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 contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Jaxon Corvid

Members
  • Content count

    189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

5 Followers

About Jaxon Corvid

  • Birthday 06/23/1981

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Interests
    Writing, movies, video games.

Star Citizen Info

  • Ships
    Constellation

Recent Profile Visitors

569 profile views
  1. The Freelancer definitely looks cooler than I thought a freighter could look when I originally pledged for it. But I don't regret upping my pledge for the Constellation. I wouldn't mind owning a Freelancer, but I'm not going to buy it for $100. I'll acquire it in-game. If it's true that it takes some time (hours? a day? dunno) for an insured ship to be replaced after it's destroyed, I could buy a Freelancer and use it as my backup ship.
  2. This is what happens when there are two Mercantile sections, one public and one for the Imperium Fleet.
  3. Sry. Wrong section. DELETE this thread please.
  4. This thread is still public.
  5. I purchased the Stealth Skin add-on for the same reason as eNeRGy: it should be more difficult to see against the starry backdrop. I don't assume that it actually has stealth properties -- but if it does, even better! It doesn't bother me if there won't be Star Trek-style cloaking devices, because true invisibility is rife with problems and balance issues. There's a youTube video from WoW of 5 Alliance Rogues infiltrating Ogrimmar and going on a killing spree, all because they could become backstab players while invisible, and slip away when the heat came down on them. I don't want Cloaking Devices in Star Citizen to enable a handful of elite players to infiltrate our territory, destroy our ships, and raid our bases, and we can't do anything to stop them because they're cloaked. I'm sure that Stealth will be more than sufficient, and properly balanced.
  6. Firstly, the glut of information, many of which is contradictory, has been enormous in the last month. Sorting it out is impossible and pointless, because it's constantly changing. CI released the Combat AI trailer around November 19, presumably to show what dogfighting will be like. I commented a week later on November 26, that it looked unbearably slow and slow. And NOW, nearly TWO WEEKS LATER, you're telling me that CI has explained that the gameplay in the trailer was deliberately slowed down, and you're criticizing me for expressing legitimate concerns about the game based on the information I had at the time. WTF is your problem? Yours is exactly the kind of attitude that I was describing: THE APOLOGIST. The person who makes every excuse for the dev team, because they believe that they can do no wrong. People like you always say, "Relax, the game's not finished. Wait until the alpha." And then if the problems persist, you'll say, "Relax, wait until the beta." But the problems persist. "Relax, wait until the game's finished." But the game is released with the same problems. Then you say, "Well if you don't like it, don't buy it." Of course, by then it's too late. That's why I'm expressing my concerns and my dissatisfaction NOW, in hopes that my voice will join other players with the same concerns, and the dev team will become aware of our collective concerns, and take action to the correct the problems. If you have a problem with that, the I SUGGEST that you keep your opinions to yourself until the game is released and we can play it, and we'll know if my concerns are justified, or if they've been resolved. If the combat in Star Citizen is as fast and furious as I hope, I'll gladly acknowledge the dev team's efforts and accomplishments, because that's exactly what I want.
  7. I predict the best control scheme for the Hornet's turret will be a second monitor and either a hatswitch, or a touchpad/touchscreen. As I've mentioned before, Windows 8 will soon cause most PC monitors to be touchscreens. I expect that the conversion to touchscreen PC monitors will be well underway by the time Star Citizen is released. I own a Constellation, not a Hornet, but my ship also has a dorsal turret (and an upgradeable ventral turret). If it's possible, I want to get a small touchscreen monitor that I can position on my left side a few inches in from of my throttle control, so it's within easy reach with my left hand. I should be able to aim the turret with my left index finger and fire it with either my left thumb or a button on my flight stick. TrackIR sounds incredible and I hope it works, but until I see it in action, I think my touchscreen idea is a better control scheme for a single person to operate a turret while also flying the ship.
  8. As long as I can perform my "signature moves" in Star Citizen, I'll be happy. I don't really care if they can be programmed using macros or not. Because as long as the controls permit those type of maneuvers, audibles can be performed on the fly, and pilots skilled enough to manually perform the maneuvers that I described should defeat the pilots who rely on macros.
  9. Can this topic be moved to the Imperium Fleet section? Because I don't discuss my operational ideas and proposals in the public forum. My ideas are intended to make the Imperium Fleet strong and profitable, not to help outsiders.
  10. That's crazy. Presuming that Star Citizen is similar to other MMO games, a Player will receive missions from mission-givers, such as "Collect 500 Hydrogen from a Kalis 7". The Player travel to Kalis 7, collect hydrogen gas, and deliver it to a refinery to complete the mission, and receive their reward. That doesn't mean that a Player has to collect hydrogen from gas giants for the rest of the game. That was just one mission! The next mission they take on might be to travel to a distant star system, pick up some cargo, and deliver it to a star system on the other side of the galaxy. Who knows? Even if a Player chooses mining as their profession and spends most of their time mining, there's no reason why they would stay in the same place and never go anywhere else. That sounds like a chore, not an entertaining game. It seems like you have some misconceptions and false assumptions about Star Citizen, thehumangerm.
  11. How would mining in Star Citizen be any different or more boring that mining or resource gathering in games like WoW or Skyrim? Will mining be more exciting than dogfighting? Of course not. But Mining will probably rewarding enough to merit investing the time into doing it, to earn credits, to buy better ships and upgrades.
  12. I think there should be ship maintenance, just like weapons and armour in RPGs have to be repaired from combat. Most vehicles only need maintenance every 6 months or so, and usually only oil and filter change, and rotating the tires. Whereas aircraft need maintenance after every flight, because when gravity is involved, what comes up will invariably come down, one way or another. Considering that ships are not only flying, but flying through space and jumping faster-than-light, it's perfectly reasonable to require ships to have regular maintenance. I mean, it might not be required at every single stop, but maybe once per play session. So if you play for ~4 hours and you make 3 or more round trips, at the end of your play session it would be a good idea to land at a space port and pay for maintenance to ensure your ship is tip-top the next time you log-in. Or your character could perform ship maintenance by going to each of the ship's subsystems, clicking on them, and waiting 10 seconds or so for a progress bar to fill, and then the subsystem is 100% again. There might only be a few subsystems to maintain, or over a dozen, depending on the ship -- because a Constellation would presumably be more maintenance intensive than an Aurora. The subsystems I can think of off the top of my head are: Avionics, Life Support, Sensors, Communications, Main Engine(s), Thrusters, Jump Drive, Landing Gear, and Weapons. Perhaps in addition to the basic systems, each upgrade would also have to be maintained. To manually perform maintenance, it might take 5-10 minutes, but it would be free (or at least cost less). If the player doesn't want to bother, they can pay mechanics in the hangar or space port to perform the maintenance for a small fee. I imagine that every port that the player can land their ship, they can probably refuel, and they can choose to refuel their ship or not when they exit their ship -- a pop-up window would appear asking Yes or No. At the same time, a pop-up could ask about paying for ship maintenance. So it would be simple, convenient, and relatively inexpensive. It makes perfect sense that ships need to be maintained to stay in optimal condition. If a player neglects their ship, it should degrade over time, and if a subsystem drops below 10%, it could fail, which might cause the ship to crash or become disabled. That's how I think ship maintenance should work in Star Citizen. But if there isn't ship maintenance, I'm not going to be too disappointed.
  13. The problem with the Boarding Info page is that it seems have been drafted before the crowd funding campaign was completed, because it refers to the possibility of EVA combat, implying that it was written before that Stretch Goal was unlocked. So while the answer to 1) is NO, it's not possible to capture single-person ships like starfighters because a.) the victim ship has to have a minimum possible crew of 2, and b.) it has to boarded internally through an airlock, so if it's not possible to stand up inside a ship it's not possible to board and capture it. However, EVA combat should mean that it's possible to space-walk and use a thruster pack to jet over to a disabled starfighter, hover over the cockpit, shoot the pilot through the canopy and kill them, then pry open the canopy, set the dead pilot adrift, climb inside, patch the canopy, repair the disabled engines, and fly the starfighter back to base. That should be possible! It would only be an artificially imposed limitation on the gameplay that would restrict that from happening. 2) Again, it should be possible to breach the ship's hull and depressurize the ship. However, if the crew are in space suits, they won't be killed by depressurization; and if they're strapped into their seats (like Ripley at the end of Alien), they won't get blown out into space if the hull is breached. So depressurizing a ship should be a viable tactic to capturing a ship, but it could defended against. It's another example of artificial restrictions on what players can and cannot do. 3) There will be anti-boarding defenses, such as automated gun turrets and self-destruct systems. No doubt they'll occupy upgrade slots though, so the dillemma will be: Do you optimize your ship for space combat, so that your ship won't get disabled and boarded in the first place? Or do you upgrade your ship with internal defence systems to make it nearly impossible to capture your ship if and when you are boarded? I'd prefer to not be boarded in the first place. And since infantry combat is apparently part of the game, I'd rather invest my credits in combat armour and heavy weapons to repel boarders than waste upgrade slots on internal defenses.
  14. I thought that tractor beams would enable pirates to tow captured ships to their bases as well, but the Boarding Info page indicates otherwise. It clearly states that at least 2 players are required to capture another ship: one to fly the original ship, and one to fly the captured ship. Apparently the usefulness of tractor beams are extremely limited. The Boarding Info warns that if a ship still has engine power, trying to capture it with a tractor beam will be more hazardous to the pirate ship than the victim ship. That means tractor beams can't be used offensively, like in Star Wars. Tractor beams are only used to stabilize a drifting ship so the docking collar can be attached. There's no information about whether or not a disabled ship can be towed using a tractor beam. Since the Boarding Info page explains that a disabled ship must be repaired before it can flown back to base, and at least two people are required to capture a ship, that implies that towing isn't an option. I'm hoping these limitations are removed, because they just don't make sense IMO. CI seems to want to make capturing ships extremely difficult, but they've taken it too far. I can live with tractor beams not being able to capture ships. But not even being able to tow ships is ridiculous.
  15. @webe123: That was a long rant about a non-issue. No one is "required" to fly a particular ship. I have no idea where you came up with that assumption. You have chosen to fly an Aurora, which is supposedly a starfighter. Other people, like me, chose higher pledge tiers and will receive the Constellation instead. I understand that my 75 ton, 4 engine starship probably won't be as fast or agile as your 15 ton single engine starfighter. That isn't important to me, because I'm more interested in the profits that I'll earn hauling 7 times the amount of cargo that your Aurora can hold.