MISC Reliant - Mini Hauler & Variants

[Reavern]

1 hour ago, Karmaslap said:

Maybe some really hardcore people won't want to add a drive, but I think the vast, vast majority will. It's like a mid-step up upgrade to get before you have enough uec to to actually get a better ship- if you're a trader/explorer. If you are a merc/something of the like, you'll want a jump drive to migrate around for jobs. CIG is making too many systems and jump points available to do anything to hinder free movement. So yeah, maybe someone wants their dogfighter to be ever so slightly better, but considering the trouble it would take to go hire someone to ferry their ship every single time they jump, I wouldn't see any player not wanting to mount a jump drive. CIG isnt letting us magically have ships appear in another system, right? If our beloved auroras are one system and we're a few systems away, or we plan to move a few systems away, we can set it up to have someone transport them all so we don't have to fly the whole flotilla. That's how I viewed the transport concept. Almost every player is going to want a jump drive. It's too restrictive to not have one.

IMO buying a jump drive for a Starter Ship wouldn't be a "mid-step" upgrade before buying a better ship. In MMORPG terms, if the Starting Zone is for Levels 1-4, earning enough UECs and buying a jump drive would be equivalent to leveling up to Level 5 and buying your first piece of Level 5 gear, so you're ready to venture out into the neighboring Level 5-8 zone.

Buying a jump drive is basically taking the training wheels off your ship, because you're able to independently leave your Starter star system and venture across the galaxy. For players who start with an Aurora, Mustang, or Reliant, buying a jump drive and leaving their Starter system will be a major milestone.

However, I don't think that hiring NPCs or other players to ferry a non-jump-drive-equipped ship between star systems will be expensive or an inconvenience. I think there are going to be plenty of transport owners available to ferry ships and passengers. I doubt you'll even have to wait 5 minutes. And the transportation fee will definitely be less than buying a jump drive. I think smart players will take advantage of the transportation system and only buy a jump drive when they truly need to.

For example, if a player owns a Reliant Kore and is hauling cargo between planets in the same star system, they might notice on the marketplace that there are better prospects in a star system a few jumps away. Rather than buy a jump drive, that player could have their Reliant ferried to the new star system, and then haul cargo within that star system.

I don't think a jump drive will be essential for certain roles. Explorers will have plenty to explore in a star system; with procedural generation, a player could conceivably spend years surveying the planets, moons, asteroids, etc. in a star system. Militia could stake out a Low-Sec system and earn a living fighting Vanduul and/or NPC or Player-Pirates.

Eventually, every player will have a ship with a jump drive, but I disagree that every player will consider it too restrictive to not have a jump drive.

[VoA]

15 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Maybe some really hardcore people won't want to add a drive, but I think the vast, vast majority will. 

Disagree. ... would most people put a Jump Engine on a Racer?.......No..... a dog-fighter. .......No...... and I bet after the deep dive design post that on Science (due to EM emissions)..... most likely not....

[Karmaslap]

A dedicated racer doesn't need a jump drive. A dogfighter, though? How would you run escort duty for convoys without one? You can't, there isn't a carrier that will let you deploy quickly and effectively in numbers. All the guys running escort duty will need jump drives. Any military ships that plan to be used for strike missions or for quick response will need jump drives.

You are in Blood Moon Squadron (Founder, I think?). Your squadron's primary roles of Vanduul hunting and Bounty hunting are both jobs which will require jump drives on personal ships- your dogfighters used for missions are going to need jump drives, for more than simple convenience. Not having a jump drive means a loss of control, loss of reaction time, and inability to escape back to safety. Most of your secondary roles do too- reconnaissance and major fleet actions certainly will, with military being dependant on what mission types you all grab. Right there, you, a typical unit, will need jump drives for most of your operations. And you think most players won't want one?

[VoA]

8 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

A dedicated racer doesn't need a jump drive. A dogfighter, though? How would you run escort duty for convoys without one?

Most Escort missions will be from planet to planet within a system..... other than that you would more likely want a long range (jump capable) fighter like a Super Hornet / Vanguard.   Most fighters though ....... including most Hornets..... don't have or want a Jump Engine (it affects maneuverability).   See RSI quote below for understanding why you wouldn't just want to always update every ship to be Jump capable... and you use the right ships for the right missions (not turn every ship into a Jack of all trades.... since it can be detrimental to be a "master of none").

8 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

You are in Blood Moon Squadron (Founder, I think?). Your squadron's primary roles of Vanduul hunting and Bounty hunting are both jobs which will require jump drives on personal ships- your dogfighters used for missions are going to need jump drives, for more than simple convenience. Not having a jump drive means a loss of control, loss of reaction time, and inability to escape back to safety. Most of your secondary roles do too- reconnaissance and major fleet actions certainly will, with military being dependant on what mission types you all grab. Right there, you, a typical unit, will need jump drives for most of your operations. And you think most players won't want one?

Correct.  Penetrating into Vanduul Space you will first want to scout it with something like a 315P or Carrack..... with Vanguard / Super Hornet as escort.   After it is determined that the Jump is safe then you transport (ferry) the ships that don't have it to the system (see Hull E picture example on previous page from ATV).  Look at the Bike example... from an RSI Forum post I just made... (Below)

VoAVoA

 

 

 

 

Archer | Mark_F said:

[source]

If you think there is a reason that some small ships don't have a jump drive as standard, then you must also think there is a reason why we can just get one fitted.

Manufacturers in the real world will add on superfluous add odds or options if the public is foolish enough to buy them but that doesn't mean they should - or that they will come to much use. For instance - someone can buy a very light frame mutli-speed bike that comes stock with narrow tires designed for street racing ..... and someone could be foolish enough to then also buy knobby off road dirt tires and try to take that bike on extreme dirt trails and try the bike on extreme jump (even likely breaking the frame with the jump)........ or they can be smart and just buy a new bike designed for off-road and keep their street bike for street use. Get it finally?

Caspar | Darath said:

[source]

Dunno why everyone is arguing so much.

For me, I just want a large, living, breathing environment, that doesn't feel confined. That means going from system to system, and from sectors of space other sectors of space, should both take time and be more of an adventure than not.

I agree - its a dead issues and case settle (with people just grasping with arguments that don't make sense anymore - trying to get CIG to ditch their lore that most small ships should be ferried or transported from system to system). It is very sad really because people aren't considering how rich this Lore will make the game feel. It will make space feel that much bigger and more realistic. Systems will be LARGE..... with many Missions...... so you don't need to be fickle and feel like you have to jump from system to system. People in the real world live in one metropolitan area most of their lives without the need or want to move from city to city all the time. Get it?

[Reavern]

13 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

You are in Blood Moon Squadron (Founder, I think?). Your squadron's primary roles of Vanduul hunting and Bounty hunting are both jobs which will require jump drives on personal ships- your dogfighters used for missions are going to need jump drives, for more than simple convenience. Not having a jump drive means a loss of control, loss of reaction time, and inability to escape back to safety. Most of your secondary roles do too- reconnaissance and major fleet actions certainly will, with military being dependant on what mission types you all grab. Right there, you, a typical unit, will need jump drives for most of your operations. And you think most players won't want one?

Vanduul Hunting will absolutely require a ship with a jump drive, because it involves executing raids into Vanduul space -- it would be crazy to enter hostile territory without the means to escape. However, Vanduul Hunting isn't a conventional profession. Certain professions will require a ship with a jump drive. For example, the Drake Herald comes equipped with a jump drive, because Info Running involves jumping between star systems to deliver data packages (because communications and data can't be transmitted through a jump point).

Whereas other professions don't necessitate jump point travel, which is why certain ships are only equipped with quantum drives. For example, a player with a Reliant Kore or a Hull A might be able to earn a decent income simply making orbital hops, ferrying cargo from a city on a planet to a space station in orbit and vice-versa. This will probably be very common, because Hull C/D/E haulers can't land on a planet laden with cargo; they have to offload their cargo in space, and small haulers will deliver them to the planet. A jump drive isn't required for that (technically, not even a quantum drive would be required).

Short-range haulers don't need a jump drive. It's optional and unnecessary.

Just because a player who has chosen a profession that will require a jump drive-equipped ship says that not every player will need a jump drive-equipped ship, doesn't make it untrue or hypocritical. That's like a professional baseball player telling little leaguers that they don't need to buy a $300 baseball glove, like he uses; instead, they should buy a youth baseball glove for $50. It's good advice. It's a waste of money to buy something that you don't need.

Not buying a jump drive pertains mainly to starter ships. An Aurora, Mustang, or Reliant should be adequate for operating in the player's starter star system. When a player is ready to venture out of their starter system, they'll probably be able to afford to upgrade to a better ship, which comes equipped with a jump drive. For example, a player with a Reliant Kore might upgrade to a Freelancer MAX. That's a logical progression. Whereas equipping the Kore with a jump drive and hauling the same amount of cargo farther doesn't sound like a great idea. In certain circumstances, it could work; generally speaking, it makes more sense to perform long hauls using a bigger ship.

There will be professions and roles that require a ship to have a jump drive. And I understand that most players will want a ship with a jump drive, so they have the freedom and ability to travel between star systems unaided. However, there will be numerous professions and roles that don't require a jump drive, and I'm certain that many of those are intended for starting players. That's why it makes perfect sense that most starter ships aren't equipped with jump drives, because they don't need them.

[Karmaslap]

7 hours ago, VoA said:

Most Escort missions will be from planet to planet within a system.

No, they won't be for traders (At least org generated missions. I'm sure that npc missions will be found as both types all the time). As Reavern writes below, smaller ships like the reliant, Hull A or Hull B are good for in-system transport as they are ablw to land and deliver goods. In-system transport won't always need an organized convoy- you can just divide the work up between smaller and more manueverable ships and have security nearby. I suppose you could use a Hull D to go from one planet to another and would need to protect it, but it makes no sense to convoy for a 15-20 minute journey, most of which is in Q space. You're going to want to convoy for safety when you travel long distances, through a chokepoint like a jump point. Plus, the areas where raw minerals are being mined and needeng transport, and the areas where those are turned into components, and the areas where the factory nodes to turn those into completed goods will often be found in different systems from each other- making the most lucrative trade require jump point navigation, which would require jump capable escorts. (If a T&I guy reads this and disagrees, post).

Quote

other than that you would more likely want a long range (jump capable) fighter like a Super Hornet / Vanguard.   Most fighters though ....... including most Hornets..... don't have or want a Jump Engine (it affects maneuverability).  

You'd want a jump drive on a hornet ghost or tracker, it expands the options for a ship not meant to have a laser focus on dogfighting and lets you use them as scouts, which they would excel at. 

Quote

 

See RSI quote below for understanding why you wouldn't just want to always update every ship to be Jump capable... and you use the right ships for the right missions (not turn every ship into a Jack of all trades.... since it can be detrimental to be a "master of none").

Your quote below applies more to something like, say, taking the Hull C into combat after putting bigger guns on it. Total role change. That isn't what a jump drive does- adding a drive just gives a player more freedom and gives ships more tactical options. 

With regards to the second part of your quote: I don't think CIG should put a jump drive on every ship. Most of the starter ships have no need for one, and players can experience the lore you mention of having to hire someone to ferry them ans their ship to the next system over. That sounds like a fun and immersive experience. And, as you say, players will have plenty to do in a system. This is great for players starting out, or players with a laser focus on something- as mentioned before, a hardcore racing ship would be something to ferry back and forth to races. Once players start expanding their reach, though, is when they'll want to become jump capable- when they earn enough for a jump drive (if that's a good financial move) for those higher paying intersystem ferry missions, before upgrading to a bigger trading ship, or when they decide to travel from system to system before settling down. 

Not every ship needs a jump drive starting out, and starters shouldn't get one, but the option shouldn't be penalizing once players figure things out and begin to expand.

Quote

Correct.  Penetrating into Vanduul Space you will first want to scout it with something like a 315P or Carrack..... with Vanguard / Super Hornet as escort.   After it is determined that the Jump is safe then you transport (ferry) the ships that don't have it to the system 

Sounds like a really fun operation

It's too early to say if this will work or not with a ferry. It won't be possible to do this for every operation, so pilots will be needing a jump equipped ship for those anyways. If you have a nice, safe staging ground that you can take your time to deploy and load ships onto your transport in, It would work. If there is a mechanic when attacking vanduul systems to have them hit you back once they find you, you might not have time to load every ship onto the hull series and escape- and it wouldn't work. It's too early to comment other than that. I'm sure you've gone over this and other i itial operation plans for your unit and know they're subject to change and why. If I flew an operation like that, I would bring a jump-capable ship. There will be plenty of attack operations that will require a jump drive anyways.

 

Reavern: 

I agree with the first paragraph, with the exception that it's feasible if game mechanics give you a lot of time to meet up, load ships, then guard the transport on the way out. If the vanduul are aggressive at all, I doubt you will and would agree with you. It seems hacing the option to retreat without the big loading hassle would be smart.

 

2 hours ago, Reavern said:

Whereas other professions don't necessitate jump point travel, which is why certain ships are only equipped with quantum drives. For example, a player with a Reliant Kore or a Hull A might be able to earn a decent income simply making orbital hops, ferrying cargo from a city on a planet to a space station in orbit and vice-versa. This will probably be very common, because Hull C/D/E haulers can't land on a planet laden with cargo; they have to offload their cargo in space, and small haulers will deliver them to the planet. A jump drive isn't required for that (technically, not even a quantum drive would be required).

Short-range haulers don't need a jump drive. It's optional and unnecessary.

Just because a player who has chosen a profession that will require a jump drive-equipped ship says that not every player will need a jump drive-equipped ship, doesn't make it untrue or hypocritical. That's like a professional baseball player telling little leaguers that they don't need to buy a $300 baseball glove, like he uses; instead, they should buy a youth baseball glove for $50. It's good advice. It's a waste of money to buy something that you don't need.

Not buying a jump drive pertains mainly to starter ships. An Aurora, Mustang, or Reliant should be adequate for operating in the player's starter star system. When a player is ready to venture out of their starter system, they'll probably be able to afford to upgrade to a better ship, which comes equipped with a jump drive. For example, a player with a Reliant Kore might upgrade to a Freelancer MAX. That's a logical progression. Whereas equipping the Kore with a jump drive and hauling the same amount of cargo farther doesn't sound like a great idea. In certain circumstances, it could work; generally speaking, it makes more sense to perform long hauls using a bigger ship.

I referenced this somewhere above. I agree, it's unnecessary if a player can make good money inside a system for them to start out with a jump drive. I have the base reliant and will be ferrying cargo part-time to earn some extra UEC. If there are contracts for intersystem transport that pay out a lot more, though, It might be a good step to equip a jump drive- depending on how expensive they are, I might be able to get one before getting a MAX (which is totally the logical upgrade) and make higher profits to save up for the next ship. I started off ferrying in-system, progressed to out of system, then upgraded to a larger ship. That is a clear progression. It does depend on how much more pay would be in going from system to system and how much a drive unit costs, but I easily see it as being worth it. 

2 hours ago, Reavern said:

There will be professions and roles that require a ship to have a jump drive. And I understand that most players will want a ship with a jump drive, so they have the freedom and ability to travel between star systems unaided. However, there will be numerous professions and roles that don't require a jump drive, and I'm certain that many of those are intended for starting players. That's why it makes perfect sense that most starter ships aren't equipped with jump drives, because they don't need them.

Yes. I also think most players will end up wanting the freedom to travel and will either add a jump drive, or upgrade ships to get one. 

 

I just think that after starting out, a large majority of players will want/need a jump drive for what they are doing- especially ships for military use will need thst mobility for a lot of operations and missions. 

 

[Reavern]

2 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Yes. I also think most players will end up wanting the freedom to travel and will either add a jump drive, or upgrade ships to get one. 

I just think that after starting out, a large majority of players will want/need a jump drive for what they are doing- especially ships for military use will need thst mobility for a lot of operations and missions. 

Yes, I agree.

This is a clinic on human nature, where wants trump needs. This is like the people who own a car to commute to work every day, instead of taking public transit (which is cheaper, less stressful, and better for the environment). This is like the people who won't buy an electric car because the range is limited, even though the average person drives less than 40 miles per day (which is half an EV's range). This is like people who buy a $5000 rear-view camera/park assist package for a $15,000 car. It doesn't make logical sense. The problem is that people are illogical.

So I completely understand that most people will buy a jump drive for their ships, regardless if they need one or not.

My point is that I don't think CIG deserves all the heat they're getting since they announced that most Starter ships will only have a quantum drive, not a jump drive. CIG is receiving a lot of pressure to change their decision and give all ships (larger than a snubfighter) jump drives. It's true that CIG claimed that *all* ships would have jump drives, and they've amended that to all ships have quantum drives, and only certain ships have jump drives. So they've technically broken their promise. However, I think it's the correct decision. I think it's in new player's best interests that Starter ships not have jump drives, to encourage them to stay in their Starting star system and gain experience and UECs, until they're truly ready to venture out into the galaxy.

Regarding Military ships, I think the quantum vs jump drive distinction now clarifies why the F7A Hornet and Gladiator torpedo bomber are considered short-range "carrier-based" ships; because they're only equipped with quantum drives, not jump drives. They launch from bases on a planet or space station, or a carrier, and quantum jump within the star system to intercept and engage enemy ships. However, they're reliant on a carrier to transport them between star systems. The UEE Navy doesn't equip Hornets or Gladiators with jump drives, because the ships don't need them.

Of course, in the PU, players won't have a carrier at their beck and call to transport them between star systems. (Well, some players and Orgs might, but the majority won't.) So I understand that Military players will want to equip their combat ships with jump drives, so they have the ability to jump between star systems whenever they want.

[VoA]

3 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

 In-system transport won't always need an organized convoy- you can just divide the work up between smaller and more manueverable ships and have security nearby. I suppose you could use a Hull D to go from one planet to another and would need to protect it, but it makes no sense to convoy for a 15-20 minute journey, most of which is in Q space. You're going to want to convoy for safety when you travel long distances, through a chokepoint like a jump point.

Still disagree.... CIG has mentioned that they will be devising ways to inhibit jump point camping (one of the ideas that they have is moving the Jump Point exit point around so it isn't in a fixed location, the other is heavy UEE patrols at entry point, etc.... - this was way back in the WMH days).... so trying to define a supply or convoy route to a planet from a "jumped into system" random location will be extremely difficult.   The heavily pirated areas will be routes from planet to planet or from a known resource to a planet.   Since small ships will dominate the VERSE by a significant amount (don't use Imperium ships as an example but as an exception) including what NPCs will fly this will mean most trade will be in system trade.

3 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

You'd want a jump drive on a hornet ghost or tracker, it expands the options for a ship not meant to have a laser focus on dogfighting and lets you use them as scouts, which they would excel at. 

Disagree.  Hornet Ghosts are better for lurking around salvage or asteroid fields and the tracker is better for a carrier group (both are carrier ships or short range patrol ships).  If you want long range or system to system stealth ship then the Sabre is better suited for that.   You can always dog-fight with a Hornet ship that has a Jump Engine installed but you will be at a disadvantage when dog-fighting another Hornet that doesn't have a Jump Engine installed.

4 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

With regards to the second part of your quote: I don't think CIG should put a jump drive on every ship. Most of the starter ships have no need for one, and players can experience the lore you mention of having to hire someone to ferry them ans their ship to the next system over. That sounds like a fun and immersive experience. And, as you say, players will have plenty to do in a system. This is great for players starting out, or players with a laser focus on something- as mentioned before, a hardcore racing ship would be something to ferry back and forth to races. Once players start expanding their reach, though, is when they'll want to become jump capable- when they earn enough for a jump drive (if that's a good financial move) for those higher paying intersystem ferry missions, before upgrading to a bigger trading ship, or when they decide to travel from system to system before settling down. 

CIG set up short range - system to system ships for a reason (and have defined it in the Lore).....  it will not be a training wheels case where the first month you start with a starter ship .... the upgrade to Jump Engines.... and the second month everyone has Jump Engines installed.  You might see this as a naive mistake.... then you'll see people (the min/maxers first) un-install their Jump Engines (and leave the upgrade in their hanger - or even sell it realizing it won't be worth having one and that many ships really don't have the range to even reach many of the jump points without extra quantum fuel storage tanks.) = Most will upgrade to another ship - keeping their smaller ships to the system to system ship..... and things will balance out back to the Lore of small ships being in-system ships as CIG intended. 

4 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

I referenced this somewhere above. I agree, it's unnecessary if a player can make good money inside a system for them to start out with a jump drive. I have the base reliant and will be ferrying cargo part-time to earn some extra UEC. If there are contracts for intersystem transport that pay out a lot more, though, It might be a good step to equip a jump drive- depending on how expensive they are, I might be able to get one before getting a MAX (which is totally the logical upgrade) and make higher profits to save up for the next ship. I started off ferrying in-system, progressed to out of system, then upgraded to a larger ship. That is a clear progression. It does depend on how much more pay would be in going from system to system and how much a drive unit costs, but I easily see it as being worth it. 

Yes. I also think most players will end up wanting the freedom to travel and will either add a jump drive, or upgrade ships to get one. 

People will eventually learn that it will be more effective to upgrade to a larger ship than to utilize ships that are designed as intra-system ships.  Especially when people realize they can have their NPCs run their missions for them.  Example.... a Person starting with a Reliant Kore or Tana will be better served (the min/maxers will realize this first) to NOT upgrade their ship with a Jump Engine.... but rather turn its operation over to an NPC to fly.... and instead buy something like a Hull A as their system to system ship that they will fly (yes you can autonomously have NPCs run missions for you in different systems - you just set up a contract with them per CR).

1 hour ago, Reavern said:

The problem is that people are illogical.

So I completely understand that most people will buy a jump drive for their ships, regardless if they need one or not.

I agree that most players will take the illogical approach first ..... but basic game mechanics (like going to a Hull A) above will filter around fast on Podcasts and you'll see people stop installing Jump Engines on ships designed to be in-system ships).   This type of "running the NPCs autonomously" approach to gaming isn't "normal" in most MMOs but the RTS players will pick up on it fast.

[Karmaslap]

VoA- we won't have readily available carriers for our ships to easily deploy from. The UEE can pull things off that players can't. We can't operate as a "carrier group" because there is no player ship that can hold more than 4 fighters and easily deploy them. I suppose eventually Imperium might end up with a Bengal for a time, and we can, but CIG has made it clear we won't be able to deploy from the Hull series as a pocket carrier, so it's impractical for use as a carrier except as a slow ferry. 

 

3 hours ago, VoA said:

Still disagree.... CIG has mentioned that they will be devising ways to inhibit jump point camping (one of the ideas that they have is moving the Jump Point exit point around so it isn't in a fixed location, the other is heavy UEE patrols at entry point, etc.... - this was way back in the WMH days).... so trying to define a supply or convoy route to a planet from a "jumped into system" random location will be extremely difficult.   The heavily pirated areas will be routes from planet to planet or from a known resource to a planet.   Since small ships will dominate the VERSE by a significant amount (don't use Imperium ships as an example but as an exception) including what NPCs will fly this will mean most trade will be in system trade.

UEE patrols is an obvious candidate as it increases the security of a system. The jump point moving around would be a terrible solution as well- pirates will still fine it profitable to camp jump points, and "camping" will be what happens no matter what CIG does, even if it isn't oiteral sitting around a fixed point waiting for the convoy. If you think otherwise, go talk to some serious pirates.

Imperium isn't that much of an exception- we have a lot of big ships, but so does everyone else, and so will everyone else a few months in. You also can't speak abaolutely about if a majority of trade will occur in-system or between systems, as that hasn't been decided yet. 

Quote

Disagree.  Hornet Ghosts are better for lurking around salvage or asteroid fields and the tracker is better for a carrier group (both are carrier ships or short range patrol ships).  If you want long range or system to system stealth ship then the Sabre is better suited for that.   You can always dog-fight with a Hornet ship that has a Jump Engine installed but you will be at a disadvantage when dog-fighting another Hornet that doesn't have a Jump Engine installed. 

The sabre is designed for space superiority in situations where a lighter footprint is needed. It slightly sacrifices combat power for some stealth, and by balance would then sacrifice stealth for some combat power. It is a compromise, and a compromise isn't going to be better than the dedicated ship, the Ghost. The Ghost is going to be a great choice to hide around enemy systems and scout, which it will need a jump drive for. The tracker is also supposed to have powerful sensors and excel at exploring, which means it will excel at scouting as well. Also, you're wrong on that last point- the SuperHornet has a jump drive and is the best dogfighter out of the hornet lineup, and will likely stay at the top, plus it will have more mobility with the jump drive. I believe that there dissproves your "no jump drive will have a significant advantage" theory.

Quote

CIG set up short range - system to system ships for a reason (and have defined it in the Lore).....  it will not be a training wheels case where the first month you start with a starter ship .... the upgrade to Jump Engines.... and the second month everyone has Jump Engines installed.  You might see this as a naive mistake.... then you'll see people (the min/maxers first) un-install their Jump Engines (and leave the upgrade in their hanger - or even sell it realizing it won't be worth having one and that many ships really don't have the range to even reach many of the jump points without extra quantum fuel storage tanks.) = Most will upgrade to another ship - keeping their smaller ships to the system to system ship..... and things will balance out back to the Lore of small ships being in-system ships as CIG intended. 

It won't really be intended to be a "level-progression" system, but in the absence of a large org to organize players, there will be a clear progression as players earn more UEC. I see no reason why a player would uninstall a jump drive. You seem to think that players with one will be at a serious disadvantage, but that won't be the case. Installing the drive will have a clear purpose if a player decides not to upgrade to a new ship altogether. Player ships will easily have enough quantum fuel to jump to the jump point and get to a newrby service station (Guy on reddit did some math for ship range in-system based on current quantum fuel levels, and CIG created those levels to correspond to what they want later even if they'll dhange a bit). Just because CIG has lore in-game does not mean that players will stick to it in any way, it just means that CIG is likely to model npcs that way.

Quote

People will eventually learn that it will be more effective to upgrade to a larger ship than to utilize ships that are designed as intra-system ships.  Especially when people realize they can have their NPCs run their missions for them.  Example.... a Person starting with a Reliant Kore or Tana will be better served (the min/maxers will realize this first) to NOT upgrade their ship with a Jump Engine.... but rather turn its operation over to an NPC to fly.... and instead buy something like a Hull A as their system to system ship that they will fly (yes you can autonomously have NPCs run missions for you in different systems - you just set up a contract with them per CR).

Yes, agreed. I don't think CIG will really allow us to run too many NPCs at once, except maybe alternate character slots turned into NPCs. Otherwise, players could set up huge mining schemes rather than get into the immersive, nitty gritty work that CR seems to want players doing. 

Quote

I agree that most players will take the illogical approach first ..... but basic game mechanics (like going to a Hull A) above will filter around fast on Podcasts and you'll see people stop installing Jump Engines on ships designed to be in-system ships).   This type of "running the NPCs autonomously" approach to gaming isn't "normal" in most MMOs but the RTS players will pick up on it fast.

If it's cheap to equip a drive and better pay, players will do that. If it isn't, they'll upgrade. That's still pretty trade-specific- exploration also makes up a large amount of the player base, and explorers won't have a big reason not to install a drive unit for convenience. If they're scanning, they can power it down to lower emissions. Running NPCs autonomously is a cool feature, but it won't mean that players will want freedom of movemnt any less. 

 

Reavern: 

It's not complety illogical for players to equip a jump drive, it's just a cool feature that players are going to want but a lot won't need. I don't think that CIG will change their minds and give all ships jump drives, especially once players see that they can install one. It would probably be an exciting purchase as well, a new toy to try out at the jump point.

5 hours ago, Reavern said:

Regarding Military ships, I think the quantum vs jump drive distinction now clarifies why the F7A Hornet and Gladiator torpedo bomber are considered short-range "carrier-based" ships; because they're only equipped with quantum drives, not jump drives. They launch from bases on a planet or space station, or a carrier, and quantum jump within the star system to intercept and engage enemy ships. However, they're reliant on a carrier to transport them between star systems. The UEE Navy doesn't equip Hornets or Gladiators with jump drives, because the ships don't need them.

Of course, in the PU, players won't have a carrier at their beck and call to transport them between star systems. (Well, some players and Orgs might, but the majority won't.) So I understand that Military players will want to equip their combat ships with jump drives, so they have the ability to jump between star systems whenever they want.

The UEE doesn't need jump drives on those ships, but players won't have the military power that the UEE does, and won't have the carrier to transport them. Here Imperium is an exception as we'll be able to back up any base our fighters launch from, but CIG isnt designing the game to cater only to huge orgs. If we want to use those ships in the same capacity for operations that the UEE does, we'll need jump drives on them. Of course, we can also use them in-system without a drive and the ship will be useful.

I'm not entirely sure how many hornet-sized craft the bengal can hold, but I do hope that CIG eventually gives us a carrier. Maybe a second hangar bay on the endeavor will come first (8 fighters being a capable force), but an endeavor-sized flying hangar (Not a powerful carrier like the bengal, but a weak and defenseless (read: balanced) hangar for larger orgs to launch ~16 ships from would be great if CIG wants to promote players to not need jump drives. 

[VoA]

9 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

VoA- we won't have readily available carriers for our ships to easily deploy from. The UEE can pull things off that players can't. We can't operate as a "carrier group" because there is no player ship that can hold more than 4 fighters and easily deploy them. I suppose eventually Imperium might end up with a Bengal for a time, and we can, but CIG has made it clear we won't be able to deploy from the Hull series as a pocket carrier, so it's impractical for use as a carrier except as a slow ferry. 

Ya and people will realize how big space is in Star Citizen when the game launches (or in Beta).  Right now we are around 1 planet - that's it.  Systems will be huge.  Space is huge.  Just because you upgrade a ship with a Jump Engine doesn't make it possible for the ship to have the range to even get to the Jump Point (though some Jump Points may closer than others).  Even going to some outer asteroid belts will be difficult without extra fuel tanks.  

People are used to Fantasy MMOs where you can wander the whole world on foot - and maybe cover ground faster by riding a horse..... Star Citizen won't be that way.  There is a reason why not ALL ships come with Jump Engines and it isn't just for "training wheels".   You don't need carrier groups to shuttle you around a system but small ships (ones not designed for range) will not be able to wander all over a system without extra fuel tanks.... then you add on a Jump Engine.... and all of a sudden you have this clunky ship....  As I mentioned most will realize that it makes more sense to work towards upgrading towards ships designed for Jumps and longer range - example is a Hull A.... is a more logical step than adding a Jump Engine to a Reliant Kore (leave the short range ships to run the short range missions = and there will be plenty of these = and NPCs can even do these autonomously for you).  There is a reason for the small ship (short range) lore to exist = again otherwise there would be no ships without a Jump Engine in Star Citizen.

9 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

UEE patrols is an obvious candidate as it increases the security of a system. The jump point moving around would be a terrible solution as well- pirates will still fine it profitable to camp jump points, and "camping" will be what happens no matter what CIG does, even if it isn't oiteral sitting around a fixed point waiting for the convoy. If you think otherwise, go talk to some serious pirates.

Moving the Exit point of a Jump Point around isn't a terrible solution..... space is BIG and it doesn't have to switch from one side of the system to another - it just just move a few thousand kilometers at a time (again the exit point not entry point)  and this would still keep in the same area of space while prohibiting Jump Point camping.   Trust me (and do some more research) - CIG will be developing many ways to prohibit Jump Point camping.  Pirates will have to find other alternatives like "route" patrols.... destination ambushes.... finding resources and camp the resources... etc...

9 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Imperium isn't that much of an exception- we have a lot of big ships, but so does everyone else, and so will everyone else a few months in. You also can't speak abaolutely about if a majority of trade will occur in-system or between systems, as that hasn't been decided yet. 

Imperium is a huge exception if you check out other Orgs and listen to some of the stats CIG occasionally throw around.  Some Orgs are just proud to have a few Connies.   Players tend to gravitate towards other players with the same commitment level.  Anyone starting to do research on Imperium would first find its a Hardcore Org.  .... Further research would easily reveal the amount of ships we have including Idris and Javelins.  Once that is known..... other players will larger pledges would then tend to gravitate toward players with that level of game commitment.   I would wager we have more Idris and Javelin (and even total ships together) in Imperium than the top 5 most populous orgs combined together.

10 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

The sabre is designed for space superiority in situations where a lighter footprint is needed. It slightly sacrifices combat power for some stealth, and by balance would then sacrifice stealth for some combat power. It is a compromise, and a compromise isn't going to be better than the dedicated ship, the Ghost. The Ghost is going to be a great choice to hide around enemy systems and scout, which it will need a jump drive for. The tracker is also supposed to have powerful sensors and excel at exploring, which means it will excel at scouting as well. Also, you're wrong on that last point- the SuperHornet has a jump drive and is the best dogfighter out of the hornet lineup, and will likely stay at the top, plus it will have more mobility with the jump drive. I believe that there dissproves your "no jump drive will have a significant advantage" theory.

I believe the Sabre Q&A revealed that it comes stock with a Jump Engine correct.  I believe that the Sabre was also competing against the F8 Lighting for the next Gen fighter concept for the UEE (but the F8 won the contract).  I believe that the Sabre was originally designed to be a dedicated stealth ship... and longer range (not the range of a Vanguard though).   I believe that the next Gen fighters - both the Sabre and F8 Lightning are designed to take on Vanduul and are specifically designed to protect the ship vs Scythe and Glaive - Blade attacks (thus the various blades protecting the thrusters and other parts of the ship).  The Sabre is more designed to be a strike fighter.  The Hornets are designed to be dog-fighters.  The Ghost is a variant to the base Hornet - thus not originally designed as a dedicated stealth ship like Sabre is..... same with the Tracker - it is a modification to a base Dog-Fighter.  Hornets are meant to be short range fighters..... and even carrier ships.

Quote from RSI on the Sabre - """

Part of Aegis Dynamics’ Phase Two of new ship models, the Sabre was designed as a space superiority fighter for those situations where you need to leave a lighter footprint. While no one will deny the Hornet’s place as the UEE Navy’s brawler, the Sabre offers an elegant and nimble alternative to handle an ever-evolving combat landscape. Designed to be a rapid responder, the Sabre is more than capable of establishing battlefield dominance for any number of combat sorties.

Engineers looked equally to the past and the future to build the Sabre . Incorporating Aegis’ battle-tested power distribution systems into their dependable ship-hull construction while developing cutting-edge flight and system technology, the Sabre is truly a next generation fighter that represents the new Aegis.

Aegis Dynamics has designed the Sabre in response to a United Empire of Earth Navy’s request for proposal for a next-generation fighter capable of outmatching the Vanduul STINGER-class heavy fighter in speed and turning. While the Navy has not yet accepted the the Sabre bid, Aegis has opted to make a run of production prototypes available to licensed civilian operators"""

From the Sabre Q&A

Can you elaborate on why someone would pick the Sabre as opposed to the Hornet, and vice-versa? How does this relate to the Hornet Ghost specifically?

The Hornet is a tank, it’s not particularly mobile but can really take a pounding and make it out which is a great feature for a lot of players. Its similar in my mind to how current day pilots love the A-10 for its rugged reliability and ability to come back home with huge amounts of damage. The Sabre on the other hand is not tough, it relies heavily on its ability to not be detected and then its array shields to keep it safe. Once those shields are down you’d best be on your way out of combat else you’ll probably not make it back.

Compared to the Hornet Ghost the Sabre is built from the ground up to be a dedicated “stealth” ship whereas the Hornet Ghost is retrofitted to become stealthy, therefore whilst the Ghost is still very stealthy compared to other ships it wont be quite as impervious to radar as the Sabre. What little it lacks in stealth capabilities compared to the Sabre though is made up for in its additional armour and weaponry however

Does it come with a jump drive?

Yes, the Sabre comes with a jump drive standard.

 

10 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Also, you're wrong on that last point- the SuperHornet has a jump drive and is the best dogfighter out of the hornet lineup, and will likely stay at the top, plus it will have more mobility with the jump drive. I believe that there dissproves your "no jump drive will have a significant advantage" theory.

The Super Hornet's Jump Engine (and really Every Jump Engine in the game) has yet to be factored into the game at all for the Jump Engine's mass etc.... CIG is still working on the components.   The Super Hornet will have an advantage with power and fire-power and even armor ..... but it handles like the other Hornets now because CIG hasn't completed the component system yet.

10 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

It won't really be intended to be a "level-progression" system, but in the absence of a large org to organize players, there will be a clear progression as players earn more UEC. I see no reason why a player would uninstall a jump drive. You seem to think that players with one will be at a serious disadvantage, but that won't be the case. Installing the drive will have a clear purpose if a player decides not to upgrade to a new ship altogether. Player ships will easily have enough quantum fuel to jump to the jump point and get to a newrby service station (Guy on reddit did some math for ship range in-system based on current quantum fuel levels, and CIG created those levels to correspond to what they want later even if they'll dhange a bit). Just because CIG has lore in-game does not mean that players will stick to it in any way, it just means that CIG is likely to model npcs that way.

I didn't say serious disadvantage for installing a Jump Engine.... but it will be detrimental to some effect.... we know that Per the LORE.... and what CIG has told us == To what effect we have yet to discover.... and we probably won't really know until Beta.   If there were no effect.... then all ships in Star Citizen would come stock with Jump Engines.   Where did you hear players will have enough quantum fuel??? -- You can't make that determination.  I have developed my premise on what CIG intends and has told us to date - and per the Lore for short range .... small ships.   The Guy on Reddit has no clue (and I do remember seeing his post).  It's not about "deciding" to stick with the lore because you don't like it or wish it to be another way.... you will find out on your own the way the lore is .... the way it is.... and adapt your play accordingly (not forcibly so but as I mentioned ..... first it will be the min/maxers..... and RTS people.... and word of efficiency will spread).

 

[Karmaslap]

5 hours ago, VoA said:

Ya and people will realize how big space is in Star Citizen when the game launches (or in Beta).  Right now we are around 1 planet - that's it.  Systems will be huge.  Space is huge.  Just because you upgrade a ship with a Jump Engine doesn't make it possible for the ship to have the range to even get to the Jump Point (though some Jump Points may closer than others).  Even going to some outer asteroid belts will be difficult without extra fuel tanks.  

 

We aren't trying to hijack the thread with this, so we should open up a new topic and copy and paste some points for discussion. I'll do that later if you'd like to continue (sitting around in between parties now on Christmas) or if you want to as your reply. No sense in taking over the reliant thread with a lot of non-related discussion. 

Not if the level of quantum fuel we end up with on ships is close to the amount we have now. What didn't you like about what the guy on reddit did? He compared the fuel we have and the rate of expenditure for a long Q jump in-system, and then measures the width of a star system. That's a perfect order-of-magnitude eatimate for this stage in the game, and with the (obviously) frequent refueling stations in civilized systems, ships will be able to easily traverse one system. Star citizen will be big, yes, but not so big that one player can't visit most of the locations in a system over the course of a few hours. Personally, I don't in any way understand why you would think ship range is so limited that a small personal craft couldn't reach all the parts in a system, we have no indication that that will be how quantum fuel is balanced.

Quote

People are used to Fantasy MMOs where you can wander the whole world on foot - and maybe cover ground faster by riding a horse..... Star Citizen won't be that way.  There is a reason why not ALL ships come with Jump Engines and it isn't just for "training wheels".   You don't need carrier groups to shuttle you around a system but small ships (ones not designed for range) will not be able to wander all over a system without extra fuel tanks.... then you add on a Jump Engine.... and all of a sudden you have this clunky ship....  As I mentioned most will realize that it makes more sense to work towards upgrading towards ships designed for Jumps and longer range - example is a Hull A.... is a more logical step than adding a Jump Engine to a Reliant Kore (leave the short range ships to run the short range missions = and there will be plenty of these = and NPCs can even do these autonomously for you).  There is a reason for the small ship (short range) lore to exist = again otherwise there would be no ships without a Jump Engine in Star Citizen.

Whether or not CIG designed it as "training wheels" is irrelevant- players won't start out with it, and have the ability to upgrade to it later as they expand their operations. It's a natural progression.

What if I (like a ton of others out there) don't care about completely maximizing profits and operating at 100% efficiency? What if I'm fine adding a jump drive to my reliant, visiting friends in another system and doing jumps and some travel while I trade? I think a majority of the player base would rather do that as long as A. The jump drive wasn't extremely expensive and B. Didn't compromise cargo carrying ability. "It makes more sense" in thisninstance just means that it makes more sense to YOU as the clear choice to do. It makes more sense to use a Hull A over a reliant for in-system trade. If players only cared about efficiency, wouldn't it be more efficient to use the Hull A, especially if they're going to be in a safe system. Yes, it would be. Will they do it? No, they won't. They'll have fun not doing it too.

Quote

Moving the Exit point of a Jump Point around isn't a terrible solution..... space is BIG and it doesn't have to switch from one side of the system to another - it just just move a few thousand kilometers at a time (again the exit point not entry point)  and this would still keep in the same area of space while prohibiting Jump Point camping.   Trust me (and do some more research) - CIG will be developing many ways to prohibit Jump Point camping.  Pirates will have to find other alternatives like "route" patrols.... destination ambushes.... finding resources and camp the resources... etc...

Yes, it would be a great solution to move the exit point, but the entrance point still has to be found, and ships will be vulnerable as they line up. This is one of the best places for pirates to hit a convoy, and nothing CIG does will be able to practically prevent this. I've done "research"- you should go ask pirate willing to share what they're planning to do.

Jump points were brought up as reasoning behind convoy guard dogfighters and escorts needing individual jump drives- I don't think that's even debatable?

Quote

Imperium is a huge exception if you check out other Orgs and listen to some of the stats CIG occasionally throw around.  Some Orgs are just proud to have a few Connies.   Players tend to gravitate towards other players with the same commitment level.  Anyone starting to do research on Imperium would first find its a Hardcore Org.  .... Further research would easily reveal the amount of ships we have including Idris and Javelins.  Once that is known..... other players will larger pledges would then tend to gravitate toward players with that level of game commitment.   I would wager we have more Idris and Javelin (and even total ships together) in Imperium than the top 5 most populous orgs combined together.

Imperium is kickass. +42

Imperium isn't that much of an exception in that other orgs will be able to launch trade runs of a comparable scale. We won't be doing anything that another org couldn't pull off. Other orgs will have multiple capital ships on an operation as well. We might have more capitals, but there's no point over-protecting a convoy, so I have no doubt other orgs will be moving similarly sized and escorted convoys around- hence Imperium not being an exception. I wasn't talking about overall military power.

I've never seen any hard numbers for how many ships Imperium could field, but from some quick estimates I would have thought we're the top dog military wise, but that mostly due to our (planned) structure and operations setup. We aren't the largest org, and any large org is going to have capitals. We might have a disproportionately large number of capitals and ships which would be awesome, but I'm not privvy to that.

Quote

The Super Hornet's Jump Engine (and really Every Jump Engine in the game) has yet to be factored into the game at all for the Jump Engine's mass etc.... CIG is still working on the components.   The Super Hornet will have an advantage with power and fire-power and even armor ..... but it handles like the other Hornets now because CIG hasn't completed the component system yet.

I didn't say serious disadvantage for installing a Jump Engine.... but it will be detrimental to some effect.... we know that Per the LORE.... and what CIG has told us == To what effect we have yet to discover.... and we probably won't really know until Beta.   If there were no effect.... then all ships in Star Citizen would come stock with Jump Engines.   Where did you hear players will have enough quantum fuel??? -- You can't make that determination.  I have developed my premise on what CIG intends and has told us to date - and per the Lore for short range .... small ships.   The Guy on Reddit has no clue (and I do remember seeing his post).  It's not about "deciding" to stick with the lore because you don't like it or wish it to be another way.... you will find out on your own the way the lore is .... the way it is.... and adapt your play accordingly (not forcibly so but as I mentioned ..... first it will be the min/maxers..... and RTS people.... and word of efficiency will spread).

 

Well, I was wrong about the Ghost. I suspect Ghost owners were probably a bit upset as their ship would be totally obsolete. The point about the superhornet is just meant to say that a jump-drive equipped ship won't be inferior to ships without one in a fight, and the SH proves it as CIG isn't going to nerf the SH to balance it's capabilities. Adding a jump drive can benefit a fighter in the absence of player carriers. 

How is something detrimental but doesn't classify as a seeious disadvantage? How would having a jump drive be detrimental when we don't know what penalties, if any noticeable ones, will apply to it yet?

You keep writing lore in caps and emphasizing how the game mechanics will heavily reflect what has been written, despite us not knowing enough yet. The open world game will give players the freedom to choose what to do with their ships. It IS about "deciding" to stick with the lore or not on a personal level, because we can make that decision as a player. 

I wrote about it earlier, but the guy on Reddit made a quick estimation of how long it would take to jump across a system based on the information we'll have been given. That's pretty far from "no clue"- he based his estimations on simple and obvious measurements. 

 

I already wrote this in this thread, so I'll post it, but we should really make a new thread and copy some of these messages over there, or continue over PM. A lot of the original jump drive points are still being discussed, but more was added and it wasn't our intent to hijack the thread with a game mechanics argument

[VoA]

18 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

We aren't trying to hijack the thread with this, so we should open up a new topic and copy and paste some points for discussion. I'll do that later if you'd like to continue (sitting around in between parties now on Christmas) or if you want to as your reply. No sense in taking over the reliant thread with a lot of non-related discussion. 

Not if the level of quantum fuel we end up with on ships is close to the amount we have now. What didn't you like about what the guy on reddit did? He compared the fuel we have and the rate of expenditure for a long Q jump in-system, and then measures the width of a star system.

It's not really hijacking the thread because it is important of those thinking about getting the Reliant Sen - Science ship that it is not the same type of explorer ship as a 315p is.... and is why it doesn't come with a Jump Engine as stock equipment.  Science is more of a stationary or in-system profession.... not like a 315p which is more of a Jump Point Navigator / mapper.

The Reddit guy is making a huge mistake trying to make extrapolations.   The metrics derived from SC2.0-2.1+ is no more than a test environment.... so the metrics should really be tossed aside. 

18 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Whether or not CIG designed it as "training wheels" is irrelevant- players won't start out with it, and have the ability to upgrade to it later as they expand their operations. It's a natural progression.

What if I (like a ton of others out there) don't care about completely maximizing profits and operating at 100% efficiency? What if I'm fine adding a jump drive to my reliant, visiting friends in another system and doing jumps and some travel while I trade? I think a majority of the player base would rather do that as long as A. The jump drive wasn't extremely expensive and B. Didn't compromise cargo carrying ability. "It makes more sense" in thisninstance just means that it makes more sense to YOU as the clear choice to do. It makes more sense to use a Hull A over a reliant for in-system trade. If players only cared about efficiency, wouldn't it be more efficient to use the Hull A, especially if they're going to be in a safe system. Yes, it would be. Will they do it? No, they won't. They'll have fun not doing it too.

I don't see it as a natural progression.   I can see why people would perceive it that way since that is how it would be in other games.   Once we have system to system travel then that is when it will click for people how involved system to system travel will be and why CIG generated the lore of small ships generally being in-system ships.  Beyond this  - and until CIG clarifies the Lore more - no definitive conclusions can be drawn.   I perceive the game based on what CIG tells us in terms of their intentions... and don't base it out of a test bed environment like SC2.0+

18 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Yes, it would be a great solution to move the exit point, but the entrance point still has to be found, and ships will be vulnerable as they line up. This is one of the best places for pirates to hit a convoy, and nothing CIG does will be able to practically prevent this. I've done "research"- you should go ask pirate willing to share what they're planning to do.

Jump points were brought up as reasoning behind convoy guard dogfighters and escorts needing individual jump drives- I don't think that's even debatable?

I've done a ton... of research too.... and obviously these pirates didn't watch the old WMH's..... and yes.... CIG can prevent jump point camping (as is their intention to do so) - so at this point - I am laughing at all the Pirate theory-crafting on this.   There will be routes Pirates can camp .... but Jump Points will not serve as a camping option for them.

System to system convoys won't use dog-fighters as escort.... they will use long range fighters (like SH, Vanguard, Sabre, etc....).   Dog-fighters will serve as in-system convoys (and yes there will be many many more in-system convoys than there will be system to system convoys).  Again nothing on this can be definitively determined since it is still a WIP - but again go off of what CIG intends for the game.

18 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Well, I was wrong about the Ghost. I suspect Ghost owners were probably a bit upset as their ship would be totally obsolete. The point about the superhornet is just meant to say that a jump-drive equipped ship won't be inferior to ships without one in a fight, and the SH proves it as CIG isn't going to nerf the SH to balance it's capabilities. Adding a jump drive can benefit a fighter in the absence of player carriers. 

How is something detrimental but doesn't classify as a seeious disadvantage? How would having a jump drive be detrimental when we don't know what penalties, if any noticeable ones, will apply to it yet?

Why is the Ghost Obsolete since most of the game will be in-system?   I think you are stuck on this notion that the game will primarily be a system to system game and I am pretty sure it won't be based on my research.   Yes the SH (once the component system is complete) will be a slower / less maneuverable ship than a standard Hornet without a Jump Engine.  The SH will have other strengths though like more power, more firepower, extra gunner, etc....

You also seem to make this assumption that if you don't have Jump Engine - that you are confined to a carrier group.... and that isn't the case either.  Carriers will be useful for longer range and longer duration operations... not just system to system operations.  Non- Jump Engine ships will have plenty to do in-system even if it isn't long distance -in-system missions.   There will be plenty of short range missions and these will probably actually constitute the majority of the missions overall in Star Citizen.  There maybe longer story arcs that tie a bunch of short range missions from mission to mission that may then lead you out of a system - but that is when you get your small ship "transported" to that other system (no need to buy or get loaded down with a Jump Engine just for that).

18 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

 How is something detrimental but doesn't classify as a seeious disadvantage? How would having a jump drive be detrimental when we don't know what penalties, if any noticeable ones, will apply to it yet?

You keep writing lore in caps and emphasizing how the game mechanics will heavily reflect what has been written, despite us not knowing enough yet. The open world game will give players the freedom to choose what to do with their ships. It IS about "deciding" to stick with the lore or not on a personal level, because we can make that decision as a player. 

I wrote about it earlier, but the guy on Reddit made a quick estimation of how long it would take to jump across a system based on the information we'll have been given. That's pretty far from "no clue"- he based his estimations on simple and obvious measurements. 

 

I already wrote this in this thread, so I'll post it, but we should really make a new thread and copy some of these messages over there, or continue over PM. A lot of the original jump drive points are still being discussed, but more was added and it wasn't our intent to hijack the thread with a game mechanics argument

See example of mission story Arc on how a Jump Engine isn't really needed - but could be detrimental to completing other missions in a new system (above).  Example a dog-fighter "transported" to the new system to continue the story arc will have a fighting advantage over the guy that decided to not be "transported" but instead got a new Jump Engine installed on his ship.

Yes I keep writing about the LORE in caps because that's what people need to focus on == WHAT CIG INTENDS FOR THE GAME..... and the governing factor for understanding the issue.   Same thing goes for understanding how ship stats, component stats, weapon stats.... constantly fluctuate but people should focus on what CIG intends for a ship or object.  Example the M50 started out as an awesome racer and awesome fighter.... things changed.... it got nerfed.... and now it is kinda sucky as both a racer and fighter.   Will that be as it will be in game at launch - obviously not.   CIG will balance it so it becomes an awesome racer again.

Same thing applies to the LORE of WHY .... CIG.... intends small ships to be more in-system ships and not have every ship in the SC Verse to have a Jump Engine with no consequence..... again..... otherwise all ships would have Jump Engine.

 

The points of both sides have been made and there is no reason to carry it on further (or worry about hijacking the thread or creating a new one)........ it is all a WIP and we will just have to wait and see.   My biggest push on the issue is to follow what CIG "intends" for the game.... that should be the governing understanding of an issue that is still in flux.

[Karmaslap]

11 hours ago, VoA said:

The Reddit guy is making a huge mistake trying to make extrapolations.   The metrics derived from SC2.0-2.1+ is no more than a test environment.... so the metrics should really be tossed aside. 

If he is making a hug mistake, then so is Imperium every time we design and augment our policy and plans for what to do in-gwme. It's all subject to change- that's why we make our best guesses based on information that we have. That is exactly what he did. It's not a mistake and it ahouldn't be tossed aside, it should just change when we get more information.

Quote

I don't see it as a natural progression.   I can see why people would perceive it that way since that is how it would be in other games.

Players start without a jump drive, earn money in-system, then with that money have the option to install a drive, upgrade to a bigger ship in-system to use, or upgrade to a larger ship capable of jumping and holding more cargo from system to system. If you don't see this as a natural progression, what would it be?

Quote

I've done a ton... of research too.... and obviously these pirates didn't watch the old WMH's..... and yes.... CIG can prevent jump point camping (as is their intention to do so) - so at this point - I am laughing at all the Pirate theory-crafting on this.   There will be routes Pirates can camp .... but Jump Points will not serve as a camping option for them.

No, they can discourage it in some forms. That's the most they can do. They can wait nearby and jump in when the convoy does, they can hit the convoy on the way to the jump point. The jump point is a bottleneck that players will take advantage of. No amount of "research" will let us know what will happen- finalized game mechanics will. Many pirate players are planning to take advantage of any mechanic they can.

Quote

System to system convoys won't use dog-fighters as escort.... they will use long range fighters (like SH, Vanguard, Sabre, etc....).   Dog-fighters will serve as in-system convoys (and yes there will be many many more in-system convoys than there will be system to system convoys).  Again nothing on this can be definitively determined since it is still a WIP - but again go off of what CIG intends for the game.

Sure thy will, if a player installs a jump drive so they can use their favorite ship in this way. Freedom of choice is cool.

Quote

Why is the Ghost Obsolete since most of the game will be in-system?   I think you are stuck on this notion that the game will primarily be a system to system game and I am pretty sure it won't be based on my research.   Yes the SH (once the component system is complete) will be a slower / less maneuverable ship than a standard Hornet without a Jump Engine.  The SH will have other strengths though like more power, more firepower, extra gunner, etc....

And you seem to be stuck on the notion that the whole game will occur in-system. Players and orgs will travel from system to system to trade. They will mine in one system, transport it back to another system, then move the ore again. Orgs will attack other orgs in nearby systems when at war. The game will occur both in-system and between them, so saying that most of the game will be in-system is an incorrect statement.

Quote

You also seem to make this assumption that if you don't have Jump Engine - that you are confined to a carrier group.... and that isn't the case either.  Carriers will be useful for longer range and longer duration operations... not just system to system operations.  Non- Jump Engine ships will have plenty to do in-system even if it isn't long distance -in-system missions.  

I didn't make an assumption with that, I stated a fact. If you want to take part in the myriad of military operations between systems which will occur, and don't have a jump drive, you'll need a ride between systems- a "carrier group". Of course ships without a jump engine will have plenty tomdo in-system, I never said differently.

Quote

There will be plenty of short range missions and these will probably actually constitute the majority of the missions overall in Star Citizen

Assumption, and while it is probably true that most NPC missions will be in-system, a lot of Org missions are likely to be between systems and will require jump travel to complete.

Quote

Yes I keep writing about the LORE in caps because that's what people need to focus on == WHAT CIG INTENDS FOR THE GAME..... and the governing factor for understanding the issue.   Same thing goes for understanding how ship stats, component stats, weapon stats.... constantly fluctuate but people should focus on what CIG intends for a ship or object.

Lore does not equal game mechanics, and you should know that

Quote

Same thing applies to the LORE of WHY .... CIG.... intends small ships to be more in-system ships and not have every ship in the SC Verse to have a Jump Engine with no consequence..... again..... otherwise all ships would have Jump Engine.

I've already both agreed to this and written it multiple times? My main point is that adding a jump drive can open up new opportunities for players in both trading ships and fighter craft, not that small ships won't have stuff to do without them.

 My biggest push on the issue is to follow what CIG "intends" for the game.... that should be the governing understanding of an issue that is still in flux.

^ Not sure why, but can't get this as a quote. That is how we should look at ships in development, but shouldn't drive other discussions such as whether or not a jump drive on a small ship will be worth the expense, because that comes from actual implementation and not lore.

Quote

 

Not "detrimental" otherwise ships without a drive would be noticeably superior in a fight to ships without one, and that isn't the case, and that isn't planned to be the case either. According to lore/marketing SH with a drive > regular hornet without, or really any other dogfighter we've seen yet 

Odds are hornet with a drive ~ hornet without one as the presence of a drive doesn't seem like it will gimp a ship much. You initially agreed to this as well, then said the hornet with drive would be so much worse as to not be worth the extra mobility.

[VoA]

9 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

If he is making a hug mistake, then so is Imperium every time we design and augment our policy and plans for what to do in-gwme. It's all subject to change- that's why we make our best guesses based on information that we have. That is exactly what he did. It's not a mistake and it ahouldn't be tossed aside, it should just change when we get more information.

No there is a difference.  Compare the recent Overclocking thread vs the thread trying to identify how long it may take in game hours to obtain a ship.  One is theory-crafting based on what CIG is telling us - as far as their intentions..... the other is trying to generate a metric based on a closed test bed situation (AC and SC2.0) that doesn't have much relationship to the PU as a whole.   CIG is taking "liberties" to make the test bed play areas work that will change when entire systems are built out.

9 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Players start without a jump drive, earn money in-system, then with that money have the option to install a drive, upgrade to a bigger ship in-system to use, or upgrade to a larger ship capable of jumping and holding more cargo from system to system. If you don't see this as a natural progression, what would it be?

 I see players identifying their favorite ship... then working towards obtaining that ship as the standard progression.  For instance.... someone that loves FireFly.... may want a Serenity type ship..... they may equate that to a Connie.   Let's say they start with an Aurora.... starter package.... they run a few missions.... gain some UEC.  They will likely think upgrading the Aurora is LONG TERM a waste of UEC or $...... so instead of adding a Jump Engine to an Aurora.... (if they want to leave the system).... they decide to sell the Aurora or have NPCs keep running missions for them autonomously... and they then get something like a Mustang Beta or a Hull A or 315p.  They repeat this process until they get their Connie.... and stop.... the swap process... and transition into the upgrading process.... = I see this as more of a natural progression in Star Citizen.

10 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

No, they can discourage it in some forms. That's the most they can do. They can wait nearby and jump in when the convoy does, they can hit the convoy on the way to the jump point. The jump point is a bottleneck that players will take advantage of. No amount of "research" will let us know what will happen- finalized game mechanics will. Many pirate players are planning to take advantage of any mechanic they can.

There will be many mechanics pirate will be able to exploit but Jump Point camping won't be one of them (again per the desire of CIG to not make it a griefing zone as Rob and Eric discussed in WMH).   They may go so far as not making combat possible in a zone around a jump point.... or they can make it so undesirable (or move exit points around etc...) to prohibit it.   Example is also Landing Zones..... you can try to smuggle an FPS weapon and you might encounter an auto-defense system that takes you out on the spot.   There are plenty of ways for CIG to control things.

10 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

And you seem to be stuck on the notion that the whole game will occur in-system. Players and orgs will travel from system to system to trade. They will mine in one system, transport it back to another system, then move the ore again. Orgs will attack other orgs in nearby systems when at war. The game will occur both in-system and between them, so saying that most of the game will be in-system is an incorrect statement.

I didn't say the whole game.... I said most of the game will be in-system.  Later on as the game matures.... more and more will be system to system.... but per the evolution process or natural progression of the game.... the Lore of having small ships stay in system- will stay intact..... since players will more likely switch ships to adapt to their system to system needs rather than dumping valuable UEC into small ships that won't net as much long term benefit and won't have as much modularity, and other options for improvements.

10 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

I didn't make an assumption with that, I stated a fact. If you want to take part in the myriad of military operations between systems which will occur, and don't have a jump drive, you'll need a ride between systems- a "carrier group". Of course ships without a jump engine will have plenty tomdo in-system, I never said differently.

Sure you will want a carrier group to advance a fleet battle from system to system.... but you can also set up transport of small ships to a system where a battle is occuring and let them operate in-system.  Sure they may not have the efficiency of a carrier in terms of re-arming and re-fueling but it is just as effective if you are garrisoning a space station or defending a base... etc....  In other words carriers are not the only way for small ships to participate in system to system operations.

10 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Assumption, and while it is probably true that most NPC missions will be in-system, a lot of Org missions are likely to be between systems and will require jump travel to complete.

Lore does not equal game mechanics, and you should know that

And those Orgs would have likely sold the ships that are not designed for their system to system operations in favor of larger ships that are better designed for system to system operations.   For instance that Org... will more likely get Vaguards.... or a Carrier.... rather than adding Jump Engines to a bunch of starter ships.   It will be more efficient to sell and transition in terms of long term planning.

LORE - does drive game mechanics.... and CIG has said many times during the game's development that the writers are consulted at every turn.... from game mechanics... to ships.... to really everything.  Setting up the LORE and then breaking it..... would be a disaster.... and would cause much of the game to loose its believably (for what can be believed or plausible for a Sci-Fi game)

10 hours ago, Karmaslap said:

Not "detrimental" otherwise ships without a drive would be noticeably superior in a fight to ships without one, and that isn't the case, and that isn't planned to be the case either. According to lore/marketing SH with a drive > regular hornet without, or really any other dogfighter we've seen yet 

Odds are hornet with a drive ~ hornet without one as the presence of a drive doesn't seem like it will gimp a ship much. You initially agreed to this as well, then said the hornet with drive would be so much worse as to not be worth the extra mobility.

As mentioned before - as of now.... the component system is done so there is no way to quantify maneuverability of a ship that has a Jump Engine vs one that doesn't - but it will happen.... I assure you (and as CIG has mentioned)

[VoA]

Back to Topic more.... but still good discussion above....

 

Another cool Teller vid

 

[VoA]

[VoA]

https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/comment/6206261/#Comment_6206261

 

 

CIG Matt ShermanCIG_M_Sherman

 

 

 

Posted: 2:17AM

 

 

 

Hey everyone,

Sorry I missed the Dec 23rd post, holidays crept up faster than expected. I've got the last batch of answers, and grabbed 10 for this last post to make up for the missing ones. I'll also work on getting the previous responses and these last few added to the initial post before the full recap-post gets made later in the week.

[ All but Tana ] Where do the other variants keep their taskforce missiles, if the in-wing launchers are for the Tana only. Is their pylon mount on the opposite wing-tip?
Yes, the missile launchers availble all Reliant models will be in the form of a wingtip launcher. They'd be able to mount to either wingtip if you wanted to move them around.

[Tana/all] The Tana has an additional wingtip hardpoint compared to the other variants (specifically, Sen and Mako). Can the specialised equipment from those variants be added to the Tana to yield a kind of Sen-Tana or Mako-Tana where you have one hardpoint mounting the camera/sensor and the other mounting a gun turret for enhanced protection?
All models of the Reliant would have the dual Wingtip mounts available to them, and the more role-specific gear from the Sen and Mako could definitely be moved around. This wouldn't just be limited to the Tana either, so even something like a Sen-Mako that's using utility gear on both wingtips.

[Mako] question: Do the main transmitter and additional external transmitter increase the Mako's ability to actively jam other ships - do these transmitters and the additional computing power inside allow it to effectively engage in Ewar?
It wouldn't really aid in active jamming against another ship, but would more be hardened against incoming jamming. Like in the Crusader map, there will be varied Comm Relays all over the universe, and the Mako's transmitters would let it stay in touch with these better and at longer distances compared to the other Reliants.

[Kore] -Is confirmed to include a Tractor Beam at stock?
Yes, for the final release, the Kore will have a tractor beam mounted on its wingtip hardpoint. When we initially bring the Reliant to a flight ready state, we'll be installing a weapon in its place until we have more active gameplay ready involving tractor beams and their role in the PU.

[ALL] - In previous Q&A's it is mentioned that the Reliant hold actually compacts somewhat during the transition from horizontal to vertical mode. Is this still the case or has this been altered to accommodate the new modules?
This is no longer the case. The rear cabs won't be changing in their overall size anymore when landed or horizontal. There will be the same amount of space in the back at all times for the ship between any of its flight or landed states.

[All] Any updates on what kind of alien technology are Reliants going to have? I didn't find any more info on this anywhere and I haven't noticed any extraordinary or alien-looking components of the ship on any screenshots/vids.
The most notable visual aspect of their influence though would be the ships main thrusters, with MISC's attempt at replicating the distinct thrusters of the Khartu-Al. Beyond this, a lot more Xi'an influence will be seen in the individual components that will be coming installed to the different variants.

[NEWSVAN] As a professional photographer/videographer IRL, I like the concept of the newsvan craft. Will one person be able to fly and aim the camera(s) or will it be a minimum of a two person crew?
You'd be able to run the ship with a single operator, but some of the actions would be a bit more limited. Due to some tech considerations, it'd be hard to run the normal cockpit view and the camera's viewport at the same time. Initially, we'll have the camera rig lock to your current active target, but if you want to take direct control of it, you'll most likely be sitting still while you work.

[Tana] The art shows what looks like a tactical station in the rear bay. What is the purpose of this station and will this potentially allow or benefit from a third crew member?
Functionally it'd be more a second terminal that the co-pilot could be operating while not in a fight, or broadcasting out a distress call before jumping into the escape beds. It wouldn't be something that'd provide real active benefit to constantly running the ship with 3 people.

[Sen] Since this Variant is focused on Science vs Hauling and Pew Pew...Can we get any confirmation on whether it will be able to hold specific kinds of "samples" and in which "state" can they be held? ie. Solid vs Liquid vs Gas and the amount of each that will be available to be contained and brought back to an Endeavor for refinement and further study?
In short, yes, there'd still be some limited storage capacity to each of the variants, so you could definitely start researching something on a Sen and bring it over to a larger ship for more work. For moving samples and matter around, probably won't be having things where a Sen would be changing a matters state in substantial volume. It'd more be what ever style of container the sample/material needs to be stored in when it's brought on board.

[SEN] Is the Ship equipped with some special equipment like extra fuel tanks, more efficient engines, sensors and living area, to use it to explore far unknown regions and planetes?
Basically everything but a nice living area. A Sen could definitely explore, but compared to something like a 315p, wouldn't be as efficient, while at the same time a 315p could do some dashboard/mobiglass science, but wouldn't be as efficient as what a Sen brings to the table. Expect it to be better at figuring out what you found rather than finding things in the first place.

[VoA]

Reliant in Sneak Peak...

57:33 - Art Sneak Peek

 

 

[VoA]

 

 

[VoA]

 

 

[VoA]

In-engine Canyon flight (Sandi)  <<-- Click on link

[Yekko]

They made an awesome progress on Reliant! It really got way better looking! I had my doubts but now they are gone! My 315p can finally end up melted for my Reliant SEN!

[VoA]

4 hours ago, Yekko said:

They made an awesome progress on Reliant! It really got way better looking! I had my doubts but now they are gone! My 315p can finally end up melted for my Reliant SEN!

Remember though - the Reliant Sen is a "Science Ship" (in-system ship for studying space anomalies, stellar research, etc...)..... some mistake it for being a "jump point explorer" like the 315p - thinking that the Sen will be good for that as well but it doesn't come stock with a Jump Engine and its vertical flight aspect would make it difficult to navigate a small jump point.

[Yekko]

10 hours ago, VoA said:

Remember though - the Reliant Sen is a "Science Ship" (in-system ship for studying space anomalies, stellar research, etc...)..... some mistake it for being a "jump point explorer" like the 315p - thinking that the Sen will be good for that as well but it doesn't come stock with a Jump Engine and its vertical flight aspect would make it difficult to navigate a small jump point.

Completely true and well aware!  I have a Freelancer DUR for that solo (even if it is for bigger jump points than the 315p could jump through), the thing is I have this idea in mind: All small ships can easily be acquired and a 315p is part of it. It won't take to much ingame time to get me one of those. The SEN has a higher value so I opted to get one of those so I can start directly with some NPC Science missions in the close area and later on I can spend UEC for jump point discovery. Also I expect so many people (which has already been seen in polls) to focus on data collecting and information gathering about jump points and start selling them very expensive (right at the start of the game). Thus it will need some market balancing first, unless CIG offers already ingame jump data that will balance this information quickly. Thus this is the second reason why I opted to upgrade the 315p to a SEN, even if I know one has a jump engine and the other not yet

But I forgot to mention I will not upgrade the 315p until I saw the redesign! If I like the redesign I might reconsider this option. 

For now the SEN has more value so thus that is why I prefer it over the 315p. 

So to get back on the first main reason: I prefer investing into more valuable ships as those (as of what it seems) would be less easier to acquire in the verse, plus when they blow up it will take time with the insurance to get them back in the hangar. While smaller ships are way easier to obtain again, since they are more easier to produce and cheaper.

[VoA]

37:54 - Art Sneak Peek