Jump to content

Welcome to Star Citizen Base
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

RSI Constellation: Is the P52 the ONLY ship it can carry?


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#41
Uttrik

Uttrik
  • Members
  • 5 posts

Damn... now I'm not sure what to think... Oh well!

Indeed, good sir. I'm all for the Constellation being able to carry nice ships, but doubtful when it comes to balance. Who knows, maybe you'll be able to carry a gutted version of the 300i (no jump drive, no upgrades, etc).

#42
D.Ifraimov

D.Ifraimov
  • Trade & Industry
  • 82 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada
It makes sense. We should be atleast capable of carrying an aurora.

#43
Watchdog

Watchdog
  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • Location:Czech Republic
I was one of those who specifically asked about the carrying capacity of the Constellation in the Kickstarter comments section and Chris Roberts explicitely stated that it would only be capable of carrying ships with no jump capability (which rules out all pledge ships). Chris also stated that the P52 may be upgradeable somehow. Any statements about the Constellation being capable of carrying a 300i or any other such ship are based equally on misunderstanding and wishful thinking. Sorry to disappoint you, fellows. :mellow:
  • Marshal Afghanicus likes this

#44
Pnuts

Pnuts

    Our Shelled Super Hero

  • Members
  • 981 posts
  • Location:California, USA

This is outdated.

Do you know of a link to any other info? I originally added on a 300i to dock with the Constellation and was disappointing with the response on reddit. I saw Ben had made a guess in the ask ben thread on the RSI site, but the response was along the lines of "I think Chris said" which would imply speculation on Bens part in direct conflict with CR's post on reddit.

#45
Bloodzee

Bloodzee
  • Fleet Member
  • 54 posts
i would presume the M50 might fit judging from the pictures in the wikea
Posted Image

#46
Watchdog

Watchdog
  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • Location:Czech Republic

i would presume the M50 might fit judging from the pictures in the wikea


M50 is jump capable, therefore, according to CR's statement, it won't fit.

#47
Grue

Grue
  • Members
  • 77 posts
  • Location:Delaware, USA

Here was his exact quote on the reddit AMA:

http://www.reddit.co...mmander/c6uwbab

I take that as only the P52 or similar will be allowed. Not even Aurora300i.


Thanks for posting that. I keep scraping posts like this and adding it to the Wiki. There is so much information spread in all the strangest places right now, and it's hard finding accurate sourced information about the game. If you all find more interesting facts like that, it'd be great if you'd pop over to the Star Citizen Wikia site and add it for all of us to reference.
  • Castellan Bocephus likes this
-Gaius Zhen, Callsign: Grue
Squadron: Brown Coats

Posted Image
We are all star stuff, and the black is our birthright. May you find freedom out in the deep dark…
Grab your flight gear and join us for FreeSpace FlightNight, Thursdays @ 7PM UTC-5 (U.S. EST)


#48
Sancus

Sancus
  • Members
  • 16 posts
I honestly don't see the benefit of being able to fit a jump-capable ship in the Constellation anyway, I mean if you're flying a jump-capable ship why not just escort your friend in his Constellation? It's more fun to actually be flying rather than sitting around in the Constellation waiting to be attacked, you will be able to react much quicker, and you don't occupy the hanger slot that way.... to me the P52 seems mostly valuable if you have a spare friend who doesn't have their own fighter nearby or doesn't want to fly it for whatever reason. Not to mention if you do get into a fight, you don't have to worry about taking your friend's Hornet back into the bay before you jump out... I'm struggling to think of why you'd want to occupy the bay with a jump-capable fighter and I can't think of many good reasons, unless fuel limitations come into play and the Constellation has a big range advantage. Dunno.

#49
elfindreams

elfindreams

    Larsson Group - Military Branch Leader

  • Members
  • 19 posts
Ok, after a bit of research here is what I found:

The confusion appears to relate to an answer from Ben Lesnick (the community manager) in this post:
http://www.robertssp.../24/#post-56151

Stating "@Dunnlang: I think this is a moving target right now. Pretty sure Chris confirmed the 300i would be able to land in the Constellation." and later "@Allgamer: 300i yes, Aurora checking… P52 stats coming soon!" in a repsonse to a question about what could fit in the bay.

However since that point, he has not confirmed any further information about it however there have been reports like:
http://www.robertssp.../33/#post-73867

Stating "Ok, Sandi asked Chris and he told, that the 300i woudn’t fit:
No – Constellation isn’t that big – it has its own fighter but none of the pledge ships can fit in its hangar."

This also appears to be confirmed by the early renders available for the ship as the "hanger" appears to be very fitted.

My guess is that since we are /very/ early in the balancing and conceptualization phase, there are a lot of ideas and thoughts kicking around the dev team. Some people get excited about and talk about them but later realize they are a bad idea from a balance or other reason and they change. This smells like one of those where there was probably some talk about the constellation holding other ships but Chris realized that he didn't want that as he worked more on the stella and changed it. But that is just my perception.

We need to remember we are witnessing the game still at the conceptualization phase and pretty much everything we learn now is very subject to change.

It is also very useful to remember that a lot has been said by the team and by people who think they know what is going to be in the game, so providing links when people say "Chris said x" or "They are going to do X" is very useful in weeding out the real information from the speculation.
  • Armand12 likes this

#50
Watchdog

Watchdog
  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • Location:Czech Republic
@elfindreams - I am afraid that given the nature of the Kickstarter chat during the end of the crowdfunding campaign, it was next to impossible to extract older comments by CR. He specifically stated there that the Constellation would not be able to carry any jump capable ships and that P52 won't be jump capable. All other pledge ships are jump capable. Chris also said that if Ben had said anything about the Constellation being able to carry any such ship, it must have been misunderstanding or something like that. Please, do not fall victim to wishful thinking, you may end up terribly disappointed.

#51
T3rran

T3rran
  • Members
  • 10 posts
I feel like having only a Snubnose Point Defense is going to be dangerous for this. A crew of 4. Complete practicality and crew will only have a Turret gunner, pilot, and fighter pilot. There's one free slot if I've read it right. So, I feel that eventually it will be possible to attach landing struts to these types of large ships so you can dock them on the side of the ship and carry them in exchange for cargo space and being sneaky (a fighter sticking off? No hiding that one.) The Caterpiller can also hide a fighter escort on its outside hold with some mods, so I think the Constellation can be modded to do the same.

#52
Watchdog

Watchdog
  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • Location:Czech Republic
@T3rran - The Constellation has a crew of four indeed:
  • Constellation pilot
  • Dorsal turret gunner (default)
  • Ventral turret gunner (upgrade)
  • P52 pilot
No free crew slot as far as I understand it.

#53
Pnuts

Pnuts

    Our Shelled Super Hero

  • Members
  • 981 posts
  • Location:California, USA

The Caterpiller can also hide a fighter escort on its outside hold with some mods, so I think the Constellation can be modded to do the same.


Oooh, where did you hear this? Any link?

#54
Jaxon Corvid

Jaxon Corvid
  • Members
  • 189 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada

@T3rran - The Constellation has a crew of four indeed:

  • Constellation pilot
  • Dorsal turret gunner (default)
  • Ventral turret gunner (upgrade)
  • P52 pilot
No free crew slot as far as I understand it.


I predict that the Constellation's fighter will use some of the ship's 35 ton cargo capacity, so some players will opt to leave their P52 elsewhere to maximize cargo, thereby leaving an open crew slot.

Crew members can also repair the ship and possibly perform other useful tasks.

#55
Sancus

Sancus
  • Members
  • 16 posts
The real question is why anyone would ever man a turret when they could be fighting next to you in a full-fledged fighter of their own. Presumably even an RSI Aurora is more powerful than a dude in a turret. I'm aware there are specialized situations where it might be used, like if your friends are all far away from you and you need help you can apparently get them to drop in on your instance instantaneously and help out, but in general when you are planning out missions with your friends I'm sort of wondering what the point of turrets are. I bet that AI will be manning them 90% of the time, because it's simply more effective to use a pilot in a separate ship and 99% of the time your limitation is going to be number of players, not number of ships... The P52 is a little more compelling, hopefully it can be upgraded to be competitive with any other fighter other than lacking jump capability.

#56
exeQuisite

exeQuisite
  • Members
  • 223 posts
  • Location:Singapore
@Sancus: Your answer is on the 2nd page.

I think you're over-looking the fact that there will be a lot more people playing Star Citizen when it's released than only the ~30,000 backers. Star Citizen would be considered an abysmal failure if that happened.

Most players won't have insured ships. There will be players who lose their ships and cannot afford to replace them immediately. Those players could be hired to serve as crew members aboard other players' ships.

Even if a player has their own ship, some might choose to crew aboard a ship so they can accumulate credits without endangering their un-insured ship, so they can sell it and combine their earned credits to buy a new and better ship.

Some players might prefer to be turret gunners instead of pilots.

Some players might prefer to hone their dogfighting skills using an insured snub fighter instead of a ship that is lost if destroyed.

And, as you mentioned, lower-ranking clan members could be required to serve aboard the multi-crew ships of higher-ranking members to assist them.

So there are numerous reasons why some players will want to serve aboard another player's ship.



#57
Sancus

Sancus
  • Members
  • 16 posts
None of those reasons really stand up to examination, I'm afraid.

Most players won't have insured ships. There will be players who lose their ships and cannot afford to replace them immediately. Those players could be hired to serve as crew members aboard other players' ships.


Well, actually, we know for a fact that pretty much all players WILL have insured ships because insurance is cheap:

Like in real-life insurance should be a relatively small part of your regular in game expenses which will also include paying landing fees, trade tariffs (if in a system with lots of infrastructure and law and order), fuel (if you don’t collect it yourself from a gas giant), buying cargo to trade, hiring help, making upgrades to your ship or even buying a whole new ship.



Even if a player has their own ship, some might choose to crew aboard a ship so they can accumulate credits without endangering their un-insured ship, so they can sell it and combine their earned credits to buy a new and better ship.


Could be, but given that insurance isn't very expensive and that most players will earn more than they lose over time(this has to be the case, because anyone who constantly loses more than they gain will quit the game.) this seems pretty unlikely. Again, everyone will have insurance. It's a cheap, base-level expectation, not unusual.

Some players might prefer to be turret gunners instead of pilots.


It's very safe to say that this won't be the case on average, very rarely it might be if the player doesn't really feel like paying attention to the game, but the way turrets appear to be designed in that they cover a portion of the hull, the turret gunner is going to be spending a lot of time staying alert and bored and not much actual time playing. That's a tailor-made recipe for fatigue. I predict turret gunning is going to be boring as heck, unless they change the design so you can control multiple turrets at once. Then it might actually be a fun role. But manning one turret covering 30 degrees of space in a Retaliator is going to be pretty damn boring. You can find out how boring by playing Planetside 2, and manning a belly gun on a Galaxy. Yeah, it's amusing while you're on the way to the actual fight, but you want to get out of there pretty damn quick :P You spend most of your time unable to fire because targets are not in your field of view. This is actually something that computers are far better at than humans pretty much by definition.

And, as you mentioned, lower-ranking clan members could be required to serve aboard the multi-crew ships of higher-ranking members to assist them.


If I'm a high-ranking clan member, I would want the assistance of a ship with many times the power of a turret over the assistance of someone in my turret, I assure you. These kinds of pseudo-roleplaying reasons are not an effective incentive in the face of major power/engagement disparities.

Some players might prefer to hone their dogfighting skills using an insured snub fighter instead of a ship that is lost if destroyed.


Like I said, I think the P52 is actually a bit more compelling, especially if it's powerful enough to go toe-to-toe with most fighters in-game, even if it does so via greater maneuverability rather than firepower. It actually sounds like it's flexible and interesting. My objection is mostly to turrets, because like I said, 80% of your time in a turret is spent sitting there waiting for a target. Not the case with the P52.

#58
Jaxon Corvid

Jaxon Corvid
  • Members
  • 189 posts
  • Location:Toronto, Ontario, Canada

None of those reasons really stand up to examination, I'm afraid.

Well, actually, we know for a fact that pretty much all players WILL have insured ships because insurance is cheap:


The correct word choice would be "all players CAN have insured ships...". You cannot make unqualified blanket statements on what YOU assume EVERY player will choose to do, specifically whether they'll purchase insurance for their ships or not.

There will always be players who are willing to take risks to get further in the game or save money. An easy example could be that a player's ship insurance lapses because they didn't pay it for whatever reason, and then their ship gets destroyed. It doesn't matter how it happened or why they don't have insurance; it can and will happen. Players will inevitably get burned by their choices, lose their ships, and might not have the money to replace them.

When that happens, becoming a crew member on another person's ship could be their only option.

Could be, but given that insurance isn't very expensive and that most players will earn more than they lose over time(this has to be the case, because anyone who constantly loses more than they gain will quit the game.) this seems pretty unlikely. Again, everyone will have insurance. It's a cheap, base-level expectation, not unusual.


More unqualified assumptions. "Everyone will have insurance." Everyone? Everyone? So if a single person doesn't have insurance, you're automatically wrong, thereby invalidating whatever your point is.

It doesn't matter how inexpensive ship insurance will be, there will always be players who will choose not to buy it, forget to pay it, or cannot afford to pay it. CR's list of everything else the player will have to pay for on a regular basis only supports my argument that players might choose not to pay for optional insurance.

It's very safe to say that this won't be the case on average, very rarely it might be if the player doesn't really feel like paying attention to the game, but the way turrets appear to be designed in that they cover a portion of the hull, the turret gunner is going to be spending a lot of time staying alert and bored and not much actual time playing. That's a tailor-made recipe for fatigue. I predict turret gunning is going to be boring as heck, unless they change the design so you can control multiple turrets at once. Then it might actually be a fun role. But manning one turret covering 30 degrees of space in a Retaliator is going to be pretty damn boring. You can find out how boring by playing Planetside 2, and manning a belly gun on a Galaxy. Yeah, it's amusing while you're on the way to the actual fight, but you want to get out of there pretty damn quick :P You spend most of your time unable to fire because targets are not in your field of view. This is actually something that computers are far better at than humans pretty much by definition.


Not only are you making more assuptions, but you're not even using common sense.

Of course players won't want to man a turret for hours at time. And they won't. Presumably they'll only need to man the turret if there's a reason to, such as if the ship comes under attack, or if the ship is travelling through a known dangerous system where it probably will be attacked.

The rest of the time the crew members could be doing other things aboard the ship. Maybe they can craft weapons and items. Maybe they can upgrade or tweek components of the ship. Maybe they can be searching for new missions to earn credits, or checking prices for ships or upgrades. Maybe they can operate the ship's other systems, like sensors or mining tools or refining tools. Maybe they'll be content chatting with their crewmates. We don't know yet.

So your baseless assertion that no one will want to be a turret gunner because they'll be stuck in the turret doing nothing is a shameful combination of assumptions, ignorance, and failure of imagination.

If I'm a high-ranking clan member, I would want the assistance of a ship with many times the power of a turret over the assistance of someone in my turret, I assure you. These kinds of pseudo-roleplaying reasons are not an effective incentive in the face of major power/engagement disparities.


You're assuming that turret weapons will be weaker than the weapons controlled by the ship's pilot. Using the Constellation as an example, it has 2 Behring M3A Laser Cannons on Class 1 fixed hardpoints, presumably firing forward. Whereas its dorsal turret has 2 Behring M5A Laser Cannons. I'll hazard a guess that the M5As are more powerful than the M3As. And of course the turrets have wider firing arcs, so they can be brought to bear against enemies that aren't only in front of the Constellation. I'd wager that a player manning the Constellation's turret will score more kills than the pilot of the Constellation -- especially if the enemy ships are smaller, more nimble starfighters.

Also, a player in another ship will probably be more concerned about their own survival (and their ship) than protecting another ship. Whereas a turret gunner will do everything they can to protect the ship they're aboard. So if I had to choose between a player in my Constellation's turret versus in their own ship, I'd prefer my turret.

Like I said, I think the P52 is actually a bit more compelling, especially if it's powerful enough to go toe-to-toe with most fighters in-game, even if it does so via greater maneuverability rather than firepower. It actually sounds like it's flexible and interesting. My objection is mostly to turrets, because like I said, 80% of your time in a turret is spent sitting there waiting for a target. Not the case with the P52.


Lemme get this straight. You claim that no one will operate a ship's turret because 80% of the time they'll spend sitting there waiting for a target -- but you assume that players will be more interested in flying the P52. How is that different? If a ship only sees action 20% of the time, and the other 80% is boring nothing, why would a player be happier flying a P52 than sitting in a turret? They're still going to be bored.

As the owner of a Constellation, I'm not going to deploy my P52 unless there's good reason to. It would be a waste of fuel for my P52 to fly alongside my Constellation constantly, for no reason.

And as I pointed out, players won't be sitting in turrets 80% of the time doing nothing, because they could be doing other things aboard the ship.

So none of your arguments really stand up to scrutiny either, because you've done nothing but make assumptions about how other people will choose to play the game. Consequently, you're the last person who should be speaking for anyone but yourself.

#59
NO-DRAGON

NO-DRAGON
  • Trade & Industry
  • 307 posts
  • Location:Shotts/Scotland
That disscusion get beside the target.You are both right and wrong.Chris stated that you can jump from where ever you are in universe, as long as you are docked into a friends turret!So no boring times as you only do it when needed. You actually do not need to be onboard.For the P52 you are correct, you will maybe have boring times, who knows Chris mind, I do not.And Insurance is the same, the fact is, insurance will climb bound to what sector you are flying in or through and how often ya lose ya ship.So it could be, that we see pilots without a insuranced ship, caused by not paid Insurance. And if none is lending them a ship (why I should???), then they would have to do other jobs on the side to get money and their insurance paid.Could that be include time were you are bored, yes why not, people should be punished for losing all the time ships and need the insurance.If you are a unlucky Pie-Rat, an over risk taking Trader or mining in the frontlines and loose all the time ships, yes let em do some boring stuff so they appriciate the cool Space Simulation they where given.
“To be in a war, you must learn the rules of survival… to win a war, you must break every fucking one of those rules.” ― Hugo Valdez “If you ever start taking things too seriously, just remember that we are talking monkeys on an organic spaceship flying through the universe.” ― Joe Rogan NO-DRAGON SC Base copy.png

#60
Bloodzee

Bloodzee
  • Fleet Member
  • 54 posts
link to official forum for npc

http://www.robertssp...ur-extra-ships/


and part about p52

Chris
    RE: Constellation and P52.
    None of the other “full” ships were ever meant to fit in the Constellation. If Ben said that then he was mistaken as it was never int he design. A bigger capital class ship could fit a pledge ship, but not the Constellation.
    the P52 was meant to be a light maneuverable short range fighter (not much fuel or ammo storage) for space defense against other light maneuverable attackers. A player HAS to pilot it though. It can not be flown as a drone. So it’s either you or a friend. If you fly it, the Constellation can fly on autopilot (and will obey your basic commands) with the turrets in auto mode, or a friend can pilot for you. If I allow ship board NPCs on player ships (not fully decided yet – these will be on bigger capital ships like the carrier) they will maybe have more personality in terms of taking their own initiative but in general will have the drawbacks of AI / NPCs.

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users