat]

Don't forget the Starlancer will likely be slow and sluggish. There is always some trade off.

[@bar10dr]

At some point, cargo not secured in a cargo grid will take damage from QT/Jumping, so its not a long term strategy.

[@nerdglider]

lol no it won’t you park a vehicle back there it’s not supposed to destroy your ship why do people keep saying this?

[@bar10dr]

@@nerdglider Because that is what CIG has said in the past, that's why the ships have specific cargo sizes.

[@user-bh6hi6cr5h]

⁠@@nerdglider Vehicle and cargo grids are different. Ships with dedicated vehicle bay/ship hangars won’t be able to secure cargo because those grids aren’t meant for cargo. Most of the ships that can carry vehicles have the two types of grids in the same area. This is why you lose cargo space when you are carrying a vehicle.

[@nerdglider]

@@bar10dr No they said it could damage your ship not it will damage your ship

[@nerdglider]

@@user-bh6hi6cr5h yes but the tech has changed we will have gravity generators now

[@Accuracy158]

I think the direct size comparison is the 600i not 400i (maybe more of a price comparison to the 400i). Honestly though the Connies are quite capable in terms of PvE bounties so you can hunt the ships and throw their cargo in your hold. It will be interesting to see how this compares. I do honestly think the Starfarer is a little more capable than people give it credit and thought the extra shield they were adding would make it interesting. This is basically like that but modern and usable. 😂 Edit: I was thinking the Starlancer Max had 2x large shields but only the TAC has two. ...Also interesting considering CIG was adding extra shields to most of the industrial ships but they must have realized this one is too capable as a combat ship also to get the extra shields. 🤔

[@mcbrite]

The problem with CIG's despicable strategy of using nerfs to existing ships, to sell more upcoming ships is the following two facts: 1. New accounts are down SIXTY PERCENT over the past 2 years... 2. Veteran backers like me refuse to spend EVEN A CENT Warbond and just get the ships with store credits from melting the nerfed ships... ;-) Soon we will have new leadership, or at the very least an end to this travesty. Could be 6 months, could be a year or even 3, but it WILL happen. I'm sure now with the new numbers...

[@toklanumia827]

eventually cargo not on cargo mag plates will be able to shift around in flight outside of scm speeds, so just be aware that this idea may not always work

[@theamericanaromantic]

MSR and Hull B will be the 1-2 crew cargo hauler/daily driver kings.

[@guillaume6525]

The Starlancer max just destroyed the competition! => Waiting for its nerf now :)

[@MrMason-q1p]

What isn't very clear ist the cost of fuel consumption, as the size and amenities also drive the mass/weight of the Starlancer significantly. For sure the MSR is dead for now... and we will get more data runners as soon as the game loop is in ;-)

[@LT_Dante]

I seem to remember CiG once said that at release, non-grided cargo will destroy the ship when entering quantum. Vehicles won't have this issue because they'll be on break. To be confirmed.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

its wont break the ship CIG is going towards physicalized destruction now, so as long as you don't lose gravity there's no reason for it to bounce around lol

[@LT_Dante]

@ All I’m saying is that there’s a reason why CiG implemented cargo grids. Theory crafting around ungrided cargo might be a disappointment at release.

[@juanecheyt]

People will stuff that ship with cargo like we all did with the reclaimer...... grid or not.

[@simondolak6534]

CIG confirmed 12x 8 scu boxes will fit in the back

[@Kyle-sr6jm]

Wait until engineering is in. Large ships have the potential to be complete cluster Fs when solo.

[@cardheon6091]

I have both of the Zeus and I just upgraded my Caterpillar I love the shape of it

[@xiuhtezcatl8161]

12:28 rip earphone users at 120 decibel music at end

[@cicio7777]

Has CIG confirmed if the Starlancer MAX and TAC can be upgraded to the BLD?

[@ZyvhurStudios]

no updates on the BLD yet

[@The_0G_Chad]

Who cares about amenities? I don’t know why people focus on that. There are not going to be in npc crews and 99% of people bed log and don’t care where they’re at. Large open space is only unused space that could be used much better. It just means more area to run around the ship and role-play but in reality, it’s a lot more surface area to target to cover and to defend. Makes ships a lot harder to park etc. This is why they nerfed the corsair for this ship sale. So be careful. If you think this shit is so much better they might just Nerf this when they need more money.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

Luckily CIG doesn't really have a track record of nerfing cargo grids :)

[@hirofortis]

the starlancer is in bwetween a taurus and a c2. taurus is more maneuverable and has more firepower. C2 has less firepower and more cargo. It rreally just depends on what you want it for. I am still struggling to see it as anything more than a bridge between the two..

[@ONI09100]

I Imagen the star lancer is going to have a larger turning circle and lower max speed the Conny also has has better coverage with its turrets

[@tricorter1]

Well....yeah.... It's a new ship...of course it'll be OP. Just wait until there's another competetor, CIG will nerf this one, to drive up sales of the next great ship....

[@keffco8733]

There is no way that thing is gonna lift off the ground with all that extra weight on it it’s not just that you can fit it in. You have to be able to take off with it.

[@sirAlexander_T]

Not another ship salesman! .. 😅.. game is hardly playable.. servers are horrendous

[@Liqweed1337]

50k less hull HP, less SCM speed, less QT & hydrogen fuel, way less firepower, splitted cargospace, no tractorbeam, triple expedite/claim time, very limited cockpit view... the ONLY thing being a positive aggainst the taurus is the overall higher cargospace but i doubt thats really that necessary for ERT/vaughn contracts. & for cargo hauling you can use a C2 / M2 anyways... nahh, no upgrade for me, taurus beats the Starlancer Max in every important point.

[@lameisthenewcool5277]

sure and i am absolutely sure that after they sell a bunch of them they WON'T nerf it to sell another similar ship right? right? (sarcasm alert - you know damn well they will)

[@ZyvhurStudios]

I don't know about the max because its components are fairly comparable to other ships in its class but they will probably nerf the TAC

[@lameisthenewcool5277]

@@ZyvhurStudios oh good catch yeah thats the one i was thinking of

[@xiuhtezcatl8161]

7:44 this numbers are make me so sleepy with this bariton voice.

[@HolyMolyDave]

i love the thicc accent. abo, simply for that.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

haha o7

[@shinyreaper]

The Starlancer is is only better on paper. I hate the letterbox view, and the Taurus still loads cargo easier, and hits harder in fights with 4 size 5 weapons. You could argue the Starlancer has a better interior, but meh, it's just bloat until CIG makes all that crap do something. Well to each their own.

[@DemiGod..]

I can't see how it can compete with an ironclad with 7-8 times the cargo capacity.

[@info_fox]

No one said it was. This is a class below the ironclad.

[@DerKilianist]

I dont see how an ironclad can be compared to a hull e with 90 times the cargo

[@sebastienjonas4984]

115 m/s max SCM, it's not gonna destroy anything.

[@reavern]

In Star Citizen, NEWER IS ALWAYS BETTER… usually. In terms of ship design, the Connie is embarrassingly outdated. The Connie needed a ship design update 5 years ago when the RSI Scorpius was released, which ushered in the new RSI ship style. The newly flyable RSI Zeus is amazing and emphasized how much the old and new RSI ship styles have diverged. TBH I’ve never been a fan of the MISC Freelancer’s ship design, but at least the Starlancer has refined and updated that style to be somewhat appealing. It’s still not my thing, but I can appreciate why other players like it. Aside from the modern ship design, biggest difference between the Connie and Starlancer is how chonky the ship is. I mean, each of the Starlancer’s engine nacelles is nearly the size of the Connie’s main fuselage. The nacelles are excessively large, and the pointless wings (holdovers from the Freelancer’s design but useless because they don’t hold any missiles) make the ship even wider. A selling feature of the Freelancer was that its (relatively) narrow profile allowed it to fit through medium-size jump points (even the Freelancer MAX fit through mediums), whereas the Starlancer is absurdly wide and might not be able to fit through jump points that the Constellation can use. But the #1 reason why the Starlancer isn’t totally superior to the Constellation is its SOLO capabilities. The Connie has 4x S5 weapon hardpoints and dozens of missiles, all pilot-controlled, whereas the Starlancer has 2x S4 dual side turrets (similar to the Freelancer but one size larger). The Connie has better solo firepower and presumably better speed and maneuverability. If you intend to solo, I’d go with the Connie. If you always plan to fly with a crew, then the Starlancer is obviously better.

[@JL-rj9fl]

I don't believe the Taurus is going to have an edge on jump points and the sizes it can traverse. They're both considered large ships, and unfortunately many people make the mistake of thinking of the Taurus as a medium cargo hauler which is not correct based on hangar/ship size metrics.

[@HeadieTV]

@@JL-rj9fl my taurus only gets a medium hanger when i stop by star ports would love a large can you let CGI know its a large please.😁

[@JL-rj9fl]

@@HeadieTV Heh, I would if I could. The size metrics I'm referring to are from an article from CIG (probably a bit old now, honestly). The length of the Connie is what puts it into Large metrics rather than its height or width if I recall. Whether or not that matters for a jump point, it's hard to say what they decide to do. They seemed to indicate ships of certain size categories could traverse certain sized jump points (medium=medium, for example) so as a Taurus owner myself, I'm not banking on in being able to take these.

[@pete3198]

How has it destroyed the competition? Idf you ree playing solo then the only tangible advantages it has over a Taurus are about 50 SCU of cargo and the abiliy to fit an URSA without sacrificing cargo space. The Taurus is smaller, faster, has way more firepower, has superior visibility from the cockpit, ,and it has a shielded cargo bay which the MAX to my knowlege does now. The Taurus should also be more edfficient to load, because majority of its cargo space fits right on the cargo lift. The MAX only fits 128 SCU on the cargo lift, and the rest needs to be loaded in the rear. The MAX is better for group play, the Taurus is better for Solo play.

[@golgoth74]

bigger bigger target, not worth the number of SCU. It is not a medium size ship anymore.

[@andreichiuzbaian147]

they called turrets not turds 🤣

[@matejmarosz20]

Yall acting like the other ships are finished and done.

[@janituomikoski6126]

...the game itself does not work, so WHAT competition ? not working game = not working ships.... ---> hmm... = haha ;) 😘

[@randy304]

Yeah i agree this is an awesome ship and compared to the taurus more cargo, but not outright better, the taurus is an ert bounty killer with loads of space. This probably wont be great for ert missions, not saying it wont do them just not as good as the taurus. Im going to keep my taurus till i can see how this one can fight. Also a good comparison would be the Starlancer TAC if it can hold 190+ cargo and has 2 shields that puts it as a viable combat ship compared to the taurus while still carrying even more cargo. I would definitely be looking to move my Taurus to the Tac if the handling isn't too much worse.

[@Sinkhole100]

The Starlancer MAX is a waste of money and space. It requires a large hangar and if I am flying a ship that needs a large hangar I am flying a C2, which is a mere 18ft longer than the MAX. The MAX has a measly 224scu of cargo across two cargo bays It's a cargo ship, a cargo ship it does nothing besides haul cargo and for it's size in is under spec'd and even if you can squeeze in a total of 324scu you can still go for a Hull B at 384scu for on a $140 vs $250 for the MAX. MISCs own ship makes this obsolete. The TAC will be a good competitor to the 'deemer but the MAX is plain and simple an after thought.

[@ninetalesxyo8842]

This ship will be Great until they ONE-UP it and Nerf it for the next ship sale.... I found out that CIG are actively going out of there way to move the cargo grid, out of its intended lines, in the C1 to make it slightly worse. In addition no longer having a middle space for a bike anymore. Why? Did they mess up the Zeus CL? YES Instead of fixing the Zeus being a terrible cargo ship, they just go after C1 ships because the C1 was well designed and easy for cargo. CIG are just morons... for no reason! I was exicited to perhaps upgrade my C1 to the Starlancer... but seeing how pety CIG are.. i kinda dont want to support them anymore. Balancing the game is one thing... creating unnecessary obstacles is a terrible idea. Backers really have half of a buggy game atm, for 8 years, all they have are the ships. Stop messing with past ships to SELL NEW SHIPS.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

This is a common theme I am seeing in the comments, and I agree, it really puts the backers in a weird place and I can only hope CIG can find more sustainable ways to monetize in the future.

[@jimc7022]

I don’t understand why the Connie’s get so much bias. When the Reedemer and Corsair (both more expensive Size 4 ships) get S5 guns taken away the Connie’s are allowed to keep their 4 S5 pilot controlled. Doesn’t make sense when you look at the more expensive ships they’ve nerfed into the dirt. It’s made me really resent the Connie’s

[@Kyle-sr6jm]

Which ones have the company's founder's name? RSI The Connie's will get the nerf last if ever.

[@ZyvhurStudios]

They are CR's favorite ships

[@COMMANDERHAWK22]

naa im good il keep my c2

[@kira68200]

that thing destroys nothing, 200 something SCU of cargo in that size category is nothing, a Galaxy has 500+ scu while a C2 have almost 700 scu of cargo, and I'm not even talking about the Hulls you will not make any money with that ship

[@MauriceTheSpaceCowboy]

I talked about a future ship being the reason for the corsair nerf. Can't have an existing ship that costs the same as the cargo varient or less than the tac, being in the way of new money.

[@heathmorris6100]

Corsair was not nerfed. The ship itself still has the same capabilities. Also the starlancer and corsair aren't really in the same class. The starlancer is pretty much in its own class of ships

[@MauriceTheSpaceCowboy]

@heathmorris6100 I appreciate your respectful reply. So refreshing to be able to engage in a discussion without it going down hill. I do disagree however with this evaluation. It can be said, I believe, that the ships are in different classes. I think however that this is not about class of ships. It's about new money. The tac is a a much larger ship with, currently, 2 size 3 shields and 4 size 4 guns for the pilot, 2 size 5 on the sides and 2 size 4s in 2 additional turrets. Before the nerf a smaller ship, in a different class, was outperforming it except on the shields. That would impact new money especially if that ship was 80 dollars less. Solution? Take away 2 pilot guns and increase the need for additional crew on a ship that is already multi crew. The timing of this could be a coincidence and if so I'm glad. But the new money idea makes more sense than their excuse about popularity and kill count

[@critic_empower_joke_rlaxtslife]

Ram 1500 capacity destroys fiat 500. Chris Robert has a bigger house than illegal immigrant. Shocker, the sun is bigger than the moon. Here is a sample of more relevant facts than comparing your lol😂 Connie to starlancer

[@TJFedoruk]

It didn't "just" do anything. Unreleased made up pixel.

[@howdoyoulikethemapples1985]

The star lancer is so slow, has a scm speed of 115 almost half that of the Connie

[@Acklend]

finally mic made a good idea for a hulling ship.

[@gitanoclub]

scammed

[@lordfraybin]

Max beats taurus...for another $150.... It fucking BETTER....

[@ZyvhurStudios]

its only 50 more

[@lordfraybin]

@ZyvhurStudios Isnt Taurus $150?

[@ZyvhurStudios]

its 200 now many ships have gone up in price now I'm afraid