Aegis Eclispe

[GeraldEvans]

According to the jump point it's 8.75m tall when landed.

 

[Devil Khan]

Well the Redeemer fitted in the hanger, but he didn't see the height. 8.75m seem too long, for both the height and the moveable wing piece.   

[GeraldEvans]

At almost 29' tall it's pretty big. But again they mention in the new jump point that they want it to fit in the Idris.

[Devil Khan]

check again, 29m tall? 29m long surely 9.something tall. sorry mobile so don't have the time and stats to check it.

[GeraldEvans]

29' is 29 feet.

[Devil Khan]

8.83m = Redeemer

8.75m = Eclipse

according to you, both are not going to fit

However, the current design is 11m, for the Redeemer. However I think the 8.75 is shorter. The Dev will change it slightly, An extra bend  in landing mode

[Snakebyte]

On 20/05/2017 at 2:52 AM, Donut said:

If any of you bought one, you may have missed out on a great opportunity for something even more rare

I thought CIG were investigating the additional CCUs and had made them unusable until the investigation completes. The guy that bought an Idris CCU posted the message he got from CIG.

[Devil Khan]

CIG knows that if the reverse it they will have to give it back either  RSI credit or cash (which they don't like). Normally they would let them slide, but not this time, this is one of the rarest ships around. It is more than likely they will at least remove the giftable of the CCU and such after.

[Hawkit]

On 5/22/2017 at 7:05 PM, Devil Khan said:

CIG knows that if the reverse it they will have to give it back either  RSI credit or cash (which they don't like). Normally they would let them slide, but not this time, this is one of the rarest ships around. It is more than likely they will at least remove the giftable of the CCU and such after.

 

Even if the remove the 'gift' option from the CCU, it wouldn't matter. You can just apply it to your giftable Eclipse and tadaaaaa! now you'd have a giftable Idris-M. (if there allow the users to keep it)

[Devil Khan]

I had said that both the CCU and when added, the Idris-M won't have a giftable either.

[GeraldEvans]

QA is out:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/engineering/15921-Q-A-Aegis-Eclipse

What does “stealth” mean within the Star citizen universe?

Spoiler

 

Stealth in Star Citizen resolves around being hard to detect via in-game systems, these being primarily radars and scanners. As mentioned previously in the Sabre Q&A, the Sabre and Eclipse are both built from the ground up around the concept of stealth whereas the Hornet Ghost was retrofitted to this mechanic. Not only does the specific hull design of the Sabre and Eclipse provide benefits to reduce their visibility on radar, but they are both equipped by default with Stealth-class items.

The item/component classes we currently have are Military, Civilian, Industrial, Stealth and Competition. Stealth class items of each item type provide the lowest emissions (IR and EM) at the expense of raw output and durability. Other classes will have comparable benefits and weaknesses allowing players to mix and match items to tune their ship’s behavior. Ships like the Eclipse come default with all Stealth class items, whereas the Sabre comes with some Military and some Stealth and the Ghost has Civilian and Stealth. We’ll be discussing the different classes of items in-depth in the future.

 

It’s said that the Eclipse will bring unique stealth components to the game. Will older stealth ships like the Sabre and Hornet Ghost be updated to include these stealth components, or are they specific only to the Eclipse?

Spoiler

It is very rare that these items are hull locked and currently none of the default items (i.e. power plants and shield generators) are tied to a specific ship such as the Eclipse. As mentioned previously, we have the stealth class of items which provide significant benefits to signature reduction and applicable ships will either come default with these or be able to equip them.

Wouldn’t Size 9 torpedoes in fighters be considered “game breaking” when the Retaliator already has S9 and the Polaris capital ship has S10?

Spoiler

The Eclipse was designed from the start to carry S9’s, the tradeoff is it doesn’t carry much else and is neither very tough, nor agile. It’s not designed to be a dogfighter, but rather a very specialized bomber that wants to approach a target silently, fire its payload, and leave. The Eclipse carries three size 9 torpedoes, and two size 2 ballistic gatling weapons. These larger torpedoes take a while to lock on to smaller ships, and combined with its relative lack of agility, that will mean the Eclipse will have a tricky time trying to use them in a dogfight.

The Eventual $330 Flight ready tag is quite expensive for a single-person ship and given how little detail we have at this stage. What is the intention behind the ship’s design that warrants the high tag that we may be missing at initial glance?

Spoiler

 

For its size, the Eclipse punches far above its weight class with its ordnance armament. It’s capable of destroying large ships, and causing serious damage to capital ships. Its specialized loadout of stealth equipment and large torpedoes all contribute to its ability to perform this task.

With regards to the announced future price, keep in mind that every Star Citizen concept ship is priced below its component value in the in-game economy. In the past, it was difficult to predict the final price with ships going through significant iterations between the concept and flight ready stages. With the ship pipeline functioning as it does today, we can now provide a solid estimate of future pricing.

 

Will there be any civilian companies looking to retrofit this military craft’s torpedo ports allowing for stealth cargo running?

Spoiler

A fun idea, but this is not something we’re currently exploring.

Will the Eclipse torpedo bay be modular, so that the ship can be used for other purposes such as electronic warfare?

Spoiler

This is not something currently planned. The Eclipse was designed around this sole purpose, while something like the Vanguard series will be more flexible with its modularity.

Can the Eclipse carry anything other than 3xS9 torpedoes (like for instance a ton of regular missiles or multiples of smaller torpedoes like the S5 carried by the Gladiator)?

Spoiler

Again, the Eclipse is an extremely specialized vessel, designed to excel at its intended task and role, so this is not something currently planned.

What ship hangars will the Eclipse fit into?

Spoiler

It’s a sizable ship, to be certain. While it cannot fit into the Polaris, it should be able to operate snugly out of a Javelin hangar.

Can the Eclipse bomb both air-to-air AND air-to-ground?

Spoiler

If you can lock on to the target, you can attack it with the torpedoes whether it is air-to-air or air-to-ground.

What kind of quantum jumping range can we expect from this ship?

Spoiler

The Eclipse currently sits in-between the Gladiator (essentially a carrier born torpedo bomber) and the Harbinger in terms of range, and is expected to stay around there. It doesn’t currently have a lot of fuel reserves so a single mission is the best plan of attack rather than daisy chaining a few together, where a Retaliator or Harbinger would fare better.

Can a Terrapin pick up the trail of an approaching Eclipse (both in their default configuration) in time to warn a nearby fleet?

Spoiler

It’s possible, but it won’t be easy for either ship. Terrapins are extremely strong at detecting signatures and whilst the Eclipse is very good at having low signatures, it still has one. With a Terrapin in a good location, with an operator on their toes they should be able to detect it but whether they have time to get the message across is a different problem entirely.

What purpose does the Eclipse serve in the civilian market? Can the bay be retrofitted for carrying cargo or data storage modules, or some other use, or is this a dedicated bomber suited for private military contractor use only?

Spoiler

There are no plans for swap-able bays, it is a dedicated bomber with that sole focus.

What are the expected Speed and Agility levels of the Eclipse?

Spoiler

The Eclipse is currently planned to be pretty fast (in a straight line), having comparable speed to the Gladius, but it’s also not an agile ship. It’s currently planned to be comparable with the Gladiator for flight agility.

How many Eclipse will it take to take down say a 890 Jump, Polaris or Idris?

Spoiler

 

As always, we must preface this by reminding everyone that all things are subject to change during game development, but our current thinking about how this should currently play out is:

A pair of Eclipses, going unnoticed attacking an Idris with its shields down and its defense turrets disabled can cripple the ship if they hit in the right areas. Attacking such a large target like this though would be fairly foolish with such a small attack force though once you factor in the overall shields and defensive capabilities of everyone involved. Sub Capital ships however are much more vulnerable to an Eclipse or two, whereas assaulting a capital ship would most likely require a first strike with an Eclipse or two followed by a heavier sustained assault with Retaliators, Gladiators or Harbingers.

 

Is 2x fixed ballistic S2 really going to hurt anything significant?

Spoiler

While the weapon compliment is only one component in the overall success of any dogfight, similar loadouts on other ships designed for that purpose can often be more effective than on a ship with a specialized focus like the Eclipse. Here, they function more as deterrent, or tool to finish off a crippled target, than an effective fighting loadout. The Eclipse isn’t supposed to be hanging around in a dogfight. This is a specialist ship with a very niche role: to deliver its devastating torpedo payload to unsuspecting targets.

Considering the sensitive nature of this ship, will purchases of this ship be limited in game, like by reputation? Does the UEE try to prevent ships like this from falling into pirate hands?

Spoiler

With the 2947 announcement, we consider the Eclipse to now be ‘for export,’ meaning that it can be sold to select groups outside the UEE military (including you). We anticipate there will be any number of limitations in the game world including both the number of bombers produced at any given time and other factors relating to reputation. It seems unlikely that the UEE would sell bombers directly to known pirates or other criminals, but it’s also easy to imagine other ways for such individuals to acquire military spec’d ships.

How does the Eclipse place among other bombers, specifically in range, speed, maneuverability, armament, survivability, role flexibility, and jump capability?

Spoiler

 

Range can be a tricky one to quantify, but basing it on duration and distance we see it as follows: Polaris, Retaliator, Harbinger, Eclipse, Gladiator. The first three all have support for long duration trips with on-board facilities while the Eclipse and Gladiator do not.

As speeds will naturally change over the course of development, the current ordering in terms of max SCM speed, going from fastest to slowest in a straight line acceleration, is as follows: Eclipse, Gladiator, Harbinger, Retaliator, Polaris

Maneuverability will be the Eclipse’s “Achilles’ Heel” and is squarely at the bottom of the smaller ships in this trait, with both the Gladiator and Harbinger outmaneuvering it.

Armament is another trait not easily compared straight across against other ships, as it obviously packs a devastating punch with its torpedoes, but once those are gone it will be considerably outgunned if you choose to stick around without re-arming. If you intended to hang around after attacking then the Eclipse is not the ship for this and a Gladiator or Harbinger are much more suited to that role. Survivability also comes into play here with the Eclipse being less durable than either the Gladiator or Harbinger, currently expected to have a similar durability to that of a 300i.

Basically, if you use it for it’s intended role, we expect the Eclipse to excel above others, but deviating outside of that the Eclipse will not fare well with its lack of cargo space, a single seat with no interior and limited weaponry. The Harbinger will allow you to maintain a longer time in the ‘verse and the Gladiator will pack a more rounded punch.

To summarize the intended roles between the four bombers (Polaris excluded):

• The Gladiator is the short range bomber, capable of absorbing and dishing out damage.
• The Eclipse is the mid range stealth bomber, capable of sneaking behind enemy lines and delivering a high damage strike, but should not stay in combat due to its defensive shortcomings.
• The Harbinger is the mid to long range endurance bomber, carrying more weapons and armament than the Gladiator and able to take more of a pounding and survive deeper into space, but without the stealth capabilities of the Eclipse.
• The Retaliator is the dedicated long range bomber, able to carry the most ordnance, the most men and the most weaponry to defend itself via its turrets. It can sustain itself and its crew much deeper in the verse and is ideal for striking targets a long way away. This is a good opportunity to mention that we are well aware of many in the community’s issues with the Retaliator (capacity, turret behavior, layouts, etc) and whilst we can’t commit to changes presently in the short term, it is on our radar and we’ll be reviewing at some point in the future.

 

Will I be able to purchase a large cloth to keep this covered in my hanger?

Spoiler

While the Historical Truth Act has permitted an unprecedented release of previously-classified UEEN military information (including the existence of the Eclipse bomber) it has NOT authorized any discussion of the Crusader Industries B419-AR Tactical Stealth Utility Tarp (TSUT.) Any discussion of its capabilities or availability should be reported to the nearest Advocacy agent.

 

[Devil Khan]

Yeah, thought so, only way was the wing bend again. It's a shame really. Would have been nice if it did. He forgot the Idris though? 

[Danakar Endeel]

They answered my question!

Quote

Can the Eclipse carry anything other than 3xS9 torpedoes (like for instance a ton of regular missiles or multiples of smaller torpedoes like the S5 carried by the Gladiator)?

Not the answer I was hoping for though as I had hoped the S9 hardpoints would function like all their other hardpoints and allow for packs of smaller missiles/torpedoes instead of being restricted to 3xS9 and nothing else.

 

What I find strange and disappointing however is the answer they gave for "What ship hangars will the Eclipse fit into?" and state that it won't fit in a Polaris and it would even be a snug fit in a Javelin. I find this very peculiar as the Javelin has a very large hangar bay for carrying a Vanguard/Redeemer sized multicrew ship!

And then JumpPoint specifically stated that the Eclipse had to be less than 25m wide because Chris Roberts wanted it to fit in an Idris. And that's probably why the ship was designed with wings that fold up.

So unless there's some voodoo magic at work over at CIG or they're eating magic mushroom cake it's almost as if the devs answering the questions forgot that the wings are supposed to fold up prior to landing and it's designed to be launched from an Idris.

 

So once again the Q&A causes more Q's than A's and is starting to make the Eclipse look a bit too limited for my tastes; especially considering the ridiculous $275 pricetag.

Maybe I'll just have to wait and see if CIG is actually going to work on the Retaliator with them specifically mentioning this during the Q&A:

Quote

This is a good opportunity to mention that we are well aware of many in the community’s issues with the Retaliator (capacity, turret behavior, layouts, etc) and whilst we can’t commit to changes presently in the short term, it is on our radar and we’ll be reviewing at some point in the future.

 

[AstroJak]

Theres a quick and easy answer to your questions Danakar. Many of CIG s staff have less experience with SC than many of the backs. They quickly write something, not realizing we have spent 4+ years ripping the shit out of every detail to the point of nozium. So when they dont triple proof read something, we all catch them amd they just look stupid.
The summary provided soon after Q&A 2 will address all their mistakes but youll not find it in an official cig doc but rather some reddit post or disco post...
These types of mistakes are getting tiresome, No?

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

[Chimaera]

8 minutes ago, AstroJak said:

The summary provided soon after Q&A 2 will address all their mistakes but youll not find it in an official cig doc but rather some reddit post or disco post...
These types of mistakes are getting tiresome, No?

And this is the point where I will agree with @Cincinnatus (omg, really?!) that CIG really need to get a design document created that actually provides full details of each ship, the roles they are supposed to fulfill, the relationships to each other they are supposed to have, and the relative balance/imbalances that are expected by design. This would seriously limit the kinds of missteps these people make, and also get stuff official instead of trickling it through reddit/forums.

[Cincinnatus]

2 minutes ago, Chimaera said:

And this is the point where I will agree with @Cincinnatus (omg, really?!) that CIG really need to get a design document created that actually provides full details of each ship, the roles they are supposed to fulfill, the relationships to each other they are supposed to have, and the relative balance/imbalances that are expected by design. This would seriously limit the kinds of missteps these people make, and also get stuff official instead of trickling it through reddit/forums.

I am glad that I won a convert. Sad as well. I would rather just be wrong. I actually liked the QA on Eclipse.  I actually just thanked the community team on it. I think the Eclipse QA was pretty clear on ships things relative. It described the pros and cons of the ship. I wish the Defender or bucc or Hurricane was done this well.  The torpedos are still too much, but shrug.  

[Chimaera]

Just now, Cincinnatus said:

I am glad that I won a convert.

Not so much a convert, it is a simple logic matter and something I've always been annoyed at them for, just not vocally so. 

[Cincinnatus]

Ah, I am vocal about anything I think. You have more self-control than me. but you are intel? 

[AstroJak]

And this is the point where I will agree with @Cincinnatus (omg, really?!) that CIG really need to get a design document created that actually provides full details of each ship, the roles they are supposed to fulfill, the relationships to each other they are supposed to have, and the relative balance/imbalances that are expected by design. This would seriously limit the kinds of missteps these people make, and also get stuff official instead of trickling it through reddit/forums.

I might also agree with him but you quoted me not him so im not quite sure what your agreeing too!

Sent from my LG-H812 using Tapatalk

[Cincinnatus]

@AstroJak, I am pretty salt about CIG and balance and sanity.

 

You will need a glass of water after that. 

[GeraldEvans]

And I definitely get the salt. I hope someone up there has a decent idea where all three ships should fall relative to each other. And it wouldn't kill them to speak plainly. If everything punches above its weight, then nothing does. Put these things out on the level and get serious about what they expect them to do when completed.

[Cincinnatus]

Just now, GeraldEvans said:

And I definitely get the salt. I hope someone up there has a decent idea where all three ships should fall relative to each other. And it wouldn't kill them to speak plainly. If everything punches above its weight, then nothing does. Put these things out on the level and get serious about what they expect them to do when completed.

No the QA that they just puts up does that super well. I am serious 

[GeraldEvans]

Yes, the breakdown at the end is pretty good. In general though I really dislike marketing speak in Q/As. It comes across as disingenuous. 'Sure it can do that*, Bob. And for you, I'll throw in an air freshener.'


*It really can't do that but by the time he figures it out it will be way too late. Buyer beware!

[Cincinnatus]

8 minutes ago, GeraldEvans said:

Yes, the breakdown at the end is pretty good. In general though I really dislike marketing speak in Q/As. It comes across as disingenuous. 'Sure it can do that*, Bob. And for you, I'll throw in an air freshener.'


*It really can't do that but by the time he figures it out it will be way too late. Buyer beware!

For CIG marketing it was a good step. Give them props for it. 

[GeraldEvans]

Done.