As far as the leaderboards go, it is also worth mentioning that during the entirety of 3.23, which is the patch when MM came out, the only map being tracked was the atmospheric combat map over Microtech. So any stats, including time played, were NOT tracked on ANY OTHER MAP. This was not the case in 3.22, which tracked all maps. So, with that knowledge, the number of players playing over 1 hour in 3.23 would be significantly higher than the 800+ given.
bro you were recommended to my page let ask you something is beef (of any sort) in a game that sells a $48k Ship but is still in a worse state then alpha releases ?
Why are you so Adamant to PROVE MM is fantastic. Why not accept that some players hate it, some like it, some don't know anything but MM. It makes more sense to just compare the two models, provide the differences, and let the chips fall where they may. Because no matter what anyone does, it's out of our hands. Let people have their opinions, you have yours. You don't need to prove you're right and they're wrong, nor do they. Avenger gave his opinion, he wasn't trying to prove anyone wrong. Your videos are a constant trying to prove everyone but you wrong.
I'm not showing up on the leaderboard at all, so the numbers might be higher. I have footage on my channel here (and hours and hours on my disk) to prove i've been playing.
@@PluckMe Please point to one example where I said was fantastic, or perfect, or anything other than a step in the right direction. In every MM video I state it isn't perfect, but it is progress. Also, because they are wrong. Simple as.
this game should not be "TRICK" based ot "SKILL" requirements like HOTAS and bullsshit you should be accessing this game with a Playstation controller or KBM like the MM stuff i don't think is the PERMINIANT but the Entry of the game like after market parts where HUGE meta in STar wars galaxies. I want SOCIAL TOOLS and ECONOMY to be in game SO WE CAN have some kind of NON combat gameplay and progression that isn't just making UEC to buy ships you will NVER FLY i want to upgrade the ships i got and BUILD My homesytead.
I'll admit, I'm a bit of an immature person and you are my kind of asshole, but I would love to see you actually get into a podcast style forum/debate with these opposing view content creators, and my fear is that the name-calling will shut any chance of those doors from opening. I get it, you have no interest nor time for something like that, but it would be a treat!
Yes they have. But it was a flight model dependent on a ton of tech that was not available ten years ago. Hover mode is still coming back when flight control surfaces are in. The slower combat speeds were already tried before, but they brought back with Master Modes. Physicalised damage was ALWAYS on the cards (it's even on the Kickstarter page), but they had to design a physics system to accommodate Chris' vision. Don't mistaken slow progress for developing features with "haven't figured it out". They figured out what they wanted when Chris first made Wing Commander, and that was the combat model he pitched back in 2012, and that's precisely the model that Star Citizen will have with all of today's modern technology. It's just that all of the pieces to bring it together took a long time due to a lot of other tech dependencies.
My central objection to MM is not the flight model moving to planes in space. It's that 12 years ago we were assured that Chris had a vision for a great game and that vision included NOT doing planes in space again, instead spending vast efforts to physicalize thrusters and make it torque/inertia/thrust accurate. After more than a decade of spending untold millions of backer money on chasing that they've decided 'ok yeah, planes in space it is'. There was no vision, there was no capability to deliver on their pitch, their 6DOF space sim was a pipe dream. That's what upsets me. How many aspects of star citizen has this happened with where they talk a big game, waste a ton of backer money then take the easy way out that they could have done on day 1? Well, physicalized salvage comes to mind. AI is supposedly best in the world yet they've had to scrap that a couple times and start over. CIG needs to learn their limitations and start implementing stuff more at their skill level like a functional paper doll UI.
Yea, the early iterations with moving thrusters gave completely different idea of what the future might seem like, granted, I am not surprised that the tech wouldn't be scalable for MMO level due to either resource limitations and difficulty of making spacecraft with delayed controls controllable enough for players.
None of what you said is true. Physicalised salvage IS in the game now, and physicalised structural salvage is coming with Maelstrom. Thorston had to repeat this several times on camer ana deven make a Spectrum post about it. As Buzz said, CR said back during the Kickstarter days that it was going to be WW2 in space... modern day Wing Commander. In fact, he literally says they are making a modern day Wing Commander in the Kickstarter video, and Wing Commander was WW2 in space. If you're objecting to that then you backed the wrong project since that's been the MO for 10+ years!
Exactly. There’s a 2013 post he wrote called “flight model and input controls”. Not once did it talk about planes In space. In fact, it spoke about trichording and how that is supposed to be part of the flight model. Newtonian flight physics. The page is still up on the RSI website.
@@BGIANAKy The game still has trichording and Newtonian physics. They simply changed the way they behave. But you completely skipped over Roberts still referring to Star Citizen as "this generation's Wing Commander", which -- as I stated -- was something he literally talked about in the Kickstarter video.
A little insight from my perspective: I think CIG did some marketing for 3.23 that pulled in a large number of new players who began playing to try something new, not to obsess over Master Modes. This group of players only knows MM and beyond 3.23, so it’s normal if it’s their only experience in the game. I didn’t play the game because of MM, and I was unaware that it wasn’t a thing before 3.23. It’s the only experience of the game I know, and it feels normal, leaving me oblivious to the huge debate surrounding it at the time. Also, I’m a huge Elite player, and coming from Elite Dangerous, MM kind of makes sense from that perspective. Nav mode is similar to supercruise/analysis mode, i.e., you can travel fast but can’t fight. SCM mode is similar to flying in local space with your hardpoints deployed; you don’t move as fast as in supercruise, but you can shoot. There are a lot of similarities between the flight modes in both games, which makes sense to me. The only major difference is shields going down in Nav mode. IMO the perfect space game would be a hybrid between Elite and Star Citizen.
I was also an Elite player before coming to SC, and I also find MM makes a lot more sense that the older FM. I have a theory that it's because MM is very pitch and roll heavy like Elite's FM. Pre-MM was very strafe heavy because of the need to bi and trichord.
Ya but that's what made it fun. U had to have fine control over ur ship, not just mash w. Ed always felt like an arcade game, while old sc felt like the expance.
Your comment makes a lot of sense. But we REALLY need the information for advertising in order to have a clearer picture. But yeah, new players have nothing to compare to.
@@BuzzCutPsycho counterpoint to ever thing that you say in this video.... pre master modes was much faster and thus much cooler and more cinematic. doing chases and bombing runs at jumptown at mach 5 was much better then whatever star wars larp we ended up in.
I hate to say this, but your logic is very bad. 300 people per hour play the old system and 800 people play master modes. we all know the game gets a big influx of play every time there is something new to check out. are your samples. Probably Even Avenger One played more time in the 2 weeks following the release of Master Modes than the 2 weeks preceding it. wanting to give it a good shake down. learn its ins and outs. that doesn't mean he "likes" it more.
Honestly don't know who avenger one is, most of of youtuber star citizen interaction is morphologis (this is also my first video of yours, which I liked). But I really do not like master modes. It's been a tough switch for me. I'm sure there are people that do like it, but the whole system makes the game feel artificial. NAV mode disables shields for no reason, switching to combat mode gives you an insane deceleration instantly, and by and large it's made flying ships that aren't fighters frustrating. From my perspective (largely non-combat) it has only taken away, and not given me anything. For that reason, I see it as a failed experiment that ruins the feeling of spaceflight. Last patch has felt really shitty since we went from master modes to master modes plus a vomit skybox.
The problem is MM is just a retread of the previous system before the last one. Star Citizen has gone through a total of 4 flight changes. All of them have had their issues. When Arena Commander was introduced as a playable module, the flight model was similar to MM where in movement with previous flight model's speed. Then the next reiteration saw a massive reduction of speed, a shift from medium to light fighter, reduction to pitch/yaw with slight boost to speed. The other model after that was a slight step forward because the game had to now adjust for larger ships, and the last model was just a interm patch that had vulnerabilities for exploits. MM was always planned to be in the game since 2016-2017. The Devs talked about it since then that the current models that each patch were on were just temporary to obtain data and telemetry for the ships. They have also stated that MM version as it stands is still at the ground floor with changes to the system coming in as data flows in. The game itself also needs a reason for players to modify their ships, as in engines, fuel lines, power plants, ect....MM provides a new avenue for customization. I think most if not everyone dislikes the idea of shields dropping during MM because from other sci-fi there needs to be a means to protect a ship from oncoming debris. The other is some ships should have a higher top speed than others, capping every ship at 200 m/s does not make any sense at all. So providing that we're going to see adjustments to MM hopefully.
In NAV mode the IFCS automatically redirects all power from weapons and shields to engines and coolers in order to achieve those higher speeds and maintain temps. It's like setting your power triangle to all engines but 10x. Makes sense to me. Anyway, it's always been "artificial" just in different ways. The new model actually more closely approximates proper relativity than the old model did. Not sure how it's "failed" when it's working as designed.
@@CitizenScott Its because most of the rest of the body has yet to be added on. MM version lets say 0 is bare bones. Come a year we'll get an updated (add on) to MM where things may change for example adding shields to SCM flight or able to toggle it cleanly. Then when engine mods become a thing (because we were always destine to modify the engines of our ships) it'd change even further. MM is a system that is going to evolve as soon as features start to be added into the game itself. People are too short sighted to even see this.
CIG said they made Master Mode to balance the overskilled few players. One of those overskilled few players is Avenger One. People stop playing arena commander and engaging in PVP because of the strategies some players use to win. There is nothing wrong with it you just have to be overly skilled and have a good joystick setup for the most part and have a shit ton of practice in arena commander. Half the time your getting your ass kicked. Some people stick through it most people give up. Which is the problem. But they did it to make it easier for more people to engage in PVP
i think we can all agree that master modes in its current state just ain't it. My concern isn't that it won't be good some day once adjusted, my concern is that they'll never get around to adjusting it. As it is, it looks like we won't get any real adjustments until 4.1 which is easily a year off. When simply mining or doing cargo contracts is this freaking tedious, adjustments coming later than sooner is not a good thing. I still think there were better game design options than this cumbersome mode switching. Itemization with stasis webs and whatnot would have been far more satisfying as a player, and probably easier to implement. Their obsession with making only a few ships able to interdict is just absurd
What are you talking about? Yogi already confirmed tons of adjustments for 4.0 since they will HAVE to make adjustments for engineering. HP pools are completely going away in 4.0.
Kinda sad to see you call anyone who doesn't like MM an "Avenger one fan". I loved industrial gameplay and its now just tedious and boring to fly now. We were promised something else entirely and if CIG wanted the WW2 planes thing so much, they should have made it on planetary surfaces with athmosphere and surface controls.
Nothing changed with industrial gameplay. Put it in Nav mode and it's identical to pre-3.23. Either you have not ever played Star Citizen or never touched Master Modes.
@@Billy-bc8pk I have been playing for every single big patch since 2.6 till now. 2.6, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, etc without the feel of needing a break. I have played 3.23 intensivelly because I liked MM at a start, until i started noticing all of the issues it caused. One example is how the SRV literally doesn't have a function anymore since you can't use a tractor beam and QT at the same time anymore. ANd even if these things could be fixed with yet another "bandaid fix", flying feels straight up boring, cumbersome and shallow than any of the other patches since 3.0.
@@CocainasBrokeBrain Then flying in 2.6, 3.0, and 3.2 was boring, cumbersome, and shallow since Nav mode is literally IDENTICAL to the flying in previous patches. And the SRV problems are temporary because the game is still in alpha development.
Some this is a bit short sighted I think, Following the money isn't necessarily a good metric when the majority of the money likely comes from new backers who have no idea of what master modes even is at the time of purchase. We would need real metrics to support any argument. I've given a couple examples below. You've just used Arena Commander metrics What did we get in 3.22 as far as features (especially that have an impact on Arena Commander) ? Basically Nothing except 1 ship to test (***) Additional Settlements and Outposts and new Jumptown Location at Hurston Structural Salvage Openable Containers Aopoa San’tok.yāi (Released in Alpha 3.22.1) X1 (Released in Alpha 3.22.1) X1 Velocity (Released in Alpha 3.22.1) X1 Force (Released in Alpha 3.22.1) Cutter Rambler *** F7C MK II (Released Alpha 3.22.1) Compare that to 3.23 which impacted Arena Commander (including unlisted control changes and AC is where most people setup controls) I've used *** again to denote TLDR: 10 Features that affect Arena Commander including some specific game modes. Star Citizen Alpha 3.23 Features Fauna (dogs - Kopions, birds - Maroks) (Source) Creature Hunting - New! Distribution Centers (Official Video) *** Engineering Gameplay (Arena Commander) *** Ship Weapon & Component MultiTool Repair (Released in Alpha 3.23.1) New Character Customizer Server Recovery EVA Rework (Flying) Interaction Menu Rework (Source) *** Visor & HUD Lens Rework MobiGlas Rework *** Master Modes in PU New Starmap FPS Minimap & Compass New in-game Ship Prices (Prices of larger ships increased) Reputation - Hostility Dynamic Crosshair *** Vulkan Graphics API New Water Simulation (not yet swimming and floating) *** Image Upscaling Replication Layer Update Vehicle Modularity (Retaliator modules) Ships that were released Ursa Medivac (Released Alpha 3.23.1) *** Saber Raven Firebird (Released Alpha 3.23.1) Mirai Pulse (Released Alpha 3.23) *** Hornet F7A MK II *** Hornet F7A Mk I *** Mirai Pulse (Released Alpha 3.23) MPUV-1T (Released Alpha 3.23.1) Retaliator Gold Standard (Released Alpha 3.23.1) Argo 1T Tractor (Released Alpha 3.23.1) And you're surprised more people played longer than an hour in 3.23, shit it takes an hour now just to take off lol. Of course more people logged in to check it out. 1 hour is also poor metric to use and barely scrapes testing time after logging in. These are also Arena commander metrics, which no-one cares about. Also wasn't there some arena commander events that happened with rewards ? Also your example of interceptors is in arena commander where the interceptor benefits don't matter. Regardless, I think half the thing A-1 Said are garbage also or poorly supported. I just want Content Creators to start being more intelligent and stop using poor arguments. 1. What I think are object facts are the old flight model needed to change. 2. Master Modes was a poor implementation to attempt to resolve 1. We just need to stop using poor metrics to support poorer arguments on all sides of these discussions please. But all Content Creators, please start demanding Game play and in-game rewards that aren't UEC over everything other discussion, or the game will be DOA and other points will be mute.
well said, this RUclipsr seems way too emotionally involved about a video game, and is just taking random irrelevant data to try and convince people he is right, kinda sad really
@@BuzzCutPsycho People play and support SC for what it can become. They practice, buy ships, and concepts, for the promise that they will see it eventually. But to judge how much people love or hate master modes based on the top level of the pvp community in AC shows nothing. 1. The PVP community is already small percentage of the overrall community. 2. There are plenty of people in master modes who play it, hate it, make a youtube video about it, and keep playing it the next day. These same players will practice to the height of their craft regardless of the shit CIG gives them. Playtime does not directly translate to enjoyment.
I'll go with stupid farm animals. I don't like Master Modes, I played it a lot and tried to like it, but I just don't. I was never a TOP pilot before master modes, but I had fun with it and wouldn't shy away from battles. Now, I just don't want to bother. I don't know if Avenger is 100% right, but he surely isn't all wrong (same for you, you make some very valid points). I hope one way or another (w/Master Modes or w/out) they find a way to fix it. Increasing the speeds would be a start. Subscribed.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Well I'm open to see them tune it up. Like I said, it doesn't have to be like the "old days", but I would first and foremost want some more speed. I feel like I'm driving through a 20 MPH School Zone. lol
No, high speed was the major problem of previous build. Combined with tricord and technical limitations and server latency it allowed the shit we were stuck for that many years. A1 wants that for reasons buzz mentioned. High speeds never coming back
Wow, 800 people testing out a NEW flight model over an hour, dropping to below *90* in the next patch ...when 2500+ people was the norm in the 2.5/2.6 days.
Why compare it to 2.6 when everyone wants .22 and before back? If you look at the stats .22 was the best patch for the old flight model with 300 people. In .21 it was 100 people. Also don't forget .24 just dropped. If you look at the leader board today .24 is nearly at 100 players after just a few weeks which took .21 the whole patch cycle.
Dude whole previous FM I was playing AC quite actively and you have seen always same people every day. PvP was happening there as there was no pvp in PU. Now with MM at least me and my crew are playing almost only PU and wee have so many fights. And we are exclusivelly pvp arrow pilots. Now we play more ships while most still fly arrows. Many years back we used to play a lot more AC as there was absolutelly nothing to do in PU, so we played only AC obviously since we only had one space station and few points of interest.
@@BuzzCutPsychono. It’s obvious you pick stats that suit your narrative. You can see my server density and even discords that used to be full are dead.
Sure, more people came back to try out master modes when it released, it doesn't mean they stuck around or still play that often now. Also, yes funding is up but look at the backer numbers for this year, they're down by about half. That means less people are pushing more money into the game to support it, not a sustainable model imo. I definitely believe master modes is one contributing factor to such a drop in new backers that we're seeing this year. It's easy to bend the metrics to your will to try and make a point.
I think Avenger One is a bit of a knob, but he isn't wrong. I thought MM was a necessary evil when it first dropped, I wasn't a fan but accepted something needed to change. After about 10-20 hours I stopped playing 3.23 because MM combat was boring. I had never been bored doing space combat before 3.23. I only came back to play with 3.24 to do some hauling/mining/salvage. The reason I hate MM has nothing to do with guns, or ship class, or speed, it's about how flight FEELS. It just feels wrong.
@@stuartriddell2461 I recommend watching Vergil’s response to a1’s video … they beat AVS in the old flight model during the last fight or flight which should translate to their opinion matters more than AV1’s.. Vergil gives a better opinion on both flight modes.
The final MMO needs some sort of blob vs blob. A Hammerhead is designed for area denial, to keep fighters and torpedos off the other larger ships. In the old flight model there was absolutely no cohesion. Watch some really cool cinematic fleet vs fleet videos, and fast forward to the chaos halfway through the video. Every single fight turns into Revenge of the Sith's Battle of Coruscant absolute madness. A Hammerhead couldn't even hit a couple fighters if they flew "right", how could it protect another ship?
12%+ inflation kinda sucks the wind out your sails on the sales point bro; plus them removing MMs from feedback because people complaining about it XDXD
@Kyle-sr6jm Did CIG raise the price of goods by 12% to match inflation? - because then we could talk about an apples to apples situation. The 35 atlas suit might be them testing that new price model, and I would say it is ugly. - Goods being a jpg of a space ship.
4:45 - Answer: Sunk cost fallacy. I'm really concerned that they still haven't made definite decisions on the model - for not one, but TWO games. Now that the first one is nearing completion, I got a bad feeling that no matter if it's good bad or otherwise, it's going to be forced onto the second product because it's most close to 'done'. So, whatever is in Sq42 is gunna be crammed down our throats whether it makes sense or not. Guess we'll see. Chris needs a manager to keep his ADHD in check so we can stop with the spastic 'every direction at once' development mentality.
@@BuzzCutPsycho That's my interpretation of Yogi's recent comments that MM is delivering what CIG wanted to achieve: allowing traversal speeds to stay high but returning to relatively low combat speeds and with limits on chording. Looking forward to aerodynamic control surfaces, personally, btw.
I'm going to bet that, like me, the majority of the people that played in Arena Commander were trying to figure out how to fly again before jumping into the PU.
@@PluckMe Arena combat is party there of offer fast instant action PvP and competition as an alternative to camping Hex. Death is harsh in the PU and harder to gain experience when half your time is spent riding trains and elevators and waiting for reclaim timers.
I wouldn't say the Majority. I went strait to the PU first and figured it out pretty fast. Then I went to AC to test out Swarm to see how I fared. I felt far more effective with the slower Max speeds than I did with the Prior flight model. No more constant jousting from the NPC's. My only beef right now is the Weapon balance(particularly the projectile speeds and ranges, they feel all over the place).
I’m not fed up. Had this game for many years, I come back to it from time to time to have a look at the progress, I think the game is coming along nicely. Yes development could be faster, but my happiness is not dependent upon a game, especially one that’s not finished. I have learned that everything wrong with the world stems from a misplaced sense of entitlement. Why people feel entitled to dislike the exact game mechanics before its release is beyond me. Stop trying to change something that you have no power to change. That will free up time to focus on what you can change in your life. I support mm and I hope its final version encourages fun and dynamic play that is not dominated by just one or two players or ships. please remember: . Tester ≠ developer . It’s just a game
With space marine 2 now released, nobody has a good reason to continue bashing their head against a developing game that frustrates them. At least in my extremely biased opinion.
to be fair i don't get the point of setting parts of the community against one another. It's not like Avenger One is lying he's being constructive and giving feedback as he see's it ... on a side note i think 2024 is a terrible year for gaming theres is a handful of good titles and tons of trash industry needs to get their act together as a whole
As one of the players who play Squadron Battle like I never used to, your explanation starting at 5:18 is severely lacking. I cannot tell if this is done with malicious intent or if you genuinely believe this. Either way, I will follow up with my personal explanation: Squadron Battle did indeed get more popular for 1) the obvious novelty factor including the F7A's, and 2) because MM did legitimately improve Squadron Battle and group fights. Group fights are the greatest and in my opinion the only notable strength of MM, as group fights are not only possible but also more strategic and allow for a wider range of playstyles. It's just more fun now. You cannot easily disengage from combat, positioning matters, and keeping track of the positions of your allies and enemies matters. Coordination is more important than ever. It's just not as stale and lame as it used to be in 3.22.1. Now, I do enjoy Squadron Battle. Let me explain to you why I'm still a Master Modes hater: For me, MM falls extraordinarily short in 1v1, racing, low flying, realism, and the general feeling of flying a spaceship. For me, the 3.22.1 FM felt more real and authentic, whereas MM is closer to Elite: Dangerous. It's not as bad, mind you, but it's one step closer to it. Master Modes has ruined my favorite activities, which are racing and 1v1 dogfight training. The skill ceiling is lower as well, which leaves me unfulfilled knowing that there isn't much I have to learn. Now I play Squadron Battle instead, and I do enjoy it a lot. However, it's not what my heart truly yearns for, it's not what I'm playing the game for, and I'd rather be doing 1v1 dogfights or racing. And that's why I don't like MM. I strongly prefer the 3.22.1 FM. My hope rests on CIG improving Master Modes and lifting some of the new MM restrictions that have ruined my fun while retaining its strengths in group fights. As an example, I would like to see the chord limiter reduced or even abolished so that strafes feel authentic again, bringing MM a bit closer to the 2.6 FM - which I greatly enjoyed too.
1v1 does not matter in an MMO, nor should it. Team battles and group interaction should always take precedence. You are correct, it feels lacking, but I simply do not care nor do most I am sure. Second, you can gussy this up however you want, but go look for yourself. Check the leaderboards across all versions. It's significantly less than MM, but by a LARGE MARGIN. Also, read the pin-3.23 only tracked one map. So, with only one map being tracked, a short patch cycle compared to its predecessors, and everything else... it was still the most popular AC has been in ages. Ain't passing the sniff test.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Thank you for your response! 1v1, light fighter combat, racing, and low flying do matter, I backed and loved this game for them. Star Citizen was made to appeal to a wide range of players; it's an MMO, a space sim, a sandbox, the game of our dreams. I understand that you don't value every single feature in the game, just like I generally am not interested in multicrewing, grinding, trading, mining, or hauling - but Star Citizen has been deliberately advertised with all of them in mind. The plan has been to create gameplay elements that bring players of different skills and interest together. No niche in Star Citizen is more important than another. Now with MM, Star Citizen has appeased one portion of the community at the expense of another. You should understand that if players lose what they have been promised in a game, this will result in a backlash. And again, you are reiterating how popular Squadron Battle is because of Master Modes, and I agree with you because group fights are MM's greatest strength. What is the point you're making here? That I should be happy because group fights are so much better? I already am. But it doesn't mean I'll be silent about the shortcomings of MM. Doing so would be not healthy for the game, as CIG need our feedback to improve it. Yogi has mentioned MM's shortcomings in ship handling and 1v1's and that we should expect changes to address these issues in 4.0 and 4.1. 1v1's and racing have been significantly more fun in every single other Star Citizen flight model that I've ever played under. I am hoping for a middle-ground solution that makes both sides of the MM debate happy. I doubt you value my happiness but I still value yours - because Star Citizen should be fun for us all. I will not watch this game fall short in any of the categories that it has promised us. If Star Citizen's flight model is not the best in the entire gaming industry, it's not enough. The best game deserves the best FM, and MM at this point is simply not it.
@@NukeSanityI don’t understand, isn’t racing and low flying still the exact same if you’re using nav mode? Or does tricording make or break it? Cause I’ve seen people doing those 2 things pretty competently. As for 1v1 isnt it still there but it’s just different.
i have to disagree with your opinion that every who dislikes MM are "simps for A1" i dislike A1 and most the people i play with have a similar opinion , but i can tell you now that hardly anybody from my play group enjoys MM and is really playing at the moment.
The issue with the "my playgroup" argument, while I do not doubt your experience, is that my org by and large enjoys MM. So no, you are not a simp for A1, and you do not like A1, and for that I was incorrect.
I don't think anyone hates you, I think you're just being somewhat obnoxious (not my preferred word, however necessary here). That being said the pre MM wasn't great either but MM isn't truly an improvement. Most importantly there's absolutely no need for so many modes.The rest can be tweaked and improved. That targeting on components (engines, etc.) it's overly complicated. Flight is more boring, it just is. Regarding numbers over skill, that's going to be a problem when organizations come into play, you may disagree with me, but that WILL kill a game when you have one org running everything in their preferred way. Keep in mind, starters are also more expensive, so chart would show more funding. Regarding playing in Arena, it's possible people played more to learn the new flight instead of flying in the live build. We need more data, it's that simple.
The image is a play on a meme. It was a joke-the "they hate him" meme-and I certainly don't think a lot of people hate me. And even if they did, that's fine too. I don't run this channel to have people mindlessly agree with me. If they do? Great. I try my best to respond to every comment at least once, but it’s hard to carry on multiple chains. The reality is, much like I said in the video, the old FM sucked as well, and even the one before that. This one is the most "playable" FM at its foundation for the average player-a good stepping stone to greater things. I have quite a few issues with MM. I do not agree with NAV removing shields, for one. And the inability of certain ships to outmaneuver is also an issue of mine. But the core of MM is consistent, manageable speed and understandable mechanics, and to me, that is what I will stand up for and defend. It doesn't matter what metrics I post, people will go against them, and it doesn't matter what subjective experiences I share, people will try to counter them. We live in a polarized world, and gaming is no different. All I can say is that, from what I have seen as a pre-MM player versus a post-MM player, I see more unique names in AC than I ever saw before. And my org, which has a lot of average people, by and large enjoyed the combat far more since we could stick together and engage together. Perfect? No. A good foundation? Yes.
@@BuzzCutPsychothe problem is that you shit on A1 but at least he has solutions and reasoning behind what he says. Not once have you sat there and showed facts to why master modes is a good idea.
@@BGIANAKy Sorry, when a guy make a 44 min video to send a message to devs, a message... you can trow it directly to the trash. This game is not a rocket science. He needs to make videos that way because his product needs to fit his bubble. For Christ sake, the guy defended for so long people should study flight, for hours every day, and them we notice that even their videos have a "high ceiling". 30 - 40 minutes about the same shit. lol He is unsuferable.
@@BuzzCutPsychojust done watching it all. Man the more I watch your content the more I enjoy. Thanks for your point of view. People really needs to think on their own and maybe that kind of content can help haha. Fly safe
but is it fun? I have never encountered a single person in the game that says. I like this way better. I can see why they are doing it. my idea is replace master modes with the power triangle, and let the power triangle determine ship stats like speed, dps, shields. that way its not such a jolting abrasive switch and gives the player more control and makes the changes to their ship feel more organic rather than forced by an artificial mode. Personally I feel like I was a much better pilot before that patch. Now I just feel crippled in a fight, no more running circles around hammerheads. Turrets can actually hit me now. I guess it kinda makes portions of the game impossible without buying the right ship. It is iterative progress, its not always a solid win. sometimes just a 10% gain.
I've encountered plenty of people who state the opposite. Which is why metrics of AC participation show otherwise. Also, the ratio in this video, and my previous one, also represent that. Look a little harder and try not to see what you want to see and you will see quite a few people like MM as a foundation. Check this comment section alone.
I think the reason why you haven’t encountered anyone who says MM is fun is because people who like it or think it’s just ok… don’t make MM and their enjoyment of it their whole personality?
@@Quickb3n oh it isn't flooded with them at all. This video is also at 78% plus like to dislike ratios. Download a browser plug in and check for yourself. Don't just take my word for it.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I really don’t care, just make it about the game. Calling people you disagree with “A1 simps” is pathetic. You’re a grown man, correct ?
Also just to clarify something about Quake: And I say this as a 10 year Quake Veteran Player who did play Pro in that game for a short time. My clan "Corrupt" won the Battletop Tournament at E3 in 2000, and got sponsored by Battletop. We got paid to play, and my clan became the #1 clan on the west coast in the U.S. I started that clan, I am responsible for its initial success, and later handed it off to a good friend of mine who lived in Arizona who went by the alias, "Burnzone." I personally trained this guy to be the best. And he took everything I taught him, and ran with it. I can't take all the credit the rest is his to take. But I showed him how to do it. I have also trained other pro players in RTCW at the time as such a few people in "Darkside" and "Exodus." Guess who trained trained most of the players in "Exodus?" Yes John Carmack didn't like Bunny-Hopping or as it was originally called "Strafe Jumping" He did want to remove it. It was NOT just the CIG elitists' of that game that wanted it to stay in the game it was the WHOLE FUCKING COMMUNITY THAT WANTED IT TO STAY. It became a game mechanic that OTHER games adopted, RTCW, CS, Doom, Call of Duty, Unreal Tournament to name a few. if something becomes a game mechanic it is no longer an exploit. That is the fundamental statement being made by these CIG elitists'. But there's a fine line between an exploit becoming a game mechanic in a game that was specifically advertised as a "Combat Simulator" and Tri-Chording being nothing more than an exploit which is by definition: Something that gives an unfair advantage to someone that other people do not have. Hence the argument about the Tutorial. If the tutorial showed everyone then it no longer is an exploit by definition. It becomes a game mechanic. The realism difference between a game like Star Citizen and those games are so far from being remotely close in comparison I wouldn't know where to begin to describe how stupid the argument being made actually is.
But tri-chording makes physical sense, that's how an actual spaceship would fly. If you fire three thrusters perpendicular to each other, you would end up with more thrusts than the biggest thruster. That's simple vector math, the very first thing you learn in physics, not sure what your argument is about, maybe I misunderstood it
@@Silverhawk-u2f You are assuming each thruster is exactly 1/3rd the exponent of the main thruster. Who said it was, or was even designed to be? In 0g, it doesn't take much force to change orientation or vectors. How fast you want to change it depends on the force being applied. Your example is akin to falling into a blackhole albeit on a smaller scale. At what point is it physically impossible for the human body to withstand the sheering force? If you believe in Newton's third law then a body must deform in some way or another to apply a reaction force to the external action force. Without the force acting the molecules will be at an average equilibrium separation with the (average) net force on each molecule being zero. Applying an external force will change the separation so there will be forces produced by the human body which will be opposite in direction to the external force. OR A rigid body cannot be deformed. But the stress is same as on an elastic body (which follows Hooke's law) "Hooke's equation holds (to some extent) in many other situations where an elastic body is deformed, such as wind blowing on a tall building, and a musician plucking a string of a guitar. An elastic body or material for which this equation can be assumed is said to be linear-elastic or Hookean." Or, to explain this more simply: The more force you apply to an elastic body such as the human body, the greater the affect on elasticity of said body. Rather or not you can do it isn't the argument here. What is the argument is realism as it relates to the human body's tolerance.
@@Fluke2SS what ? No not at all what I am saying. The sum of three perpendicular vectors will always be larger than the largest of the vectors it is made of, Because the diagonal of a cube is always larger than any of its sides, that's all I am saying. The first link I found on how vector addition works so that what I am saying is maybe clearer: ruclips.net/video/dIsWuZXWWbE/видео.htmlfeature=shared
@@Silverhawk-u2f What you refer to here is called "Distance" not a vector. The diagonal distance of a cube is always larger than any of its sides. A Vector is not defined as distance, but rather a direction of travel, which cannot exclude acceleration variables until speed/velocity remains constant. If Speed/Velocity is constantly changing then acceleration can never be 0. And as such the force acting on an elastic body is always being applied. I think you are confusing definitions and coming to conclusions that make no sense because of it.
@@Fluke2SS A vector is a direction AND length, this is basic physics of how forces work and are calculated. The length of a vector represent the amount of force / acceleration (since they depend on each other they are proportional for the same mass) so yes it is about distance. Maybe I misunderstood once again or I wasn't clear enough, but I think you should read more on the subject, it seems you are not understanding what I am talking about. Sorry if that sounds rude, it's really not the intent.
To be honest, the previous fliget model made me feel so free in comparison to the restricted speeds we are using now. I don’t even do much combat but I liked the previous model a lot better
Yeah it's pretty horrible it's like they've forgotten they are space ships.why have a power management system of I can't power my ship myself. If I want all power to engines let me do it.
@@BuzzCutPsycho "Unlimited freedom is bad for gameplay" - there were already rules before. The ship's limitations and pilot skills determined the rules. You can't even clearly descibe the advantages from the previous modal in your video.
how about master modes in atmo and space is tweaked old model? it would be more realistic IMO... also you have to look at stats and all the possibilities. one of them being 800 master mode players because it is new and folks jumping back into the game and people giving them time to tweak it. however given time with it and seeing what they do and say (yogi's post for example) folks are realizing that they do not like it... i also think that what we have with master modes is a 2 level system of noob to pro {possibly 3 level could be argued} when it should be noob to good to excellent to master if you want long term playability IMO.
Atmospheric flight is going to be completely reworked in the near future. Today its basically the same as space flight but everything is more sluggish. In the future, its going to be closer to what you would experience in a plane. If you ship does not have a VTOL mode, you will not be able to hover in place for long. If you want to turn at high speeds, you will have to roll to the side and then pitch. Yawing wont cut it. People who are skilled dog fighters in space will not necessarily be skilled at dog fighting in atmo because the flight characteristics will be completely different.
@@Xaxxus It's gonna basically the same man. It's roll and pitch centric in both space and atmo. It will still be roll and pitch centric after whatever update they do.
I think they will add shields in nav mode in future. And I also hope they remove this stupid 5 sec shield delay after you got hit and balance shield regen.
I think there really needs to be some middle ground, as we have all put money in to this game. Keep master modes, speed limits, but reintroduce trichording, doesnt really feel like im flying a space ship without it.
@BuzzCutPsycho No, but when you're shredding around space stations, racing, and dogfighting, it makes it 10 times more fun. Again, compromise. I think with the lack of compromise and slow development, a large part of the playerbase is going to leave which is going to be a real net loss for the game and end up hurting the game.
The problem is that it isn't a game yet. It's a buggy tech demo with no real new content for years, constant wipes, and tedious group play with time sinks for getting ready to actually play on par with physically just driving 30 miles to hang out IRL.
@@crispy9175 Apologies, I was talking to @lordsheogorath3377 regarding his info on the constant wipes and no new content. I believe this is a little subjective as I personally find the addition of salvaging and hauling to be significant enough to be considered content, and new at that. Constant wipes is outright false, haven't had a proper wipe in years now either. I actually want one.
So, i'd be hesitant to measure the first patch into MM arena commander numbers against the numbers of the previous patch, which would have been the same flight model for quite a long time before the switch. MM was pushed very heavily by CIG, i feel like it's very reasonable to expect players to put it through it's paces as the "shiny and new" feature at the forefront of development, and not necessarily an indication of quality of the system itself. I'm interested to see how those numbers fair over the rest of the year.
I feel like even woth MM a lot of people utilize the interceptor ships to change modes quickly and run away. This needs to be fixed in mm in my opinion.
Seems to me star citizen is alienating those of use that just want to do our thing and not have to be a part of a group. Not to mention making ships outrageously expensive and de-incentivizing freight hauling and making that miserable. Some of us are on this for an hour or 2 and then we have to go back to life because people like me have a house, a mortgage and a job and I don't live in mommy's basement being waited on hand and foot and spending her credit card on this game. Just the thought that someone would spend 500 bucks in real money on an M2 is really insane. In game they were 5 mil, not they are what, 42 million now? Are you serious? I can see the day coming where I will no longer be able to play. Seems like the hand is cutting off the foot, eh eh ehm chris roberts....
I've already walked away. It's the ones living at home in mum's basement that are paying them all of their money. They don't care about anyone else. It's all about lining their pockets with money.
The Tricording is one of those deadlock topics that are difficult to discuss, both Parties have many valid points. It was originally a natural result of a very high attention to detail to physics by John Pritchett, yes this is a real property of vector combination. I think the main reason it is seen as an exploit is because it is cumulative, which is realistic, however when a physically accurate representation of vectoring gets combined with for the human body wildly unrealistic accelerations of 20+ Gs it has created a severe reaction time Problem, both on the human and server end. With those levels of thrust on LFs it would catapult people from 0-300 (300 m/s is about Mach 1) in seconds. This sentence here is a cool little thing to illustrate that. Say out loud “10g acceleration is faster than going from standing still to supersonic in the time it takes to read this sentence”. So imho tricording being seen as an exploit is more of a result of poor thruster tuning choices, not it itself being flawed. If we fought with more realistic values on thusters like 4-6 Gs Main and at max 2-3 Gs for the other directions then we also couldnt achieve anything higher than 12 Gs in a tricord (6+3+3).
Is Prichett still around? Also, yes, extreme Gs are never punished. I also think, from a game pov, flying at that degree was rather silly, especially since it is all i did.
Devs have repeatedly said it was an exploit and getting more speed and desync than is playable, there is no debate, they are the authoritative final word about their software. The Space Shuttle only hit ~11G at peak for less than 2 minutes at launch. Nearly every launch at least one person who has passed rigorous training sometimes still partially or completely blacks out when they hit max-q and why launches were mostly automated and the ship remotely controllable from the ground. Getting an instant 16-20G boost while already moving at speeds with a few Gs would tear ships apart and launch eyes out of skulls or deform them to temporary virtual blindness. Of course, we are using a stolen alien artifact to become semi-immortal Space Litches with 3d printed bodies so is realism even a valid argument? The other part of the trichord speed hack few say out loud that knows, and what some really wanted to keep, the important part of the exploit is being able to manually induce server desync nearly on demand so you could hit them, but they could not hit you. A macro with dynamic padding to pulse the afterburner just right at a certain speed made it reliably easier using an Arduino pretending to be a USB keyboard wired to a foot switch and EAC can't detect it. All those shots you swear you saw hit and should have killed them by now after joust pass 10 but didn't while they seem to be able to shoot and hit you constantly? lolz ☠ I know there would be lots of peeps that would love that to come back so they can call themselves high skill again.
@@eltreum1 This is were we disagree, it WAS added on purpose there is so much evidence to support it. But where it became an exploit is when players learned how to use the system to get more G's then the devs intended. I am not arguing for or against it, just that yours and most others take on history of it being always unintended is incorrect just because they say now its an exploit. They are using the term to mean outside of the devs intentions, and they are changing it to stop it. Which is totally fine the game is in development. Not sure why you are bringing up real life physics, nothing applies to the game. I never brought up realism other than their initial intention for the game was to have a realistic physics model and why it didn't work. the other point not sure what you are talking about I have no idea how to induce server desync? are you just confusing the game not being able to handle hit reg reliably at faster traversal speeds? The other part you bring up pip wiggling, and that is totally 100% still in the game, mostly because there is insanely low Jerk
I mean, trichording can be realistic, but it is still an unintuitive way to handle ship movement for most people. And there are so many realistic reasons for why trichording WOULDN’T be a thing. Basically trichording presumes that your manoeuvering thrusters cannot contribute to forward movement, and that they can put out maximum thrust at the same time as the main engine puts out maximum thrust. If any of these two conditions are not met, trichording vanishes as a technique. If manoeuvering thrusters CAN contribute to forward movement, then going forward will always result in the highest acceleration (in that case the final vector really is the raw main thruster max output + manoeuvering thruster max output). If the engines are competing for fuel flow and power, lighting up the main engine afterburner would realistically reduce manoeuvering capability and vice versa, resulting in inefficiencies when using multiple thrusters at once.
As a NON pew pew pilot, MM is clunky with it's drastic speed changes and modes in modes. Maybe I have to work on key bindings. I'd like to see them tweak the transitions for a more smooth experience. Also the automation moving in and out of cruise needs to be fixed. It's acts like a bug as it requires a throttle movement to engage or distingue.
Nav/flight mode in atmosphere is pure suffering. You might get a good initial burst of acceleration but the instant you do a single evasive turn, you bleed off all your speed and you're putting along at SCM, needing to accelerate again. This makes escaping ganks in atmosphere a tall order indeed, particularly for ships not intended to fight. I really hope CIG comes to their senses.
3:44 This picture gives a bit wrong info. Players normally do not pledge ships they can buy ingame for aUEC. Because there is no reason to pledge 600$ if you can buy 10Mil aUEC for 5$ and buy that ship in the game. It can be easily proven by looking at players ASOPs, everyone has like a 40k$ fleet, which is nonsense. These sell numbers on the screen are mostly about "new ships", not about quality of entire game. People just curious about new ships, that is it. It may not reflect anything about MM acception at all, just irrelevant info.
You're only focusing on combat in arena commander. The reality is most people in SC don't do combat or arena commander. Master modes made flying less fun, less realistic, and more complicated. After 10 years of enjoying a buggy, janky game, I stopped playing this year because master modes just isn't fun to fly.
Doesn't matter. AC is a combat test environment and the easiest way for combat ships to fight one another. And it is also the only available metric with public information. Spin it how you like, it is a factual representation of accessibility that CIG was going for.
I'm not spinning anything. I'm saying master modes in Star Citizen is just not fun. You want to play an arcade game and I get that. But most of us long time backers do not.
I joined roughly 2017 and have been used to pre-mm flight for the longest time. MM came in and barely changed anything for me. I change modes as needed and have been fine with it, not complicated at all. MOLE mining has been a little slower but not anywhere near frustrating or annoying. I am really having a hard time understanding the hate.
@@aaronhunyady This is virtually the 4th time they changed the flight model. I remember the first flight model. People who flew light fighters bitched. So they changed the flight model and light fighters became top over medium fighters. then they increased speeds. Then they did something else. MM was always the end game for flight even as far back as 2016. I think you're just too busy slobbering over A-1 to think for yourself.
Yo, this is insane because when A1 was on stream with Yoge hosted by Space Tomato, I though man he knows what he's talking about even though Yoge stood his own on what was going to happen with MM. I am so confused now. You make such a great point on the fences. I mean, I'm not great at fighting anyhow, but DCS did seem like the way to go...And in space games, I have played full newtonian physics and although I liked it because it's realism and a channlege, I guarantee a lot of the player base us not going to like that. And the side strafing thing is I really had no clue of. I just know I was doing it as a technique to dodge the bullets. At the end of the day A1 wrote the book on it that he spent hours on and what made him known in my opinion on SC my question is why wouldn't you fight for your baby even though it was not intended by the devs. Devs don't like it that's it Find something else that makes it a chanllege to learn. OH by the way leave my Gunz out if this! 😂
1. I think you are too offensive towards A1. 2. A1 is not insisting on returning to the old model; he is asking to increase the speed range we fly at. I think he’s right-when I fly, it feels unnatural. 3. In the old model, if you flew at full speed, you flew flat, which meant you died. 4. In general, MM is a step forward, but the speed is too low. 5. The multicrew system can be improved by adjusting how many bullets (ballistics) it can carry and how it can saturate the area.
1. Don't care. 2. Moving the speed up is returning to the old FM, as is restoring tri-cords. 3. No, you just got away. Nobody died in the old FM unless they wanted to. 4. Step forward, yes. Speed? I don't think so. 5. I rather hit things than saturate an area. I do not want to deter, I want to kill. Good comment though, glad you actually thought it out even if we disagree.
@@BuzzCutPsycho 2. It’s not about tricording - just the SCM speed range. 200 m/s is roughly 700 kph… we’re flying spaceships, not P-51s. I’m not insisting on using the combined thrust of all engines simultaneously, and neither is A1. The idea is to adjust the thrust output to maintain balance without exceeding reasonable limits. 3. In general, I miss the stasis web, like in EVE ;) 4. You can’t hit a fighter at long range due to geometry and game mechanics. To stick with the current model, MC ships should be able to saturate the area with fire, ensuring that the sheer volume of projectiles increases the likelihood of hitting targets. This kind of saturation fire would not only improve the chances of scoring hits but also create a deterrent effect, making it difficult for enemy fighters to approach or engage effectively. By overwhelming them with fire, the fighters could be eliminated or forced to keep their distance, preventing them from getting close enough to pose a significant threat. Ballistics, in particular, can penetrate shields and damage the hull, so this method could be an effective solution. In general, a fully crewed Hammerhead should be able to withstand and fend off at least 8 light fighters. Atmospheric flight could account for higher drag and reduce speed to 200, depending on how thin the atmosphere is. But it is another story.
@@BuzzCutPsycho "dont care" is so upsetting to hear from you, who just made a whole video insulting someone that can actually deliver well explained arguments, while not having any good ones yourself
I hate it. I bought the game before it. Still my hate not enough to not buy the game . I like 100 other things about game. So ur logic is wrong. Regarding spending money
I am with you on this one here. I have written a lengthly comment on the A1 video because he didn't even understand what JC said and showed that in the first few minutes of the video. He ignored that the participation in combat having increased after mastermode and brought up reasons for people not playing that haven't changed. And he willingly ignored that both more people took part in ship combat and that the number of players has increased according to CIG. And the absolute best comment: it doesn't take long to learn the basics, a couple of weeks or a month. Yeah right, weeks or a month of constantly dying and losing isn't much.... 😂 SC is not meant to be one of his competitive wet dreams. Having to constantly lose for weeks up to a month will kill SC for the vast majority of players faster than MM ever could.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I can not say how much i dislike this elitest attitude of some. As if ganes are made to be played by a small number of people only. They are not, and especially MMOs are played by as many different kind of players as possible. And Chris himself stated in his letter: Star Citizen is a game for everyone.
LOL people leave because of server stability and bugs/glitches. Imagine doing cargo missions then consoles are glitched or bunker mission where npc security turn hostile when you're done with the mission. Same with pirating, you bushwack someone then realize you can't sell the cargo you've stolen because salvage consoles are broken. Yeah, I'd quit because of that.
Sorry to ask, and its really off topic, but I noticed that your HUD in the squadron battles is different? is this old game play? or a certain way to turn it on? I really enjoy the look of it, i started playing when 3.23 first dropped so I don't know if that's how it looked before and I just don't remember or something?
7:26 To be fair to the point here, it may be that people are coming in to try out the new flight model and see what's going on to test if they like it. Most average players may make up their mind about whether they like it or not earlier than an hour of flight time, but certainly there's a cohort that would. If there's no major headline feature being added/adjusted in the next version then we would have a better idea on how well MM retains players if we look at the player numbers on that patch.
I'm not playing as much due to Master modes, and I feel that as slow as it may take for CIG to realize that they will remove MM. I also still support the game because they have shown they will eventually do what is best for the backers because that ensures the project's success. I also think you have some valid points for your perspective, but just because you don't agree with Avenger One doesn't mean he's wrong. I think you have some bias against him, and I am not a fan of his, but I feel he has described a lot of things that are in fact accurate that are hurting the game. Like I said, I will still support the project while they are working through a lot of this, and probably even if they don't fix it, but I can't imagine they would stay doing things that hurt them. Time will tell, but I think you are dismissing a lot of players opinions and playstyle with saying more players like it. I don't think the statistics you provide explain why the numbers are different, it's just you are saying why you think it's different. Time will tell.
Thank you. This is a problem in eso and other games with a dead PvP scene. You shoud not be 1vXing comfortably. I have no problem with a high skill ceiling in 1v1 and even enjoy that myself. Outside of that , new players should be able to enjoy combat and contribute with minimal skill. This is what draws people. If I start I shouldn’t be able to kill some expert.. but me and my 3 buddies shouldn’t have a problem killing you because we can put a mouse cursor on you and there are 3 of us. If SC allows skilled flyers to 1v4 or worse… that aspect is dead.
I can see a lot of your points and agree that Avenger made a lot of faulty arguments. That being said, I feel like you refute yourself in one area in particular, being the combat speeds. You essentially said that the higher speeds didn't have much of a reason since the only thing they allowed you to do was to radically accelerate to throw off the enemy's pip...but that's the entire point for me. The old speeds gave you the ability to evade incoming fire and make your opponent whiff their shots, while now you basically just sit there and shoot each other until one blows up. I find the latter to be much less engaging. And to be clear, I'm no PvP player, I avoid it as much as possible.
I would like to say that the reason you cannot "throw off" aim is due to auto-aim being on all weapons, and auto-aim being added as a result of the old high speed flight.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I'm aware of the micro gimbal aim assist, tho I always perceived the effect to be rather small. Didn't take me much adjustment from flying fixed guns on a fighter, over to the Ares back when they had disabled micro gimbal on that. I feel like it's more a matter of rotation speeds outpacing strafe speeds, not letting you get out of the way of your opponent's nose. Only exasperated when the opponent is using gimbal mode. I also believe they knew this, since auto gimbal got removed.
Great video. I am glad you came on the scene. I said it before but I have to repeat it, PvP players in MMOs are a very small group of the game but they are always the loudest. One thing I forgot to add to my previous dissertation a couple of your videos back is that these types of players (PvP) are never loyal to a game. Once they have taken over an MMO and the majority of players quit out of frustration, the game's population starts to dwindle. The PvP player no longer has anyone to shoot because of low server populations so they move on to the next new "hotness" (very evident in all PvP games, not just MMOs). The much greater population of "casual adults" (the vast majority of MMO players) don't do this, they tend to stick around for years, being faithful to one game (WoW, EQ, FFXIV, etc.). Some of the oldest online games are mostly PvE MMOs that still have healthy populations, even the ones that have been abandoned by their developers come back with fans running private servers. There is even a "nostalgia" trend in MMOs to allow players to play the old pre-DLC versions of the game. That is how loyal a fan base MMOs have.
I consider myself a die hard pvp player. It is all I do in games really. But I'm not blind to reality. If I want a game worth playing everyone other than me has to be catered to.
You have some really good points here. I would however prefer if we all could control our language a little bit more. It may all be true what you say, but it helps no one to have a colorful language about it. That said: good video. 👍🏻
Back in the day, I used to detach the weapon gimble on the Kore Reliant( for the size 3 hard mount) and attach a non gimbled mounted size 3 ballistic cannon. It had the second fastest strafing speed in the game at the time too. It allowed me to snipe most ships as they all mostly used shorter range lasers and missiles. If they got in close I just nose to nose orbit strafed them to death. I could kill at most 3 other ships before running out of ammo( the only down side to the better ballistic cannons vs using lasers). That ship used to be a low key glass cannon but they nerfed the shit out of circle strafe/orbit fighting when they added the weird G-force crap in space battles, and then further nerfed the Kore and it's movement. There used to be a few ships that if you took the dumb gimble mounts off you could get an entire size larger weapon and be dangerous as hell to any ship with slower maneuvering. I gave up on this game two or 3 years ago at this point. I used to wreck people while flying the mustang at one point by out orbit dog fighting them. After they nerfed the ships, I used to just kill people docked at stations because griefing was the only fun thing left. When they added the forced safe area's at most stations the game lost any fun left. I'm still waiting for the tractor beam on the Kore, but doubt they can add it in as originally promised where they said it would be able to stay attached to larger ships so you could orbit and bolo throw another ship( or stay locked on while front facing a ship and blasting so another ship couldn't shake you). I have over 15 ships with unlimited insurance too, I noticed they haven't been doing that anymore. Seems like new players are still getting screwed over. I had got several cheap ships with unlimited insurance just to use later with ships that won't come with it normally. Heck what ever happened the land rights they sold off as claims beacons back in the day?
Was that back when auto gimbal was really good? TBH I wish auto gimbals were back, I know that is not popular, and I don't feel too strong about it, but they were nice to have.
@@BuzzCutPsycho pre 3.0, I wasn't even aware they took the auto gimble out as it wasn't a problem to deal with at all. It made PvE feel more fun because you could roast the AI ships and do missions more fast, but the auto gimbles didn't add any advantage in PvP because anyone who could fly would be front facing and strafe orbiting so effective weapon distance was the most important thing, and then maneuvering speed( not straight line cruising speeds unless you were running away). Large multi crew ships used to be dangerous too because they could have multiple ballistic cannons all engaging you at once out of missile ranges so if you had less cannons( or smaller sized weapons) than them they would out damage you before you could get in close combat. The two ships with the EMP were the only hard counters but they couldn't equip big enough weapons to be a threat damage wise. Large fleets that can swarm a lone enemy or small group will always be the real meta. I never encountered more than 4 ships in a group on a server before though. I saw more groups of two than anything else. Maybe one day the game will be more solid and fun to play who knows.
Great video man. I’m so tired of these narcissistic “top 1%” type of people who clearly care only about their own ego. It’s so obvious by how they over-explain the most simple concepts. Great points on multicrew, as someone who organizes a lot of multicrew events for our org, it’s always a challenge to make sure everyone involved has fun. Let’s face it, just sitting in a turret is currently pretty damn boring for the most part. I also relate a lot to your last point. As someone who also only does this for a hobby, it’s so sad seeing all these people try and tear the star citizen community apart for just a couple extra measly dollars of the almost nonexistent ad revenue that comes with being a SC creator. It only goes to show where their priorities truly lie, and it’s not in the betterment of the game or community, but their own pockets and ego.
This is the issue when people make a hobby a source of revenue. It becomes business. And what is bad for business much go. Making SC easier removes the need for guides, removes the need for training and thus removes the need for those people. If that is their revenue, they're basically out of a job.
Wow, you Psy-op videos are hilarious. You're attempt to compare 3.23 with mm and 3.22 is flawed. After all, where did those 700 people go in the new 3.24 version? Why is there only 89 players with more than 1hr of gameplay in squadrons in 3.24? Could it be because the initial influx of players were just curious to try out MM? And then after trying it out and realizing its shit, then droped the game. I thought you said they loved it, why would they leave after one patch! Its less now than it was in 3.22
I think you have some very solid points that a lot of us agree on, we uh just not as vocal about it, hopefully, we get this in front of devs, so they understand that we are not dissatisfied with master modes, it just needs more time to cook is all, and maybe add some clear visible effects to show when we are changing modes, between travel, and SCM, which I believe is probably already coming. I look at this game as Freelancer 2.0 and in that game, your engines would charge up before you went into "travel" mode, but it was called "cruise" mode in that game. I, personally like the transitions to master modes, because it makes you really decide if I am going to fight, or I'm going to run, it's really not as bad as people make it out to be, and Starcitzen is still a skill game, just judging by how many wrecks are outside of the LEOs.
I only have 2 complaints about MM. 1) Space friction: it just feels wrong to me for my ship to slow down when I let go of burst when I boost in space. 2) I do agree that movement controls should be based upon thruster location, rather than the limitations of a controller. Other than that, I have no complaints.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I get that, but it still annoys me as someone who is in love with games like KSP. I do think MM is a step in the right direction though. Because of physics. I know they said its not a network thing. But my reason is a network thing, but it has nothing to do with the net code. In pre MM gameplay, we had speeds averaging arround 1000m/s. A reasonable ping time is 30ms or 0.0030s. When you multiply these together you get 30m. The longest length of a gladius is 27m. This means you could move further than the full length of a meta pvp ship, before it would even be physically posiable for a packet to travel across the internet and allow the game to update your position. Add this to the common pvp practice of pip spamming. (Also known as pip wiggle.) And well you can see why MM wasn't just a design decision, it was needed to balance game play. Especially for players with poor ping times. (So when players say that ships are too slow now, what i hear is, I lost my op advantage.) I know a lot of players, try to argue about tri-cording, but that was a minor issue, heck I'm not even sure it was an issue in the first place. I do feel the system they chose to fix it doesn't feel right. Personally, I feel that they should just reduce thruster output (for the tiny thrusters) and base movement on thruster power and position. (Basically a vector add procedure which is easy and fast in computers. Seriously your video card does this hundreds of billions of times per second to render any scene.) Sure tricording for some ships would make sense like this, but hey its the ships physics. Others would be crippled if you tried tri-cording.
My biggest problem with ship movement is saying you can pull 20+ g's. Now I don't know if that's 'realistic' for the thrust being generated or it's just some number CIG plopped in there just so there was a number for players to look at, but no fighter should be pulling sustained 20+ g's. If CIG can correctly compute g-forces and then limit the ships to fall within human limits I think it will go a long way into getting them to their 'realistic' combat they seem to be aiming for.
True. Thrusters are waaaay too powerful. CIG said they had to do that because of the introduction of gravity/atmosphere and we didn't have control surfaces or anything to counter gravity. So they increased thruster power to the heavens so ships could still fly in gravity/atmosphere. That resulted in the stupid flight model of 3.7 (or whatever it was) to 3.22 where ships were flying like bumblebees and the lead pip was pretty much always wrong. The flight model before that, in 2.x, was awesome though. Ships had weight. You were floating around. You could feel the inertia. It was soooo good. We had the best freaking space flight model ever and they removed it because they introduced gravity/atmosphere without a solution for flight in gravity/atmosphere. I so miss that flight model...
@@BuzzCutPsycho Gameplay balance is good and all, but it also has to feel good to play. Taken to the extreme if you want true gameplay balance, just give everyone a stationary turret with the same guns. There is your gameplay balance. But is it fun? That's the real question. It has to feel good and fun. If it doesn't, then gameplay balance won't matter.
I love MM and I’ve definitely voted with my wallet lol Especially cargo running it actually adds an element of game play and anxiety (which I like) about when to switch to Nav mode. Before MM, I rarely even thought about shield because I don’t typically seek out PvP. I guess, I just don’t get why people like A1 hate on it. Maybe it’s only people who give a shit about AC. (Which I obviously don’t)
@@BuzzCutPsychonot exactly hard, given the hovering tower defence game we're playing in 2024 I came over from DCS to star citizen so I could go faster, not slower, than my godamn spitfire in combat & the only reason I ever pledged a ship, was based on having what felt like an actual spaceship, with all the speed, functionality & tech I'd expect of one; whereas now, it just feels like a ripoff in game purchase, you'd see anywhere else. They sold spaceships with sim-lite levels of detailing & have essentially turned them into glorified bumper cars in space, with less speed, control, choice & fun to be had all round. Stacking bodies in MM feels like stacking Ducks on duck hunt.
This is the first video of yours I have watched and I'm now subscribed. It was suggested I don't call people names " so this idiot" you got me right there. I agree wholeheartedly with you. Too many of these light fighter elites forget there is more to this game and it's universe than single seat fighter game play. 5 light fighters should be afraid of a Hammer Head and engage cautiously if at all not giggle with glee and charge in.
Welcome! It is criminal how little light fighters care about big ships. And I am always advocating for these things to be monsters, but right now they are kittens.
I'm not sold but I guess I've been brainwashed by A1 and everyone on spectrum. I see the idea of limiting speeds being healthy (but not limiting speed to 150 SCM) I don't think I would mind a projectile speed buff outside of MM (just not massively faster with ships flying at a quarter the speed). I do mind tricording be removed. I do mind boost being super OP compared your normal "speed limit". I do mind all the vectors of motion besides forward thrust being clamped down on. I do mind the mode transition and deceleration when running out boost. I don't care about weapon balancing (or even really ship balancing) at all in this stage of development. We need to get the flight model right.
You aint brainwashed. For your own opinion, don't even have to agree with mine. A lot of the perceived issues with the flight model are all balance related however. From certain ships SCM/Boost speed to weapon damage/velocity. Those are seperate from MM. MM is, essentially, forced SCM speeds that can only be broken at limited times using a consumable resource.
I play Star Citizen pretty casually, basically only for a few weeks every update, when MM dropped I spent about 5 minutes working out how it works and it was back to business. I found it kinda funny how I could headbutt the control panel if I dropped out at full speed, and I'm abit iffy on the whole 'no shield' thing, but that's the extent of my opinions on it. I can see why the mechanical players care alot, they basically had their world turned upside down, but to assume that they even remotely share the same experience as the casual audience is abit silly.
I do not like the no shield thing. As for mechanical players? They have a new mechanic to learn and master. They will be fine. The new audience is more important.
Alot of good points in the vide. My main issues with the current flight model are the low speeds, especially realative to weapon projectile speeds. I understand removing tri-chording. But, I think they didn't compensate by giving more thrust to basic strafing as you seem to drift and not counter strafe fast enough from something your trying to avoid. This is to encourage de-coupled flight, use your main thrust to counter your current vector. However, decoupled is also not intuitive for general populace as you now need to keep track and compensate for wverymanner of things that have imparted velocity deltas on your ship. The amount of times my friends have fallen out the sky because they didnt know theybwere decoupled and so it didnt auto-compensate to keep them hovering while they checked their mobiglass is too numerous. Also, when your trying to make the game WW2 in space, which coupled flight better fits, just make decoupling a by product of engaging thrust just like a high-g turn in like Ace Combat and I think players would better vibe with it.
Would you be shocked to hear that I would prefer the game to force either coupled or decoupled and not give players the option to pick? I am THAT insane.
When I tested it I really liked the MM in Arena Commander, but I disliked it in PU. It felt totally different. I did a beginner bounty to enhance my reputation and my target was an aurora. You might expect the aurora would blow up quite fast when shot with 4 size 5 laser repeaters. I was quite stunned when I needed almost half a minute till that tiny thing finally died. I don't know what happened there, maybe it was a server-related issues and the hits not counted/registered or whatever but I had this issue often. At this time I simply abandoned doing bountys, I really felt stupid not being able to complete the easiest missions. Also I really dislike the feeling of switching the mode. Instead of instant deceleration I would love if I had to do a flip and burn like in the old model (or at least consider I need some time to decelerate to a save speed for approaching a station) What concerns me the most and is really upsetting: We had the old flight model for YEARS. We had it for a long time and I thought for a long time "well, this will be the final flight model, they will continue developing and improving it" but NO, in the middle of development they changed it entirely. And it't not just the flight model, other things changed in a similar matter as well. This is not how a game should be developed, if you do a space sim the flight model is the first thing you do and you stick to it. I really get a feeling they have no idea where to go with the game and how flying should feel like. At last, I have to defend the interceptors but in this case I'm very biased because I love the arrow. It's just such a beautiful fighter and I love flying around with it. In the case of balancing their target should be other fighters or interceptors but nothing larger than this.
MM was better in EPTU. What changed were terrible BALANCE decisions that people are attributing to the master modes system. Cannons, nerfed repeaters, broken hitboxes, some ships having unkilling noses, the list goes on. That is a balance issue.
First time watching one of your videos and I have to say that when I saw your background footage consisted of combat in a Connie and a Vanguard I had a feeling I was going to agree mostly with what you say. Great video. I don't like master modes because I think it just makes things more confusing for new players. The flight model didn't change under MM at all. Nav mode is the old way with disabled guns and shields while SCM is a speed cap and boost/afterburner. That's it. And I still think flight is bad. Ironically the Connie is closer to a better model as it has lower accelerations and slower rotation speeds that don't stop on a dime. Unfortunately the Connie is an old ship still running a flight model from 3.10. And the very same people who push for faster faster faster flight were the same people who were playing Into The Black where they convinced the devs to make the flight faster and faster right up until it ruined the combat and the game died. That is also not the first space combat game they have done this too over the last decade.
Love the big ships, glad to have you hear. Compartmentalizing things for people is a good way to teach, not saying that is what MM is trying, but what I will say is the NAV/SCM switch isn't too... fluid, if that is the correct term. But the speeds being manageable and forward thrust being dominate over "tri-cording" is certainly in my opinion an easier to understand system. And I think that was the goal, and it seems to in my experience have worked.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Subscribed lol. Tricording is as I assume "Triangular coordinates" which in itself a buzzword and obviously an exploit as it is not an obvious maneuver one would take to turn faster and in fact is a fault of the way the thrusters are coded. Hence Yogi mentioning that it would be removed. In the end I would just like to see ships fly forward more often than they did in the past using whatever mechanics CIG deem possible with the star engine.
@@BuzzCutPsycho yes but starcityzen was supposed to be « realistic » a sort of simulation. Something like a battlefield game not a Arcady, stat base, kids friendly game but a immersive simulation where you are not the greatest hero of the universe but a normy who make his way.
@@BuzzCutPsycho A game being a multi billion dollar game doesn't mean it's a good game, in 2024 it means it's a good business model that more than likely appeals to a Chinese market or children. Would you say Fornite is a better shooter than Tarkov because it makes more money? Tarkov is objectively a better shooter and has WAY more heart than Fortnite, but it doesn't appeal to the widest audience possible. Tarkov is still a VERY successful game though. Maximizing profits at the expense of the games soul. Buzzcut psycho logic. SC was pitched as a semi-realistic space sim. People invested money and now they take a 180 and make the ship combat Fortnite instead of Tarkov. People have a reason to not like it and it's not just AvengerOne try hards.
@@luckys9249"realistic" this "realistic"… But "too realistic" or "not realistic enough" when one don't like it. Fun fact: SC never had a realistic flight model in space, to begin with. Now what?
"They don't care about Star Citizen" "Classic case of player vs developer" I am fucking glad somebody said it without sounding like a lunatic. This, in my opinion, definitely stretches beyond Master Modes.
I've never been a fan of MM but the real issue is that RSI continues to change the flight model rather than complete the game to the point of a fully flushed out working core not over run with bugs. A game stable with all fairly modern computers and GPUs. This is not the case. There are several NVIDIA and AMD GPUs that do not work with SC at this time. This killed a lot of users who don't play now because the game is unplayable ATM for them. Instead they keep redoing the same systems, never reaching the goal. Instead of MM they could have simply adjusted the G-force blackout mechanic to cause blackout at lower G force at a shorter time interval with bonuses to ships with gravity generators. This would have fixed 80% of their problems for all classes of ships without pissing of half the SC community. Removing tri-cording was a mistake as it was a great feature. Adjusting the G-force blackout mechanic would have fixed the advantage without removing the feature. Now that they spent all this time and money developing MM, its hear but the problems still persist. MM was a mistake they don't want to back down from. I think it could still work in some form but they should bring back the old flight model for combat mode with the simple changes I proposed.
@@BuzzCutPsycho They really need to focus on game stability, economy, and crafting (including base building) I'd love to fly with you, but unfortunately SC is unplayable for me at this time as I'm running a NVIDIA RTX A5000 26 GB GPU that will not work with SC. The game crashes as soon as it finishes loading. RSI knows about the problem but won't fix it as I don't have a common enough GPU. It's likely that I will have built my own spaceship before RSI releases SC 1.0
Only thing that bother me with MM is no shield on Nav mode which makes it annoying for industrial ship, the rest, I let them cook, this feature is this new compare to the rest.
When streamers think just because they're popular they can influence the development of the game to their liking. How his neck supports that swollen head I have no idea.. you hit the nail on the head here dude. Not that it's hard to miss LOL
Being passive aggressive (along with overtly aggressive by sending his minions behind the scenes) is not respectful. Being (fake) nice does not give you a leg up if you're objectively wrong.
Are you surprised that Buzz and myself are not the ones banning for having a different opinion? We can clearly see this is the next little trap. Still copying Daddy D and not even doing it right.
Avenger One is a disgraceful person. I saw several videos from him, with CIG, without CIG on the line. I'm far from being a white knight. The game still a f tech demo after 12 years... but that guy is a doushbag. He burns devs everyday with this passive aggressive comments, sometimes accusing them liars and other things. I really cant stand this guy.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I disagree. The average player has bought the game, downloaded it, and played it for a dozen hours at most. Doing delivery missions etc before giving up. As far as combat flight, they couldn't care less about either model because they sat perfectly stationary and lost to an NPC Mustang. Combat is the main pull for people that CONTINUE to play the alpha on a regular basis. This isn't necessarily representative of the average backer. I base this 'fact' on vibes, 'common sense' and the other stuff I pull out of my ass. I just don't think people are as tuned in on this bickering as either side claims, most backers don't even know what Spectrum is.
Thank you on bringing up multicrew. I am *amazed* how many people say "well Avenger says he wants mastermodes to be good for multicrew/for the new player, so obviously he wants what's best for the game" as though people are incapable of obfuscating their real intention and motives by saying that it isn't the case.
I think it's rather Option C There is a sufficient amount of 50+ year old cattle that keeps fueling the Chris Roberts machine to make it seem like the game is still good, and those Legatus+ boomers outweigh any Master Mode hater that isn't dropping new money. As long as advertisement for new products and features strike a nostalgia cord on the boomers to make 'em think of the old pop culture movies, they'll keep pledging for the new JPEGs
GREAT ANSWER!!!!!! It is many of us think, and finally we have someone telling them whet we think. Another point is that these people plays the Leader and Wingman tactic, where the wingman is just a turkey to pull the fools. Easy kills then, and after 20 mins of that if you remain alone the opponents are in a great confusion,expecially if they are not all together in a Discord like them.
I'm honored you view me that way. Truly. Another note about that tactic is that it was much more powerful with tricords against players who had no idea what tricords were. Things will change now and team fights are far more dynamic.
You're telling me that the previous patch that's had roughly the same gameplay for years, had LESS players than the new exciting master modes patch? Do you think maybe it's because people wanted to test out the brand new MM? No? You think its evidence that everyone prefers MM? Okidoki
TBH when i saw AV1's video i thought he made a lot of valid points, as im not a fan of master modes either because it seems to punish the player trying to just gtfo vs fight. That said you bring up excellent counter points that seem to debunk the majority of AV1's talking points around people jumping the SC ship in droves when its simply not true, at least not due to master modes. I get why CIG wants to slow down dog fighting, to solve for the common denominator (player). CIG wants to set a low entry to each of the games disciplines and that makes sense financially. At the end of the day CIG is a business and in business to make money, it just so happens they're building an awesome space game doing it.
On the flip side A LOT of awesome videos got really popular just before the MM update, along with free fly event. Say what you want but that patch made the game highly playable, it was super stable on lower end hardware. The only flaw was MM. I'm not playing the game right now because MM got super boring super fast.
As far as the leaderboards go, it is also worth mentioning that during the entirety of 3.23, which is the patch when MM came out, the only map being tracked was the atmospheric combat map over Microtech. So any stats, including time played, were NOT tracked on ANY OTHER MAP. This was not the case in 3.22, which tracked all maps. So, with that knowledge, the number of players playing over 1 hour in 3.23 would be significantly higher than the 800+ given.
bro you were recommended to my page let ask you something is beef (of any sort) in a game that sells a $48k Ship but is still in a worse state then alpha releases ?
Why are you so Adamant to PROVE MM is fantastic. Why not accept that some players hate it, some like it, some don't know anything but MM.
It makes more sense to just compare the two models, provide the differences, and let the chips fall where they may. Because no matter what anyone does, it's out of our hands.
Let people have their opinions, you have yours. You don't need to prove you're right and they're wrong, nor do they.
Avenger gave his opinion, he wasn't trying to prove anyone wrong. Your videos are a constant trying to prove everyone but you wrong.
@@PluckMe lol it's an opinion 🤷♂️ I agree , you don't have too. It's gonna be okay either way
I'm not showing up on the leaderboard at all, so the numbers might be higher. I have footage on my channel here (and hours and hours on my disk) to prove i've been playing.
@@PluckMe Please point to one example where I said was fantastic, or perfect, or anything other than a step in the right direction. In every MM video I state it isn't perfect, but it is progress.
Also, because they are wrong. Simple as.
"i'm gonna be nicer in this video..THIS IDIOT AVENGER ONE"
ahahaha
😂😂😂😂
I am glad you found it funny :D
this game should not be "TRICK" based ot "SKILL" requirements like HOTAS and bullsshit you should be accessing this game with a Playstation controller or KBM
like the MM stuff i don't think is the PERMINIANT but the Entry of the game
like after market parts where HUGE meta in STar wars galaxies.
I want SOCIAL TOOLS and ECONOMY to be in game SO WE CAN have some kind of NON combat gameplay and progression that isn't just making UEC to buy ships you will NVER FLY i want to upgrade the ships i got and BUILD My homesytead.
@@BuzzCutPsycho oh it had me cackling for sure!
I'll admit, I'm a bit of an immature person and you are my kind of asshole, but I would love to see you actually get into a podcast style forum/debate with these opposing view content creators, and my fear is that the name-calling will shut any chance of those doors from opening. I get it, you have no interest nor time for something like that, but it would be a treat!
What concerns me more is after a decade they still haven't figured out the flight model they want and there's still control surface to come.
This is a valid concern. You would think a space game would have space flight nailed before anything else LOL
@@BuzzCutPsycho I mean, we're talking about a MMO that can barely house more than a 100 players, so... 😅
@@BuzzCutPsycho Well, maybe it will. I mean, is anything else in Star Citizen finished yet?
Tbf, there are very popular games, such as Cyberpunk 2077 and Halo, that went through the same shit during development.
Yes they have. But it was a flight model dependent on a ton of tech that was not available ten years ago. Hover mode is still coming back when flight control surfaces are in. The slower combat speeds were already tried before, but they brought back with Master Modes. Physicalised damage was ALWAYS on the cards (it's even on the Kickstarter page), but they had to design a physics system to accommodate Chris' vision. Don't mistaken slow progress for developing features with "haven't figured it out".
They figured out what they wanted when Chris first made Wing Commander, and that was the combat model he pitched back in 2012, and that's precisely the model that Star Citizen will have with all of today's modern technology. It's just that all of the pieces to bring it together took a long time due to a lot of other tech dependencies.
My central objection to MM is not the flight model moving to planes in space. It's that 12 years ago we were assured that Chris had a vision for a great game and that vision included NOT doing planes in space again, instead spending vast efforts to physicalize thrusters and make it torque/inertia/thrust accurate. After more than a decade of spending untold millions of backer money on chasing that they've decided 'ok yeah, planes in space it is'. There was no vision, there was no capability to deliver on their pitch, their 6DOF space sim was a pipe dream. That's what upsets me. How many aspects of star citizen has this happened with where they talk a big game, waste a ton of backer money then take the easy way out that they could have done on day 1? Well, physicalized salvage comes to mind. AI is supposedly best in the world yet they've had to scrap that a couple times and start over. CIG needs to learn their limitations and start implementing stuff more at their skill level like a functional paper doll UI.
10+ years ago CR said WW2 in space. I agree though it sounds kinda stupid LOL
Yea, the early iterations with moving thrusters gave completely different idea of what the future might seem like, granted, I am not surprised that the tech wouldn't be scalable for MMO level due to either resource limitations and difficulty of making spacecraft with delayed controls controllable enough for players.
None of what you said is true. Physicalised salvage IS in the game now, and physicalised structural salvage is coming with Maelstrom. Thorston had to repeat this several times on camer ana deven make a Spectrum post about it. As Buzz said, CR said back during the Kickstarter days that it was going to be WW2 in space... modern day Wing Commander. In fact, he literally says they are making a modern day Wing Commander in the Kickstarter video, and Wing Commander was WW2 in space. If you're objecting to that then you backed the wrong project since that's been the MO for 10+ years!
Exactly. There’s a 2013 post he wrote called “flight model and input controls”. Not once did it talk about planes In space.
In fact, it spoke about trichording and how that is supposed to be part of the flight model. Newtonian flight physics.
The page is still up on the RSI website.
@@BGIANAKy The game still has trichording and Newtonian physics. They simply changed the way they behave. But you completely skipped over Roberts still referring to Star Citizen as "this generation's Wing Commander", which -- as I stated -- was something he literally talked about in the Kickstarter video.
A little insight from my perspective: I think CIG did some marketing for 3.23 that pulled in a large number of new players who began playing to try something new, not to obsess over Master Modes. This group of players only knows MM and beyond 3.23, so it’s normal if it’s their only experience in the game. I didn’t play the game because of MM, and I was unaware that it wasn’t a thing before 3.23. It’s the only experience of the game I know, and it feels normal, leaving me oblivious to the huge debate surrounding it at the time.
Also, I’m a huge Elite player, and coming from Elite Dangerous, MM kind of makes sense from that perspective. Nav mode is similar to supercruise/analysis mode, i.e., you can travel fast but can’t fight. SCM mode is similar to flying in local space with your hardpoints deployed; you don’t move as fast as in supercruise, but you can shoot. There are a lot of similarities between the flight modes in both games, which makes sense to me. The only major difference is shields going down in Nav mode. IMO the perfect space game would be a hybrid between Elite and Star Citizen.
I was also an Elite player before coming to SC, and I also find MM makes a lot more sense that the older FM. I have a theory that it's because MM is very pitch and roll heavy like Elite's FM. Pre-MM was very strafe heavy because of the need to bi and trichord.
Ya but that's what made it fun. U had to have fine control over ur ship, not just mash w. Ed always felt like an arcade game, while old sc felt like the expance.
Your comment makes a lot of sense. But we REALLY need the information for advertising in order to have a clearer picture. But yeah, new players have nothing to compare to.
If the current FM works for "new" players then it sounds like CIG accomplished their goal, no?
@@BuzzCutPsycho counterpoint to ever thing that you say in this video.... pre master modes was much faster and thus much cooler and more cinematic. doing chases and bombing runs at jumptown at mach 5 was much better then whatever star wars larp we ended up in.
I hate to say this, but your logic is very bad. 300 people per hour play the old system and 800 people play master modes.
we all know the game gets a big influx of play every time there is something new to check out. are your samples. Probably Even Avenger One played more time in the 2 weeks following the release of Master Modes than the 2 weeks preceding it. wanting to give it a good shake down. learn its ins and outs. that doesn't mean he "likes" it more.
Go even further back. I gave you the info and tools to do so. Also read the pin.
Honestly don't know who avenger one is, most of of youtuber star citizen interaction is morphologis (this is also my first video of yours, which I liked). But I really do not like master modes. It's been a tough switch for me. I'm sure there are people that do like it, but the whole system makes the game feel artificial. NAV mode disables shields for no reason, switching to combat mode gives you an insane deceleration instantly, and by and large it's made flying ships that aren't fighters frustrating. From my perspective (largely non-combat) it has only taken away, and not given me anything. For that reason, I see it as a failed experiment that ruins the feeling of spaceflight. Last patch has felt really shitty since we went from master modes to master modes plus a vomit skybox.
I am 100% with you btw on NAV removing shields. I do not like it.
The problem is MM is just a retread of the previous system before the last one. Star Citizen has gone through a total of 4 flight changes. All of them have had their issues.
When Arena Commander was introduced as a playable module, the flight model was similar to MM where in movement with previous flight model's speed. Then the next reiteration saw a massive reduction of speed, a shift from medium to light fighter, reduction to pitch/yaw with slight boost to speed. The other model after that was a slight step forward because the game had to now adjust for larger ships, and the last model was just a interm patch that had vulnerabilities for exploits.
MM was always planned to be in the game since 2016-2017. The Devs talked about it since then that the current models that each patch were on were just temporary to obtain data and telemetry for the ships. They have also stated that MM version as it stands is still at the ground floor with changes to the system coming in as data flows in.
The game itself also needs a reason for players to modify their ships, as in engines, fuel lines, power plants, ect....MM provides a new avenue for customization.
I think most if not everyone dislikes the idea of shields dropping during MM because from other sci-fi there needs to be a means to protect a ship from oncoming debris. The other is some ships should have a higher top speed than others, capping every ship at 200 m/s does not make any sense at all.
So providing that we're going to see adjustments to MM hopefully.
In NAV mode the IFCS automatically redirects all power from weapons and shields to engines and coolers in order to achieve those higher speeds and maintain temps. It's like setting your power triangle to all engines but 10x. Makes sense to me.
Anyway, it's always been "artificial" just in different ways. The new model actually more closely approximates proper relativity than the old model did. Not sure how it's "failed" when it's working as designed.
@@CitizenScott Its because most of the rest of the body has yet to be added on. MM version lets say 0 is bare bones. Come a year we'll get an updated (add on) to MM where things may change for example adding shields to SCM flight or able to toggle it cleanly. Then when engine mods become a thing (because we were always destine to modify the engines of our ships) it'd change even further. MM is a system that is going to evolve as soon as features start to be added into the game itself.
People are too short sighted to even see this.
CIG said they made Master Mode to balance the overskilled few players. One of those overskilled few players is Avenger One. People stop playing arena commander and engaging in PVP because of the strategies some players use to win. There is nothing wrong with it you just have to be overly skilled and have a good joystick setup for the most part and have a shit ton of practice in arena commander. Half the time your getting your ass kicked. Some people stick through it most people give up. Which is the problem. But they did it to make it easier for more people to engage in PVP
i think we can all agree that master modes in its current state just ain't it. My concern isn't that it won't be good some day once adjusted, my concern is that they'll never get around to adjusting it. As it is, it looks like we won't get any real adjustments until 4.1 which is easily a year off. When simply mining or doing cargo contracts is this freaking tedious, adjustments coming later than sooner is not a good thing. I still think there were better game design options than this cumbersome mode switching. Itemization with stasis webs and whatnot would have been far more satisfying as a player, and probably easier to implement. Their obsession with making only a few ships able to interdict is just absurd
Video was about combat. Industrial will almost without a doubt get changes for MM to make it feel better.
What are you talking about? Yogi already confirmed tons of adjustments for 4.0 since they will HAVE to make adjustments for engineering. HP pools are completely going away in 4.0.
Kinda sad to see you call anyone who doesn't like MM an "Avenger one fan". I loved industrial gameplay and its now just tedious and boring to fly now. We were promised something else entirely and if CIG wanted the WW2 planes thing so much, they should have made it on planetary surfaces with athmosphere and surface controls.
I cannot stress enough this pertains to the combat side of things. I do not like how non-combat ships interact at the moment with MM.
Nothing changed with industrial gameplay. Put it in Nav mode and it's identical to pre-3.23. Either you have not ever played Star Citizen or never touched Master Modes.
@@Billy-bc8pk I have been playing for every single big patch since 2.6 till now. 2.6, 3.0, 3.1, 3.2, etc without the feel of needing a break. I have played 3.23 intensivelly because I liked MM at a start, until i started noticing all of the issues it caused. One example is how the SRV literally doesn't have a function anymore since you can't use a tractor beam and QT at the same time anymore.
ANd even if these things could be fixed with yet another "bandaid fix", flying feels straight up boring, cumbersome and shallow than any of the other patches since 3.0.
@@BuzzCutPsycho So you're saying physics should be magically different depending on if you're fighting or not?
@@CocainasBrokeBrain Then flying in 2.6, 3.0, and 3.2 was boring, cumbersome, and shallow since Nav mode is literally IDENTICAL to the flying in previous patches.
And the SRV problems are temporary because the game is still in alpha development.
Some this is a bit short sighted I think, Following the money isn't necessarily a good metric when the majority of the money likely comes from new backers who have no idea of what master modes even is at the time of purchase. We would need real metrics to support any argument. I've given a couple examples below.
You've just used Arena Commander metrics
What did we get in 3.22 as far as features (especially that have an impact on Arena Commander) ? Basically Nothing except 1 ship to test (***)
Additional Settlements and Outposts and new Jumptown Location at Hurston
Structural Salvage
Openable Containers
Aopoa San’tok.yāi (Released in Alpha 3.22.1)
X1 (Released in Alpha 3.22.1)
X1 Velocity (Released in Alpha 3.22.1)
X1 Force (Released in Alpha 3.22.1)
Cutter Rambler
*** F7C MK II (Released Alpha 3.22.1)
Compare that to 3.23 which impacted Arena Commander (including unlisted control changes and AC is where most people setup controls) I've used *** again to denote
TLDR: 10 Features that affect Arena Commander including some specific game modes.
Star Citizen Alpha 3.23 Features
Fauna (dogs - Kopions, birds - Maroks) (Source)
Creature Hunting - New!
Distribution Centers (Official Video)
*** Engineering Gameplay (Arena Commander)
*** Ship Weapon & Component MultiTool Repair (Released in Alpha 3.23.1)
New Character Customizer
Server Recovery
EVA Rework (Flying)
Interaction Menu Rework (Source)
*** Visor & HUD Lens Rework
MobiGlas Rework
*** Master Modes in PU
New Starmap
FPS Minimap & Compass
New in-game Ship Prices (Prices of larger ships increased)
Reputation - Hostility
Dynamic Crosshair
*** Vulkan Graphics API
New Water Simulation (not yet swimming and floating)
*** Image Upscaling
Replication Layer Update
Vehicle Modularity (Retaliator modules)
Ships that were released
Ursa Medivac (Released Alpha 3.23.1)
*** Saber Raven Firebird (Released Alpha 3.23.1)
Mirai Pulse (Released Alpha 3.23)
*** Hornet F7A MK II
*** Hornet F7A Mk I
*** Mirai Pulse (Released Alpha 3.23)
MPUV-1T (Released Alpha 3.23.1)
Retaliator Gold Standard (Released Alpha 3.23.1)
Argo 1T Tractor (Released Alpha 3.23.1)
And you're surprised more people played longer than an hour in 3.23, shit it takes an hour now just to take off lol. Of course more people logged in to check it out.
1 hour is also poor metric to use and barely scrapes testing time after logging in. These are also Arena commander metrics, which no-one cares about. Also wasn't there some arena commander events that happened with rewards ?
Also your example of interceptors is in arena commander where the interceptor benefits don't matter.
Regardless, I think half the thing A-1 Said are garbage also or poorly supported. I just want Content Creators to start being more intelligent and stop using poor arguments.
1. What I think are object facts are the old flight model needed to change.
2. Master Modes was a poor implementation to attempt to resolve 1.
We just need to stop using poor metrics to support poorer arguments on all sides of these discussions please. But all Content Creators, please start demanding Game play and in-game rewards that aren't UEC over everything other discussion, or the game will be DOA and other points will be mute.
Underrated response
well said, this RUclipsr seems way too emotionally involved about a video game, and is just taking random irrelevant data to try and convince people he is right, kinda sad really
This comment just obliterated this entire dumbass video. lmao
100% right.
Nice argument, but the numbers speak against you. SC has attracted some of the lowest numbers of new players this year, but funding is up.
Option C: People spend money like farm animals because they have no self control. And people hate master modes. Both can be true at the same time.
AC metrics etc
@@BuzzCutPsycho People play and support SC for what it can become. They practice, buy ships, and concepts, for the promise that they will see it eventually. But to judge how much people love or hate master modes based on the top level of the pvp community in AC shows nothing.
1. The PVP community is already small percentage of the overrall community.
2. There are plenty of people in master modes who play it, hate it, make a youtube video about it, and keep playing it the next day. These same players will practice to the height of their craft regardless of the shit CIG gives them. Playtime does not directly translate to enjoyment.
Yah, by this logic, people spend money on the game because they approve generally of the state. It's a nonsense extrapolation.
I'll go with stupid farm animals. I don't like Master Modes, I played it a lot and tried to like it, but I just don't. I was never a TOP pilot before master modes, but I had fun with it and wouldn't shy away from battles. Now, I just don't want to bother. I don't know if Avenger is 100% right, but he surely isn't all wrong (same for you, you make some very valid points). I hope one way or another (w/Master Modes or w/out) they find a way to fix it. Increasing the speeds would be a start. Subscribed.
Thanks! I never expect people to agree with me, I put it out and let people decide on their own.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Well I'm open to see them tune it up. Like I said, it doesn't have to be like the "old days", but I would first and foremost want some more speed. I feel like I'm driving through a 20 MPH School Zone. lol
No, high speed was the major problem of previous build. Combined with tricord and technical limitations and server latency it allowed the shit we were stuck for that many years. A1 wants that for reasons buzz mentioned. High speeds never coming back
@@youwonder472 I didn't say HIGH speed like prior to Master Modes, I asked for more speed than they're currently allowing.
Wow, 800 people testing out a NEW flight model over an hour, dropping to below *90* in the next patch ...when 2500+ people was the norm in the 2.5/2.6 days.
exactly. 2.5 and 2.6 had the split speed flight model just like master modes. not the high speed nonsense from 3.5 to 3.22.
Why compare it to 2.6 when everyone wants .22 and before back? If you look at the stats .22 was the best patch for the old flight model with 300 people. In .21 it was 100 people.
Also don't forget .24 just dropped. If you look at the leader board today .24 is nearly at 100 players after just a few weeks which took .21 the whole patch cycle.
Read pin. Leaderboards are still bugged and winner's circle is still the only one that counts stats. Also, waiting on 4.0
Dude whole previous FM I was playing AC quite actively and you have seen always same people every day. PvP was happening there as there was no pvp in PU. Now with MM at least me and my crew are playing almost only PU and wee have so many fights. And we are exclusivelly pvp arrow pilots. Now we play more ships while most still fly arrows. Many years back we used to play a lot more AC as there was absolutelly nothing to do in PU, so we played only AC obviously since we only had one space station and few points of interest.
@@BuzzCutPsychono. It’s obvious you pick stats that suit your narrative.
You can see my server density and even discords that used to be full are dead.
Sure, more people came back to try out master modes when it released, it doesn't mean they stuck around or still play that often now. Also, yes funding is up but look at the backer numbers for this year, they're down by about half. That means less people are pushing more money into the game to support it, not a sustainable model imo. I definitely believe master modes is one contributing factor to such a drop in new backers that we're seeing this year. It's easy to bend the metrics to your will to try and make a point.
Most people are waiting for 4.0, myself included. Game sucks now separate from MM.
I think Avenger One is a bit of a knob, but he isn't wrong. I thought MM was a necessary evil when it first dropped, I wasn't a fan but accepted something needed to change.
After about 10-20 hours I stopped playing 3.23 because MM combat was boring. I had never been bored doing space combat before 3.23. I only came back to play with 3.24 to do some hauling/mining/salvage.
The reason I hate MM has nothing to do with guns, or ship class, or speed, it's about how flight FEELS. It just feels wrong.
Define wrong.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Not right. 🙂
@@stuartriddell2461 I recommend watching Vergil’s response to a1’s video … they beat AVS in the old flight model during the last fight or flight which should translate to their opinion matters more than AV1’s.. Vergil gives a better opinion on both flight modes.
The final MMO needs some sort of blob vs blob. A Hammerhead is designed for area denial, to keep fighters and torpedos off the other larger ships.
In the old flight model there was absolutely no cohesion. Watch some really cool cinematic fleet vs fleet videos, and fast forward to the chaos halfway through the video.
Every single fight turns into Revenge of the Sith's Battle of Coruscant absolute madness.
A Hammerhead couldn't even hit a couple fighters if they flew "right", how could it protect another ship?
@@BuzzCutPsycho the fun in flying is gone, that what feels wrong. before you could login and just fly around and it was fun. now it is gone.
12%+ inflation kinda sucks the wind out your sails on the sales point bro; plus them removing MMs from feedback because people complaining about it XDXD
So people have less money so they spend more?
The numbers have to he adjusted for inflation.
The raw numbers are no longer equivalent.
Do you really not understand that?
@Kyle-sr6jm Did CIG raise the price of goods by 12% to match inflation? - because then we could talk about an apples to apples situation. The 35 atlas suit might be them testing that new price model, and I would say it is ugly. - Goods being a jpg of a space ship.
4:45 - Answer: Sunk cost fallacy.
I'm really concerned that they still haven't made definite decisions on the model - for not one, but TWO games. Now that the first one is nearing completion, I got a bad feeling that no matter if it's good bad or otherwise, it's going to be forced onto the second product because it's most close to 'done'. So, whatever is in Sq42 is gunna be crammed down our throats whether it makes sense or not. Guess we'll see. Chris needs a manager to keep his ADHD in check so we can stop with the spastic 'every direction at once' development mentality.
Pretty sure MM is the final decision.
@@BuzzCutPsycho That's my interpretation of Yogi's recent comments that MM is delivering what CIG wanted to achieve: allowing traversal speeds to stay high but returning to relatively low combat speeds and with limits on chording. Looking forward to aerodynamic control surfaces, personally, btw.
MM has been planned since about 2016, so... you're a little too late to be upset about it 😂
I'm going to bet that, like me, the majority of the people that played in Arena Commander were trying to figure out how to fly again before jumping into the PU.
Otherwise, good points about the interseptors and such.
I play AC because I like pvp.
@@BuzzCutPsycho But that's YOU
@@PluckMe Arena combat is party there of offer fast instant action PvP and competition as an alternative to camping Hex. Death is harsh in the PU and harder to gain experience when half your time is spent riding trains and elevators and waiting for reclaim timers.
I wouldn't say the Majority. I went strait to the PU first and figured it out pretty fast. Then I went to AC to test out Swarm to see how I fared. I felt far more effective with the slower Max speeds than I did with the Prior flight model. No more constant jousting from the NPC's. My only beef right now is the Weapon balance(particularly the projectile speeds and ranges, they feel all over the place).
I’m not fed up.
Had this game for many years, I come back to it from time to time to have a look at the progress, I think the game is coming along nicely. Yes development could be faster, but my happiness is not dependent upon a game, especially one that’s not finished.
I have learned that everything wrong with the world stems from a misplaced sense of entitlement. Why people feel entitled to dislike the exact game mechanics before its release is beyond me.
Stop trying to change something that you have no power to change. That will free up time to focus on what you can change in your life.
I support mm and I hope its final version encourages fun and dynamic play that is not dominated by just one or two players or ships.
please remember:
. Tester ≠ developer
. It’s just a game
great points. I think cig wants the game to appeal to many, and this is a step towards that.
With space marine 2 now released, nobody has a good reason to continue bashing their head against a developing game that frustrates them. At least in my extremely biased opinion.
This is one of the best comments on here. Well said, and I totally agree.
Best ever comment
to be fair i don't get the point of setting parts of the community against one another. It's not like Avenger One is lying he's being constructive and giving feedback as he see's it ... on a side note i think 2024 is a terrible year for gaming theres is a handful of good titles and tons of trash industry needs to get their act together as a whole
Nah.
👉"theres is a handful of good titles and tons of trash industry needs to get their act together as a whole" 👈
If he's as good as he keeps telling us, removing the exploit won't affect him a bit.
@@mikew9106 Who is exploiting what?
@@mikew9106 it in fact didnt.
he still 1v7s with ease
As one of the players who play Squadron Battle like I never used to, your explanation starting at 5:18 is severely lacking. I cannot tell if this is done with malicious intent or if you genuinely believe this. Either way, I will follow up with my personal explanation:
Squadron Battle did indeed get more popular for 1) the obvious novelty factor including the F7A's, and 2) because MM did legitimately improve Squadron Battle and group fights. Group fights are the greatest and in my opinion the only notable strength of MM, as group fights are not only possible but also more strategic and allow for a wider range of playstyles. It's just more fun now. You cannot easily disengage from combat, positioning matters, and keeping track of the positions of your allies and enemies matters. Coordination is more important than ever. It's just not as stale and lame as it used to be in 3.22.1.
Now, I do enjoy Squadron Battle. Let me explain to you why I'm still a Master Modes hater:
For me, MM falls extraordinarily short in 1v1, racing, low flying, realism, and the general feeling of flying a spaceship. For me, the 3.22.1 FM felt more real and authentic, whereas MM is closer to Elite: Dangerous. It's not as bad, mind you, but it's one step closer to it. Master Modes has ruined my favorite activities, which are racing and 1v1 dogfight training. The skill ceiling is lower as well, which leaves me unfulfilled knowing that there isn't much I have to learn.
Now I play Squadron Battle instead, and I do enjoy it a lot. However, it's not what my heart truly yearns for, it's not what I'm playing the game for, and I'd rather be doing 1v1 dogfights or racing.
And that's why I don't like MM. I strongly prefer the 3.22.1 FM.
My hope rests on CIG improving Master Modes and lifting some of the new MM restrictions that have ruined my fun while retaining its strengths in group fights. As an example, I would like to see the chord limiter reduced or even abolished so that strafes feel authentic again, bringing MM a bit closer to the 2.6 FM - which I greatly enjoyed too.
1v1 does not matter in an MMO, nor should it. Team battles and group interaction should always take precedence. You are correct, it feels lacking, but I simply do not care nor do most I am sure.
Second, you can gussy this up however you want, but go look for yourself. Check the leaderboards across all versions. It's significantly less than MM, but by a LARGE MARGIN. Also, read the pin-3.23 only tracked one map.
So, with only one map being tracked, a short patch cycle compared to its predecessors, and everything else... it was still the most popular AC has been in ages. Ain't passing the sniff test.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Thank you for your response!
1v1, light fighter combat, racing, and low flying do matter, I backed and loved this game for them. Star Citizen was made to appeal to a wide range of players; it's an MMO, a space sim, a sandbox, the game of our dreams. I understand that you don't value every single feature in the game, just like I generally am not interested in multicrewing, grinding, trading, mining, or hauling - but Star Citizen has been deliberately advertised with all of them in mind. The plan has been to create gameplay elements that bring players of different skills and interest together. No niche in Star Citizen is more important than another.
Now with MM, Star Citizen has appeased one portion of the community at the expense of another. You should understand that if players lose what they have been promised in a game, this will result in a backlash.
And again, you are reiterating how popular Squadron Battle is because of Master Modes, and I agree with you because group fights are MM's greatest strength. What is the point you're making here? That I should be happy because group fights are so much better? I already am. But it doesn't mean I'll be silent about the shortcomings of MM. Doing so would be not healthy for the game, as CIG need our feedback to improve it.
Yogi has mentioned MM's shortcomings in ship handling and 1v1's and that we should expect changes to address these issues in 4.0 and 4.1. 1v1's and racing have been significantly more fun in every single other Star Citizen flight model that I've ever played under. I am hoping for a middle-ground solution that makes both sides of the MM debate happy.
I doubt you value my happiness but I still value yours - because Star Citizen should be fun for us all. I will not watch this game fall short in any of the categories that it has promised us. If Star Citizen's flight model is not the best in the entire gaming industry, it's not enough. The best game deserves the best FM, and MM at this point is simply not it.
@@NukeSanityI don’t understand, isn’t racing and low flying still the exact same if you’re using nav mode? Or does tricording make or break it? Cause I’ve seen people doing those 2 things pretty competently.
As for 1v1 isnt it still there but it’s just different.
i have to disagree with your opinion that every who dislikes MM are "simps for A1" i dislike A1 and most the people i play with have a similar opinion , but i can tell you now that hardly anybody from my play group enjoys MM and is really playing at the moment.
The issue with the "my playgroup" argument, while I do not doubt your experience, is that my org by and large enjoys MM. So no, you are not a simp for A1, and you do not like A1, and for that I was incorrect.
@@BuzzCutPsycho you’re forgetting your org and by large people liked combat before MM ever existed.
They're just mad they can't compensate for their tiny members by taking advantage of people who didn't know how or refused to use it.
Based quake avatar
I don't think anyone hates you, I think you're just being somewhat obnoxious (not my preferred word, however necessary here).
That being said the pre MM wasn't great either but MM isn't truly an improvement. Most importantly there's absolutely no need for so many modes.The rest can be tweaked and improved.
That targeting on components (engines, etc.) it's overly complicated.
Flight is more boring, it just is.
Regarding numbers over skill, that's going to be a problem when organizations come into play, you may disagree with me, but that WILL kill a game when you have one org running everything in their preferred way.
Keep in mind, starters are also more expensive, so chart would show more funding.
Regarding playing in Arena, it's possible people played more to learn the new flight instead of flying in the live build.
We need more data, it's that simple.
The image is a play on a meme. It was a joke-the "they hate him" meme-and I certainly don't think a lot of people hate me. And even if they did, that's fine too.
I don't run this channel to have people mindlessly agree with me. If they do? Great. I try my best to respond to every comment at least once, but it’s hard to carry on multiple chains.
The reality is, much like I said in the video, the old FM sucked as well, and even the one before that. This one is the most "playable" FM at its foundation for the average player-a good stepping stone to greater things. I have quite a few issues with MM. I do not agree with NAV removing shields, for one. And the inability of certain ships to outmaneuver is also an issue of mine. But the core of MM is consistent, manageable speed and understandable mechanics, and to me, that is what I will stand up for and defend.
It doesn't matter what metrics I post, people will go against them, and it doesn't matter what subjective experiences I share, people will try to counter them. We live in a polarized world, and gaming is no different. All I can say is that, from what I have seen as a pre-MM player versus a post-MM player, I see more unique names in AC than I ever saw before. And my org, which has a lot of average people, by and large enjoyed the combat far more since we could stick together and engage together.
Perfect? No. A good foundation? Yes.
@@BuzzCutPsychothe problem is that you shit on A1 but at least he has solutions and reasoning behind what he says.
Not once have you sat there and showed facts to why master modes is a good idea.
@@BGIANAKy Sorry, when a guy make a 44 min video to send a message to devs, a message... you can trow it directly to the trash. This game is not a rocket science. He needs to make videos that way because his product needs to fit his bubble. For Christ sake, the guy defended for so long people should study flight, for hours every day, and them we notice that even their videos have a "high ceiling". 30 - 40 minutes about the same shit. lol He is unsuferable.
@@lss247 A1 actually cares about the game’s longevity. Something CIG clearly doesn’t.
@@BGIANAKy I think he cares about himself. But it just my opinion. I used to be in your side, but not anymore. Its ok.
That opening😂❤
I thought it was fitting.
@@BuzzCutPsychojust done watching it all. Man the more I watch your content the more I enjoy. Thanks for your point of view. People really needs to think on their own and maybe that kind of content can help haha. Fly safe
Who the hell is avenger one?
Some dork
but is it fun? I have never encountered a single person in the game that says. I like this way better. I can see why they are doing it. my idea is replace master modes with the power triangle, and let the power triangle determine ship stats like speed, dps, shields. that way its not such a jolting abrasive switch and gives the player more control and makes the changes to their ship feel more organic rather than forced by an artificial mode.
Personally I feel like I was a much better pilot before that patch. Now I just feel crippled in a fight, no more running circles around hammerheads. Turrets can actually hit me now. I guess it kinda makes portions of the game impossible without buying the right ship.
It is iterative progress, its not always a solid win. sometimes just a 10% gain.
I've encountered plenty of people who state the opposite. Which is why metrics of AC participation show otherwise. Also, the ratio in this video, and my previous one, also represent that. Look a little harder and try not to see what you want to see and you will see quite a few people like MM as a foundation. Check this comment section alone.
I think the reason why you haven’t encountered anyone who says MM is fun is because people who like it or think it’s just ok… don’t make MM and their enjoyment of it their whole personality?
@@BuzzCutPsychoYou mean the comment section flooded with those of the opposite opinion ? Or are we looking at two completely different things.
@@Quickb3n oh it isn't flooded with them at all. This video is also at 78% plus like to dislike ratios. Download a browser plug in and check for yourself. Don't just take my word for it.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I really don’t care, just make it about the game. Calling people you disagree with “A1 simps” is pathetic. You’re a grown man, correct ?
Also just to clarify something about Quake: And I say this as a 10 year Quake Veteran Player who did play Pro in that game for a short time. My clan "Corrupt" won the Battletop Tournament at E3 in 2000, and got sponsored by Battletop. We got paid to play, and my clan became the #1 clan on the west coast in the U.S. I started that clan, I am responsible for its initial success, and later handed it off to a good friend of mine who lived in Arizona who went by the alias, "Burnzone." I personally trained this guy to be the best. And he took everything I taught him, and ran with it. I can't take all the credit the rest is his to take. But I showed him how to do it. I have also trained other pro players in RTCW at the time as such a few people in "Darkside" and "Exodus." Guess who trained trained most of the players in "Exodus?"
Yes John Carmack didn't like Bunny-Hopping or as it was originally called "Strafe Jumping" He did want to remove it. It was NOT just the CIG elitists' of that game that wanted it to stay in the game it was the WHOLE FUCKING COMMUNITY THAT WANTED IT TO STAY. It became a game mechanic that OTHER games adopted, RTCW, CS, Doom, Call of Duty, Unreal Tournament to name a few.
if something becomes a game mechanic it is no longer an exploit. That is the fundamental statement being made by these CIG elitists'. But there's a fine line between an exploit becoming a game mechanic in a game that was specifically advertised as a "Combat Simulator" and Tri-Chording being nothing more than an exploit which is by definition: Something that gives an unfair advantage to someone that other people do not have. Hence the argument about the Tutorial. If the tutorial showed everyone then it no longer is an exploit by definition. It becomes a game mechanic.
The realism difference between a game like Star Citizen and those games are so far from being remotely close in comparison I wouldn't know where to begin to describe how stupid the argument being made actually is.
But tri-chording makes physical sense, that's how an actual spaceship would fly. If you fire three thrusters perpendicular to each other, you would end up with more thrusts than the biggest thruster. That's simple vector math, the very first thing you learn in physics, not sure what your argument is about, maybe I misunderstood it
@@Silverhawk-u2f You are assuming each thruster is exactly 1/3rd the exponent of the main thruster. Who said it was, or was even designed to be? In 0g, it doesn't take much force to change orientation or vectors. How fast you want to change it depends on the force being applied.
Your example is akin to falling into a blackhole albeit on a smaller scale. At what point is it physically impossible for the human body to withstand the sheering force?
If you believe in Newton's third law then a body must deform in some way or another to apply a reaction force to the external action force.
Without the force acting the molecules will be at an average equilibrium separation with the (average) net force on each molecule being zero.
Applying an external force will change the separation so there will be forces produced by the human body which will be opposite in direction to the external force.
OR
A rigid body cannot be deformed. But the stress is same as on an elastic body (which follows Hooke's law)
"Hooke's equation holds (to some extent) in many other situations where an elastic body is deformed, such as wind blowing on a tall building, and a musician plucking a string of a guitar. An elastic body or material for which this equation can be assumed is said to be linear-elastic or Hookean." Or, to explain this more simply: The more force you apply to an elastic body such as the human body, the greater the affect on elasticity of said body.
Rather or not you can do it isn't the argument here. What is the argument is realism as it relates to the human body's tolerance.
@@Fluke2SS what ? No not at all what I am saying. The sum of three perpendicular vectors will always be larger than the largest of the vectors it is made of, Because the diagonal of a cube is always larger than any of its sides, that's all I am saying.
The first link I found on how vector addition works so that what I am saying is maybe clearer: ruclips.net/video/dIsWuZXWWbE/видео.htmlfeature=shared
@@Silverhawk-u2f What you refer to here is called "Distance" not a vector.
The diagonal distance of a cube is always larger than any of its sides.
A Vector is not defined as distance, but rather a direction of travel, which cannot exclude acceleration variables until speed/velocity remains constant. If Speed/Velocity is constantly changing then acceleration can never be 0. And as such the force acting on an elastic body is always being applied.
I think you are confusing definitions and coming to conclusions that make no sense because of it.
@@Fluke2SS A vector is a direction AND length, this is basic physics of how forces work and are calculated. The length of a vector represent the amount of force / acceleration (since they depend on each other they are proportional for the same mass) so yes it is about distance. Maybe I misunderstood once again or I wasn't clear enough, but I think you should read more on the subject, it seems you are not understanding what I am talking about. Sorry if that sounds rude, it's really not the intent.
To be honest, the previous fliget model made me feel so free in comparison to the restricted speeds we are using now. I don’t even do much combat but I liked the previous model a lot better
Yeah it's pretty horrible it's like they've forgotten they are space ships.why have a power management system of I can't power my ship myself. If I want all power to engines let me do it.
Games have rules. Unlimited freedom is bad for gameplay.
You can. And you move perform better with 100% power to engines. I did a video on this.
@@BuzzCutPsycho "Unlimited freedom is bad for gameplay" - there were already rules before. The ship's limitations and pilot skills determined the rules. You can't even clearly descibe the advantages from the previous modal in your video.
how about master modes in atmo and space is tweaked old model? it would be more realistic IMO... also you have to look at stats and all the possibilities. one of them being 800 master mode players because it is new and folks jumping back into the game and people giving them time to tweak it. however given time with it and seeing what they do and say (yogi's post for example) folks are realizing that they do not like it... i also think that what we have with master modes is a 2 level system of noob to pro {possibly 3 level could be argued} when it should be noob to good to excellent to master if you want long term playability IMO.
Oh atmo needs major tweaks. I know not all ships have any control surfaces yet. A lot are just horrendous in atmo.
Atmospheric flight is going to be completely reworked in the near future.
Today its basically the same as space flight but everything is more sluggish.
In the future, its going to be closer to what you would experience in a plane. If you ship does not have a VTOL mode, you will not be able to hover in place for long.
If you want to turn at high speeds, you will have to roll to the side and then pitch. Yawing wont cut it.
People who are skilled dog fighters in space will not necessarily be skilled at dog fighting in atmo because the flight characteristics will be completely different.
@@Xaxxus It's gonna basically the same man. It's roll and pitch centric in both space and atmo. It will still be roll and pitch centric after whatever update they do.
The only thing I dont like about MasterModes is the how it prevents you from having shields while in Nav Mode.
yeah its so dumb
I think they will add shields in nav mode in future. And I also hope they remove this stupid 5 sec shield delay after you got hit and balance shield regen.
agreed
I think it's a good thing. There is risk to traveling faster
Jup there is risk in traveling faster and no sane human would build a ship without shilds if they are available.
I think there really needs to be some middle ground, as we have all put money in to this game. Keep master modes, speed limits, but reintroduce trichording, doesnt really feel like im flying a space ship without it.
Last time I went to the moon I didn't use tri-cording to get there.
@BuzzCutPsycho No, but when you're shredding around space stations, racing, and dogfighting, it makes it 10 times more fun. Again, compromise. I think with the lack of compromise and slow development, a large part of the playerbase is going to leave which is going to be a real net loss for the game and end up hurting the game.
It's not your duty to PR Master Modes. Just accept that lots of people don't like it. If it was great, we wouldn't be in this state.
Check the ratios on the video
Defends master modes while absolutely shitting on the game 😂
I just keep it real. MM aint why it sucks my friend.
The problem is that it isn't a game yet. It's a buggy tech demo with no real new content for years, constant wipes, and tedious group play with time sinks for getting ready to actually play on par with physically just driving 30 miles to hang out IRL.
damn you're really out of date on your info
@@exnemswho is? What info?
@@crispy9175 Apologies, I was talking to @lordsheogorath3377 regarding his info on the constant wipes and no new content. I believe this is a little subjective as I personally find the addition of salvaging and hauling to be significant enough to be considered content, and new at that. Constant wipes is outright false, haven't had a proper wipe in years now either. I actually want one.
So, i'd be hesitant to measure the first patch into MM arena commander numbers against the numbers of the previous patch, which would have been the same flight model for quite a long time before the switch. MM was pushed very heavily by CIG, i feel like it's very reasonable to expect players to put it through it's paces as the "shiny and new" feature at the forefront of development, and not necessarily an indication of quality of the system itself.
I'm interested to see how those numbers fair over the rest of the year.
Check 3.16 numbers, old FM was introduced around that point. Less than 100 people in SB.
@@BuzzCutPsycho fair assessment
I feel like even woth MM a lot of people utilize the interceptor ships to change modes quickly and run away.
This needs to be fixed in mm in my opinion.
Of course. It doesn't work. I agree.
Seems to me star citizen is alienating those of use that just want to do our thing and not have to be a part of a group. Not to mention making ships outrageously expensive and de-incentivizing freight hauling and making that miserable. Some of us are on this for an hour or 2 and then we have to go back to life because people like me have a house, a mortgage and a job and I don't live in mommy's basement being waited on hand and foot and spending her credit card on this game. Just the thought that someone would spend 500 bucks in real money on an M2 is really insane. In game they were 5 mil, not they are what, 42 million now? Are you serious?
I can see the day coming where I will no longer be able to play. Seems like the hand is cutting off the foot, eh eh ehm chris roberts....
I've already walked away. It's the ones living at home in mum's basement that are paying them all of their money. They don't care about anyone else. It's all about lining their pockets with money.
This game is more solo friendly than ever. Nothing for groups to do.
The Tricording is one of those deadlock topics that are difficult to discuss, both Parties have many valid points.
It was originally a natural result of a very high attention to detail to physics by John Pritchett, yes this is a real property of vector combination.
I think the main reason it is seen as an exploit is because it is cumulative, which is realistic, however when a physically accurate representation of vectoring gets combined with for the human body wildly unrealistic accelerations of 20+ Gs it has created a severe reaction time Problem, both on the human and server end. With those levels of thrust on LFs it would catapult people from 0-300 (300 m/s is about Mach 1) in seconds. This sentence here is a cool little thing to illustrate that.
Say out loud “10g acceleration is faster than going from standing still to supersonic in the time it takes to read this sentence”.
So imho tricording being seen as an exploit is more of a result of poor thruster tuning choices, not it itself being flawed. If we fought with more realistic values on thusters like 4-6 Gs Main and at max 2-3 Gs for the other directions then we also couldnt achieve anything higher than 12 Gs in a tricord (6+3+3).
I get your point but it's removal didn't change the g's we hit, a bunch of ships are still capable of 20+ g's you just hit a speed wall really fast
Is Prichett still around? Also, yes, extreme Gs are never punished. I also think, from a game pov, flying at that degree was rather silly, especially since it is all i did.
Devs have repeatedly said it was an exploit and getting more speed and desync than is playable, there is no debate, they are the authoritative final word about their software. The Space Shuttle only hit ~11G at peak for less than 2 minutes at launch. Nearly every launch at least one person who has passed rigorous training sometimes still partially or completely blacks out when they hit max-q and why launches were mostly automated and the ship remotely controllable from the ground. Getting an instant 16-20G boost while already moving at speeds with a few Gs would tear ships apart and launch eyes out of skulls or deform them to temporary virtual blindness. Of course, we are using a stolen alien artifact to become semi-immortal Space Litches with 3d printed bodies so is realism even a valid argument?
The other part of the trichord speed hack few say out loud that knows, and what some really wanted to keep, the important part of the exploit is being able to manually induce server desync nearly on demand so you could hit them, but they could not hit you. A macro with dynamic padding to pulse the afterburner just right at a certain speed made it reliably easier using an Arduino pretending to be a USB keyboard wired to a foot switch and EAC can't detect it. All those shots you swear you saw hit and should have killed them by now after joust pass 10 but didn't while they seem to be able to shoot and hit you constantly? lolz ☠ I know there would be lots of peeps that would love that to come back so they can call themselves high skill again.
@@eltreum1 This is were we disagree, it WAS added on purpose there is so much evidence to support it.
But where it became an exploit is when players learned how to use the system to get more G's then the devs intended.
I am not arguing for or against it, just that yours and most others take on history of it being always unintended is incorrect just because they say now its an exploit.
They are using the term to mean outside of the devs intentions, and they are changing it to stop it.
Which is totally fine the game is in development.
Not sure why you are bringing up real life physics, nothing applies to the game.
I never brought up realism other than their initial intention for the game was to have a realistic physics model and why it didn't work.
the other point not sure what you are talking about I have no idea how to induce server desync? are you just confusing the game not being able to handle hit reg reliably at faster traversal speeds?
The other part you bring up pip wiggling, and that is totally 100% still in the game, mostly because there is insanely low Jerk
I mean, trichording can be realistic, but it is still an unintuitive way to handle ship movement for most people. And there are so many realistic reasons for why trichording WOULDN’T be a thing. Basically trichording presumes that your manoeuvering thrusters cannot contribute to forward movement, and that they can put out maximum thrust at the same time as the main engine puts out maximum thrust. If any of these two conditions are not met, trichording vanishes as a technique. If manoeuvering thrusters CAN contribute to forward movement, then going forward will always result in the highest acceleration (in that case the final vector really is the raw main thruster max output + manoeuvering thruster max output). If the engines are competing for fuel flow and power, lighting up the main engine afterburner would realistically reduce manoeuvering capability and vice versa, resulting in inefficiencies when using multiple thrusters at once.
As a NON pew pew pilot, MM is clunky with it's drastic speed changes and modes in modes. Maybe I have to work on key bindings. I'd like to see them tweak the transitions for a more smooth experience. Also the automation moving in and out of cruise needs to be fixed. It's acts like a bug as it requires a throttle movement to engage or distingue.
It can, at somes, feel unnatural, I think I said that in the video. But that isn't a reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater imo.
Nav/flight mode in atmosphere is pure suffering. You might get a good initial burst of acceleration but the instant you do a single evasive turn, you bleed off all your speed and you're putting along at SCM, needing to accelerate again. This makes escaping ganks in atmosphere a tall order indeed, particularly for ships not intended to fight. I really hope CIG comes to their senses.
I hate Master Modes, its a large part of why most people stopped playing because its boring now.
Where is your census?
@@BuzzCutPsycho How much does your channel rely on Star Citizen doing well?
@@dean8367 Not as much as the others. clearly.
I don't mind master modes. But then I'm a filthy cargo hauler and box delivery boy. 😆
You're important to somebody out there in space my friend.
3:44 This picture gives a bit wrong info. Players normally do not pledge ships they can buy ingame for aUEC. Because there is no reason to pledge 600$ if you can buy 10Mil aUEC for 5$ and buy that ship in the game. It can be easily proven by looking at players ASOPs, everyone has like a 40k$ fleet, which is nonsense.
These sell numbers on the screen are mostly about "new ships", not about quality of entire game. People just curious about new ships, that is it. It may not reflect anything about MM acception at all, just irrelevant info.
I dont buy things for things I hate
I don't buy add-ons to games I don't like.
You're only focusing on combat in arena commander. The reality is most people in SC don't do combat or arena commander. Master modes made flying less fun, less realistic, and more complicated. After 10 years of enjoying a buggy, janky game, I stopped playing this year because master modes just isn't fun to fly.
Doesn't matter. AC is a combat test environment and the easiest way for combat ships to fight one another. And it is also the only available metric with public information. Spin it how you like, it is a factual representation of accessibility that CIG was going for.
I'm not spinning anything. I'm saying master modes in Star Citizen is just not fun. You want to play an arcade game and I get that. But most of us long time backers do not.
I joined roughly 2017 and have been used to pre-mm flight for the longest time. MM came in and barely changed anything for me. I change modes as needed and have been fine with it, not complicated at all. MOLE mining has been a little slower but not anywhere near frustrating or annoying. I am really having a hard time understanding the hate.
@@aaronhunyady I think we're using the term arcade very loosely at this point.
@@aaronhunyady This is virtually the 4th time they changed the flight model.
I remember the first flight model.
People who flew light fighters bitched.
So they changed the flight model and light fighters became top over medium fighters.
then they increased speeds.
Then they did something else.
MM was always the end game for flight even as far back as 2016. I think you're just too busy slobbering over A-1 to think for yourself.
Yo, this is insane because when A1 was on stream with Yoge hosted by Space Tomato, I though man he knows what he's talking about even though Yoge stood his own on what was going to happen with MM. I am so confused now. You make such a great point on the fences. I mean, I'm not great at fighting anyhow, but DCS did seem like the way to go...And in space games, I have played full newtonian physics and although I liked it because it's realism and a channlege, I guarantee a lot of the player base us not going to like that. And the side strafing thing is I really had no clue of. I just know I was doing it as a technique to dodge the bullets. At the end of the day A1 wrote the book on it that he spent hours on and what made him known in my opinion on SC my question is why wouldn't you fight for your baby even though it was not intended by the devs. Devs don't like it that's it Find something else that makes it a chanllege to learn. OH by the way leave my Gunz out if this! 😂
I just present a different view. Both of those cucks won't have the stones to face me and debate it tho!
1. I think you are too offensive towards A1.
2. A1 is not insisting on returning to the old model; he is asking to increase the speed range we fly at. I think he’s right-when I fly, it feels unnatural.
3. In the old model, if you flew at full speed, you flew flat, which meant you died.
4. In general, MM is a step forward, but the speed is too low.
5. The multicrew system can be improved by adjusting how many bullets (ballistics) it can carry and how it can saturate the area.
1. Don't care.
2. Moving the speed up is returning to the old FM, as is restoring tri-cords.
3. No, you just got away. Nobody died in the old FM unless they wanted to.
4. Step forward, yes. Speed? I don't think so.
5. I rather hit things than saturate an area. I do not want to deter, I want to kill.
Good comment though, glad you actually thought it out even if we disagree.
@@BuzzCutPsycho 2. It’s not about tricording - just the SCM speed range. 200 m/s is roughly 700 kph… we’re flying spaceships, not P-51s. I’m not insisting on using the combined thrust of all engines simultaneously, and neither is A1. The idea is to adjust the thrust output to maintain balance without exceeding reasonable limits.
3. In general, I miss the stasis web, like in EVE ;)
4. You can’t hit a fighter at long range due to geometry and game mechanics. To stick with the current model, MC ships should be able to saturate the area with fire, ensuring that the sheer volume of projectiles increases the likelihood of hitting targets. This kind of saturation fire would not only improve the chances of scoring hits but also create a deterrent effect, making it difficult for enemy fighters to approach or engage effectively. By overwhelming them with fire, the fighters could be eliminated or forced to keep their distance, preventing them from getting close enough to pose a significant threat. Ballistics, in particular, can penetrate shields and damage the hull, so this method could be an effective solution. In general, a fully crewed Hammerhead should be able to withstand and fend off at least 8 light fighters.
Atmospheric flight could account for higher drag and reduce speed to 200, depending on how thin the atmosphere is. But it is another story.
@@jacekdarocha7054 three words: game engine limitation.
Excessive speed is an issue while allowing players to fight using it.
@@BuzzCutPsycho "dont care" is so upsetting to hear from you, who just made a whole video insulting someone that can actually deliver well explained arguments, while not having any good ones yourself
@@why-not-fly-the-av8b Found the sock
unrelated question lol but how do you get the crosshair to look like that? its got the cube corner bits on it? it looks alot nicer
Cannot get that anymore. Sadly.
ah ok thanks for answering
I hate it. I bought the game before it. Still my hate not enough to not buy the game . I like 100 other things about game. So ur logic is wrong. Regarding spending money
participation in AC, etc etc, others were given.
I am with you on this one here. I have written a lengthly comment on the A1 video because he didn't even understand what JC said and showed that in the first few minutes of the video.
He ignored that the participation in combat having increased after mastermode and brought up reasons for people not playing that haven't changed. And he willingly ignored that both more people took part in ship combat and that the number of players has increased according to CIG.
And the absolute best comment: it doesn't take long to learn the basics, a couple of weeks or a month.
Yeah right, weeks or a month of constantly dying and losing isn't much.... 😂 SC is not meant to be one of his competitive wet dreams. Having to constantly lose for weeks up to a month will kill SC for the vast majority of players faster than MM ever could.
"Having to constantly lose for weeks up to a month will kill SC for the vast majority of players faster than MM ever could."
That quote is so good.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I can not say how much i dislike this elitest attitude of some. As if ganes are made to be played by a small number of people only. They are not, and especially MMOs are played by as many different kind of players as possible. And Chris himself stated in his letter: Star Citizen is a game for everyone.
LOL people leave because of server stability and bugs/glitches. Imagine doing cargo missions then consoles are glitched or bunker mission where npc security turn hostile when you're done with the mission.
Same with pirating, you bushwack someone then realize you can't sell the cargo you've stolen because salvage consoles are broken. Yeah, I'd quit because of that.
The game just doesn't work. MM or no MM. I am also waiting for 4.0.
Sorry to ask, and its really off topic, but I noticed that your HUD in the squadron battles is different? is this old game play? or a certain way to turn it on? I really enjoy the look of it, i started playing when 3.23 first dropped so I don't know if that's how it looked before and I just don't remember or something?
3.23 EPTU. 1 week before launch.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Ohhhh alright that makes sense. Thank you!
I usually like you but when I voiced my opinion on what I liked you went emotional. can't we have our own opinion on what we like or dislike?
We sure can. And these are mine. I don't expect people to like me 100% of the time brother.
7:26 To be fair to the point here, it may be that people are coming in to try out the new flight model and see what's going on to test if they like it. Most average players may make up their mind about whether they like it or not earlier than an hour of flight time, but certainly there's a cohort that would. If there's no major headline feature being added/adjusted in the next version then we would have a better idea on how well MM retains players if we look at the player numbers on that patch.
Check out 3.16, when the old FM was released. Less than 100 people testing.
I'm not playing as much due to Master modes, and I feel that as slow as it may take for CIG to realize that they will remove MM. I also still support the game because they have shown they will eventually do what is best for the backers because that ensures the project's success. I also think you have some valid points for your perspective, but just because you don't agree with Avenger One doesn't mean he's wrong. I think you have some bias against him, and I am not a fan of his, but I feel he has described a lot of things that are in fact accurate that are hurting the game. Like I said, I will still support the project while they are working through a lot of this, and probably even if they don't fix it, but I can't imagine they would stay doing things that hurt them. Time will tell, but I think you are dismissing a lot of players opinions and playstyle with saying more players like it. I don't think the statistics you provide explain why the numbers are different, it's just you are saying why you think it's different. Time will tell.
if you wanna go fast enter nav.
Thank you. This is a problem in eso and other games with a dead PvP scene. You shoud not be 1vXing comfortably. I have no problem with a high skill ceiling in 1v1 and even enjoy that myself. Outside of that , new players should be able to enjoy combat and contribute with minimal skill. This is what draws people. If I start I shouldn’t be able to kill some expert.. but me and my 3 buddies shouldn’t have a problem killing you because we can put a mouse cursor on you and there are 3 of us.
If SC allows skilled flyers to 1v4 or worse… that aspect is dead.
I'm so glad you mentioned ESO. They keep that god awful combat system and pretend like it is high skill with weaving. In reality it is crap.
Great video.. You encapsulated my thoughts on this very well.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I can see a lot of your points and agree that Avenger made a lot of faulty arguments.
That being said, I feel like you refute yourself in one area in particular, being the combat speeds.
You essentially said that the higher speeds didn't have much of a reason since the only thing they allowed you to do was to radically accelerate to throw off the enemy's pip...but that's the entire point for me.
The old speeds gave you the ability to evade incoming fire and make your opponent whiff their shots, while now you basically just sit there and shoot each other until one blows up.
I find the latter to be much less engaging.
And to be clear, I'm no PvP player, I avoid it as much as possible.
I would like to say that the reason you cannot "throw off" aim is due to auto-aim being on all weapons, and auto-aim being added as a result of the old high speed flight.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I'm aware of the micro gimbal aim assist, tho I always perceived the effect to be rather small. Didn't take me much adjustment from flying fixed guns on a fighter, over to the Ares back when they had disabled micro gimbal on that.
I feel like it's more a matter of rotation speeds outpacing strafe speeds, not letting you get out of the way of your opponent's nose. Only exasperated when the opponent is using gimbal mode.
I also believe they knew this, since auto gimbal got removed.
Gaming nerd calls someone else a gamer nerd. Cant make this shit up.
You must be a gamer tough guy.
Goymers mad
Dude I am a gaming enjoyer.
@@SpaceDad42 not sure what makes you say that, but feel free to read more into this comment as well.
@@omnipresencetv8929 found the irony humorous. If that makes me a “goymer” so be it. I still think the shit is funny.
Great video. I am glad you came on the scene. I said it before but I have to repeat it, PvP players in MMOs are a very small group of the game but they are always the loudest. One thing I forgot to add to my previous dissertation a couple of your videos back is that these types of players (PvP) are never loyal to a game. Once they have taken over an MMO and the majority of players quit out of frustration, the game's population starts to dwindle. The PvP player no longer has anyone to shoot because of low server populations so they move on to the next new "hotness" (very evident in all PvP games, not just MMOs). The much greater population of "casual adults" (the vast majority of MMO players) don't do this, they tend to stick around for years, being faithful to one game (WoW, EQ, FFXIV, etc.). Some of the oldest online games are mostly PvE MMOs that still have healthy populations, even the ones that have been abandoned by their developers come back with fans running private servers. There is even a "nostalgia" trend in MMOs to allow players to play the old pre-DLC versions of the game. That is how loyal a fan base MMOs have.
I consider myself a die hard pvp player. It is all I do in games really. But I'm not blind to reality. If I want a game worth playing everyone other than me has to be catered to.
You have some really good points here. I would however prefer if we all could control our language a little bit more. It may all be true what you say, but it helps no one to have a colorful language about it. That said: good video. 👍🏻
I'll try harder next video. I promise. For real this time.
Back in the day, I used to detach the weapon gimble on the Kore Reliant( for the size 3 hard mount) and attach a non gimbled mounted size 3 ballistic cannon. It had the second fastest strafing speed in the game at the time too. It allowed me to snipe most ships as they all mostly used shorter range lasers and missiles. If they got in close I just nose to nose orbit strafed them to death. I could kill at most 3 other ships before running out of ammo( the only down side to the better ballistic cannons vs using lasers). That ship used to be a low key glass cannon but they nerfed the shit out of circle strafe/orbit fighting when they added the weird G-force crap in space battles, and then further nerfed the Kore and it's movement. There used to be a few ships that if you took the dumb gimble mounts off you could get an entire size larger weapon and be dangerous as hell to any ship with slower maneuvering. I gave up on this game two or 3 years ago at this point. I used to wreck people while flying the mustang at one point by out orbit dog fighting them. After they nerfed the ships, I used to just kill people docked at stations because griefing was the only fun thing left. When they added the forced safe area's at most stations the game lost any fun left. I'm still waiting for the tractor beam on the Kore, but doubt they can add it in as originally promised where they said it would be able to stay attached to larger ships so you could orbit and bolo throw another ship( or stay locked on while front facing a ship and blasting so another ship couldn't shake you). I have over 15 ships with unlimited insurance too, I noticed they haven't been doing that anymore. Seems like new players are still getting screwed over. I had got several cheap ships with unlimited insurance just to use later with ships that won't come with it normally. Heck what ever happened the land rights they sold off as claims beacons back in the day?
Was that back when auto gimbal was really good? TBH I wish auto gimbals were back, I know that is not popular, and I don't feel too strong about it, but they were nice to have.
@@BuzzCutPsycho pre 3.0, I wasn't even aware they took the auto gimble out as it wasn't a problem to deal with at all. It made PvE feel more fun because you could roast the AI ships and do missions more fast, but the auto gimbles didn't add any advantage in PvP because anyone who could fly would be front facing and strafe orbiting so effective weapon distance was the most important thing, and then maneuvering speed( not straight line cruising speeds unless you were running away). Large multi crew ships used to be dangerous too because they could have multiple ballistic cannons all engaging you at once out of missile ranges so if you had less cannons( or smaller sized weapons) than them they would out damage you before you could get in close combat. The two ships with the EMP were the only hard counters but they couldn't equip big enough weapons to be a threat damage wise. Large fleets that can swarm a lone enemy or small group will always be the real meta. I never encountered more than 4 ships in a group on a server before though. I saw more groups of two than anything else. Maybe one day the game will be more solid and fun to play who knows.
Great video man. I’m so tired of these narcissistic “top 1%” type of people who clearly care only about their own ego. It’s so obvious by how they over-explain the most simple concepts. Great points on multicrew, as someone who organizes a lot of multicrew events for our org, it’s always a challenge to make sure everyone involved has fun. Let’s face it, just sitting in a turret is currently pretty damn boring for the most part. I also relate a lot to your last point. As someone who also only does this for a hobby, it’s so sad seeing all these people try and tear the star citizen community apart for just a couple extra measly dollars of the almost nonexistent ad revenue that comes with being a SC creator. It only goes to show where their priorities truly lie, and it’s not in the betterment of the game or community, but their own pockets and ego.
This is the issue when people make a hobby a source of revenue. It becomes business. And what is bad for business much go. Making SC easier removes the need for guides, removes the need for training and thus removes the need for those people. If that is their revenue, they're basically out of a job.
Wow, you Psy-op videos are hilarious. You're attempt to compare 3.23 with mm and 3.22 is flawed. After all, where did those 700 people go in the new 3.24 version? Why is there only 89 players with more than 1hr of gameplay in squadrons in 3.24? Could it be because the initial influx of players were just curious to try out MM? And then after trying it out and realizing its shit, then droped the game. I thought you said they loved it, why would they leave after one patch! Its less now than it was in 3.22
Read the pin numb nuts.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I did baby dick
@@BuzzCutPsycho I did babydick, my point still stands.
I think you have some very solid points that a lot of us agree on, we uh just not as vocal about it, hopefully, we get this in front of devs, so they understand that we are not dissatisfied with master modes, it just needs more time to cook is all, and maybe add some clear visible effects to show when we are changing modes, between travel, and SCM, which I believe is probably already coming. I look at this game as Freelancer 2.0 and in that game, your engines would charge up before you went into "travel" mode, but it was called "cruise" mode in that game. I, personally like the transitions to master modes, because it makes you really decide if I am going to fight, or I'm going to run, it's really not as bad as people make it out to be, and Starcitzen is still a skill game, just judging by how many wrecks are outside of the LEOs.
We are not vocal because we have better things to do with our lives imo
I am a stupid farm animal with no self control. I also like Master Modes. Something can be two things at once.
lol
I only have 2 complaints about MM.
1) Space friction: it just feels wrong to me for my ship to slow down when I let go of burst when I boost in space.
2) I do agree that movement controls should be based upon thruster location, rather than the limitations of a controller.
Other than that, I have no complaints.
Understandable. I just look at friction as a gameplay mechanic and not realism personally
@@BuzzCutPsycho I get that, but it still annoys me as someone who is in love with games like KSP.
I do think MM is a step in the right direction though. Because of physics. I know they said its not a network thing. But my reason is a network thing, but it has nothing to do with the net code.
In pre MM gameplay, we had speeds averaging arround 1000m/s. A reasonable ping time is 30ms or 0.0030s. When you multiply these together you get 30m.
The longest length of a gladius is 27m. This means you could move further than the full length of a meta pvp ship, before it would even be physically posiable for a packet to travel across the internet and allow the game to update your position.
Add this to the common pvp practice of pip spamming. (Also known as pip wiggle.) And well you can see why MM wasn't just a design decision, it was needed to balance game play. Especially for players with poor ping times. (So when players say that ships are too slow now, what i hear is, I lost my op advantage.)
I know a lot of players, try to argue about tri-cording, but that was a minor issue, heck I'm not even sure it was an issue in the first place. I do feel the system they chose to fix it doesn't feel right. Personally, I feel that they should just reduce thruster output (for the tiny thrusters) and base movement on thruster power and position. (Basically a vector add procedure which is easy and fast in computers. Seriously your video card does this hundreds of billions of times per second to render any scene.) Sure tricording for some ships would make sense like this, but hey its the ships physics. Others would be crippled if you tried tri-cording.
Avenger 1 has been doing this game from the start. I think that deserves some respect.
I don't think so. I don't expect respect for anything I do in a video game.
@@BuzzCutPsycho you also dont deserve respect when you constantly insult someone just cause he has a different opinion than you
@@BuzzCutPsycho You would never get respect in a game in the first place. Why? Because you are bad
Well said, thumbs up!
thanks!
My biggest problem with ship movement is saying you can pull 20+ g's. Now I don't know if that's 'realistic' for the thrust being generated or it's just some number CIG plopped in there just so there was a number for players to look at, but no fighter should be pulling sustained 20+ g's. If CIG can correctly compute g-forces and then limit the ships to fall within human limits I think it will go a long way into getting them to their 'realistic' combat they seem to be aiming for.
Issue with arguing realism is there is always a counter point which is why I avoid it. I talk straight gameplay balance.
True. Thrusters are waaaay too powerful. CIG said they had to do that because of the introduction of gravity/atmosphere and we didn't have control surfaces or anything to counter gravity. So they increased thruster power to the heavens so ships could still fly in gravity/atmosphere. That resulted in the stupid flight model of 3.7 (or whatever it was) to 3.22 where ships were flying like bumblebees and the lead pip was pretty much always wrong. The flight model before that, in 2.x, was awesome though. Ships had weight. You were floating around. You could feel the inertia. It was soooo good. We had the best freaking space flight model ever and they removed it because they introduced gravity/atmosphere without a solution for flight in gravity/atmosphere. I so miss that flight model...
@@BuzzCutPsycho Gameplay balance is good and all, but it also has to feel good to play. Taken to the extreme if you want true gameplay balance, just give everyone a stationary turret with the same guns. There is your gameplay balance. But is it fun? That's the real question. It has to feel good and fun. If it doesn't, then gameplay balance won't matter.
I love MM and I’ve definitely voted with my wallet lol Especially cargo running it actually adds an element of game play and anxiety (which I like) about when to switch to Nav mode. Before MM, I rarely even thought about shield because I don’t typically seek out PvP. I guess, I just don’t get why people like A1 hate on it. Maybe it’s only people who give a shit about AC. (Which I obviously don’t)
Are you and I farm animals?
the low effort/low skill players were always going to like MM, like the guy who posted this vid.
I stack bodies in PvP, son.
@@BuzzCutPsycho since MM everyone does 👍
So you like it? Good. 🤗
@@BuzzCutPsychonot exactly hard, given the hovering tower defence game we're playing in 2024
I came over from DCS to star citizen so I could go faster, not slower, than my godamn spitfire in combat & the only reason I ever pledged a ship, was based on having what felt like an actual spaceship, with all the speed, functionality & tech I'd expect of one; whereas now, it just feels like a ripoff in game purchase, you'd see anywhere else.
They sold spaceships with sim-lite levels of detailing & have essentially turned them into glorified bumper cars in space, with less speed, control, choice & fun to be had all round.
Stacking bodies in MM feels like stacking Ducks on duck hunt.
Isn't it a good thing ??? giving a chance to more casual players to have fun in PvP no ?@@analysedean
This is the first video of yours I have watched and I'm now subscribed. It was suggested I don't call people names " so this idiot" you got me right there. I agree wholeheartedly with you. Too many of these light fighter elites forget there is more to this game and it's universe than single seat fighter game play. 5 light fighters should be afraid of a Hammer Head and engage cautiously if at all not giggle with glee and charge in.
Welcome! It is criminal how little light fighters care about big ships. And I am always advocating for these things to be monsters, but right now they are kittens.
I'm not sold but I guess I've been brainwashed by A1 and everyone on spectrum.
I see the idea of limiting speeds being healthy (but not limiting speed to 150 SCM)
I don't think I would mind a projectile speed buff outside of MM (just not massively faster with ships flying at a quarter the speed).
I do mind tricording be removed.
I do mind boost being super OP compared your normal "speed limit".
I do mind all the vectors of motion besides forward thrust being clamped down on.
I do mind the mode transition and deceleration when running out boost.
I don't care about weapon balancing (or even really ship balancing) at all in this stage of development. We need to get the flight model right.
You aint brainwashed. For your own opinion, don't even have to agree with mine.
A lot of the perceived issues with the flight model are all balance related however. From certain ships SCM/Boost speed to weapon damage/velocity. Those are seperate from MM. MM is, essentially, forced SCM speeds that can only be broken at limited times using a consumable resource.
I play Star Citizen pretty casually, basically only for a few weeks every update, when MM dropped I spent about 5 minutes working out how it works and it was back to business. I found it kinda funny how I could headbutt the control panel if I dropped out at full speed, and I'm abit iffy on the whole 'no shield' thing, but that's the extent of my opinions on it.
I can see why the mechanical players care alot, they basically had their world turned upside down, but to assume that they even remotely share the same experience as the casual audience is abit silly.
I do not like the no shield thing. As for mechanical players? They have a new mechanic to learn and master. They will be fine. The new audience is more important.
Alot of good points in the vide. My main issues with the current flight model are the low speeds, especially realative to weapon projectile speeds. I understand removing tri-chording. But, I think they didn't compensate by giving more thrust to basic strafing as you seem to drift and not counter strafe fast enough from something your trying to avoid. This is to encourage de-coupled flight, use your main thrust to counter your current vector. However, decoupled is also not intuitive for general populace as you now need to keep track and compensate for wverymanner of things that have imparted velocity deltas on your ship. The amount of times my friends have fallen out the sky because they didnt know theybwere decoupled and so it didnt auto-compensate to keep them hovering while they checked their mobiglass is too numerous. Also, when your trying to make the game WW2 in space, which coupled flight better fits, just make decoupling a by product of engaging thrust just like a high-g turn in like Ace Combat and I think players would better vibe with it.
Would you be shocked to hear that I would prefer the game to force either coupled or decoupled and not give players the option to pick? I am THAT insane.
"They hated BuzzCutPsycho because he told them the truth."
Like another wise man history remembers.
This shit has been happening for decades now.
I like BuzzCutPsycho because he doesn’t sugar coats anything
When I tested it I really liked the MM in Arena Commander, but I disliked it in PU. It felt totally different. I did a beginner bounty to enhance my reputation and my target was an aurora. You might expect the aurora would blow up quite fast when shot with 4 size 5 laser repeaters. I was quite stunned when I needed almost half a minute till that tiny thing finally died. I don't know what happened there, maybe it was a server-related issues and the hits not counted/registered or whatever but I had this issue often. At this time I simply abandoned doing bountys, I really felt stupid not being able to complete the easiest missions.
Also I really dislike the feeling of switching the mode. Instead of instant deceleration I would love if I had to do a flip and burn like in the old model (or at least consider I need some time to decelerate to a save speed for approaching a station)
What concerns me the most and is really upsetting: We had the old flight model for YEARS. We had it for a long time and I thought for a long time "well, this will be the final flight model, they will continue developing and improving it" but NO, in the middle of development they changed it entirely. And it't not just the flight model, other things changed in a similar matter as well. This is not how a game should be developed, if you do a space sim the flight model is the first thing you do and you stick to it. I really get a feeling they have no idea where to go with the game and how flying should feel like.
At last, I have to defend the interceptors but in this case I'm very biased because I love the arrow. It's just such a beautiful fighter and I love flying around with it. In the case of balancing their target should be other fighters or interceptors but nothing larger than this.
MM was better in EPTU. What changed were terrible BALANCE decisions that people are attributing to the master modes system. Cannons, nerfed repeaters, broken hitboxes, some ships having unkilling noses, the list goes on. That is a balance issue.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Fixing those balance issues still won't make flying feel good. Flying will feel just as crap.
A kindler, gentler buzz.
The Ambassador of Love & Kindness.
@@BuzzCutPsycho… that sounds like something you would write on a bomb or torpedo
First time watching one of your videos and I have to say that when I saw your background footage consisted of combat in a Connie and a Vanguard I had a feeling I was going to agree mostly with what you say. Great video.
I don't like master modes because I think it just makes things more confusing for new players. The flight model didn't change under MM at all. Nav mode is the old way with disabled guns and shields while SCM is a speed cap and boost/afterburner. That's it. And I still think flight is bad. Ironically the Connie is closer to a better model as it has lower accelerations and slower rotation speeds that don't stop on a dime. Unfortunately the Connie is an old ship still running a flight model from 3.10.
And the very same people who push for faster faster faster flight were the same people who were playing Into The Black where they convinced the devs to make the flight faster and faster right up until it ruined the combat and the game died. That is also not the first space combat game they have done this too over the last decade.
Love the big ships, glad to have you hear.
Compartmentalizing things for people is a good way to teach, not saying that is what MM is trying, but what I will say is the NAV/SCM switch isn't too... fluid, if that is the correct term. But the speeds being manageable and forward thrust being dominate over "tri-cording" is certainly in my opinion an easier to understand system. And I think that was the goal, and it seems to in my experience have worked.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Subscribed lol.
Tricording is as I assume "Triangular coordinates" which in itself a buzzword and obviously an exploit as it is not an obvious maneuver one would take to turn faster and in fact is a fault of the way the thrusters are coded. Hence Yogi mentioning that it would be removed. In the end I would just like to see ships fly forward more often than they did in the past using whatever mechanics CIG deem possible with the star engine.
Master mode is made for Fortnite players…
Isn't that a popular multi billion dollar earning game?
@@BuzzCutPsycho yes but starcityzen was supposed to be « realistic » a sort of simulation. Something like a battlefield game not a Arcady, stat base, kids friendly game but a immersive simulation where you are not the greatest hero of the universe but a normy who make his way.
@@BuzzCutPsycho A game being a multi billion dollar game doesn't mean it's a good game, in 2024 it means it's a good business model that more than likely appeals to a Chinese market or children. Would you say Fornite is a better shooter than Tarkov because it makes more money? Tarkov is objectively a better shooter and has WAY more heart than Fortnite, but it doesn't appeal to the widest audience possible. Tarkov is still a VERY successful game though. Maximizing profits at the expense of the games soul. Buzzcut psycho logic.
SC was pitched as a semi-realistic space sim. People invested money and now they take a 180 and make the ship combat Fortnite instead of Tarkov. People have a reason to not like it and it's not just AvengerOne try hards.
@@luckys9249"realistic" this "realistic"… But "too realistic" or "not realistic enough" when one don't like it.
Fun fact: SC never had a realistic flight model in space, to begin with. Now what?
@@eldarionmarchombre4568well it wasn't realistic & now its just a total fantasy, that's the difference
Holy shit it's great to hear rational and insightful takes on this matter when so much of the discussion and narrative is the most ridiculous nonsense
I'm glad you feel that way. Read the comments it is pure insanity.
"They don't care about Star Citizen"
"Classic case of player vs developer"
I am fucking glad somebody said it without sounding like a lunatic.
This, in my opinion, definitely stretches beyond Master Modes.
You know some would also call me a nutter too. I'm passionate!
@@BuzzCutPsycho you know they call you worse already :)
Bro. Guyver Dark Hero. My dude.
@@Defanos "Out of Control"
I've never been a fan of MM but the real issue is that RSI continues to change the flight model rather than complete the game to the point of a fully flushed out working core not over run with bugs. A game stable with all fairly modern computers and GPUs. This is not the case. There are several NVIDIA and AMD GPUs that do not work with SC at this time. This killed a lot of users who don't play now because the game is unplayable ATM for them. Instead they keep redoing the same systems, never reaching the goal. Instead of MM they could have simply adjusted the G-force blackout mechanic to cause blackout at lower G force at a shorter time interval with bonuses to ships with gravity generators. This would have fixed 80% of their problems for all classes of ships without pissing of half the SC community. Removing tri-cording was a mistake as it was a great feature. Adjusting the G-force blackout mechanic would have fixed the advantage without removing the feature. Now that they spent all this time and money developing MM, its hear but the problems still persist. MM was a mistake they don't want to back down from. I think it could still work in some form but they should bring back the old flight model for combat mode with the simple changes I proposed.
No argument that this late in development they do not have a solid FM yet. But I am sure this is the final one.
@@BuzzCutPsycho They really need to focus on game stability, economy, and crafting (including base building)
I'd love to fly with you, but unfortunately SC is unplayable for me at this time as I'm running a NVIDIA RTX A5000 26 GB GPU that will not work with SC. The game crashes as soon as it finishes loading. RSI knows about the problem but won't fix it as I don't have a common enough GPU. It's likely that I will have built my own spaceship before RSI releases SC 1.0
It was Jousting constantly before MM, I hated that.
btw, AvengerOne is Not happy with You!~
(but I am)
Sure was. It is a little better now.
Good. He hates me.
« It was jousting constantly before MM»
Yeah now it’s sentry mode constantly, amazing… so much fun…
Jousting is a little better, they could have made jousting a little better in the old flight model
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this game feature (MM).
No problem! I want to be a voice for the silent majority. If I may be so bold as to think I can be!
Remember when the world wasnt backwards?
I don't remember when it wasn't flat.
Only thing that bother me with MM is no shield on Nav mode which makes it annoying for industrial ship, the rest, I let them cook, this feature is this new compare to the rest.
I dont care for that myself but it isn't a hill I will die on
When streamers think just because they're popular they can influence the development of the game to their liking. How his neck supports that swollen head I have no idea.. you hit the nail on the head here dude. Not that it's hard to miss LOL
You'd be shocked how few people realize this.
In that video, Avenger One is respectful, you're not, why? It makes him look more thoughtful than you. Think on that. Now ban me
Being passive aggressive (along with overtly aggressive by sending his minions behind the scenes) is not respectful. Being (fake) nice does not give you a leg up if you're objectively wrong.
I don't ban people here. You're allowed to voice your dislike for me. You must be used to other channels run by lesser men.
Are you surprised that Buzz and myself are not the ones banning for having a different opinion? We can clearly see this is the next little trap. Still copying Daddy D and not even doing it right.
Avenger One is a disgraceful person. I saw several videos from him, with CIG, without CIG on the line. I'm far from being a white knight. The game still a f tech demo after 12 years... but that guy is a doushbag. He burns devs everyday with this passive aggressive comments, sometimes accusing them liars and other things. I really cant stand this guy.
"It doesn't matter if they lie to my face, as long as they're nice and respectful!"
Bravo! I am a strong supporter of your content because you preach exactly what me and my friends feel. We are the quiet majority!
Makes me feel good knowing that.
I think most people are non-combat players and couldn't give a s*** about master modes
And the majority of the player base plays this game for combat. And that's a reality, it is why it gets so much focus. Non-combat will get their time.
@@BuzzCutPsycho I disagree. The average player has bought the game, downloaded it, and played it for a dozen hours at most. Doing delivery missions etc before giving up.
As far as combat flight, they couldn't care less about either model because they sat perfectly stationary and lost to an NPC Mustang.
Combat is the main pull for people that CONTINUE to play the alpha on a regular basis. This isn't necessarily representative of the average backer.
I base this 'fact' on vibes, 'common sense' and the other stuff I pull out of my ass. I just don't think people are as tuned in on this bickering as either side claims, most backers don't even know what Spectrum is.
Thank you on bringing up multicrew. I am *amazed* how many people say "well Avenger says he wants mastermodes to be good for multicrew/for the new player, so obviously he wants what's best for the game" as though people are incapable of obfuscating their real intention and motives by saying that it isn't the case.
You're welcome. I see through that act. I wish more people did.
I think it's rather Option C
There is a sufficient amount of 50+ year old cattle that keeps fueling the Chris Roberts machine to make it seem like the game is still good, and those Legatus+ boomers outweigh any Master Mode hater that isn't dropping new money.
As long as advertisement for new products and features strike a nostalgia cord on the boomers to make 'em think of the old pop culture movies, they'll keep pledging for the new JPEGs
I just buy things because I usually enjoy the game and see the potential of it being a real space mmo. I could also be dumb.
GREAT ANSWER!!!!!!
It is many of us think, and finally we have someone telling them whet we think.
Another point is that these people plays the Leader and Wingman tactic, where the wingman is just a turkey to pull the fools.
Easy kills then, and after 20 mins of that if you remain alone the opponents are in a great confusion,expecially if they are not all together in a Discord like them.
I'm honored you view me that way. Truly. Another note about that tactic is that it was much more powerful with tricords against players who had no idea what tricords were. Things will change now and team fights are far more dynamic.
@@BuzzCutPsycho Totally agree.
Avenger Run just can't run away anymore, that's why he's pissed
Could be a part of it.
The fact that he combat logs the second he thinks he can't win gives me second hand embarrassment.
yup.
Can't stomp players so they complain that's how i see it personally
@@viper2255 yea pretty much.
Combat Geometry can be fixed by magic bullet or auto-aim adjustments and power/shields mechanics being added for a shields station person advantage.
You ain't wrong.
You're telling me that the previous patch that's had roughly the same gameplay for years, had LESS players than the new exciting master modes patch? Do you think maybe it's because people wanted to test out the brand new MM? No? You think its evidence that everyone prefers MM? Okidoki
Check out 3.17, or 3.16, compare player counts. You are welcome to find the truth if you so desire.
completely right.
ty sir
Holy fuck! This was refreshing! 😎
Sometimes we just need a good ole cleansing.
TBH when i saw AV1's video i thought he made a lot of valid points, as im not a fan of master modes either because it seems to punish the player trying to just gtfo vs fight. That said you bring up excellent counter points that seem to debunk the majority of AV1's talking points around people jumping the SC ship in droves when its simply not true, at least not due to master modes. I get why CIG wants to slow down dog fighting, to solve for the common denominator (player). CIG wants to set a low entry to each of the games disciplines and that makes sense financially. At the end of the day CIG is a business and in business to make money, it just so happens they're building an awesome space game doing it.
I also should have mentioned the truth that current network/engine cannot handle such speeds either. Desync was terrible before.
On the flip side A LOT of awesome videos got really popular just before the MM update, along with free fly event. Say what you want but that patch made the game highly playable, it was super stable on lower end hardware. The only flaw was MM. I'm not playing the game right now because MM got super boring super fast.
I'm wondering why...
My brother the game is an unstable mess with nothing to do. MM or not.
@BuzzCutPsycho it's never been more stable, getting 60 fps in a city was a massive fucking milestone, we werent even getting 20 a year prior