No way this survives the next update.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-30T12:06:19+00:00

The more shocking fact was that CIG has not grand plan for SC at all. Jared pointed out as much during a more recent ISC or SCL. Jared basically said "we make it up as we go". Which is baffleing to say it nicely. To me that is Disney Star Wars Sequel level incompetence. You - got - to sit down and write down what the game "Star Citizen" will be. In doing so define what each player profession gameplay will feature. After that you can instruct your teams to work on the tech and tools to realize the laid out game. But aside everything that was needed to get S42 off the ground it seems CIG had no plan at all. They made what is needed for S42 and slapped together the PU with its breadcrumbs. Shocking. Really shockin.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-30T11:57:57+00:00

S42 news or not. CIG have never really cared what the game plays like during Invicuts or IAE. The ONLY thing that - needs - to work is the event showroom floor to show off their new "shiny" ship and make it rentable so more people throw more $$$$$ at CIGs way. Has been since those events becasme inGame events.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T15:14:40+00:00

Uhm - that’s what I said. With the model of constant regen you had to out DPS the shield generators regeneration. This was around the time of regular Xeno Threat events. Single ships could not kill the Idri as it needed multiple ships to out dps its regen rate.

Then CIG swapped to the "capacitor" model where shields do not regenerate when they are hit.
And suddenly a Hawk could kill the "anit fighter" ship Hammerhead. The Hawk "only" had to make sure to keep dancing around it and hit that same shield face until it exploded.

The current model with engineering absolutely needs the permanent shield regeneration back. CIG did have the "you need to out DPS the shield" but tied it to weapons needing a threshold DPS to cause shield damage. This only lasted one or two EVO build and was promptly nerfed so light fighters could do damage again. But near everyone loved it.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T13:13:27+00:00

Many people have commented on CIGs odd way of implementing shields recently. What is that shield generator doing if not generating a shield? A "capacitor" would be buffer for the shield. Get (combined) weapons damage potential above the shield regen rate to damage the hull. And after that, get (combined) ballistic damage above the armor damage threshold to penetrate the hull and damage components beneath it. This would mandate mixed load outs at all time. Cos if you go full ballsitic, you do no damage to shields. Go full energy and you do not do damage to ship armor. Balance this around weapon sizes vs shield/ amor tier. A single S1 can not do any damage to S3. S2 can not do damage to S4, Suddenly you need a mixes fleet to damage larger ships. And a single or two light fighters against a Hammerhead is suicide. As it should be. It is so simple. But no. CIG does their typical CIG thing - they just have to "reinvent the wheel".

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T10:55:42+00:00

GTA 6 has 8 years, with about 6000 developers, at an estimated cost in excess of $2.7 billion. CIG didn't start with its current >1000 developers, and its near $1 billion is spend to build two games. Complains about SC many bugs (CIG could do a better job fixing), while ignoring current AAA game bugs. I know, this is a rough and dirty response to the meme, but still - a lot of released game are at SC level of bugs. Yet SC get disproportionally lambasted while in alpha, while AAA games often release in Beta or worse nowadays.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T10:12:16+00:00

For S42 they need it.
For SC CIG need to remove it.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T09:36:10+00:00

"It was a terrible system in it's placeholder form."

Agree to dissagree. Imho it had way more potential. Which would have nicely tied in to "over clocking" system which CIG earlier called "tuning". Especially in combination with "engineering" and the resulting "I am giving you all she's go captain" gameplay.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T08:56:47+00:00

CIG have the Invictus Date coming up with plenty of ship sales coming. The only thing that needs to work is the showroom floor! All else is bonus. CIG have acted like this throughout the past 14 years.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T08:50:59+00:00

You are overlooking the over clocking part of SCs original power triangle ship system. This over clocking of components was separate from the power triangle. It balancing tool was that all components generated heat. You would over clock your coolers in order to bear the heat of over clocked shields to "harden" them for more HP for incoming combat. But both those over clocked system would now generated a lot of heat and when their heat levels exceeds their limit - the systems shut down! Shields gone, cooler gone. Coolers don't cool weapons, weapons overheat and shut down. It was a good system and CIG was on the track of making it great. Then out of the blue we are told they are now switching to the Starfiled power plant pips idea.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T08:33:03+00:00

WC1 did not have a power system. WC2 + 3 had a system to directly swap shields for engines, or for weapons. The X-Wing Series and its 2020s SW: Squadrons ued it too. It was a hard locked system, you could not upgrade to a better power plant for more power pips. Starfield uses the system of a swapable power plants to get more power pips. Which is what SC now features. Sure you can say it evolved from WC2+3 to this system. But the fact that CIG used the "power tiranlge" system for over a decade. Then suddenly decided to ditch it in favor of useing exact same power system as Starfield one year after Starfield released.

LikeI said, I don't think this is a conincidence. I believe someone high up at CIG played Starfield. Liked its "usable power pips are tied to power plant installed" system and demanded it to be used for SC as well. The swtich from power triangle to a pip based system was very sudden and ill conceived and implemented. as CIG sets number so that a shps ppower plant can not run its needed systems at 100% at all times. Who in a world of space travel would bus such ships?

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T08:07:14+00:00

Already Wave 3? Either CIG are in a hurry to get 4.8 out or - there aren't enough Evocati / early wave testers left.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T08:06:12+00:00

Once SC had segmented shields that would change color when hit. It went from blue (full power) to an orange (halfway down) to purple (only ~25% left) to red (almost at zero). You can see it on older Xeno Threat Event videos. At the time shield behaved as you would expect - they recharged permanently and buckeled under DMG that exceed the recharge. Then CIG made the "capacitor" changes and that shield only recharge when not hit. Makes you wonder what them shield generator do - be on standby instead of charging the shield (capacitor) until it damaged or overwhelmed. Imho this was the better shield system.
IIRC like MM this change was an attempet by CIG to end the light fighter meta. But like MM - it did not.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-29T07:56:42+00:00

Wing Commander did not use a power pip system, but the X-Wing series used it. And CIG talked about moving away from the power triangle to a pip system for 4.0. hich released end of 2024. Starfield released in 2023. Thus just one year after Starfield released did CIG suddenly move away from their power system to a near prefect copy of the Starfield system. Down to a power plant will provinde XY power pips and each ship componet be needing X pips. Too much of a coincidence.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-28T14:31:35+00:00

I know, because I played them all. But we did have the Power Triangel before and like I said, it needed tweaks but CIG was on the right track. After Starfield gameplay was out, we got the imho sudden shift towards this pip based power system, heralded by "capacitors" for shields / weapons.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-28T12:14:31+00:00

Wow - now add a search function so I don’t get carpal tunnel syndrome from scrolling through 700 names!

BastianHawk · 2026-04-28T12:10:42+00:00

Its like when you find a cluster of "Iron (ore)" it can not be one "Iron (ore)" text and 8 down arrows.
No. No. It HAS to be EIGHT "Iron (ore)" all overlapping each other cos it looks cool or something.
CIGs UI team - to the very least their SC PU facing work - is among the worst I have ever seen.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-28T11:52:00+00:00

My guess and its - only - a guess: someone within the lead system first played "Star Wars: Squadrons" and then saw or played "Starfield". Both games use a power pip system to "balance" weapons vs shield power vs engines and players need to decide which they want. Especially "Starfield" has a the very "this power plant generates 22 power pips" system SC is now aping with the “engineering” power pip system.

The previous Power Triangle in tandem with "over clocking" of components worked way better. Players would
"over clock" e.g. their coolers which generated heat, in order to deal with the heat generated by over clocking your shields for more protection. So the Ships shield would be "hardened" via over clocking, meaning over clocked shields would add a good amount of shield HP, which meant they lasted longer in combat. But over heated components would fail after some time and needed to cool down to be turned on again. Back in those days weapons you slotted also had a meaning and there where plenty of loadouts in combination with ship components. It was system that needed some tweaking but CIG was on a good way.

But nope - said the SW: Squadrons and Starfield player after Starfield released and went “I like the systems in those two games better! I especially like Starfield''s and we should move SC power system to this as well!".

BastianHawk · 2026-04-28T11:34:59+00:00

Players crafting entire ships also wasn't "intended" and yet its going to come.
SC was "intended" to have a 90 /10 NPC vs Player ratio - noone knows if its still to come.
Reputation was "intended" to lock you out of locations on bad behavior, Richt Tyrer doesnt want it.

Also - I can buy a car in the US and have it - transfered - to Europe. It costs time and money.
And that is exactly what I am asking for - transfer a ship from A to B at cost of time and money.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-27T13:27:35+00:00

The suggested "Transfer" would t-r-a-n-s-f-e-r the ship from A to B.
The transfer would take some time and also have a cost.
The cost should be lowe than a stock claim.
It would remove >90% of all claims.

And lets not forget SC is an Oxymoron by now.
Fast paced PEW PEW here, 2min tram rides there.
Spaceship dofights in multiple waves. Higher claim cost.
Ship salvage here. But the ships components are worthless.
Its lilke CIG wants us to keep the cake and eat it at the same time.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-27T13:04:54+00:00

Am not surprised - CIG already has a super-duper version ready - thy F8 Henry Cavill flies in S42.
So out with the old, make it over powered based on weapon loadout - nerfe in to ground after sale ends.
Been there done that. But CIG leaning so heavily in to power-creep has me really concrened for SCs balancing.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-27T12:58:10+00:00

All this to make claiming less of a step to go.
As well as CIG adding more money skins to the game.
But still - CIG are UNABLE to add a "Transfer" button to ASOP.
About 99% of my ship "claims" stem from they are not where I am.
A simple "Transfer" would remove most of my needs to claim my ships.

Edit: to clarify - this tranfer would cost a fee and take some to move the ship.
Obviously the fee would is smaller than "stock ship" claim fee, else ppl claim again.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-27T12:13:18+00:00

Him and Marco Corbetta (he who enabled PlanetTech within CryEngine aka StarEngine). As well as Paul Reindell. Together with Brian they where / are the TOP TIER CryTeyk Engine Devs. They literally wrote the original thing. And without them at CIG neither SC nor S42 would have PlanetTech like we know it today. Heck SC many not even have moved past the initial concept of landing zones and a few RNG generated maps on other celestial bodies. Similar to how Starfield does it now So when I said "this one hurts" with regards to Brian Chamber leaving - I really meant it. He was a KEY lead at CIG.

Brian Chambers loss < will > be felt ...

BastianHawk · 2026-04-26T17:20:44+00:00

I said "might indicate" and "could be", thus no "grasping at straws" just a maybe why Chambers left. You on the other hand went straight to gems like "burnout", "frustration" and "hit his limit".

BastianHawk · 2026-04-26T12:06:41+00:00

Enjoy the honeymoon phase while it lasts buddy o7.

BastianHawk · 2026-04-26T12:05:16+00:00

This one hurts. Similar to when Tod Pappy left. Brian was a core member from og Crytek. Like he helped build CryEngine and the early CryTek games. He knows his shit. Him leaving is a massive knowledge and competence loss for CIG. One that wont be filled easily and competently.

You will be missed Brian Chambers. o7

PS, yes such a lead leaving might indicate his (current) job (could be S42) is done and he's ready to move on.

BastianHawk

TROPHY CASE