[Megathread] Star Citizen

[Surfd]

A civilization that can produce or mass produce a workable, advanced spacecraft surely is capable of creating weapons for it more effective, long-distance and accurate than a damn WWI-era machine gun that only works at point blank visual range.

Going to disagree slightly here: In terms of space combat, it realistically most likely would be one of two options, A: Super close slug fests or B: Just a bunch of ships flinging a bunch of long range guided missiles at each-other until one or the other's anti-missile batteries run out of ammo.

The main problem inherently IS the distances involved, and more importantly, the fact that hitting something with a "ballistic projectile" at proper "outer space range" long distances is going to be super hard since range of motion is significantly greater in space. If you are too far away, your target is likely to literally side step your shot before it reaches them. The idea that super capital ships are going to stand off thousands of miles apart and shoot each other with direct fire weaponry is kind of absurd when you consider that.

The idea that there would actually be "dogfights" in space between jet-fighter like craft is silly, because manoeuvrability in space (where there is no need to maintain lift, or worry about aerodynamics or any number of a host of issues that actual atmospheric fighters need to consider) is completely different than manoeuvrability in atmosphere. The worlds best human pilots can barely handle certain high intensity manoeuvres in current aircraft. An actual Space fighter would be capable of manoeuvres that make anything an atmospheric craft can do look like child's play.

[Elim Garak]

Well let's get even more realistic here.
Yes you can produce an absolutely accurate laser that can pinpoint a target at infinite range. Albeit at declining power right to zero at infinity.
But and it's a huge BUTT
You cannot aim it at anything far away, you can try - but you will miss every time, especially if it's a moving target.
The precision sadly comes not from the beam being straight (though at space ranges you have to account for relativity and gravity) - but from the weapon and the "hands" that hold it.
Every object in space is in motion. Including your weapon on your moving ship.
So realistically you cannot reliably hit with a laser anything small (a ship) even at 1000 km range. A slight movement of your ship or target - and you lose the target even before you fired.
A tiny deviation at close range (your Joystick holding hand twitched a little bit) - gets bigger at long range. Angles, that's how they work.
At 1000km, a tiny twitch of 1 degree can amount to ~17km wide error. Even a capital ship of 1km size is hard to aim at.
Of course in the Sci-Fi future they can account for that and make it easier, like the aiming system compensates for your twitches and you get no more than 0.01 degree of error
But around 10000km it's still a whooping 1.7km wide error. And that's against a drifting or relatively stationary target - i.e. something your aiming computer can calculate. Unlike a moving target with an active pilot.

Go on do a test with a laser pointer. The closer the wall the easier it is to point at something on it. Get farther from the wall - and you might reach a point where you would even have trouble pointing at the wall.

[gondrin]

Well let's get even more realistic here.
Yes you can produce an absolutely accurate laser that can pinpoint a target at infinite range. Albeit at declining power right to zero at infinity.
But and it's a huge BUTT
You cannot aim it at anything far away, you can try - but you will miss every time, especially if it's a moving target.
The precision sadly comes not from the beam being straight (though at space ranges you have to account for relativity and gravity) - but from the weapon and the "hands" that hold it.
Every object in space is in motion. Including your weapon on your moving ship.
So realistically you cannot reliably hit with a laser anything small (a ship) even at 1000 km range. A slight movement of your ship or target - and you lose the target even before you fired.
A tiny deviation at close range (your Joystick holding hand twitched a little bit) - gets bigger at long range. Angles, that's how they work.
At 1000km, a tiny twitch of 1 degree can amount to ~17km wide error. Even a capital ship of 1km size is hard to aim at.
Of course in the Sci-Fi future they can account for that and make it easier, like the aiming system compensates for your twitches and you get no more than 0.01 degree of error
But around 10000km it's still a whooping 1.7km wide error. And that's against a drifting or relatively stationary target - i.e. something your aiming computer can calculate. Unlike a moving target with an active pilot.

Go on do a test with a laser pointer. The closer the wall the easier it is to point at something on it. Get farther from the wall - and you might reach a point where you would even have trouble pointing at the wall.

And if Star Citizen is trying to emulate real life physics in the future, they should also have those targeting computers that would deal with long range combat. I know Star Trek has this and rarely has anyone actually targeting anything. They always have the computer do it as the distances would, as you said, be too great for a person to realistically be able to compensate for.

The problem with space combat is that, unlike atmospheric combat, there is nowhere to hide unless you are behind another object in space. The moment someone detects someone else, they can shoot at them and there is no way to stop from being hit unless you can predict the future, especially with a laser or directed energy weapon of some sort. It does get easier to stop traditional weapons such as bullets and missiles as you can detect those way before they connect with the target. Even the fastest bullet would still take many seconds to minutes(depends on the distances involved) before getting to their target.

- - - Updated - - -

Or just go a step further, and neutralize laser weaponry tech entirely. Put a cloud of gas between you and your enemy. Beam hits the cloud, dissipates. You'd expect that they'd invent a way to generate this in the era of space combat. Kinda similar to how WW2 bombers regularly dropped aluminum chaff to neutralize radar detection systems.

The thing about those things in space is that, especially with directed energy weapons, is that you would have to deploy it BEFORE the enemy detects you. Otherwise, they would be worthless if the enemy gets off a "shot" before you can deploy it. Even at a distance of 2 million miles, you would literally have 10 seconds before it hits you AND you wouldn't be able to detect a shot until it hits you unless you have the ability to detect things faster than light.

Also, I feel this should be allowed as SC is trying to be "realistic" as possible which means this would be a thing they would have to consider if they wanted real life physics involved into space combat.

Wanted to add, SC literally has to suspend belief in physics to be a game. Between space combat, distances between planets and stars, how mass and gravity actually works and a number of other things, there is no way they can accurately portray these things without a supercomputer level of computing power. So everything in the game still has to have a fantasy level of design. That is why anyone arguing the physics in this game are any different than in games like GTA, Elite Dangerous, or even Mass Effect, is just foolish at best.

[Yriel]

Going to disagree slightly here: In terms of space combat, it realistically most likely would be one of two options, A: Super close slug fests or B: Just a bunch of ships flinging a bunch of long range guided missiles at each-other until one or the other's anti-missile batteries run out of ammo.

The Expanse tv-show tried a more realistic approach to space battles, they went with your second option. Guided Missiles, anti-missile gatling guns and, on larger ships, railguns. Ships fought far out of sight of each other and basically the computers fought against each other.

I'm not so sure though that you could to easily "side step" projectiles as battles won't be fought with relative still standing ships, the ships will usually travel at high relative speeds and if i understand it correctly it would need tremendous force to alter the course in that case.

[DarkAmbient]

I don't believe it started as a scam, but it's becoming one. Star Citizen is what happens when a control freak with poor project management skills and a penchant for unrestrained flights of fantasy is given hundreds of millions of dollars to turn his fever dreams into reality. I think Roberts still genuinely believes that he's eventually going to deliver on his promises. He just doesn't care how long it takes. In his mind, it'll take as long as it needs to, and that's that. And in my opinion, the extent to which he feathered his own nest indicates a narcissistic arrogance rather than any intent to defraud.

So what's the scam? At this point, it's the withholding of the truth about how much longer development will need to go on. It's fair for backers to have expected the game to release in a reasonable time frame. What's reasonable when it comes to making the game Chris Roberts promised? 10 years? 15, 20? It's virtually impossible to put a definitive number on that, but as the years pass it becomes easier to argue that backers have waited an unreasonably long time, and that CIG are lying by omission.

The backers will eventually get something (besides a playable alpha). Will that something be the dream they were promised? Extremely unlikely. And that's a shame, because it would have been awesome.

[kenn9530]

I don't believe it started as a scam, but it's becoming one. Star Citizen is what happens when a control freak with poor project management skills and a penchant for unrestrained flights of fantasy is given hundreds of millions of dollars to turn his fever dreams into reality. I think Roberts still genuinely believes that he's eventually going to deliver on his promises. He just doesn't care how long it takes. In his mind, it'll take as long as it needs to, and that's that. And in my opinion, the extent to which he feathered his own nest indicates a narcissistic arrogance rather than any intent to defraud.

So what's the scam? At this point, it's the withholding of the truth about how much longer development will need to go on. It's fair for backers to have expected the game to release in a reasonable time frame. What's reasonable when it comes to making the game Chris Roberts promised? 10 years? 15, 20? It's virtually impossible to put a definitive number on that, but as the years pass it becomes easier to argue that backers have waited an unreasonably long time, and that CIG are lying by omission.

The backers will eventually get something (besides a playable alpha). Will that something be the dream they were promised? Extremely unlikely. And that's a shame, because it would have been awesome.

CR stated from the kickstarter he wanted to make his dream game so that's what he is doing, ppl backed him knowing this from the start and we all knew it would take much longer than anyone could even think, the single player is pretty much done so it didn't take long at all for a next gen game that started from scratch. So no the backers have not waited an unreasonable amount of time, its the time it take to develop 2 massive and detailed space games, creating an MMO is more than difficult on its own, creating 2 games and building a company from nothing is a challenge for anyone.

[Henako]

CR stated from the kickstarter he wanted to make his dream game so that's what he is doing, ppl backed him knowing this from the start and we all knew it would take much longer than anyone could even think, the single player is pretty much done so it didn't take long at all for a next gen game that started from scratch. So no the backers have not waited an unreasonable amount of time, its the time it take to develop 2 massive and detailed space games, creating an MMO is more than difficult on its own, creating 2 games and building a company from nothing is a challenge for anyone.

I imagine most backers backed the advertised project, which no longer exists.

[Dhrizzle]

Most ironic part is, if they were trying to be realistic about space combat, you wouldn't know you would be attacked until you blew up due to the fact you could detect someone from many millions to billions of miles away. You also couldn't sneak up on someone from nearly any distance, because, as stated, you could detect someone from million to billions of miles away. Someone could easily shoot you with an ultra powerful laser and you wouldn't be able to detect it until it burned a hole in your hull and caused you to depressurize as detecting something like that would be impossible. Space combat, as shown, in any media is about as realistic as the ability for man to spontaneously grow wings and fly.

The Expanse showed realistic space combat.

- - - Updated - - -

Well let's get even more realistic here.
Yes you can produce an absolutely accurate laser that can pinpoint a target at infinite range. Albeit at declining power right to zero at infinity.
But and it's a huge BUTT
You cannot aim it at anything far away, you can try - but you will miss every time, especially if it's a moving target.
The precision sadly comes not from the beam being straight (though at space ranges you have to account for relativity and gravity) - but from the weapon and the "hands" that hold it.
Every object in space is in motion. Including your weapon on your moving ship.
So realistically you cannot reliably hit with a laser anything small (a ship) even at 1000 km range. A slight movement of your ship or target - and you lose the target even before you fired.
A tiny deviation at close range (your Joystick holding hand twitched a little bit) - gets bigger at long range. Angles, that's how they work.
At 1000km, a tiny twitch of 1 degree can amount to ~17km wide error. Even a capital ship of 1km size is hard to aim at.
Of course in the Sci-Fi future they can account for that and make it easier, like the aiming system compensates for your twitches and you get no more than 0.01 degree of error
But around 10000km it's still a whooping 1.7km wide error. And that's against a drifting or relatively stationary target - i.e. something your aiming computer can calculate. Unlike a moving target with an active pilot.

Go on do a test with a laser pointer. The closer the wall the easier it is to point at something on it. Get farther from the wall - and you might reach a point where you would even have trouble pointing at the wall.

As if meatbags like us would be doing the aiming. By the time we get into space in a meaningful way we probably won't even be trusted with target selection.

[banmebaby]

Within the next year or so the squadron 42 campaign should be ready and shortly after that the PTU will be ready.

next year we should have squadron 42 and not long after that the universe should quickly come together.

Current features in SC now are higher quality that ED/NMS has currently, i would say in around a year squadron 42 should be almost with us.

*7 years later*

the single player is pretty much done so it didn't take long at all for a next gen game that started from scratch.

Also:

So no the backers have not waited an unreasonable amount of time, its the time it take to develop 2 massive and detailed space games, creating an MMO is more than difficult on its own, creating 2 games and building a company from nothing is a challenge for anyone.

... and once upon a time...

The two games are the same using pretty much sharing all of the same assets, its basically the same as what GTA 5 done where you get to follow the story mode or at some point can just jump into the multiplayer. Creating a story campaign is still a fair bit of work but they are not two completely seperate games and many of the story mode missions can be adapted for the PU.

Squadron 42 and Star Citizen will share all the same assets, making both at a similar time makes the most logical sense as you don't want to complete one and then find out later it doesn't work for the other in turn creating even more work.

Sorry, just hard to resist sometimes

[Dhrizzle]

*7 years later*

Also:

... and once upon a time...

Sorry, just hard to resist sometimes

You're doing God's work.

[Jastall]

Going to disagree slightly here: In terms of space combat, it realistically most likely would be one of two options, A: Super close slug fests or B: Just a bunch of ships flinging a bunch of long range guided missiles at each-other until one or the other's anti-missile batteries run out of ammo.

The main problem inherently IS the distances involved, and more importantly, the fact that hitting something with a "ballistic projectile" at proper "outer space range" long distances is going to be super hard since range of motion is significantly greater in space. If you are too far away, your target is likely to literally side step your shot before it reaches them. The idea that super capital ships are going to stand off thousands of miles apart and shoot each other with direct fire weaponry is kind of absurd when you consider that.

The idea that there would actually be "dogfights" in space between jet-fighter like craft is silly, because manoeuvrability in space (where there is no need to maintain lift, or worry about aerodynamics or any number of a host of issues that actual atmospheric fighters need to consider) is completely different than manoeuvrability in atmosphere. The worlds best human pilots can barely handle certain high intensity manoeuvres in current aircraft. An actual Space fighter would be capable of manoeuvres that make anything an atmospheric craft can do look like child's play.

My physics knowledge is quite lacking overall but it does seem to me that the sort of massive, Star Destroyer-esque space ship one envisions in this situation wouldn't be able to just side-step much unless the projectile(s) take literal minutes to arrive. This amount of mass doesn't move on a whim, it seems like at least.

[Elim Garak]

My physics knowledge is quite lacking overall but it does seem to me that the sort of massive, Star Destroyer-esque space ship one envisions in this situation wouldn't be able to just side-step much unless the projectile(s) take literal minutes to arrive. This amount of mass doesn't move on a whim, it seems like at least.

A Star Destroyer-esque space ship flies fast. At space speeds. As in km/s. So let's say at a distance of 1000000km a laser weapon going at the speed of light takes 3 seconds. In these 3 seconds the SD can go forward further than its length. The laser will miss.
In a scenario where it's moving and the other ship predicts movement - the SD can slow down or turn. The laser will miss.

At 300000 km it's 1 second. Still a high chance to miss.

At 100000 km, sure you might hit, but something tells me that in order to do any damage beyond shields at that range you have to be literally Death Star, to produce such a powerful laser beam that it delivers enough of the power at the core (still focused) that far. Think of a really FAT laser beam, so FAT your mom will go DAMN!

And most of that power will go to waste.

It is economically unfeasible to fire at such range. And as we all know battles are won by economics and logistics.

[Cloverfield]

CR stated from the kickstarter he wanted to make his dream game so that's what he is doing, ppl backed him knowing this from the start and we all knew it would take much longer than anyone could even think.

This is demonstrably false. At the start, in 2012, Chris Roberts already stated that they were

... already one year in - another two years puts us at 3 total which is ideal. Any more and things would begin to get stale."

He clearly communicated that that the development would last only around 3 years "which is ideal. Any more and things would begin to get stale." and people backed with that timeline (3 years from 2011) in mind.

[Kilpi]

CR stated from the kickstarter he wanted to make his dream game so that's what he is doing, ppl backed him knowing this from the start and we all knew it would take much longer than anyone could even think, the single player is pretty much done so it didn't take long at all for a next gen game that started from scratch. So no the backers have not waited an unreasonable amount of time, its the time it take to develop 2 massive and detailed space games, creating an MMO is more than difficult on its own, creating 2 games and building a company from nothing is a challenge for anyone.

This still keeps being the stupidest argument. The game he pitched was supposed to be the dream game, that's what people backed. Not the seventh iteration that no longer is the game he pitched. Always saying "nah that wasn't it, THIS is it" is fucking moronic.

[Dhrizzle]

Interviewer: You have stated that you expect to have an Alpha up and going in about 12 months, with a beta roughly 10 months after that and then launch. For a game of this size and scope, do you think you can really be done in the next two years?

Chris Roberts: Really it is all about constant iteration from launch. The whole idea is to be constantly updating. It isn’t like the old days where you had to have everything and the kitchen sink in at launch because you weren’t going to come back to it for awhile. We’re already one year in - another two years puts us at 3 total which is ideal. Any more and things would begin to get stale.

[kenn9530]

This still keeps being the stupidest argument. The game he pitched was supposed to be the dream game, that's what people backed. Not the seventh iteration that no longer is the game he pitched. Always saying "nah that wasn't it, THIS is it" is fucking moronic.

We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.

This is a direct quote from the kickstarter campaign, he wanted to make his dream game but would settle depending on how much funding he managed to get, so it was all down to how much funding the game got to what kind of game he was going to develop, its not even an argument its a statement which is true because he is making the game he wants.

[Kyanion]

So when 2024 rolls around based on what CR said if they started in 2011 that puts the game going into year what? 13? Fucking amazing.

- - - Updated - - -

We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.

This is a direct quote from the kickstarter campaign, he wanted to make his dream game but would settle depending on how much funding he managed to get, so it was all down to how much funding the game got to what kind of game he was going to develop, its not even an argument its a statement which is true because he is making the game he wants.

And yet they reached every level of funding in the kickstarter so they were thus 'aiming for a AAA game experience. Duh?

[Henako]

We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.

This is a direct quote from the kickstarter campaign, he wanted to make his dream game but would settle depending on how much funding he managed to get, so it was all down to how much funding the game got to what kind of game he was going to develop, its not even an argument its a statement which is true because he is making the game he wants.

There's a difference between scaling back because you missed funding goals and scaling up because you overshot. You must understand this.

CIG did the latter, which isn't what he said might happen in your quote.

[Surfd]

We are aiming for a AAA game experience. But depending on the funding levels reached, we may have to limit the experience for the initially released game version.

This is a direct quote from the kickstarter campaign, he wanted to make his dream game but would settle depending on how much funding he managed to get, so it was all down to how much funding the game got to what kind of game he was going to develop, its not even an argument its a statement which is true because he is making the game he wants.

Holy shit way to twist his statement into a caricature of what he meant in order to excuse how badly things have ended up.

What he meant in that statement was "We plan to make an AAA game experience, and expect to be able to accomplish that if we meet 100% of our funding goal. If we DON'T reach our funding goal, we may be required to scale back on what is delivered by our expected launch date". Nowhere in that statement was it suggested that if they blew past their funding goals, all bets were off and the expected launch date goes out the window in favour of hookers and blow and rampant, uncontrolled feature creep.

[Kyanion]

Holy shit way to twist his statement into a caricature of what he meant in order to excuse how badly things have ended up.

What he meant in that statement was "We plan to make an AAA game experience, and expect to be able to accomplish that if we meet 100% of our funding goal. If we DON'T reach our funding goal, we may be required to scale back on what is delivered by our expected launch date". Nowhere in that statement was it suggested that if they blew past their funding goals, all bets were off and the expected launch date goes out the window in favour of hookers and blow and rampant, uncontrolled feature creep.

Don't forget mansions and boats.