I mean, the people looking at numbers and trying to balance all the ships towards their vision, of course *they* have the kinds of skills in coding to fix bugs, right? Of *course* they do. Every employee at CIG is a high end coder, instead of an artist, or level designer, or ship design, or gameplay design... right? Those things equate directly, right Straw Man?
Master Modes has made fighter ships so unbalanced that 90% of them are simply incompatible with the flight model due to lack of DPS and HP, two characteristics that cannot be increased on most ships. Snub, light, most medium fighters, and most heavy ships are guaranteed death to fly into battle.
IMO, Flight Performance and combat balance aren't going to get better until new people are put in charge of it. The current team is too entrenched in their own rut to find a way out.
@@Ratticus_Black And even then, they need to come to an understanding of balance should not be based on the concept of "My Gladius should be able to affect a hammerhead"
Pitch has become the way to track since MM was implemented. I have made the adjustment from tri cording to tracking in pitch. Kind of nice that F8 got the buff in pitch 😊
I might be in the minority here but I actually enjoyed doing all those missions for the military upgrade of the hornet and I wouldn't mind seeing that for the lightning as well... as long as it's not bugged to all hell and back... it needs to be fair but challenging.
90% of fighter ships have been made obsolete with the introduction of Master Modes. These ships lack the HP and DPs to take on the other 10% and balancing will never fix them since it is impossible to give these ships the speed and agility within in the confines of the MM flight model, that made them balanced in combat. CIG really screwed their game and player base and chose the wrong dev to lead the FM development. It would have been way easier for them to fix the plethora of minor imbalances in legacy instead of creating this entirely new nightmare.
Heavy fighters are slow AF in master modes. But they are supposed to be tougher. I'm wondering were everything will land after they are done tweaking all the ships to their proper roles.
I feel like these changes are similar to the hornet mk2. Seems like CIG wants us to treat these ships like fighter jets by rolling & up strafing (exempli gratia - The hornet mk2 is a true monster if you fly it like a jet in a battlefield game).
I would be ok with the slow pitch and yaw if this was offset by greater speed, at the moment F8C is uncompetitive in pvp. It is good the sabre has finally received some buffs, it is closer to where it should be now. Surely tougher heavier ships should turn slower and have lower accelerations offset with higher overall top speeds.
CIG's little darling, the Gladius light fighter, has better armour (57% physical damage reduction vs 55% physical damage reduction, 3% energy damage increase(!)). Or even better: Ares and Retaliators only have 50% physical damage reduction. What a mess.
Thanks for the vid Infinite Space! Man, I love my F8C. It's definitely my favorite fighter. I guess I'm going to have to put up with a more sluggish ship now.
Don't put up with it just call them out untill they make fighters fly like fighters instead of nerfing everything untill it's unflyable to fix fundamental problems they can't seem to fix
@infinitespace239 , to quote a song, "You can't always get what you want." What you chose to pay for a ship that's always been known as a heavy fighter. Heavier things always turn more slowly than lighter things but are usually more durable or benefit in other ways. That was why I gave my suggestion. Since you like the ships I suggested, then I suggest you purchase them either as well or melt your F8C to use the funds to get them instead.
The ship feels like shit to fly, it's a heavy fighter not a freighter. But it has too much fire-power to be agile and balanced, imo they should just lower its dps, it'd be a much better ship
I think at 5500+ DPS and tough to killitneeds to be slower. If it were faster it would be too much. It is definitely joining the Vanguard as a brawler heavy fighter.
its ridiculous nerfing it that much for movement before armor is implemented.. i die so fast now in the f8c its basically useless against any medium or light fighter
The F8C is supposed to be a superiority fighter. It should be tougher than most anything else. It was designed to be just that. CIG needs to not concern themselves with trying to prevent 'Buy to win' and just make things realistic. If you can afford $260 for an F8C, then you can have an advantage. Good pilots are going to take out a bad pilot most of the time anyway. Nerffing flight characteristics, or coming up with some lame flight mechanic to equalize flight combat "Nerf Modes" is the wrong mindset! It was fine before they broke it.
Yeah, take that ship into AC and watch it get wasted by a sweat in Gladius. It's so slow, has no boost. Could be a skill issue but, was doing better before last major update. I dunno. On a side note, why you fly in coupled mode?
It’s slower than Vanguard because a Vanguard is not a single seat ship. Two F8C bring way more dps and tank than a single crewed Vanguard, so the Vanguard has to have an advantage. When comparing single seat fighters to dual seat fighters you need to, you know, consider having two of them. Because that’s the even fight-a 2v2 (as in, 2 F8C vs 1 crewed Vanguard), not a 1v2. In fairness, this is a fundamental problem with current balance. Multicrew is in such a bad state people straight up forget ships aren’t all supposed to be solo’d. The Scorpius is the closest to having a not useless turret, so it seems like the “gold standard” for turret power. In reality the Scorpius turret is still under gunned and should go up 1 size. The Warden needs its turret to go up 2 sizes (Sentinel only 1 size up cus it has emp-most turrets need to only go up 1 size, but on larger ships multiple turrets should be linked to one gunnery chair.) Heavy fighters just aren’t solo ships. Either you fly a wing of two (in which case the F8C is by far the most powerful, as two F8Cs can take any other crewed heavy fighter) or one crewed one.
@@Brian-us2xz Warden & Sentinel both still have S2s in the turret, Harb has S3. Ofc, that you don’t pay attention to the turret is my point: multicrew is so bad we all default to comparing 1 seaters to 2 seaters as though it was a 1v1 and not what it actually is: a 1v2
@@Brian-us2xz As someone whose only pledged ship that isn’t a single seat fighter is the Heartseeker, I desperately want them to add flak and massively improve the actual human experience of playing as crew. I worry that if they don’t add a weapon actually designed to be anti-fighter, we will keep seeing fighters nerfed into the ground until the Corsair is the lightest ship anyone flys. The most frustrating part is they already have all the tools and technology in the game to instantly bring multicrew into balance and end the era of “it’s literally always better to just bring another .” It’s actually insanely easy to balance multicrew ships. It could be done over night by adjusting a few values and systems they already have in the game + adding two old animations. - Add flak to the game, restricted to crewed turrets: Proximity fuse aoe, ballistic hits a little harder with a little bigger aoe than energy flak. For any given size, flak is the lowest dps weapon in slot (making it bad vs bigger targets, but excellent at splashing damage onto fighters. Now ship building has a real chocie: anti fighter or anti ship). - Convert all existing manned turrets into remote turrets - Upsize almost all existing turrets by +1 size or add additional utility to them (a handful, like the Warden, Connie & Corsair, would need to be +2, but Connie & Corsair pilot guns need to go down 1 size. Meanwhile… the Scorp A just shouldn’t exist, add those abilities to the Scorp, or give the Scorp bigger turret guns and give the Scorp A the current Scorp turret. It’d still work out to basically the same as an F7C + Mantis) - Allow a gunner station / co pilot seat / wtc to control any 2 remote turrets on a ship (configure in MFD, works just like Reliant co-pilot when that isnt bugged). Connie and Corsair only 1 gunnery station, while the redeemer should have two stations, and the Hammerhead 4 (side pairs, spinal mounts, bottom/rear mounts)-scale from there. if they wanna be fancy/immersive sitting in the weapons station seat can cause your visor to have an external “turret” mode view of your firing arcs + a little (same in game tech as the Talon and it’s camera cockpit), all guns under your control fire at the same point as they have an angle or not. - Tune effective hit points to be basically a little better than linear with the same number of players in fighters + a modifier for lost mobility (easier to hit, so you need more raw hp to make up for lost effectjve evasion hp-like balancing a knight-style armor tank vs ninja style evasjon tank in any other mmo). - Tune the total of DPS and utility the same way. Never forget the single biggest utility two fighters have isnt an emp or anything else-its literally being two ships. They can maneuver as a team to gain huge advantages, so multicrew ships need utility to make that anneven fight). - Remove precision mode from pilots, restrict it to turret operators. Specialist “sniper” and stealth ships can retain pilot precision mode as part of what makes them unique (the Ares ships, the prowler, etc). A mulitcrew ship’s primary advantage is that they do not degrade until the ship is lost, which means instead of (for example) 8 fighters losing 1x fighter dps & utility for approximately every 1x fighter’s worth of damage the group sustains, they won’t loose any/much damage until their ship is destroyed/soft killed/what ever it’ll be called for when a ship goes into “it’s engineering time” mode. So just make an 8 person ship about 8-10 times as durable as a 1 seat fighter, with about 8-10 times the total DPS + Utility as the one fighter. Two seat fighters are the same. About 2x the hp and damage as a 1 seat. Less speed, so easier to hit, but more raw bulk than the fighter. (hence me saying the warden should get +2 size to its turret, while the Sentinel gets only +1 cus it has utility via an emp, and the Harb has its torps. Idk, warden might need to go to a 3x or 4xS4 mount, its hard to see how it would ever be preferable to the Harb at equal turret weight. Assuming Scorp is bumped to 4x S5, warden at 4xS4 makes sense). This is also, incidentally, the answer to both why torpedo bombers are fine and why fighters would still have a role. If the advantage of multi crew is immunity to piecemeal degradation, bombers act as a soft counter. If you let one get to you, it poses a real risk. But it also just makes bombers priority targets. And what’s better at hunting and killing bombers than fighters? Similarly, fighters can go after mobility kills on bigger ships by targeting their engines when not hunting opposing utility ships (bombers, interdictors, etc). They don’t need to make anything new for this btw. We already have the “armor” values where ships have damage reductions vs incoming damage types, and the hp values can be directly adjusted. Literally the only thing not currently in the game we need to instantly make every single ship pvp viable is a reliable anti-fighter weapon choice for multicrew ships. Happily, Chris promised us just such a weapon that perfectly fits “WW2 in space” 12 years ago: flak! Even better news! They have shown animations for flak way back when, so they’ve already got the art-all they have to do is add a line to the data sheets for a pair of new cannons, one ballistic and one energy, from S2-S6, that can only be mounted on crewed turrets. It should be just as it was in the WW2 space CIG insist they want: proximity fuse aoe, but low impact compared to normal shells. In SC, this translates to a weapon that’s great at splashing damage onto fighters via near misses, but has the lowest dps of any weapon in its class. Ballistic flak should do slightly more damage on a slightly larger aoe than energy flak. This prevents flak from becoming the new default-as it would be awful for using against a 890J, but also gives us a sandbox where a fully crewed 890J isn’t literally a free kill for a mantis and gladius pair. It’s also the ideal weapon for shooting down incoming torpedoes, so as long as you have a flak boat with you, and they aren’t blind… you’re protected from bombers. Additionally, crewed turrets have auto gimbal as an option. This makes balancing their accuracy pretty easy to do-literally just dispersion values in a spreadsheet. I suggest that an auto gimbal flak cannon should have roughly 5% accuracy vs a maneuvering Razor that’s at the edge of size 4 Omniski’s range. This should climb to about 90% accuracy at 40% of the S4 Omni’s range, and fall off again to about 2% at point blank. This creates a screen effect on fighters-but allows them to dance on the edge, or attempt to get under the enemy guns by crossing that screen (where they are then trapped, and thus extremely vulnerable to any escort). Dedicated flak boats like the redeemer and hammerhead would, and I know this might sound crazy to CIG, finally actually have the flak weapons they were explicitly designed to carry!!! It would make almost every ship in the game instantly pvp viable. Bombers and even the Ares and Ion would be necessary for popping flak boats, but you’d also want real gun boats for targets like the HH & 890J. Fighters of all weights now have room to contribute. Stealth is a genuine possibility. Can you coordinate a barrage from your light fighters with your eclipse pilot to catch the enemy looking and slip a torpedo into their flak redeemer? That’s gameplay. A caterpillar with one extra person aboard to man the gunnery station could actually defend itself from 1-2 gank fighters, but still wouldn’t be a powerhouse, and those two fighters, if they’re very good, could still win. This would open up literally the entire range of planned ships. It scales from the above 2v2 of two fighters vs a cat with one crew member aboard to 200v200 when Javelins and the like are in. I want 25 players in a Wolfpack of 1 and 2 seat fighters to encounter 25 players in a multicrew squadron of 3-7 seat medium and large ships and it actually be a real, tactical fight. I want it to matter if the Wolfpack brought fighter bombers (or strike craft like the Ares or Eclipse) to take on the Squadron’s flak boats. I want it to matter how many flak turrets the Squadron brought, and how they’re distributed-is it two dedicated flak redeemers escorting a mix of other ships, or are they 3 Hammerheads each with a few flak turrets and a Liberator with a few snubs? I want it to matter when the Squadron sends out its snubs to try to knock out the Wolfpack’s interdiction generator-and for it to matter if the Wolfpack dedicated superiority fighters to cover their Mantis or Scorp A. I want it to matter how good at holding formation the Squadron’s pilots are, and how good at threat assessment the Wolfpack’s are. I want it to matter how good individual fighter pilots are at sustaining dps on a target while dancing at the edge of the enemy flak cloud. It should matter that the Squadron’s boats are bigger, and it should matter if they coordinate targets to thin the fighters quickly.
idk man, there are plenty of agile ships, the selling point of this ship is it's guns. you can't make this ship as agile as the other ones without nerfing the fire power, but if you nerf the firepower this ship loses it's identity
Yogi needs to be fired. This is so stupid... someone send them that scene from squadron 42 where they are talking about how agile the f8 lightning are then ask them why the fk they are contradicting themselves..
Yogi's team has been a disaster since the start. They don't know a thing about flying, nothing, and their output shows this. CIG needs to contract real pilots to come in and advise - it's not hard, there are many looking for short term work. Job Crewe is bad. Yogi is bad. CIG's ship output will be bad.
It's not that they don't know what they are doing. What they are doing is useless until all combat featureS are in. Scarier... by manipulating base conception of a ship patch after patch is best way to annihilate a good portion of ships descriptions when all features are in. It feels like They ...."sometimes" listen to the wrong crowd. Heavy combat, forward concentric firing...." need to be more agile". I don't know mate, it ain't everyday goofing who has biggest balls peacocking pvp 1 on 1 to begin with. If you want more agile, they will kill component(s) - or downgrade weaponry. they have and likely read metrics... I truly don't understand the pvp community asking dev for anything when features like npc turret/engineering controlled or blade target and fire automatisation are missing as well as so much desync, latency occurrences just to name couple of big elephants in the room
@@infinitespace239 in every game there is end game OP weapon. I thought the F8A was gonna be it but if the F8C fly's like brick can you imagine flying the F8A will be bus !! sad..😑
Isn't the F8 a HEAVY fighter? It should be slow. If all of that fire power was zipping everywhere it would make hitting and killing it near impossible. Have you tried the Scorpius? That ship is the glass canon of heavy fighters. She is nimble as a medium fighter but near paper-thin shields.
IMO, these heavy fighters might need to be slower, but they should then at least have a range advantage over smaller craft. Larger ships, should be able to carry larger weapons, and should be able to flex that advantage through range.
@@infinitespace239 I own an F8c and an Inferno, I've just come to accept that CIG has no idea how to make ship combat fun or give differing sized ships an appropriate hierarchy amongst the backdrop of 200+ other craft. They are lost in their own weeds. IMO, Space combat in SC hasn't been fun since before they made all of the components the same for "data gathering".
The Scorpius is a multicrew ship. It should be stronger than the F8C to justify the playtime of two humans. The F8C ought to be compared to the Gladius. Want to solo a heavy fighter? Get in an F8C. You’ll have the most dps any single seat gets, and the most health, but you’ll be slow. And you should be overall weaker than the Hurricane, Vanguard, and Scorpius because they are all multicrew ships. The comparison ought to be 2 F8C to 1 Scorpious. Two F8C’s can work together to gain position on an enemy 2 seater-one of you back strafe to pull it flat, the other moves behind. I do not understand why people think single seat ships should be “balanced” 1:1 vs multi seat ships, and vise versa. Idk about you, but I’d never get out of a F7A Mk II to get into a Hurricane’s turret atm. The Hurricane is too fragile and too low dps. The same is true of a Scorpius and Vanguard turret. All three need serious dps and some combination of speed + tank buffs. All multicrew ships need to justify their seats. A Scorpious needs to justify not just bringing two Lightning’s, so it’s faster and more nimble, but even now it doesn’t have enough dps. Imo, every seat in the game should be thought of versus the Gladius as default. Either you gain dps and lose speed, or maybe health for dps, etc. A multicrew ship should “add up” to that multiple of a Gladius. Ex: For the Hammerhead to ever not suck, it needs to be about 6-7x the dps and durability of one Gladius. Otherwise you should have brought 6-7 Gladius instead.
This seems like a discreet message that goes like this: F8C will not be a light or medium And by heavy fighters the rule seems like: slightly quicker but fragile (Scorpius, hurricane) x super tough but quite slow (F8, Vanguard) The exceptions, as always, will be recently released ships that will be fast and tough for some months XD Edit: looking at the scorpius numbers made me go o.o Maybe just go with the F7A and win...
lol it feels alright to me, buff nerf, yaw is unreliable for targeting. Too many smooth brains not realizing that you’re supposed to use all six degrees together not rely on yaw. The increased pitch helps tracking and fine tuning the reticle, which is gonna make it easier to track the light fighters. But overall the ship has enough agility to track the light targets and deal with the f7 cod side strafing or the little jiggle wiggle as I like to call it
I finally got myself an f8c and its nothing but a disappointment. I dont care how much damage it does, i want suck a sick ship to fly well and fun. Which it absolutely doesnt. It looks like a ferrari but drives like a ford truck. Im about to melt it and get my F7A MK2 back.
Screw flight mechanics being real, how about a working game. If any other legit company had these funds game would be a slam dunk. Go to No Mans Sky. Gets better every year no bugs.
Ships getting Nerf = Ships not selling. Making way for newer ships that will "Accidently" have a bug that will also make that new ship way overpowered to make everyone want it. RINSE AND REPEAT over a 12 year span. When will we learn? Imagine all the those people who spent so much money on this game...only to be betrayed!....Sorry but I left this game behind. Starfeild is SOOOOOO much more fulfilling and satisfying . And do not tell me "we are working on it". Over 12 years? CIG told on itself when they have a creator on the live podcast and creates a whole function designed model in 1 Hour!! If they can do that kind of development in 1 hour, then they should be able to fix most of the other issues in a short amount of time. I mean really? Think about it, does it take 5 years to fix NPC from standing on tables???? Sorry but this game makes me very upset to think about it...I'm out. I will say Infinite Space is a great youtuber and have enjoyed his content for a long time. Please keep doing what you are doing!
Thanks mate. It is sometimes good to pause a game and try something else. SC will be still here in case you want to try it. Yeah I agree with nerf ships bad 😔. But development I don't agree. For example GTA 6 is longer in development than SC but we don't see it. Here we are testing the game, not playing and also they have two tasks, make a new game from scratch and at the same time somehow make it playable for players. O7 my friend I hope we meet in the Verse.
Balance Ships in an Alpha?: YES
Fix bugs that are years old?: NO
I mean, the people looking at numbers and trying to balance all the ships towards their vision, of course *they* have the kinds of skills in coding to fix bugs, right? Of *course* they do.
Every employee at CIG is a high end coder, instead of an artist, or level designer, or ship design, or gameplay design... right? Those things equate directly, right Straw Man?
@@corwyncorey3703Interns, they are all Interns.
Does that trigger you some more ? 😂
@corwyncorey3703 every employee has to be paid through, so why waste the money
Master Modes has made fighter ships so unbalanced that 90% of them are simply incompatible with the flight model due to lack of DPS and HP, two characteristics that cannot be increased on most ships.
Snub, light, most medium fighters, and most heavy ships are guaranteed death to fly into battle.
IMO, Flight Performance and combat balance aren't going to get better until new people are put in charge of it.
The current team is too entrenched in their own rut to find a way out.
@@Ratticus_Black And even then, they need to come to an understanding of balance should not be based on the concept of "My Gladius should be able to affect a hammerhead"
The ditch they are in is called Master Modes...
Pitch has become the way to track since MM was implemented. I have made the adjustment from tri cording to tracking in pitch. Kind of nice that F8 got the buff in pitch 😊
I might be in the minority here but I actually enjoyed doing all those missions for the military upgrade of the hornet and I wouldn't mind seeing that for the lightning as well... as long as it's not bugged to all hell and back... it needs to be fair but challenging.
Yeah me too it was fun for F7A
I made a lot of friends doing the F7A event. I couldn't do the xenothreat event completely from how broken the servers were.
90% of fighter ships have been made obsolete with the introduction of Master Modes. These ships lack the HP and DPs to take on the other 10% and balancing will never fix them since it is impossible to give these ships the speed and agility within in the confines of the MM flight model, that made them balanced in combat.
CIG really screwed their game and player base and chose the wrong dev to lead the FM development. It would have been way easier for them to fix the plethora of minor imbalances in legacy instead of creating this entirely new nightmare.
100% agree. Master Modes put the game back 75 years in flight, not 900 years in the future. It's a joke.
Camural is the only one and true apostle that sees this project for what it truly is.
Sale over, nerf time 🎉
That's how it goes every time
Sale over, nerf time, sale again knowing all who missed out will buy it anyways and be disappointed
Heavy fighters are slow AF in master modes. But they are supposed to be tougher. I'm wondering were everything will land after they are done tweaking all the ships to their proper roles.
I feel like these changes are similar to the hornet mk2. Seems like CIG wants us to treat these ships like fighter jets by rolling & up strafing (exempli gratia - The hornet mk2 is a true monster if you fly it like a jet in a battlefield game).
Yeah, they look more like jets than space ships or fighters.
So it flies very differently now... roll and pitch, instead of yaw and strafe.
Which is better training for flight in atmo I suppose.
I would be ok with the slow pitch and yaw if this was offset by greater speed, at the moment F8C is uncompetitive in pvp. It is good the sabre has finally received some buffs, it is closer to where it should be now. Surely tougher heavier ships should turn slower and have lower accelerations offset with higher overall top speeds.
Thanks for a link for a great tool! Raft is buffed in terms of HP, manevuerbility and nav speed. Good!
CIG's little darling, the Gladius light fighter, has better armour (57% physical damage reduction vs 55% physical damage reduction, 3% energy damage increase(!)). Or even better: Ares and Retaliators only have 50% physical damage reduction. What a mess.
Thanks for the vid Infinite Space! Man, I love my F8C. It's definitely my favorite fighter. I guess I'm going to have to put up with a more sluggish ship now.
Don't put up with it just call them out untill they make fighters fly like fighters instead of nerfing everything untill it's unflyable to fix fundamental problems they can't seem to fix
If you want a more agile ship with 4x S3 weapons, check the Aegis Sabre. Want more agility than that, Anvil Arrow.
But they are not what I bought, F8C. I love the design of this ship. I have sabre and arrow amazing ships. o7
@infinitespace239 , to quote a song, "You can't always get what you want." What you chose to pay for a ship that's always been known as a heavy fighter. Heavier things always turn more slowly than lighter things but are usually more durable or benefit in other ways. That was why I gave my suggestion. Since you like the ships I suggested, then I suggest you purchase them either as well or melt your F8C to use the funds to get them instead.
@@andrewmaughan1205 or the f7c mkii 3 size 4 guns and a size 3
The ship feels like shit to fly, it's a heavy fighter not a freighter. But it has too much fire-power to be agile and balanced, imo they should just lower its dps, it'd be a much better ship
glad i saw this video i was about to buy the ship but now nope im not throwing 345$ to get nerfed smh
CIG has no idea what they are doing. Balancing all ships even in between classes, is ridiculous arcade buffoonery.
I think at 5500+ DPS and tough to killitneeds to be slower. If it were faster it would be too much. It is definitely joining the Vanguard as a brawler heavy fighter.
F8 needs some new skins already too
Vote f8c, hopefully we get one.
It won the Contest, it placed 1st, it will get a new skin.
CIG just dont know what they are doing
They haven’t realized that MM has thrown the balance of ships off so much so that 90% of fighter ships will never be viable in combat again.
It's an alpha. Balancing will continually be in flux until they settle on something
its ridiculous nerfing it that much for movement before armor is implemented.. i die so fast now in the f8c its basically useless against any medium or light fighter
Lightning it is not.
The F8C is supposed to be a superiority fighter. It should be tougher than most anything else. It was designed to be just that. CIG needs to not concern themselves with trying to prevent 'Buy to win' and just make things realistic. If you can afford $260 for an F8C, then you can have an advantage. Good pilots are going to take out a bad pilot most of the time anyway. Nerffing flight characteristics, or coming up with some lame flight mechanic to equalize flight combat "Nerf Modes" is the wrong mindset! It was fine before they broke it.
$300
Yeah, take that ship into AC and watch it get wasted by a sweat in Gladius. It's so slow, has no boost. Could be a skill issue but, was doing better before last major update. I dunno. On a side note, why you fly in coupled mode?
Forgot to turn ot off lol
@@infinitespace239 lol :)
It’s slower than Vanguard because a Vanguard is not a single seat ship. Two F8C bring way more dps and tank than a single crewed Vanguard, so the Vanguard has to have an advantage.
When comparing single seat fighters to dual seat fighters you need to, you know, consider having two of them. Because that’s the even fight-a 2v2 (as in, 2 F8C vs 1 crewed Vanguard), not a 1v2.
In fairness, this is a fundamental problem with current balance. Multicrew is in such a bad state people straight up forget ships aren’t all supposed to be solo’d. The Scorpius is the closest to having a not useless turret, so it seems like the “gold standard” for turret power.
In reality the Scorpius turret is still under gunned and should go up 1 size. The Warden needs its turret to go up 2 sizes (Sentinel only 1 size up cus it has emp-most turrets need to only go up 1 size, but on larger ships multiple turrets should be linked to one gunnery chair.)
Heavy fighters just aren’t solo ships. Either you fly a wing of two (in which case the F8C is by far the most powerful, as two F8Cs can take any other crewed heavy fighter) or one crewed one.
Could have sworn the vanguard had size 3's in ac last time I logged in. Not that I pay a lot of attention to the turret
@@Brian-us2xz Warden & Sentinel both still have S2s in the turret, Harb has S3.
Ofc, that you don’t pay attention to the turret is my point: multicrew is so bad we all default to comparing 1 seaters to 2 seaters as though it was a 1v1 and not what it actually is: a 1v2
@piedpiper1172 that makes sense, I miss the days when you could mount the hurricane turret to the to turret of the vanguard, looked sick.
@@Brian-us2xz As someone whose only pledged ship that isn’t a single seat fighter is the Heartseeker, I desperately want them to add flak and massively improve the actual human experience of playing as crew. I worry that if they don’t add a weapon actually designed to be anti-fighter, we will keep seeing fighters nerfed into the ground until the Corsair is the lightest ship anyone flys.
The most frustrating part is they already have all the tools and technology in the game to instantly bring multicrew into balance and end the era of “it’s literally always better to just bring another .”
It’s actually insanely easy to balance multicrew ships. It could be done over night by adjusting a few values and systems they already have in the game + adding two old animations.
- Add flak to the game, restricted to crewed turrets: Proximity fuse aoe, ballistic hits a little harder with a little bigger aoe than energy flak. For any given size, flak is the lowest dps weapon in slot (making it bad vs bigger targets, but excellent at splashing damage onto fighters. Now ship building has a real chocie: anti fighter or anti ship).
- Convert all existing manned turrets into remote turrets
- Upsize almost all existing turrets by +1 size or add additional utility to them (a handful, like the Warden, Connie & Corsair, would need to be +2, but Connie & Corsair pilot guns need to go down 1 size. Meanwhile… the Scorp A just shouldn’t exist, add those abilities to the Scorp, or give the Scorp bigger turret guns and give the Scorp A the current Scorp turret. It’d still work out to basically the same as an F7C + Mantis)
- Allow a gunner station / co pilot seat / wtc to control any 2 remote turrets on a ship (configure in MFD, works just like Reliant co-pilot when that isnt bugged). Connie and Corsair only 1 gunnery station, while the redeemer should have two stations, and the Hammerhead 4 (side pairs, spinal mounts, bottom/rear mounts)-scale from there. if they wanna be fancy/immersive sitting in the weapons station seat can cause your visor to have an external “turret” mode view of your firing arcs + a little (same in game tech as the Talon and it’s camera cockpit), all guns under your control fire at the same point as they have an angle or not.
- Tune effective hit points to be basically a little better than linear with the same number of players in fighters + a modifier for lost mobility (easier to hit, so you need more raw hp to make up for lost effectjve evasion hp-like balancing a knight-style armor tank vs ninja style evasjon tank in any other mmo).
- Tune the total of DPS and utility the same way. Never forget the single biggest utility two fighters have isnt an emp or anything else-its literally being two ships. They can maneuver as a team to gain huge advantages, so multicrew ships need utility to make that anneven fight).
- Remove precision mode from pilots, restrict it to turret operators. Specialist “sniper” and stealth ships can retain pilot precision mode as part of what makes them unique (the Ares ships, the prowler, etc).
A mulitcrew ship’s primary advantage is that they do not degrade until the ship is lost, which means instead of (for example) 8 fighters losing 1x fighter dps & utility for approximately every 1x fighter’s worth of damage the group sustains, they won’t loose any/much damage until their ship is destroyed/soft killed/what ever it’ll be called for when a ship goes into “it’s engineering time” mode.
So just make an 8 person ship about 8-10 times as durable as a 1 seat fighter, with about 8-10 times the total DPS + Utility as the one fighter.
Two seat fighters are the same. About 2x the hp and damage as a 1 seat. Less speed, so easier to hit, but more raw bulk than the fighter. (hence me saying the warden should get +2 size to its turret, while the Sentinel gets only +1 cus it has utility via an emp, and the Harb has its torps. Idk, warden might need to go to a 3x or 4xS4 mount, its hard to see how it would ever be preferable to the Harb at equal turret weight. Assuming Scorp is bumped to 4x S5, warden at 4xS4 makes sense).
This is also, incidentally, the answer to both why torpedo bombers are fine and why fighters would still have a role. If the advantage of multi crew is immunity to piecemeal degradation, bombers act as a soft counter. If you let one get to you, it poses a real risk. But it also just makes bombers priority targets.
And what’s better at hunting and killing bombers than fighters? Similarly, fighters can go after mobility kills on bigger ships by targeting their engines when not hunting opposing utility ships (bombers, interdictors, etc).
They don’t need to make anything new for this btw. We already have the “armor” values where ships have damage reductions vs incoming damage types, and the hp values can be directly adjusted.
Literally the only thing not currently in the game we need to instantly make every single ship pvp viable is a reliable anti-fighter weapon choice for multicrew ships.
Happily, Chris promised us just such a weapon that perfectly fits “WW2 in space” 12 years ago: flak!
Even better news! They have shown animations for flak way back when, so they’ve already got the art-all they have to do is add a line to the data sheets for a pair of new cannons, one ballistic and one energy, from S2-S6, that can only be mounted on crewed turrets.
It should be just as it was in the WW2 space CIG insist they want: proximity fuse aoe, but low impact compared to normal shells. In SC, this translates to a weapon that’s great at splashing damage onto fighters via near misses, but has the lowest dps of any weapon in its class. Ballistic flak should do slightly more damage on a slightly larger aoe than energy flak.
This prevents flak from becoming the new default-as it would be awful for using against a 890J, but also gives us a sandbox where a fully crewed 890J isn’t literally a free kill for a mantis and gladius pair. It’s also the ideal weapon for shooting down incoming torpedoes, so as long as you have a flak boat with you, and they aren’t blind… you’re protected from bombers.
Additionally, crewed turrets have auto gimbal as an option. This makes balancing their accuracy pretty easy to do-literally just dispersion values in a spreadsheet.
I suggest that an auto gimbal flak cannon should have roughly 5% accuracy vs a maneuvering Razor that’s at the edge of size 4 Omniski’s range. This should climb to about 90% accuracy at 40% of the S4 Omni’s range, and fall off again to about 2% at point blank. This creates a screen effect on fighters-but allows them to dance on the edge, or attempt to get under the enemy guns by crossing that screen (where they are then trapped, and thus extremely vulnerable to any escort).
Dedicated flak boats like the redeemer and hammerhead would, and I know this might sound crazy to CIG, finally actually have the flak weapons they were explicitly designed to carry!!!
It would make almost every ship in the game instantly pvp viable. Bombers and even the Ares and Ion would be necessary for popping flak boats, but you’d also want real gun boats for targets like the HH & 890J. Fighters of all weights now have room to contribute. Stealth is a genuine possibility. Can you coordinate a barrage from your light fighters with your eclipse pilot to catch the enemy looking and slip a torpedo into their flak redeemer? That’s gameplay.
A caterpillar with one extra person aboard to man the gunnery station could actually defend itself from 1-2 gank fighters, but still wouldn’t be a powerhouse, and those two fighters, if they’re very good, could still win.
This would open up literally the entire range of planned ships. It scales from the above 2v2 of two fighters vs a cat with one crew member aboard to 200v200 when Javelins and the like are in.
I want 25 players in a Wolfpack of 1 and 2 seat fighters to encounter 25 players in a multicrew squadron of 3-7 seat medium and large ships and it actually be a real, tactical fight.
I want it to matter if the Wolfpack brought fighter bombers (or strike craft like the Ares or Eclipse) to take on the Squadron’s flak boats.
I want it to matter how many flak turrets the Squadron brought, and how they’re distributed-is it two dedicated flak redeemers escorting a mix of other ships, or are they 3 Hammerheads each with a few flak turrets and a Liberator with a few snubs?
I want it to matter when the Squadron sends out its snubs to try to knock out the Wolfpack’s interdiction generator-and for it to matter if the Wolfpack dedicated superiority fighters to cover their Mantis or Scorp A.
I want it to matter how good at holding formation the Squadron’s pilots are, and how good at threat assessment the Wolfpack’s are.
I want it to matter how good individual fighter pilots are at sustaining dps on a target while dancing at the edge of the enemy flak cloud. It should matter that the Squadron’s boats are bigger, and it should matter if they coordinate targets to thin the fighters quickly.
@piedpiper1172 i'll fire up ac and do live test. I will let you know if it takes 3 rounds from the maxium alpha guns.
all ships need speeding up, 2 steps forward 20 steps back, its the norm atm with this game
idk man, there are plenty of agile ships, the selling point of this ship is it's guns.
you can't make this ship as agile as the other ones without nerfing the fire power, but if you nerf the firepower this ship loses it's identity
It lost its identity with master modes... before at least you could fly fast 1350 m/s now...
Yogi needs to be fired. This is so stupid... someone send them that scene from squadron 42 where they are talking about how agile the f8 lightning are then ask them why the fk they are contradicting themselves..
Yogi's team has been a disaster since the start. They don't know a thing about flying, nothing, and their output shows this. CIG needs to contract real pilots to come in and advise - it's not hard, there are many looking for short term work. Job Crewe is bad. Yogi is bad. CIG's ship output will be bad.
@@project.jericho I agree for real pilots, that would be awesome.
Said it a few months ago, say it again. Yogi needs to be fired as they are actively destroying the main draw to SC.
Thats what happens when you put a Sound guy in charge of the Flight model.
Yeah because real pilots know how space craft should fly. Some of you arm chair pilots need to chill. Have you even been inverted
@@beardedbarnstormer9577 Well they at least know how to fly in atmosphere. P
It's not that they don't know what they are doing.
What they are doing is useless until all combat featureS are in. Scarier... by manipulating base conception of a ship patch after patch is best way to annihilate a good portion of ships descriptions when all features are in.
It feels like They ...."sometimes" listen to the wrong crowd.
Heavy combat, forward concentric firing...." need to be more agile". I don't know mate, it ain't everyday goofing who has biggest balls peacocking pvp 1 on 1 to begin with. If you want more agile, they will kill component(s) - or downgrade weaponry. they have and likely read metrics...
I truly don't understand the pvp community asking dev for anything when features like npc turret/engineering controlled or blade target and fire automatisation are missing as well as so much desync, latency occurrences just to name couple of big elephants in the room
Mate the F8c went from favorite ship to getting melted. It shit now just shit and for 260 bucks that is a slap face !!
@@trevor6752 From fast and unique and powerful to flying brick. Sad 😢
@@infinitespace239 in every game there is end game OP weapon. I thought the F8A was gonna be it but if the F8C fly's like brick can you imagine flying the F8A will be bus !! sad..😑
Isn't the F8 a HEAVY fighter? It should be slow. If all of that fire power was zipping everywhere it would make hitting and killing it near impossible. Have you tried the Scorpius? That ship is the glass canon of heavy fighters. She is nimble as a medium fighter but near paper-thin shields.
IMO, these heavy fighters might need to be slower, but they should then at least have a range advantage over smaller craft. Larger ships, should be able to carry larger weapons, and should be able to flex that advantage through range.
F8C was selling as fast and powerful, but nerfed now, as always. I would prefer paper tin Scorpius speed over this brick flight. o7
@@infinitespace239 I own an F8c and an Inferno, I've just come to accept that CIG has no idea how to make ship combat fun or give differing sized ships an appropriate hierarchy amongst the backdrop of 200+ other craft. They are lost in their own weeds. IMO, Space combat in SC hasn't been fun since before they made all of the components the same for "data gathering".
The Scorpius is a multicrew ship. It should be stronger than the F8C to justify the playtime of two humans.
The F8C ought to be compared to the Gladius. Want to solo a heavy fighter? Get in an F8C. You’ll have the most dps any single seat gets, and the most health, but you’ll be slow. And you should be overall weaker than the Hurricane, Vanguard, and Scorpius because they are all multicrew ships.
The comparison ought to be 2 F8C to 1 Scorpious. Two F8C’s can work together to gain position on an enemy 2 seater-one of you back strafe to pull it flat, the other moves behind.
I do not understand why people think single seat ships should be “balanced” 1:1 vs multi seat ships, and vise versa.
Idk about you, but I’d never get out of a F7A Mk II to get into a Hurricane’s turret atm. The Hurricane is too fragile and too low dps. The same is true of a Scorpius and Vanguard turret. All three need serious dps and some combination of speed + tank buffs.
All multicrew ships need to justify their seats. A Scorpious needs to justify not just bringing two Lightning’s, so it’s faster and more nimble, but even now it doesn’t have enough dps.
Imo, every seat in the game should be thought of versus the Gladius as default. Either you gain dps and lose speed, or maybe health for dps, etc. A multicrew ship should “add up” to that multiple of a Gladius.
Ex: For the Hammerhead to ever not suck, it needs to be about 6-7x the dps and durability of one Gladius. Otherwise you should have brought 6-7 Gladius instead.
@@infinitespace239 they could even go ahead and give us one size smaller weapons but yeah being slow makes no sense what so ever.
Cant you do video of ship balance as I think its a huge problem no one is talking about ?
What do you need ship balance?
Melted mine, Sad~ but Oh well! CIG keeps nerfin it into the ground, I am Not sorry however.
This seems like a discreet message that goes like this: F8C will not be a light or medium
And by heavy fighters the rule seems like: slightly quicker but fragile (Scorpius, hurricane) x super tough but quite slow (F8, Vanguard)
The exceptions, as always, will be recently released ships that will be fast and tough for some months XD
Edit: looking at the scorpius numbers made me go o.o
Maybe just go with the F7A and win...
Sadly it seems that is true. Star Citizen and it's balance....
Well, to be fair, you're supposed to fly in pitch and roll, not in yaw ... so. But omg yeah, looks so bad, like a brick.
This is a space sim not dcs
@@1nc0gn3to1 And there's a reason every ship is way more responsive in pitch and roll.
lol it feels alright to me, buff nerf, yaw is unreliable for targeting. Too many smooth brains not realizing that you’re supposed to use all six degrees together not rely on yaw. The increased pitch helps tracking and fine tuning the reticle, which is gonna make it easier to track the light fighters. But overall the ship has enough agility to track the light targets and deal with the f7 cod side strafing or the little jiggle wiggle as I like to call it
how long is now since we heard we need one more week lol this game never going really playable at this rate
How can I get it ingame without real money?
You cant get it even with real money, only if you have gold card.
@@infinitespace239 how do I get a hold card
One day I might unmelt it.
I finally got myself an f8c and its nothing but a disappointment. I dont care how much damage it does, i want suck a sick ship to fly well and fun. Which it absolutely doesnt. It looks like a ferrari but drives like a ford truck.
Im about to melt it and get my F7A MK2 back.
Exactly, as I said I wanted this ship fast not overpowered. o7
@@infinitespace239 im today days old when I found out I can't get my f7a MK2 back because of their weird buy back system. So I uninstalled xD
Screw flight mechanics being real, how about a working game. If any other legit company had these funds game would be a slam dunk. Go to No Mans Sky. Gets better every year no bugs.
Not even close. 😂
Ships getting Nerf = Ships not selling. Making way for newer ships that will "Accidently" have a bug that will also make that new ship way overpowered to make everyone want it. RINSE AND REPEAT over a 12 year span. When will we learn? Imagine all the those people who spent so much money on this game...only to be betrayed!....Sorry but I left this game behind. Starfeild is SOOOOOO much more fulfilling and satisfying . And do not tell me "we are working on it". Over 12 years? CIG told on itself when they have a creator on the live podcast and creates a whole function designed model in 1 Hour!! If they can do that kind of development in 1 hour, then they should be able to fix most of the other issues in a short amount of time. I mean really? Think about it, does it take 5 years to fix NPC from standing on tables???? Sorry but this game makes me very upset to think about it...I'm out. I will say Infinite Space is a great youtuber and have enjoyed his content for a long time. Please keep doing what you are doing!
Thanks mate. It is sometimes good to pause a game and try something else. SC will be still here in case you want to try it. Yeah I agree with nerf ships bad 😔. But development I don't agree. For example GTA 6 is longer in development than SC but we don't see it. Here we are testing the game, not playing and also they have two tasks, make a new game from scratch and at the same time somehow make it playable for players. O7 my friend I hope we meet in the Verse.
I think we all know that Chris Roberts will prefer the hornet to be the ultimate fighter in its class...
Good, need to be nerfed even more. no ship that small should be able to one shot a cutlass black or any ship this size.
Lol it can't one shot Cutlass
@@infinitespace239 just did yesterday, he was full cannon loadout, 1 salvo 1 shot my shield,, the second one 1 shot me
Nerf the Buccaneer.
@@vik12D nobody play the buccaneer xD
That isn't being one shotted... questions though... Was the cutlass stock?
Is it a joke?
Sadly no.
they just killed the whole game franchise... dissapointed of Chris choice to take the game in a WRONG and DARK PATH....