My only problem with the Redeemer changes is the existance of Constellations and Corsair, it is counter-intuitive that a explorer\cargo ship has not more shields and firepower than dedicated comabat ship, no matter the exact combat sub-role.
My biggest problem is still the fact that they're changing the component sizes significantly without addressing the fact that they save a price based on component sizes. And now the ship is worth a lot less.
I completely understand this take. I also know that its active game development, and even live games make balance changes and design tweaks of things they dont think are in a good spot. Its sadly a risk you take with real money purchases for any multiplayer game.
my guy be real, you are DONATING to the game. They are not selling you ships. Its stupid to give CIG money bc you expect XYZ performance. And CIG allows you to melt and use store credit anyway...
Your anger is understandable, but you really are thinking about the money wrongly. The price is just based on popularity and what the marketing guys think it will sell for. Prices are all over the place in the store and while bigger ships usually cost more, that's not always the case. If you are paying based on components and stats, you are doing it wrong and should stop buying ships honestly... Additionally, we have no idea what this shield change will do. A component refactor is on the way and they're going to add engineering and hull armor. The only thing that we know is that redundancy is important. What that means is 6 shield components is better than 2, the size change might not matter as much.
I think when they announced the changes they should have made it more clear that the intended role was changing. People would have still been upset, however some people might have been a bit more receptive. Suddenly losing a quantifiable and large amount of DPS and shielding for an unquantifiable amount of manoeuvrability was bound to feel like a bad trade without being able to try things out, and the lack of clarification didn't help.
IMO these types changes truly hurt SC as a whole, "buy this ship, here are the specs" years later "ship was OP" nerf. If it was so OP why did it take 5 years to fix, I wonder is there a new ship coming that they need to drive sales for in this role?
Because a lot happens in 5 years? And the game before wasn't as developed as it is now? Like, use your brain. Things happen, and 5 years from now something else will cause another ship you love to need to be altered.
one of the ships in concept that will come out soon have 2 turrets with a pair of size 4 guns and 2 size 4 guns for the pilot....it also has a single large shield so its basically a redeemer that lost 4 size 3 weapons and gained a large shield for it.....
The Hammerhead needed a buff. A2 received 3rd S3 shield. The HH needs the same shield buff. The Redeemer's chin and tail mounted lasers turrets should have been upgunned 1 size, though - that would have made manning them more viable, if it is to be used an anti-fighter solution.
Ship armour comes in 4.0, which will certainly make the HH a class above the Hercules series when it comes to armour rating. Expect S5 minimum to be required to punch through the HH's plating, and S4 for the Herc. This information comes straight from CIG in the past when they talked about what armour will look like for something straight military like the Hammerhead
@@TheRealMinotaur667 I'm curious to just how armored it will be. Armor is likely going to be a huge deal for the game, easily as important or more important as shields. Recently CIG has shown its perfectly willing to change things many likely thought set in stone, like the new competent and weapon size changes on so many ships so it will be interesting to see. Other than that internally the ship is a mess, wasted space, the infamous hole to no where, the engine room, the giant fridge/messroom, the list goes on. The inside layout makes me wonder if it was intended or being used as a set piece in S42. While that's great, its left the internal extremely lackluster in some ways. I hope it gets improved. I'm not against the ship or hate it, I just think it need at least an internal rework. Lastly the fact it likely isn't going to receive the PD systems other large ships are getting doesn't make sense to me given its role but I do understand balance concerns.
if you thinking of giving s4 guns onto the remotes, then the main pilot basically about the same firepower as a connie in a solo pilot state with no gunners, now imagine it's fully crewed with a total of 3 pairs of s4( 2 on each remote turret, 2 for main pilot) and 2 manned turret armed with a pair of s5 gun each, that be wait too OP and could possibly shred almost any ships below it's size and an absolute terror to bigger ships.
@@raigaLCC Um, no, it isn't. Solo Connie has 4x S5 and a S3 shield to the Redeemer's pilot controlled 2x S4 and 2x S3 with soon to be 6x S2 shields. Redeemer only has two manned turrets and the remote turrets are S3. I'm not sure where you got that idea. And the Redeemer is supposed to be a dedicated military gunship. It has a whopping 2scu of cargo space and only 8x S2 missiles. Compare that to the Connie which now is stated to be a gunship, but it used to be considered multirole. Even now the Connie has 4x S5 and something like 48 missiles and that's just pilot control. It's also got a snub fighter with 1x S3 and 2x S1, and a pair of manned turrets with 2x S2 on each. After the Redeemer nerf, the Redeemer doesn't stand a chance against a Connie. The Redeemer was always supposed to be more powerful than the Connie, but only when fully crewed. Now they're changing it into a fighter slayer.
@@j.d.4697 the ships we'd be gunning for are far more maneuverable and we are a far bigger target. The ship's saving grace is it's ability to kill the enemy more quickly and efficiently, not be dogfighting with them. The ship is completely gimped barring some kind of armament rollback.
@@j.d.4697 Even with Vanguard maneuverability it is not going to keep up with dedicated fighters. It had no issues staying on target before. The issue was and continues to be that it is too slow to keep up with Boom and Zoom from multiple targets. It's also gigantic and easy to hit from max effective range. It's nothing but a loot pinata for any small group of decent pilots in fighters.
Hmm I never thought of it that away, may give the Redeemer another go around,,, thanks CitizenMaxx here and remember to fly fast plus enjoy SC to it's fullest
This newest version of the Redeemer will still get its lunch handed to it by 2 or 3 fighters. Let’s not forget it takes a lot of bodies to man a Redeemer. If you lose the fight against 3 fighters, that’s a lot of dead bodies.
What a lot of people forget is eventually we'll have crew to man these vessels. Obviously it sucks for NOW but eventually you'll be able to effectively "solo" with this ship, and I think it's this final vision that doesnt exist yet that CIG is balancing towards right now.
(PvP perspective, PvE it's will be ok)The issue is why would you want a redeemer. Before the nerf it was a gunship that can punch up, now it is designed to punch equal to down. The minimum you want is a 3 crew but really want a fourth member to cover you behind. So depending on the cost of this ship in game, why not have two vanguards, or A vanguard and two heavy fighters, like why would I want all my eggs in one basket. Like if they increased the Quantum range more I guess there will be a reason. But I think they just kinda kill it, if you are in a ship with multiple people in it, you want to punch up.
Balancing around crew in seats is always hard because prices come into play, Redeemer is $330, 2 vanguards come up to $500ish. This version of the redeemer feels like it's supposed to be the thing that chases smaller damage dumpers from your subcapitol ships when they get outmaneuvered.
@@kaplield4565 they didn't nerf pilot dps at all though. btw 2 of the guns that the pilot can control use turret capacitors, so they can essentially shoot forever. it's going to be a meta solo fighter in .2 IMO
Exactly. Two Vanguards becomes a better option and use of 4 crewmembers. Or hell, even FOUR MIS gunships. Yes the MIS is less maneuverable but that's FOUR cannons the pilot can control along with 28 missiles...and you get 4 of them vs one ship with 4 people. Or Cutlasses for the amount of agility AND firepower they'd bring.
Question, did they speed up the turrets when they reduced the gun size? The original nerf to the Redeemer was the turret speed back in the day. Would be cool if, as a measure of compensation, we got its old turret speed back. Especially if its role is now more of a small craft hunter.
We had plenty of ships to take out fighters. Give me the big guns back. EDIT: I'm not mad they made it better at the role it was never intended for. I'm mad they changed the role entirely. I'm sure its a beast against fighters and I dont freaking care. It was a medium sized ship that could bunch above its weight class, now with the gun changes its just punching down. Now I'd rather have three F7A's in play than a minimum crewed redeemer
Read the original brochure. It never promised to punch above it's weight on the very beginnings. With the current game I get it, a crewed deemer might suck vs hornets ( broken little ships anyway) but let's say engineering allows you to continue the fight, all parts are accessible inside the ship, thus I'll be crew member doing repairs will then outlast the hornets, without the need for a carrier to get it to and from its destination
Honestly I'm just looking at the Perseus now for a gun ship punching up. Not the same as the Redeemer and I very much prefer the Redeemer, but seems they didn't want it stepping in the Perseus' toes too much.
Not sure how ballistics are going to be great for anti-fighter escort due to the limited ammunition. Especially if the projectile speed will remain at 900m/s.
because ships with specilized roles like a redeemer or cargo ship are not ment to be fighting 24/7 and can conserve ammo. Dropships are likely to be used on planets. with atmo flight and atmo handling coming in the future balistics can cripple a fighter fairly quickly and they wont be able to fly like spaceships in atmo anymore meaning if they come at you they will have to fly past meaning 2-4 redeemer turrets pelting you in atmo. That and heavy fighters will be less effective most likely in atmo verses lighter ships made for atmo combat like the arrow, gladius, sabre.
Redeemer always felt clunky and sluggish when flying, redeemer sits in a unique spot rather than just being a small hammerhead. Now its a great swatter.
Its a bit of a dichotomy for me. On the one hand its good to see CIG is willing to make big strides when it comes to balance, on the flip slide of that I think this has a potential to really create some power creep and fomo. Idk. As a person who owned a corsair and upgraded it to a redeemer seeing both ships nerfed feels not so great to me. I'm curious how I will feel when and if the drop another gunship similar to the redeemer tbh. I always looked pledge purchases as the idea of buying a ship, less than a finite thing. Like a concept if you will. This really drove that home for me. Nerfing soft stats or bespoke weapons is one thing, changing component sizes is entirely another.
concept origionally in the brochures ect had it as a heavy fighter. anycase as a solo redeemer pilot its pritty much a buff. For the majority of redeemer pilots i see, no one really crews the turrets so you end up being a sort of mobile base for groups of fighters and when one gets shot down then they man the turrets. main difference now is you have to worry about being shot down.
I have a strange feeling that a redeemer/ harbinger or scorpius Antares may be the fighters to worry about when flying a Polaris around in the future. I see the Antares shutting down the anti missile turrets since they are only size 1 and computer operated with the harbinger and redeemers taking out ship turrets with ballistic turrets. Could be a potent mix against a capital ship
The Connie is the best gunship now. It's been bumped up to the point where it has the armament the original redeemer had at launch. And it still has an S3 shield, a cargo bay, a snub, and multi-mission capabilities.
Redeemer vs smaller fighters also makes a smaller number of targets. So if you are using a redeemer, your opponents can focus on a single ship/target verses multiple targets.
thing 1 ship vs 1 ship redeemer will be scary to a fighter. a dropship most likely means larger groups as support. they have said in the past the valkyrie and redeemer is made to work together. so you are looking at potentially on the low end 3 people as crew in each ship so 9 over 2 redeemers and 1 valkyrie. Then anywhere between 20-56 potential players being dropped on the ground. The last thing those ships are worried about is a big lumbering ship coming down into atmo they are worried about ground and small air targets coming in.
I disagree with this. I think the majority of people were sold a gunship, not a heavy fighter. To push it closer to the latter is to push it away from what players had in mind when they made the purchase decision. People want staying power on a gunship, over the ability to catch up to smaller fighters. At least that's what feedback sounds like to me. CIG can't stop nerfing non-RSI ships and it's awful.
Exactly, if I wanted a Vanguard I would have gotten a Vanguard. The Redeemer is basically redundant now. 3 or 4 crew members that should just be in fighters because 3 or 4 of any ship will eat it for lunch. 4 dedicated heavy fighters would be vastly more effective in long range operations. 4 bombers outperform it against large ships. 4 Light Fighters will have a better chance to win dogfights. a mix of any 4 ship types would be more versatile. The Redeemer is now basically an overpriced (both in game and out) dedicated ground attack ship for people that have friends that can't or don't want to fly because it is simply not worth the cost and effort to crew and equip it in ANY ship vs ship situation.
Read the original redeemer pitch. It originally was shown as having size 2 badgers for the manned turrets. Cig was generous giving it size 5s and it definitely scaled too easily vs other supposedly more powerful vessels. It's still a gunship, count it. 10 guns, most stuck to turrets. I think you'll be ok
Bringing 4 ships on a long range expedition will mean you have to refuel, rearm, repair and maintain 4 ships. With engineering online its highly unlikely that 4 solo vanguards will be able to operate as efficiently . The smart play would be to bring one redeemer and a support ship like Vulcan.
A gunship is a role, not a size. This thing isn't even truly meant to be taking on fighters but acting as a longrange barrage platform and to attack ground targets.
I originally got into SC and the redeemer was my instant favorite. I upgraded up from it to the perseus and currently have a hammerhead as a loaner. I would say the size comparison put alot into perspective. I still think they owe the consumers a apology for nerfing something they sold at a price point then reduced. Personally i believe the redeemer shouldnt cost over 300 bucks now but be closer to 200.
3 targets are always better than one. The redeemer was the exception because of the firepower. 2 medium fighters with good pilots could take this out now.
It reeeeaaaalllyyy needs an interior rework though. It's so far ahead of most other ships in terms of exterior design, but the opposite is true for the interior.
Deeper I my favorite ship & I honestly do not mind the changes (as they male perfect sense); but i will say the ONLY thing I wish CIG would update on the body is the turret size. The big chonky turrets look amazing with size 5s on them, but look almost cartoonishly oversized for size 4 guns. Like a big man with a Derringer kind of goofy. If CIG were to slap on a pre-made Aegis remote turret to be used by the remote operator seats (yeah, let the pilot keep one turret & let one of the seats switch between the rear turret and / or the dorsal / ventral turret), that would look amazing! Hell, CIG could even leave the turret access points for crew to load ammunition cassettes or repair the turret brains of knocked offline. I am also with the thought the engine pods should be rotated 45° so they could swing out & unfold with an amazing VTOL animation. (That and from the front end view, the canted engine pods would legit form the Aegis emblem!)
@@lawofthewestgaming I guess. It fells like everything is better. I may melt it for a scorpius or something idk. I think it’s the maneuverability change since master modes paired with the low weapon velocity of the weapons makes it really tough to dog fight in. It may be tankish with engineering maybe but that’s for the future to find out. I appreciate the comment I just don’t feel that way but I see your point
@@Vioblight Scorpius is easy pickings if the pilot is solo. I'm not sure if you're planning on mostly solo flying but Scorp has a pretty decent list of major flaws.
Thanks for doing this. As a long time redeemer pilot, I have been pretty unhappy about the changes. But this makes me feel at least a bit better and more cautiously optimistic.
OP didn't mention that shields were reworked with s3 having much less shields. someone did the math and said that the redeemer now has 50% of the shields a s3 would have. That's REALLY good!!! Not only does it tank well, it will also regenerate very quickly and it has a ton of built-in redundancy with a huge powerplant and many shields vs a single shield. it's going to have a lot of staying power in combat as long as it doesn't get wrecked by missile spam.
@@mndeg Friend, the Connie still has the same armament the original redeemer had, plus one S3 shield, and costs $90.00 less. How can I feel happy? With the shield refactor a Redeemer with the best S2 shields would still be about half the shields of a Connie, with a shield regen rate that is about 1000hp/s lower. The poweplant is not a factor for the Redeemer. Shield regen in its case is capped at the max for the type of shield it has. If the single powerplant dies, it doesn't matter how many redundant shields you have.
My assumption with the shield change was also to do with engineering gameplay coming they stated somewhere that S3 components will not be swappable in the field - so swapping the redeemer to a lot more s2 shields means that they can be swapped out by a player mid combat if needed. - with component wear and tear becoming more a thing in the future as well maybe this means it might be better too. If 1 of your 2 S2 shields is starting to show wear then half your shields are gone. but if 1 of the 6 s2 shields is failing, this might be less impactful. I suspect the devil is in the details like a lot of SC. That said I never really felt like the Redeemer was so beefy it could survive anything even with the s3 shields. usually the MOMENT the shields are down one of the side nutcrackers gets damaged and the ship is basically impossible to fly. - So hopefully armor being implemented helps with this as with much less shields if it still takes damage like that then it will be pretty hard to use
The reason why I assumed the Redeemer had the same shields as the Hammerhead was because it was supposed to loiter in an active combat zone and provide close air support. Perhaps taking on slightly larger targets. The Hammerhead was designed to take on a large number of light to medium fighters. Putting out a relatively small amount of damage but in larger numbers and for a shorter amount of time. Redeemer was to take on medium and larger targets, smaller numbers and longer amount of time. If that makes sense. Even if they wanted you make it more agile and much more squishy, I don't think the nerf was worth it or deserved. If I wanted to fly a vanguard, I'd fly a vanguard.
I like the changes but I am looking forward to further tuning. It's not a fighter, it's a gunship, so it should be more sluggish than the Vanguards but also have more turret firepower.
I can live with the shield changes now that they are addressing the maneuverability issues. I still think the manned turrets should have kept their twin S5 guns though. Their manned turrets. They have to be worth putting a body in them! Well, guess that means if I want a gun ship to blast bigger ships down with now, I gotta start looking at the Perseus....but I liked the Redeemer more.
Great video as usual and a nice, even handed approach to this change. "I can understand why, it sucks to have something you like taken away from you..." - I also agree with this but would question the wisdom about investing alot of emotion in a test platform that we have been told over and over is going to change many, many times.
I think the change is great, I own a redeemer and the hammerhead. It might be better against fighters now because its faster. But weaker against hammerheads or other huge ships. On org pvp events we always used the redeemer as the heavy ship to deal with fighters and other big ships. The hammerhead was just weaker and require a lot more players to crew. The redeemer was always the better option to chose, it was also the best ship to deal with ground vehicles because of its strong shields. Could eliminate all their anti air easy with just one redeemer.
Ultimately the problem is marketing. Pimped out overpowered ship sells for a lot. Reality sets in, planned or unplanned, and after the cash grab the balancing comes in. Not the most ethical approach with 10 years of game development when we could have learned from this already.
personally this is something i'd expect and hope from the devs attempting to 'rebalance' a ship, like if you think the ship's invested too many points int the str and wanna reduce it? sure but instead of removing the point, reallocate it it's other stats, in this case it's agi which i have no qualms sure it loses some fire power but in return it's more maneuverable than before which i wholesomely welcome it, i really the like the Deemer as to me it's like a small ver of the Perseus, but at the moment pre 24.2 it's movement is too sluggish, heck way more sluggish than ships twice it's size, so when i'm quite happy that they finally starting to adjusting it, even thou at the cost of it's firepower but that can be adjusted depending on the guns that are used
2:53 - If you are looking at efficiency, and you have 2 crew, just get 3 Avengers. Its about the same and cheaper. If you have a full crew, 5 Avengers is better than one Redeemer in every way. There is no force multiplier to multicrew at this point.
@@Tarnfalk which can be safely ignored because turrets still suck and it still flies like a brick. Vanguard level performance is not going to save it from 3+ fighters with decent pilots.
The Hammerhead should have been buffed, not the Redeemer being nerfed. The Hammerhead is a corvette class ship for goodness sake. The Redeemer nerfs were uncalled for.
@@MrClassytangerine Let's be real for a second and leave the theory crafting/lore/daydreaming departments alone, the HH is supposed to be a *dedicated* anti-fighter ship but it sucks at its job big time, so much so that a group of fighters can easily deal with a single HH when if it really succeeded at its role it should be able to dispose of more fighters than it has crew and fighters seeing this ship should be avoiding to engage (for example if 7 people are on board of the HH on all the turrets then it should mean that you need *more than* 7 fighters, the problem is right now that even 3-4 fighters can quite easily deal with it unless they're totally brainded, this is very worrying as if it is supposedly the best anti-fighter ship in the entire game but if it is this bad at its job then I don't even want to know what the other non dedicated ships are like), don't forget that it is supposed to be a *fleet escort* ship, that means it's supposed to do PD/anti fighter and *defend the whole fleet* and yet, *it cannot even defend itself* , can you see why this is a major problem ? This thing's counter should be other capital ships and dedicated bombers, not light fighters, right now it's actually quite decent against big ships so this is kinda ironic It is in desperate need of a buff but to be fair that applies to most multicrew ship which get easily annihilated by fighters so it's not like it's a HH only issue, still though a buff would've been nice as a temporary fix since we're not getting a complete rebalance of multicrew to make it actually efficient like it's supposed to be any time soon
Yeah, no, if the Polaris is a corvette, the Hammerhead is most definitely _not_ the same, it's smaller and it doesn't have the level of mission flexibility the Polaris offers. At best, the Hammerhead is a classic gunship, it has the weaponry to fulfill its role and do a little more than that, but beyond that, it is not really capable of doing more than it's designed to.
@@Stormyy6310 that's literally all due to turrets sucking. How would you even buff it? Adding guns to the turrets would be silly and upping them to s5 would make it even worse at engaging fighters.
The HH is a sub-capital corvette. Means it's less than something like the Polaris, but it's going to be a whole other thing to deal with in 4.0 when we finally get the long awaited "Ship armour rework". Which will mean anything smaller than S4 won't even be able to punch through the armour of the Hammerhead. This is information straight from CIG regarding the eventual armour on the HH when armour is added. This change will make only it's turrets and engines able to be damaged by fighters unless they have the minimum S4 or larger. A fighter screen it will be.
I was there when it was 1st suggested, and I wanted my Gunboat and I waited and got it and loved it for what it was.. Now it is been Nerffed. So I will either let it sit hoping that they will fix it at some point or I will just turn it into something else.
I don't think it's the problem that they nerfed this ship. I think the problem is other "do all" or "non-gunships" being able to outgun this. IMO a lot of rebalancing needs to be done.
Whodda thunk it, CIG making well thought out changes lol. Now i just hope they scale those turrets down abit, abit like the new ones from the f8c and f7aMkII
my main issue is this ship is less capable then it was before. c.i,g is more then happy to sell you a ship as advertised then nerf it but cig wont reduce the price. imagine paying 65k for a camaro zl1 then when you get it serviced they stick a turbo 4 cylinder in it.
We do not need another anti fighter, we have too many already. I am fine with the all the changes apart from the gun size change. This is just to sell new ships.
I have both the Vanguard and the Redeemer, so I suppose I have to ask if this flies like a Vanguard now... why fly a Vanguard? The deemers single player firepower is nearly compairable if not more, let alone adding crew? Kind of makes the Vanguard redundant?
Not if crewed no.... without a crew anything is just a target. You're telling me with 20 guns on 5 turrets you can't kill a single fighter? You haven't fought a crewed hammerhead then.... and a hammerhead without crew is like a fighter without a pilot.
@jimrussell4062 sorry if I did not state crewed, but yes crewed. If you stay far and stay fast and change trajectory to throw off pips, it's just a fat fish. Not to much hull health on the mid section either, not enough to stop balistic cannons on any medium to heavy fighter from killing it in 2 mins
Being nearly as maneuverable is not the same as the same in a turning gunfight, you are either better or worse than your opponents maneuvering speed. So if you are solo playing the Vanguard is the better choice with better fire-power in that scenario.
I got jumped by a group of five pirates while I was in my Redeemer solo. That ship was knocked up pretty bad but actually was able to fly it back to the space station for a full repairs, while two of the pirates ended up fleeing from the engagement. They left their brethren in smoldering piles on the surface of Aberdeen. If CIG actually nerfed the Redeemer in its tankiness, I don't think there's another ship that fills that role at that size. I won't melt it but I will be sad. If it has the same tankiness as a Vanguard then that's actually head scratching.
its a helicopter that was just as tanky if not stronger than a hammerhead and i had 4 redeemers. nothing majorly wrong with changes and can always change again if something is needed.
Revert it to its old self, Nobody complained about the speed at the end of the day. Id wager the HH needs stronger shields. Game isnt fully realized and it cant even tank a ship flying into it with full shields and have it bounce right off. Not to mention the HH should be able to ram ships.
Agreed. It shouldn't be a "fighter" at all. It should be heavily armed, heavily armored and SLOW. That keeps it from competing with fighters. It's meant to be a gunship to primarily hit ground targets and in a pinch escort SLOW ships in a convoy. It only had to be as fast as capital ships and cargo ships. So Connie speed. That was already balanced....
@@jimrussell4062 people are concerned less about the big picture and more about whats been put in front of them. "x thing makes sense based on whats currently in the game." Unfortunately the comparisons they make are to vehicles who are also broken and will require a rework or upgrade later on.
Really solid analysis! Glad to hear that these changes panned out in a way that, even if not loved across the board, are understandable and place it in a specific role in a fleet and the 'verse
The maneuverability changes make the ship better against ships it was already beating. The shield and gun changes mean it's never going to be able to fight the ships it intuitively should be able to.
The A2 is better than the HH at doing what the HH is supposed to do. Thr HH guns have to short of range, they should be size 4s with a 20% bonus to range so that fighters can't sit outside gun range and still be able to kill the HH. CIG could reduce the size of the guns on every fighter so they don't go above size 3. CIG should look towards EVE online and how they handle ships/weapons!
@LAWoftheWEST Gaming - Um... It was supposed to be a dropship/gunboat, not anti-fighter screener tho? I agree with the shield strength thing, but that would also speak to CIG's propensity towards overboarding ships then nerfing them later, which really needs to stop. I will say that it sucks they downgraded the main weapons, but after watching your turret video, it makes a certain amount of sense if you can then upgrade turret weapon sizes to compensate. If not.. then they literally just dropepd the size 5's to 4s, which is what the Zeus mk2's are rocking? and that seems... petty and unneeded. lol.
I'm glad I let myself simmer and waited for the nerf to get tested. I love my redeemer and initially I was pretty upset, but the nerf totally makes sense for the size of this ship. Thanks for the update! o7
If we look into the ship class based on the size, the Redeemer is still powerful compared to others even after the nerf. It's like a heavy fighter on steroids, or like a cutty/freelancer/C1 class. No other ship in a similar size is that beefy and has that much firepower. Besides, if I remember correctly, the Javline hangar bay is a dedicated Redeemer hangar, which means the Redeemer has never been a large/cap ship killer, instead, it's an escort ship that meant to kill smaller ships for the Jav.
I'm not jazzed about the redeemer changes, half the reason I bought it was for it's firepower. But this video does kinda help me come around a touch, My worry is as you say one of it's selling point now is longevity in long rage excursions but one that's what the warden is two, it has 5 usable stations at current and a 6th if you want an engineer. There are 4 beds..... And no real food prep facilities. This thing can barely go a day or two without resupply. I dunno perhaps on a fleet but it's size might make it near impossible for carrier ops meaning it'll need supply ships it's just kinda a mess so I dunno
The Redeemer has a full sized kitchen on its lower deck as well as coming with a fully stocked fridge. You can slide the doors on the glass downstairs and all that food and drink is consumable as of right now. The Redeemer certainly is a long range ship. It's four spare seats are for its crew minus the pilot when in areas where people in turrets will be seen as an act of aggression. So no, it really is designed for 4-5 people at long range, unlike most ships
There would be no need to balance ANYTHING if they would just stick to the physics of the natural world! Instead we can look forward to an endless supply of balance changes that are based on absolutely NOTHING but some idiots feelings! Hense how we got Master Modes!
Super heavy what? It is worse than a single hurricane now. With two hurricanes you'd totally outperform anything you can do with the Redeemer now. It was supposed to be a Gunship, you know.
How is this right? This ship was supposed to be a Gunship. A dedicated military ship that was a step between the S4 generalists, and the dedicated multicrew military ships. What happened to the ships role and concept? How come it is worse than ships that cost around $100.00 USD less? How is it it should be nerfed because it is small? The Connie now, has the same armament the Redeemer originally had, mostly pilot controlled, a S3 shield, plus a snub, and it is capable of doing a myriad of missions and is almost a hundred dollars less expensive! How is that even logical? The size comparison makes no sense for specialist ships. If you take the cargo bat and the snub from a Connie and stack the rest vertically you will end with something the size of a Redeemer too. That's because the Redeemer gives everything in order to be the best at its one mission. Cutting it down to a Vanguard's level is exactly the dame as cutting the Hull-A's cargo bay to a Nomad's size just because they both can fit in the same pad. Size doesn't matter for specialists because they give everything else in exchange for being the very best at their role. As it was launched, the Redeemer was a good representative of what a Gunship should be. It was a bit sluggish, but not overtly so. The turrets it had were good against fighters and medium ships (until their rotation was severely cut). Abd it was properly protected. What you probably refer to as the previous Redeemer, is the cut down version we have after several nerfs. It is an incompetent ship because it was forced to be (after launch) by CIG. It has now been cut to the level of an S3 ship, and that makes it even more incompetent at its job. It still has the crew requirements of a large ship (S5), as well as the price tag of an S5, but it no longer has the protection or firepower to justify packing that many players in there rather than in individual ships. You say that each turret is the equivalent of a medium fighter, when in fact they weigh in at about the firepower of a light fighter. The Hammerhead argument is invalid. With the ship refactor it is evident that ship will have to go up a class in terms of shields. Now we have one more heavy fighter, which is arguably WORSE than a Hurricane, and we have a hole in the progression for people who want to pursue a career in the dedicated military ships.
This ship was my biggest deception after they transformed it from the vision of the creators (4 horsemen of apocalypse). Now they bring back that vision, and i am more excited than ever. This ship with some adjustment inside will be the perfect special forces aircraft this game has.
Balance and Chanage is never fun.. but the game is about to go in to a big shift. AND alot of the old fighter needed a rework so there not to OP for the Cap classes. the new endgame will not be fighter v fighter.. its CapvCap and fighter will there to help support. I think alot of player need to keep in mind that the game need to be balanced and sometime they over buff something befor other ship are done and they see it to OP for its role now.
So previously I noticed as a pilot you also lost the 4x pilot controlled weapons. It used to be the chin turret (the remote one) would slave to the pilot when not manned.... recently I only had control of 2x guns, did that stick or does the pilot have control of all 4 guns as a pilot?
@@ddavis5442 Dunno, from what I';ve read since posting some people are saying they lost control of the small chin turret and some people say they didn't. Looking at what happened to the Corsair it can go either way.
@CptFugu yea just not much reason to put people in a ship that carries 5 when you can do 5 seperate connies. Yes you don't have the manuverability, but what you lack in that you can make up for in area coverage. Sure you can say that each connie needs an engineer. So let's add 1 to a Redeemer as well. Now is 3 connies a better choice (each with a pilot and 1 engineer)? Or is the Redeemer fully crewed one? I don't know many that would say the Redeemer is a better choice. I think the only thing this might take out is the Warden IF you get control of all 4 guns as a pilot. If not, the warden is the better choice.
Balance is massively changing for all ships and components, as well as ship class, and armour. Taking on capital ships, with a fighter or gunship, won't be a thing. There will be a couple smallish ships dedicated to this, but for the most part, it will likely be similar classes fighting each other.
A tiny plus from the change: now you can replace the shields manually since they're size 2 instead of size 3, also has more redundancy. Not sure how efficient it'll be to target shield generators to beat up a ship once we have engineering, but this would be a plus even while having a lower pool amount.
I haven't played SC in a while because my PC needs un upgrade first... But I do have a Redeemer in my hangar collecting dust and I am very relieved to hear that all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about its nerf was exaggerated, as I couldn't really log on and see for myself. Then again I was never gonna melt it anyway because it was a gift by CIG that I cherish dearly.
@@alandab I reject your completely exaggerated negativity. There is no "real" redeemer. This is a game. As the kids these days say, get out and touch some grass.
@@tofupanda8168 That was at Gamescom in 2013 or 2014. CIG was basically forced to have a booth on the showfloor at the last second that they had never planned on doing and they had brought no people to staff it. I was a volunteer for the off Gamescom event that weekend and I was also at Gamescom that day before the doors opened and helped set up the little impromptu booth, I even got to pick the colour of the carpet 😄And later when Sandi Gardiner and that one poor community management guy were compeltely swamped with people I jumped in and helped answer questions and guide people through the little demo they had back then. I got gifted a ship as a thank you for that together with a couple other dudes.
@@tofupanda8168 Sorry, youtube decided to delete my reply for some reason. Since I don't know why I don't know how to tell you without the reply getting deleted agian. :/
The Redeemer is one of my only two major gun boats (the other is a Retaliator). I love this ship for its versatility in multi-crew combat, which is the only reason I have it. If I'm going out alone, I'll use a different ship. Thanks for your review on the updates!
Appreciate this perspective. I loved the Redeemer when it came out as it was surprisingly nimble. Then it got nerfed and felt like a slug. I actually prefer the way it sounds now. Like the Corsair, it was OP anyway imo. The comparisons to the Hammerhead was eye opening and sealed the deal wrt the nerfs it’s just had. I know others won’t agree due to overwhelming loss aversion but that’s life.
I agree with the changes made to the Redeemer, no matter what people think. It was OP and needed to be balanced. Plus those giant guns looked like clown guns on there.
Thank you. Too many peeps screeching online about this without even trying it or trying to understand it and No one talks about range and longevity in combat when comparing fighters and larger ships. Short sighted citizens abound. Anyone who’s been in one of these and gave it a once over knows those big components aren’t fitting up and down a ladder.
Worse than the Connie now, which is much cheaper and multi-role. Arguably worse than a single Hurricane. Definitively worse than 5 people taking out their own fighters, regardless of their class.
they still need to move the living area upstairs and the drop seats downstairs
how dare you tell CIG how to make their game
I’ve backed since 2017 and have no idea why they didn’t release the ship with the two levels flipped
@@SniPantsu 😅
The beds are escape pods. They won't do well with leaving the ship in the upper area.
@@Cooli167 so true
My only problem with the Redeemer changes is the existance of Constellations and Corsair, it is counter-intuitive that a explorer\cargo ship has not more shields and firepower than dedicated comabat ship, no matter the exact combat sub-role.
My biggest problem is still the fact that they're changing the component sizes significantly without addressing the fact that they save a price based on component sizes. And now the ship is worth a lot less.
Yes, let hope they fix that..but the change is good.
I completely understand this take. I also know that its active game development, and even live games make balance changes and design tweaks of things they dont think are in a good spot. Its sadly a risk you take with real money purchases for any multiplayer game.
im hoping with the component change that you can take extra components and switch them out in battle for quicker repair
my guy be real, you are DONATING to the game. They are not selling you ships. Its stupid to give CIG money bc you expect XYZ performance. And CIG allows you to melt and use store credit anyway...
Your anger is understandable, but you really are thinking about the money wrongly. The price is just based on popularity and what the marketing guys think it will sell for. Prices are all over the place in the store and while bigger ships usually cost more, that's not always the case. If you are paying based on components and stats, you are doing it wrong and should stop buying ships honestly...
Additionally, we have no idea what this shield change will do. A component refactor is on the way and they're going to add engineering and hull armor. The only thing that we know is that redundancy is important. What that means is 6 shield components is better than 2, the size change might not matter as much.
I want my big guns back 😿
I think when they announced the changes they should have made it more clear that the intended role was changing. People would have still been upset, however some people might have been a bit more receptive. Suddenly losing a quantifiable and large amount of DPS and shielding for an unquantifiable amount of manoeuvrability was bound to feel like a bad trade without being able to try things out, and the lack of clarification didn't help.
IMO these types changes truly hurt SC as a whole, "buy this ship, here are the specs" years later "ship was OP" nerf. If it was so OP why did it take 5 years to fix, I wonder is there a new ship coming that they need to drive sales for in this role?
Original pitch had it with size 2 guns on the manned turrets.
Better return to that asap
conspiracy. i have a redeemer and i think it's a buff
Because a lot happens in 5 years? And the game before wasn't as developed as it is now? Like, use your brain. Things happen, and 5 years from now something else will cause another ship you love to need to be altered.
@@artuno1207 Lot of different ships to sell in those roles, so it had to be moved to less crowded niche by nerfing it.
one of the ships in concept that will come out soon have 2 turrets with a pair of size 4 guns and 2 size 4 guns for the pilot....it also has a single large shield so its basically a redeemer that lost 4 size 3 weapons and gained a large shield for it.....
The Hammerhead needed a buff. A2 received 3rd S3 shield. The HH needs the same shield buff.
The Redeemer's chin and tail mounted lasers turrets should have been upgunned 1 size, though - that would have made manning them more viable, if it is to be used an anti-fighter solution.
HH needs a rework. get rid of that gap in the middle. needs cases for suits and gun racks.
Ship armour comes in 4.0, which will certainly make the HH a class above the Hercules series when it comes to armour rating. Expect S5 minimum to be required to punch through the HH's plating, and S4 for the Herc. This information comes straight from CIG in the past when they talked about what armour will look like for something straight military like the Hammerhead
@@TheRealMinotaur667 I'm curious to just how armored it will be. Armor is likely going to be a huge deal for the game, easily as important or more important as shields. Recently CIG has shown its perfectly willing to change things many likely thought set in stone, like the new competent and weapon size changes on so many ships so it will be interesting to see. Other than that internally the ship is a mess, wasted space, the infamous hole to no where, the engine room, the giant fridge/messroom, the list goes on. The inside layout makes me wonder if it was intended or being used as a set piece in S42. While that's great, its left the internal extremely lackluster in some ways. I hope it gets improved.
I'm not against the ship or hate it, I just think it need at least an internal rework. Lastly the fact it likely isn't going to receive the PD systems other large ships are getting doesn't make sense to me given its role but I do understand balance concerns.
if you thinking of giving s4 guns onto the remotes, then the main pilot basically about the same firepower as a connie in a solo pilot state with no gunners, now imagine it's fully crewed with a total of 3 pairs of s4( 2 on each remote turret, 2 for main pilot) and 2 manned turret armed with a pair of s5 gun each, that be wait too OP and could possibly shred almost any ships below it's size and an absolute terror to bigger ships.
@@raigaLCC Um, no, it isn't. Solo Connie has 4x S5 and a S3 shield to the Redeemer's pilot controlled 2x S4 and 2x S3 with soon to be 6x S2 shields. Redeemer only has two manned turrets and the remote turrets are S3. I'm not sure where you got that idea. And the Redeemer is supposed to be a dedicated military gunship. It has a whopping 2scu of cargo space and only 8x S2 missiles. Compare that to the Connie which now is stated to be a gunship, but it used to be considered multirole. Even now the Connie has 4x S5 and something like 48 missiles and that's just pilot control. It's also got a snub fighter with 1x S3 and 2x S1, and a pair of manned turrets with 2x S2 on each. After the Redeemer nerf, the Redeemer doesn't stand a chance against a Connie. The Redeemer was always supposed to be more powerful than the Connie, but only when fully crewed. Now they're changing it into a fighter slayer.
The shields I could live with a change. It's the firepower changes that I find unjustified.
Well, better maneuverability also means more potential DPS by potentially being able to stay on target better.
@@j.d.4697 the ships we'd be gunning for are far more maneuverable and we are a far bigger target. The ship's saving grace is it's ability to kill the enemy more quickly and efficiently, not be dogfighting with them. The ship is completely gimped barring some kind of armament rollback.
@@j.d.4697 Even with Vanguard maneuverability it is not going to keep up with dedicated fighters. It had no issues staying on target before. The issue was and continues to be that it is too slow to keep up with Boom and Zoom from multiple targets. It's also gigantic and easy to hit from max effective range. It's nothing but a loot pinata for any small group of decent pilots in fighters.
I paid for those S5 guns, they need to at least be in my inventory permanently.
@@blacksheepboyz thats not how EA works bub
Hmm I never thought of it that away, may give the Redeemer another go around,,, thanks
CitizenMaxx here and remember to fly fast plus enjoy SC to it's fullest
This newest version of the Redeemer will still get its lunch handed to it by 2 or 3 fighters. Let’s not forget it takes a lot of bodies to man a Redeemer. If you lose the fight against 3 fighters, that’s a lot of dead bodies.
What a lot of people forget is eventually we'll have crew to man these vessels. Obviously it sucks for NOW but eventually you'll be able to effectively "solo" with this ship, and I think it's this final vision that doesnt exist yet that CIG is balancing towards right now.
have you tried turrets since 3.23? the auto gimbals on them are very accurate
As soon as engineering is in, the whole situation changes. Try fixing components in a single seater ...
@@mndeg auto gimbals? since when did they re-enabled auto gimbals? as far as i know we can only use em manually?
(PvP perspective, PvE it's will be ok)The issue is why would you want a redeemer. Before the nerf it was a gunship that can punch up, now it is designed to punch equal to down. The minimum you want is a 3 crew but really want a fourth member to cover you behind. So depending on the cost of this ship in game, why not have two vanguards, or A vanguard and two heavy fighters, like why would I want all my eggs in one basket. Like if they increased the Quantum range more I guess there will be a reason. But I think they just kinda kill it, if you are in a ship with multiple people in it, you want to punch up.
Balancing around crew in seats is always hard because prices come into play, Redeemer is $330, 2 vanguards come up to $500ish. This version of the redeemer feels like it's supposed to be the thing that chases smaller damage dumpers from your subcapitol ships when they get outmaneuvered.
I agree with you, though. It having so little dps from the pilot seat REALLY hurts this ship. I can't ever justify having it in my fleet.
having someone be engineer will allow a ship to fight for longer. just wait for .2 and 4.0
@@kaplield4565 they didn't nerf pilot dps at all though. btw 2 of the guns that the pilot can control use turret capacitors, so they can essentially shoot forever. it's going to be a meta solo fighter in .2 IMO
Exactly. Two Vanguards becomes a better option and use of 4 crewmembers. Or hell, even FOUR MIS gunships. Yes the MIS is less maneuverable but that's FOUR cannons the pilot can control along with 28 missiles...and you get 4 of them vs one ship with 4 people. Or Cutlasses for the amount of agility AND firepower they'd bring.
Gimme quad 4 turrets and i am fine with the changes, twins don"t cut it at all!
Question, did they speed up the turrets when they reduced the gun size? The original nerf to the Redeemer was the turret speed back in the day. Would be cool if, as a measure of compensation, we got its old turret speed back. Especially if its role is now more of a small craft hunter.
I think the Redeemer's niche as a nimble anti-fighter ship is perfect and logical.
We had plenty of ships to take out fighters. Give me the big guns back.
EDIT: I'm not mad they made it better at the role it was never intended for. I'm mad they changed the role entirely. I'm sure its a beast against fighters and I dont freaking care. It was a medium sized ship that could bunch above its weight class, now with the gun changes its just punching down. Now I'd rather have three F7A's in play than a minimum crewed redeemer
Read the original brochure. It never promised to punch above it's weight on the very beginnings.
With the current game I get it, a crewed deemer might suck vs hornets ( broken little ships anyway) but let's say engineering allows you to continue the fight, all parts are accessible inside the ship, thus I'll be crew member doing repairs will then outlast the hornets, without the need for a carrier to get it to and from its destination
Honestly I'm just looking at the Perseus now for a gun ship punching up. Not the same as the Redeemer and I very much prefer the Redeemer, but seems they didn't want it stepping in the Perseus' toes too much.
Not sure how ballistics are going to be great for anti-fighter escort due to the limited ammunition. Especially if the projectile speed will remain at 900m/s.
because ships with specilized roles like a redeemer or cargo ship are not ment to be fighting 24/7 and can conserve ammo. Dropships are likely to be used on planets.
with atmo flight and atmo handling coming in the future balistics can cripple a fighter fairly quickly and they wont be able to fly like spaceships in atmo anymore meaning if they come at you they will have to fly past meaning 2-4 redeemer turrets pelting you in atmo.
That and heavy fighters will be less effective most likely in atmo verses lighter ships made for atmo combat like the arrow, gladius, sabre.
Redeemer always felt clunky and sluggish when flying, redeemer sits in a unique spot rather than just being a small hammerhead. Now its a great swatter.
Its a bit of a dichotomy for me. On the one hand its good to see CIG is willing to make big strides when it comes to balance, on the flip slide of that I think this has a potential to really create some power creep and fomo. Idk. As a person who owned a corsair and upgraded it to a redeemer seeing both ships nerfed feels not so great to me. I'm curious how I will feel when and if the drop another gunship similar to the redeemer tbh. I always looked pledge purchases as the idea of buying a ship, less than a finite thing. Like a concept if you will. This really drove that home for me. Nerfing soft stats or bespoke weapons is one thing, changing component sizes is entirely another.
concept origionally in the brochures ect had it as a heavy fighter. anycase as a solo redeemer pilot its pritty much a buff. For the majority of redeemer pilots i see, no one really crews the turrets so you end up being a sort of mobile base for groups of fighters and when one gets shot down then they man the turrets. main difference now is you have to worry about being shot down.
I have a strange feeling that a redeemer/ harbinger or scorpius Antares may be the fighters to worry about when flying a Polaris around in the future. I see the Antares shutting down the anti missile turrets since they are only size 1 and computer operated with the harbinger and redeemers taking out ship turrets with ballistic turrets. Could be a potent mix against a capital ship
I always felt the redeemer was the military Connie, but I see how it hasn't stayed true to its original purpose.
The Connie is the best gunship now. It's been bumped up to the point where it has the armament the original redeemer had at launch. And it still has an S3 shield, a cargo bay, a snub, and multi-mission capabilities.
Redeemer vs smaller fighters also makes a smaller number of targets. So if you are using a redeemer, your opponents can focus on a single ship/target verses multiple targets.
thing 1 ship vs 1 ship redeemer will be scary to a fighter.
a dropship most likely means larger groups as support.
they have said in the past the valkyrie and redeemer is made to work together. so you are looking at potentially on the low end 3 people as crew in each ship so 9 over 2 redeemers and 1 valkyrie.
Then anywhere between 20-56 potential players being dropped on the ground.
The last thing those ships are worried about is a big lumbering ship coming down into atmo they are worried about ground and small air targets coming in.
I disagree with this.
I think the majority of people were sold a gunship, not a heavy fighter.
To push it closer to the latter is to push it away from what players had in mind when they made the purchase decision.
People want staying power on a gunship, over the ability to catch up to smaller fighters.
At least that's what feedback sounds like to me.
CIG can't stop nerfing non-RSI ships and it's awful.
Don’t buy ships from CIG. This is what they do.
If you want to give CIG free money to make their game, then do so.
Exactly, if I wanted a Vanguard I would have gotten a Vanguard. The Redeemer is basically redundant now. 3 or 4 crew members that should just be in fighters because 3 or 4 of any ship will eat it for lunch. 4 dedicated heavy fighters would be vastly more effective in long range operations. 4 bombers outperform it against large ships. 4 Light Fighters will have a better chance to win dogfights. a mix of any 4 ship types would be more versatile.
The Redeemer is now basically an overpriced (both in game and out) dedicated ground attack ship for people that have friends that can't or don't want to fly because it is simply not worth the cost and effort to crew and equip it in ANY ship vs ship situation.
Read the original redeemer pitch. It originally was shown as having size 2 badgers for the manned turrets.
Cig was generous giving it size 5s and it definitely scaled too easily vs other supposedly more powerful vessels.
It's still a gunship, count it. 10 guns, most stuck to turrets. I think you'll be ok
Bringing 4 ships on a long range expedition will mean you have to refuel, rearm, repair and maintain 4 ships. With engineering online its highly unlikely that 4 solo vanguards will be able to operate as efficiently . The smart play would be to bring one redeemer and a support ship like Vulcan.
A gunship is a role, not a size. This thing isn't even truly meant to be taking on fighters but acting as a longrange barrage platform and to attack ground targets.
Keep the Redeemer weapons S5!!
I originally got into SC and the redeemer was my instant favorite. I upgraded up from it to the perseus and currently have a hammerhead as a loaner. I would say the size comparison put alot into perspective. I still think they owe the consumers a apology for nerfing something they sold at a price point then reduced. Personally i believe the redeemer shouldnt cost over 300 bucks now but be closer to 200.
3 targets are always better than one. The redeemer was the exception because of the firepower. 2 medium fighters with good pilots could take this out now.
It reeeeaaaalllyyy needs an interior rework though. It's so far ahead of most other ships in terms of exterior design, but the opposite is true for the interior.
@@alandab the interior is upside down...
And the best interior is in the Tana :)
You've really sold me on these changes!
Deeper I my favorite ship & I honestly do not mind the changes (as they male perfect sense); but i will say the ONLY thing I wish CIG would update on the body is the turret size. The big chonky turrets look amazing with size 5s on them, but look almost cartoonishly oversized for size 4 guns. Like a big man with a Derringer kind of goofy.
If CIG were to slap on a pre-made Aegis remote turret to be used by the remote operator seats (yeah, let the pilot keep one turret & let one of the seats switch between the rear turret and / or the dorsal / ventral turret), that would look amazing! Hell, CIG could even leave the turret access points for crew to load ammunition cassettes or repair the turret brains of knocked offline.
I am also with the thought the engine pods should be rotated 45° so they could swing out & unfold with an amazing VTOL animation. (That and from the front end view, the canted engine pods would legit form the Aegis emblem!)
Yet another moment I feel like a dumbass for owning a vanguard…. 😡
you shouldn't. The vanguard is going to be a better choice for solo pilots. Its faster and and has a better DPS for its pilot controlled weapons.
@@lawofthewestgaming I guess. It fells like everything is better. I may melt it for a scorpius or something idk. I think it’s the maneuverability change since master modes paired with the low weapon velocity of the weapons makes it really tough to dog fight in. It may be tankish with engineering maybe but that’s for the future to find out.
I appreciate the comment I just don’t feel that way but I see your point
@@Vioblight Scorpius is easy pickings if the pilot is solo. I'm not sure if you're planning on mostly solo flying but Scorp has a pretty decent list of major flaws.
Thanks for doing this. As a long time redeemer pilot, I have been pretty unhappy about the changes. But this makes me feel at least a bit better and more cautiously optimistic.
OP didn't mention that shields were reworked with s3 having much less shields. someone did the math and said that the redeemer now has 50% of the shields a s3 would have. That's REALLY good!!! Not only does it tank well, it will also regenerate very quickly and it has a ton of built-in redundancy with a huge powerplant and many shields vs a single shield. it's going to have a lot of staying power in combat as long as it doesn't get wrecked by missile spam.
@@mndeg Friend, the Connie still has the same armament the original redeemer had, plus one S3 shield, and costs $90.00 less. How can I feel happy?
With the shield refactor a Redeemer with the best S2 shields would still be about half the shields of a Connie, with a shield regen rate that is about 1000hp/s lower.
The poweplant is not a factor for the Redeemer. Shield regen in its case is capped at the max for the type of shield it has. If the single powerplant dies, it doesn't matter how many redundant shields you have.
My assumption with the shield change was also to do with engineering gameplay coming
they stated somewhere that S3 components will not be swappable in the field
- so swapping the redeemer to a lot more s2 shields means that they can be swapped out by a player mid combat if needed.
- with component wear and tear becoming more a thing in the future as well maybe this means it might be better too. If 1 of your 2 S2 shields is starting to show wear then half your shields are gone. but if 1 of the 6 s2 shields is failing, this might be less impactful.
I suspect the devil is in the details like a lot of SC.
That said I never really felt like the Redeemer was so beefy it could survive anything even with the s3 shields. usually the MOMENT the shields are down one of the side nutcrackers gets damaged and the ship is basically impossible to fly.
- So hopefully armor being implemented helps with this as with much less shields if it still takes damage like that then it will be pretty hard to use
The reason why I assumed the Redeemer had the same shields as the Hammerhead was because it was supposed to loiter in an active combat zone and provide close air support. Perhaps taking on slightly larger targets. The Hammerhead was designed to take on a large number of light to medium fighters. Putting out a relatively small amount of damage but in larger numbers and for a shorter amount of time. Redeemer was to take on medium and larger targets, smaller numbers and longer amount of time. If that makes sense. Even if they wanted you make it more agile and much more squishy, I don't think the nerf was worth it or deserved. If I wanted to fly a vanguard, I'd fly a vanguard.
I like the changes but I am looking forward to further tuning. It's not a fighter, it's a gunship, so it should be more sluggish than the Vanguards but also have more turret firepower.
I can live with the shield changes now that they are addressing the maneuverability issues. I still think the manned turrets should have kept their twin S5 guns though. Their manned turrets. They have to be worth putting a body in them!
Well, guess that means if I want a gun ship to blast bigger ships down with now, I gotta start looking at the Perseus....but I liked the Redeemer more.
Great video as usual and a nice, even handed approach to this change.
"I can understand why, it sucks to have something you like taken away from you..." - I also agree with this but would question the wisdom about investing alot of emotion in a test platform that we have been told over and over is going to change many, many times.
I think the change is great, I own a redeemer and the hammerhead. It might be better against fighters now because its faster. But weaker against hammerheads or other huge ships. On org pvp events we always used the redeemer as the heavy ship to deal with fighters and other big ships. The hammerhead was just weaker and require a lot more players to crew. The redeemer was always the better option to chose, it was also the best ship to deal with ground vehicles because of its strong shields. Could eliminate all their anti air easy with just one redeemer.
Ultimately the problem is marketing. Pimped out overpowered ship sells for a lot. Reality sets in, planned or unplanned, and after the cash grab the balancing comes in. Not the most ethical approach with 10 years of game development when we could have learned from this already.
personally this is something i'd expect and hope from the devs attempting to 'rebalance' a ship, like if you think the ship's invested too many points int the str and wanna reduce it? sure but instead of removing the point, reallocate it it's other stats, in this case it's agi which i have no qualms
sure it loses some fire power but in return it's more maneuverable than before which i wholesomely welcome it, i really the like the Deemer as to me it's like a small ver of the Perseus, but at the moment pre 24.2 it's movement is too sluggish, heck way more sluggish than ships twice it's size, so when i'm quite happy that they finally starting to adjusting it, even thou at the cost of it's firepower but that can be adjusted depending on the guns that are used
2:53 - If you are looking at efficiency, and you have 2 crew, just get 3 Avengers. Its about the same and cheaper. If you have a full crew, 5 Avengers is better than one Redeemer in every way. There is no force multiplier to multicrew at this point.
Sure but Avengers can get absolutely bullied by other fighters. Couple half decent missile hits and the Avenger is dead unlike the Redeemer
Redeemer will be just as bullied by the fighters.
@@Brian-us2xz it has the scariest anti fighter guns short of a subcap now
@@Tarnfalk which can be safely ignored because turrets still suck and it still flies like a brick. Vanguard level performance is not going to save it from 3+ fighters with decent pilots.
One hurricane is better than a Redeemer now.
The Hammerhead should have been buffed, not the Redeemer being nerfed. The Hammerhead is a corvette class ship for goodness sake. The Redeemer nerfs were uncalled for.
Why does the hammerhead need a buff???? It's covered in the best anti fighter turrets available. What would you want buffed?
@@MrClassytangerine Let's be real for a second and leave the theory crafting/lore/daydreaming departments alone, the HH is supposed to be a *dedicated* anti-fighter ship but it sucks at its job big time, so much so that a group of fighters can easily deal with a single HH when if it really succeeded at its role it should be able to dispose of more fighters than it has crew and fighters seeing this ship should be avoiding to engage (for example if 7 people are on board of the HH on all the turrets then it should mean that you need *more than* 7 fighters, the problem is right now that even 3-4 fighters can quite easily deal with it unless they're totally brainded, this is very worrying as if it is supposedly the best anti-fighter ship in the entire game but if it is this bad at its job then I don't even want to know what the other non dedicated ships are like), don't forget that it is supposed to be a *fleet escort* ship, that means it's supposed to do PD/anti fighter and *defend the whole fleet* and yet, *it cannot even defend itself* , can you see why this is a major problem ? This thing's counter should be other capital ships and dedicated bombers, not light fighters, right now it's actually quite decent against big ships so this is kinda ironic
It is in desperate need of a buff but to be fair that applies to most multicrew ship which get easily annihilated by fighters so it's not like it's a HH only issue, still though a buff would've been nice as a temporary fix since we're not getting a complete rebalance of multicrew to make it actually efficient like it's supposed to be any time soon
Yeah, no, if the Polaris is a corvette, the Hammerhead is most definitely _not_ the same, it's smaller and it doesn't have the level of mission flexibility the Polaris offers.
At best, the Hammerhead is a classic gunship, it has the weaponry to fulfill its role and do a little more than that, but beyond that, it is not really capable of doing more than it's designed to.
@@Stormyy6310 that's literally all due to turrets sucking. How would you even buff it? Adding guns to the turrets would be silly and upping them to s5 would make it even worse at engaging fighters.
The HH is a sub-capital corvette. Means it's less than something like the Polaris, but it's going to be a whole other thing to deal with in 4.0 when we finally get the long awaited "Ship armour rework". Which will mean anything smaller than S4 won't even be able to punch through the armour of the Hammerhead. This is information straight from CIG regarding the eventual armour on the HH when armour is added. This change will make only it's turrets and engines able to be damaged by fighters unless they have the minimum S4 or larger. A fighter screen it will be.
I was there when it was 1st suggested, and I wanted my Gunboat and I waited and got it and loved it for what it was.. Now it is been Nerffed. So I will either let it sit hoping that they will fix it at some point or I will just turn it into something else.
does the corsair have improved handling now?
Good, balanced review
I don't think it's the problem that they nerfed this ship. I think the problem is other "do all" or "non-gunships" being able to outgun this. IMO a lot of rebalancing needs to be done.
RIP Redeemer... 😢
Great video. I think it's nice that the Redeemer is now as pleasant to fly as a Vanguard.
but still useless. a few fighters will eat it up
Whodda thunk it, CIG making well thought out changes lol. Now i just hope they scale those turrets down abit, abit like the new ones from the f8c and f7aMkII
Thank you Law!!
my main issue is this ship is less capable then it was before. c.i,g is more then happy to sell you a ship as advertised then nerf it but cig wont reduce the price. imagine paying 65k for a camaro zl1 then when you get it serviced they stick a turbo 4 cylinder in it.
The size comparison to the hammerhead makes me agree with it
Now please explain the corsair in the same way 😂
They have to increase fuel 0r8ces to the moon to make it more resonable to go one ship
Thx for the words of reason
We do not need another anti fighter, we have too many already. I am fine with the all the changes apart from the gun size change. This is just to sell new ships.
This kind of B's will be the end of this game of they don't stop the idiocy.
I have both the Vanguard and the Redeemer, so I suppose I have to ask if this flies like a Vanguard now... why fly a Vanguard? The deemers single player firepower is nearly compairable if not more, let alone adding crew? Kind of makes the Vanguard redundant?
Having owned both I don't see how you can rate the single player fire-power the same.
@@cardinalmite9183 I can look at the figures! The single pilot DPS on the Deemer is more than the Vanguard.
Sell the Redeemer, and buy a Hurricane.
@@CptFugu Na your alright I have a Scorpios and that does that job.
The hammerhead is grossly underpowered, you can kill it with any fighter if you have half a brain cell. The redeemer could have kept at least 1s3
Not if crewed no.... without a crew anything is just a target. You're telling me with 20 guns on 5 turrets you can't kill a single fighter? You haven't fought a crewed hammerhead then.... and a hammerhead without crew is like a fighter without a pilot.
@jimrussell4062 sorry if I did not state crewed, but yes crewed. If you stay far and stay fast and change trajectory to throw off pips, it's just a fat fish. Not to much hull health on the mid section either, not enough to stop balistic cannons on any medium to heavy fighter from killing it in 2 mins
I guess the changes now raises another question, why would I want my Vanguard instead of this ship?
Being nearly as maneuverable is not the same as the same in a turning gunfight, you are either better or worse than your opponents maneuvering speed. So if you are solo playing the
Vanguard is the better choice with better fire-power in that scenario.
Thanks for the update.
Which paint is that on the Redeemer and Vanguard in this video? The dark one in the beginning.
would be totally fine with 1 sz 3 shield, the 2 sz 4 turrets and the speed changes
I think the biggest issue is that CIG is awful at communication. I think these Redeemer changes are cool.
I got jumped by a group of five pirates while I was in my Redeemer solo. That ship was knocked up pretty bad but actually was able to fly it back to the space station for a full repairs, while two of the pirates ended up fleeing from the engagement. They left their brethren in smoldering piles on the surface of Aberdeen. If CIG actually nerfed the Redeemer in its tankiness, I don't think there's another ship that fills that role at that size. I won't melt it but I will be sad. If it has the same tankiness as a Vanguard then that's actually head scratching.
its a helicopter that was just as tanky if not stronger than a hammerhead and i had 4 redeemers. nothing majorly wrong with changes and can always change again if something is needed.
Revert it to its old self, Nobody complained about the speed at the end of the day. Id wager the HH needs stronger shields. Game isnt fully realized and it cant even tank a ship flying into it with full shields and have it bounce right off. Not to mention the HH should be able to ram ships.
Agreed. It shouldn't be a "fighter" at all. It should be heavily armed, heavily armored and SLOW. That keeps it from competing with fighters. It's meant to be a gunship to primarily hit ground targets and in a pinch escort SLOW ships in a convoy. It only had to be as fast as capital ships and cargo ships. So Connie speed. That was already balanced....
@@jimrussell4062 people are concerned less about the big picture and more about whats been put in front of them. "x thing makes sense based on whats currently in the game." Unfortunately the comparisons they make are to vehicles who are also broken and will require a rework or upgrade later on.
Really solid analysis! Glad to hear that these changes panned out in a way that, even if not loved across the board, are understandable and place it in a specific role in a fleet and the 'verse
Oh no, NPCs…
Does the Redeemer maneuverability feel like pre-nerfs throughout the years or still slower?
The maneuverability changes make the ship better against ships it was already beating. The shield and gun changes mean it's never going to be able to fight the ships it intuitively should be able to.
The A2 is better than the HH at doing what the HH is supposed to do.
Thr HH guns have to short of range, they should be size 4s with a 20% bonus to range so that fighters can't sit outside gun range and still be able to kill the HH. CIG could reduce the size of the guns on every fighter so they don't go above size 3.
CIG should look towards EVE online and how they handle ships/weapons!
If the HH has the same guns as fighter they can't "sit outside range." And it has a lot MORE of them. That's realistic.
@@jimrussell4062 some fighters have size 4 or size 5 guns!
What helmet/suit are you wearing at 4:11?
@LAWoftheWEST Gaming - Um... It was supposed to be a dropship/gunboat, not anti-fighter screener tho? I agree with the shield strength thing, but that would also speak to CIG's propensity towards overboarding ships then nerfing them later, which really needs to stop. I will say that it sucks they downgraded the main weapons, but after watching your turret video, it makes a certain amount of sense if you can then upgrade turret weapon sizes to compensate. If not.. then they literally just dropepd the size 5's to 4s, which is what the Zeus mk2's are rocking? and that seems... petty and unneeded. lol.
BEST ID THE REST SIR!
I think it would be right then to replace the s3 guns with s4
wait, so did they not reduce the manned gun size from 5 to 4??
The Pilot guns were always 4's.
Thanks for the comparison.This makes a lot more sense to me now. Still kind of stinks, but I now understand why they're doing it.
I'm glad I let myself simmer and waited for the nerf to get tested. I love my redeemer and initially I was pretty upset, but the nerf totally makes sense for the size of this ship. Thanks for the update! o7
Thank you.
But what about the 400i?? Please look into that ship a post a video. Thank you!!
If we look into the ship class based on the size, the Redeemer is still powerful compared to others even after the nerf.
It's like a heavy fighter on steroids, or like a cutty/freelancer/C1 class. No other ship in a similar size is that beefy and has that much firepower.
Besides, if I remember correctly, the Javline hangar bay is a dedicated Redeemer hangar, which means the Redeemer has never been a large/cap ship killer, instead, it's an escort ship that meant to kill smaller ships for the Jav.
what about the rumour that the pilot can now control one extra turret (the one at the bottom likely)?
Its just a rumor
@@lawofthewestgaming Does the piolet still control the bottom remote?
@@seane6616 the pilot still does
@@lawofthewestgaming nice! ty!
I'm not jazzed about the redeemer changes, half the reason I bought it was for it's firepower.
But this video does kinda help me come around a touch,
My worry is as you say one of it's selling point now is longevity in long rage excursions but one that's what the warden is two, it has 5 usable stations at current and a 6th if you want an engineer. There are 4 beds..... And no real food prep facilities. This thing can barely go a day or two without resupply.
I dunno perhaps on a fleet but it's size might make it near impossible for carrier ops meaning it'll need supply ships it's just kinda a mess so I dunno
The Redeemer has a full sized kitchen on its lower deck as well as coming with a fully stocked fridge. You can slide the doors on the glass downstairs and all that food and drink is consumable as of right now. The Redeemer certainly is a long range ship. It's four spare seats are for its crew minus the pilot when in areas where people in turrets will be seen as an act of aggression. So no, it really is designed for 4-5 people at long range, unlike most ships
There would be no need to balance ANYTHING if they would just stick to the physics of the natural world! Instead we can look forward to an endless supply of balance changes that are based on absolutely NOTHING but some idiots feelings! Hense how we got Master Modes!
the redeemer is a super heavy fighter vanguard is a heavy fighter so is the f8
Super heavy what? It is worse than a single hurricane now. With two hurricanes you'd totally outperform anything you can do with the Redeemer now.
It was supposed to be a Gunship, you know.
@@CptFugu it need the 2 turrets to be bumped up to a quad s4 turret top and bottom
How is this right? This ship was supposed to be a Gunship. A dedicated military ship that was a step between the S4 generalists, and the dedicated multicrew military ships. What happened to the ships role and concept? How come it is worse than ships that cost around $100.00 USD less?
How is it it should be nerfed because it is small? The Connie now, has the same armament the Redeemer originally had, mostly pilot controlled, a S3 shield, plus a snub, and it is capable of doing a myriad of missions and is almost a hundred dollars less expensive! How is that even logical?
The size comparison makes no sense for specialist ships. If you take the cargo bat and the snub from a Connie and stack the rest vertically you will end with something the size of a Redeemer too. That's because the Redeemer gives everything in order to be the best at its one mission. Cutting it down to a Vanguard's level is exactly the dame as cutting the Hull-A's cargo bay to a Nomad's size just because they both can fit in the same pad. Size doesn't matter for specialists because they give everything else in exchange for being the very best at their role.
As it was launched, the Redeemer was a good representative of what a Gunship should be. It was a bit sluggish, but not overtly so. The turrets it had were good against fighters and medium ships (until their rotation was severely cut). Abd it was properly protected. What you probably refer to as the previous Redeemer, is the cut down version we have after several nerfs. It is an incompetent ship because it was forced to be (after launch) by CIG. It has now been cut to the level of an S3 ship, and that makes it even more incompetent at its job. It still has the crew requirements of a large ship (S5), as well as the price tag of an S5, but it no longer has the protection or firepower to justify packing that many players in there rather than in individual ships.
You say that each turret is the equivalent of a medium fighter, when in fact they weigh in at about the firepower of a light fighter.
The Hammerhead argument is invalid. With the ship refactor it is evident that ship will have to go up a class in terms of shields.
Now we have one more heavy fighter, which is arguably WORSE than a Hurricane, and we have a hole in the progression for people who want to pursue a career in the dedicated military ships.
This ship was my biggest deception after they transformed it from the vision of the creators (4 horsemen of apocalypse). Now they bring back that vision, and i am more excited than ever. This ship with some adjustment inside will be the perfect special forces aircraft this game has.
Balance and Chanage is never fun.. but the game is about to go in to a big shift. AND alot of the old fighter needed a rework so there not to OP for the Cap classes. the new endgame will not be fighter v fighter.. its CapvCap and fighter will there to help support.
I think alot of player need to keep in mind that the game need to be balanced and sometime they over buff something befor other ship are done and they see it to OP for its role now.
So previously I noticed as a pilot you also lost the 4x pilot controlled weapons. It used to be the chin turret (the remote one) would slave to the pilot when not manned.... recently I only had control of 2x guns, did that stick or does the pilot have control of all 4 guns as a pilot?
Nope, lost control of that too.
@CptFugu awesome so instead of a crew of 4 (without engineering) you now need a crew of 5 to fully man it.
@@ddavis5442 Dunno, from what I';ve read since posting some people are saying they lost control of the small chin turret and some people say they didn't. Looking at what happened to the Corsair it can go either way.
@CptFugu yea just not much reason to put people in a ship that carries 5 when you can do 5 seperate connies. Yes you don't have the manuverability, but what you lack in that you can make up for in area coverage.
Sure you can say that each connie needs an engineer. So let's add 1 to a Redeemer as well. Now is 3 connies a better choice (each with a pilot and 1 engineer)? Or is the Redeemer fully crewed one? I don't know many that would say the Redeemer is a better choice.
I think the only thing this might take out is the Warden IF you get control of all 4 guns as a pilot. If not, the warden is the better choice.
3:13 fart?
melt
Thank you for doing the research and to come to and share this insight. It makes sense, I guess.
Balance is massively changing for all ships and components, as well as ship class, and armour. Taking on capital ships, with a fighter or gunship, won't be a thing. There will be a couple smallish ships dedicated to this, but for the most part, it will likely be similar classes fighting each other.
A tiny plus from the change: now you can replace the shields manually since they're size 2 instead of size 3, also has more redundancy.
Not sure how efficient it'll be to target shield generators to beat up a ship once we have engineering, but this would be a plus even while having a lower pool amount.
thanks
I haven't played SC in a while because my PC needs un upgrade first... But I do have a Redeemer in my hangar collecting dust and I am very relieved to hear that all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about its nerf was exaggerated, as I couldn't really log on and see for myself.
Then again I was never gonna melt it anyway because it was a gift by CIG that I cherish dearly.
Why did they gift you a redeemer?
@@alandab I reject your completely exaggerated negativity. There is no "real" redeemer. This is a game. As the kids these days say, get out and touch some grass.
@@tofupanda8168 That was at Gamescom in 2013 or 2014. CIG was basically forced to have a booth on the showfloor at the last second that they had never planned on doing and they had brought no people to staff it. I was a volunteer for the off Gamescom event that weekend and I was also at Gamescom that day before the doors opened and helped set up the little impromptu booth, I even got to pick the colour of the carpet 😄And later when Sandi Gardiner and that one poor community management guy were compeltely swamped with people I jumped in and helped answer questions and guide people through the little demo they had back then. I got gifted a ship as a thank you for that together with a couple other dudes.
@@tofupanda8168 Sorry, youtube decided to delete my reply for some reason. Since I don't know why I don't know how to tell you without the reply getting deleted agian. :/
I think we will see more adjustments before it's done. I just hope they have solved the "problem" rather than just shift it to a tier below.
You are right! It's now a medium fleet/convoy protector. Thx for your great videos!
Thank you for making this video. I like to think CIG has a method to their madness. This is just the most whiney community I have been a part of.
The Redeemer is one of my only two major gun boats (the other is a Retaliator). I love this ship for its versatility in multi-crew combat, which is the only reason I have it. If I'm going out alone, I'll use a different ship. Thanks for your review on the updates!
Lets Go LAAAAW! OG Star Citizen creator!
Appreciate this perspective. I loved the Redeemer when it came out as it was surprisingly nimble. Then it got nerfed and felt like a slug. I actually prefer the way it sounds now. Like the Corsair, it was OP anyway imo. The comparisons to the Hammerhead was eye opening and sealed the deal wrt the nerfs it’s just had. I know others won’t agree due to overwhelming loss aversion but that’s life.
I agree with the changes made to the Redeemer, no matter what people think. It was OP and needed to be balanced. Plus those giant guns looked like clown guns on there.
Thank you. Too many peeps screeching online about this without even trying it or trying to understand it and No one talks about range and longevity in combat when comparing fighters and larger ships. Short sighted citizens abound. Anyone who’s been in one of these and gave it a once over knows those big components aren’t fitting up and down a ladder.
hehe ok try and understand.. it flys a bit worse than a vanguard and its shields are useless... i few fighters eat it up now.. its useless..
Worse than the Connie now, which is much cheaper and multi-role. Arguably worse than a single Hurricane. Definitively worse than 5 people taking out their own fighters, regardless of their class.