The new cockpit's advantages are a non-factor.

[A Fat, Angry Serval]

I'm seeing a lot of people claiming that the DLC cockpit provides an advantage in terms of visibility. However, there's two massive issues with that line of reasoning.

Issue 1: Small combat ships are non-viable in combat as soon as large grids get involved. If you're going to devote resources to a small fighter you BETTER be planning on using it in the very early game, when people haven't readied defenses yet. Even heavy armored small grids die quickly to large gatling turrets, so as soon as someone places one down your small fighter is grounded.

Issue 2: Cockpit visibility is actually a trade-off in this game. Sure, having good visibility is a massive advantage in a one-on-one dogfight, but your cockpit is a critical component and a highly exposed cockpit is a liability. The vanilla cockpits, especially the fighter cockpit, are designed with the idea that they will have armor around them. You can armor around the new cockpit as well, but that defeats the purpose of using it on a combat vessel. There's also the fact that visibility is a moot point anyway unless 3rd-person view is disabled. Of course, all this assumes that the cockpit is functioning properly and isn't the invincible block people have been complaining about.

While the DLC cockpit may sound like a useful cockpit on a fighter, it's ultimately limited to non-combat roles such as mining and construction ships.

[Karmaterrorᵁᴷ]

What about out of combat visability, your going to be a more efficent miner and get to better blocks quicker than someone muddling along with the standard one :P

I agree though the "advantages" are trivial appart from the not being able to grind or damage them. My issues with it arent based around these "advantages" though, i mean who doent use a camera to aim anyways hahaha

[Thalyn]

I'm under the impression that those arguing it gives an advantage are trying to make the wrong argument for making it part of the base game in the hopes that it's more effective. It becomes a more "compelling" argument if you make it appear that someone can pay for an advantage, even if that's technically not true at all.

Myself, I don't feel like it offers an advantage. But I do feel that it should be part of the base game. Why? Because it serves a fundamental game purpose. You can create a ship with that as the only cockpit, which then starts to cause complications in multiplayer games (your teammates can't use the ship at all unless they own the DLC) and with blueprints (have to modify everything which includes it to actually work, regardless of how well it's maintained).

This is further exacerbated by its conveyor port locations being in a different place to any of the existing cockpits. So not only do you have to retrofit a non-DLC cockpit, you also have to potentially re-plumb the craft to restore full functionality.

If a chair, a kitchenette or locker doesn't work, it's no issue. You might lose access to a seat (or even the presence of a seat in the case of a blueprint) and/or a tiny amount of non-conveyored storage. But if the one-and-only cockpit on a craft does the same? That's a problem, and it's a problem which could have been easily avoided.

So the issue isn't one of advantage. It's one of consistency and unnecessary tedium.

[Troubleshooter]

What is the price of good will? Every time I see the new cockpit, I will have a negative reaction to it because I know only some players are allowed to play with it. I will automatically revile it. Its visiblity advantages are out weighed by its optics, which are entirely negative.

I dislike it on principal. Not because I can't afford it, but because I know there are people who can't, and so I won't grind their game time against a pay-wall just to help keen sell copies of things that, if they were just included in the base game, would have a greater chance of drawing players in at full price.

If we are past selling the game to new players, I'm not interested in sticking around for for the DLC apocalypse.

When you click on a prospective new game in the steam store, and see 12 DLC's available, does that make you more or less likely to buy it?

[A Fat, Angry Serval]

Originally posted by Karmaterrorᵁᴷ:

What about out of combat visability, your going to be a more efficent miner and get to better blocks quicker than someone muddling along with the standard one :P

Visibility in mining is rendered moot by ore detectors as ores within range appear on your HUD.

Originally posted by Karmaterrorᵁᴷ:

I agree though the "advantages" are trivial appart from the not being able to grind or damage them. My issues with it arent based around these "advantages" though, i mean who doent use a camera to aim anyways hahaha

My only intent was to address the claim that the cockpit was "pay to win" in some way. I'm not addressing any other issues with it. Personally, I'm kinda indifferent about the DLC pack overall - not because I don't have issues with it but because it's outright trivial compared to the ridiculousness that Paradox and SEGA have managed to pull off with Stellaris and Total War respectively.

Originally posted by Thalyn:

I'm under the impression that those arguing it gives an advantage are trying to make the wrong argument for making it part of the base game in the hopes that it's more effective. It becomes a more "compelling" argument if you make it appear that someone can pay for an advantage, even if that's technically not true at all.

This is part of why I decided to address that argument. I know that at least some people are arguing in bad faith but simply calling them out without addressing their argument is in itself logically invalid.

Originally posted by Thalyn:

Myself, I don't feel like it offers an advantage. But I do feel that it should be part of the base game. Why? Because it serves a fundamental game purpose. You can create a ship with that as the only cockpit, which then starts to cause complications in multiplayer games (your teammates can't use the ship at all unless they own the DLC) and with blueprints (have to modify everything which includes it to actually work, regardless of how well it's maintained).

This is further exacerbated by its conveyor port locations being in a different place to any of the existing cockpits. So not only do you have to retrofit a non-DLC cockpit, you also have to potentially re-plumb the craft to restore full functionality.

If a chair, a kitchenette or locker doesn't work, it's no issue. You might lose access to a seat (or even the presence of a seat in the case of a blueprint) and/or a tiny amount of non-conveyored storage. But if the one-and-only cockpit on a craft does the same? That's a problem, and it's a problem which could have been easily avoided.

So the issue isn't one of advantage. It's one of consistency and unnecessary tedium.

This is a much better argument overall. I do want to mention, though, that you run into a similar issue with having to replumb ships when switching between the standard and fighter cockpit, and with using modded cockpits. Like I said previously, though, it's a very small issue compared to what other companies are doing.

Ultimately, again, as I said before, my intent was never to directly address the DLC issue. I mainly wanted to clear up the bogus "Pay 2 Win" claims.

Originally posted by Troubleshooter:

What is the price of good will? Every time I see the new cockpit, I will have a negative reaction to it because I know only some players are allowed to play with it. I will automatically revile it. Its visiblity advantages are out weighed by its optics, which are entirely negative.

I dislike it on principal. Not because I can't afford it, but because I know there are people who can't, and so I won't grind their game time against a pay-wall just to help keen sell copies of things that, if they were just included in the base game, would have a greater chance of drawing players in at full price.

If we are past selling the game to new players, I'm not interested in sticking around for for the DLC apocalypse.

When you click on a prospective new game in the steam store, and see 12 DLC's available, does that make you more or less likely to buy it?

For the purposes of this particular discussion, that's an irrelevant argument. Again, I'm not addressing the DLC issue. I'm specifically addressing the bogus "Pay 2 Win" claims that some people have been going on and on about.

But to answer your question just to satisfy your curiosity, the quantity of DLC for a game alone doesn't sway me either way. A game with 12 different DLC packs could be more OR appealing to me than a game with only 3 or 4 depending on the content of those packs and the pricing.

I'm going to use Cities: Skylines and Dragon Ball FighterZ as examples.

Cities: Skylines has a LOT of DLC, ranging from full feature expansions to in-game radio stations. A fully loaded Cities: Skylines install is going to be EXTREMELY expensive, but you don't have to set up a fully loaded Cities: Skylines install to enjoy the game. The big DLC expansions primarily add new environments or fun things to the game, some of which may or may not appeal to certain players. This is doubly so for the building packs, which are basically just neatly packaged bundles of buildings pulled from the workshop - with those you're not so much paying for the content as you are paying for the convenience of adding all that content in one neat little package. The prices are a bit steep for each major expansion, but you get a lot of content. And the only reason to buy the building packs and radio stations would be to throw more money at the devs so that they can continue to support the game.

Dragon Ball FighterZ doesn't have nearly as much DLC, but it's all characters - including one DLC pack that does nothing except automatically unlock SSJB Goku and Vegeta, which are characters that can be unlocked for free albeit with a LOT of difficulty. The prices are a lot lower per DLC pack, but because you basically need to purchase every DLC to get the full game it really bumps up the cost of the game.

Guess which of these games are in my library.

Anyway, I do want to say one more thing about the DLC in general. I know I complained about Paradox before, but they did do one thing I do like - Cities: Skylines has a unique DLC system where you only have to pay for unique content. Anything significantly game-changing enough that isn't a part of the expansion pack's theme gets added as a free update. A hypothetical example for Space Engineers would be making the cockpit available for free while making all the furniture blocks paid DLC.

[Karmaterrorᵁᴷ]

Originally posted by VestedGamr:

Originally posted by Karmaterrorᵁᴷ:

I agree though the "advantages" are trivial appart from the not being able to grind or damage them. My issues with it arent based around these "advantages" though, i mean who doent use a camera to aim anyways hahaha

My only intent was to address the claim that the cockpit was "pay to win" in some way. I'm not addressing any other issues with it. Personally, I'm kinda indifferent about the DLC pack overall - not because I don't have issues with it but because it's outright trivial compared to the ridiculousness that Paradox and SEGA have managed to pull off with Stellaris and Total War respectively.

Agreed, I wouldnt call it pay to win at all. I stopped playing total war games a while back because of too much dlc. Shame because i played those from the first shogun one where the guys were all little 2d barely animated pixels :)

PS just about what you said on cities skylines, one point id make is that isnt built around the idea of a community sharing creations. Here if we had that many dlc the workshop would be a complete mess, the populor builders would probbably use most of them and then to have the latest and greatest creations you need X, Y and Z dlc. Its kinda my worst fear of them going this route :(

[krzosu18]

As far as visibility is concerned - well i prefer to armour the cockpit area anyway (on combat ships) so i pilot the ship in 3-rd person anyway. I Fly the civi ships in the same manner as well since that kind of visibility will always beat the mere cockpit view anyway.

So from my point of "view" the new cockpit doesnt actually changes anything.

For any decent amount of combat time - you simply must have your cockpit (small grid) completely armoured otherwise first stray rocket will knock you out of a fight.

And if you go against a target with at least few guns on it - it will help considerably as well.

Also the name industrial cockpit kinda implies it should be used on civi ships (although no one says you cant use it on combat ship as well).

[Pri0n]

I'm covering a ship in toliets - completely invulnerable. I feel like Thanos in multiplayer.

[krzosu18]

Originally posted by Pri0n:

I'm covering a ship in toliets - completely invulnerable. I feel like Thanos in multiplayer.

I just hope you have decent Wipers on the windows - otherwise the view might get sorta obscured :D

[A Fat, Angry Serval]

Originally posted by RT:

People who don't own the DLC can't use the new cockpits.
That automatically gives the person using them a distinct advantage over a player who didn't buy the extra content, that's pay to win almost to the letter.

From what I've read, that only applies to building the new cockpit, not interacting with it.

Originally posted by Pri0n:

I'm covering a ship in toliets - completely invulnerable. I feel like Thanos in multiplayer.

1. How is this relevant to the claims that the cockpit provides an unfair advantage?

2. You're also assuming that's an intended feature, not a bug that the devs haven't gotten around to fixing.

3. Enjoy looking ridiculous. :P

[Pri0n]

made you reply.
get another hobby, <insert your favorite expletive>

[Wastefield]

I find it rather funny that they made the "Industrial Cockpit" have no large conveyor port on small grid... I always use that large connection on my welder ships so I can freely move steel plates and tubes etc freely between all inventories as well as the character's own inventory. Many times I do that also with other types of ships...it's just annoying, having to jump out to get a hydrogen bottle refilled in an O2/H2 generator!
But for the constructor ships - should really have that in a cockpit meant for industrial use...

[A Fat, Angry Serval]

Originally posted by Pri0n:

made you reply.
get another hobby, <insert your favorite expletive>

So you confess to trolling?

[krzosu18]

Originally posted by Wastefield:

I find it rather funny that they made the "Industrial Cockpit" have no large conveyor port on small grid... I always use that large connection on my welder ships so I can freely move steel plates and tubes etc freely between all inventories as well as the character's own inventory. Many times I do that also with other types of ships...it's just annoying, having to jump out to get a hydrogen bottle refilled in an O2/H2 generator!
But for the constructor ships - should really have that in a cockpit meant for industrial use...

Aye - i think two versions of it would make more sense (or a third one with both small and large ports) - that way ppl would be able to use it in a wider variety of designs.

[VanGoghComplex]

I like how you're basing your entire argument on the notion that an "industrial" cockpit, designed to be use in things like mining ships, offers no combat application.

[A Fat, Angry Serval]

Originally posted by VanGoghComplex:

I like how you're basing your entire argument on the notion that an "industrial" cockpit, designed to be use in things like mining ships, offers no combat application.

Eh, people were complaining that it provided a visibility advantage and that it made the game "pay to win" as a result. I'm simply pointing out how that's not the case.

If there's any block that really needs complaining about, it's those damn invincible toilets. :P