I think this is a great idea! It’s a game. It’s all about moves and counter moves. It an over simplified way, it’s like a game of chess. Torpedoes are like the Queen right now. Extremely powerful as they should be. But if you’re careless with them, they can be checked by any of the other pieces on the board. I think scanners gameplay is fantastic! Maybe toss a bit of shield and power management into it as well for the larger ships. If you can’t maneuver or didn’t scan them in time, full power to shields with shields diverted to double aft, port, or wherever the torpedo is coming from, should allow you to limp. I’d imagine nearly 80-90% damage if you managed to actually get power fully up in time. And would not survive a second one. Perhaps too, once ship physicalization is done, where the torpedo hits too. If you manage to turn starboard hard enough and take it to the cargo hold, you might loose most if not all your cargo, but still have main systems online to limp home. Ships coming to dock that survived a torpedo attack is a thing that happened. Survivor would have to be lucky/skilled and the shot unlucky/unskilled for the bomber.
This guy has cognitively modified his psychology to view griefing and adversity as an opportunity to solve an interesting and complex problem. Brilliant!
I genuenly love how you aren't going: "OP plz nerf!" But actually think about how a similar problem was solved in the real world. The Entente couldn't exactly go: "God it's OP plz nerf".
My counter to this is that games demand balance and fairness... While the real world always encourages the exact opposite. Weapon designers strive for their designs to be as unbalanced and unfair as possible. Military doctrine is the same. You NEVER want to be in a 'fair' fight in the real world. Thus, real world analogies break down because the real world doesn't care about fairness, while in a game we generally do.
KuraIthys S’why Morph has hit the nail on the head perfectly with this one. He’s saying that don’t make it fair by the devs, but the players need to level or up the playing field for then defenders.
@@KuraIthys Problem is, right now? acquiring S9 torpedoes is just too easy. They're supposed to be a significant investment, hence how powerful they are. That was supposed to be the balancing factor that, instead of wasting a potentially very expensive weapon on a smaller vessel, you'd instead make sure its target is well worth the cash your going to be flinging around. Imagine the Polaris S10 torpedoes in the current state of the PU, if we think S9's are an issue, S10's would make that issue seem even more outright, but again.. S9 and S10's are for targets of a more sub-cap to cap variety.
I like the new additions to the targeting system (where you can see when somebody is locked onto you) because that allows stealthy ships or bombers to get relatively close without detection but once they fire their payload they are vulnerable. Torpedoes act too much like missiles at the moment, and they should be slower, and a little less maneuverable. I like the idea that eclipses could go in close for a high risk of losing your ship, or fire from farther away with a risk of the missile being avoided or destroyed with turrets or other weapons.
I think the rub here is with larger ships engaging each other, long range torpedoes and missiles seem intuitive. However, making the torpedo slower sounds right to me. As much as I hate saying that being an Eclipse pilot.
@@nara6540 That and they should have an absolute limit to their range. If you fire one off at maximum lock range, they would not have enough fuel for anything but the most basic of corrections and detonate shortly afterwards. Something that real-life torpedos already do. This gives the pilot a tradeoff between safety and hit chance. If you wait a little longer to fire, your shot will have a better chance of catching the target, but you will also be in far more danger from escorts. A potential target would need to try and get as much distance as possible in an attempt to outlast the torpedo's fuel supply.
I like the way EVE Online does the concept of "long-range scanners." Star Citizen could and should give it more depth, but EVE's system is a great starting place. Any un-cloaked ship within a specific distance (14.3AU for all ships in EVE) shows up in a list. You see the ship type and that's it. You don't know who they are, exactly how far away they are, or what direction they're in. You narrow that down with subsequent scans by adjusting the range of the scan and the size of your scan cone in degrees.
I like this system Except you should not know what type of ship something is, thats kind of "magic" Unless they get REAL close then I would consider a computer being able to figure out what type of ship it is.
@@AlbertoMartinez765 agreed, it should be "Unidentified object" until a certain range, maybe military scanners can pick up on ship types easier, but also have less "range" than a scanner made for exploration, giving it a little balance
Also false positives like asteroids add some uncertainty to the mix. I love the idea of a fleet scrambling fighters because of some rocks picked up by a scanner. It could really add value to a skilled radar technician versus a newbie.
@@AlbertoMartinez765 I disagree it's not magic at all. Ships would emit very unique and identifiable EM and IR signatures, it would be pretty trivial for a computer to match them against a database, or even a well trained operator. Perhaps something like radar being able to pick them up at very long range, but all the information you get is about the size class, light fighter, fighter, corvette etc. and stealth ships would show up many classes smaller than what they actually are, like the ghost, saber and eclipse would show up as a snub or maybe even as a bike like the Nox or something. EM and IR would be either short range or a narrow cone in order to get a positive ID (even though that's not really realistic, there is no real stealth in space as pretty much anything stands out hot against the vacuum of space).
@@AlbertoMartinez765 submarines can tell what kind of submarine or boat is in front of them by listening to its engines. those scanners are a hell of a lot more advanced so yes, it's fully acceptable to see what kind of ship it is.
I personally hates how big (and small) ships explodes and kills everyone inside when the HP bar hits zero. They should begin to "sink" instead. Or becomes disabled in other words. There's no point in escape pods or damaged states in big ships if they and everyone inside get instabgibbed. CIG did talk about "Time to disable" in one of their videos, but given their speed track record . . . That feature will be up 5 years later.
Yeah doesn't make sense unless I don't know, your reactor decided to go boom. I recall starship troopers when they got hit with plasma of bug's ass. At one moment they crashed against another ship and the ship broke in half, but you could see escape pods leaving the ship.
So it actually sounded like Salvage when implemented will end the death boom of ships, because you'll have a shell of the ship left to salvage for scrap and components, and maybe after being disabled that's when you rush to the escape pods, and perhaps if the pod isn't shot down it brings you to a npc patrolling rescue craft that takes you back to port or something. I'm expecting solid work into Salvage to start showing up Q1 2021 as the Q4 patch seems to be bringing what's probably the final feature set for mining, but time will tell.
I think component damage has something to do with this, once they become targetable. But considering boarding action, escape pods, salvage, and crash landings all seem to be planned emergent gameplay mechanics I think CIG is working on a way to make this happen... someday.
Yeah, take out the exploding ships - reserve those instakills to smaller targets - and instead have the bigger vessels get 'hulled' and see deck fires and atmosphere loss before the vessel essentially becomes too crippled to fly anymore. As you say, not much point of the escape pods when there's only milliseconds of reaction time.
@@jesterprince4949 mayhaps. Or it's a fiddle of code to 'wound' big ships and outright kill smaller ones. As Morph says, if persistent inventories comes in before the torp issue is modified it's going to cause a lot of aggro. Not sure if that will damage CIG or SC massively, but considering how vocal some backers are I'm sure it's an issue best tackled to some degree now before it can potentially bite them in the pocket later...
That sort of anti missile counter measure exists already i hope they add it in, but you will need to buy a really high quality system for it to be reliable imo
Torpedoes are fast and extremely small in comparison to any ship, and I really hope that even if you will be able to hit the torpedoe eventually, the probability of such scenario should be no more then 25%. If 1/3 of my projectiles will explode before they hit the target, plus my target can use countermeasures, PLUS I can easily be spotted and intercepted even before I get a chance to lock on the target, then this is too much of RNG to me. I hope the difference between newbie and experienced player will be in the amount of information they can utilize about surroundings, enemy signatures, loadout, etc.
Denys Dorokhov certain weapons like rockets have a slight rng even in real life. Countermeasures like anti torpedo automated turrets sound like a solution to me. Only way to torpedo somebody is to get into the dead zone of that defense.
I'd say partly, the torps need to change as well. I agree that scanning needs to be developed so you can use picket scanner ships as well for the fleet. But I also think torps need a rework. They act way too much like missiles with a different name and larger damage number. These torpedoes should just take a lock and after a couple of seconds after launch go into dumbfire mode. The first few secs are for it to make any subtle course corrections to intersect with the target. But it only has a few seconds to lock. That means smaller ships could easily dodge and even medium ships. But larger ships caught flat footed would not have enough reaction time due to the thruster lag coming in 3.10 to react in time. And in those instances, hammerheads and picket ships should be in your fleet for defense. That is how I've always understood torpedoes were supposed to behave in star citizen. Right now, it sounds like torpedoes should be your choice missile on any ship that can fit them. And I'm saying this while looking ahead at other torpedo equipped ships still not implemented. Like the s10 torpedoes on the polaris.
That's literally not how modern torpedoes work though. A modern Mk 48 can be fired to whatever range/depth the operator wishes, at which point it will arm and begin an autonomous search-and-destroy pattern on its own if it's not being wire-guided by the operator. If it acquires a lock during this protocol, it will turn to engage the target. If it misses, it will then resume its search-and-destroy pattern. This continues until the torpedo reaches the end of its lifespan, or meets its target. I personally think that the torpedoes in Star Citizen would be very interesting if they were made to work in a similar way. They become A) standoff weapons for large ships, and B) area-of-denial weapons for just about anyone near them. If you really need to, you can make sure they don't come with IFF (Identify Friend or Foe) protocol so that allied ships and even the ship that fired them have to be careful not to get locked by the seeking warhead.
@@OneBiasedOpinion CIG seems to have made torps like Trident missiles a la passive seeking. If we didn't have CrossSection, it would give the game a new level of depth by being able to "Go Dark" to avoid torpedo sensors
Raymond Biskner I agree that pilots should have some more options to “dodge” said missiles. Preferably options that have risks to them as well. We also have to keep in mind that eventually all ships will have multiple modules that can all be damaged and won’t always explode in a fireball the second they run out of “HP.” I’m sure that will alter how missiles behave as well.
@@OneBiasedOpinion not saying you're wrong, but syaondri was talking about the older, dumbfire torps, and i agree that torps using a search and destroy function would be interesting.
torps actually a) lock WAY too fast on small ships b) are too nimble as they are able to follow even light fighters c) dont slow down in athmo, making them in athmo even more deadly d) are often not distiguishable from normal missles in the warnings all this points must be adressed!
@@vladfedonkin4731 yeah but that should be the decision of the operator on what the proper loadout should be for each situation. It shouldn't be a system restriction (like it shouldn't be restricted by the developers). It should be a restriction based on thought and logic (it should be a logical restriction)
I think i remember CIG mentioning in a QA, that they want torpedoes to take longer to lock on to targets with lower signatures. Meaning that if a eclipse locks on to a small fighter, the signature may make it so that it takes so long that the target has plenty of time to catch up and destroy the eclipse (since the lock is a give away). This making engaging small fighters a dangerous risk. As engaging a high signature target like say a connie, will allow you to unload much faster and get out before anyone gets to you. To use the u boat analogy. Locking a fighter, is like a u boat trying to torpedo a destroyer. There is no point and its dangerous for the u boat. Rather the u boat will select proper prey, like a big cargo ship, and dive before getting destroyed. Same here, a s9 is not intended for fighters. It s intended and better used on targets large enough to create a big signature which can be locked on easily and fast
That would make equipping your solo ship for stealth (even a large ship) much more sensible. I used a DPS calculator and compared a stealth loadout on a 315p and 350r vs a typical high power build (maximising shield and weapon power as well as reactors and cooling) And the stealth build put out between 1000-3000 units of IR/EM vs the non-stealth build hitting 15,000-30,000 units, so it's a BIG difference. However there's 2 problems with this; Stealth components for larger ships are non-existent. And presently nothing can help you with cross-section, meaning cross-section based weapons are even more OP. (probably also why they can target fighters with them right now.) In short, we need more ways to combat cross-section, as currently there's basically nothing you can do that can mitigate against them at all...
@@KuraIthys I think you misunderstood the intent of the mechanic. The idea isn't to push everyone to use stealth comps to avoid torps (though yes, stealth ships will take even longer). The idea is to give a single eclipse a bigger risk when engaging a single hornet for example. Like say, an eclipse doing bounty hunting. Because doing so on a small ship will let them know they are being locked on, and that will take a long time I'm their case. Plenty for them to use their short range scanners, find you and kill you potentially. To take morphs analogy to U boats. When a U boat attacks a convoy. It doesn't go for the small destroyers.it goes for the carrier or the cargo ships then dives away to avoid being destroyed. Same thing here. The idea is to make attempting to lock a small fighter a big risk, that isn't worth it (like a u boat trying to take on a destroyer). But rather to focus on a bigger target (like a Caterpillar), which will lock much faster and allow you to flee before getting detected. It's not really about using stealth comps to be used to defend against torps but rather, that bigger ships are the natural target of big torpedoes. An eclipse trying to take on a fighter with a torpedo is going to come at a high risk of being detected and killed before even have a lock on.
@@Sarazoul I think you also misunderstood MY point. But sure. - point is, based on how you were justifying why a small ship is a higher risk target, discussing the stealth mechanics becomes inevitable, because stealthier ships will be harder to hit for the exact same reasons you gave here... Also we have to discuss using appropriately sized weapons for your target. Using a size 9 torpedo on a fighter sounds like something that just plain shouldn't work period. We can argue about why not, but just think about it for a moment and ask yourself why that would ever make any sense. You probably shouldn't even be thinking about trying to get a size 9 to hit a larger ship like a 600i or caterpillar, much less a fighter... That's just... Not an appropriate tool for the job. Just like trying to take out a javelin using a fighter with size 1 guns is basically impossible, I don't even think trying to hit a fighter with a size 9 torpedo should be a maybe... It should be a one in a million type of impossibility...
RosscoAW yeah, that's sort of what I had in mind as well... hence why I called it the ultimate (which in other games like LoL also has to be timed in order to be effective) 👍
@Antonio Vinciguerra I’d say a more proper solution is making them faster than missiles, but only able to slightly turn. This way, a larger ship can’t just run away, but something like a fighter or maybe even something like the Hammerhead could break into it - assuming they saw it coming from far enough away. Also, for larger ships, I’m thinking some form of CIWS would be nice. I mean come on, we have things like the Phalanx or Kashtan IRL.. this way, you’d need to fire enough torpedoes to overwhelm the anti-missile systems. Another good reason to make torpedoes fast.
Hmm, I just want to say that scanning seems less of a "counter" to torpedos and more of a counter to the Eclipse specifically. Torpedos themselves aren't scary when it's a Retaliator bringing them, you can see that thing before they're in range to lock you lol. But I do wish torpedos were less maneuverable, that's it, I don't want to have to dodge the same torpedo 2-3 times while also under fire.
Just being able to target missiles and torpedoes would be a great addition... having hard points just for counter measures that have different lvl of efficiency would be great as well
@Dustin Godin well I think he also means like automated countermeasures, like how Elite dangerous has it where as soon as something like a missile or torpedo is shot at you that it automatically start targeting it for you and trying to take it out
It's a nice idea Morph but I feel you are only looking at it from the perspective of large groups of players fighting each other. Small groups of 2 or 3 people won't always have a scanning ship, nor should they. I feel nerfs are still needed to both speed and maneuverability which will allow torpedoes from a single eclipse relatively easy to shoot. Give torpedoes a higher health pool to sustain more damage, and then you create a fun gameplay element, shooting down torpedoes moments before they slam into the side of your ship.
"nor should they" the smaller your convoy, the less likely it is to be detected but at the cost of protection. why should something be nerfed because people take risks and then complain about getting killed???
@@gtifighter Depends on the overall consequences doesn't it. If the concensus becomes that there is no point of playing the game without one particularly powerful weapon combined with particular min-maxed ship layout, then maybe nerfing the OP weapon isn't so bad a thing. Also I understand that harassing other players in a game can be quite fun and shouldn't be prevented (this is just a game after all right), but there is a danger that harassing becomes the only rewarding activity that you can do and that I don't know how that could be a positive thing.
@@gtifighter Because the risk is entirely one-sided.The Eclipse is a I-WIN button if I have ever seen one. I never get detected as long as I watch my signature, and the initiative is always on my side. If it looks unwise to attack I just abort but that hardly never happens. My prey has such a short reaction window that they are usually dead before they have been able to shake of the initial panic. A single pilot shouldn't have this godlike power. I could be onboard with a Retailiator requiring 4 crew members to achieve the same result. The Eclipse is going to be the meta for every single griefer if this is allowed to continue, and that will spell the end for small scale PVE industrials. Being griefed by undetectable enemies that can one-shot you without leaving you any way to defend simply won't be fun for them. There will be a lot of solo PVE players out there, and they will just be grist for the mill.
@@platiuscyndar9017 And with that, you've pissed off a decent fraction of the playerbase enough to possibly make them give up on the game entirely. Which just shows that there's an actual problem here, not just some hypothetical issue that should be countered with some other mechanics (mechanics that are effectively inaccessible to players with smaller non-combat vessels...)
i love these ideas though i would feel like torpedoes should probably be less maneuverable having missiles as an option that sacrifice damage for maneuverability. since well it's dum that an over sized torpedo will always hit a small ship. since that means that there's really no reason to carry small torpedoes other than having more of them. hm well idk. just don't like the idea of only using size 9 against everything. maybe they should be easier to detect? idk just think eh. large = sluggish and small = nimble. or something like that giving a reason to match the ship you are firing at. this is just rambling btw. i haven't thought of why these ideas are properly stupid.
Yeah, I wasn't expecting torpedoes to be nimble things that can even hit fighters. That seems odd. From expectation I would have thought a torpedo should have little to no chance of hitting fighter, might struggle to hit a 'large' ship (by which I mean the ships classed as 'large' vs 'capital') if the pilot is alert, but will hit a capital ship pretty often. Obviously torpedoes come in multiple sizes, so this is relative. You might use Size 6 or 7 torps on say a 600i or hammerhead... But a size 9 or 10 torpedo, while perhaps being able to one-shot such a ship if it hits, likely is too unmaneuverable to hit such a 'small' (relatively speaking) ship... That's kind of what I expected, but that doesn't seem to be the present situation...
@KuraIthys Thoughts/issues with having torps being very fast, but (at least in the case of the class 8 or 9 torps) turning so slowly that even a well-aware HH or similar can evade them? Obviously not a dev, but you seem like the kind of person to point out flaws with the argument if there are any, and I’m trying to find reasons they may have decided not to go this route. In my opinion, having torps be fast would reinforce their “anti-capital ship” role, given that said cap-ships are going to by all logic have some form of CIWS to shoot down missiles or torpedoes. Having them be very fast would help with that, as said CIWS would have major issues shooting something down with only a ~5-second engagement window.
Yes they should have it where the size nine which are made to go after capital ships be slower and sluggish Then the lower the size more speed and maneuverability compared to the ships that you're firing if that's the case for size nine who in the world would want to buy anything small with very little armor? 🤠
They may change their speed a little but don't expect a fighter to outrun these with ease either. CIG has said they want to address the effectiveness of torps against small fighters (as fighters should be a natural counter to bombers and right now, bombers can take out Fighters with ease). Their solution is to make Locking times on torps be significantly longer the lower the signature is. Essentially. Locking on a carrack, will take as long as it does now. But a locking a Gladius, because it has such a low signature... takes a lot more from your computer to lock on. So getting a lock on it would be MUCH longer. So long in fact that, locking on fighter would be a terrible idea because it gives you out and the fighter as plenty of time to react. This would be a great solution. It's more simple on their end and it gives the desired result. With this, an eclipse doing bounty hunting killing small aurora's etc... would be a thing of the past. As the moment the eclipse lock on the aurora, it takes so long that the aurora as plenty of time to react and either run away or engage the target.
ok i see all these comments and i just wanted to say. i don't think they should make them slower just how well they turn so they won't have the ability to swing back and hit the target after missing running out of fuel or having a kill timer before that can happen.
I'm concerned that your suggestion works for large warships, but seems a lot more troubling for smaller ships that are likely to be operating independently a lot. Explorers in particular are going to be in a tough spot here. Exploration by it's nature is a frequently solitary affair, yet it's still possible that you'll run into pirates, the vanduul or what have you. It's unreasonable to expect exploration to be done using a fleet that's on constant alert for torpedo bombers, yet without such you're basically a sitting duck if a torpedo can one-shot you and you have basically NO countermeasures, defenses or anything at all that can protect you. I'm thinking of ships like the 600i and Carrack (and I suppose in the current state given what cross-section torpedoes can do even to a fighter, the Aquila is also vulnerable.) These ships, by their nature, are going to be out alone a lot. And to basically be defenseless with no recourse at all to any random idiot that can get an eclipse or retaliator near you seems... Problematic. Granted, explorers, by definition tend to have above average scanning equipment. But it still doesn't seem like a good idea that even the explorers need a permanent escort. ... How do you even support such a thing without ending up with a fleet that has a carrier and fuel tanker along for the ride? Suddenly you no longer have a carrack out in the void, you've got a carrack, a starfarer, an idris, some terrapins, a hammerhead, a few fighters, and so on. And at this point I think we've rather lost that spirit of exploration. Yet the alternative is that the carrack goes out all by itself in the knowledge that if anyone tries to hunt you down with a torpedo bomber, you're pretty much guaranteed screwed. Not only is this problematic, it's also rife for abuse, as you yourself experienced, since people were doing it to you basically just to troll you for being a 'celebrity'...
A torpedo should take a disgustingly long time to lock onto a ship that's considerably smaller than its intended size. The amount of time should scale depending on the difference between the torpedo size (actually the size of any lock-on weapon) and the target. Say you have a size 9 torp and you're targeting a Kraken - All good. Lock-on as normal. If you're targeting an Aurora, it's going to take you a long time. 30 seconds? A minute? The exact timings can be tweaked, but suffice it to say it should be long enough that the ship has time to take evasive manoeuvres before you can fire.
In terms of a Carrack Explorer - I don't think the intention with that ship is that it should be flown solo - you're still meant to have a crew. One of your crew members should be on scanning duty, at least when first entering a system.
I do agree that independent ships need to be able to find a response to. Though explore ships are the ships I think should have better scanners and possibly faster jump capability. If you're going to go after an explorer I think you need to lure it in to a trap. It should be doable but the counterplay from the explorer should really be focused on what an explorer normally do. That what gameplay that draws people to the explore role should still be a part of how they counter such ambushes, even if there might be a slight mix to it. In general, I think we need layered counterplay where everything is not determined in a short encounter lasting just a few seconds. A battle engagement should be an investment in time when you try to outmaneuver your target, both literally and metaphorically. And of course we need to see the implementation of time to disable rather the time to kill to where ships more often are disabled first and foremost, at least if their bigger ships, then outright destroyed. As this opens up more gameplay where the crew of the big vessel try frantically to save the disabled ship, possibly with attackers doing boarding actions rather than more attack runs as a followup. I am sure a multilayed approach is what will make the games gameplay stand out in from other games. And the foundations for this is there, just all parts need to come together for this to become a reality. And yes. Some of what I am saying here is rather abstract. But I think one need to break it down to abstract concepts first then give context and meaning to it. After all this is a complex interconnected system of layered gameplay we are making so the game feels deep and rewarding to master. Not a simple twichy arcade experience.
Maybe the idea is that these massive scanners would be on larger ships or dedicated ships, so a large powerful fleet could have some dominance over and area, but that smaller independent pilot would be able to detect the larger ships more easily as well and could escape pretty easily if they wanted to. The big issue then would be smaller stealthy fleets of ships that would try to sneak up on explorers, but a small stealthy fleet would also have issues with being able to have the resources to get into deep space, and could only really grief because they'd not have the storage space and long term resources to be able to make much of it. So you have to choose: -Go into deep space with the slow, but effective dominance of a large fleet. -Go deep with speed and flexibility with a smaller dedicated explorer ship. -Or be sneaky, fast, and deadly, but be unable to go into deep for long with light stealthy ships that have radar. It's like rock paper scissors.
@@KindredBrujah I mean solo as in single ship by itself, not solo as in single person by themselves. Consider the difference: You've got a large fleet with dedicated scanning vessels, anti-fighter screening (hammerhead) and fighter escort. The scanning ships are well out from the fleet and detect an incoming bomber long before it can threaten the larger ships. the fighters go out and engage the bombers and destroy them before they're even in range. Now imagine the sole carrack. It detects a bomber at maximum scanning range... ... Now what? You have maybe a few seconds before the bomber can start firing, it's outside of your weapon range, since torpedoes have longer range than guns... It'll take you a while to jump away... Cross-section torpedoes currently have no countermeasures... What are you supposed to do exactly? That's what I meant by being out solo. When you're a lone ship out on your own, your tools for countering a bomber are extremely limited...
Great video. This is the definition of constructive criticism. You're thinking like a game designer on how to solve these problems. Far more effective than just whining about getting stream sniped. Kudos. Also let's acknowledge that Morph takes the time to make these cinematically beautiful shots applicable to what he's talking about and diagrams to further illustrate things. Others just have trailer footage or them sitting in front of a green screen. It's a lot of work so I feel it should be pointed out when someone puts forth the effort
I like this line of thinking. It could enrich our experience by adding something in stead of taking something away. I feel the tricky part is in adding things that address the intended issue without creating too many overlapping effects across other aspects of the game. The more game components one item touches, the more difficult it is to balance changes (e.g. the more complex the web, the more pulling on one thread affects the whole). I also appreciate the concept of broad scanning vs. narrow scanning, as it reminds me of game mechanics in other sci-fi games I've played. I would be curious as to how this would affect other game components and intended player interactions. It would definitely affect game play related to smuggling, not to mention allowing players to stalk other players more effectively basically allowing the "hunters" you are trying to avoid better capabilities to hunt you down if they can employ the same tool. It is a fun thought exercise with countless possibilities. Instead of taking the obvious route, we can dream up possibilities that may create greater depth, texture, and complexity to our experience.
Love the footage quality! Also a great look at Torpedoes, here's to hoping that CIG will allow Security Protection Details the ability to actually protect clients as that is exactly what my Organization aims to do when contracted out as security for an event. One thing would be giving us an effective force reconnaissance screen with ships like Terrapins - offering a net of surveillance. Then allowing us to dispatch hostiles in a zone without incurring a crime-stat would be helpful, or at least flagging the hostile as red if they attack your party members (won't help with torpedo snipers but at least helps with other issues).
I think the issue is also that there aren’t enough counter measures for torpedoes. Also, modern torpedoes are basically Anti-Ship Missiles. In this regard, the torpedoes in Star Citizen aren’t that far off.
Yeah... Except of course the fact that they can hit fighters. I think we need to look at sizes vs targets. You shouldn't be using a size 9 torpedo on a fighter and expecting that to work. Honestly I don't even think you should expect to be able to hit a large (but not capital class) ship like a 600i, Hercules or Caterpillar with a size 9 or 10 torpedo. Rather, you use missiles against the small to medium ships, and you'd use say a size 6 or 7 torpedo against these ships, while the bigger torpedoes are reserved for the true capital ships...
#1 - CIG keeps records of everything we do, if you report a stream sniper player/group and obviously you will have video proof to back it up, then CIG should issue 3 warnings then start locking out those accounts for up to 30 days for each occurrence, too many repeat offenses could result in permanent ban. #2 - If CIG doesn't like the idea of banning people then there should be more severe punishments for this type of griefing. For example, create a special prison sentence for a griefer which is much longer than what we currently have - say 14 days, and increasing the amount of merits to an appropriate amount for such a sentence. (Also blocking the ability to transfer merits so they don't bypass punishment). If the user wants, they can appeal the sentence but they would need to explain themselves, what they were doing at the time and if possible provide video proof. I have to add this in here because as we all know the game is full of bugs and the last thing anyone wants is to get this type of sentence due to a bug. #3 - In previous CR games, a torpedo was slow, very slow but also very tough. In order for it to hit a target it had to be protected as it traveled to it's target. I think that same technique should be applied here. Now calibrating and spooling take a certain number of seconds and we can no longer do any blind jumps so that means if you detect an incoming torpedo you have to identify and target a destination, spool, and jump all in a matter of seconds. The torpedoes should be balanced to reach their target within this time frame, but not so quickly that the target doesn't have a chance to get away. Furthermore, the timing should be balanced to give the target enough time to make a decision: jump away or try to take out the torpedo. For the attackers the torpedo now has to be escorted and defended to the target. For the defenders the torpedo and it's escorts must be dealt with simultaneously. #4 - Another option to banning or disabling accounts is banishment. When we get the Pyro system, CIG could automatically send these players to that system and prevent them from entering Stanton for a long time.
I think they need to introduce point defence. Your idea with scanning is good, but what response can you give to torpedoes right now? You either quantum, or try to gun it down. Both are very unreliable, so to be effective, time to react needs to be really long.
Point defense will be a thing, they even sold an Upgrade for the Idris that has some. But like with all things it takes them many more years to implement those things.
@@jsalsman I don't think shields should be a counter to every weapon. You could just put the best shields and deal with everything then. No need to think at all and no counterplay possible. Besides, what's the point of having shield tank the damage of torpedoes? Those are specifically designed to destroy big ships. I honestly think missiles and torpedoes should even deal more damage to shield compared to hull, because that's so much damage in a single point or even penetrate shields. But I don't know if CIG want to take this route with them and what are the plans for differing different weapons damage types and roles in combat. That's why I think they need to create a countermeasure. As it stands, torpedoes and missiles in game are fire and forget type of weapons, they seek targets automatically after that. That's part of why it's hard to deal with them. There are countermeasures to missiles, but for torpedoes, if they are fired in CQC, there's really nothing you can do apart from trying to gun them down and in current form of the game, gunning them down isn't easy at all, especially at such a close distance. Now, to deal with problem, that is small ships, I honestly think they should be able to outrun torpedoes. Torpedoes are antilarge ships and shouldn't even be fired at small ships, this shouldn't be viable, if that small ship isn't immobile. Then onto large ships. They desperately need to have a way to quickly destroy torpedoes if reacted properly by crew. That should be a really quick response. What Morphologis suggested with dedicated scanning ships is really great, it will give time to destroy the torpedo carrier itself, before it fires (I think small escort ships should be the way to minimize damage in this situation). But what if it's too late and torpedo bomber is already in CQC and fired a torpedo? I don't think this should be a guaranteed frag, provided crew of large ship needs to react really quickly. The way I see it is by implementing point defence, that are in form of small fastfiring lowdamage turrets. They plan to add point defence to some of the capital ships and I don't know what exact implementation they are going for, but I think that point defence should be in any form a thing for all large ships (basically ships that can't outrun torpedoes and are designed for combat). I don't necessarily think it should be a part of large civilian ships, like cargo and transport, those need to go for effort of buying an escort team to deal with dangers, if they have some important cargo or just don't want to have their ships destroyed by pirates. Obviously, large military ships best have escort team too, because they should still lose in most encounters with torpedo bombers on their own. I think it mades a pretty balanced situation. Making torpedo bombers viable, but not OP and introducing different options for counterplay. I think you shouldn't allow bombers is CQC in the first place, that's why Morphologis's solution is really good, so I include it in my.
@@jsalsman or if you want a shield solution, they should at least make it this way. Shields stay the same, but large ships crew is able to boost shields really hard for short moment and maybe even only at one side of the ship (calculating torpedo impact point), but then shields should drop after this "overcharge". Obviously they should drop if torpedo hits them, and maybe recharge slower. They also need to adjust damage values, so that it still oneshots hull + normal strength shields, but maybe overcharged shields should tank the damage by themselves, leaving hull intact. But this solution will just make it so bombers should waste additional torpedo to take down large ships and give it some time to gun down the bomber from all guns. It seems an okay solution too.
I think of torpedoes as what they really are: Large anti-ship missiles like the real life Harpoon or Exocet. I see no issue with their range or speed, as they should be able to be fired from a standoff distance with a relatively short time-to-target. I think the balance issue will for the most part solve itself once long range scanning and point defense are properly implemented. That being said, I do feel that reducing the maneuverability of torpedoes will certainly help in the interim. There are certainly modern missiles IRL that can in fact, turn 180 degrees and hit a target behind the launch ship, but these are all short range IR missiles like the AIM-9X Sidewinder, ASRAAM, and the K-74M2 Archer. I think that kind of agility should be reserved for S1 and maybe S2 missiles, since those are the closest ingame analogues we have, but a ginormous, fast moving torpedo should be less maneuverable.
This was the first idea that hit me when you mentioned the stream snipers, but along with that adding in layered defenses to augment the scanning would help a lot, too. EWO is a thing in the real world, so having a dedicated EWO boat in a fleet pumping out ECM would be a good way to help protect against cross-section torps. Additionally, automated rader-guided point-defense turrets are also a thing in the real world- I speak from experience of having my butt saved more than once by the Phalanx batteries tied into our CRAMs in Iraq that burned the volleys of IDF we had thrown at us regularly out of the sky more often than not. But something else that has been overlooked is the EMP capabilities of some canon vehicles in the setting. A directed EMP pulse in a conical projection would be a helluva way to put a torp out of commission, which challenges the shooter AND the defenders both to play a cat-and-mouse game.
Aye, in the sci-fi future they would definitely have advanced CIW systems that could burn most missiles and projectiles before they hit. Though, this brings a realism vs gameplay issue because if those automated point defense turrets could shoot down incoming missiles, why wouldn't they also do the same for fighters and other small craft. But then again, most space games do it like that already, so in a fight of fun vs realism, fun should win I guess.
Hey, Morph, Khemsa from ARMCO here. I think that your make a very strong case and I agree with you about preemptive action. After that it would be not only a matter of avoiding them, but also shooting them down, either manually or blade-computer assisted. And it is in this last bit that we could further expand the mechanic with the need for specific weapons to target them (maybe add small anti-torpedo weapons or small missiles). But all in all. I think that the balance between needing a bunch of specialised ships or just the one to defend yourself is where the key work will be.
While not specifically related to Star Citizen, I've had a similar issue bringing in the concept of 'Torpedoes' to a P&P RPG game I developed which already had 'missiles' of several types. So in the end I made Torpedoes the largest of the missile style weapons with oversized engines. This made them fast, but greatly limited their ability to maneuver so needed to be used at 'close' ranges to provide short windows of opportunity for the target to respond. However, it also means the Torpedo can't adjust very much so agile targets can evade easier once the incoming torpedo is detected and they are easier to hit with counter fire as the fly more direct paths than missiles which often are designed to be highly evasive. You had shorter times to fire on them, but the higher chance to hit made a good balance for that. Lastly Torpedoes were more vulnerable to ECM, as even getting pulled off a degree for their target usually meant a miss and do to speed athey weren't going to be turning back around for a second pass if they miss. The result seems to have made them a balanced weapon in the game as they give smaller vessels a way of doing amazing damage to larger ones, though the smaller vessel often needs to fire multiple torpedoes and do so from close range to get this critical hits in.
@@Morphologis Thanks, could you make a video on personal weapons in star citizen. It just got myself the game a month ago and have no idea when it comes to weapons.
I am going to have to partially disagree with you; your suggestion for torps doesnt work for the issue you mentioned at the start of your video. Being griefed (or PVPed) by a single torp boat with, pretty much, an "I win" button. Your suggestion only works for large packs of players that have a fleet that has a ship capable for long range scanning. Does nothing for solo players or small groups of players that dont have such ships capable of doing that. Nor does it address that once the torpedo has been fired, its still "I win, you lose". While I do enjoy what we have in SC now, a big concern that I have for the game remains that it is not going to consider the solo players out there and that they only way to enjoy the game is to be in a huge pack all the time. In my opinion that is going to kill the game (or, perhaps more accurately, keep the game from being what it could be in terms of a strong player base), if the only way anyone can enjoy it without being raped by griefers (so called PVPers lol) in tails and eclipses is to always be in a giant group of players with the perfect ship combination. Keep in mind, I am not against your suggestion for those looking for that kind of group play; but not everyone is and and that should not be the only answer to fixing torps
Yeah, that sounds like a nightmare honestly. Where does that leave the non-combat players flying medium to large ships? Stuff like a Hercules or Caterpillar, constellation, that kind of thing? They're either going to be forced into only operating in large convoys, which is very limiting, or they're just going to quit
KuraIthys once the universe is large enough solo players shouldn’t have to worry about griefing as much. Also, once the bounty system and death mechanics are fleshed out a little more, griefers will have to consider the consequences of their actions a lot more.
I think they should make torpedoes like they are in World of Warships for example. They are pretty much unable to maneuver more than like a 20-30° cone from the bomber. This way they perform there role of doing massive damage to larger ships but smaller Vessels and skilled pilots in medium ships can evade them. Torpedoes shouldn't be effective on anything but heavy and slow targets.
Your idea is one of the best I've heard and provides a long term solution as well as an engaging mechanic for both scanning ships and torpedo ships. I'd even love to see it taken a step further and having modules or variants of a larger ship acting as a sort of destroyer/ sub hunter. Regardless, the goal of making it all about turning it into a real cat and mouse game is something that I think CIG should strive for. On the subjects of torpedoes themselves, I think the warhead is just fine as well as the ranges they operate at, but as you said they should not be doing 180s to track smaller ships. Until scanning is more fleshed out and we do get real use out of things like the Terrapin and the Tracker, CIG may only have the option of addressing the torpedoes themselves as a sort of band aid. Anyway, keep up the great work Morph, as always your's is an important voice in this community.
Absolutely fantastic suggestion Morph. Love the positivity and creativity you've got in the hunt for the solution, and I hope CIG gives it a solid solid consideration. Keep up the good work, and I look forward to your eventual video on architect and the javelin ;)
"And if you like it, make sure to hit that subscribe button" But... what if I'm already subscribed since your first SC video? I'll just... hit this thumb button before viewing it. You always have top-quality vids.
The quality of your videos is architectural to say the least... Your content is amazing Morph and I agree the size 9s don't need a nerf that defeats the whole purpose.
Excellent video as usual. I appreciate the way you’ve thought about how to counter torpedos in a way that doesn’t diminish their capability too much. When full persistence is here, and when something is gone it’s gone, then I think the requirement of good skill needs to be on the attackers, especially in regards to capital ships. They should have an easier skill requirement to defend. Torpedoes shouldn’t be taking out small fighters except in very specific scenarios; such as the fighters thrust is disabled. That’s a task for missiles. Horses for courses and the payload of torpedos is designed for the slower moving big ships. i disagree with you on the PDC’s. I think PDC’s should be added to medium and big ships. They’re realistic to torpodo and missle play. To balance it, accuracy rate can be adjusted, and i think their ammo should be a manually replaced component; making crew an essential requirement in a protracted battle. All this in addition to the longer range scanning from certain ships. A successful takedown of a capital ship should need good tactics and good skill.
I was watching a stream a week or so ago on this issue of torpedoes and they were thinking to reduce the use of torpedoes by increasing the price to a more realistic price for such a weapon and also to get around the reclaim ship to get free torpedoes all ships when claimed do not have missiles or torpedoes so the player is then forced to purchase to both missiles and torpedoes I think if cig do both the longer ranged scanning and the increas in torpedo price will have a significant impact on torpedoe spam
I think they should of implemented PDCs alongside torpedoes. Yes ofc it’s an alpha but it doesn’t make sense why griefers can just run unchallenged for this long.
I think that what makes games like this interesting, is offering multiple solutions to a problem. I think that the solution in this video is good, but it shouldn't be the only way. Personally I would like to see weapons that are solely to be used as countermeasures/deterrent. Like a laser weapon that tracks a target, does basically no damage to ships but if it remains locked on a torpedo for long enough, it can damage/destroy it. It shouldn't be a 100% guarantee that you will be saved, it should depend on being able to avoid getting hit long enough and get a target lock quick enough. The other trade off would be that you're sacrificing one or more weapon hard points for this solution.
I would like to see counter measures like a emp signal chaff that mirrors the signal of your ship and has a 60 to 70% chance of keeping a Torpedo busy long enough for flight counter measures to be employed by the pilot to get some cover or make a jump. Love the vid and keep going, I can't play for more than an hour since Invictus without crashing or falling through planet or Station, so watching this high quality vid is my only SC fix I get without the frustration of dying with cargo or friends being left out in the verse while watching my ship QT far away. You, bored and salty have a unique way of delivery that gets us wanting more and a good discussion about the best and worst of SC. Ty
This kind of big sized terpedoes should be highly regulated, that makes them rare and expensive so random people can't just spam them. The only way to get plenty of them is from military and they only let you buy it if you have a good standing with them and of course the terpedoes they sold to you will have your ID so you can't just sell them to other people. Other way to buy these terpedoes perhaps from high class black market but the price would be higher because of the low number of stocks. Just my ideas.
Hope at some point they consider adding dumb fire torpedoes. If they are cap ship killers it makes sense to try to capture the spirit of WW2 combat by having torpedoes that you have to lead so they hit the target as its moving would also make a nice skill check. Also would be nice if torps would just lose tracking if the target dodges. EM and CS missiles are incredibly powerful right now for this reason. The pilot has to spend way too much time dodging by running away, which can feel tedious. I feel like only a few select missiles should have this behavior, perhaps the larger ones like the ones on the Harbinger or MIS or a manufacturer specific missile.
Original torpedoes were dumb fire. So it could be that your stealth torpedo bomber has a choice run with dumbfire and sneak in for close range or use smart torpedoes which run a hot detecting signal while tracking but fly slower and less manourverable so they could be shot down.
Thanks Morph for the carefully considered and thoughtful approach to this issue. Too many other streamers are calling for nerfs and you have created a wonderful positive approach to this issue. I too believe that the explosive strength of a torp or missile should not be reduced but CIG needs to bring back in factors that affect them such as differing speeds, maneuverability and that counter measures that have some effectiveness against such weapons. I would also argue that the price of a missile or torp needs to be dramatically increased where it actually makes a players think twice before they hit they "red" launch missile/s button. I also would go so far as to say that a destroyed or abandoned vessel does not come back with its payload after it is insurance claimed thus not giving a player a method to get new missiles while avoiding such costs. Make it cost players and bring another aspect of a planned economy into the game.
That intro and music was so clean and epic. It reminded me of those documentaries showing military vehicles and there being an impressive intro for every item introduced
I really like the scanning approach. It provides counter play for stealth, and requires both to play more actively. And your comment about a mantis coming along ties into an idea I had for active anti-qed gameplay. I love the idea thata theae systems arent just 'flip switch, thing happens' but require active involvement. A competitive minigame that very much impacts the battle, making sure scanning and engineering roles are -vital- to get right, and not just busywork for crew. In short, more active counterplay is always better. Give players more tools with which to solve problems.
Great idea on the increased range of scanning. An additional thought could be "seismic radar charges" that you could launch out into areas of space that will ping out a scanner reading back to you (on top of your segmented scanning idea!) 1. This way you could fire these out into a deeper space and get a medium sized ping from the center of the blast though (radius of 10 -20-100 -1000km depending on the size and cost?) 2. Could place "mines" as you're going, or have them flown out to certain coordinates, that ping out in a small area for as long as their fuel lasts - that can create a "ring-fence" around you that will give you a controlled + skilled scanning area (that skilled small crafts could fly around or destroy these). (Maybe these can be recoverable afterwards and just recharged/refueled? 3. Floating drones around the ship that will try intercept a long range missile or torpedo once detected (so good to get in close to hit the target) (These would be useful for big ships that cost a lot - so you would invest in the ordinance to keep it safe on missions.) 4. The basic idea that big ships = big shield generators (especially once upgraded), so one torpedo hitting fully charged shields wouldn't destroy the ship, but would rather deplete the shields in the explosion... just watch any star wars or star trek - only once shields are down on a large vessel - boom! So a coordinated attack, or an unaware pilot, or power being used somewhere else would be the downfall. Failing that - make 1 hit BIG ship destroying torpedoes cost A LOT!!! So people use them sparingly.
This reminds me of when the Gladiator was still properly usable. Turret slaved to pilot, S5s doing a bunch of damage and the wings loaded with Rattlers. Then came 3.0 and since then I couldn't use the ship properly without bawling my eyes out tbh. That intro was totally badass btw
There is no stealth in space, if you have the capacity to move through it without dying, you are easily trackable by any modern sensor. This is due to a number of factors but the most important of which is heat, the heat you exhaust out the back for propulsion and the heat you radiate away via IR, the former which gets you to your target and the latter which keeps you from cooking alive as you do so. As such the only way I see sensors functioning as they currently do or as you suggest is if the devs throw out real world physics entirely in favor of dog fighting in space, or the in universe ship designers put comically old and under-powered sensors into their ships to the point of being a liability. Now to that end if we are going to accept the fact that FTL is a requirement for the game to be enjoyable, there could be an opportunity for bombers to still function as intended, that is to use an ally to spot the enemy so that they can jump in within range to deliver their payload, while the proactive response would be to cast a wider sensor net in the surrounding systems to catch these bombers before they are within range to jump in, essentially turning non-stream sniping attacks into multiplayer games of cat and mouse. Regardless, PD should have been in the game from day one as they already exist in laser, ballistic, and even missile variants, and it annoys me to no end when Devs make such lazy design decisions with games that they tout as realistic. Though depending on torpedo yield and armor, it's very likely that a torp would survive all but direct attacks long enough to get close enough to deal some damage in return, possibly even a crippling blow which would make a follow up attack all the easier, after all the only kinds of explosives that matter in space at all are fragmentary and nuclear, the former of which can be destroyed but will shower the target with varying degrees of shrapnel, while the latter seeks to overload the ship's radiators in an attempt to cook the occupants alive. Now sadly it would appear the Devs don't think nukes exist which would only leave us with fragmentary which can still be fairly deadly, just ask any fighter that has been hit by a missile.
Very true. However this is a game. If I were to start listing all the things this game already does wrong compared to the real world, it would be a VERY long list. But let's start with a fundamental one that gets to the core nature of the game; Space fighters are nonsensical as a concept. (Space battles are borderline nonsense in general, but starfighters in particular make no sense.)
In what way does stealth not exist in space? Sure you've got less to hide behind, but there are asteroid fields that would work for that. As for other kinds of sensors, shielding can be used against electromagnetic to prevent internal systems from being visible from outside the ship, and non-reflective coatings and geometry similar to current day stealth fighters is very effective at reducing reflected signals. Infrared is not emmited whe your engines are off, and the use of heat banks to store heat for later release gives you a short time frame without needing to radiate any heat. All these techniques are currently in use and whould work just as well in space.
@J P Two issues here. First, asteroid fields in the real world aren’t particularly dense; in fact the absolute closest you’d be likely to find two asteroids t each other is the distance between earth and the moon. as for the second thing.. there is no physical way to “store” heat. Sure, it’s possible if the engines are off - I can see that. But if you’re jumping in, that gives off some sort of radiation as a signal. Then what? Do you just.. sit there, without your thrusters going at all? There’s no way to just stop thrusters from producing heat and continuing to work. If there was, flares wouldn’t be necessary in a modern aircraft.
@@vladfedonkin4731 You only need one asteroid to hide behind, yes in the real world they're too far apart to be useful but in the game we don't have that issue. Yes there is a way to store heat, when things get hot they are storing heat. Pump all your heat into a big water tank, lump of metal, or whatever material makes the most sense. You can only hold so much heat before whatever it is, or the container it's in melts, boils etc. and becomes uncontainable, hence the time limit. But until it does you are storing that heat, and as long as the material you are storing it in is sufficiently insulated there will be no infrared emission. In space you don't stop moving when you turn off the engines, you just loose the ability to change direction. Build up speed when far away and outside sensor range, aim for where you think the enemy will be, then turn of the engines and coast. Once you fire the first shot they know you're there anyway so fire up the engines and either run or mop up what's left.
Can you destroy torpedoes with guns? If you are a high value target expecting to be torpedoed, mount some really high RPM ballistics on your fleet's ships to provide a screen of protection against torpedoes. Or is it that they are just too small and fast to hit? Do they take more than one hit? Because if yes, maybe their HP could be nerfed. Anyway I like the idea of scanning being counterplay. It could also be really good scanning gameplay, if you could set a scan to constantly monitor heat signatures to detect a torpedo, say 5-10sec before it hits. Detecting the torpedo would give a warning signal to all connected ships, and a targeting UI would appear for anyone with guns to see a calculation where to shoot to hit the torpedo based on it's velocity and trajectory. They could also implement automatic point defense missile turrets on bigger/specialized anti-torpedo ships. These turrets could shoot smaller quick interceptor missiles to lock on and intercept the big torpedo once it is detected. For fleet battles this would provide interesting tactical approaches. Say you have a massive javelin/idris as a flagship that you want to destroy with a huge torpedo, but it is protected directly by a scanning ship, and a couple of ships covered by such anti-torpedo missiles. You could send fighters or use your bigger guns to dismantle the scanners, but the capital ship might still have some scanning capability of its' own that it could turn to counter torpedoes. You could also use ballistic weapons to attack the defensive turrets covering the target ship, and destroy the defensive anti-torpedo ships. Or you could just destroy the missile systems, and brute force enough torpedoes to overwhelm any turret based torpedo defense. Also for torpedo gameplay, they should have far longer range, and way less turning capability. There should also be a data link style gameplay, where you could lock on and fire a torpedo REALLY far away, if your fleet has a ship or drone able to send the target data for a lock. This would also be useful for scanning gameplay, where the attacker could also use long range tactics to scan a ship/fleet far away, and fire really really long range torpedoes at them. If they are not prepared (aka scanning for torpedoes), they would be likely to get hit. However if they are prepared, they would have spared some scanning capability to detect torpedoes, with interceptor missiles ready.
Respect to you man! Not only you are a nice guy and make great videos in a positive tone. You are also being griefed and stream sniped and you are not crying to the devs asking for nerfs like it happens in other communities, you approach the topic in a very constructive, intelligent, and grown up manner. Keep up the good work man.
Unlike other youtubers/players that cry when they are getting steam sniped you take it and don't make a mess about it, no whitchhunting or calling them out. Impressive and honorable.
Very good discussion and argument. Thank you Morph! I personally think that PDC still need to be a thing though. And ships like Valk and HH could provide that barrage of intercepting fire that shield high value ships from torps. As of last day I tried to shot down missile to no luck though. All in all I am sad to hear that you are being repeatedly stream sniped but that is a problem that 99% of your viewers probably would never face. But most of us face tops now an then. So my personal proposition for a solution is both scanning and PDC's as was intended by CIG. It's just lag and game itself does not let us to shoot down torps as of now. I hope it will change soon. I also wonder about using EMP on incoming torps from a smaller interceptor ship. I tried in PU, did not worked but I wonder if it will change in the future as well? All in all thanks for such a good discussion. Was a pleasure to watch.
I'd love to see some sort of "decoy" scrambler that didn't fog your radar but gives false signals that make it seem like you're being approached from different places, or perhaps a whole fleet, a skilled or clever scanner/pilot could perhaps figure out who's the real and spot them, but could give a scare to a new pilot, while not being impossible to counter. Sorry if this is just stupid cause I don't have a PC that can play star citizen but I do want to try and help the community with fun ideas
Good video overall and It hink you hit the nail on the head in regards to the balance of this. It is just a clear example of how we are still missing a lot of mechanics which need to be implemented and once that is done it should be a proper skill vs skill playstyle as things should be in PVP
I'd like to see a turret that actively scans areas. Take the example given here and allow pings to be widened for close area and focused for longer range. This allows for team work and pathfinder gameplay. Also, the way you have responded to griefers is a step ahead. Good stuff
You mentioned the directional scanning which is great, I’d like add on to that with the concept of directional shielding. Enhancing the shield strength in a single direction but it weakens/shuts down in the other directions.
Torpedoes need to do a few simple things when the armour system is fully implemented. - Give them a low to moderate damage value against the hull - Give them superior armour penetration values - Give them high damage against any internal module/component their explosion can hit A S5 torpedo would not make much outside damage to a hull, but it would go through armour like a hot knife through butter and slag a few components behind the armour.
I agree with you on the scanning technical solutions the addition of the new targeting mechanic and speed limiters will also help, however they will simply not be enough For the Stream sniping. I have 2 solutions: 1) On large crewed ships have a Pilot assistant to manage where you are going to keep locations secret and delay the stream snipers time on target. 2) Your escort can act an extended scanner. Instead of being right next to you have them set up in probable jump in points - keep communication with them Off stream. Think of it as Body guarding for RL snipers- by understanding most likely set up locations/fire vectors you can shoot them before they shoot you. Your escorts need to be at a distance and not bunched up to act as an expanded screen. Also consider baiting your snipers with kill zones- If you fly into a location and you know they know take a more convoluted path with your final location never being your 1st few QT points, this will have the natural effect of limiting approach vectors to set up a counter ambush. Note tactics evolve and they will get wise but the point here is to create reflexive control scenarios (note allot of the decisions made by the snipers are based on the stream, so it can be a double edged sword.)
I’m a bit of a submarine nut, and I think there is two sides to this problem, as you said there should be proactive measures to protect yourself, similar to modern anti submarine warfare ASW. The second part is on the torpedo ship. In modern submarines torpedos are almost never duds, are accurate down to the centimeter. So the trick becomes finding the enemy and firing before they find you and fire. To find the enemy and fire first you rely on the skill and expertise of your sonar operators and target motion analysts. I hope that they make getting in range and acquiring a target with torpedo ships more of a skill based cat and mouse situation. I wouldn’t want them to go as far as some submarine sims I’ve played but I think some skill based detection and concealment will be important. I love the videos, hope to see you in the verse.
I would implement anti-missile-missles. So small missles can not only shoot down ships but also other larger missles or torpedos. Maybe invent some new missle types for this, that are extremly fast and maneuverable but do only little damage. Combine them with a small automated launch system that covers 360 degrees. A size 9 torpedo will cost a lot more than a missle, so it's maybe not worth it for griefing....
ehh, I think you'd want role specific missiles in this case, as everyone would just load multirole missiles to stay safe. In a larger ship you could load a rack with anti-missile point defense, and ther others with standard offensive loads. In a smaller ship you are more limited, using a weaker multirole missile would hurt your offensive capability drastically, while only slightly increasing your defensive capability. I say this mostly because i dont think torpedoes should be able to track a fighter to begin with, or at least be relatively easy to shrug off with adequate planning and pilot skill
That Drake Cutlass Red at minute 11:34 is mine :) I was at New Babbage then, still doing boxes around, but having a rescue ship, I can respond to needs to come and heal :) The ship is poor at fighting, but I am not a fighter, I am Doctor.
Torpedoes in WWI and WWII had little chance of hitting small vessels. They where knock out punches on large mass vessels that could not easily dodge. Even now they are capital ship killers not AAM's.
I honestly can't wait for long range scanners to become a thing. In this case you talked about running single ship scanning defenses, but I could totally see large orgs running 3-4 scanning vessels each positioned at a distance to the main fleet, likely with a fighter escort or two of their own, or running even just 2, hopping the way ahead of the main fleet scanning away with a couple escort fighters, checking the locations where you are expecting attacks to come from. I could even support long range scanners being reasonbly powerful, requiring the use of a decoy attack to distract scanners and then pop up behind with torp bombers. I would however like to see some active defense for ships, something like a conventional/laser CIWS that gives larger ships a chance at shooting down torpedos.
It sounds like a fantastic idea! This would also play into the readiness of escort pilots. Lets say for instance in your example of a 15 second response time. If your escort pilots are alerted by radio and have the best and fastest quantum drives it might give them enough time to spool up and engage said bomber before they get a lock. This sounds like a very fun rock, paper, scissors scenario.
Great video, imagine the depth and immersion the countermeasure mechanic would bring to the game . Imagine hiring PMCs to escort you through lawless hinterspaces (Null secs if you play EVE) ! That would be fun!
Make locking a target not be immediate, but take some amount of time based on scanner type, and target EM/Thermal output.That were there are two timers.The first one to lock the target with your scanner, then for the missile to lock. Once a bomber goes "active" to start targeting you they become visible. For the smaller ships it will take longer to lock them up and the bomber must be at a closer range. For larger ships the bomber will have to make a choice, lock them up at long range and fire hoping for a hit while being safe from retaliation, or sneak in closer to give them less warning at the risk of the scanner crew person finding you while you well inside turret defense range.
That's what I like about your videos Morph, you analyse the situation, give your opinion about it and the reasons why this mechanic right now is not good for the game overall. And then you present solutions that could not only bring better balance to the game, but enrich the gameplay as well. On another note, the IRIS-T short range air to air missile can pull and estimated 120G, wich gives the missile the ability to turn on the area of a soccer field. Actual exisiting technology can pull those stunts, and Star Citizen is way ahead of what we have right now. But then, it's a missile, not a torpedo. To me, game balance wise, a torpedo should one- or two-hit even the largest capital ships. Even the biggest baddest mothertrucker out there should be afraid to be shot down. But a torpedo is a designated weapon against larger, less mobile targets so a fighter should be able to out-maneuver a torpedo, if the pilot is aware of the situation and reacts in the proper way to the thread. For example, the torpedo should be able to turn and re-engage a missed fighter, but it should turn noticible slower then a missile, so the fighter pilot can gain more distance and get ready to dodge again, if needed. Beeing tracked by the torpedo is something that is quite the diversion in the heat of the battle. And the idea to give players a way to prepare and counter a stealth strike is the way to go. Right now it seems the bomber pilot must not fear anything and can kill everything. With such mechanic, he at least has the threath of beeing detected and shot down. On the last note, I'd say people trying to stream snipe and troll you just shows how good you and your content is known also within Star Citizen. Despite those players beeing whatever they are, it is you that is doing great, beeing calm about it and not letting yourself get mad about such behavior.
Torpedoes and missiles in space would more than likely be able to do 180s tbh, as well as be pretty agile given size. The main issue would be using fuel to turn around. Also being in space, realistically they wouldn't need to use thrust at all times aside from turning, and such, as they don't have to deal with air resistance. The lack of gravity would also make them able to stop thrust, 180, and full thrust to probably fully reverse direction in a matter of seconds. That would be pretty unbalanced though, and probably hard to program
I think the solution to the torp problem is actually fairly straightforward and realistic. Logistics. In the same way that capital ships themselves in the finished product will be the sort of thing an organised group of players will have to work toward and then work hard to operate then it should absolutely be the case that the anti-capital weaponry is the sort of thing an opposing group of organised players would have to talk through before deployment. If we say that each of these torpedos costs the same as a decent light fighter to buy and are only available to be purchased in a select few locations then that will absolutely make it so they're only used for the intended purpose. To stop these bombers being redundant to solo or smaller groups then give them options to swap the torp racks out for other munitions much like irl strategic bombers.
really love your content Morph just go on with that :) maybe Jammers variant A: component ) I was thinking of a torpedo/missile jammer that can be used on cooldown with a certain range depending on the quality variant B: shields subcomponent) You would have to overcharge the shields so they create an em-wave witch neutralizes every missile/torpedo in it's range, but the shields will collide and have to rebuild, also you have to communicate the usage in order not to jam your friends missiles In order to disencurage people from spamming jammers it would have a certain chance depending on the quality, to damage the jamming ships shield-components or even demolish them maybe the jamming field ( overcharge ) can be adjusted. The further the radius, the higher the damage/risk. Maybe a jammer component can only be obtained on an illigal and very difficult way such as robbing it from the military connocted to a mission. both would give a potential bomber squad a time window to act, but also give your response force or carrier strike group let's say the time to eliminate the threat. for balancing: The jammers power could scale with the ship, so only large ships can jam large torpedos f.e. only javelin+ can jam up to size 12 torpedos bla bla bla i think there are way enough ways to balance things like bombers and countermeasures against those but i don't think CIG is really reading youtube comments to pick up the one and other good idea...
9:20 So basically what you need is a proper radar. It works just like you described it, the smaller area you choose, more frequently the radar scans it. In before, I don't play Star Citizen but here are few solution that in my opinion could work. Maybe they are already in the game. 1) Radar warning receiver (RWR) for cross-section missiles (maybe also for others), which as I understand, are counterparts of IRL radar guided missiles. The moment it's launched and detects you, RWR notifies you. Considering that nowadays, afaik, every modern fighters is equipped with it, even civilian ships should (or at least have a possibility to) carry it in Star Citizen. 2) Chaff or some scrap to fool cross-section missiles. It would distort ship's shape seen by the missile causing to lose the track.
ECM on say the Terrapin could also help as a countermeasure to the Cross Section type of lock on by jamming or confusing torpedo radar. That way there is a coutermeasure to EM, IR, and Cross Section. But if you don't spot the enemy in time, there won't be time to deploy the ECM and disrupt the torpedoes. That would definitely add more rolls to those electronic warfare ships, even beyond just being scanning vessels for early detection. Could even go so far as to make the ECM a cone that has to be aimed and continue to track the torpedo to keep it confused, and multiple torpedoes in a barrage could overwhelm a single ECM ship's capability to block cross section tracking.
Some ideas here. 1) add in mass shadows, so hiding behind an asteroid or a bigger ship stops or distorts the scan as all they pick up is the bigger object 2) instead of putting a hard limit on, put signal degradation. So that object 100km might be a ship or could be an asteroid, so we should either focus on it or send some scout to take a look 3) ew. You mentioned this already but I want to give some examples. a) a jamming field - the ew ship projects a "haze" around it that just shows up as one big sensor ghost, objects inside are hard to impossible to lock down and it mess with targetting pips as well b) we ship lowers the radar signal so that near u ships seem different than they are. Hh could look like a carrack for example. c) countering g those points we add to the minigame by ew and radar ships swapping frequency, to try to counter the jamming. Ships that give off no or minimal signal (ie, turned off) can also show up as just a small asteroid if hit by active, and dontvshow up on passive until you are right on them, but active lights the scanner up like xmas tree.
I love how the video is framed bro, it's so sexy. The shots are so nice and pretty it's insane, that a game like this exists and how you can use it to make it look even better.
I like your additional game play ideas. Those plus a few minor tweaks to the torps is all that's need. First, variable lock times. Torpedoes are supposed to be used to against larger ships so it doesn't seam necessary to build a disposable device to have the fine sensor resolution to lock and track targets smaller then they are intended to engage. So make lock times on smaller targets take longer and decrease the turning radius of the torpedoes since they are also only intended to track larger ships.
tbh PDCs are probably your best bet if a torp has been launched, as seen very clearly in The Expanse. If vessels had PDCs, or if you could add them on as a sort of after-market addition, you could have the reactive part of taking out torpedoes if, say, you don't have enough people/aUEC to get/maintain scanning ships.
You mentioned high value transportation. I can see, with this kind of solution, a lot more Transport Orgs getting active in the game. You’re killed because of you’re name, they’re killed, ambushed and cornered by pirates for the cargo, numbering in the 100’s of thousands for potential profits. This also works for criminal gangs, scan the ships coming in, see what’s there, jam them to stop any transmissions. It also would allow for those kind of daring heists in the game that a lot of criminals would go for, say, stealing a shipment of classified armour and weapons from a Naval shipyard and to prevent Police Stings in their ships and so forth.
Great video but I think the solution can be much, much simpler. (though I like all your ideas) (1) Make torpedoes easy to shoot down with a turret. If you're flying a large ship with no one in your turret; you're doing it wrong. (2) Make torpedoes slow so that it is easy for small targets to move away or outrun them.
Speaking of submarines and radars. What if you could turn off the power to be "invisible" for long range? Or depending of the radar you could get different data like; undefined object, large/small object etc? Also round radars (like IRL ships) need to do full circle to cover whole area. This also could be potential "balance" for this. For example if you extend the range you it would need scan this slower for better accuracy or something.
I like the idea that a skilled scanner could potentially detect stealth threats 5, 10, up to 15 seconds away. Pretty simple mechanic and will still allow hunters to take advantage of those who do not properly prepare for said operation.
E-War really needs to come into the game. As you brought up, maybe they will scramble sensors so that torpedoes can't be target locked properly. Perhaps it could even effect torpedoes after they've been fired jamming their onboard sensors. Sensors in a torpedo should theoretically be less sensitive than the sensors in a ship and easier to jam. Or maybe the launching ship sensors control the torpedo all the way to its target, but if you can disrupt that link the torp would be "dead in the... space." It is a good angle on the problem and a good discussion to start, but with so may pieces of the game not in place yet, it's hard to get the full or even a bigger picture.
since we're talking about space combat, there are a lot of unknowns. but we can look at some elements from modern day submarine and aerial combat to maybe learn something. so, torpedos; you can dodge them! and you should be able to in space, too. same goes for AAMs (Air-to-Air Missile). the main two differences between real life torps and AAMs are speed and fuel. an AAM has very limited fuel, which it burns as soon as it goes off the rail, accelerating to ludicrous speeds. the way to dodge an AAM is to make it lose speed and enegry untill it just falls to the ground. in contrast, torpedos burn their fuel slowly and reach much lower speeds (because water is much more viscous than air). the ways to dodge them all revolve around countermeasures and sonar hijinks attempting to make them lose their target lock (sensors have a field of view, and also subs are stealthy). so... space (the one place capitalists haven't corrupted). a space torpedo wouldn't have to burn all of its fuel accelerating, because nothing's slowing it down! so it has a way higher possible top speed (duh), and/or more manueverability - or so you'd think! because of newton, the faster a space torpedo is going, the more difficult it would be for it to change course; remember, AAMs and normals torpedos have fins - they use air/water to change direction. but with the frictionless, very-high-possible-top-speed enviornment of space also comes the issue that you have to burn lots of fuel to change course. so, what do we learn from this? well, the faster your torpedo, the harder it is for it to miss - but if it misses, it misses for good. if your torpedo is slow - then it's easy to dodge/outrun, but it can be very persistant. i think sc should consider either adding two types of torpedo - fast and slow (and possibly a different atmospheric torpedo, which would be more like a normal AAM). p.s sorry for the wall of text if anyone actually read through it.
