The way I see the Valkyrie, Paladin, and Redeemer is colored by my time in the Navy. I equate the Valkyrie with the CH-47 Chinook, people mover with some vehicle ability, some weapons for infiltration/exfiltration cover fire. The Redeemer is like the UH-60 Blackhawk, specifically the Direct Action Penetrator (DAP) variant, some troops with a heavier weapon load for direct support on the ground. The Paladin is an AH-64 Apache. All firepower, no frills, kill everything on the ground so that the 47's and 60's can swoop in to land the troops after. I've seen a lot of folks talking about ship-ship action, but you have to remember that base building is coming soon(tm) which means that legit ground combat action is also coming with it.
as an operator who served in the war and leveled up many times, seeing a lot of good men get lost in pvp battles, I've gotta say these civvies just don't understand
The price can be anything they think gets them most money without making people look at them funny. Its a virtual item without duplication cost to them.
It feels like they are using gunship in 2 distinct senses for these 2 ships. For the redeemer with the current loadout it’s more like a helicopter gunship, meant to provide fire support and take out vehicles or attack bases from a nimble platform. While the paladin (and old slow heavy redeemer) is more like a naval gunship, a light warship smaller than a corvette designed to mainly be a threat to enemy merchant or pirate ships but can provide additional fire in a fleet battle if needed.
Every ship definitely should have some cargo grids. Now that we no longer have universal ship storage on all ships, one needs to bring their ship storage with them.
I disagree. I think the redeemer is more fast anti-fighter, anti-infantry ship, where the Paladin I think will be more heavy covering fire and take a beating covering insertions of troops and boarding craft.
I don't think most people's complaints about soloing multi-crew ships is that we don't want them to be better multi-crew. Every solo player I've heard talk about flying a big ship has understood that it will be better when fully crewed. I do both by the way, but speaking for the solo side of things I think most just want the ability at some point to have AI blades and or NPC crew to improve the solo capability. It should never equal the capability of a full crew. It's just about having options and about not having dead ships sitting in our hanger that we can't use unless we rally up a bunch of randoms and trust that they're going to be good and not grief us. When I'm with friends it's easy but we don't all get together at the same time always.
The problem is that the ship being "not as good" when solo'd isn't enough. Either CIG balance the game such that, for example, 5 players in a single ship makes more sense for doing a mission than those same 5 players each flying that same ship... or muticrew won't happen. That requires the difference between solo'ing a large ship and multicrewing it has to be vast. There is a dichotomy here, and CIG need to pick which of those two realities they want. They can't have both.
@Aethid while I don't disagree, that is the same problem that happens in nearly every game. The point is that it's a game. It's supposed to be fun. If players can't fly their ships then they won't be having fun. They need to figure out a way to keep people happy because they made this bed.
My question is does multi-crew equate to multi-player directly. My understanding was that these ships would have to be crewed, but that didn't mean player crew. I'd never expect actual players to hop on my ship that I play 2-6 hours per week and be stuck there.
People also pay for social security without knowing if they will get anything in return. My friend keeps laughing at me for spending money on an alpha with bugs, then proceeds ro spend $200 in clubs for vodka and beer. I guess people have different priorities.
I've always found it dumb that the Mole pilot didn't have access to a mining laser. If they did, I'd 100% have one. I get bored taking it out with friends because I need to run to the laser which takes time or we get 3 people for mining and then I'm just flying it around.
I honestly was fine with only flying as the pilot in the paladin. Its got a lot of firepower so i just saw it as a balance thing. Also the paladin is gonna be super slow, probably worse than the valk. The redeemer flies almost as good as a vanguard. One is clearly a small fighter screen (more turrets, faster, and full 360 firing arcs at all times) and one is clearly meant for heavier targets (less turrets, more firepower, more concentrated firepower, and you have to move the main firepower away from half of the ship)
Superheavy turret: Quad S5 (paladin), Twin S7 (Perseus) (S9 main gun) Very Heavy Turret: quad S4 (hammerhead) Heavy Turret: Quad S3 (Hurricane, Scorpius), twin S5 (old redeemer) (see also S7 main gun, quad S3 pilot armamant) Medium turret: Quad S2, twin S4 (C2, new redeemer, Catapillar, Carrak) (see also quad S2 or triple S3 main armamamnt) Light turret: Twin S3 (Cutlass, Freelancer, Vanguard, Retaliatorx5, Connie, ect) very light turret: twin S2 (A1 bomber, old connie, Arrow, Superhornet mk1)
It's funny to me everyone uses this as a "competitor" for the Redeemer and power creep...when this whole time the Andromeda has 4xS5 pilot guns and is cheaper and has WAY more missiles.....600i same but 600i is larger and costs about the same as the Redeemer, with 3xS5. Also the damage increase from S4 to S5 is WAY more than from S3 to S4.
I am just basing my opinion on the marketing, and lore of the Redeemer. But, in short, the Redeemer was marketed as a fighter hunter style gunship. Its weapons were configured in such a way that everything could face forward and be accurately aligned with a target in front of the ship. It's engines are a new technology, designed to give impressive maneuverability providing the pilot with a flight experience that you cannot find anywhere else in a ship this size. And its lighter hull armor further increased its agility while supporting an impressively advanced shield array. All of this wording seems to suggest, to me at least, that the Redeemer is designed to be an aggressive escort to ward of fighter attacks. Think a Hammerhead but instead of holding still, it attacks and chases its targets. Now the Paladin seems to be more interested in taking out larger ships, more akin to the Perseus but on a smaller scale. Its going to be slower, its turret isn't going to be capable tracking smaller targets, and its maneuverability will not be high enough to track fast moving targets. It will be heavily armored, and slow moving. Pretty much the opposite of the Redeemer. P.S the AC130 comparison CIG gave out was later a mistaken label attached to the Redeemer, but that did not stop players from running with it.
I don't get the principle of blast shields in SC. WHY ?? Does that mean the cockpit windows will be able to be broken or could that mean you could kill the pilot by firing at him from outside if the shield goes down? They have no real purpose outside looking good.
The double deck cockpit is the design I like the most from that ship. I could imagine the Valkyrie with the same kind of cockpit layout and seats to man ALL the turrets converted to remote turrets, and have a front door right under the cockpit to unload the troops. Or even better, that design while keeping the rear door, so you can make the Valkyrie roll-on/roll-off and deliver light vehicles and infantry on the battlefield ! (and seal the crew area as well lol)
The problem isn’t that they want multi crew ships to function better when fully crewed. The problem is their approach to it. CIG’s design philosophy to developing multi-crew play is one of enforced artificial limitations. Multi-crew play should enhance fun, not increase frustration.
you are playing a MMO by the very definition of that it forces the aspect of multiple people working together to achieve a goal what does needing multi crew have to do with anything outside the fact you are playing a MMO, if you are looking for a single player experience then stick to the single seat fighters then you do not have to worry about having multi crew, but if you buy a ship that needs multi crew and then whine about how its being forced on you then the problem is with you, not the game. nothing is being forced on anybody, if you want the big ships you will have to find some friends to crew it. all you have to do is ask in global I have never had a issue finding crew regardless of the ship.
@@dicegamer3466 what limitation are being placed on you, or are you considering not being able to solo around in a Polaris as a limitation? Once again, there is no such thing as a Solo MMO if you are a Solo player that is a choice, its not being forced on you, its in no way a limitation there are some crazy powerful solo ships. if you are in a Multi crew ship, you will need, well multi crew, just like you need a group in WoW for a raid, or a fleet in Eve. You are saying basically its not fair that you have to have multi crew in order to use the larger ships, and that equates to saying its not fair that you have to be in a raid to get the best Armor in World of Warcraft, or have to be on team in World of Warships. this like all other MMO's is based off people playing together to achieve a common goal. and that my friend will never change, but hey if you need a copilot My in game name is the same feel free to drop me a friend request I will gladly fly with you.
@Coldures Personality - I think the argument is more focused on that point that multicrew gameplay currently stinks..... and doesnt appear to be getting better soon.
I love how everyone is concerned about the guns, and everyone ignores the fact the Paladin has 1 s3, and the Redeemer has 6 s2s that eat 5 times the power, for half the shield hit points.
one thing i see nobody mentions in videos (albeit im only 3:50 into this one but I want to write this comment so here i am) with the confirmation of the Paladin's remote turrets being pilot slave-able.... Does this mean the galaxy's 3 remote turrets ALSO will be pilot slave-able? both ships have nearly identical promo art where it LOOKS like the pilots are shooting the remote turrets, but both ships never said that was explicitly the case, until the devs commented on it for the Paladin, so surely the Galaxy pilot will have some way to defend itself as a support vessel too, right?
The one thing I find odd is Mike argues that ships shouldn't come into the game until the gameplay is done, which I completely agree with. Cuz they end up having to redo the ship anyways once the gameplay is developed. But then he's complaining that a newer concept ship which already has their gameplay shouldn't come in before those legacy ships? Personally, I think cig should prioritize any ship that already has a gameplay loop and any ship that doesn't have a gameplay loop put on the back burner until the gameplay loop is built.
There are really only 2 gunships architypes you can have. -Engage in combat to do a ton of damage and draw fire -Insertion craft with its own fire support
The Mole pilot, when the thing works properly, does the scanning, rock selection and can view mining mode to direct laser operators. Ofc at present CIG have screwed it. The co pilot seat has nothing to do, canrt even scan! And ofc the perfectly good Corsair was emascualted just to sell this Paladin. (and probably the various Starlancers)
I bought the Paladin Shadowfall edition... I cant wait for this ship, It looks like a flying tank. Love the look but internals could be a bit better. Wish they would extend the back to fit a ursa or some infantry
I'm sure it will fly like a brick, just like the retaliator. The redeemer actually is very agile for being a gunship and I can see it out maneuvering the paladin with ease. Hopefully that moving turret can make up for flying like shit.
Mathematically, a quad S5 turret is similar to a paired S7 like the Perseus. Twice as powerful as an Ares, on a turret. (just like the Connie's main guns)
If we are being honest this ship will most likely release before some of the older ships there has been a noticeable difference in newer concept ships releasing rather quickly compared to old ships
I don't think most people complain that multicrew ships are multicrew. I think most people complain that CIG put this soft (or hard) requirement on operating a multicrew ship at all with upcoming Wear and Tear and Engineering, even though both of those systems are still at varying levels of In Concept. People also largely complain that multicrew ships are not even remotely competitive with single-seaters; you are far and away better taking six dudes in buccaneers (or, if you want to be flexible, three Bucs and three Gladiators), than you are fully crewing a Hammerhead. Wear and Tear should not be an overhead cost to operating a ship. W&T should basically just be component damage that accrues due to operating components outside their rated limits; running weapons too hot or thrusters too hard, components taking distortion or explosion damage, stuff like that - it shouldn't just be a passive, constant damage that builds up from the components being On. If you choose to run your ship carefully, Wear and Tear should be mostly a non-issue. Fuses are stupid, also, the idea that a power relay "wears out" over time due to just being in use.
Grabbed one with CREDIT...fully expect to trade it in once they de-tune the concept and announce that quad size 5 will become quad size 3 and can't be 'bladed.' Needs 2 scu of cargo grid near the door.
The Paladin wasn't changed, it was clarified. It used to say crew CAN operate all the turrets, not that only crew could operate it. Then CIG added which weapons the pilot has controll of. Hate on CIG if you want, but do it when it applies. The Redeemer also has more weapons/turrets, so it's not the same thing. Just like the Corsair can carry a Nursa, not the same thing.
It seems by this channel that they drop a new ship every week...even if you split the cost with 4-5 people thats still about the cost of a AAA title..for a single ship!
I think we get it before 1.0 the ships that are after 1.0 are ships that still need game features like passengers or true modularity. This should t be any more difficult to make than the zeus.
I honestly hope the Paladin is more sluggish and slow. Make it feel like it's carrying heavy firepower. Balance it that way. Slow and heavy, good armor and guns. It's a gunboat used for support. The redeemer should be able to outrun it without any issues. The redeemer may be less powerful, but it's speed and agility should be what makes it a choice over the Paladin Thanks for coming to my TED talk
This ship is coming out before 1.0 guaranteed Smaller than a capital. It's just a fighter. There's no exploration, no data running, no extra/different animation like with alien ships. It's just gun and (maybe) cargo.
See that's just it, Mike. You said are they brawlers meant to take out capital ships. The way I see it, they can SUPPORT in the process of taking out a capital ship, but a s5 should be looked at as the introduction of large arms fire. That means they can take out small "easily if they're dumb enough to get hit" medium and large ships. Large ships should still take a bit of time though. Against capitals? They should do what a s6 or larger does, but slower. Again, they're the introduction weapon size to large arms. To me, torpedoes are the killers. Large arm weapons shred components once all the other layers are taken out. I don't see the Redeemer or Paladin being the go-to capital ship killer. I see them hunting down fighters, bombers, and larger specialty ships "again with a longer kill time" like the HH, Perseus, and similarly sized. But their stomping grounds are within fighters and bombers. Ground targets as well.
Redeemer yes has 6 size 2 shields but they can actually almost use all of them because they have a size 3 power gen. Where as a retaliator also has 6 size 2 shields but only size 2 power gen. You can only really use 2.8 of the 6 shields on the retaliator. I'm assuming that's broken?
20:50 how many "slaps" like that do we get anually again? Dude, this is due to ship development pipeline not being ready for certain ships to bring out. They propably said "What's a ship role we can expand on with a new ship we can sell to pay salaries, while being able to kitbash assets and quickly utilize tech and animations already available?" and ran with this one. Seen loads of times now.
The Paladin has a smaller energy supply (s2) as the Redeemer with a s3 energy supply. So the smaller weapons of the Redeemer can be powered by more capacitors and therefore more ‘ammo’ than the Paladin. If this is well balanced, it would make sense to me.
No cargo bay. No ramp. For a ship this size ? Pass. You have the same fire power with a Corsair or a Connie (+52 missiles) and the cargo bay and the flexibility.
what precedent? They said they wanted different styles. Each builder has their own style, doesnt rule out that each builder won't try to have a similiar ship. They have done this in the past with basically EVERY fighter and every time the fighters get nerfed.
This is a great ship for some solo missions or with a friend but it will be more powerful with a crew and that’s the point you can solo but it will be better with a crew…. People are also forgetting the capacitors. You might have bigger guns but if you have small capacitors you’re a lot less powerful.
I know it's a dead horse, but I'm still waiting for an explanation on how the Corsair nerf is justified when the Connie still has 4 size 5 pilot guns, better HP, and more cargo. Really wish they'd explain how the change to the Corsair is "balance". All they did was make it worse in every way. The thing that "broke" the Corsair is the same thing that "broke" every other ship in the same way... The gimbal change.
5:30 rather have 2x 2s5 turrets than 1x 4s5 turret... that said... now I want a paladin, thanks Montoya :( 11:45 Valkyrie is a great ship, flies very well 20:35 lol Salty still thinks 1.0 will come out in next 2 years KEKW
The Paladin looks really nice but so does the Redeemer, my question is... End year 2025 numbers...(hear me out!) near the end of 2025 they nerf the Paladin and make a new ship slightly better to sell it for year end numbers as they always seem to do.
Think it’s time for CIG to play a game of: SHIP 1.0 or NO? Because I’m sitting on a Crucible, Vulcan & Apollo looking around like the gif of John Travolta.
I love to watch many content creators for Star Citizen. And I love to giggle at Montoya every now and again. But I tend to avoid those who only seem to speak positively about the game. Dont get me wrong... I am a SC enjoyer, and I huff probably more copium than most. But we need the realists like Mike, who points out the obvious things. I stopped pledging for concepts after i bought the Corsair. To give you an Idea, I melted my Vulcan for the Corsair, because even then it started feeling like certain things will never come out. And right now, I am having concept buyers remorse after the Corsair nerf. I will never pledge again. Anything I want, I'll work my butt off to get in game.
I'd be curious to understand how you manage your life between work, family, gaming. I'm trying to figure that out, would you mind sharing your approach?
What about the Scorpius Antares why does it need a copilot really when you consider if a pilot just flies and does nothing els what about a copilot just clicking a button on and click off when the pilot can do that
Regardless, it's another ship in front of the crucible.... Big sad. Gonna be weird if they make the crucible look like a hornet too, I really hope it's not a giant peener like the carrack.
I think having the guns controlled by a gunner vs the pilot is a good thing for the following reason. The pilot should be focused on flying in a combat environment giving the gunner also the ability to focus entirely on taking on enemies, specially for a large ship. In the real world, we never see a large ship captain control the ship and guns at the same time, you will never see that. Now if you have a smaller ship, then yes, the pilot having control of flight and weapons, then i dont see the problem, but some gamers want to be able to fly a damn destroyer sized vehicle and still fire all the weapons too.
you call this game a scam, however you sit here making money off of that, so who is the real scammer here. the game that is in fact playable in alpha or the guy calling it a scam while making money off it... that really does beg a question to be asked there. as for the Paladin vs the redeemer the redeemer is listed as a gun ship, the paladin is listed as a Heavy gunship equipped to take down huge targets, its heavily shielded and heavily armed, its much slower, less responsive than the redeemer. where as the redeemer is more useful its on weight class vs medium and heavy fighters. hence the down graded of the guns, and its increased agility. also the redeemer can be used as a de facto drop ship as well seeing as it has a number of spare seats for that purpose. where as the Paladin is just a gun ship, no cargo, no drop seats, just guns and just thee one turret that can move from top to bottom however that move will not likely be useful in a fight against a heavy fighter like a scorpious or Hurricane. in closing the redeemer has the ability to fight off and hold its on, the Paladin is not so lucky and will quickly fall to fighters with out a support group defending it
Problem i have with crap like not allowing a pilot full control over all system functions is just crazy. Its arbitrary. You think as technology advances to the point where humans can traverse the stars that humans lose the ability to automate basic control functions of electronics we have today? I think multi-role should be optional in any ship. That a pilot can fully control everything if they want.
this ship is a concept purchase and is by default cheaper, it will likely be around the same price point when it comes out, I think I paid 240 for the redeemer in concept I could be wrong on that it has been a while somebody feel free to correct me here
@ redeemer was 250 at concept but also that was many years ago concepts usually come out closer to the final price now. I do think they will end up close to the same price but then the paladin is just a heavier ship in the same category they said was too strong for the redeemer
None of it matters because CIG can't be trusted to even make the ship, let alone make the ship as promised. Spend over $300 just to have CIG nerf it a month or two after releasing it.
I can't support the Paladin at all given they nerfed the competitor to make more sales. I wanted to get one but can't support it given the marketing issues.
@@bdashrye182 this is true but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be fun, void crew does multi crew better. Need more things to do like scanning, painting targets, sharing targets with other ships and setting vectors for large ships
im sure its nice and all, but as soon as they are releasing something that competes, they will nerf it so you buy the next jpeg, they are not even hiding it
Even though Gunships are my favorite ship class, with my brother and I having the best time in a hurricane and crewing a redeemer together with friends when it was still good and free during events, I could not get myself to buy this. Only because I al starting to loose faith in SC ever becoming good enough to warrant me spending that much money on. :( If QOL and bugs improve, I'll probably just work for it ingame. Will probably be better anyway. Why would I want to start out with a dream ship.
The way I see the Valkyrie, Paladin, and Redeemer is colored by my time in the Navy. I equate the Valkyrie with the CH-47 Chinook, people mover with some vehicle ability, some weapons for infiltration/exfiltration cover fire. The Redeemer is like the UH-60 Blackhawk, specifically the Direct Action Penetrator (DAP) variant, some troops with a heavier weapon load for direct support on the ground. The Paladin is an AH-64 Apache. All firepower, no frills, kill everything on the ground so that the 47's and 60's can swoop in to land the troops after. I've seen a lot of folks talking about ship-ship action, but you have to remember that base building is coming soon(tm) which means that legit ground combat action is also coming with it.
Brilliant, the ships need to fit more into these exact roles
So we went from the Luke Skywalker fantasy to just doing stuff that could be done on ArmA 3 with mods.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD brain dead comment
as an operator who served in the war and leveled up many times, seeing a lot of good men get lost in pvp battles, I've gotta say these civvies just don't understand
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD I mean...Clone Wars had this kind of stuff....so the SW aesthetic still holds?
Redeemer was 250 in concept. So pricing will be more than redeemer when released
was it 250... I was thinking it was 240 but yes you are very correct it will be more than the redeemer once released
The price can be anything they think gets them most money without making people look at them funny. Its a virtual item without duplication cost to them.
@lassikinnunen that's true, but CIG prices ships to their made up ship economy.
It feels like they are using gunship in 2 distinct senses for these 2 ships. For the redeemer with the current loadout it’s more like a helicopter gunship, meant to provide fire support and take out vehicles or attack bases from a nimble platform.
While the paladin (and old slow heavy redeemer) is more like a naval gunship, a light warship smaller than a corvette designed to mainly be a threat to enemy merchant or pirate ships but can provide additional fire in a fleet battle if needed.
Every ship definitely should have some cargo grids. Now that we no longer have universal ship storage on all ships, one needs to bring their ship storage with them.
I disagree. I think the redeemer is more fast anti-fighter, anti-infantry ship, where the Paladin I think will be more heavy covering fire and take a beating covering insertions of troops and boarding craft.
I don't think most people's complaints about soloing multi-crew ships is that we don't want them to be better multi-crew. Every solo player I've heard talk about flying a big ship has understood that it will be better when fully crewed. I do both by the way, but speaking for the solo side of things I think most just want the ability at some point to have AI blades and or NPC crew to improve the solo capability. It should never equal the capability of a full crew. It's just about having options and about not having dead ships sitting in our hanger that we can't use unless we rally up a bunch of randoms and trust that they're going to be good and not grief us. When I'm with friends it's easy but we don't all get together at the same time always.
The problem is that the ship being "not as good" when solo'd isn't enough. Either CIG balance the game such that, for example, 5 players in a single ship makes more sense for doing a mission than those same 5 players each flying that same ship... or muticrew won't happen. That requires the difference between solo'ing a large ship and multicrewing it has to be vast. There is a dichotomy here, and CIG need to pick which of those two realities they want. They can't have both.
@Aethid while I don't disagree, that is the same problem that happens in nearly every game. The point is that it's a game. It's supposed to be fun. If players can't fly their ships then they won't be having fun. They need to figure out a way to keep people happy because they made this bed.
My question is does multi-crew equate to multi-player directly. My understanding was that these ships would have to be crewed, but that didn't mean player crew. I'd never expect actual players to hop on my ship that I play 2-6 hours per week and be stuck there.
Amazing that people are still spending money on this game
People also pay for social security without knowing if they will get anything in return.
My friend keeps laughing at me for spending money on an alpha with bugs, then proceeds ro spend $200 in clubs for vodka and beer.
I guess people have different priorities.
@pjdaprinz your friend at least Wil probably have much more fun while you wait for the elevator that never shows up while you sit there alone
@@pjdaprinz Comparing Social Security with a unfun, unfinishable, unplayable tech demo is wild.
Yes, it's okay for the pilot to do nothing but fly in a multi-crew ship.
^^^^i store credit bought this ship and I’m okay with it not having pilot weapons
People when the pilot does its job (actually flying): 😠😠😠
I think it's fun to note that the freelancer MIS and the Connie Andromeda are also considered gunships by CIG.
I've always found it dumb that the Mole pilot didn't have access to a mining laser. If they did, I'd 100% have one. I get bored taking it out with friends because I need to run to the laser which takes time or we get 3 people for mining and then I'm just flying it around.
The Redeemer’s current nerf is actually more in-line with its original concept, I don’t get the whining.
It's more enjoyable to fly and use. The complainers are the people not playing the game per usual
I love the new redeemer. Much better than beforen
Ppl seams to base the component of a concept ship to what it will do.
For me the paladin should be sluggish enough to lose to a Redeemer
I think that the issue is the timing and the lack of communication prior to it
This will be flyable at Invictus! I think they are better creating new ships vs fixing old ones
I honestly was fine with only flying as the pilot in the paladin. Its got a lot of firepower so i just saw it as a balance thing. Also the paladin is gonna be super slow, probably worse than the valk. The redeemer flies almost as good as a vanguard. One is clearly a small fighter screen (more turrets, faster, and full 360 firing arcs at all times) and one is clearly meant for heavier targets (less turrets, more firepower, more concentrated firepower, and you have to move the main firepower away from half of the ship)
Superheavy turret: Quad S5 (paladin), Twin S7 (Perseus) (S9 main gun)
Very Heavy Turret: quad S4 (hammerhead)
Heavy Turret: Quad S3 (Hurricane, Scorpius), twin S5 (old redeemer) (see also S7 main gun, quad S3 pilot armamant)
Medium turret: Quad S2, twin S4 (C2, new redeemer, Catapillar, Carrak) (see also quad S2 or triple S3 main armamamnt)
Light turret: Twin S3 (Cutlass, Freelancer, Vanguard, Retaliatorx5, Connie, ect)
very light turret: twin S2 (A1 bomber, old connie, Arrow, Superhornet mk1)
It's funny to me everyone uses this as a "competitor" for the Redeemer and power creep...when this whole time the Andromeda has 4xS5 pilot guns and is cheaper and has WAY more missiles.....600i same but 600i is larger and costs about the same as the Redeemer, with 3xS5. Also the damage increase from S4 to S5 is WAY more than from S3 to S4.
I am just basing my opinion on the marketing, and lore of the Redeemer. But, in short, the Redeemer was marketed as a fighter hunter style gunship. Its weapons were configured in such a way that everything could face forward and be accurately aligned with a target in front of the ship. It's engines are a new technology, designed to give impressive maneuverability providing the pilot with a flight experience that you cannot find anywhere else in a ship this size. And its lighter hull armor further increased its agility while supporting an impressively advanced shield array. All of this wording seems to suggest, to me at least, that the Redeemer is designed to be an aggressive escort to ward of fighter attacks. Think a Hammerhead but instead of holding still, it attacks and chases its targets. Now the Paladin seems to be more interested in taking out larger ships, more akin to the Perseus but on a smaller scale. Its going to be slower, its turret isn't going to be capable tracking smaller targets, and its maneuverability will not be high enough to track fast moving targets. It will be heavily armored, and slow moving. Pretty much the opposite of the Redeemer. P.S the AC130 comparison CIG gave out was later a mistaken label attached to the Redeemer, but that did not stop players from running with it.
Yes
Thought the starlancer tac was the c130 equivalent
I don't get the principle of blast shields in SC. WHY ?? Does that mean the cockpit windows will be able to be broken or could that mean you could kill the pilot by firing at him from outside if the shield goes down?
They have no real purpose outside looking good.
You used to be able to snipe a pilot through window with ballistic cannons.
When? 2.7 ?? I don't remember that and I pledged back in 2014
The double deck cockpit is the design I like the most from that ship. I could imagine the Valkyrie with the same kind of cockpit layout and seats to man ALL the turrets converted to remote turrets, and have a front door right under the cockpit to unload the troops. Or even better, that design while keeping the rear door, so you can make the Valkyrie roll-on/roll-off and deliver light vehicles and infantry on the battlefield ! (and seal the crew area as well lol)
The problem isn’t that they want multi crew ships to function better when fully crewed. The problem is their approach to it. CIG’s design philosophy to developing multi-crew play is one of enforced artificial limitations. Multi-crew play should enhance fun, not increase frustration.
you are playing a MMO by the very definition of that it forces the aspect of multiple people working together to achieve a goal what does needing multi crew have to do with anything outside the fact you are playing a MMO, if you are looking for a single player experience then stick to the single seat fighters then you do not have to worry about having multi crew, but if you buy a ship that needs multi crew and then whine about how its being forced on you then the problem is with you, not the game. nothing is being forced on anybody, if you want the big ships you will have to find some friends to crew it. all you have to do is ask in global I have never had a issue finding crew regardless of the ship.
I disagree. Multi crew should not be forced through limitation, it should be encouraged through advantage.
@@dicegamer3466 what limitation are being placed on you, or are you considering not being able to solo around in a Polaris as a limitation? Once again, there is no such thing as a Solo MMO if you are a Solo player that is a choice, its not being forced on you, its in no way a limitation there are some crazy powerful solo ships. if you are in a Multi crew ship, you will need, well multi crew, just like you need a group in WoW for a raid, or a fleet in Eve. You are saying basically its not fair that you have to have multi crew in order to use the larger ships, and that equates to saying its not fair that you have to be in a raid to get the best Armor in World of Warcraft, or have to be on team in World of Warships. this like all other MMO's is based off people playing together to achieve a common goal. and that my friend will never change, but hey if you need a copilot My in game name is the same feel free to drop me a friend request I will gladly fly with you.
@Coldures Personality - I think the argument is more focused on that point that multicrew gameplay currently stinks..... and doesnt appear to be getting better soon.
I love how everyone is concerned about the guns, and everyone ignores the fact the Paladin has 1 s3, and the Redeemer has 6 s2s that eat 5 times the power, for half the shield hit points.
Where in the concept ship pipeline does the paladin fall. Before the BMM near the Starlancer tac, after the legionarie.. just wondering.
one thing i see nobody mentions in videos (albeit im only 3:50 into this one but I want to write this comment so here i am) with the confirmation of the Paladin's remote turrets being pilot slave-able....
Does this mean the galaxy's 3 remote turrets ALSO will be pilot slave-able? both ships have nearly identical promo art where it LOOKS like the pilots are shooting the remote turrets, but both ships never said that was explicitly the case, until the devs commented on it for the Paladin, so surely the Galaxy pilot will have some way to defend itself as a support vessel too, right?
The one thing I find odd is Mike argues that ships shouldn't come into the game until the gameplay is done, which I completely agree with. Cuz they end up having to redo the ship anyways once the gameplay is developed. But then he's complaining that a newer concept ship which already has their gameplay shouldn't come in before those legacy ships? Personally, I think cig should prioritize any ship that already has a gameplay loop and any ship that doesn't have a gameplay loop put on the back burner until the gameplay loop is built.
"Speaking of scams, let's watch Montoya"
There are really only 2 gunships architypes you can have.
-Engage in combat to do a ton of damage and draw fire
-Insertion craft with its own fire support
You can tell Mike is married because he referred to the Redeemer's "Hair straightener" engines.
12:36 @SaltEMike it's a Scorpius that ate it's Wheaties, lol
I wonder if CIG every think "performance per player / value per crew" when they make ship
It has size2 shields and it means that maybe you can change an exhaust shield generator for a new one during combat
Redeemer has 6 s2 shields but it's impossible to have more than 2/3 power to them while also firing your guns
Every ship needs at least 1 or 2 scu. cargo grid. Need to be able to carry some things. Ammo reload, armor, food, etc.
The Mole pilot, when the thing works properly, does the scanning, rock selection and can view mining mode to direct laser operators. Ofc at present CIG have screwed it. The co pilot seat has nothing to do, canrt even scan! And ofc the perfectly good Corsair was emascualted just to sell this Paladin. (and probably the various Starlancers)
The mole pilots job is scanning and maneuvering for the mining crew. I personally don't mind flying instead of shooting.
I wonder if this ship will be able to have size 5 cannons
Would this fit on a Liberator ?
I bought the Paladin Shadowfall edition... I cant wait for this ship, It looks like a flying tank. Love the look but internals could be a bit better. Wish they would extend the back to fit a ursa or some infantry
I'm sure it will fly like a brick, just like the retaliator. The redeemer actually is very agile for being a gunship and I can see it out maneuvering the paladin with ease. Hopefully that moving turret can make up for flying like shit.
Mathematically, a quad S5 turret is similar to a paired S7 like the Perseus. Twice as powerful as an Ares, on a turret. (just like the Connie's main guns)
If we are being honest this ship will most likely release before some of the older ships there has been a noticeable difference in newer concept ships releasing rather quickly compared to old ships
I don't think most people complain that multicrew ships are multicrew. I think most people complain that CIG put this soft (or hard) requirement on operating a multicrew ship at all with upcoming Wear and Tear and Engineering, even though both of those systems are still at varying levels of In Concept. People also largely complain that multicrew ships are not even remotely competitive with single-seaters; you are far and away better taking six dudes in buccaneers (or, if you want to be flexible, three Bucs and three Gladiators), than you are fully crewing a Hammerhead.
Wear and Tear should not be an overhead cost to operating a ship. W&T should basically just be component damage that accrues due to operating components outside their rated limits; running weapons too hot or thrusters too hard, components taking distortion or explosion damage, stuff like that - it shouldn't just be a passive, constant damage that builds up from the components being On. If you choose to run your ship carefully, Wear and Tear should be mostly a non-issue. Fuses are stupid, also, the idea that a power relay "wears out" over time due to just being in use.
Grabbed one with CREDIT...fully expect to trade it in once they de-tune the concept and announce that quad size 5 will become quad size 3 and can't be 'bladed.' Needs 2 scu of cargo grid near the door.
The Paladin wasn't changed, it was clarified. It used to say crew CAN operate all the turrets, not that only crew could operate it. Then CIG added which weapons the pilot has controll of.
Hate on CIG if you want, but do it when it applies. The Redeemer also has more weapons/turrets, so it's not the same thing. Just like the Corsair can carry a Nursa, not the same thing.
No one believe that. Sales were low until they “clarified” that the pilot could fire the side mounted guns.
It seems by this channel that they drop a new ship every week...even if you split the cost with 4-5 people thats still about the cost of a AAA title..for a single ship!
I think we get it before 1.0 the ships that are after 1.0 are ships that still need game features like passengers or true modularity. This should t be any more difficult to make than the zeus.
I honestly hope the Paladin is more sluggish and slow. Make it feel like it's carrying heavy firepower. Balance it that way. Slow and heavy, good armor and guns. It's a gunboat used for support. The redeemer should be able to outrun it without any issues. The redeemer may be less powerful, but it's speed and agility should be what makes it a choice over the Paladin
Thanks for coming to my TED talk
This ship is coming out before 1.0 guaranteed
Smaller than a capital. It's just a fighter. There's no exploration, no data running, no extra/different animation like with alien ships. It's just gun and (maybe) cargo.
A Valk and a Scorp had a baby.
See that's just it, Mike. You said are they brawlers meant to take out capital ships.
The way I see it, they can SUPPORT in the process of taking out a capital ship, but a s5 should be looked at as the introduction of large arms fire. That means they can take out small "easily if they're dumb enough to get hit" medium and large ships. Large ships should still take a bit of time though. Against capitals? They should do what a s6 or larger does, but slower. Again, they're the introduction weapon size to large arms. To me, torpedoes are the killers. Large arm weapons shred components once all the other layers are taken out. I don't see the Redeemer or Paladin being the go-to capital ship killer. I see them hunting down fighters, bombers, and larger specialty ships "again with a longer kill time" like the HH, Perseus, and similarly sized. But their stomping grounds are within fighters and bombers. Ground targets as well.
Anyone gonna question the price difference between the paladin and valkyrie?
Redeemer yes has 6 size 2 shields but they can actually almost use all of them because they have a size 3 power gen. Where as a retaliator also has 6 size 2 shields but only size 2 power gen. You can only really use 2.8 of the 6 shields on the retaliator. I'm assuming that's broken?
CIG knows no matter how they treat their player base, they'll get money from them.
Missed the shadowfall with my Legionnaire, and I'm sad about it.
A reaction to the reaction of a reaction. smh As far as the ship goes, I refuse to even consider buying anymore until it flies.
I'm only using store credit from now on, but agreed, not buying concept ships anymore.
I got a chain going for the paladin, got it down to $220 so far. But I love the andromeda, I so hope it gets a rework.
the loaner is a redeemer - cig is trolling us
Starcitizen in 2042, this starter has 8 size 6 and can mine while racing.
20:50 how many "slaps" like that do we get anually again? Dude, this is due to ship development pipeline not being ready for certain ships to bring out. They propably said "What's a ship role we can expand on with a new ship we can sell to pay salaries, while being able to kitbash assets and quickly utilize tech and animations already available?" and ran with this one. Seen loads of times now.
The Paladin has a smaller energy supply (s2) as the Redeemer with a s3 energy supply. So the smaller weapons of the Redeemer can be powered by more capacitors and therefore more ‘ammo’ than the Paladin. If this is well balanced, it would make sense to me.
No cargo bay. No ramp. For a ship this size ? Pass.
You have the same fire power with a Corsair or a Connie (+52 missiles) and the cargo bay and the flexibility.
What exactly does it mean that something "Breaks CCU chain"?
The price increase frustrated people who bought speculative CCUs and who were expecting to be able to fill in gaps in their CCU chains.
what precedent? They said they wanted different styles. Each builder has their own style, doesnt rule out that each builder won't try to have a similiar ship. They have done this in the past with basically EVERY fighter and every time the fighters get nerfed.
sorry but anything smaller than a reclaimer/HH should have pilot guns, even if it's only if the guns aren't manned by other crew
This is a great ship for some solo missions or with a friend but it will be more powerful with a crew and that’s the point you can solo but it will be better with a crew…. People are also forgetting the capacitors. You might have bigger guns but if you have small capacitors you’re a lot less powerful.
The interior of the Polaris is rushed and uninspired.
Said no one ever 😂
It’s a common complaint.
I know it's a dead horse, but I'm still waiting for an explanation on how the Corsair nerf is justified when the Connie still has 4 size 5 pilot guns, better HP, and more cargo. Really wish they'd explain how the change to the Corsair is "balance". All they did was make it worse in every way. The thing that "broke" the Corsair is the same thing that "broke" every other ship in the same way... The gimbal change.
If I soloing some pew pew in space, I use my loaner Andromeda, if I need more dps, I take out my Polaris and crew it. 😆
That Redeemer better fly like an M50 or the are dead every time.
5:30 rather have 2x 2s5 turrets than 1x 4s5 turret... that said... now I want a paladin, thanks Montoya :(
11:45 Valkyrie is a great ship, flies very well
20:35 lol Salty still thinks 1.0 will come out in next 2 years KEKW
I know the best way to fix the size 5 gun problem make it a triple turret or just bump the size 5s down to 4 size 4s then the trade off is better
The Paladin looks really nice but so does the Redeemer, my question is... End year 2025 numbers...(hear me out!) near the end of 2025 they nerf the Paladin and make a new ship slightly better to sell it for year end numbers as they always seem to do.
what is the loaner for this ship?
redeemer
Think it’s time for CIG to play a game of:
SHIP 1.0 or NO?
Because I’m sitting on a Crucible, Vulcan & Apollo looking around like the gif of John Travolta.
Yes i want the paladin to have only fly for the pilot and my buddy with a bigger gun for himself.
im done buying concept ships that wont be released for years to come
That's my fearful larder - TEST Squadron BEST SQUARDON!!!
They’re gonna create a medical version of the Paladin(Lay on Hands) to price out the Apollo
I love to watch many content creators for Star Citizen. And I love to giggle at Montoya every now and again. But I tend to avoid those who only seem to speak positively about the game.
Dont get me wrong... I am a SC enjoyer, and I huff probably more copium than most. But we need the realists like Mike, who points out the obvious things.
I stopped pledging for concepts after i bought the Corsair. To give you an Idea, I melted my Vulcan for the Corsair, because even then it started feeling like certain things will never come out.
And right now, I am having concept buyers remorse after the Corsair nerf.
I will never pledge again. Anything I want, I'll work my butt off to get in game.
IDK if Star Citizen is a scam, but it is more and more looking like the only thing CIG is running is a confidence game.
I'd be curious to understand how you manage your life between work, family, gaming. I'm trying to figure that out, would you mind sharing your approach?
4:18 after an unnecessary buff, yeah! Is was not concepted that way. If you advocate to bringing out ships as concepted, this should be a non-issue.
What about the Scorpius Antares why does it need a copilot really when you consider if a pilot just flies and does nothing els what about a copilot just clicking a button on and click off when the pilot can do that
Regardless, it's another ship in front of the crucible.... Big sad. Gonna be weird if they make the crucible look like a hornet too, I really hope it's not a giant peener like the carrack.
I think having the guns controlled by a gunner vs the pilot is a good thing for the following reason. The pilot should be focused on flying in a combat environment giving the gunner also the ability to focus entirely on taking on enemies, specially for a large ship. In the real world, we never see a large ship captain control the ship and guns at the same time, you will never see that. Now if you have a smaller ship, then yes, the pilot having control of flight and weapons, then i dont see the problem, but some gamers want to be able to fly a damn destroyer sized vehicle and still fire all the weapons too.
soooo for 2 scu space you lose 4s5 to 4s4 and pilot 4s4 to 2s4 and 2s3 and 65k point of shield..............................................
Poor Valky abandoned to dust 😞
This ship is great. They will nef it.
I’ll pay 260 right now for an actual game CIG. Delivery real game play = get paid
Whats the point of buying a new ship today when a new ship in a week will be bigger, better, and cheaper?
Hair Straightner Engines haha
you call this game a scam, however you sit here making money off of that, so who is the real scammer here. the game that is in fact playable in alpha or the guy calling it a scam while making money off it... that really does beg a question to be asked there.
as for the Paladin vs the redeemer the redeemer is listed as a gun ship, the paladin is listed as a Heavy gunship equipped to take down huge targets, its heavily shielded and heavily armed, its much slower, less responsive than the redeemer. where as the redeemer is more useful its on weight class vs medium and heavy fighters. hence the down graded of the guns, and its increased agility. also the redeemer can be used as a de facto drop ship as well seeing as it has a number of spare seats for that purpose. where as the Paladin is just a gun ship, no cargo, no drop seats, just guns and just thee one turret that can move from top to bottom however that move will not likely be useful in a fight against a heavy fighter like a scorpious or Hurricane. in closing the redeemer has the ability to fight off and hold its on, the Paladin is not so lucky and will quickly fall to fighters with out a support group defending it
CIG is the real scammer here. Until they release a product.
Problem i have with crap like not allowing a pilot full control over all system functions is just crazy. Its arbitrary. You think as technology advances to the point where humans can traverse the stars that humans lose the ability to automate basic control functions of electronics we have today? I think multi-role should be optional in any ship. That a pilot can fully control everything if they want.
wasnt the redeemer always supposed to be a dropship? the redeemer just is a mess of a ship development
Still no Q&A for the Paladin LMAO
People should wait for that at least before buying. Do I want this ship yes but no Q&A… lmao
The redeemer had 2 turrets with 2 size 5 guns requiring 2 gunners, and that was apparently too strong so now one gunner gets 4 on a cheaper ship
this ship is a concept purchase and is by default cheaper, it will likely be around the same price point when it comes out, I think I paid 240 for the redeemer in concept I could be wrong on that it has been a while somebody feel free to correct me here
@ redeemer was 250 at concept but also that was many years ago concepts usually come out closer to the final price now. I do think they will end up close to the same price but then the paladin is just a heavier ship in the same category they said was too strong for the redeemer
They are made for different tasks and the paladin is cheaper because its a concept
None of it matters because CIG can't be trusted to even make the ship, let alone make the ship as promised. Spend over $300 just to have CIG nerf it a month or two after releasing it.
I can't support the Paladin at all given they nerfed the competitor to make more sales. I wanted to get one but can't support it given the marketing issues.
Piloting the Polaris is boring as well. Not having anything to do is boring.
Lots of recent ships have been mid
when your the pilot your ment to focus on piloting the ship and not get hit LOL
@ no I need a fidget spinner in my cockpit!!!
its a capital ship, the pilot's supposed to only pilot....
@@bdashrye182 this is true but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be fun, void crew does multi crew better. Need more things to do like scanning, painting targets, sharing targets with other ships and setting vectors for large ships
I like the ship a lot. But I refuse to endorse it after they slaughtered the Redeemer.
im sure its nice and all, but as soon as they are releasing something that competes, they will nerf it so you buy the next jpeg, they are not even hiding it
Wait, let me get my wallet out. No really. LOL CIG is in denial. This ship is not real. It is vapor.
Even though Gunships are my favorite ship class, with my brother and I having the best time in a hurricane and crewing a redeemer together with friends when it was still good and free during events, I could not get myself to buy this. Only because I al starting to loose faith in SC ever becoming good enough to warrant me spending that much money on. :(
If QOL and bugs improve, I'll probably just work for it ingame. Will probably be better anyway. Why would I want to start out with a dream ship.