So where is "master modes?"

[Richard Bong]

It's also possibly waiting for ship armor to become meaningful, to allow a degree of protection while the shields are offline as well.

That's just numbers in a database.

 

[Lorddarthvik]

It is indeed a game, with game mechanics. It is also supposed to be "the best damn space sim, period." The two are not mutually exclusive.

Ship stats where there is no jousting isn't going to happen, nor should it. That concept is completely unrealistic. Mallory's "Big Wing," the "Thatch Weave" and similar tactics forever ended Snoopy vs. The Red Baron combat style.

In air combat the victory goes to a single pass where you put rounds (or especially missiles) on target. This is especially true if you do it in a formation.

Why would I try to fly my Vanguard or Sabre like a Gladius?

In WWII the complaint that the P-38, F4F, P-47, etc. can't dogfight was met with the response, then don't dogfight.

You assume best = your personal preference level of "realistic". It isn't.
No one cares that it's unrealistic, we have tractor beams and FTL on demand ffs.. it's a sci fi universe with it's own rules. Not our real world's rules, not your rules, not my rules. It is what it is.
CR said in his very first pitch he want ww2 in space. Why did you back the game if you find this concept unacceptable? They been trying to make this ww1 style happen since day one, but it's only an issue now that they might actually pull it off?

Modern air combat is BVR, you lock you shoot you run as fast as you can or you die. That's it.
WW2 planes didn't dogfight nearly as much as ppl like to assume.. so what? You don't have to either, I don't recall any mention of limiting every single ship to the exact same combat speed? The armor and weapon differences will still make it possible to do hit n runs, but now maybe dogfighting will become a viable tactic as well, I hope at least.

Look. Let's be real for a minute. It's not about us, it's about them. They made all these fancy ship models with fancy physicalized components and damage models and much more stuff yet to come out like fires and shit. They NEED to get us closer and slower so it makes sense to have all these game mechanics. Currently there is like zero chance that even your above avarage players can precisely hit these subsystem components on smaller ships, they are way too small and too fast. CIG keep talking about blowing off hatches and shield emitters and grav generators (realism huh?) and boarding and whatnot... you can barely hit the big ass bubble cockpit of a gladius with 50 shots from a repeater cos it's like 2 pixels at it's closest and zooms by in a hundredth of a second.
This has been the goal all along, now they found a way. Is it a kinda stupid way? Maybe, I'll judge it when I tried it.

 

[Richard Bong]

You assume best = your personal preference level of "realistic". It isn't.
No one cares that it's unrealistic, we have tractor beams and FTL on demand ffs.. it's a sci fi universe with it's own rules. Not our real world's rules, not your rules, not my rules. It is what it is.
CR said in his very first pitch he want ww2 in space. Why did you back the game if you find this concept unacceptable? They been trying to make this ww1 style happen since day one, but it's only an issue now that they might actually pull it off?

Modern air combat is BVR, you lock you shoot you run as fast as you can or you die. That's it.
WW2 planes didn't dogfight nearly as much as ppl like to assume.. so what? You don't have to either, I don't recall any mention of limiting every single ship to the exact same combat speed? The armor and weapon differences will still make it possible to do hit n runs, but now maybe dogfighting will become a viable tactic as well, I hope at least.

Look. Let's be real for a minute. It's not about us, it's about them. They made all these fancy ship models with fancy physicalized components and damage models and much more stuff yet to come out like fires and shit. They NEED to get us closer and slower so it makes sense to have all these game mechanics. Currently there is like zero chance that even your above avarage players can precisely hit these subsystem components on smaller ships, they are way too small and too fast. CIG keep talking about blowing off hatches and shield emitters and grav generators (realism huh?) and boarding and whatnot... you can barely hit the big ass bubble cockpit of a gladius with 50 shots from a repeater cos it's like 2 pixels at it's closest and zooms by in a hundredth of a second.
This has been the goal all along, now they found a way. Is it a kinda stupid way? Maybe, I'll judge it when I tried it.

No, I assume that the term "space simulation" means simulating how being in space really works, which includes real physics.

In space the speed of ships does have the same limit. "C it's not just a good idea, it's the speed limit."

The game mechanics of things being blown off, or fires, or other things is not reliant on speed. There is no NEED for us to be closer or slower.

The only reason for being slower is for a hollywood interpretation of what air combat was in World War 2, which isn't the same as air combat that actually really occurred after 1940, taken into space.

That's not a space simulation. It's not even good science fiction.

Space combat is not about absolute speed, it's about vectors, acceleration and rellative speed.

This is supposed to be a space sim, not an arcade game.

 

[Shadow Reaper]

In air combat the victory goes to a single pass where you put rounds (or especially missiles) on target. This is especially true if you do it in a formation.

In WWII the complaint that the P-38, F4F, P-47, etc. can't dogfight was met with the response, then don't dogfight.

That's it exactly. Dogfighting is dead. Today's IRL combat is to get in range, fire missies and fly away before you opponent can spot you. Fighters don't fight, and they don't actually pass one another anymore. America's most recent air-to-air missiles are gong to make that a thing of the past all the more with their insane ranges. There's no reason to even see the target.

There's no fun and little skill in that--certainly not enough for a game.

 

[Richard Bong]

That's it exactly. Dogfighting is dead. Today's IRL combat is to get in range, fire missies and fly away before you opponent can spot you. Fighters don't fight, and they don't actually pass one another anymore. America's most recent air-to-air missiles are gong to make that a thing of the past all the more with their insane ranges. There's no reason to even see the target.

There's no fun and little skill in that--certainly not enough for a game.

There is quite a bit of skill required, however the one pass kill which is a staple of aircombat and has been since fighters were invented doesn't lend itself well to a game.

Having said that, that doesn't mean arbitrary speed limits are the answer.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

930 years into the future I'm sure you won't need to be within half a million meters to launch ordnance at a target and whats more that technology should be attainable and democratised to all. In the 70's eMail and the internet was the prevail of elite universities and the Millatary, today you have it in your pocket and are buried under the adverts and fraud attempts of a million faceless hopefuls. In the 2900's, those won't be phishing attempts, they'll be missiles, bullets and energy bolts.

Further to that, if we do get Beam Lasers in the game eventually with the laws of physics being what they are you will be able to hit long range targets at the speed of light, too. Imagine you're tootling along in your Freelancer Dur and your long range scanners ping a Idris K at 32km and suddenly you're bathed in 70,000gw of death-light from its Size 10 Laser and BOOOOOM. You didn't have a chance, and nor should you have. at 32km it doesn't matter how manoeuvrable your ship is even a slow turning Capital Ship like the Idris will be able to track your movements with a light-speed shoota.

Actually, if we are to treat Quantum game mechanics as we treat standard physics as being defacto real, why are we not able to use Quantum Spacial Field Compression to allow us to create beneficial range reduction Alpha Strikes - Idea right here for Test Weapons Research Lab (TWRL): Using Quantum Drive, a starship can compress the area of space between it and a target bringing the other ship in range, launch a hard hitting volley across that patch of compressed space and then turning off the Compressed field putting that ship then out-of-range of your guns... and you out of range of theirs. Load up another volley and compress that space again for another broadside from a safe distance. EDIT - I've stuck that idea on Spectrum.

 

[Lorddarthvik]

This is supposed to be a space sim, not an arcade game.

Umm, not sure if you are serious there. I'm not even sure what game or what announcements you were looking at for the last 10 years, but this certainly isn't a physically accurate simulation set in space, never has been, and it never implied that it aims to be that. This is intended to be an Arcade shooter, it always has been from day one. The spiritual successor to games like WingC and Freelancer and such. Ya know, "space sims" as the genre cos you fly ships in space, just like people calling Forza and GranTurismo a "racing sim" cos it's cars while it's actually the most arcadey racers out there...

CiG had basically gone fukced themselves from the get go by going with some weird half-newtonian kinda-really-simulated-but-isn't flight model, cos it led to the "realistic" fight model of jousting, which it never ever ever intended to do. They been trying to reign this back ever since, and they were very vocal about this. There was never any shadow of adoubt that they will try to get rid of that in any way they can. I genuinely don't get why you'd think this wasn't gonna happen and somehow the arcade game they intended to make becomes a full on raw physics sim.

We have C+ speeds already as standard while we have lasers that only travel as fast as a regular 9mm and have a limited effective range that is less then your average hunting rifle, we have energy shields , we have handheld tractor beams that can lift a skyscraper, gravity generators that can fit in your palm... yet you expect this game to have a 100% real world physically accurate maneuvering? Dude, c'mon. Play some Kerbal for that sim, and play this for the pew-pews and dogfights!

Remember when they tried to simulate proper hovering mechanics and everyone freaked out, so CiG dropped the whole mechanic in a heartbeat? I actually do really miss that mechanic. It was a steep learning curve for sure but it made landings and planetside flight so much more involved and interesting... I hate how we can hover at a perfect stand still with almost any craft while facing any orientation, it looks so dumb. But this is an arcade game and it's aiming to be as accessible as possible, CiGs willingness to drop that mechanic made it pretty clear.

BTW, a game with the combat you are looking for did exist back like 15-20 years ago. I remember playing the demo for about half an hour before getting bored of it. It failed miserably, never even heard of it's launch or sales because no one cared. The ships in it had the only viable shape for such levels of realism. A cylinder, with huge boosters on each end along with the weapons. It looked ass, and it played as such. It was a novel idea, but it didn't stick around for very obvious reasons.

Now imagine CiG caving to the pressure for "realistic space combat" and selling the next most optimalest bestestest spaceship Jpeg the for the SC universe!
A cylinder.
That would be something hah? lol



TLDR.: space sim doesn't mean real world physics simulation, it just means a game where you fly spaceships. What you want out of this was never intended to happen, they never implied it would become what you are looking for. It always was an arcade game.

 

[Richard Bong]

Umm, not sure if you are serious there. I'm not even sure what game or what announcements you were looking at for the last 10 years, but this certainly isn't a physically accurate simulation set in space, never has been, and it never implied that it aims to be that. This is intended to be an Arcade shooter, it always has been from day one. The spiritual successor to games like WingC and Freelancer and such. Ya know, "space sims" as the genre cos you fly ships in space, just like people calling Forza and GranTurismo a "racing sim" cos it's cars while it's actually the most arcadey racers out there...

CiG had basically gone fukced themselves from the get go by going with some weird half-newtonian kinda-really-simulated-but-isn't flight model, cos it led to the "realistic" fight model of jousting, which it never ever ever intended to do. They been trying to reign this back ever since, and they were very vocal about this. There was never any shadow of adoubt that they will try to get rid of that in any way they can. I genuinely don't get why you'd think this wasn't gonna happen and somehow the arcade game they intended to make becomes a full on raw physics sim.

We have C+ speeds already as standard while we have lasers that only travel as fast as a regular 9mm and have a limited effective range that is less then your average hunting rifle, we have energy shields , we have handheld tractor beams that can lift a skyscraper, gravity generators that can fit in your palm... yet you expect this game to have a 100% real world physically accurate maneuvering? Dude, c'mon. Play some Kerbal for that sim, and play this for the pew-pews and dogfights!

Remember when they tried to simulate proper hovering mechanics and everyone freaked out, so CiG dropped the whole mechanic in a heartbeat? I actually do really miss that mechanic. It was a steep learning curve for sure but it made landings and planetside flight so much more involved and interesting... I hate how we can hover at a perfect stand still with almost any craft while facing any orientation, it looks so dumb. But this is an arcade game and it's aiming to be as accessible as possible, CiGs willingness to drop that mechanic made it pretty clear.

BTW, a game with the combat you are looking for did exist back like 15-20 years ago. I remember playing the demo for about half an hour before getting bored of it. It failed miserably, never even heard of it's launch or sales because no one cared. The ships in it had the only viable shape for such levels of realism. A cylinder, with huge boosters on each end along with the weapons. It looked ass, and it played as such. It was a novel idea, but it didn't stick around for very obvious reasons.

Now imagine CiG caving to the pressure for "realistic space combat" and selling the next most optimalest bestestest spaceship Jpeg the for the SC universe!
A cylinder.
That would be something hah? lol



TLDR.: space sim doesn't mean real world physics simulation, it just means a game where you fly spaceships. What you want out of this was never intended to happen, they never implied it would become what you are looking for. It always was an arcade game.

Space sim is by definition a simulation of mechanics in space. That would mean physics.
We're supposed to have planets and moons rotating and orbiting.
So now the question becomes speed relative to what?


Hover mode wasn't realistic and has nothing to do with being a space sim.

 

[Lorddarthvik]

Space sim is by definition a simulation of mechanics in space. That would mean physics.
We're supposed to have planets and moons rotating and orbiting.
So now the question becomes speed relative to what?


Hover mode wasn't realistic and has nothing to do with being a space sim.

That is your definition, which I would happily agree with if it hasn't already been misused for over 30+ years now, meaning that when it comes to video games it just means pixels in space, nothing more.
Anyways...

Speed Relative to whatever makes sense.
In this case the physics grid you are in, which I think is tied to the closest large body like planets, moons, suns, the LaGrange stations... TBH I haven't tested it as it makes zero difference to gameplay, for now at least, and I doubt it ever will. We are already moving fairly slowly compared to when it would actually matter. There is no orbital gameplay mechanics, even though the planets do rotate, you can stay stationary or move relative to or from any body with any ship with zero effort. The ships are so overpowered that it seems like there is no gravity at all unless you are on foot or in a ground vehicle.

Cos seeing an 890 jump and 2 hammerheads perpendicular to the ground with their noses pointing down, sitting absolutely perfectly still 2 feet off the deck above area18 waiting for the hangar doors to open is realistic and not immersion breaking and stupid at all...
I'd rather have hover mode any day of the week tyvm, but to each their own I guess...

 

[Deroth]

...and back to the original question...
I believe CIG has been tentatively targeting 3.19.x for Master Modes from the very beginning, but from the comments I've seen from the developers involved in it the sticking points have been both the quantity of ships that need their HUDs overhauled (they still hadn't finished updating all ships for the last two HUD overhauls/updates, and MM requires yet another one that really needs to be implemented across all Flight Ready ships at the same time instead of staggered like they could get away with for the past changes) and getting it balanced for industrial/non-combat ships (all industrial/non-combat ships shouldn't be able to just freely run whenever they want, enabling them to never need escorts or turret gunners; conversely, an Hull-A shouldn't be required to employ an entire fleet of ships just to run scrap as that is neither fun nor viable for the in-game economy.)

 

[Richard Bong]

That is your definition, which I would happily agree with if it hasn't already been misused for over 30+ years now, meaning that when it comes to video games it just means pixels in space, nothing more.
Anyways...

Speed Relative to whatever makes sense.
In this case the physics grid you are in, which I think is tied to the closest large body like planets, moons, suns, the LaGrange stations... TBH I haven't tested it as it makes zero difference to gameplay, for now at least, and I doubt it ever will. We are already moving fairly slowly compared to when it would actually matter. There is no orbital gameplay mechanics, even though the planets do rotate, you can stay stationary or move relative to or from any body with any ship with zero effort. The ships are so overpowered that it seems like there is no gravity at all unless you are on foot or in a ground vehicle.

Cos seeing an 890 jump and 2 hammerheads perpendicular to the ground with their noses pointing down, sitting absolutely perfectly still 2 feet off the deck above area18 waiting for the hangar doors to open is realistic and not immersion breaking and stupid at all...
I'd rather have hover mode any day of the week tyvm, but to each their own I guess...

Several dictionaries and Wikipedia.

Right now, sitting at the computer you are travelling at roughly 460m/s around the axis of the Earth.
You are also moving at roughly 30,000m/s around the Sun.
You are also moving 220,000m/s around the center of the Milky Way Galaxy.

None of the speeds make sense based on those numbers and the speed of ships in normal space in Star Citizen. You can't get to the surface of any of the planets.

 

[Bambooza]

Several dictionaries and Wikipedia.

Right now, sitting at the computer you are travelling at roughly 460m/s around the axis of the Earth.
You are also moving at roughly 30,000m/s around the Sun.
You are also moving 220,000m/s around the center of the Milky Way Galaxy.

None of the speeds make sense based on those numbers and the speed of ships in normal space in Star Citizen. You can't get to the surface of any of the planets.

Oh, wait until you witness the joys of planetary grids. Because planets in SC are rotating they have a different grid than space and in fact the planetary grid speed is significantly faster than space. This means that if you are chasing a ship and they cross over the grid line even a little bit ahead of you they will move significantly faster away from you putting themselves well ahead of you by the time you cross over. I was looking for a video that shows this during lessons learned with a mantis and interdiction.

Even games like Kerbal do something similar with different physic grids to cut down on the calculations required. As for SC its done so that the speed of a planet's rotation is high enough that if your speed was always referenced to space you would never be able to match let alone over come the rotational speed of the planet.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

Oh, wait until you witness the joys of planetary grids. Because planets in SC are rotating they have a different grid than space and in fact the planetary grid speed is significantly faster than space. This means that if you are chasing a ship and they cross over the grid line even a little bit ahead of you they will move significantly faster away from you putting themselves well ahead of you by the time you cross over. I was looking for a video that shows this during lessons learned with a mantis and interdiction.

Even games like Kerbal do something similar with different physic grids to cut down on the calculations required. As for SC its done so that the speed of a planet's rotation is high enough that if your speed was always referenced to space you would never be able to match let alone over come the rotational speed of the planet.

Lol that's fantastic I can't wait until I see this happen in game! It'll be like Benny Hill you'd just put the Yackety Sax song on and watch them stroll away :D

 

[BUTUZ]

Guys you do realise you are arguing on the internet, right? ;)

 

[KuruptU4Fun]

Guys you do realise you are arguing on the internet, right? ;)

I'm pretty sure the marijuana tube doesn't, but then I'd blocked him a while ago because his sanity levels interfere with mine on an upsetting level.

 

[NaffNaffBobFace]

The long-and-ahort of it is we'll get whatever they make us - and we'll like it.

 

[Lorddarthvik]

Guys you do realise you are arguing on the internet, right? ;)

Yep, taht's what it's for. And cat pics ofc.
I was waiting on 3.18.2 for the supposed bugfixes and google was fresh out of cat pics so I had nothin better to do...

@Richard Bong
Despite your dissatisfaction with the yet unreleased thus mostly unknown arbitrary speed limits system, I do hope you will find your fun time in the game, even though it won't be as complex and demanding that it would require all of Earth's supercomputers to calculate your ships trajectory.

 

[Richard Bong]

Guys you do realise you are arguing on the internet, right? ;)

Wait, I'm not discussing this at a Bar Citizen across a table?

I suppose that was an alcohol deprivation induced mirage. I guess I need to break out the Rum!

 

[Richard Bong]

Yep, taht's what it's for. And cat pics ofc.
I was waiting on 3.18.2 for the supposed bugfixes and google was fresh out of cat pics so I had nothin better to do...

@Richard Bong
Despite your dissatisfaction with the yet unreleased thus mostly unknown arbitrary speed limits system, I do hope you will find your fun time in the game, even though it won't be as complex and demanding that it would require all of Earth's supercomputers to calculate your ships trajectory.

You do realize they calculated burn time and direction to bring Apollo 13 back with slide rulers, right?

The math isn't that difficult.

The reasoning behind what we have, and are reportedly getting appears to be CR's fascination with space opera, and hollywood depictions, instead of science fiction and space sim. Disappointing but not unexpected.

 

[Richard Bong]

...and back to the original question...
I believe CIG has been tentatively targeting 3.19.x for Master Modes from the very beginning, but from the comments I've seen from the developers involved in it the sticking points have been both the quantity of ships that need their HUDs overhauled (they still hadn't finished updating all ships for the last two HUD overhauls/updates, and MM requires yet another one that really needs to be implemented across all Flight Ready ships at the same time instead of staggered like they could get away with for the past changes) and getting it balanced for industrial/non-combat ships (all industrial/non-combat ships shouldn't be able to just freely run whenever they want, enabling them to never need escorts or turret gunners; conversely, an Hull-A shouldn't be required to employ an entire fleet of ships just to run scrap as that is neither fun nor viable for the in-game economy.)

3.19 seemed a bit ambitious to me, though they did appear to be pretty much done for Citizen Con, appearances never tell the real tale.