Star Citizen: Chris Robert`s new space sim (the Wing Commander guy)

[catnapper]

It looks kind of random. I have access to the PTU (for "backers" again). The loading screen is a little different, some other things.

 

[rivethead]

Can someone please tell me what I need if I want to give SC a try and what the least minimal amount of money is to get going with it.

So if someone gets access, a "hangar pass" (???) and a starter/beginner ship...what are the costs and what can you do right now in the game? I would like to give it a look.

Assuming this link works, here are all the game packages sorted lowest price to highest:

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/...pe=skus&storefront=pledge&type=game-packages&

The Aurora MR for $30 gets you a ship (Aurora MR), the games (SC and Squadron 42), some money, some insurance and a basic hangar.

It does NOT get you beta access to the games, nor does it give you access to the Arena Commander module.

If dogfighting/flying are important to you today, then spend $5 more and buy and AC pass.
If having access to the beta releases of the games is important, then spend $5 more and buy the Aurora ES package.

If BOTH of the above are important to you, then buy both (Aurora ES package $35, AC pass $5) = $40 total.

Having said the above, I'm not yet convinced you need the AC pass. I don't have an AC pass and yet I've been able to fly as much as I want due to all the free trials (such as this week with the Mustangs). But that may end at any moment!

 

[rivethead]

Back when this was more popular (before November 2013), there were lots of original backers who told the people receiving the ship to make sure they spent $5 to get a skin, or 5,000 UEC (name of game money), so their accounts would then be listed as a backer gaining all the bonuses of being so (such as all the pledge rewards from that point on).

I think this distinction is still very important. To be considered a backer in the eyes of CIG, you must spend real money.

I was thinking about buying a package and gifting it to my son for Xmas. After some research, I realized this would be a stupid thing to do. He would not get backer status and would miss out on any more freebies.

So I just had him create and account and we purchased a package directly through that account....giving him backer status.

 

[rivethead]

Dogfighting isn't going to be an end-all, and there will be a relevant place for every individual, despite the level of starting ship or perceived advantage.

That's why I'm excited about this game. It appears to be so much more than a dogfighting sim.

I hope you're right. But I have to admit I'm a bit concerned about this. The Star Citizen world I envision would actually have more peaceful citizens doing things like commerce (me!), exploration, science, etc. than combative citizens.

Yet, every single ship released thus far (including racing ships!) has included weapons. I think that's a bad sign. Now, maybe this is just a marketing ploy (boys like guns so let's give them some on every ship). But it seems to me like this is evidence that combat is going to be a pervasive part of the universe.

I hope I'm wrong. I hope when the PU goes live I can sell all my weapons and use the money to upgrade my Aurora LN's engines and shields.....and buy a cargo container.....and still be able to operate in "safe" space.

 

[MeldarthX]

I hope you're right. But I have to admit I'm a bit concerned about this. The Star Citizen world I envision would actually have more peaceful citizens doing things like commerce (me!), exploration, science, etc. than combative citizens.

Yet, every single ship released thus far (including racing ships!) has included weapons. I think that's a bad sign. Now, maybe this is just a marketing ploy (boys like guns so let's give them some on every ship). But it seems to me like this is evidence that combat is going to be a pervasive part of the universe.

I hope I'm wrong. I hope when the PU goes live I can sell all my weapons and use the money to upgrade my Aurora LN's engines and shields.....and buy a cargo container.....and still be able to operate in "safe" space.

Honestly every ship should have some sort of weapons; also comes to if you hit astroid field; etc.......also even shipping lanes that are patolled people will still attempt attacks. There is no such thing as a 100% safe shipping lane.....

while most routes close to planets will be safe; there will be some degree of watching for pirates.....*just my feeling*

 

[Worthington]

Can always strip off the guns for that extra bit of maneuverability and speed. But, unless they design and build a ship (which takes serious man hours) that's sole goal is to stay inside secure space you probably won't see a ship designed without any armaments. People want to explore, run blockades, etc etc. Way easier to design a ship that meets those demands, and then allow people to strip it if they so desire.

 

[rivethead]

Honestly every ship should have some sort of weapons; also comes to if you hit astroid field; etc.......also even shipping lanes that are patolled people will still attempt attacks. There is no such thing as a 100% safe shipping lane.....

while most routes close to planets will be safe; there will be some degree of watching for pirates.....*just my feeling*

Asteroid fields are best handled by stronger shields and maneuverability. And a society sophisticated enough for space travel should be smart enough to not chart major travel routes through asteroid fields right?

But I think your feeling is right: I think this game is being build around combat. Which is disappointing to me.

 

[rivethead]

Can always strip off the guns for that extra bit of maneuverability and speed. But, unless they design and build a ship (which takes serious man hours) that's sole goal is to stay inside secure space you probably won't see a ship designed without any armaments. People want to explore, run blockades, etc etc. Way easier to design a ship that meets those demands, and then allow people to strip it if they so desire.

You're probably right. But it's conveying a bad message to me.

I mean someone really tell me the reason the Mustang Omega (and Delta) have lasers? Their primary purpose is to race around a track as fast as they can. Or is space racing in the future a combative sport?

 

[Worthington]

One of the races that was mentioned is in fact a "guns lit" event. It's not a Murry cup race, it's some underground bloodsport type event that takes place in fringe systems.
Was mentioned in one of the Jumppoints.

 

[Fallen Kell]

Asteroid fields are best handled by stronger shields and maneuverability. And a society sophisticated enough for space travel should be smart enough to not chart major travel routes through asteroid fields right?

But I think your feeling is right: I think this game is being build around combat. Which is disappointing to me.

Think of it like the real world. In the 16th-18th centuries, ship manufacturers still put places to have weapons on their ships, even if the owners of the ship did not put weapons there. Why? Because even traders needed to be able to defend their ship from pirates, or hostile natives should they be encountered. If you felt like you were not going to be operating in a region/place where you would encounter such hostilities, you would not spend the money on the weapons, but the manufacturer wouldn't design a ship that didn't have defence available because they wouldn't be able to sell it to the vast majority of the market.

 

[Revolution 11]

The Public Test Universe is now available to all backers. Seems to be 24 GB download, just follow the steps at the link below to setup your account.

Access seems to be on-off as the PTU will be shut down when a patch is being applied.

https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14442-Public-Test-Universe-Launched


This should not be confused with the yet-to-be-shown Persistent Universe.

 

[rivethead]

Hey backers, more freebies: https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/14446-Everyone-Gets-A-Space-Globe

 

[Stringjam]

You're probably right. But it's conveying a bad message to me.

I mean someone really tell me the reason the Mustang Omega (and Delta) have lasers? Their primary purpose is to race around a track as fast as they can. Or is space racing in the future a combative sport?

I can see what you're saying, and I agree for a big part.

I think RSI is doing a pretty good job with setting ship specs for specific use. I would personally like to see "Racers" stripped down even more. Right now you can get the same kind of shield protection in the Omega (Racer) as you can the Delta (dogfighter).

Regarding "balance," I think that any purpose-built fighter should be able to utterly destroy any racer, unless the pilot is a total dolt.

You get a different opinion from another set of people, who are complaining "It's not fair that Super Hornets keep destroying my 350R...it's too fragile."

Well...yeah....that's the way it's supposed to be. That's like saying "My G6 doesn't stand a chance against an A10 Warthog....it's not fair!"

There are a lot of whiny people that actually hold this view that ships should be more equal. I don't hold that view at all.

I like the idea that you have to compromise based on what you role you want your ship to fill. If you want a versatile ship that can fight and scream at the same time, then you just need to be a much better pilot if you want to take on the tanks.

 

[rivethead]

I can see what you're saying, and I agree for a big part.

I think RSI is doing a pretty good job with setting ship specs for specific use. I would personally like to see "Racers" stripped down even more. Right now you can get the same kind of shield protection in the Omega (Racer) as you can the Delta (dogfighter).

Regarding "balance," I think that any purpose-built fighter should be able to utterly destroy any racer, unless the pilot is a total dolt.

You get a different opinion from another set of people, who are complaining "It's not fair that Super Hornets keep destroying my 350R...it's too fragile."

Well...yeah....that's the way it's supposed to be. That's like saying "My G6 doesn't stand a chance against a A10 Warthog....it's not fair!"

There are a lot of whiny people that actually hold this view that ships should be more equal. I don't hold that view at all.

I like the idea that you have to compromise based on what you role you want your ship to fill. If you want a versatile ship that can fight and scream at the same time, then you just need to be a better pilot if you want to take on the tanks.

I agree and have faith that CIG will balance things well while taking into account ship role. I've read some of the complaints where people want a every ship to be "balanced" and I just shake my head. It just doesn't make sense. What DOES make sense is that every ship has role it's well-suited for and comes with associated strengths and weaknesses.

Admittedly, most of my whining in this thread is because I'm a shitty pilot. I'm by no means a pacifist......just a bad pilot who is worried he's gonna be spending a lot of time waiting for insurance to replace his ship!

 

[Stringjam]

Admittedly, most of my whining in this thread is because I'm a shitty pilot. I'm by no means a pacifist......just a bad pilot who is worried he's gonna be spending a lot of time waiting for insurance to replace his ship!

Well, I haven't heard any whining from you yet by my definition , and I think we're on the same page regarding what we're hoping to see.

I'm also hoping for solid roles for non-combat intensive positions (exploring, transport, rescue, salvage, etc...).

I'm also not a pacifist, and I love a good dogfight or the thought of an FPS strike, but it's not what I want to be doing for hours on end.

On the other side of that, it's the risk that creates the excitement, and being an "explorer" at heart, I'm looking forward to that feeling of getting away from the safe routes and putting myself (and my shiny expensive ship) at risk in the unsecured zones.

That's where I think the real balance comes into play. My small exploration vessel may not have massive firepower to take on a group of Hornets, but I think it should have other systems that facilitate a strong defense against them (advanced scanning, high speed and maneuverability, superior shielding and low radar signature, etc).

I think it's a different story with big, crewed ships set out for the same purpose. These need to be very well-armed and protected, because there are more lives and more expense at stake. In a realistic situation, even exploration vessels like this would be outfitted with the ability to put up a stand against smaller , purpose-built attack vessels, and it looks like CIG is also taking that approach as well, since even some cargo vessels have multiple turrets and high missile capacity.

 

[rivethead]

On the other side of that, it's the risk that creates the excitement, and being an "explorer" at heart, I'm looking forward to that feeling of getting away from the safe routes and putting myself (and my shiny expensive ship) at risk in the unsecured zones.

This is so true and I think it's the most overlooked point regarding SC. Risk/Reward is king.

So many people seem to think SC will be a pay-to-win model but from my perspective, that's flawed thinking. If you can't afford real money to buy a Connie or a Freelancer, you have the alternative of earning one in-game. Which takes time. But it will take less time the greater the risk you're willing to take.

 

[Fallen Kell]

This is so true and I think it's the most overlooked point regarding SC. Risk/Reward is king.

So many people seem to think SC will be a pay-to-win model but from my perspective, that's flawed thinking. If you can't afford real money to buy a Connie or a Freelancer, you have the alternative of earning one in-game. Which takes time. But it will take less time the greater the risk you're willing to take.

And even then, we still don't know what that time will be yet. In all seriousness, it might not take that much time at all. Now I don't think it will be a "it only took me 30 minutes" type thing, but I don't think it will be a "it took me a couple weeks" type thing either. The longest/hardest part might be finding a ship manufacturer that has them available (at least in the beginning).

 

[Blue_Max]

How much RAM would you say this game really needs?

I'm only running 6GB at the moment and I'm quite sure I need more... but not sure how MUCH more to get!

Being triple-channel, I could go up to 12GB or 18GB...

 

[mnewsham]

How much RAM would you say this game really needs?

I'm only running 6GB at the moment and I'm quite sure I need more... but not sure how MUCH more to get!

Being triple-channel, I could go up to 12GB or 18GB...

12GB would probably be fine, but if you wish to err on the side of caution. 18GB would for sure be more than enough.

 

[Bubbleawsome]

12 is plenty. It works fine on 8GB.

 

[Fallen Kell]

12 is plenty. It works fine on 8GB.

Glad someone chimed in. I have 16GB so couldn't say if it worked well on less. But do remember that we are only looking at the hanger and dogfighting. Don't know about some of the other things that will happen in the game, but I don't expect RAM usage to go a whole lot higher, and it will probably actually shrink as things get optimized (which won't happen until things get finalized, since it is a waste of developer/artist time to optimize a function or asset that gets changes or goes unused).

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm nearly positive I've read 8GB is the target for good performance

 

[bbhaag]

Well I had a momentary lapse in reason today and bought the $20 hanger upgrade. I even told myself I would never spend more than the original $30...sigh. I hope this doesn't snowball on me.
Those Hornets do look nice though and my new hanger has plenty of space for another ship.:hmm:

 

[bbhaag]

I'm nearly positive I've read 8GB is the target for good performance

I have 8gig of the slow stuff(1333)and it runs good. My whole rig is old and it seems to run the AC and hanger just fine.

 

[jlee]

I'm really tempted to get in on this early vs in a year or two; is there any benefit other than assisting in development, vs waiting for the retail release?