This Ship Takes "BROKEN" to a Whole New Level. | Star Citizen 3.23.1 AC | Hornet MKII F7A
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 19 окт 2024
- #pvp #starcitizen #squadron42 #hornet #spacesim #combatstrategy
The Hornet MKII is just king when it comes to player vs player situations.
Dive deep into the world of Star Citizen as we take the Hornet MK2 to its limits in today’s episode of our 'How to Squadron' series. Discover why this ship is both feared and revered as the king of PvP arenas, and watch as we pull off something so unexpected, you’ll have to see it to believe it! 🚀✨
🎮 What’s Inside:
Intense dogfight action with the Hornet MK2.
A hilarious surprise: even the best pilots get taken down by the unexpected!
Tips and strategies for dominating in your Hornet, whether you’re a rookie or a veteran.
👍 Enjoying the video? Smash that like button, drop us a comment, and share this video to help us fend off the RUclips algorithm gatekeepers. Every like, comment, and share makes a huge difference!
🔔 Don’t miss out on more content: Subscribe and hit the bell to get notified about our latest videos filled with tips, tricks, and plenty of in-game action.
#StarCitizen #HornetMK2 #SpaceCombat #GamingGuide
I think this is a problem with Master Modes as currently implemented, and not exclusive to the Mk II.
Low maneuvering speed + artificially limited off axis mobility + high rate of change for Angle of Attack = head on fights.
When every fight is a head on fight, the system will always produce a single best ship. For any given minor tweak to the MM model, some amount of dps out, evasiveness / front silhouette, and shield + hp will be optimal.
At the moment, it’s the Mk II hornet. Really, it’s all Hornets, with the F7A Mk II being at the top, then the C Mk II, then the MK I’s, then the Super Hornets. But they all fall in that general area of the current optimal DPS + Tank.
If they slow flight down even more, the Corsair would be the single best ship, as now it can apply it’s DPS to everything and be carried by its tank. Speed it up and probably the Buccaneer would be, as it’s evasion would pull ahead to buff its tank.
The Mk II is op, but it’s also the canary in the coal mine. This version of MM will always be a readily solvable equation for best ship, no matter how much any one ship is nerfed or buffed.
Lower SCM speeds are fine, but they need to really dial back how hard they limited tricording. Probably by about 1/3 of the gap between the current limit and how fast a tricord vector could be in the old model.
The old model had too many G’s available to the maneuvering thrusters, this one artificially caps thrusters to a net sum vector. Remove the sum cap, but enforce per thruster limits, possibly reducing current main thrusters a little bit.
Evasive ships need to be evasive, and can be, without such tight constraints as we have now. Forcing head on fights without deviation will only ever produce a DPS + Tank equation.
💯 you couldn't have said it better dude! Current master modes tunning caters for tanks that hit hard. All the hornets fall under that category. We need movement that allows positional fighting where you can evade shots and get positions on your opponent.
I don't know what you think about the new guns speed but I believe they contribute massively to why tanks with good damage are just the meta right now. Those speeds are just insane. And the distance in which they are effective all contribute to why the hornet is broken.
There will always be a meta ship, no matter what tunning we get but the true question is, is that what we want?
Thanks again for sharing dude! I appreciate these comments the most! 😊
@@spatialmonkeys I posted in another thread you had responded to in this video, but I think the answer is simply allowing maneuverable ships to maneuver and add flak to manned turrets. I think current projectile speeds are more or less fine, actually, and instead the problem is that a gladius cannot actually leverage its maneuverability against a hornet because of the excessive tricord limit.
A gladius should be able to dance at the edge of its cannon range and apply dps to a hammerhead. But that Hammerhead should be able to choose to equip itself-or be escorted by a friend-with a weapon dedicated to hitting fighters. This makes it about skill: the flak gunner & flak boat pilot vs the knife edge skill of the gladius.
Manned Turrets have auto gimbal as an option. This makes balancing their accuracy pretty easy to do-literally values in a spreadsheet. I suggest that an auto gimbal flak cannon should have roughly 5% accuracy vs a maneuvering Razor that’s at the edge of size 4 Omniski’s range. This should climb to about 90% accuracy at 40% of the S4 Omni’s range, and fall off again to about 2% at point blank. This creates a screen effect on fighters-but allows them to dance on the edge, or attempt to get under the enemy guns by crossing that screen (where they are then trapped, and thus extremely vulnerable to any escort).
So, flak should be just as it was in the WW2 space CIG insist they want: proximity fuse aoe, but low impact compared to normal shells. In SC, this translates to a weapon that’s great at splashing damage onto fighters via near misses, but has the lowest dps of any weapon in its class. Ballistic flak should do slightly more damage on a slightly larger aoe than energy flak.
This prevents flak from becoming the new default-as it would be awful for using against a 890J, but also gives us a sandbox where a fully crewed 890J isn’t literally a free kill for a mantis and gladius pair.
It would make almost every ship in the game instantly pvp viable. Bombers and even the Ares and Ion would be necessary for popping flak boats, but you’d also want real gun boats for targets like the HH & 890J. Fighters of all weights now have room to contribute. Stealth is a genuine possibility. Can you coordinate a barrage from your light fighters with your eclipse pilot to catch the enemy looking and slip a torpedo into their flak redeemer? That’s gameplay.
A caterpillar could actually defend itself from 1-2 gank fighters, but still wouldn’t be a powerhouse, and those two fighters, if they’re very good, could still win.
@@spatialmonkeys As to “there will always be a meta ship.” I think the difference lies in the space between “most effective” and “wins by default.”
At present, there simply isn’t counter play for Hornets. Either it is engaging you head on and you’re going to lose, or that’s not the case and you might kill it, maybe. This isn’t a case of a meta ship the way the Arrow was in the old model, it’s a case of winning default.
And I genuinely don’t think it’s the Hornet’s fault. Some ship was going to win the math on having the highest total for the MM equation: (DPS * AoA Rate) + (Evasion * Total Health) = Viability.
This is because MM forces fights into too tight of an envelope: pure head on.
People point to weapon velocities because the projectiles are currently so much faster than ships can maneuver. But, that is really more because of how excessively vector addition has been limited. Gradually loosening the limit on vector addition (bi/tricording) is the easiest way to balance this. Loosen the limit enough to allow evasive flight, but not so much as to return the old DDR fidget spinner effect.
You could lower projectile velocity instead, but I think that will just feel worse. Some would be in danger of becoming faster than their own bullets, and flight would still feel super stiff. Imo, better to hold projectile velocity constant, and adjust ship skill expression to dial in a flight model where the (Evasion * Total Health) equation needs to add a term for “Skill” and thus become less set in stone.
@piedpiper1172, you've really hit the nail on the head with your suggestions. Bringing back tricording to about 1/3 (MAYBE 2/3) of its original capacity is a stellar idea. It could reintroduce some of the maneuverability that many of us miss from the old model, without overdoing it. Also, the tweak you suggested for forward thrust acceleration, I'm all for it! It definetly seems like it could fine-tune the flight dynamics perfectly. This will make 1v1 feel drastically way better than what we have now.
The flak vision is spot on "might I say" into manned turrets-lowering the damage but adjusting the gimbal systems would really add so much depth to group play and for sure allow more ships to be viable. Btw great job on your end on your breakdown. It without a doubt painta clear picture of how these changes could really add what we are missing right now.
Thanks so much for laying this all out with such clarity. Really, even an idiot like I am, was easily capable to imagine what you described. Your approach and view on things could really make spice things up! Let's just hope the servers get fixed too. I think people miss out on the fact that the game has been running like absolute shit the past two patches, and none of what we are dreaming up could possible happening if that isnt resolve! 😂
Thanks again dude! Really enjoyed what you had to share 🔥🔥🔥🔥
@@spatialmonkeys Thank you so much! 🥰
I’ve been trying hard to refine how to express it, partially because the issues are so fraught. Often people assume one is either a member of the “light fighter mafia” or the “big ship carebears.” As it happens, my passion in the game is racing. For PvP, my partner wants to live out her R2-D2 dreams, so I’d love to see 2 seat fighters consistently viable (ex: under my model, the Super Hornet should have an option for flak turrets the pilot can’t control).
I’ve been starting to try to differentiate between “speed/fast” and “stiff” when discussing the SCM flight model. While yes, objectively, the speeds are lower, I don’t think that’s really what bothers people. We all want to be able to follow what’s happening in the fight, and we all want to feel like our shots will land or miss mostly because of our own skill, not because of hilariously slow projectiles.
So I think the speeds are more or less fine. It clearly has raised the skill floor, so just about anyone with 1-2 hours of practice can mentally process dogfights. Shots are fast enough to hit when you know you’ve aimed well, but slow enough to miss when you make mistakes.
But it’s all so.. stiff. It doesn’t matter that the gladius can out rate the Hornet because it can’t do so close enough, and by enough, to evade fire (plus the gladius is forged from paper this patch, but I’m happy to ignore things that are clearly up in the air, like exact health and damage numbers. Though… the F8C and Hornet MK II *exist* so imo the glad should probably get a S4 nose mount…).
And because the flight is so stiff, it just doesn’t feel good. As the pilot you feel trapped, like someone hung weights from your wrists. We need that little dash of vector summation to allow for a bit more skill expression. The Hornet will still 2-3 tap the Gladius if the glad can’t maintain smooth vector shifts and stay ahead of the barrels, but at least it’s got a chance. How big of a chance that is can be balanced and fine tuned by adjusting the slider on tricording-all without increasing the overall speed of combat. Same speed, just looser.
As to multicrew viability: I think the entire CIG staff should spend a single shift actually crewing ships. “You get the day off early once you earn 1 Million Credits, but you can’t fly. You must join player’s and crew their ships.”
Because the actual human experience of most turrets / co pilots / etc is… wildly bad. We’ve seen massive power creep in the pilot seat (ex: F8C, F7A-2, Corsair), and it really highlights how bad crewing is. Some people even expect the Zeus bounty hunter to have a pilot controlled damper! A ship that big with that many pilot guns, and people think it should/will have pilot interdiction!!
I’d really, really like them to take a breath and imagine the human being who will play as crew. We need things like dampers, emps, scanning, set waypoints, etc to be doable by a copilot/turret officer, and turrets in general need to be more powerful.
I really think almost every manned turret in the game needs to go up at least 1 size, gain a significant function in addition to its current weapons (emp, interdiction, etc), or in some cases simply be swapped with the pilot’s current guns (The Corsair and probs the Constellations are the most obvious examples of this).
I’d say the Warden is a clear example of needing to go up 2 sizes (the Harb is already +1 relative to the Warden, and it has torps), to have a manned 2x S4. The Sentinel’s turret can stay S2, but should gain a QED and the emp should be moved to the turret / removed from the pilot.
Similarly, the Scorp’s turret should go up 1 size to 4x S4, and the Scorp A gain the current 4x S3 in addition to its current tools. I love the Super Hornet concept, and in addition to a Mk II, I’d love to see an entire series of Super Fighters (Super Glad, Super Arrow, Super Razor, etc) that get either a one size upgraded co-pilot hard point, or get an existing hard point converted to a ball turret of the same size and some ship system added.
A pilot gets to fly, control all ship systems, and has an ever increasing arsenal on top of that. We will never see multicrew ships be genuinely viable or even worthwhile unless the prospect of being anyone other than the pilot is genuinely appealing.
In particular, I think expanding systems accessible only to the crew (such as the Scorp changes: either you get 4x S4, or 4x S3 + Damp / Ewar, both genuinely appealing gameplay) and finally introducing flak as a weapon option *exclusive* to manned turrets would be an over-night massive improvement to the game.
People who pay the most get multi crew ships, but those ships are almost always empty. It just isn’t appealing to crew them, and while Engineering and cargo will help a bit, the combat experience is always going to loom large, and atm it’s awful for crew. You’re literally always more efficient coming in a Gladius than being crew-which sucks for people who don’t want to be fighter jocks.
And the wildest part is that SC’s truly big hook is multicrew! There just isn’t another game where multicrew is half as viable as it already is in SC, except maybe some really niche stuff that isn’t anywhere close on immersion or sandbox. The entire SC pitch was explore the verse with multicrew, so from the start they wanted humans playing to crew, and… it’s just not even remotely close. Multi crew ships aren’t viable because flak doesn’t exist, and even if it did, most ships would still be a bummer to crew.
As to the servers… yeah. Well, 4.0 is gonna have full meshing and all that’s solved… right? Right? …. Right?
Anyway. Thanks so much for the feedback. I will keep working on refining how I say it, and trying to reach others. I think SC is shockingly close to finally delivering the vision (at least for combat) it promised. All we need are some small flight model tweaks (just nudge that SCM tricord limit up a bit!) and flak. Then I can focus on my crusade to make turrets not awful.
It will suck once the "New Hotness" gets released, then once it sucks, they won't touch it for 3 years.
They clearly don't do that on purpose 😜
Cant wait
I’ve given ballistic cannons ago on the hornet turret , it’s great combo
I should try it! I heard Vergil talking about it!
@@spatialmonkeys yes 🙌 I watched his video and it all made sense so gave it ago and I’m loving it tbh , now run it in the PTU
Great video! Love the music choice, narration, and skill you demonstrated. I love this and hope to see more content like it!
That said, I have a very different experience and thought you might enjoy another perspective. I find that the Hornet struggles against skilled players in faster ships (Bucc, Arrow, Gladius) and that it seemed the players in this video were flying well, but not as good opponents to the hornet. They flew close (allowing you to be close that is, considering back strafe) which let your shots connect. The benefit of lighter fighters is that they get length of fight from a higher skill ceiling, from a smaller profile and dodging shots etc. But in this video, every light fighter disappeared immediately because they walked right up to you and sat in your firing arc, with little in the ways of dodging. They also opted to chase you while you flew backwards which, while an effective tactic, only works in AC. Running from fights in PU means you get to leave, not chased. I know you might not be big on PU combat, but I find merit in the diversity there (weapons, ships, skill).
Another perspective is my own from my preference in pvp, the Arrow. I find that against skilled pilots, I am the most untouchable in an Arrow. Even the faster shots of Lightstikes and CF-series repeaters feel sluggish by comparison to how I am able to move that ship. Perhaps it's just that the players I practice and spar with are not top of the line, and I admit that I may be missing a more professional view on the flight model. But from my experience, I can consistently 1v1 and 1v2 Hornets in my arrow, and against varying builds on those Hornets as well. Yes, Omnisky is the accepted "best" for pvp but my arguments against that won't fit here, and yes I did fight F7A IIs full racked Omnis and they couldn't touch me either. Flight is only the boring "strafe backwards and keep nose on" if your opponent buys into it and chases. They could just pop space brake and make distance from you, and past 1 km you are not hitting any half-decent arrow pilot (or other light figher with powerful strafe). I've trained newbies on the arrow for less than 2 hours and they were consistent with that at least.
All of this is to say, I agree that the hornet is a powerhouse. It's hardpoint sizes are enormous (especially on the A variant), it's strafe is insane in most directions, and it feels like an absolute beast to fly. I don't think it's the end-all win-all broken "meta defining" ship you sell it as, but it's certainly a fun fly. I think rather that your opponents in this example do not know how to approach and handle larger targets than them (and specifically, the beast that the Hornet is). This again is also not intended as any slight towards you, I greatly enjoyed watching you fly and demolish that lobby, and learned a bit myself doing so.
Thanks for your time, and for making an awesome video. Can't wait for the next one!
o7 and Fly safe
-A Shipwright
Hey dude! Thanks for dropping by with your thoughts. I totally get where you're coming from. When I say the Hornet is "broken," I'm really talking about when you put pilots of similar skill levels against each other. Just picture this: give an ace pilot a Hornet and another equally skilled pilot an Arrow, and I bet the Hornet takes it 95% of the time. But Im just a mediocre player, so what do I know :)
I appreciate the kind words bud! And I do agree some of the players in the video were trolling! Especially the Dorito Pilot! :)
See ya around! o7
How do you get this ship? I see it on the star citizen website as still "in concept"
What's the difference between F7A and F7C?
Thanks
Hey there! So, the main difference between the two is all about the firepower. The Hornet F7C Mark 2, which you can buy directly from the shop, is equipped with two size 2 guns, 2 size 1 guns, and 2 size 4 guns, plus eight size 1 missiles. On the other hand, the Hornet F7A MK 2 steps it up with four size 3 guns, two size 4 guns, and eight size 2 missiles-definitely packing more punch!
Unfortunately, getting the F7A isn't as simple. It was only available through completing a series of missions that allowed you to upgrade from the F7C to the F7A. Not sure if they'll bring that option back, but it'd be cool if they did! Hope that clears it up for you!
@@spatialmonkeys Thank you so much, yes all clear now.
..just a bit sad for being unable to get one 🥲👍
@ShinigamiAnger No sweat, they're bound to drop more wild rides in the future! And hey, don't underestimate the F7C-it's still as broken. In this video, I'm actually rocking the F7C turrets because those F7A turrets have a nasty bug where they break down way too fast and stop being operational. I've gone with 3 size 4 and 1 size 3 on the nose-works like a charm!
If you think the F7C is broken try the F7A. Waaaaayyyyy more firepower!!
But I am using an F7A :P just without the F7A turrets!
Star Citizen faces the problem we face in the real world. Do we want same chances or do we want same outcome?
If you make it skillbased because it is a big open world, it will lead to only few people having fun and dominating the server. The safety measures to counter that can only fail.
If you make it mechanicbased (rock>paper>scissors) then theres no hard to master mechanic and the player base may shrink very soon especially if theres no other ways to progress and SC lacks a huge amount of content.
What they are doing today is to create a meta to sell ships - lame money milking strategy.They already introduced the hornet MK II, a rework of an existing ship for new money before the game was lunched.
It will get better, the flight model tunning will get better, and cig will stop milking us with broken ships in the future! I m delusional btw ... o7
How can you installing 3 size 4 guns in the F7A? isn't it only got 2 spots for size 4 guns?
my set ups is 2 size 4 and 4 size 3 and that consume the power so so quick can't last for long
Hey! Yep, you're right about the F7A normally having only 2 spots for size 4 guns. However, if you switch out to the size 5 turret on top, you trade off the two size 3 guns for a single size 4. I've also opted for just one size 3 gun on the nose because, honestly, the turrets on the F7A feel like they're made of paper. The moment your shields drop and those turrets take a hit, they just stop firing. So this is my go to setup till they get the F7A turrets fixed :P As you said, running with what i m using right now will give you a few extra shoots, its not too bad.
You could still max out with 6 guns if you swap to the civilian variant turrets, but then you end up with 2 size 1 guns on the nose and 2 size 2 on top, which honestly does less damage than what I’m using in this video.
@@spatialmonkeys Brilliant ideal that blowing my mind, I'd like to try on my F7A MKII, thanks mate for sharing.
This ship is awesome! Question, why do you have only 4 guns? I think 6 guns performance better
The reason I'm running four guns is because the F7A turrets literally can't take any damage right now. It's a bug, and I'm hoping the next patch fixes it! Yeah, it's nearly 30-40% off in terms of effectiveness. You can still run six guns if you use F7C turrets, but the damage is a bit less compared to the four I'm using. I'd recommend using the Erkul DPS calculator to get a better idea of what's optimal.
@@spatialmonkeys oh that’s true. Forgot about that bug. Thx o7 and keep it up with great content
Thanks man! I appreciate it!
Your videos keep getting better. Great progress!
Thanks man! I appreciate it. That is the goal (:
This ship is the ultimate proof that CIG really wants a P2Win game afterall. It`s just ridiculous!
What's next? Mark 3 is going to have size 9 guns?
With the current master-modes tuning, it does feel way more p2win. The previous flight model didn't suffer from this. You could literally take out a mining ship and be successful against light fighters :P The good old days!
It really was the exact opposite of what we have right now. I hope the future tuning focuses MORE on pilot skill over who has bigger guns :) thanks for the comment dude!
lmao. first time in this "game"? every new ship is OP at the beginning, and then becomes nerfed to the state of potato. ask owners of Ares platform, lmao
Its always a bug dude! They never do it on purpose :P Its not like it effect sales ..
@@spatialmonkeys yeah... bug, for sure, lmao. I'm in this game from the "Hangar module" times
@izraphailzero5610 Ares is not bad if it's doing what it was made to do. It shouldn't be able to bullseye a fighter. I hate that the Ions gun was changed to less per shot and higher of though. They should have left it alone and just lowered ship manuverability while it's cannon was online. Could have made for some interesting runs on larger ships where you'd be kinda locked in while bearing down on targets.
SC takes "Hype" "Alpha" and "troubleshooting" and makes it the game mechanics.
I thought it was a chat simulator! :P
I love my F7A
Ya its brettty peasty :P
A name I always see in AC o7
Hopefully I'm not too annoying (:
@@spatialmonkeys never , AC is the place to find the good pilots it means the PTU is a breeze 🤘🏻
until this 700 million dollar game releases a finished product I just cat give it my money. Ive got a feeling people are going to get burned and left with unfinished product one day.
Totally get you! It’s been a long ride with this game, over a decade now and still ticking. But hey, the good news is you can snag almost all the ships in-game, so no need to open the wallet too much. Just play and enjoy it for what it is.
That’s the state of games now, no new game is complete or bug free. Also DLC are not updates, their are chunks of incomplete games as well. Complete games died when the industry switched to digital instead of using dvd.
If your gonna add commentary atleast use your own voice, or just leave it without if you don’t want to, no point in using a monotone AI.
If this is your actual voice you need to work on your commentary, because you sound extremely monotone, no emotion whatsoever and its just not engaging
Thanks for the feedback dude! I completely understand! Should happen soon 🤞
Absolute slapper
Thanks mate 🧉
Tana is coming up!
Power creep and marketing FOMO.
They could fix the Hornet in a day.
Less than....
Yup
The game was so buggy, I couldn't get the upgrade earned. Missions bugged out every time.
I'm sorry to hear that! A lot of mates in the org had the same issue! The ones who didn't suffer did it weekly as the phases were rolling out!
gotta work at that power management timing
Someones jelly! 😂 :P my brain switches off as soon as I get in this thing. The missing chromosome also doesn't help
Its only been like that snce it was released...your a lil late rookie
Lol appreciate the comment
Monke died to an ion smh my head
No one saw that :P
Nice tone, nice pace, good humor =) Keep up the good work mate ! JeanMarie_Medpen
Thanks buddy! 😊 Your feedback is highly appreciated!
all those "broken" cries are pointless...
its CIG, they'll nerf it to the state of unplayable crap. They're always doing this, unless its a Gladius.
Its a typical CIG strategy: make ship OP during the release/sale patch, and nerf it into the potato. The same happened with Shrike, Ares, and many more....
This is all new to me :P
How can you state that a digital ship bought with real money in a unfinished scam of a game is BROKEN? The cope is real.
Oh well
The super hornet was always my favorite. I love the new one too, but man, not having 4 MFD's is horrible
Couldn't agree more! It's pretty disappointing 😕
@@spatialmonkeys I think newer ships like this one and the Spirit are being made with the new HUD from last citizen con in mind. once we get that, it should be even better than MFDs. (hopefully lol). But I get it if people still prefer MFDs tho, they have their charm for sure.
@@tim-jim760 ahh that makes sense! Thanks for the info dude! I had no clue that was the case 👍
So a pure military ship is broken compare to your civillian ones.. i see LOL
It's just the mark 2 hornet, both variants. 😂
@@spatialmonkeys NERF the civ mk2 and keep the A how it is :P
I' am pretty sure all the pvp community wants both of the ships nerfed to oblivion :P Mastermodes just needs a better tunning so flight skill could matter a bit more!
@@spatialmonkeys it's the same discussion again before cig nerfed the super hornet about 10 years ago. Because 6 guns. Obviously that didn't aged well. Sorry but the fake pvp community shouldn't say anything. They ruined a lot of ships for they gameplay.
@@machoalright Just give us flight skill back and no one would complain about this thing :P I personally dont like flying it, because its so much stronger than everything around. I mean the thing slaps a tad bit to hard. But nerfing it to oblivion wont be the solution, as you mentioned earlier, it only ends up killing ships!
في حد بحكي عربي؟
Yup
ما فهمت شو بتقصد @@spatialmonkeys
@@Joker-1-ba7kee Arabi (:
@@spatialmonkeys هههه أنت عربي؟
Ahh 😂 ordonee maread nafseeyan ! Itsharafna joker!