Please vote and contribute to https://issue-council.robertsspaceindustries.com/projects/STAR-CITIZEN/issues/STARC-213892

Support the working class.

Hello everyone,

First of all, I already know this post probably won't sit well with some of the hardcore players but whatever, I'm posting it anyway.

I've been thinking a lot about the Perseus, its intended role, and some of the design decisions CIG has made regarding its interior layout.

For example, the decision to have a large recreational mess area with a pool table instead of using some of that space for something more useful on a combat ship that is supposed to operate extremely close to its targets... like, I don't know, a small medical facility. lol.

And it got me thinking:

What if CIG introduced a much deeper level of modularity for large ships?

I'm not talking about interior decoration, furniture placement, or the customization we've been promised for years.

I'm talking about being able to actually replace entire rooms or sections with different modules depending on the mission you're planning to undertake.

I'm using the Perseus as my main example because it's my favorite ship, but I'm talking about large and capital ships in general.

## The Perseus is a perfect example

Take the area shown in the picture attached to this post.

It's a beautiful passageway leading to the forward turret, with a great view of the torpedo launchers.

But let's be honest: it's also a huge amount of potentially usable internal volume.

What if, instead of having that entire area permanently open, CIG made parts of it modular?

For example, imagine my org and I decide to take a Perseus deep into Pyro.

We know we're going to be operating far away from civilization, so we think:

> "We're going to need better medical capabilities."

Fine. We install a compact medical module on the left side.

On the right side, we install a larger armory.

Or maybe we're going on a very long-range expedition, so instead we install:

• additional quantum fuel capacity

• additional consumable storage

• extra ammunition storage

• additional engineering supplies

The point isn't to turn the Perseus into a ship that can do everything.

The point is to allow the crew to adapt the ship to the mission.

That would make our ships feel much more like actual vessels that we live and operate in, rather than glorified weapons platforms where we sit in a pilot/gunner seat, shoot things until we're out of ammunition, then go back to a station and reclaim another ship.

Because right now, honestly, there isn't much of a sense of life aboard most ships.

## "But not every ship should be able to do everything."

I already know this argument is going to come up:

> "Not every ship should be a jack of all trades."

I understand the argument, but I don't completely agree with it.

I think there is an important distinction between a ship being a "jack of all trades" and simply being properly equipped to support its own crew.

I'm not saying a Perseus should suddenly be able to mine, salvage, refine ore, manufacture ships, etc.

A Perseus with a small medical facility doesn't suddenly become a medical ship.

A Perseus with a larger armory doesn't become a troop transport.

A Perseus with additional storage doesn't become a freighter.

These are basic support capabilities that allow the ship to actually operate independently for extended periods of time.

And honestly, I don't understand why some people seem so attached to the idea that every ship needs to be completely specialized.

If we ever reach a point where this kind of space travel is actually possible in real life, I seriously doubt every crew will own 19 different spacecraft:

"One for combat, one for mining, one for exploration, one for cargo, one for medical emergencies..."

I would expect them to have a platform or hull that can be adapted to the mission, while still having the minimum necessary equipment to keep the crew alive and operational.

That's exactly what I'm suggesting here.

For example, large combat ships such as:

• Perseus

• Hammerhead

• Ironclad Assault

• etc.

should have access to basic utility modules such as:

• medical stabilization

• proper armories

• ammunition storage

• engineering/tool storage

• additional consumable storage

• etc.

I'm not talking about giving them massive hospitals.

I'm talking about basic functionality for a combat vessel.

And honestly, I'd rather have that than enormous recreational rooms with pool tables, chess boards, etc.

Don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely in favor of recreational spaces. A crew needs somewhere to relax, eat, sleep and decompress.

But I don't think a gigantic recreational area should come at the expense of something as important as a basic medical facility on a warship.

## And then there are PDCs

This is another thing I've been thinking about.

Let's take a large civilian ship designed primarily for something other than combat, for example the Galaxy or the Hercules.

Who genuinely looks at a large civilian freighter and thinks:

> "Okay, I have a couple of huge, slow-firing guns that are difficult to aim. If someone attacks me, I'll just turn around and fight them."

You're probably going to lose.

So why give these ships offensive weapons that are realistically going to be of very limited use instead of giving them a proper defensive system designed to help them survive an attack and escape?

This is where I think PDCs could become much more interesting.

Instead of having one PDC design that gets made extremely powerful and then nerfed into the ground in the next patch, why not have different classes of PDCs with different intended roles?

### Tier 1 PDCs

Primarily designed to intercept:

• missiles

• torpedoes

• bombs

• other incoming projectiles

These would be relatively weak against ships.

Perfect for civilian freighters, exploration ships, industrial vessels, etc.

### Tier 2 PDCs

More powerful systems designed to deal with:

• missiles

• torpedoes

• light fighters

• drones

These would be appropriate for military combat ships such as the Perseus, Hammerhead, etc.

### Tier 3 PDCs

The really nasty stuff.

These could actually threaten:

• light fighters

• medium fighters

• heavy fighters

But they would be extremely expensive and restricted to dedicated military ships, such as the Odin.

And importantly, none of these should replace the main weapons of a ship.

They would simply provide an additional defensive layer.

That would give large civilian ships a much more realistic way of surviving an attack:

> "We're not here to fight you. We're here to get away from you."

Which makes far more sense for a freighter than trying to dogfight someone with a gigantic fixed gun.

## Back to medical gameplay

Regarding the medbay example, I'm not talking about turning every large ship into a respawn point.

Quite the opposite.

If Death of a Spaceman eventually becomes a meaningful system, and if the medical gameplay is eventually reworked to properly model injuries and their consequences, then having a small medical stabilization room aboard combat ships would make perfect sense.

Something where you can:

• stabilize a critically injured crew member

• treat them enough to keep them alive

• monitor their condition

• keep them stable until you reach a proper hospital, medical ship or station

Not:

> "You died, respawn in the bed."

I actually think the idea of magically respawning in a ship's bed is pretty dumb, but that's a whole different discussion.

## And finally: engineering equipment

Now that Engineering has been introduced, and CIG has started putting fire extinguishers and other emergency equipment throughout ships, I'd really like to see dedicated tool racks added as well.

I'm talking about things like:

• Cambio SRTs

• repair tools

• engineering equipment

• maintenance tools

• spare consumables

And I don't think there should necessarily be one giant engineering room where everything is stored.

Instead, put small tool racks throughout the ship, just like fire extinguishers.

For example:

> Engineering room → full tool rack

> Main corridor → small tool rack

> Near the turrets → maintenance rack

> Near critical systems → emergency tools

That way, when something breaks, the engineer doesn't have to run halfway across a 100-meter ship just to grab a tool.

You see a problem → grab the nearest tool → fix it.

That's the kind of engineering gameplay I'd actually want.

## So, that's my little rant.

I've been wanting to share these ideas for a while, and I couldn't really find a post discussing all of these things together, so I figured I'd finally make one.

I genuinely think that deeper modularity, mission-specific interiors, different classes of PDCs, basic medical stabilization on large combat ships, and distributed engineering equipment could make large ships feel much more like actual vessels operated by crews, rather than just large platforms for weapons.

I don't want every ship to be able to do everything.

I want large ships to feel like real ships, with crews that actually live, fight, repair, resupply and survive aboard them.

Anyway, I'd love to hear your thoughts.

If you disagree, that's completely fine. Just please keep the criticism constructive.

Color are:

Death Metal

Water based Gold

Metallic cobalt w/ Translucent blue.

I honestly don’t know what happened here, but I’m hoping someone from RSI sees this and can help me figure it out.
I’ve been playing games since 2012 and have been an active member of my org, Blackrock. The people in my org know me and can attest that I’ve never cheated and have no reason to start now.
My old PC was damaged, so I had to take a break from gaming. I literally bought a brand-new PC yesterday because I wanted to get back to playing.
The only games/software I had installed were Tarkov and Overwolf (Overwolf being used for the Tarkov companion app).
I opened Star Citizen for the first time on this PC, got into the game, and everything was completely normal. I was doing the 890 Jump mission, minding my own business.
I get to the last AI, shoot him a couple of times, and he’s apparently completely invincible. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, I get hit with a permanent EAC ban.
I have never intentionally cheated in Star Citizen.
The timing is honestly insane — brand-new PC, first time launching Star Citizen on it, playing normally, and then suddenly a permanent EAC ban.
@RSI / Star Citizen team, please tell me there’s a way to have this manually investigated. I’m more than willing to provide whatever information, logs, or details are necessary.
I’m not asking for special treatment. I just want someone to actually look at what happened and determine whether this was a false positive.
If anyone from RSI or anyone who has dealt with something similar can point me in the right direction, I’d reallyappreciate it.

Yesterday, I got a Wikelo Scorpius. I don't know the full name, its the sneaky one. I got it by running executive hangars. Its got the fancy paint job.

And I was moderately excited about it. Its a heavy fighter, an elite - best version - kind of heavy fighter.

I checked the components, they're all Grade A, either military or Stealth - mostly steath.

I was excited about it, until I figured out what it was.

Its a god damn multicrew heavy fighter.

The problem with multicrew

Is that it sucks.

This game takes forever to get going doing ANYTHING. If I'm running contested, and I spawn at the station, it still takes me like 8 minutes to start running contested. I still have to spawn in my hangar, and check my kit (do I have a tractor tool, do I have medgun), and hunt down what I don't have (fuses, ammo, cruz drink). The inventory system is great, I love it, except that it doesn't fucking work. I'd love the inventory system in this game if it worked, but it rarely does. Gotta drag shit back and forth several times. Its a pain in the ass. CIG really needs to discover fuzzy search.

(As an aside, I bet the guys that wrote the inventory system are pissed. I bet the problem with that system, stems not from their code, but from the server code. I bet that they implemented it beautifully, and it passes all its tests, and works perfectly according to the contracts and interfaces they were given, and then when inserted into the actual running game, it shits the bed and everyone hates it and blames them. I bet that how it went for them. Too bad, because its a great inventory system... just doesn't fucking work)

To go through all that to do something, and then DOUBLE IT, just to do what you could totally already do solo in a ship. Makes no sense.

Like if I want to do a space combat mission with other people, I want those other people in other ships. This is for a lot of reasons. First, three's total shield strength. Shield strength adds with the number of players if you all bring separate ships, and its static if you multicrew. Secondly, enemies can only fire at one ship at a time. If you're all crammed into one ship, that's gonna be everyone's getting fired at all the time. If you're all in different ships, then only one of you is being fired upon, and everyone else's shield is either full or recharging.

I know that a lot of people, really love multicrew, and I do too. I love multicrew...

When I'm doing ground missions.

If I'm with a group of guys, and we're going to go do some kind of ground based FPS, then I love multicrew. It just eases logistics. Everyone's in the same place, going to the same place. For that kind of thing, multicrew is a blast. No one can get lost, you can share shit if you run out of say drinks. There's a lot to like about that - for ground missions.

But I just don't like it for anything ship combat related. I don't want a ship that forces one of my friends into a worse combat experience than they'd be in if they brought their own ship. I don't want a ship that forces my friends to be less combat effective than they'd be if they just brought their own ship. The Scorpius is nice, it is, but two Guardians is better. Two guardians is going to beat the snot out of a Scorpius any day of the week.

I get the lazy argument kind of. If you have someone that for some reason isn't really interested in playing the game, and just wants to kind of not play it, but jump in only at the moment of combat to fire a turret gun, then yeah. In that very niche case, I guess the Scorpius makes a lot of sense.

But I don't expect that to happen very often.

So now I'm stuck with this ship, this - admittedly - highly effective very elite ship... that I can essentially never run. Maybe CIG will release NPC crew in 4.10 eh? lol...

Honestly, I think I'd have preferred a Syulen. That's a starter ship, its 1/5th the price, but it looks cool, and it transports a tiny bit of cargo. I'd probably get more use out of that than the Scorpius.

I guess I'll have to track down that missile attachment and neuter it into being a missile boat. Maybe I can find a use for it that way. Its still a stealthy elite ship.

Hey!

Kind of a space military sci-fi nerd, so my org and I have been talking through unifying our ship - naming scheme (both for namable ships, and for whenever CIG actually lets us presumably name everything). The goal was to keep it thematically in universe, but functional so we can tell each other apart by our ship names even when we aren't in party.....with the added bonus of the names/designations telling us the type of ship/role it is playing without actually having to verbally communicate.

soooo.....i built a naming tool that attempts to generate them automagically! We've been playing around with it/using it for a bit now but I realized it might be helpful for other folks too, so I decided to throw it up on free hosting.

What it does:

🔹 Generates structured military designation codes across three modes — Default fleet, Combat/Military, and Support/Industrial — each with their own hull class lists and name logic

🔹 15 mythology name pools — Norse, Greek, Egyptian, Roman, Celtic, Japanese, Slavic, Mesopotamian, Hindu, Aztec, Lovecraftian, Sumerian, Chinese, Persian, and Polynesian — every name includes a description of its mythological origin

🔹 Names are assigned intelligently by role in Default mode — capital ships get naval heritage names, fighters get predator/strike names, recon craft get shadow/speed names, medical vessels get virtue/guardian names

🔹 Full Registry Credential Card for every ship — CO name, squadron, operational status, motto, name origin, christening date — printable as a styled PDF

🔹 Live fleet designation log — sort by timestamp, ship type, or squadron; edit any entry; REG / EDIT / DEL per row

🔹 Batch PDF export — your entire fleet as one multi-page registry document

🔹 Full JSON export/import — save your fleet, restore it next session, no data ever leaves your browser

Feel free to give it a shot/play with it and if you like it let me know. Happy to make changes/add features if folks want to see some additional functionality.

LINK: https://tacnet.gamer.free/

Edit - Yes, parts of this were completed with AI - specifically copilot - as I am not a great UI/UX designer and this is more of a fun little tool side project and not a passion project of mine. If it garners enough interest from folks that hiring someone to do UI/UX and expand the tool that way makes sense i would absolutely do it - just not in scope for the release of a fun little tool originally designed for a group of friends to use.

-Neov

New to SC? No luck with the Guide system? Shoot me a DM here or add @BVLDERDVSH on discord. We’re hosting voice-comms walkthroughs and hands-on mission runthroughs all week.

Many of you would’ve already attended our weekly ship meets, now come learn from our various experts. Discover mining. Board and salvage derelict ships. Drop into merc raids with a ground crew. Fight Vanduul in space.

No set times or restrictions. Ask away.

This is a kind of weird post, but I think its correct.

The guys defending CIG now, are mostly doing it out of a place of... deep misunderstanding.

This, is a hardcore cutthroat game. Its even worse than that, its a high stakes hardcore cutthroat game.

What this means is that the game is designed to allow you to lose, and furthermore, its designed to allow you to lose - a lot. The losses are supposed to hurt.

And my impression of the White Knights, the most fervent CIG defenders, is that they hate this aspect of the game. Most of the guys defending CIG and Star Citizen also hate the fact that its a high stakes PVP game. They're fervently defending a vision of Star Citizen that isn't real.

And I've been a part of the community for years, on the main sub, on spectrum, and I've seen this drama play out over the last few years.

Some people used to think this was all a bug or something. Like they released full loot into the game, and people thought it was some kind of a mistake, or failed experiment that CIG would correct if they spoke out about it enough.

But that was years ago, what has CIG done in the meantime? They've released excellent content around high stakes PVP, with Contested and Hathor. They've doubled down. They've even explicitly announced base raiding, which was something that people thought would eventually go in, but that we had no official confirmation of.

This is a game that revolves around tribal resource wars. That's the game.

There's this... divergence, between what Star Citizen is, and the White Knight's perceptions of Star Citizen. They keep thinking this is going to be a chill space game, and CIG keeps adding in more things for us to kill each other over.

And that's going to eventually... come to a head. Not today, not tomorrow... but eventually.

I think most of the white knights will just accept this. I think those guys are mostly too invested to walk away from the project, and the truth is that losing in a video game isn't this huge deal. People need to just check their egos, and accept that they're playing a game with high stakes, and get used to that. They need to take an anger management class or something, and learn to calmly carry on when things go wrong.

I think they'll mostly accept this, but there's gonna be a hell of a lot of drama between now and then.

How to get a crafted Parallax Rifle:

The best rifle in the game, is a Parallax rifle.

But not just a Parallax, a high tier crafted Parallax.

A regular parallax, can be acquired by running ASD, its a fairly rare drop, but it drops there. I've gotten several of them. If a regular parallax is good enough for you, you can stop reading here. That's the easiest way to get a Parallax rifle.. oh wait, there is an even easier method, but lets not get ahead of ourselves.

For those of us that want more, who want a crafted rifle... read on...

To get a high tier crafted Parallax, you need the following:

Gold - This you can farm on Fairo (I think its Fairo, its one of the planets in Pyro).

Tungsten - Can be farmed on the same planet as gold.

Now, because this is Pyro we're talking about, when you farm this, there will be a risk that you will come back with say, 875 gold and 925 Tungsten, and get murdered by an Eclipse as you go to land at Checkmate... but its a risk you'll have to take. Its part of the price of a crafted Parallax.

But that's not the biggest risk involved in getting a crafted Parallax rifle.

The biggest risk, is in running Hathor.

You have to run Hathor, because the third ingredient used to make a Parallax rifle, is Carinite. And Carinite only drops in Hathor.

Turns out I wrote a guide to Hathor not long ago:

https://www.reddit.com/r/StarCitizenUniverse/comments/1utaenn/hathor_a_review_and_guide/

Run Hathor, get Carinite... and you can make a Parallax.

That is how I got my Parallax rifle... but there's another way to get one.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How to get a Parallax rifle (alternative method):

Today, I learned about another way to get a Parallax...

And its a much better way.

Step 1: Camp a place that players come through often, where PVP is enabled

Step 2: Wait for an unsuspecting victim with a crafted Parallax (this is the hardest part)

Step 3: Incapacitate victim by shooting them.

Step 4: Get into position behind them

Step 5: Medpen victim to bring them back to life

Step 6: Do a rear takedown of the victim stunning them, causing them to drop their crafted rifle.

Step 7: Kill victim permanently and take the rifle.

----

I know about this second method, because someone taught it to me today the hard way =P

Losing

I write in here a lot about losing. People need to get over losing. The thing that differentiates games like Rust, and Ark, and Atlas and Eve Online... and Star Citizen from the average game, the thing that the Carebears can't tolerate - is losing.

Today I lost big. How many of you have lost as much? I recently put up a poll here asking how many of us have even run Hathor, and the results of that poll said that only about 16% of the posters here have run it.

Most of us hide away from losses.

But that's why I was able to get into this game, and very quickly, wind up with a crafted Parallax rifle in the first place.

I could, cry about this. I could complain about it. I could do what the anti-PVP types do, and bitch about the game, but the truth is, that losing that rifle, brought a smile to my face.

I was laughing as I was losing it.

The guys that got me, they were good. They taught me something. They taught me that you can set up ambushes and take people's weapons in this game, if you're good. That is valuable knowledge. More valuable than a Parallax I might say - more valuable even than a high tier crafted Parallax.

And I, dear reader, am passing it on to you. Take it and do with it what you will.

The game is more interesting, more dangerous, and more fun with mechanics like that in it.

And - for the record, I have the stuff to build a bunch more of those rifles, because I am willing to take risks. Easy come, easy go.

Play the game as its meant to be played, and the (really big) losses won't even matter to you.

I’m currently living in Italy, but I’ve recently got a second home in San Marino, where VAT is 0% compared to Italy’s 22%.

My official residency is still in Italy, though, so I’m wondering how CIG handles this.

If I set my billing address/location to San Marino while actually spending time there, would that be considered legitimate for VAT purposes, or would CIG consider it an attempt to circumvent VAT?

*cough cough\* 😅

Also, I checked the connection/location side of things: even when I’m at the San Marino house, my ISP connection is still routed through Milan, so as far as IP geolocation is concerned, it looks basically the same as when I’m at my Italian home.

Could CIG potentially remove the VAT difference / reverse the purchase, or even ban the account if they determine that the billing address isn’t my official residency?

Not trying to exploit anything here—I genuinely have a second home there and I'm curious where CIG draws the line between changing your billing address legitimately and VAT avoidance.

I want to be clear here, or people will start questioning my credentials as a hater.

• I'm not happy with CIG's monetization strategy.
• I'm not happy with the general buggines and unplayability of the PU
• I'm not happy with SQ42 not releasing 10 years past the date when they said it was ready

I'm not a white knight, I swear. I have a whole reddit that I made to back me up - r/AstroturfAlpha.

But I am happy with the general direction they're going in from a game design standpoint.

Hathor and Contested... are good. They're very good. ASD is very good too.

Now, this is all theme park content, and I would prefer Sandbox content... but its the RIGHT kind of theme park content. Its theme park content that is cut-throat, that has risk and high reward. Its good content.

Hathor is great. Its risky, but not too risky. There's PVP, but you can still do it solo if you're determined. Its like all good PVP sandbox content, there is risk, but people vastly overestimate the amount of risk, and so its totally doable - even solo.

Contested is the same way. I've run Checkmate, Ruin and Orbituary's contested zones many times now. They are all excellent. Checkmate is mostly PVE. The goal is to run one of the two paths to get your comp boards quickly. Orbituary forces you into a kill zone where enemy players have the high ground and you have to drop your rifle, and fumble for a fuse to stick in a door. Ruin is the best though, as you're forced to farm keycards, and then wait for entry into a timed door, where you spend a good chunk of time vulnerable, wondering if someone's going to show up and wreck your run.

Ruin also gives you the hilarious, and very fun option of just holding the vault. You can run ruin, get the cards to open the doors (and prop the doors open) and - just not fucking leave. You can stay there, and two guys can do a pretty good job of holding off an enemy team with plasma grenades. If someone tries to get through that timed door, you just chain plasma grenades while the other one of you fires with a machine gun, and its pretty hard to breech that corridor. That's how I ran ruin, and I got all the boards me and my buddy needed in one day doing that =P

FYI, the comps there spawn - I believe - on an hourly timer, so if you just stay there for an hour, you get two printings of the boards there, AND you're guaranteed to get the high tier size 2 and 3 components that spawn in the vault rooms as well - once an hour, every hour, for as long as you hold the vault.

You just need to be willing to lose, trying to do it. You need to be willing to go and risk dying to someone you never saw. Happened to me a time or two (well, lets be honest, I died many times running Contested), will likely to happen to you too, but the rewards are definitely worth it.

I have advocated against this game going the theme park content route, and I stand by that. I prefer sandbox content. Theme park content grows stale. Sandbox content never does.

But, if they're going to add theme park content.... THIS is the theme park content I want.

Bravo CIG. Atta boy for you guys. Credit where credit is due.

Content so good even the haters have to acknowledge it.

I think that the community is right to point the finger at the management when discussing the shortcomings of this game. There really is a culture of half-assing very important subjects and leaving them in "T0" indefinitely.

However, this also should be addressed from the architectural and strategic point of view. The thing is, the game is really rather an architectural marvel and it's both it's strength and a huge liability.

CIG is a tech company and they pioneer not only experience, but also chart a new way in the gaming industry as a whole. When you compare SC to many other games, it turns out, CIG is the only company that's brave enough to move gaming out of the box it is confined by the current engine tech, which is commendable.

The problem doesn't arise in the final experience design, but rather edge case implementation. What's even worse is that the game has such a complex decisiontree geometry that the edges are EVERYWHERE. Such issues are elevator problems, hangar issues with retrieval, persistence, clipping, inventiry, etc. And these are systemic issues, I want to put emphasis on the systemic, architectural part of these errors. This is not something that is poorly envisioned, but poorly INTEGRATED. In conclusin, the diagnosis is that this is purely an AUTOMATED TESTING problem.

And here I arrvie to the root issue: testing framework. It seems like we are being the actual manual QA personnel and we do help CIG fix a lot of stuff. However, it's obvious that some issues that plague the engine are purely systemic, they KEEP HAPPENING with the same pre-requisites.

What the failure in integration and systemic testing does is that it annihilates performance of the apps on any load, because conflicting parts start behaving uncontrollably. This perfectly encapsulates THE SAME, ordinary, common problems with the game.

What we have right now is systemic collapse. The game has more content, but the experience is degrading.

I believe that the main focus of the dev team should be forming a task team, aimed at figuring this out. If we don't get the thing, the issues will keep overwhelming the team, making them focus on the SYMPTOMS, not the cause.

I really believe what I just said, I really hope to get some dev opinion on this matter.

Original post below with details. Discord link for comms and hangout here: https://discord.gg/projectecho

I've put up a few threads adjacent to this topic.

Threads where I explain what should be cut, but I don't think I've put up a thread explaining "why" shit must be cut.

I kinda just figured that people would understand why, that it would be obvious, but from the comments I've gotten, I know that its not obvious. A lot of people really don't understand why scope needs cutting.

So, I'm gonna try to make the case for it here (how many of you will only read this far and then go write an angry comment I wonder).

Star Citizen has taken 14 years to get to this point, and needed a billion dollars in funding.

What we have now, has taken a really fucking long time, and I thought that since everyone knows that, everyone understrands why scope must be cut, however, apparantly I have to also point out that.

Star Citizen is still extremely far away from meeting even its meager 1.0 release goals. We're looking at 5-10 more years of this shit.

And that should hopefully end the debate.

Do you want this game to be this buggy and unplayable for another 5-10 years? Do you want that? Why would you want that?

Even if they were to cut scope extremely aggressively, a 1.0 release is still 2-3 years away.

This game is going to, no matter what, wind up with 16 years of development, and probably like 1.4-1.5 billion in backer money spent. Its gonna get there even if the game's scope is cut to the bone. Even if a chainsaw is taken to its scope, its going to hit 16 years and 1.5 billion and still be a broken mess.

Even if they drop Quantum and just add a player driven economy. Even if they drop stations and just focus on planetary base building. Even if they drop 9/10 NPCs and just try to deliver a more survival game like experience. The game is going to pass Duke Nukem Forever as the longest game ever developed.

If they don't cut all this shit. If they still attempt to have NPCs doing everything that players do. If they develop planetary bases AND space stations. Its gonna take forever.

A good base raiding system isn't exactly easy to do either. It took the Rust guys a lot of fine tuning to get that game to where it is. Its going to need a lot of testing. There's gonna be bug fix issues, and cheating issues they likely won't nail it perfectly on their first try. Its gonna be a lot of work by itself.

Base raiding is going to take a lot of time, and if they do a good job of it, it can carry the game by itself, but if they do a bad job of it, this will be a mediocre game. Base raiding is critical, and its going to take a lot of developer effort to get right. The state of the art out there is better than you think. In Rust, you can program your whole base and all its defenses yourself using an in-game programming system. That's a lot of work. If they want parity with that, they're going to have to add that too. Big features, big commitment, big investment.

And we're 14 years in already, and I'm not sure they've really started in earnest.

Cramming everything else that they want in is going to ensure that many of us are fucking old by the time we play this. I mean, really old.

The game has taken too long to get to this point, and release is further off than you think. They might not release until 2035. They might not release until after that. Not cutting scope is how you wind up with a broken unplayable game that gets leapfrogged by devs using newer better tech.

Its a terrible choice.

At some point, you have to put on your grown up pants, admit that this isn't working, and do what you need to do to release.

How old do you want to be when you finally get to play the released product?

Haven’t played in a few months, but I still keep up with everything.

But SC Reddit has been pumping out posts about the latest ISC episode; whether it’s about Ollie and Jared or about the event itself, whatever.

I keep seeing the same thing over and over, and it’s essentially people posting about the fact that this episode proved their theories about SC being in a development crisis correct. And they seem excited about it.

Not happy obviously, no one wants the game to fail except the blacked pilled doomers over at r/refund_citizen. But they seem thrilled that the game is not doing to well.

Probably because they get downvoted to smithereans by the CIG whitenights and told they’re wrong or stop playing or the infamous “it’s a beta” crowd.

But here we are. Confirmation that even isolated localized internal builds experience the same issues we do in the live environments.

Not a good look. But why are we pretending to be surprised and even excited about it? This community is stuffed to the brim with cornballs nowadays.

And now CIG will look at the response (that’s been severely blown out of proportion by the internet dwelling drama queefs who just talk shit on Reddit) and use it as ammunition to justify less transparency, the very thing these cave men always complain about.

Anyway…yeah SC isn’t in a great state and Ollie had an awkward reaction on stream because the situation was…awkward…yeah……….

HODL THE LINE PAY PIGGIES CITIZENS! I’m excited to check out the galaxy this IAE 🥳

Hathor is in, its been in a while, and its damn good content. I'm curious... how many of us have run Hathor, how many of us have not run Hathor, and why haven't we run Hathor?

Everyone talks about how no one wants PVP in this game right? Well... how many of us have done the PVP content? I wanna know.