Cool, just started back with SC after leaving at 3.16. Spent some time in arena commander working on flying, have to check out master mode. I upgraded from the T1600m to dual VKB Gladiator NXT EVOs with a left stick Omni and vkb rudder pedals. An awesome setup and fun to fly with the current SC flight model.
3.22 is quite good time to be returning. It's somewhat stable compared to what 3.21 was. I do expect everything to break down one they start adding replication layer to the PU.
And servers will still suffer trying to track entities moving at 1,200 m/s while firing projectiles just as fast. The current dogfights in space look ridiculous as the server FPS tries ot keep up and track the extra fast dog fights (jousting) and it really hampers the experience. I know some people say "it's more realistic", but it's not. We all know "realistic" would be EM targeted laser strikes from 100km out, with very little skill and never seeing who fired the shot or from where, similar to how in DCS World most of the kills take place from 30km out from people you never see.
What issues would arise if you couldn't switch to SCM while above SCM speeds? It removes the need for magic force, and doesn't allow for max speed jousts while firing.
Jousting comes from a lack of player skill, not the flight model. Jousting is still the most common form of fighting in master modes as well, it's just significantly slower and less realistic.
Yea the flight model isn’t full there. I’d rather see it more realistic, then build the combat systems and techniques around that. But it seems that the vision for the combat is cinematic ww2 style prop driven in atmosphere combat, all taking place in space.
"The introduction of a mysterious force in space ... where there should be no external forces" Except for the Quantum Drive you enabled in Nav Mode that does spacial folding. That is, in fact, an engine capable of sudden slow downs; it has to be to drop you out of a Quantum tunnel.
You definitly don't need the quantum drive to kick in to reach nav modes speeds already, thrusters don't magically stop working at a certain speed. There ain't no way humans need spatial folding to go over a few hundreds of meters per seconds in 2953 when we can already go at several dozens of thousands of meters per seconds in 2023. The whole SCM speed concept shits on middle-school grade physics.
Great video. I'm excited for the flight model changes and have been waiting on it to be settle before getting back into the game. First time watching one of yours though I've seen you around in the community often. Happy new year.
I've had a thought for how to make NAV mode feel less arcadey and have the switch feel better. Tie top speed and thrust output to the power triangle, possibly with a boost to both when power is entirely to the trust corner. This could work for all 3 as well. It might be harder to balance cleanly, but this could make the thrust limits and shield dropping feel a lot less arbitrary, give some more depth to combat, and also make the copilot role a lot more engaging and useful. As is, copilots still don't really contribute much to combat, but if they could be adjusting speed and shield power mid fight, competent teamwork could be a serious leg up in a fight. This might also help with the issue I've had for a while with there not really being a way for industrial ships to run from a fight, because they could put power to thrusters, while a fighter holds off any attackers preventing them from doing the same, while any lone ships would still have to compete with any interdictions because they can adjust power the same way
Personally I am not a fan of the new Mastermodes at all... from my point of view it feels like they gives slugfest a new meaning... instead of slugging it out you have become the slug. Not sure what I think about the dispersal pattern either, but I do like that guns now travel way further than before. For me it is a mixed bag of goodies, and I don't like licorice.
Yeah personal preferences, that will be a problem for many aspects, but at least features which will not affect everyone's Behavior would benefit from very detailed options, like additional graphical details, i certainly hope I'm not going to have to live with FORCED vignette, too dark or too bright blacks, excessive light adaptation, on-screen water drips, ect ... flight physics will be a problem as it has to be same for everyone
Personally my friend and I had a blast with master modes. It needs tuning of course, but it instantly made combat feel exciting, fast, and close, which was exactly what they're going for.
I definitely feel like master modes could be implemented better with soft systems rather than hard locks. for example, some weapons might have a chance to damage themselves or just be wildly inaccurate at higher speeds. shields as well. something like a capital class shield generator might be able to sustain integrity at speeds of 1000+ but a small shield generator would likely crap out at 200-300. the railgun on the idris, or the torpedoes on the eclipse should require the vehicles to be close to stationary to fire properly without damaging the ship and its components. truth be told, I'm no game dev, but having these systems be somewhat based on in universe physics as opposed to, in videogame mechanics, would feel more natural and more sim-like.
Oh I love it. I always felt that old tricoording was awful because it makes no sense to have higher accel diagonally than you have longitudinally given your mains should be used as your primary means of traversal. This seems like a great compromise
Yes. Thank you. All this master mode stuff I've found super discouraging. I choose you out of all the contenters to represent my opinions to cig. Go get em.
The removal of excess tricord G is a disaster for space combat too. Despite this "fix", what it means for space combat is that if you try to push forward to you can no longer evade incoming shots. Because if you max out your forward acceleration, you use up the available acceleration and can no longer strafe. There is a bit more to it, not sure how their calculations work exactly, but this is the effective net result. The consequence is that in space combat, no one are pushing forward, and every fight turns into a distance aim battle, which each player using the maximum strafe to dodge shots and wiggle using their strafes. No PvP combat content creator have identified an pointed out this flaw, and it's kinda impossible to reach CIG. There is so much feedback being posted on Spectrum than any attempts to point this out just drowns. The correct solution to the tricording issue is to reduced the strafe accelerations, so they don't contribute so much to the total vector, and allow tricording in the game. In the previous flight model (3.10) the max strafe values were 8.5G vs 13G in both live and MM. In live tricording contributes 35% to the total vector and that's just too much. Vs. in 3.10, tricording was only a 17% addition to the total vector. In 3.10 there was not a single complaint on Spectrum about tricording. So in short, the correct solution is to keep tricord, lower the strafes, and change the input mask for gamepads to have some exponential gain when combining axis' so they can reach the corner too. Just a suggestion for a new video topic. ;) (Master modes is going to kill the game for anyone with actual interest in the space flight)
There is one video that someone really has to do, related to Master Modes speed limits (and I think it needs to be done soon, before 3.23 drops and all this might become impossible): Take a ship and circle an asteroid in decoupled mode. Then take the same ship, still in decoupled mode, and circle another ship flying at 1000m/s. The two are identical! You do exactly the same thing in both cases. You pilot around that 1000m/s ship exactly the same way as if it had been a rock standing still. The reason is simple: That other ship *is* standing still. In decoupled mode, you fly fully Newtonian. In Newtonian physics, there is no such thing as absolute speed, all speed is relative. When you fly decoupled, the game is actively lying to you: Your core instruments, like the speed bar and the TVI are lying. Even space itself, with the way contrails are done and space dust flies past is a lie! The reality is that if you can imagine away the space dust, turn off the contrails and ignore your instruments, circling a ship flying at 1000m/s is exactly as easy as circling an asteroid: They are literally the same thing. There is no speed in space, at least not in the sense that CIG are trying to tell us. Your speed is relative whatever you happen to have targeted at the moment, and as soon as you change targets, your speed changes with it (how will you solve that with space dust? Reality has a simple solution: no space dust because space dust is logically impossible). Now, once you have done this a while and your brain has acclimatized to thinking in relative speed, if you turn on coupled mode, you will find your engines inexplicably start accelerating your ship from standing still beside that other ship and pulling you away in some random direction. All coupled mode does is "match speed to space stations". Obviously, if you are in deep space, that is an entirely irrelevant thing to match speed against. The problem with Master Modes is that the speed problem that MM tries to solve is artificial. It is a direct a result of coupled mode. All that is needed to remove all speed issues is to go decoupled. It would really help beginners with some helpful instruments (at least not instruments that outright lie) and encouragement to learn decoupled flying, at least once you have left the vicinity of the space station.
Great comment and ideas. Something to keep in mind is that the target audience (The majority of people who will pay when the game comes out) are not going to be at the same skill level as most racers. So keeping flight "easier" while also leaving room for higher skill players is going to be their best bet for player retention.
People really don't want an extremely realistic flight model, because you'd never see another ship. You'd be looking at a radar screen and shooting at dots on that screen 100's if not 1000's of KM away.
To be fair, I believe that the decision to remove it would have be been due to the larger UI that was added a while back. It may have been the UI Team's decision. Hopefully with more unique HUDs set to come some time in the future we can see a return of that sort of homage to modern fighter jets. @@brianfury9790
I still don't understand the artificial limits to accelerations. Ships were supposed to act the way thrusters can push it. The issue so far has been that maneuvering thursters have been way too powerful. They should be there to turn the ships around instead of doing 8G or more accelerations to every direction.
I agree, I wonder how that would work out, for example make engines powerful enough but not building power way too fast, that would slow down combat and it would still have the power to get big ships of planets... it would possibly be too easy to destroy ships too quickly then since there will be more time to hit before they can go away, then if guns would damage slower too it would maybe work out
Can racing components be buffed for that? Performance Profiles in racing ships only work in Racing ships , fighters etc but not in industrial ships perhaps?
I like the current flightmodel, the only problem that i have is when someone doesnt know how to pvp and they just keep boosting past you making the fight longer then nessesary. i hope that the new flightmodel will still heavily rely on skill over stats
People who say MM is arcadey are just big noobs that you never see fly in MM. Most of them thought they were good in current flight model cuz they could trichord. So laughable.
I am still not a fan of the fact that when you go out of nav mode, no matter if you turn off engines or inertial dampeners immediately slows you down. I still think the flight model should be unchanged from current, and instead there should be severe accuracy penalties for dogfighting that is happening at super high speeds. Which would make for a soft penalty rather than hard penalties to help incentivize slowing down combat
Unfortunately it still is a system not fit for the PU. For Arena arcade combat and the single-player maybe, but not the verse. It's a system that's going to create massive imbalances between groups. It's unfortunate that content creators have such an outsized influence on the game, it skews things so badly and really overshadows feedback from the rest of the community that doesn't have the benefit of thousands of followers to boost their feedback. It gives an illusion of consensus on things.
I personally hate how slow and stupid this game is becoming. We launched the PU with an amazing flight model, components had different stats, weapons had decent ranges and good tradeoffs between types, and from that high point, where flight in SC was fun, engaging, and supported a vast depth of skill and technique - - patch after patch since then, it's been dumbed down, stripped down, made more generic and less fun. We used to be making the 'Best Damn Space Sim Ever' and now we're making what feels like a rail shooter mobile game. I intensely dislike everything about flight in the master mode, it feels like we're flying WW1 biplanes with spaceship skins.
Well if they listened before, they will again. History has proven this. Even the current Master Modes coming, i doubt will be the final iteration. They most likely want to mass test the system, then make changes where needed. But yes, they need to avoid the arcade style flight... Flight should take some skill.
this is where i disagree somewhat. the game cannot be a hardcore flight sim otherwise the game dies. whilst CIG need to balance it to not go full arcade, they need to also make it very accessible. i would prefer them to add skill to combat in more ways than just simply who is the best pilot or who has the best flight sticks. this is where they need to look at other MMOs and apply strategy of system and weapon use to the game so that a less skilled pilot can still compete if they are more intelligent in the use of other systems and tools available to them.
@ddha0000 i do agree here, but i also believe that pilot skill should matter more when you start getting into larger ships. Especially when they start getting more advanced systems.
@@ddha0000 highly disagree, people who play SC play it for the realistic flight sim fighting & flying Changing to an arcadey mode will kill off the whole point of SC... I don't want a No Man's Sky remake.. I want Star Citizen ✨
And I quote the devs "Take it to sim and dial it back to fun." Add to that Hit reg issues and MM being far more accessible to the middle and lower tiers of pilots you can see why they're trying MM. @@TheVirtualFloof
I really thought they already had flight nailed and didn't need to mess with it. I feel like they have gone backwards with these changes and master modes. CIG, you know it's ok to just say "yea, this was a bad ideal, we are going back to what it was."
@@reveille1289 Pretty much. With some of their reasons for MM being making combat more accessible, hit reg due to high speeds and wanting to bring fights in closer/reduce jousting I doubt they're going back to the current flight model.
@@reveille1289The thing is - limiting speeds to 500m/s and limiting backwards speeds even more would have solved all the problems. The additional changes weren’t really necessary.
Completely agree. Master modes makes combat really boring and too easy to master. For a game that’s supposed to last years, master modes is not sustainable with long term practice and mastery in mind.
this is a game first. People need to stop saying MM feels arcadey. Its meant to be more fun than realistic. Also its a fucking space game with spaceships. You cant have realistic over gameplay for something that literally doesnt exist in the real world.
IMO I'd rather have a chance to retaliate when someone do a flyby than see something doing zips zips and just be an annoying moskito. But hey, if it's "more arcade" then '^'
I think your SCM speed limit should be allowed to increase if you turn off weapons and/or shields. And I mean turn off, not just set your capacitor triangle to engines. I think that would keep people from abusing the increased limit in combat, since you would want all 3 main capacitor pillars to be active, but if you're just racing and you're competent enough to race without shields, you could get a significant speed increase.
you can turn off your weapons and still fire missiles/bombs, and if you want to fly stealth you turn off your shields; that would just give an advantage to those two game plays.
@@xyberviri I would obviously change it to where missiles and bombs would be unavailable if your weapon systems are off. I feel like that's how it's intended anyway. As for turning off shields for stealth, I think that's fine. It's a high risk, high reward scenario. Also, when actual stealth gets implemented, I'm sure it will be much more nuanced anyway.
The SCM restrictions on speed need to happen to allow turrets to be far better at shooting fighters, however it happens. The days of the light fighter meta are coming to an end, to the delight of most of us.
SCM restrictions also mean big ships will no longer be even 1/4 as mobile compared to currently. No more AI dodging with an Idris, or hammerhead for players. The "meta" will simply shift to a more extreme version of what it is currently, that is staying just within max range. For light fighters, turrets always evaporated them with comedic ease in my experience, so no difference there.
There is no light fighter meta. Ships like the Hornet, F8C, and Fury have many advantages over light fighters. Turreted ships like the Hurricane absolutely slap a light fighter around as well.
@@SaintNyx If the Fury is not a light fighter I do not know what you are smoking. The Hornet is only good because of a bug that they have not fixed and the F8C is the only valid option you proposed but still gets slapped around by equivilent skilled people in an Arrow or Blade or Gladius.
@@spider0804 The Fury is literally not a light fighter, it's a snub. ALL of these ships I mentioned are better than every light fighter in atmosphere. The Sabre also dominates in atmosphere. It's worth noting that the MAJORITY of fights occur in atmosphere in the PU, and almost half of them occur in atmosphere in AC. The Hornet "bug" is being left alone on purpose, so it might as well be considered part of the ship at this point. I've killed excellent light fighter pilots with all of these ships. There only appears to be a light fighter meta because the best pilots enjoy flying light fighters, since they are the most skill-expressive and fun. Try taking a light fighter into the PU sometime and you'll see how badly it actually performs, especially in a team fight. There is no clear light fighter meta right now, there is a good pilot meta. Light fighters are only good at one thing: 1v1 dogfights in space. That's all they're good at, and they're not much better at it than something like a Hornet.
All they would have to do is have ship weapons actually hit yourself increasingly as you reach speeds well above SCM. It could be explained as some kind of shockwave propagating in the weapon, so flying decoupled in reverse at well above SCM to shoot a pursuer would be risky. This will give the opportunity to break away, and then ready yourself to fight, before slowing down to fight. Apply the same logic to the shields, they'll only charge to some inverse proportion of your velocity above SCM. The faster you're going when you drop back into combat mode, the lower your shields will be capped at.
To comment on the arcadification of the flight model, I'm personally very happy with it because I want the game to be fun. 1000m/s fights is not fun. Being able to get away from a committed engagement with no risk is not fun. I want the ships and combat geometry to be skillful and not p2w, so long as they make combat engaging, risky, and fun, I am happy. Overall, I'm glad they made the tricording changes as it was unintuitive, and this seems like a great middle-ground. Great video!
The speeds are so slow in MM to the point of boredom and the skill ceiling has been lowered dramatically. I’m not even super good at pvp and I can feel this. In terms of pay to win, many videos have gone over the fact that MM makes the game more pay to win due to the lower skill gap and speeds, making DPS and ship stats matter much more in fights rather than maneuvering skill.
If they want the best flight model and FPS combat they'd make the entire Arena Commander module f2p and include a Battle Pass in the subscription for access to all ships and weapons and components and that way they'd get a ton of data. If no one's playing it, it will show them what they have isn't fun. It's what the EvE devs should have done with Dust 514. That thing could have been great, but instead was mediocre and died before it took off.
Eh.....no. A battle pass on this sorta thing would be damaging. It's not a complete product, it's an Alpha. And in Arena commander you can basically rent out any ship for use that you don't have. The Master Mode tests have limited the ships you can use because they need some form of consistency of data to roll with. F2P wouldn't help either, most that are involved in SC have bought a basic game package. Or just hop on free flies to see how the game is progressing. Some Free fliers aren't interested in keeping involved because it's just a "cool tech demo" with not enough to it. And...technically there is a "Battlepass" it's the SC Subcribers.
@@S386LWBNM A playable alpha is precisely the time you want a TON of data. They need data from the masses. We're all very niche players with HOTAS setups etc. They NEED data from people with Xbox controllers and 5 games on their Steam account. If you think this game will be financially viable long term, post launch without mainstream PC players, you're incorrect. The FPS combat in this game is serviceable at best. They need to shore it up and make it more accessible. Otherwise you better be telling all your homies to pony up for that $45,000 pkg or whatever it is they just added to the Concierge shop.
@@DaringDan A basic subscription of RSI already starts at 10 dollars a month. It's basically the battlepass subscription you're mentioning. A tweak to a couple of the benefits and you'd be there.
What I don't understand is why CGI wants spaceships to behave like WW2 aircraft. If they wanted WW2 dogfight combat they should have made a WW2 fighter game. Making a space game, they are now adding non-physics to their flight model that I find annoying to say the least.
MM is a arbitrary solution to a non-existent problem. SC is so realistic that I can't see a magical name plate over the head of the player standing in front of me but now for no technical or lore reason weapons and shields magically stop working if I go above a certain speed. If I do enable my weapons now I magically can't go over some magical speed barrier that a second ago I was speeding way past. The whole idea is moronic and arcady. Next we will be sprinting around bunkers and knifing everything while tea bagging everything. CoD is space here we come!
