User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 5:09:43 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I had both and ended up keeping the Ghost and CCUing the Super Hornet into a Sabre. The turret was fun, but... the baby PU is validating every notion I ever had of hanging out as a powered-down (except shields) spider on structures and always getting to engage on my own terms. Finding good hiding spots and just lurking is turning into an addiction already. Doubly so when something like the above happens. "Pew pew, Aurora!" "No, PEW PEW ON YOU FROM OUT OF NOWHERE BIATCH! OH! YOUR $165 FIGHTER ASPLODED!"  I just wish Vanduul Swarm still worked like it used to where the Vanduul spawn at the edges of the map and you have to close with them. The Ghost was a lot of fun there, getting up to speed on an intercept course and then killing the engines and weapons and drifting into battle. Vanduul wouldn't even detect you until you were within 1.5km. Good stuff. That does still work for the de facto PvP area around Kareah though. Drop out of a quantum jump drifting toward the station, kill the engines and weapons and drift in. Get to see who's up to what and decide if I want to stay or leave. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Now this is what I got a Hornet Ghost for. Sitting at Cry-Astro, blending into the structure, weapons and engines powered down. Watching an Aurora repair himself after an array mission. Super Hornet griefer jumps in and starts trying to shoot him on the pad, and completely does not detect me. It went badly for him. Element of surprise > 2 more guns and bigger shields.  And yes, the Aurora lived to see another day. Makes me wish that I had kept my Ghost...I have the Super Hornet now instead. Haven't logged in in a minute...maybe i'll get some free time this weekend or next weekend...  I had both and ended up keeping the Ghost and CCUing the Super Hornet into a Sabre. The turret was fun, but... the baby PU is validating every notion I ever had of hanging out as a powered-down (except shields) spider on structures and always getting to engage on my own terms. Finding good hiding spots and just lurking is turning into an addiction already. Doubly so when something like the above happens. "Pew pew, Aurora!" "No, PEW PEW ON YOU FROM OUT OF NOWHERE BIATCH! OH! YOUR $165 FIGHTER ASPLODED!" I just wish Vanduul Swarm still worked like it used to where the Vanduul spawn at the edges of the map and you have to close with them. The Ghost was a lot of fun there, getting up to speed on an intercept course and then killing the engines and weapons and drifting into battle. Vanduul wouldn't even detect you until you were within 1.5km. Good stuff. That does still work for the de facto PvP area around Kareah though. Drop out of a quantum jump drifting toward the station, kill the engines and weapons and drift in. Get to see who's up to what and decide if I want to stay or leave.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 7:04:09 AM EDT
[#2]
Just one thing to point out, the Sabre will have a bigger alpha strike than the Ghost, but it will hold significantly less ammo per gun so it won't stay in the fight as long as the Hornet series.
The devs are moving ammo from on-gun to in-ship, so exact magazine sizes can be used in balancing. Kharn Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 12:55:48 PM EDT
[#3]
so, when your ship gets blowed up, does it respawn?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 12:59:01 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
so, when your ship gets blowed up, does it respawn? Right now it does but later on you'll rely on an insurance system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 3:36:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Right now it does but later on you'll rely on an insurance system. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
so, when your ship gets blowed up, does it respawn? Right now it does but later on you'll rely on an insurance system. Yup. But if you are in safe space, the guys that blew you up (assuming it is a player or AI, not accidentally running into an asteroid) will get a bounty on their head and the police AI after them pretty quick. Nullsec, well better to run than fight if you get your butt kicked. Insurance will get you another ship so long as it is paid (in game) or LTI. Might be quick, might take a bit, if it is your 5th hornet of the month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 4:21:54 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Don't really see a point in keeping a Ghost when you have a Sabre, although you can always retrofit the Ghost to be a pure brawler like a regular or super hornet. The Sabre is an actual stealth fighter like the F-22 or YF-23 whereas the Ghost is a retrofitted regular fighter to be more stealthy like the F-15 Silent Eagle. Notice the class in the pic below. The Sabre Q&A further reinforced this attribute. http://i.imgur.com/IV8Ed0r.jpg Mainly because of what they said about the difference between them in their Q&A and on reddit. The Ghost isn't quite as stealthy as the Sabre, but it's a tank like the rest of the Hornet series. It can continue taking a serious beating while shields are down and shrug off collisions with kamikaze players as long as the speed difference isn't too high. And if you don't need the stealth you can swap in hardware from the rest of the series including the turret. Sabre is stealthier and has powerful shields but is structurally brittle. Basically I see them as the Sabre, your goal is to never be seen at all, and if you are, dish out heavy damage fast and get away before you take too much of a pounding yourself. Like the Gladius (before it was nerfed into a slow POS), your armor is your maneuverability and speed. The Ghost, you're expecting a likelihood of ending up in a fight, and want to be able to sustain your presence in a prolonged brawl after entering the fight on your own terms. You trade that for a bit less damage output and somewhat less stealth. Not to mention you can get away with sneaking a small amount of high value cargo around since you can fit a Stor-All Big Box on it like the rest of the Hornet series. Sabre has no cargo. I think they've both very much got a role in the stealth system, they're just different roles. EDIT: I really like the idea of and how they've pitched the stealth system, so I want to be able to play both sides of it. That's why keep both. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 4:26:57 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Mainly because of what they said about the difference between them in their Q&A and on reddit. The Ghost isn't quite as stealthy as the Sabre, but it's a tank like the rest of the Hornet series. It can continue taking a serious beating while shields are down and shrug off collisions with kamikaze players as long as the speed difference isn't too high. And if you don't need the stealth you can swap in hardware from the rest of the series including the turret. Sabre is stealthier and has powerful shields but is structurally brittle. Basically I see them as the Sabre, your goal is to never be seen at all, and if you are, dish out heavy damage fast and get away before you take too much of a pounding yourself. Like the Gladius (before it was nerfed into a slow POS), your armor is your maneuverability and speed. The Ghost, you're expecting a likelihood of ending up in a fight, and want to be able to sustain your presence in a prolonged brawl after entering the fight on your own terms. You trade that for a bit less damage output and somewhat less stealth. Not to mention you can get away with sneaking a small amount of high value cargo around since you can fit a Stor-All Big Box on it like the rest of the Hornet series. Sabre has no cargo. I think they've both very much got a role in the stealth system, they're just different roles. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Don't really see a point in keeping a Ghost when you have a Sabre, although you can always retrofit the Ghost to be a pure brawler like a regular or super hornet. The Sabre is an actual stealth fighter like the F-22 or YF-23 whereas the Ghost is a retrofitted regular fighter to be more stealthy like the F-15 Silent Eagle. Notice the class in the pic below. The Sabre Q&A further reinforced this attribute. http://i.imgur.com/IV8Ed0r.jpg Mainly because of what they said about the difference between them in their Q&A and on reddit. The Ghost isn't quite as stealthy as the Sabre, but it's a tank like the rest of the Hornet series. It can continue taking a serious beating while shields are down and shrug off collisions with kamikaze players as long as the speed difference isn't too high. And if you don't need the stealth you can swap in hardware from the rest of the series including the turret. Sabre is stealthier and has powerful shields but is structurally brittle. Basically I see them as the Sabre, your goal is to never be seen at all, and if you are, dish out heavy damage fast and get away before you take too much of a pounding yourself. Like the Gladius (before it was nerfed into a slow POS), your armor is your maneuverability and speed. The Ghost, you're expecting a likelihood of ending up in a fight, and want to be able to sustain your presence in a prolonged brawl after entering the fight on your own terms. You trade that for a bit less damage output and somewhat less stealth. Not to mention you can get away with sneaking a small amount of high value cargo around since you can fit a Stor-All Big Box on it like the rest of the Hornet series. Sabre has no cargo. I think they've both very much got a role in the stealth system, they're just different roles. Exactly. The Sabre is more of your rogue class vs the ghost/hornet is the warrior/tank. Considering I suck at flying right now, my plan of alpha strike and run seems to work well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 4:33:35 PM EDT
[#8]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 4:42:14 PM EDT
[#9]
In the grand ol' Ghost/Sabre debate, I see the Ghost as a lie-in-wait ambusher, while the Sabre is more of the sucker-punch you never saw coming. The toughness of the Hornet serves it well in cluttered environments, while the Sabre is, seemingly, more dainty and better suited to open space where collisions are less likely.
It's all speculation, conjecture, and wags until the numbers all get finalized, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/1/2016 5:43:16 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
In the grand ol' Ghost/Sabre debate, I see the Ghost as a lie-in-wait ambusher, while the Sabre is more of the sucker-punch you never saw coming. The toughness of the Hornet serves it well in cluttered environments, while the Sabre is, seemingly, more dainty and better suited to open space where collisions are less likely. It's all speculation, conjecture, and wags until the numbers all get finalized, though. I'm a Sabre convert so take my bias for what it is. I think it's been said that the Sabre is meant to be the Hornets Huckberry. It doesn't have the standup fight capability of the Hornet but it makes up for it in other areas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/2/2016 5:57:10 PM EDT
[#11]
Question and then new screen porn.
How the hell do you activate your missiles in a freelancer? I can't find that hud menu for the life of me. Do I need to switch to the copilot seat, turn shit on, then switch back, or ? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/3/2016 7:38:21 AM EDT
[#12]
I really hope they reverse the decision to have ballistic weapons, especially gatlings, overheat at ridiculous rates. Running tri-Mantises on Hornets without overheating in literally two seconds, and dancing around targets spraying cannonfire in the Avenger and Gladius was so fucking fun it's half of what sold me on the game this time last year. I was dogfighting another player in a Hornet while I was in an Avenger and it really hammered it home for me tonight... I was a better pilot than he was, so every time my Avenger's gun wasn't cooking itself I was ripping his shields and chunks of his Hornet off. But that's just it, I'm constantly pegged against overheat. Meanwhile he's spewing his repeaters practically nonstop with no need to even slow down and I'm dancing about rolling and strafing decoupled to buy myself a couple seconds of fire here and there.
That sumbitch would've been DEAD last year in the opening moments of that fight. Less pew pew, more bang bang! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/3/2016 10:44:54 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I really hope they reverse the decision to have ballistic weapons, especially gatlings, overheat at ridiculous rates. Running tri-Mantises on Hornets without overheating in literally two seconds, and dancing around targets spraying cannonfire in the Avenger and Gladius was so fucking fun it's half of what sold me on the game this time last year. I was dogfighting another player in a Hornet while I was in an Avenger and it really hammered it home for me tonight... I was a better pilot than he was, so every time my Avenger's gun wasn't cooking itself I was ripping his shields and chunks of his Hornet off. But that's just it, I'm constantly pegged against overheat. Meanwhile he's spewing his repeaters practically nonstop with no need to even slow down and I'm dancing about rolling and strafing decoupled to buy myself a couple seconds of fire here and there. That sumbitch would've been DEAD last year in the opening moments of that fight. Less pew pew, more bang bang! It's intentional, so don't expect it to change. Trigger discipline is a skill you have to learn, just like maneuvering or using countermeasures effectively. Cooling capacity is a ship function, not a gun function, so you can also put on smaller guns...probably what the hornet had done...and sustain fire longer. You could go do the math and set your trigger up for rapid fire at a rate that allows continuous bursts that don't overheat your gun, but that's considered a party foul by the devs and you'll get a timeout or a ban if they catch you. That's a 1st-hand conversation I had with them...I told them that was a bit heavy-handed, and they told me to go fuck myself, so pretty sure they're firm on that position. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/3/2016 8:44:38 PM EDT
[#14]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2016 5:44:54 AM EDT
[#15]
Even on low graphics the ship destruction is awesome. From what I've read, the clipping through/not dying is a bug they are working on. You are part of the physics grid but not "attached" to the ship (ie at a console, etc) when it goes, so it gets goofy.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/4/2016 8:58:10 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's intentional, so don't expect it to change. Trigger discipline is a skill you have to learn, just like maneuvering or using countermeasures effectively. Cooling capacity is a ship function, not a gun function, so you can also put on smaller guns...probably what the hornet had done...and sustain fire longer. Eh, it's not that, it's just the gatling guns and railguns. I load up my Ghost with triple badgers and spam all day long with abandon, and it's not like that doesn't put out significant amounts of damage. Same with the Vanguard's nose-mounted lasers. You can just spew massive damage and they recover from all that firing remarkably fast. If ballistics are going to overheat that fast AND have long cooldowns, they need higher burst DPS to make up for it. Right now the weapon meta is with a few exceptions, ballistics overheat quickly, cool down slowly, AND run out of ammo. Energy weapons have none of those problems, so repeaters and the Behring lasers are really strong right now. Then again, this isn't taking into account that armor isn't in the game yet. Armor might laugh off laser hits but get shredded by ballistics, which would change that equation quite a bit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 4:54:43 AM EDT
[#17]
So the Starfarer is a LOT bigger than I thought. The cockpit section alone is two decks from the exploded pic below. Gonna be fun ramming stuff with it in Crusader
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 2:18:19 PM EDT
[#18]
is this game ready to play yet?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 2:36:08 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
is this game ready to play yet? There is a fair amount to play already, just no permanence and its only one part of a system. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 3:22:05 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
is this game ready to play yet? I've been posting gameplay video in GD. It's nowhere near feature complete but is still fun as hell. They do add stuff in patches every two to three weeks as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 4:04:32 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So the Starfarer is a LOT bigger than I thought. The cockpit section alone is two decks from the exploded pic below. Gonna be fun ramming stuff with it in Crusader
http://i.imgur.com/AI8oWp6.png http://i.imgur.com/mnE8cMP.png http://i.imgur.com/bh3uzzk.png God I want my Gemini in-game so bad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 4:10:17 PM EDT
[#22]
I'm thinking they are really pushing to get 2.2 out here fast. They just stretched free fly to 2/14, and it would make sense to drop the patch during that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 4:51:25 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm thinking they are really pushing to get 2.2 out here fast. They just stretched free fly to 2/14, and it would make sense to drop the patch during that. I've been out of the loop for awhile now, but I want to say back in December they said they'd be pushing for about a patch a month...so nothing unexpected about there being a patch, but I'm curious to see what will be in it. I'm not super interested in performance patches...I'm just not set up to be an effective performance tester...but I'll be really excited when those patches include new content (beyond just adding ships...ships excitement is fleeting until there's something to do with them). |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 5:49:39 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've been out of the loop for awhile now, but I want to say back in December they said they'd be pushing for about a patch a month...so nothing unexpected about there being a patch, but I'm curious to see what will be in it. I'm not super interested in performance patches...I'm just not set up to be an effective performance tester...but I'll be really excited when those patches include new content (beyond just adding ships...ships excitement is fleeting until there's something to do with them). Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm thinking they are really pushing to get 2.2 out here fast. They just stretched free fly to 2/14, and it would make sense to drop the patch during that. I've been out of the loop for awhile now, but I want to say back in December they said they'd be pushing for about a patch a month...so nothing unexpected about there being a patch, but I'm curious to see what will be in it. I'm not super interested in performance patches...I'm just not set up to be an effective performance tester...but I'll be really excited when those patches include new content (beyond just adding ships...ships excitement is fleeting until there's something to do with them). Rumor is hangar ready Starfarer, flight ready Sabre and Reliant. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/5/2016 11:00:41 PM EDT
[#25]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2016 6:29:46 AM EDT
[#26]
Does anyone want to give me a short version of where this game is at?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/6/2016 1:04:41 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Does anyone want to give me a short version of where this game is at? You can play in ship combat matches against players or AI aliens on two maps, or race other players around 3 tracks. You can go into a single system open world where there are three stations and multiple satellites to fight with friendly AI against enemy AI. One station lets you spawn ships and catch rides with other players to check out their ships. The second station is for FPS combat, and the third station lets you repair/refuel your ship. Kharn |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2016 7:50:02 PM EDT
[#28]
So, I loaded up the hangar module tonight for the first time in forever, and the only ship in there is my Freelancer, and my Super Hornet is nowhere to be found! I also cannot find the console where you can change to loadouts of your ships.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2016 7:51:30 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, I loaded up the hangar module tonight for the first time in forever, and the only ship in there is my Freelancer, and my Super Hornet is nowhere to be found! I also cannot find the console where you can change to loadouts of your ships. Did you add them to your hangar from the RSI site? And the holotable changes position depending on the hangar. Changes only work in Arena Commander unless you want to jump through a lot of hoops btw. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2016 8:16:35 PM EDT
[#30]
Yea, you've got to go to your Hangar at the RSI site and set it up. You can also switch between the four different hangars if your package has multiples.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2016 8:28:53 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yea, you've got to go to your Hangar at the RSI site and set it up. You can also switch between the four different hangars if your package has multiples. I only see two hangars...Aeroview and Selfland...but yeah, the hornet was not added to the hangar. It was before, so I am not sure what happened there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2016 8:42:14 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I only see two hangars...Aeroview and Selfland...but yeah, the hornet was not added to the hangar. It was before, so I am not sure what happened there. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yea, you've got to go to your Hangar at the RSI site and set it up. You can also switch between the four different hangars if your package has multiples. I only see two hangars...Aeroview and Selfland...but yeah, the hornet was not added to the hangar. It was before, so I am not sure what happened there. You only see what you have access to. They reset all the setting at one point I think. That's probably what happened. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2016 11:17:53 PM EDT
[#33]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/7/2016 11:29:40 PM EDT
[#34]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/8/2016 1:24:05 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You only see what you have access to. They reset all the setting at one point I think. That's probably what happened. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yea, you've got to go to your Hangar at the RSI site and set it up. You can also switch between the four different hangars if your package has multiples. I only see two hangars...Aeroview and Selfland...but yeah, the hornet was not added to the hangar. It was before, so I am not sure what happened there. You only see what you have access to. They reset all the setting at one point I think. That's probably what happened. Probably...still playing with my controller settings. Running through the tutorial...while taking off, I could use the HAT switch to lift off, and WASD to move left and right, but for some reason the HAT switch stopped working for up and down. My solution was to rotate the ship 90 degrees so it was pointing up and use W to move out of the space station. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/12/2016 7:32:50 PM EDT
[#36]
From the livestream:
Once the internal build is ready, it’ll go to PTU. Big things in this patch: hangar ready ship, flyable ship, physicalized EVA, some reputation changes in Crusader, and some other under the hood stuff. My $ is on the Sabre being flyable and the Reliant for hangar, but could be wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/12/2016 7:42:58 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From the livestream: Once the internal build is ready, it’ll go to PTU. Big things in this patch: hangar ready ship, flyable ship, physicalized EVA, some reputation changes in Crusader, and some other under the hood stuff. My $ is on the Sabre being flyable and the Reliant for hangar, but could be wrong. I'm betting Starfarer in the hangar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/12/2016 8:09:28 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm betting Starfarer in the hangar. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
From the livestream: Once the internal build is ready, it’ll go to PTU. Big things in this patch: hangar ready ship, flyable ship, physicalized EVA, some reputation changes in Crusader, and some other under the hood stuff. My $ is on the Sabre being flyable and the Reliant for hangar, but could be wrong. I'm betting Starfarer in the hangar. They've been pushing both pretty damn hard, so you could be right. My guess was simply because the Reliant was smaller and probably easier to model. We'll see though. I'd love to get lost wandering around in my Gemini 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/12/2016 8:37:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They've been pushing both pretty damn hard, so you could be right. My guess was simply because the Reliant was smaller and probably easier to model. We'll see though. I'd love to get lost wandering around in my Gemini Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
From the livestream: Once the internal build is ready, it’ll go to PTU. Big things in this patch: hangar ready ship, flyable ship, physicalized EVA, some reputation changes in Crusader, and some other under the hood stuff. My $ is on the Sabre being flyable and the Reliant for hangar, but could be wrong. I'm betting Starfarer in the hangar. They've been pushing both pretty damn hard, so you could be right. My guess was simply because the Reliant was smaller and probably easier to model. We'll see though. I'd love to get lost wandering around in my Gemini They did mention a bug with the Starfarer in-hanger, but that was a couple of weeks ago... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2016 2:21:39 AM EDT
[#40]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2016 2:30:29 AM EDT
[#41]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/13/2016 2:46:20 PM EDT
[#42]
Greycats 50% off this weekend:
You can buy as many as you want but can only have a limit of 4 per hangar. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:41:22 PM EDT
[#43]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 10:33:18 PM EDT
[#44]
It would be really, REALLY nice if the people modeling the insides of the multicrew ships had ever actually been on board a ship.
I see 10' wide walkways/passageways and stations that are like an 8' office cubicle. You'd never see that on a real working ship (I've never been on a cruise ship). Passageways are 5' wide unless they need to be bigger for loading and unloading. Ladders (stairs to you 'lubbers) are not wide enough to pass someone on, and a workstation (for example in a CIC) is just wider than the shoulders of a barrel chested sailor. This jars me out of my willing suspension of disbelief every time I see it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2016 2:40:14 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be really, REALLY nice if the people modeling the insides of the multicrew ships had ever actually been on board a ship. I see 10' wide walkways/passageways and stations that are like an 8' office cubicle. You'd never see that on a real working ship (I've never been on a cruise ship). Passageways are 5' wide unless they need to be bigger for loading and unloading. Ladders (stairs to you 'lubbers) are not wide enough to pass someone on, and a workstation (for example in a CIC) is just wider than the shoulders of a barrel chested sailor. This jars me out of my willing suspension of disbelief every time I see it. Realism has to take a back seat to gameplay, and the capital ships will be FPS battlegrounds. Too narrow and one guy could lock a hallway down pretty easy. If that's all it takes to jar you out of the experience, maybe you should re-evaluate your level of willingness, because at that level you might as well chuck your computer out the window. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2016 4:32:05 AM EDT
[#46]
Maybe just go with the parameters and restrictions of a space ship not being the same as a surface ship. The Idris doesn't need to worry about slicing through the water, and it looks like resources and construction aren't the drawbacks in SC that they are IRL. Also, it may be something psychological about sticking people long term inside a can of atmosphere in space. Cramp them up with the knowledge that vacuum is right outside and brains start to scramble after awhile. Give them room to move about and it doesn't become so oppressive. Also, more air is better than less if something goes wrong with life support.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2016 5:32:50 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Realism has to take a back seat to gameplay, and the capital ships will be FPS battlegrounds. Too narrow and one guy could lock a hallway down pretty easy. If that's all it takes to jar you out of the experience, maybe you should re-evaluate your level of willingness, because at that level you might as well chuck your computer out the window. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It would be really, REALLY nice if the people modeling the insides of the multicrew ships had ever actually been on board a ship. I see 10' wide walkways/passageways and stations that are like an 8' office cubicle. You'd never see that on a real working ship (I've never been on a cruise ship). Passageways are 5' wide unless they need to be bigger for loading and unloading. Ladders (stairs to you 'lubbers) are not wide enough to pass someone on, and a workstation (for example in a CIC) is just wider than the shoulders of a barrel chested sailor. This jars me out of my willing suspension of disbelief every time I see it. Realism has to take a back seat to gameplay, and the capital ships will be FPS battlegrounds. Too narrow and one guy could lock a hallway down pretty easy. If that's all it takes to jar you out of the experience, maybe you should re-evaluate your level of willingness, because at that level you might as well chuck your computer out the window. Riiiight. Because tossing a grenade down a hallway would never get rid of one guy with no cover. Quoted:
Maybe just go with the parameters and restrictions of a space ship not being the same as a surface ship. The Idris doesn't need to worry about slicing through the water, and it looks like resources and construction aren't the drawbacks in SC that they are IRL. Also, it may be something psychological about sticking people long term inside a can of atmosphere in space. Cramp them up with the knowledge that vacuum is right outside and brains start to scramble after awhile. Give them room to move about and it doesn't become so oppressive. Also, more air is better than less if something goes wrong with life support. US submariners don't have that attitude problem when being "canned" for 6 months at a stretch. But ti's ok, I'll get over it. Just finally said something because it's been bugging me for over a year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/18/2016 10:06:49 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Riiiight. Because tossing a grenade down a hallway would never get rid of one guy with no cover. US submariners don't have that attitude problem when being "canned" for 6 months at a stretch. But ti's ok, I'll get over it. Just finally said something because it's been bugging me for over a year. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It would be really, REALLY nice if the people modeling the insides of the multicrew ships had ever actually been on board a ship. I see 10' wide walkways/passageways and stations that are like an 8' office cubicle. You'd never see that on a real working ship (I've never been on a cruise ship). Passageways are 5' wide unless they need to be bigger for loading and unloading. Ladders (stairs to you 'lubbers) are not wide enough to pass someone on, and a workstation (for example in a CIC) is just wider than the shoulders of a barrel chested sailor. This jars me out of my willing suspension of disbelief every time I see it. Realism has to take a back seat to gameplay, and the capital ships will be FPS battlegrounds. Too narrow and one guy could lock a hallway down pretty easy. If that's all it takes to jar you out of the experience, maybe you should re-evaluate your level of willingness, because at that level you might as well chuck your computer out the window. Riiiight. Because tossing a grenade down a hallway would never get rid of one guy with no cover. Quoted:
Maybe just go with the parameters and restrictions of a space ship not being the same as a surface ship. The Idris doesn't need to worry about slicing through the water, and it looks like resources and construction aren't the drawbacks in SC that they are IRL. Also, it may be something psychological about sticking people long term inside a can of atmosphere in space. Cramp them up with the knowledge that vacuum is right outside and brains start to scramble after awhile. Give them room to move about and it doesn't become so oppressive. Also, more air is better than less if something goes wrong with life support. US submariners don't have that attitude problem when being "canned" for 6 months at a stretch. But ti's ok, I'll get over it. Just finally said something because it's been bugging me for over a year. Right, because it's realistic to be throwing hand grenades on a space ship. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/19/2016 2:03:27 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be really, REALLY nice if the people modeling the insides of the multicrew ships had ever actually been on board a ship. I see 10' wide walkways/passageways and stations that are like an 8' office cubicle. You'd never see that on a real working ship (I've never been on a cruise ship). Passageways are 5' wide unless they need to be bigger for loading and unloading. Ladders (stairs to you 'lubbers) are not wide enough to pass someone on, and a workstation (for example in a CIC) is just wider than the shoulders of a barrel chested sailor. This jars me out of my willing suspension of disbelief every time I see it. Yeah the Retaliator is nothing but cramped corridors and the interior sucks a fat dick. It was the ship I was most excited for. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/19/2016 3:13:02 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be really, REALLY nice if the people modeling the insides of the multicrew ships had ever actually been on board a ship. I see 10' wide walkways/passageways and stations that are like an 8' office cubicle. You'd never see that on a real working ship (I've never been on a cruise ship). Passageways are 5' wide unless they need to be bigger for loading and unloading. Ladders (stairs to you 'lubbers) are not wide enough to pass someone on, and a workstation (for example in a CIC) is just wider than the shoulders of a barrel chested sailor. This jars me out of my willing suspension of disbelief every time I see it. I mostly justify it as most of those ships are being shopped to the civilian market, not the military. Things tend to get a little comfier when it's the end user buying for himself rather than the government going, "Here, use this, fuckers. You'll fit. If you don't like it, here's your enlistment that says you'll like it. Now go kick the enemy's ass." As far as military hardware though, yeah, I hear you. The only non-fighter military design that makes total real world sense to me is the Avenger. Cargo area has enough room for basic cargo, living area has enough room for a dude to sleep and take care of the bare essentials on an extended flight, and then a cockpit. No frills. Feels like a Space Shuttle orbiter in miniature. Some of the other designs, wellll... I think they're cool, but at the same time I think the interiors would get a big overhaul and make much better use of available space if they were designed for real world use. You could almost fit the B-1B cockpit in the Retaliator's bathroom, and you could easily cram like 4x the munitions into it by streamlining wasted space. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
