RSI Nova and Tevarin Jackel
- Thread starter Blind Owl
- Start date
I don't want mine... oh I don't have one. Never mind that.
What I would like though, is a list of ships that aren't created yet, and an estimate... it can even be soft.... but something that indicates what the current timeline is, rather than just deleting them and hoping we don't notice.
Aha, there's timelines and there's roadmaps.
If you go on Maps on the internet and ask it for Directions from point A to point B it will give you multiple options on how to get to point B with varying different travel estimates. If you imagine that, but with all of the options on making the game, and they are all constantly jostling around some suddenly becoming smaller and easier to get across, some suddenly ballooning out of all proportion and becoming almost unscaleable mountain passes, that's what the roadmap is. Route A suddenly has a traffic jam? Please select another route.
With S42 having a full scale roadmap too, perhaps it would give a better view of the map looking at both of them side by side. As S42 comes ever closer to release we always assumed it would get more priority than SC to the point only joint ventures were likely to get attention on SC side...?
Last edited:
You're so wise! I believe that both maps are synergistic, with one most certainly breathing life into the other.
I prefer to not look at any maps, and focus my life on other things. It is in this matter that I have managed to pass many years and many iterations of this game, to have it at a point where suddenly it's pretty dang awesome.
Ok we'll use that analogy for a sec. When you drive following a map you get obstacles etc, but the buildings you pass are fixed in place. If you take a different route, you never pass the buildings that you expected to pass as you reach the new milestones, unless you double back. That takes extra time.
We are passengers here on a very large bus, not the driver. And a good many of the passengers got on a long time ago, but they're seeing the places they wanted to go vanish from the route. Yes they promise to visit the place later, but as I said, that means extra time.
Great expansion on the analogy! Well said my friend.
Mercury will be amazing, but I want my C2 and Tonk!
I'll love to have a clear release esitmated time for all the ship, but now is too early for that...
Thake the Hull series for example: they state they are basicallly ready after they came to solve the folding phisics problem, but then they stump upon another one thet is the number of SCU that can be reasonably maneged with the small box size we have now, so they need to wait for the prop guys and the code guys to realize and implement the large cargoo container for goods.
I'm confident we will see a clear road map for the ship release in fhe future, but before that every mechanics must be in place and the basic foundation of every game aspect flushed out.
Thats why, in my opinion, they are selling and getting ready most of the smal-medium fighter ship: they do not require additioon game mechanics other the the one oalready in place, it the do otherwise we will end up having ship like the Reclaimer or the Herald that doesn't have a real in game purpose for a log time...
Honestly they could just release the Hull series when they're ready in their folded state. They already have ships in with no functionality (Reclaimer/Starfarer) that have moving parts.
Dont see why they couldn't haul cargo while folded for now, just to get it in people's hands. I'm sure no one would mind they candy unfold their ship or see the cargo.
I didn't know that Owl's used maps. I thought that you just used your great vision to travel though life using unconsumed beers as your next checkpoint towards getting where you wanted to go.
As somebody that has spent many years in the role of a healer in MMO's, I don't mind sitting back while doing my job at the back of the bus while the driver (Tank) steers us around & the DPS destroys the obstacles along the way. With SC, I'm doing my best to take each release as it comes & enjoy the development journey as best as I can. Sure, some patches work better than others, but that's life & there's no reason to get upset over a minor set back.
I want my Mercury StarRunner & my C2 Mercury StarLifter. My Nova tank can stay in my buybacks until it seems to be worth pulling out.
They've recently stated that the latest hurdle for the Hull C is the need for the ship to ship docking mechanics so that they can dock at space stations to load & unload.
The Reclaimer & Herald currently have a purpose in game. The Reclaimer is a massive target for new players in starter ships to target & poke at all day long but never drop thanks to it's powerful shields. The Herald is the opposite in that it's a tiny target that skilled players use for target practice.
I see where you are coming from, however consider this:
On route A there is a McDonalds 15 miles down the road.
On route B there is another identical McDonalds but it is 60 miles down the road.
It's 9.30am and the Breakfast Menu does not stop serving until 10:30am and you want a BigMac and fries. You can either go down Route A and grab a McMuffin you don't really want, or get there and wait another 45 minutes for the kitchen to be ready to serve the BigMac you want - or you can go down route B, get to Maccies just as the Menu changes over, get exactly what you want and you'll be 45 miles nearer to your destination with out having to compromise on what you eat (and likely having to go for a BigMac later anyway) or having to wait around and have a delay while the kitchen is getting ready.
Sounds about right. Time for another beer.
Don't get me wrong here, for the most part I love what they're doing with SC too. I'm just not happy with ships being put on the roadmap, then removed without comment or explanation.
Let me ask you something. If your company has announced something that will be available and even sold some units without delivering, then quietly sweeps the product under the rug... what do you tell customers that have the audacity to ask about it? Is it audacity to ask?
I'm not disagreeing with you my friend. I'm simply stating that I'm doing my best to not let the setbacks cause me to become stressed or lose hope. Thus I look at each advancement as a positive thing & each set back due to complications with them pushing the boundaries of new tech as future advancement that is unfortunately taking longer than they were expected. I still think that when things like that get held up that they owe it to us to give us some sort of explanation because they promised to be open with us about their development process. Who knows, perhaps if they were, some backer might work for some tech company that has been developing a technology that would solve the issue. Then both companies could work together on that issue so that they both would benefit. Just my thoughts on the matter.
As we are talking about the Roadmap, I am going to assume you are referring to it, rather than the Kickstarter 2014 original aim date which I believe is the only time CIG has offered a launch date for anything, prior to the announcement of s42 Beta some time in 2020. If I am incorrect please let me know and we can take the discussion in that direction
To answer your question, no it's not audacity to ask at all - I understand your frustrations entirely, it's been a long time and continues to be so, occasionally there looks to be a break in the monotony of waiting only to have that roll back in on itself again; frustration is only to be expected.
Sometimes it is too easy for me to assume what I have seen and read all other backers have seen and read too. I'm not sure if you are familiar with the following, if so apologies if it is retreading old ground:
[TL;DR the following, the Roadmap is and always has been a To Do list, not a features launch schedule.]
If you look on the Roadmap there is a section called "Caveats" which has been on there since the roadmap became live and a big thing was made of it at the time to ensure people didn't think features and timescales on it were intended launch dates for said features:
Star Citizen Roadmap - RSI
The Roberts Space Industries Star Citizen and Squadron 42 roadmaps.
robertsspaceindustries.com
I would like to highlight a few paragraphs from the caveats if I may:
1) The roadmap data is pulled directly from the internal project management database.
In the spirit of transparency, the data found on this page is pulled directly from JIRA, our internal database that we are using to plan and manage the project. Feature progress and release plans will be updated here in an automated fashion, once per week.
ii) Future work estimates are just that: estimates.
All estimates are based on our knowledge and experience but there are many aspects of game development that are impossible to predict because they literally cover uncharted territory. You will see the same estimates we use in our internal planning, but it is important to understand that in many cases (especially with groundbreaking engineering tasks) these estimates are often subject to change due to unforeseen complexity in implementing features.
C) Internal schedules, the ones you will now be privy to, tend to have aggressive dates.
This helps to help the team focus and scope their tasks, especially in the case of tech development. Every team needs target dates, so you may see dates adjust when we get more accurate information and understanding of what’s needed to be completed.
I suppose what I am trying to say pulling these three up is the roadmap is not a launch schedule, it's a To-Do list with things they want to do on it. In hind-sight a less Dev orientated name like "To Do List" may have been a better name for it than "Roadmap". I was going to delve into my own experiences with Jira, however that would be irrelevant as 1) I do not work in software development b) I work on the 'do the work' side of Jira, not the management side, three) I do not work in CIG who may use Jira in a totally different manner to how I have experienced it. Jira is a tool, not a solution, and pulling info from it with automation and displaying that on a website is a roadmap of things to do, not a launch schedule.
I've reread my comments and they come across as a bit Arsehole, I've reworded it the best I can, apologies if that's how they have come across that is definitely not how I intend the discussion to be!
Last edited:
No, you're doing fine. I started using Jira in 2005, and Trello since 2014. We use GIT for most software, but sometimes integrated with Jira. I know how it works. That is not the problem.I've reread my comments and they come across as a bit Arsehole, I've reworded it the best I can, apologies if that's how they have come across that is definitely not how I intend the discussion to be!
That is what I said. It wasn't a criticism, it was a desire. It has not changed.
Yep, have used Trello and Pivotal Tracker as well as Jira, and have used all of them in more than one methodology of Agile/s. The only noticeable thing these systems have done for me on the blunt end is slow everything up so it must be doing one hell of a good job for the managers for them to persist with it.
Last edited:
The other things are just tools, but ugh... Agile. I usually write it as Agile(tm). You know it evolved from "The Manifesto for Agile Software Development." Some places use it correctly, but most use it to call meetings with so many participants everyone is basically wasting the time. I know project managers that prepare a daily speech so they can talk about crud during a daily "scrum". heh, I'm probably preaching to the choir.
