An Architect Reviews the RSI Constellation - Star Citizen
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 окт 2024
- In this new installation of An Architect Reviews, I take a look at the RSI Constellation in Star Citizen. This will be an in-depth look at the design language and organization of space on the interior, in addition to how successfully it accomplishes its design goals.
Want to get into Star Citizen? Use my code and get 5,000 UEC!
STAR-MVMG-5MLN
Join my community and get in the game with me for my next video! OR just discuss SC with fellow players and me.
/ discord
Music by Epidemicsound.com
![An Architect Reviews the Anvil Carrack [Star Citizen]](/img/1.gif)
When flying above a planet doing scanning, you would want the scanning turrent on the bottom.
And when landed on a planet, you would want your gun turret on the top as AA.
Designers placed them exactly the opposite way.
That seems like a perfect solution to the problem.
It really upsets me, that too often the design decisions by CIG are the opposite of what common sense would recommend to almost anyone. Dont want to sound rude, but the explanation choices are not many: stupidity or sabotage? Tough choice, when talking of people who included a statement in one of their official videos, that "air gets less dense closer to the ground"... Ideas?
Another example: all ships in SC are VTOL (vertical takeoff and landing). For such craft, safety of landing is vitally important. Name a ship with good pilot's view of where you land.
In space there is no up or down so scanning can with the top of the ship toward a planet. Flying above the ground in an atmosphere you might want to shoot to the ground so your logic isn't the best one per se. They might have designed it with that in mind what i described and it is pretty logical knowing there will be a lot of planet side missions where people use the andromeda series. Flying upside down in an Amosphere isn't very logic though.
"In space there is no up or down"
Yes
"so scanning can with the top of the ship toward a planet."
Not on atmospheric planets, which are the most promising exploration objects. Scanning in SC is relatively low-range, so planet surface scanning will be done in atmospheric flight mode. As you wrote yourself, "Flying upside down in an Amosphere isn't very logical though."
Other than that, even on non-atmospheric planets it is not comfortable to fly bottom-up above ground. Try, and get this confirmed yourself.
Scanning for an exploration ship is main gameplay, so it has to be implemented as well as it gets. Here it is not.
"Flying above the ground in an atmosphere you might want to shoot to the ground"
Yes, but shooting surface emenies from the air is nowhere close to the main functions of an exploration ship. This is a task for ground-assault craft. In our case, this irrelevant function should have been definitely dropped to provide two benefits:
- better scanning gameplay
- better protection of the landed ship.
But this has not been done. Therefore I call this bad (non-purpose-oriented) design.
Imo both variants have their advantage - if it's a dropship, I'd rather have a turret on the bottom giving fire support and clearing the LZ while landing, although when landed a turret on top would make more sense to defend against attackers... And regarding the scanning, as it's been said before, you could turn your ship upside down in space , although that'd be when being at a low altitude with gravity and all
After watching your previous vid, I immediately checked for more. You've got a solid format here and could build an interesting series by deconstructing more ships. People love to hear a logical, critical view on the ships they've paid money for. Once you put out a few more, I'd happily subscribe.
Yeah, he could totally review lots of spaceships in video games! Like the ones in Mass Effect (+Andromeda), or any game! And in movies too, like Passenger's spacecraft... And also speak about architectural building issues in video games ! 8O
So many possibilities (ﾉ◕ヮ◕)ﾉ*:･ﾟ✧
I already subscribed off Morph's SE content but having a guide to all the different Star Citizen ships would be great. Most players focus on dog-fighters and most space sims have covered dog-fighting ad nauseum. There's a lot less content on ships designed to explore, mine, haul, and do all the other dirty work that makes life in the 'verse possible. Keep it up, Morph
TOTATLY Agreee
Very solid on the videos I found the 600 and then this one and I like your breakdown but do more than just the big ships in my opinion there will be alot of people in single to two man operations
Why not just subscribe now? You know he will do more content
Great video, however I want to point out something you said that was wrong. your blood doesn't actually boil in a vacuum as it's not exposed to the vacuum of space. The veins and arteries themselves create enough tension strength to hold the pressure of the blood relatively stable (at least for a while). However eyes would be a different story... Another issue would be the lungs, as they too are exposed to vacuum the air currently in your lungs as you're exposed to the vacuum of space might expand into your blood and kill you instantly (so always breathe out if not wearing a suit and exposing yourself to a vacuum).
PS. Decompression isn't as dangerous as it's shown off in movies etc when going from 1 atmosphere to 0 atmosphere. However I do really hope they implement it like in movies as it's simply plain awesome. Freezing is also not really as big an issue as in movies where it would take you up to 40 mins to reach 4 Kelvin, give or take. This is because there's no atoms to transfer heat to, therefore the only heat transfer in space is radiation. and radiating your heat is the slowest heat transfer there is.
Keep up the good work, I hope to see more architect videos in the future! I'd love to see a video on the Avenger rework next!
one of the best cinematic illustrations I've seen was the rock hoppers in The Expanse. In one scene he exhales and opens his helmet to fix a loose wire or something INSIDE his suit. Just a few seconds, not enough to do serious damage to himself, and then he closes and repressurizes.
One of the simplest suit designs is a "pressure suit" which is basically a lightly insulating compression garment meant to protect you from vac caused swelling. The only part that has atmo is the helmet.
I just double checked, he breathes in on that scene (S01 E06 around 7 minutes and 50 seconds) and not out which always bugged me. For breathing in is dangerous as I mentioned above. I did like that they showed that you can be exposed to space though, even though there was a slight error there.
I recall there's research on the subject.
You'd pass out in 10 seconds, but pretty much all test subjects survived and made a 100% recovery with no ill effects if they had less than 2 minutes of vacuum exposure.
Past that point it's increasingly likely that you'll suffer permanent injury.
So, really, you have about 10 seconds to save yourself, and about 2 minutes to be rescued and you'll be perfectly fine.
So it's not quite the immediate disaster it appears to be.
It also means decompression where there is a loss of atmosphere/pressure, but not so much force you risk being sucked out of your spaceship is not an instant death kind of hazard by any means.
(in fact, I've heard for the kind of small leaks they expect to be plausible due to a minor impact, the crew of the ISS has on the order of several minutes to even half an hour or more to patch things up before it even becomes a major hazard.)
Risks are certainly there, but they're not as dramatic as might at first be expected.
My blood would boil at the thought of how stupid I was to forget my helmet
Omricon, really? I seem to remember him breathing OUT. I thought it was a deliberate detail.
Even the B-17 Bomber's lower ball gunner rotated with the guns so he could see down, that's just poor design on that ship
Not all the way down. I have been in one and it was terrifying.
Lol, and the b17 was 1940-something, this game is set in like 9000 years after that
@@josephjones6870 i have also had the privilige....and the absolute scare of being allowed in a working b17 ball turret years ago. its a one of a kind experience that i never want to repeat
@@user-zq6yz5gf6d About 900 years, actually, but your general point is accurate nonetheless.
It's also not a ball turret.
Damn what a pleasant video!
I'm surprised you didn't mention that the bridge seats are facing forward when not occupied, so you end up having to wait for it to rotate before you can sit down.
They should always be facing to the rear so you can just plop down, then spin around facing forward.
If this ship was real you would never use the automated twist of the seat, you would just shimmy around and sit down, much less hassle.
@@marc0523 But it isn't real.
@@databite2549 It's a "suspension of disbelieve" it has to "feel" real so that you can get lost in the fantasy.
@@marc0523 fair enough
Really loving this series. You're putting into words and well-edited video an aspect of space-sims that really pull you into the escapist experience. Hope to see much more!
I dream to have a Constellation one of these days. I've always loved it since they launched it around 2014. In my opinion, It's a gorgeous ship.
love your type of review
the designers need to personally talk to you
nah... the designers do their job and morphologist does his own
@@-_Nuke_- what is wrong with you. this comment is 2 years old D:
@@topy706 lol you are right! sorry about that xD
@@-_Nuke_- you're good man
I do agree having someone who’s torn their ship designs apart logically and from a architectural POV would be nice for CIG to have on staff to give this feedback in house.
Yes I know this is 2 years ago but I’m starved for star citizen content after just finding out about it recently
more of this please. This is exactly what I've been looking for in a RUclips series. Not even that big a fan of Star Citizen but you make it all seem so interesting
I agree on some points something you didn't mention at least with mine is that big fold down screen in front of the two "co-pilot seats that effectively blocks their view and ability to fly the ship effectively. screen should either be made small or be able to be folded up and away, The center bars are a pain in the but blocking view no normal designers would have done so. As for the small ship in the back . Since we cant seem to use it of late its kind of hard to see it's usefulness. If I was a bad guy that would be my first target on a conny . Blow that little ship up while its attached and the explosion could take out a good chunk of the ship. I rarely have someone with me who could jump in the little ship to help me fend off pirates. Truthfully by the time the guy ran back to the ship through the three air locks to get to it get in it and de tach it ship would be destroyed. If the ships Ai was smart enough to keep the big ship in orbit around a planet you could jump in the snub nose and go down to the planet surface for a meeting or grab supplies or some such but of course there is no storage space. if the constellation is about to be destroyed you might be able to get to the little ship and undock but once again is has no warp drive so finish off the pirates then float along I guess but it is nice to have it there as a choice. They should just make it modular let us change it out to just more storage space, a place I could put my nox which I would love, or like you said a small med bay , a repair area, I will say on the Andromeda putting a cyclone in the large lift the cyclone moves around. I put in my nox and my cyclone both fit fine but until I lifted off they were dancing all over. Of this latest patch on the one moon if I put in just the nox when you lift up the cargo bay the nox falls through the floor of the lift jittering around. Didn't use to, One you didn't mention is the shower is suppose to have a toilet also and a sink. there are cut outs for them but they are not there. at least not in the Andromeda, Looking at the pictures of the Apollo looks like they have done the same with the bars on its front windshield or port. Oh yea and the bottom gunner they did it right in other ships flips you upside down and you are upside down with the rest of the ship I guess Roberts space industries are behind the times. or they need a new engineer. Considering how long it took them to fix the missles on one side sticking out of their tubes I wouldn't hold my breath on anything.
Yes more of these critiques please.
I love my Aquila. However, I have had many of the same thoughts you have; widen the cargo area, get rid of, or completely change those struts in the canopy...obstructed vision isn't good on an explorer, I would say. The turret...should have been a ball turret, if they really had to have one. As for the fighter...I'd say lose it and use that area as a med bay. Exploration is dangerous. People get hurt. Some way to see to the health of your crew, and therefore the mission, is necessary, not optional, in a ship this size. FWIW
Lose the canopy and use screens or a head mounted display. Also change everything so the the floor is aligned tangential to the main thrust vector.
Siani tell that to nasa lol
Aquila is not a deep exploration vessel though, it's meant to explore solar systems not discover new ones, ideally it'd be working with a fleet including Carracks (that have med bays and repair facilities) and an endeavor discovery (that can process all the data the Aquilas/Carracks bring back). Gotta think on the fleet level for Exploration, one ship won't be able to do it all! (I own Endeavor Discovery + Endeavor Hope, Carrack, Aquila, Freelancer DUR and a couple 315p's - that's just my exploration fleet haha).
The canopy bars don't really bother me as much as the feeling that all the bridge stations are too far back in the hull. I think a lot of the view problems would become less of an issue if the seats were further forward, which would also give improved side views.
Onr thing that bothers me about the snub fighter: How does one refuel that thing while on a long expedition? Does it just leech off the host ship's fuel supply?
If we were to start a petition to get you hired onto the ship team, would you dlconsider it if CIG responded to it?
His job should be more of just reviewing the ships before they are implemented to ensure they make sense
Lol, this is perhaps one of the few times I will ever comment on the canopy. But I think they should have minimized the canopy struts when piloting seeing as how in real life the struts (actually pillars in cars) would be minimized by our perception because we have a much greater field of view and we shift constantly or turn our heads which gives us view around the pillars. If you keep your focus to a distance point they are hardly an issue. But since we are playing a game from a monitor with a significantly reduced field of view, they would have done better to artificially reduce the impact of the struts in the game as we fly. But I still think that the majority of the time, most of the ships will not have a problem.
Well said. So often people post images of fighters or other aircraft with horribly restricted strut filled views and say "see, not an issue' - which is true enough. BUT, a real person can move their head a bit and see around that strut in a way our avatars won't be able to.
I once had a terrible little car (Chevette) where due to my height I had to duck my head to look under the rear view mirror to see right side approaching traffic at every four way stop. It was only practical because the little ducking motion to check that angle was trivial to perform in real life. If I were locked in position like our avatars, that would have been an intolerable and lethal problem.
haha, I had one of those cars, for a short time. Amazingly simple thing to repair and maintain, but otherwise not a thing to write home about.
Edit: it blew a fuel hose just after night time and I found it, walked 2 blocks to an auto parts store, got a new hose and clamps, fixed it in the dark and went home.
My Chevette (aka the Chevy Shove-It) blew three heater cores, two carbs, the radiator fell out on the highway (tied back into place with shoestring from a nearby convenience store), and it tended to fail in threes (three repairs close together). Not a good machine, but it was my first car and it only cost me $300 to start.
Yep, the heater core wasn't even connected when I got it.
Maybe the Aquila needs a canopy armor system like the RSI Carrack has to justify all those struts. As seen in this picture, mir-s3-cdn-cf.behance.net/project_modules/max_3840/8b91e321714779.5630697666025.png
Loving these reviews. I will say on the note of the medical facilities from what we just learned it does not seem feasible to have them on a ship this size. The struts are seemingly an forever issue with CIG they love them to much and we all want to get rid of them. I mean at least with the normal connie cockpit the panels look like they would be easier to replace in case of damage, but with the aquila it is the exact opposite.
love the camera work in the intro as well as your logical and elegant criticism. Please keep this series up. As for the Connie series I love the ships and hope when in-game purchasing is finally implemented I can get one.
Your commentaries are great! I also appreciate the time you put into cinematic shots and the perfectly timed music. Based on the 600i review and this video, you are my new favorite ship reviewer!
5:27 because I am guessing that the gravity generator affects the turret too so if you are upside down… yeah. Also even if it didn’t effect the turret you would have to get in from under the turret (the top there would be a seat in the way) which means getting out of the ship to ge to to the turret
Really loving the Ship Reviews, saw the 600i and went to your channel looking for more, glad you are making more.
I love this sort of review! CIG really care about immersion, and the design of their ships needs to make sense for that to work. As you say, if there is no space to store food, how do you survive for months at a time out on journeys? Why is there so much stuff blocking your view in a ship literally designed to Look For Stuff (exploration)? Once again, a spot-on review and I hope CIG sees it and listens to your feedback.
Please keep these coming, I saw the 600i video and was alittle sad you didn't have more, came back and subbed, these are great!
I'm very glad you're doing these. I've been saying for a LONG time that CIG should hire an architect at least at the concepting phase to work out the blueprints for ships. I hope CIG pays attention to these videos of yours.
I love this new reveiw series. Its such a creative way to combine your eduction with your hobby. Keep up the great work!
I know this is years later, but this video playlist/format is awesome and I've been very much enjoying these.
loving this review series. Please do more of them and this doesn't mean it can only be Star Citizen but other games as well.
Keep up the good work
Please continue this SC series. Love your professional manner of critique.
Absolutely love this series of architectural reviews! Really glad I subscribed and you rock for doing them!!!
Great comments overall, but loved what you said about the turrets and back with the snub nose docking area.
The only thing I think missing is commentary on the ship's design for defenders/boarders and a "playlist" for this series.
Watched your 600i and then this video. Good stuff, man. I'm in the Navy right now, so I tend to compare these against the spaces that I'm used to being in. It's neat comparing and contrasting the things I notice with the things that you point out, but I largely find agreement with you for the most part, and I appreciate your perspective, attention to detail, and politeness, as well as your narration tone and style. There are things I note differently than you do, of course, but I love your perspective and presentation, and will keep watching as you put more of these out!
2 years later and out of the Navy, it's cool that I found my way back to this video again.
Wondering if I should buy a Constellation...heh. I wish they had a medical variant, though.
I agree with what you said about storage and other functions like having a med-bay, perhaps either downsizing the Rover or expanding the cargo hold would solve that issue, and they could squeeze a med-bay in the bow section or the aft section where the fighter is
Enjoyed your analysis! Thank you for taking the time to make this video!
I really enjoyed the 600i video and this one. Looking forward to what's next!
Very nice video, and it really shows the issues of designing the exterior before the interior that plagues the older ships.
I am enjoying this style of review on the ships, a very nice change over the reviews we typically see where people theory-craft over presumed parts and upgrades and combat comparisons. Future review plans? I would be interested in your take on the Starfarer and Retaliator
This is a wonderful thing, I hope you take a look at the biggest ships out there. I wouldn't mind a 1 hour video just exploring every nook and cranny.
Good series ! Agree entirely with canopy section needing a rework. Btw you appear to have part of a desiccated Geddon lizard attached to your shoulder.
One purpose for the structure in the canopy is when in space heading towards a station a star is in the background it can be used to block the light so you can see where you are going.
I liked it. I wish you could comment more on how specific visuals and design choices impacts the feeling. You mentioned it every now and then but I feel like there were lots of things that got skipped that would have been worth. Basically: go deeper! :D
Love the constructive feedback and the way it puts ideas that I think a lot of us have about these ships into terms that the design teams that worked on the ships could find useful. P.s would love this as a series looking at reasons for the design choices, it gives us a better appreciation for the hard work gone into these ships. Thanks.
loved your video, lol i actually have a aquila its my favourite ship too. When you said why are there no medical facilities on board a exploration ship. honestly i hadn't thought of that but that is a massive concern massive. because when you are off exploring you most likely will only be in this ship. love the video
I just found this channel through sheer luck with RUclips recommending your Lorville business district video. I didn't know I wanted videos like these until I saw them. Great Job!
In regards to the Andromeda. Too much wasted space, especially in the front of the ship. The pilots chair should be closer to the windows, as they are the ones needing to see. Struts are cool but when they are directly in the middle of your view they are harmful.
Good review, keep it up m8. I was surprised you commented at the end that this was your favorite ship. That you didn't mention why this was the case, escapes me. With all of the available and coming ships, could you do one explaining why this is a favorite please?
H'mm I love this breakdown, I might add that the cargo bay lift is not to be opened/closed by the rover driver from the side panels, the driver of the rover would first lower the lift from above then use the airlock, then to re-enter the connie the driver should exit the rear of the rover when parked on the lift then raise the lift from the rear exterior switch located under the rear of the connie just outside the lift then move to the frontal airlock, now with a second person in mind the crewmate would operate the lift from the panel beside the ladder to bring the rover up. Something to note is all constellations are supposed to include an optional expansion station which could be used for any number of purposes perhaps even as a med station.
Looking forward to the next videos, well done.
One note however regarding redundant systems: Watch how CIG implements the very idea of redundant system in the typical CIG way. They integrate two shield gen or two power plants and place them next to each other on one side of the ship. So if one shield gen is it, it is very likely the the other is getting damaged as well.
This is also very apparent in the Retaliator where the components are not concealed, but it is the same in the connie.
The clever way would be to place one shield gen, one avionics unit and one power plant on either side of the ship so that when one side is hit, the other side has a chance to stay intact. But well, CIG and clever design.....
I really hope that the designers can take notes from these videos. They do an excellent job, considering their work load and this helps them greatly.
Loved the video. Good job working through the challenge of it being a utility video!
That bottom turret is probably designed more for ground cover fire more than space and dog fighting
I think the bottom turret will eventually flip over the seat while lowering
The ship is going to be in space more than on the ground, so it would make more sense for both turrets to act more like ball turrets and have the operator rotate with the guns.
And dual purpose would be utterly necessary.
I wonder what they could do with that aft-most section if they flipped the snub-nose, had it doc upside down with gear against the hull of the constellation, and made it something you access by EVA rather than through the constellation's interior.
Really enjoying this series. Keep it up! :)
Out of all of the critiques over the years that have been made about the constellation ships this is definitely the best. All of the problems with the original iterations were fleshed out but it's clear there is still room for improvement. I Do give the developers credit, the current constellation is better design wise than the originals, but there are still many issues. I remember when I first saw the new Aquila redesign and question the lack of storage since it's technically a long range exploration vessel; happy there are others who noticed it.
You bring up a good point. They always said the constellation is a versatile ship. Why not make the "snub ship" area of the ship with different modules available to replace that room and to change its capability. Examples like: a medical bay, extra storage bay, research work station, ect.
Thanks for the series. That bottom turret. Sadly it's the main breaker for me. Second is the lack of medbay. Absolutely love the escapepod beds, great way to start the day :D
Another excellent video, all the more so since I'd bought the ship a week back. Can't wait until you review the Carrack from your professional view point. Cheers and please continue making these great vids o7
PS: I have subbed in hope that you will review more of the ships. The format is great, and the videos have a high quality both in visuals and information. Good job!
I would love to hear your take on the Freelancer, the Catepillar and the Mercury once that is in engine.
I do enjoy the Connie, she was was first purchase back in 2013. I bought it with the idea that she'd be perfect for trying to convince my friends to play. I'd get a bigger ship, and they could tag along and try out the game. I ended up trading up from my Connie, I CCU'd it to a Carrack, but I still may end up getting another Andromeda as I have a soft spot for it. A gunship / hauler / doing chores kind of a ship.
I really enjoy this series of videos you're doing! Please keep doing them!
Great video I'm really enjoying this series. I have a humble request on whether you'll be reviewing the smaller ships as well, potentially in batches. I have an Avenger Titan and even as a single manned ship I find it's design really interesting. Would be great to see what you pick up on various other ships
Another great video Morph looking forward to seeing more of this series
Great work again! Loved the unique insight you provide.
I have an andromada and love the canopy. Gives it a certain feel that other ships don't have
I wish I could upgrade my Cutlass to this beauty! Amazing ship!
Great review! I am really enjoying your "Architect Reviews". I agreed with most of what you said when it came to the 600i. Especially the too much unused space part. However, when it comes to the Connie... (I am admittedly a little biased, as i own one, and i quite like the ship). When I first saw the concept for what the Connie would become (not including the luxury version), my first thought was "this is RSI's answer to the Millenium Falcon. Its their utilitarian ship, and has that look. So, when it comes to things like physical space, and the cables hanging here and there, it made sense to me. It was meant to look a little rough and cramped, though thankfully they found out a few great ways of stowing things like tables away. As for the bottom turret, ships have artifical gravity. To use that turrret in the way you suggest would be like hanging upside down on Earth. As annoying as it is, i dont see any other way of having it unless you turn off the gravity every time you use that turret. The bridge window I agree with. Far too many things getting in the way. And i must admit, i had never even considered a medical bay. The cargo bay, I think the connie has the bad luck of being a cargo vessel first, the variants were just an afterthought (i could be wrong). Which is a shame because the Aquilla works well as an exploration vessel. Had they all had the extra large hold like the Taurus, then things may have been a little better. Like you said, the space for the snub fighter could have been used better.
Thank you for your review!
I really like this review. I hope that you'll be able to switch the "snub-module" for something else, like a 20 SCU cargo hold or, as you point out, a small medbay (which is especially needed for the Aquilla, on those dangerous long range exploration trips).
I think some good places for inspiration when it comes to interiors could come from submarines and for cockpits tractor cabs, there’s so much cool shit in there and it’s all perfectly designed to be within reach
i got caught up in how amazing everything looks from ship to ship, planet to planet that i never once considered the need for a sick/med bay **
Nice series, I enjoy your video's. Can't wait to see your take on the Carrack, if and when it is ever made
I really like your opinions about this wonderful ship! I pretty much think this will be good for beginner solo players, or a duo of players that really do intend to choose exploration as a carrier in SC. But if you have 3 or more friends already playing and dedicated to exploration, I'd recommend to recruit 1-2 more and get yourselves a Carrack. That beast will be much more suited for exploration, and I could imagine being settled on that ship permanently, instead of just taking it out for long-haul explorations.
10:39 I don't have additional storage when the ursa is loaded if I had to store food or water 7:28 lockers you can definetly have a suit there and this fit a bottle laying down there with no problems
all ships should have a VR headset for the pilot and use multiple cameras on the outside of the ship stitched together so the pilot can see in all directions.
I enjoy this series and has made me a subscriber. I can't wait to see you do the Carrack once it becomes available
Awesome video, Constellation is also my favorite series, it is wonderful.
Great video ty! I think the bottom turret is a major issue they should fix. Since you can't actually trip over the cable running across the bridge floor, I'm ok with it. It makes me think of an aftermarket or fix on the fly bypass kind of immersion. Liked and subscribed, looking forward to more ship reviews.
Nice to see you back in business! Will you make a video of the newest SE multiplayer patch?
Wow, GREAT point about the bottom turret!
Watched both your reviews, and frankly it was mesmerizing. I don’t own or play star citizen but frankly I think this a very cool concept. You need to review other ships not just on star citizen. Maybe Mass Effect or other Sci Fi games. I think you’d garner a lot of support. I would definitely subscribe if you did a dedicated series on this! It’s just great!
The Constellation is one of my favorite ships and despite having upgraded my original pledges I always kept a Constellation in my pool, just for nostalgia and the iconic front section of the ship.
Design wise though I think it's one of the least thought through vehicles in the game which has it's roots in it's age and what appears to be that the designers didn't even had a clue back then what this ship would be good for. They just added a bunch of cool stuff everyone dreamed about to have one day in a space game into one ship. Multi crew, a big hangar allowing to drop vehicles, a snub ship, manable turrets and so on.
Considering the oldedst of them all, the Andromeda, you have a ship that so far behaved like a sitting duck in space fights. You might seriously threaten ships the size of a Freelancer or Caterpillar but only got one turret on each side to defend against fighter sized ships, which likely will be the most common opponents in this game. You got a snub fighter which adds to defense capability but not in an outstanding way and you got a cargo bay that allows for using a Rover or being a trader but then again there are also more effective alternatives for that as well. So what exactly is the purpose of this ship?
The first Phoenix was a weird Frankenstein of a utility ship and over the top kitsch interior. The revision is much, much better yet I'm very curious about your review.
The Aquila has the flaws you perfectly called out. What do you need a snub ship for? If it would be some kind of utility vessel with arms that can take probes of asteroids, board landing parties etc - fine. But in it's current iteration it's rather a waste of space, just like the defensive turret on the bottom. If you get into a fight you're dead meat anyway like any other civilian ship. The missing med bay limits the range and area of operation for this ship (anything with a Rover on it for planetary excursions should have a med bay) to scanning and sending out probes and so does the missing storage area. If you pass on taking your rover with you on the other hand the storage area is way too big to make effective use of it - because having that much rations for a really long term exploration would mean that a med bay and perhaps a mess/hall kitchen were required once again.
The Taurus appears to me the design with the most purpose. It's very simple and straight forward.
love this format, really interesting to hear an architects POV on this.
subbed
After watching your 600i video, i had to add something:
A comparisson, or your thoughts on, the Constellation Phoenix compared to the 600i would be great.
I love your reviews. May they live long and prosper.
Disclaimer: No ships nor pilots were harmed in the making of this video.
Commander Jack I think you are lying ;)
*sigh* Ill get the bodybags..
Hehe
How can you tell?
I hope you make more Architect Reviews they are really good
Wait...you're back??? I thought this channel died!
I am now happy...thanks for coming back ;)
The bottom turret fixing was one of the earliest complaints and in Chris Smith's lengthy rework - his final words about it amounted to "I'm too tired of working on this to bother fixing the turret and not everything needs to work perfectly" Maybe you can find that video, its years back now...
I enjoy hearing the reviews from a professional structural designer as their opinions seem quite relevant for deciding what ship to aim for
It’s really interesting getting an architect’s point of view on this kind of stuff I’m not gonna lie.
Nice video, Morphologis. Regarding the sick bay and the cargo bay, I think that, given the size of the ship, there is no room for a dedicated med bay but an existing zone should contain some medical equipment to serve such purpose up to some basic level (i.e. keep someone alive long enough). And regarding cargo bay, I'd get rid of the exploration dinghy on the back and dedicate that area to provisions.
I could watch these architect reviews all day.
Glad he’s back 😁!!! I’m hoping to see more of this AND more space engineers!!!
You make me want this game so bad! Despite the fact that you are pointing out problems, the beauty and skill of the shots, music, and even just the ships on their own is jaw-dropping. That on top of the fact that this game is basically everything I’ve ever wanted in a space-related videogame, you should seriously be getting sponsored by the Star-Citizen crew.
Pease cover all ships! Im so hesitant about this game, but your ship reviews are the only star citizen videos that are convincing me! Keep it up
I'm an engineer, i like how things look but I always value more function over looks. I do understand beauty in aesthetics and simplicity in the many fields of science. But you have made me understand why i like certain things, but couldnt do it as eloquent as you. I noticed the harmony in the geometry of this game but maybe i wasnt seeing the whole picture why the design was good. so thanks, your videos are very interesting. by the way i upgraded my starter package to the taurus and love it.
I haven't been in a Constellation since 2.0, and I have to say I'm impressed! This is far better than the old edition, even though some of the issues is still present. I'm actually starting to consider it for my exploration ship, even though I don't have friends ready to join the crew... I have thought it to big for solo operation, and probably not very cost effective compared to a Freelancer DUR, but still it is tempting.
Feels like and adventurous home. The struts are by far the biggest problem in my opinion, but even that sounds less troublesome compared to other ships solutions... and the constellation is one of the very few to perform what it performs while being a medium ship. That size is the sweet spot, really, for playing alone or with a couple of good friends.
The Constellation is one of those ships, that I'd love to fly. Such a gorgeous ship and I love its' interior
Thanks you for addressing the cable !
These reviews just show how much my Aurora vessel is missing, but what can ya do except wait to win the lottery ;)
As an architect I love this, keep doing it.
During free fly, I kept going back to the Aquila, my ship. It is not great in combat, but the new flight model made it survivable, thankfully. I think it will get better with missle and armor improvements that are expected for the Constellation series.
Just...everything. You nailed everything.
It's such a potentially great ship with just a few things holding it back. The cockpit view and the inability to see or target much of anything from the lower turret are the biggest offenders. More storage in the Merlin launching bay would be welcome, as would picking up the cable on the deck, but those aren't nearly as critical in fulfilling the role.
Agree- I love the Constellation. My preference is for the Andromeda. Ventral turret is the biggest problem. A lot of people have problems with the canopy struts but they don’t really bother me.
I love these reviews- keep it up!
One note when loading an Ursa. There is a second button to raise the ramp from outside. If you look up at the back of the loading bay on the outside you will see a button to close the ramp. You do not need to do it from inside the ship.
I know you an close it from the outside, but it's really annoying if you're alone to have to close it and then go up in separate lift. Especially if you're being pursued.
I have the constellation Andromeda, i really love it.
Thanks for your awesome vids
I love the Constellation line and the aquila is my favorite however I would like to see the scanner array and the turret flipped a deffencive turret on top would prove far more effective and the scanner bellow again more useful on bottom for scanning the planet your flying over . And maybe some magnetic plates to the rear of the cargobay for safe extra storage, plus a slightly wider lift for the ursa.