... it's okay for me because that kind of difficulty is realistic for a 3-man vehicle... and yet, you have an easier time of it than everyone else and yet you for some reason are the one complaining about something you're doing easier than everyone else ...
You must understand that our posts should not be for complaining or whining, but simply telling the devs where we feel it causes unpleasent gameplay feeling. To help the devs decide if they change something to the better or not. If too many people agree on an unpleasent issue, the devs will probably change it to improve their gameplay.
So the game is fun to me and I put my stress on the things that could be better (or are bad) in my opinion. And one sure is that unless the Cyclops won't be co-op driven by 3-man multiplayers, I really don't need split up controls of that kind. Or the problems come from being perfect for VR headsets and only a pain for non VR headset players (head turns tied to mouse while keyboard drives ship).
If you think you must have controls torturing you because it's a 3-man vehicle and must be like that. Ok, it's like Dark Souls players thinking suffering must be part of gameplay. But please not in this game and not through bad controls.
One thing with the Cyclops I don't understand. We have vertical strafing, but no horizontal strafing?
(Please don't tell me what I know. That subs can use their air tanks to do vertical movement. But this should be awefully noisy and not a superfast strafing process.)
So if we get scifi superfast and noiseless vertical strafing like crazy, why don't we get minimal horizontal strafing through side thrusters? And more important. Why not have a far more natural vertical tilting control? Doesn't the Cyclops have planes for vertical tiliting? Stern planes and some sort of sail planes with thrusters? No?
Let me guess the solution:
Although the devs love to play VR, they know that the majority of the playerbase use only minor controls without VR headturning and thus would be either forced to turn their head or pilot the ship with keyboard, but not both with a single control unit. And vertical rotation with keyboard is really bad.
My suggestion:
Allow us to map the Cyclops controls how we like it. There isn't even a page on the Subnautica wiki that explains how to control vehicles in each mode.
@zetachron
I have a nice 3-axis joystick sitting here that would make the game massively more playable if they implemented native joystick support. Especially if we could do custom maps for the different subs. That would go a long way towards giving non-VR players the type of control a 6-DoF game calls for.
the entire purpose of it is survival mode as a mobile base for extreme distances, home away from home, base of operations (can build almost anything inside), spawn point as well as a freighter if you add plenty of storage. lastly its an 150 foot! sub literally made from scraps cobbled together from 3 blue prints!! vehicle was never meant to be agile, maneuver obstacles, nor were you supposed to park it in insanely dangerous areas lets's say a leviathan breeding ground
the entire purpose of it is survival mode as a mobile base for extreme distances, home away from home, base of operations (can build almost anything inside), spawn point as well as a freighter if you add plenty of storage. lastly its an 150 foot! sub literally made from scraps cobbled together from 3 blue prints!! vehicle was never meant to be agile, maneuver obstacles, nor were you supposed to park it in insanely dangerous areas lets's say a leviathan breeding ground
Nice try. But the devs themselves did months of programming to get the Cyclops being able to deal with leviathans directly through means of
silent running to bypass leviathans (works)
decoys to lure leviathans away (almost works)
shields to block leviathan attacks (works, with a small infinity bug)
safely parking the Cyclops among leviathan breeding ground (works didn't think that, huh?)
The only 2 things that are really missing now are
customizable navigation (not general keymapping) or controlable submarine diving planes
HUDs in cam mode or cam PiP windows or better cockpit sight
"At 54.2m long, 12.6m wide and 14.2m tall, the Cyclops is the largest player controlled vehicle in the game, and is capable of diving to depths of up to 500m or greater with upgrades."
Before reading these two, I would have tended to agree with you that the Cyclops is *significantly* smaller than the Virginia class. But going only off these two web pages, it seems like 54 meters is roughly half 115 meters.
You must understand that our posts should not be for complaining or whining, but simply telling the devs where we feel it causes unpleasent gameplay feeling. To help the devs decide if they change something to the better or not. If too many people agree on an unpleasent issue, the devs will probably change it to improve their gameplay.
So the game is fun to me and I put my stress on the things that could be better (or are bad) in my opinion. And one sure is that unless the Cyclops won't be co-op driven by 3-man multiplayers, I really don't need split up controls of that kind. Or the problems come from being perfect for VR headsets and only a pain for non VR headset players (head turns tied to mouse while keyboard drives ship).
If you think you must have controls torturing you because it's a 3-man vehicle and must be like that. Ok, it's like Dark Souls players thinking suffering must be part of gameplay. But please not in this game and not through bad controls.
You say that... but you're the one complaining about something that, again, difficulty controlling is realistic for given it's mass, it's design and the fact it's intended to be one person running a 3-person craft. There's less ease than the Seamoth, but I don't think it's at the level of "unpleasant" - heck, I'm not even the only one saying these things, so you can't claim that there's enough agreement to consider it a problem ATM.
The reason I'm arguing this is because what you think should be changed doesn't really have a reason for it besides "make it easier on me" as opposed to whether or not it realistically should or shouldn't be. That the Cyclops will never be driven by 3 players is one thing, but it feels like you think it should run as though it was - extremely smooth without any weight of difficulty to it.
This is another divide between us, though - while I've found the Cyclops harder to manage than the smaller vehicles, I've never found it as outright torturous as you. The controls don't actually feel bad to me - they just feel weighted differently than the Seamoth. And it's primary purpose in the game is long-range transport and deep-sea travel - it's not a free-range exploration craft like the Seamoth and PRAWN are.
Nice try. But the devs themselves did months of programming to get the Cyclops being able to deal with leviathans directly through means of
silent running to bypass leviathans (works)
decoys to lure leviathans away (almost works)
shields to block leviathan attacks (works, with a small infinity bug)
safely parking the Cyclops among leviathan breeding ground (works didn't think that, huh?)
The only 2 things that are really missing now are
customizable navigation (not general keymapping) or controlable submarine diving planes
HUDs in cam mode or cam PiP windows or better cockpit sight
Only the shields count as being able to "deal with leviathans directly", though - the others are either diversionary tactics that focus on avoiding an encounter entirely or, in the case of parking it, leaving the ship motionless in an inactive state it won't take note of. None of those count as dealing with them directly - if anything, those things functions to keep them away from the sub itself, with no way of directly warding them off like the Seamoth with it's electrical defense.
@The08MetroidMan
I'm quite satisfied with overall Cyclops gameplay rework that made it into 4.0 with the ghost update (rating 4/5). I just don't keep quiet when I feel something is not done well in my eyes or accept suffering like you. And I don't love to fight against game controls.
And maybe you realize that my words just address my personal annoyances (and it's up to others to add to that or not) while I can still live with those annoyances:
There is no vertical tilt / sub diving plane control, so I use the vertical strafing instead, with feeling bad, but still managing quite good.
I find no use for the floodlights ever in the game, so I simply ignore and never use them again after turning off. A strategy I use for all useless items like the dive reel. I just tell the devs that this and that seems useless to me.
The Cyclops cockpit view is milky even with interior lights off, but enough to drive all directions but vertical. I think it got even better than at the begin.
Driving vertical is best done with the cam sight, so there I miss HUD info on Cyclops status, but now that effects are togglable it's managable.
Sneaking around a leviathan in silent running is best done with driving in cam sight. Again no silence info or hotswitching defenses, but managable. I simply wish I could hotswitch visions while maintaining HUD info and effect switches to make it a fluent adventure and no bumpy stop and go ride.
...
You see, driving doesn't feel too well and could be better (my opinion) with simply allowing HUD info and effect switches at cam mode. Maybe this even gets changed. The devs have improved the Cyclops incredibly with version 4.0, allowing dealing with leviathans with several different approaches or strategies. And maybe it's all just a tech issue, as right now they are changing HUDs for vehicles and cams again.
I'm quite satisfied with overall Cyclops gameplay rework that made it into 4.0 with the ghost update (rating 4/5). I just don't keep quiet when I feel something is not done well in my eyes or accept suffering like you. And I don't love to fight against game controls.
And maybe you realize that my words just address my personal annoyances (and it's up to others to add to that or not) while I can still live with those annoyances:
And likewise, I don't keep quiet if I see something I disagree with - which in this case is that I disagree with your claims that the controls are "suffering." Less responsive and stiffer than the Seamoth, yes, but I don't find them anywhere near as agonizing as you claim them to be - so much so that, as I said before, it comes across like you think the Cyclops should have maneuverability and response-time on-par with the Seamoth.
Likewise, my own words are in debate of what you find annoyances as being overly-critical of parts.
Again, the ship isn't built like the Seamoth for free-range movement, nor is it reliably built for sharp ascents - it doesn't have the bullet-like shape/tapered bow used in military submarines for sharp climbs and surface-breeching; it's closer to an exploration-based model that, due to it's blockier design, climbs and descents at more vertical angles. That's not a gameplay failing - that's something realistically inherent to the Cyclops' design. The Seamoth has tapered front-ends that help with this, but the Cyclops is built like a block - why wouldn't it ascend and descend like one (up and down)?
That's more personal preference rather than universal annoyance, though; I myself found the spotlights very useful in surveying the sea floor at night. And on that topic, it's hard to take these as "personal annoyances" when you're arbitrarily declaring things "useless" as though it's objective fact - you finding it useless doesn't actually mean it is, at least beyond such to yourself (for example, I myself actually used the dive reel a ton to help quickly explore the Sparse Reef and it's canyons).
Haven't had that kind of problem with the Cyclops' window-pane myself. Than again, I admit it might just be a graphics thing - I use a Macbook, which I know isn't a hardened gaming system.
Wasn't able to get anywhere with cam-sight in tunnels or when in silent running at nighttime (which was at least a few times out in Leviathan territory); sonar made all the difference for me in that regard.
Same as above; I had extremely fickle luck trying to rely on cam-sight with Leviathans. Best for you, maybe, but I was almost never able to locate them with the cameras until they were right on top of me. In my opinion, the cameras are a separate system meant to ideally be manned independently from the main sub cameras - but you're driving solo, so you have to instead pick-and-choose what best fits your style. if you have sharp enough eyes to make the cameras work, more power to you, but others might rely on the sonar or radar just because it's less taxing than swinging a camera around only to suffer a heart-attack when you get a facefull of Reaper jaws.
To make a long story short, driving just doesn't feel as severe an issue to me - more taxing than with a smaller vehicle, but it doesn't feel like the controls cause actual suffering.
I am curious as to how somthing the size of the cyclops can sneak past an apex predator such as a ghost or reaper leviathan. I'm pretty sure those things could see the shimmering metal of the pristine titanium submarine, unless they have evolved to be more dependent on noise.
Faculties like eyesight can devolve or completely disappear if they provide no advantage, eg. species of blind fish that live in total darkness.
An apex predator like the leviathan gains nothing from being able to detect or distinguish between extremely slowly moving large objects like the cyclops. The only comparable thing we see are reefbacks. Those aren't a threat and can't be mated with or eaten.
I am curious as to how somthing the size of the cyclops can sneak past an apex predator such as a ghost or reaper leviathan. I'm pretty sure those things could see the shimmering metal of the pristine titanium submarine, unless they have evolved to be more dependent on noise.
Faculties like eyesight can devolve or completely disappear if they provide no advantage, eg. species of blind fish that live in total darkness.
An apex predator like the leviathan gains nothing from being able to detect or distinguish between extremely slowly moving large objects like the cyclops. The only comparable thing we see are reefbacks. Those aren't a threat and can't be mated with or eaten.
Yes, eyesight can degrade if there is no need for it, but a reaper leviathan is known to use sonar to detect prey.
It's possible they will pay no attention to the cyclops just because it's slow, but that's highly unlikely.
If anything the reaper would be more interested in the cyclops because, well its a giant slow hunk of metal. It might not attack, but it most certainly will investigate.
The devs have rendered all practical detection to noise level only in case of the Cyclops. Yes, any creature trying to detect the Cyclops will need to hear it.
Does it make sense? That's not the question. The devs implementation is that way. So eyes play no role and sonar too, as sonar is ACTIVE detection by sonic waves reflecting back from the target. The target can be completely silent and still get detected. As all Cyclops detection is strictly based on the Cyclops making noise, sonar can't play a role.
Scientificly it would be as nonsense as creatures having eyes in the game not seeing an object right in front of them. But programming implementation is hard to achieve for a multiclass detection stealth gameplay. This is out of scope for the devs. So it won't happen. Sad, but a compromise to programming reality.
"At 54.2m long, 12.6m wide and 14.2m tall, the Cyclops is the largest player controlled vehicle in the game, and is capable of diving to depths of up to 500m or greater with upgrades."
Before reading these two, I would have tended to agree with you that the Cyclops is *significantly* smaller than the Virginia class. But going only off these two web pages, it seems like 54 meters is roughly half 115 meters.
@sayerulz Yeah, that's the Subnautica FOV playing tricks on your eyes again. The Cyclops is YUUUUGE. Also, unless you've got concrete facts floating in your head from previous learning, I always find it better to check facts before posting a disagreement to a purported fact, for the reason obvious above (you look silly once facts are checked if you're wrong -- been there, done that, didn't like the T-shirt). Although you were probably using the appearance of the Cyclops in-game, which makes sense (but why would you think I would make a presumption like that without having researched it first?!). For the record, I looked up the Cyclops dimensions, and then the dimension of some common modern subs before posting. So, yeah, a sub that big physically can't maneuver as fast as a Seamoth because it has far too much mass. Someone needs to make a to-scale Cyclops with a human beside it for scale. Anyone? :tumbleweeds:
Really a shame that the Seamoth and Prawn are so unreal and scifi-like with their amazing maneuverabilities, infinite air and omnipotent range.
Not that the devs weren't aware of some tight maneuvering problems (some Lost River passage getting fixed), but why the hell did they lock the vertical axis for control (the sub itself can tilt, but you can't control it directly) ? Don't subs have diving planes for that purpose in reality?
And of course we only get engine efficiency upgrades. Instead we could have complete engine upgrades:
Engine Mark 2: slightly more speed, acceleration and turning time
Silent running upgrade (yes, additionally to be found)
Not that I'd want an even faster Cyclops. I'd say that speed and acceleration now would be the upgraded version and the first would be slower than now. The turning time could be reduced to 10 secs though to match that insane acceleration already there, while the old engine has 15 secs turning time. Isn't that sensible?
Really a shame that the Seamoth and Prawn are so unreal and scifi-like with their amazing maneuverabilities, infinite air and omnipotent range.
Not that the devs weren't aware of some tight maneuvering problems (some Lost River passage getting fixed), but why the hell did they lock the vertical axis for control (the sub itself can tilt, but you can't control it directly) ? Don't subs have diving planes for that purpose in reality?
And of course we only get engine efficiency upgrades. Instead we could have complete engine upgrades:
Engine Mark 2: slightly more speed, acceleration and turning time
Silent running upgrade (yes, additionally to be found)
Not that I'd want an even faster Cyclops. I'd say that speed and acceleration now would be the upgraded version and the first would be slower than now. The turning time could be reduced to 10 secs though to match that insane acceleration already there, while the old engine has 15 secs turning time. Isn't that sensible?
I dunno, that's an awful lot of mass... if you have access to a boat, try flooding it in shallow water (NOT running water like a river unless it's completely calm where you're doing this, or it would actually be potentially quite dangerous, people have died!). Then try spinning it on its axis, or pushing it sideways. As you'll see, it's a herculean task just doing this with a small 1-3 person boat, let alone anything larger. Which is also why it's dangerous in moving water, the water can easily literally pin and then crush you if you get between the boat and something hard like a log or boulder.
As for the Seamoth and PRAWN being too fast, it's probably gameplay reasons, but then again, the Seamoth is basically all engine, round, and only carries one person. I don't know what would be realistic, but it seems within the realm of possibility. 12.7 m/s is about 28.4 MPH, 45.7 kph, or 24.7 knots... not that fast, really. Here's some personal subs, not sure on their speed, but ~25 knots doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility: https://www.thrillist.com/cars/the-coolest-mini-subs-you-can-actually-buy-pedal-powered-submarines-personal-submarines-real-yellow-submarine
None of the vehicles in game account for momentum in water so the cyclops has that going for it at least. Something that size at flank speed would take hundreds of meters to make a turn and fully cancel out the momentum. Lack of currents definitely help, but still. It's hard to judge distance as-is, but it feels like the Cyclops can navigate a turn at full speed with less momentum issues than the average kayak. (Not that I'm complaining, that would be a royal pain, but still its something to keep in mind as far as realism arguments go)
All of you who hate how the Cyclops handles, just out of curiosity, do you use a controller?
If you use a mouse, do you have mouse acceleration turned off? (It's deceptively labeled "enhance pointer precision" in Windows Mouse settings, it makes a mouse less sensitive if moved a slowly, and a lot more sensitive if moved quickly. Handy on the Desktop, not so much in games.)
I hate how the Cyclops drives, maneuvers and turns. I play with a standard 104-key keyboard and a standard 2-button mouse. I originally wanted to play SN with a controller, but circa July 2016 enabling the option at the menu screen made the mouse inoperable... I went through hell trying to turn it off - just deleting/reinstalling SN will not change that setting (you've got to change internal settings).
Suffice to say, the Cyclops is too slow and difficult to operate in most places. The fact it rotates on a gimbal instead of being able to strafe (despite the Seamoth being able to strafe) makes navigating tunnels incredibly tedious. I don't have any special keyboard settings conflicting with movement, and mouse precision is not enabled in Windows settings... I mean if it were, then the Seamoth and Exosuit would be a nightmare to pilot, but they are like a dream.
If they could make the Cyclops move more like the Seamoth I would be happy, even if it were less power efficient. But by the time I have it built to progress the story, I lose interest in the game as I dread having to need it for story progression... As such, I have only been able to stomach the trip to the Lava Castle once in my entire 13-month timeframe of playing SN (that's how much I dislike the Cyclops, lol).
I accept the momentum realism of the Cyclops. It's much more real than the Seamoth and Prawn, but ok. I'd even rather see the air and energy range of those minor vehicles getting restricted a bit. The turning of the Cyclops though doesn't match the acceleration, as such a massive vehicle could never accelerate that fast. The engines are scifi, so it's ok, but usually turning is tied to the acceleration of the engines, so it should also turn a bit faster. All in all this balance is strange, but I can get along with it. Not really my important issue.
But no one can answer the question why the sub can't control its diving planes. There are a few vertical drops where the Cyclops just fits, yet doesn't tilt to fit better. And it can't be controlled, so it dives down vertically with the sub body remaining horizontally, nearly scratching the walls. I played the game often enough now, so I can do this at full speed now and almost blind, but does it feel ok?
@0x6A7232
I thought of engine mk1 doing 8m/s and 16s turning time and engine mk2 doing 12m/s and 12s turning time. Not some fantasy superengine with 20m/s and 5s turning time or what others think - speed and turning like Seamoth.
My greatest annoyance so far is that diving vertical makes cam sight driving a must, as you can see in the direction you are driving, yet some important HUD info is missing as well as emergency buttons for activating shield, engines off or decoy launching. There are only a few places where a leviathan is looming above or below a vertical moving Cyclops and being carefully you can take your time switching, so it's not the major issue, now that all effects are togglable. And once you have ion energy and know how to keep cool for a few minor damages, you can drive without HUD info, but I must confess that the missing HUD info worries me most when I drive in cam mode. And if I drive in milky cockpit mode it always gets an adventure itself when diving vertically or around leviathans.
Though even nothing would change, I'd like to see silent running as a tech upgrade and maybe a general engine upgrade (mk2) intead only an energy efficiency upgrade.
My second dream would be a sight/HUD improvement for the Cyclops.
... if you have access to a boat, try flooding it in shallow water (NOT running water like a river unless it's completely calm where you're doing this, or it would actually be potentially quite dangerous, people have died!). Then try spinning it on its axis, or pushing it sideways. As you'll see, it's a herculean task just doing this with a small 1-3 person boat, let alone anything larger ...
Who'd turn a ship with minor thrusters without forward/backward movement when it's done by main engines and rudders/planes? If you have two propellers a bit from each other, you could use a forward/backward combination. A scifi sub could use internal MHD jet streams, but the devs have decided to use a more real and single propeller shaft. So the only turning options are the rudders and planes in combination with the main drive, being the only one to deliver enough power for turning such a mass.
Which shows the physical game simulation failure, as the sub always needs the same turning time of about 15 secs. It doesn't matter if it moves forward at top speed or isn't moving at all. The simulation just applies a fixed turning speed, as it would have turning thrusters for that operation, ignoring any mass physics.
Yes, eyesight can degrade if there is no need for it, but a reaper leviathan is known to use sonar to detect prey.
Yes - and reefbacks, due to their thick shells, are not liable to be considered prey. And again, like @Halios said, the Reaper lacks the eyesight needed to distinguish something metal from something living - or the intelligence, for that matter, if the PDA data-entry is any indication. So by all accounts, it actually might not be able to tell.
I beg to differ; it's a key question because it's answer may determine why the devs chose this route. Specifically that, as was mentioned before by @Halios, eyesight is a sense that can atrophy in sea creatures depending on their circumstances - and as this is an alien world where the eyesight of creatures may have developed in unpredictable ways, the only realistic constant would be that they could detect soundwave-vibrations through the water.
Also... that's not actually true - sonar depends on receiving soundwaves as much as it does a solid object to reflect against. If the target has equipment and a hull specifically designed to dampen soundwaves when activated, than the target actually wouldn't be liable to be detected. Sonar very much does play a role in that it's how creatures like the Reaper are factually stated to hunt - but if their target is something that dampens sound at best or is just a dead "brick" at worst, it'd be more effective against something as stupid as the Reaper.
Or to put it simply; rather than it being "out of scope for the devs", it might instead be that such stealth was not needed.
Really a shame that the Seamoth and Prawn are so unreal and scifi-like with their amazing maneuverabilities, infinite air and omnipotent range.
Not true at all, actually; the Seamoth's only that maneuverable because (A) it's got a tapered body for improved hydrodynamics, (B) isn't actually that big compared to the player and (C) is made out of materials so lightweight that it's native crush-depth and durability are rather low.
As for the PRAWN... I'm sorry, but how does something that (A) sinks like a rock with zero free-range movement of it's own and (B) has a waking pace so slow that manual swimming outpaces it possibly count as "amazing maneuverabilities"?
Also, last I checked, they didn't have infinite air and omnipotent range, since both those are tied into their finite power cells - when those die, you lose movement and oxygen. None of what you said feels like it rings true for those two.
With the Cyclops, again, it's likely because of how the thing is built - it's a large oblong "brick" design-wise. Like the blocky modern-day exploration craft used in deep-see diving, it's design makes moving on it's vertical axis too problematic with all the heavy equipment it has aboard, thus it operates more simply.
Another major consideration you're forgetting; the Cyclops is not a single-seater vehicle - and by that, I mean it literally doesn't have any seating. You're standing and driving it from the bridge - we've seen what happens when the ship tilts and is thrown about; the player gets thrown about with it. It's not like a space-ship where such designs have artificial gravity behind them to justify it - you're standing upright on a flat deck controlling a literal submersible brick; it'll never be as nimble/have as wide a range of axial movement as the Seamoth.
The turning of the Cyclops though doesn't match the acceleration, as such a massive vehicle could never accelerate that fast.
Not true at all; forward motion is not the same as rotation. Rotation requires either a propulsion system that can shift and turn, multiple propulsion sources to re-adjust direction with every course change, or both - on the other hand, forward motion simply requires enough thrust directly behind you. In short, the Cyclops very much could accelerate that fast, because fast forward motion and fast turning are not the same things - it's easier to push something forward in water than it is to rotate it, because the momentum of the water around it will help push it ahead with increasing speed; turning around is more liable to kill momentum by contrast, because the rotation causes the water to churn around it rather than push it along.
Yes, eyesight can degrade if there is no need for it, but a reaper leviathan is known to use sonar to detect prey.
It's possible they will pay no attention to the cyclops just because it's slow, but that's highly unlikely.
If anything the reaper would be more interested in the cyclops because, well its a giant slow hunk of metal. It might not attack, but it most certainly will investigate.
That doesn't make any sense. I can only repeat what I said earlier.
An apex predator like the leviathan gains nothing from being able to detect or distinguish between extremely slowly moving large objects like the cyclops. The only comparable thing we see are reefbacks. Those aren't a threat and can't be mated with or eaten.
Yes, eyesight can degrade if there is no need for it, but a reaper leviathan is known to use sonar to detect prey.
It's possible they will pay no attention to the cyclops just because it's slow, but that's highly unlikely.
If anything the reaper would be more interested in the cyclops because, well its a giant slow hunk of metal. It might not attack, but it most certainly will investigate.
That doesn't make any sense. I can only repeat what I said earlier.
An apex predator like the leviathan gains nothing from being able to detect or distinguish between extremely slowly moving large objects like the cyclops. The only comparable thing we see are reefbacks. Those aren't a threat and can't be mated with or eaten.
So your saying the leviathans would turn a blind eye to a huge, foreign, possibly dangerous object floating around in its territory?
The shape of the cyclops as well as the sounds and perhaps even the vibrations it makes are drastically different than that of a reefback.
So your saying the leviathans would turn a blind eye to a huge, foreign, possibly dangerous object floating around in its territory?
No. That's nothing like what I said.
To repeat myself again, the ONLY large, slow moving creatures which we see are reefbacks. They are not dangerous. They don't look like ideal food for a reaper. They can't be mated with.
That being the case, it makes sense for reapers to ignore the cyclops when it slows down sufficiently. It's likely to think it a reefback and ignore it.
The shape of the cyclops as well as the sounds and perhaps even the vibrations it makes are drastically different than that of a reefback.
Completely irrelevant.
The ONLY large, slow moving creatures we see are reefbacks. There is absolutely no survival value in being able to detect the things which could distinguish between reefbacks and the cyclops. None at all. So it's very unlikely that a reaper could sense those things.
Whether or not you understand it, the cyclops being able to stealth past big predators like this makes sense. You're of course free to keep attempting to argue otherwise but the devs probably know that you're wrong and won't be bothered in the slightest. Nor can I do any better. I've explained to the best of my ability.
So your saying the leviathans would turn a blind eye to a huge, foreign, possibly dangerous object floating around in its territory?
No. That's nothing like what I said.
To repeat myself again, the ONLY large, slow moving creatures which we see are reefbacks. They are not dangerous. They don't look like ideal food for a reaper. They can't be mated with.
That being the case, it makes sense for reapers to ignore the cyclops when it slows down sufficiently. It's likely to think it a reefback and ignore it.
The shape of the cyclops as well as the sounds and perhaps even the vibrations it makes are drastically different than that of a reefback.
Completely irrelevant.
The ONLY large, slow moving creatures we see are reefbacks. There is absolutely no survival value in being able to detect the things which could distinguish between reefbacks and the cyclops. None at all. So it's very unlikely that a reaper could sense those things.
Whether or not you understand it, the cyclops being able to stealth past big predators like this makes sense. You're of course free to keep attempting to argue otherwise but the devs probably know that you're wrong and won't be bothered in the slightest. Nor can I do any better. I've explained to the best of my ability.
I understand where your coming from but if you wish to end the discussion, then we will.
So your saying the leviathans would turn a blind eye to a huge, foreign, possibly dangerous object floating around in its territory?
No. That's nothing like what I said.
To repeat myself again, the ONLY large, slow moving creatures which we see are reefbacks. They are not dangerous. They don't look like ideal food for a reaper. They can't be mated with.
That being the case, it makes sense for reapers to ignore the cyclops when it slows down sufficiently. It's likely to think it a reefback and ignore it.
The shape of the cyclops as well as the sounds and perhaps even the vibrations it makes are drastically different than that of a reefback.
Completely irrelevant.
The ONLY large, slow moving creatures we see are reefbacks. There is absolutely no survival value in being able to detect the things which could distinguish between reefbacks and the cyclops. None at all. So it's very unlikely that a reaper could sense those things.
Whether or not you understand it, the cyclops being able to stealth past big predators like this makes sense. You're of course free to keep attempting to argue otherwise but the devs probably know that you're wrong and won't be bothered in the slightest. Nor can I do any better. I've explained to the best of my ability.
There's also other Leviathans.
Sea Dragon Leviathans eat other Leviathans, so any large creature detected would be a serious threat.
Not to mention other Leviathans of their species. Which would probably be very territorial, especially the Reaper.
So your saying the leviathans would turn a blind eye to a huge, foreign, possibly dangerous object floating around in its territory?
No. That's nothing like what I said.
To repeat myself again, the ONLY large, slow moving creatures which we see are reefbacks. They are not dangerous. They don't look like ideal food for a reaper. They can't be mated with.
That being the case, it makes sense for reapers to ignore the cyclops when it slows down sufficiently. It's likely to think it a reefback and ignore it.
The shape of the cyclops as well as the sounds and perhaps even the vibrations it makes are drastically different than that of a reefback.
Completely irrelevant.
The ONLY large, slow moving creatures we see are reefbacks. There is absolutely no survival value in being able to detect the things which could distinguish between reefbacks and the cyclops. None at all. So it's very unlikely that a reaper could sense those things.
Whether or not you understand it, the cyclops being able to stealth past big predators like this makes sense. You're of course free to keep attempting to argue otherwise but the devs probably know that you're wrong and won't be bothered in the slightest. Nor can I do any better. I've explained to the best of my ability.
There's also other Leviathans.
Sea Dragon Leviathans eat other Leviathans, so any large creature detected would be a serious threat.
Not to mention other Leviathans of their species. Which would probably be very territorial, especially the Reaper.
This.
What I was getting at was the fact that most large predators bite first and think later. Sharks do this all the time. Your in its territory? It bites you first. Look like a seal? Bite. I think you get the point. Sure, silent running limits the chance of you being seen when theres lots of distracting things around, but when its you and a leviathan in open water, best not to take any chances.
Comments
You must understand that our posts should not be for complaining or whining, but simply telling the devs where we feel it causes unpleasent gameplay feeling. To help the devs decide if they change something to the better or not. If too many people agree on an unpleasent issue, the devs will probably change it to improve their gameplay.
So the game is fun to me and I put my stress on the things that could be better (or are bad) in my opinion. And one sure is that unless the Cyclops won't be co-op driven by 3-man multiplayers, I really don't need split up controls of that kind. Or the problems come from being perfect for VR headsets and only a pain for non VR headset players (head turns tied to mouse while keyboard drives ship).
If you think you must have controls torturing you because it's a 3-man vehicle and must be like that. Ok, it's like Dark Souls players thinking suffering must be part of gameplay. But please not in this game and not through bad controls.
(Please don't tell me what I know. That subs can use their air tanks to do vertical movement. But this should be awefully noisy and not a superfast strafing process.)
So if we get scifi superfast and noiseless vertical strafing like crazy, why don't we get minimal horizontal strafing through side thrusters? And more important. Why not have a far more natural vertical tilting control? Doesn't the Cyclops have planes for vertical tiliting? Stern planes and some sort of sail planes with thrusters? No?
Let me guess the solution:
Although the devs love to play VR, they know that the majority of the playerbase use only minor controls without VR headturning and thus would be either forced to turn their head or pilot the ship with keyboard, but not both with a single control unit. And vertical rotation with keyboard is really bad.
My suggestion:
Allow us to map the Cyclops controls how we like it. There isn't even a page on the Subnautica wiki that explains how to control vehicles in each mode.
I have a nice 3-axis joystick sitting here that would make the game massively more playable if they implemented native joystick support. Especially if we could do custom maps for the different subs. That would go a long way towards giving non-VR players the type of control a 6-DoF game calls for.
Nice try. But the devs themselves did months of programming to get the Cyclops being able to deal with leviathans directly through means of
The only 2 things that are really missing now are
I found this info about the Cyclops:
http://subnautica.wikia.com/wiki/Cyclops
"At 54.2m long, 12.6m wide and 14.2m tall, the Cyclops is the largest player controlled vehicle in the game, and is capable of diving to depths of up to 500m or greater with upgrades."
I found this about the Virginia class:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia-class_submarine
Length: 377 ft (115 m)
Before reading these two, I would have tended to agree with you that the Cyclops is *significantly* smaller than the Virginia class. But going only off these two web pages, it seems like 54 meters is roughly half 115 meters.
You say that... but you're the one complaining about something that, again, difficulty controlling is realistic for given it's mass, it's design and the fact it's intended to be one person running a 3-person craft. There's less ease than the Seamoth, but I don't think it's at the level of "unpleasant" - heck, I'm not even the only one saying these things, so you can't claim that there's enough agreement to consider it a problem ATM.
The reason I'm arguing this is because what you think should be changed doesn't really have a reason for it besides "make it easier on me" as opposed to whether or not it realistically should or shouldn't be. That the Cyclops will never be driven by 3 players is one thing, but it feels like you think it should run as though it was - extremely smooth without any weight of difficulty to it.
This is another divide between us, though - while I've found the Cyclops harder to manage than the smaller vehicles, I've never found it as outright torturous as you. The controls don't actually feel bad to me - they just feel weighted differently than the Seamoth. And it's primary purpose in the game is long-range transport and deep-sea travel - it's not a free-range exploration craft like the Seamoth and PRAWN are.
Only the shields count as being able to "deal with leviathans directly", though - the others are either diversionary tactics that focus on avoiding an encounter entirely or, in the case of parking it, leaving the ship motionless in an inactive state it won't take note of. None of those count as dealing with them directly - if anything, those things functions to keep them away from the sub itself, with no way of directly warding them off like the Seamoth with it's electrical defense.
I'm quite satisfied with overall Cyclops gameplay rework that made it into 4.0 with the ghost update (rating 4/5). I just don't keep quiet when I feel something is not done well in my eyes or accept suffering like you. And I don't love to fight against game controls.
And maybe you realize that my words just address my personal annoyances (and it's up to others to add to that or not) while I can still live with those annoyances:
You see, driving doesn't feel too well and could be better (my opinion) with simply allowing HUD info and effect switches at cam mode. Maybe this even gets changed. The devs have improved the Cyclops incredibly with version 4.0, allowing dealing with leviathans with several different approaches or strategies. And maybe it's all just a tech issue, as right now they are changing HUDs for vehicles and cams again.
And likewise, I don't keep quiet if I see something I disagree with - which in this case is that I disagree with your claims that the controls are "suffering." Less responsive and stiffer than the Seamoth, yes, but I don't find them anywhere near as agonizing as you claim them to be - so much so that, as I said before, it comes across like you think the Cyclops should have maneuverability and response-time on-par with the Seamoth.
Likewise, my own words are in debate of what you find annoyances as being overly-critical of parts.
To make a long story short, driving just doesn't feel as severe an issue to me - more taxing than with a smaller vehicle, but it doesn't feel like the controls cause actual suffering.
Faculties like eyesight can devolve or completely disappear if they provide no advantage, eg. species of blind fish that live in total darkness.
An apex predator like the leviathan gains nothing from being able to detect or distinguish between extremely slowly moving large objects like the cyclops. The only comparable thing we see are reefbacks. Those aren't a threat and can't be mated with or eaten.
Yes, eyesight can degrade if there is no need for it, but a reaper leviathan is known to use sonar to detect prey.
It's possible they will pay no attention to the cyclops just because it's slow, but that's highly unlikely.
If anything the reaper would be more interested in the cyclops because, well its a giant slow hunk of metal. It might not attack, but it most certainly will investigate.
Does it make sense? That's not the question. The devs implementation is that way. So eyes play no role and sonar too, as sonar is ACTIVE detection by sonic waves reflecting back from the target. The target can be completely silent and still get detected. As all Cyclops detection is strictly based on the Cyclops making noise, sonar can't play a role.
Scientificly it would be as nonsense as creatures having eyes in the game not seeing an object right in front of them. But programming implementation is hard to achieve for a multiclass detection stealth gameplay. This is out of scope for the devs. So it won't happen. Sad, but a compromise to programming reality.
@sayerulz Yeah, that's the Subnautica FOV playing tricks on your eyes again. The Cyclops is YUUUUGE. Also, unless you've got concrete facts floating in your head from previous learning, I always find it better to check facts before posting a disagreement to a purported fact, for the reason obvious above (you look silly once facts are checked if you're wrong -- been there, done that, didn't like the T-shirt). Although you were probably using the appearance of the Cyclops in-game, which makes sense (but why would you think I would make a presumption like that without having researched it first?!). For the record, I looked up the Cyclops dimensions, and then the dimension of some common modern subs before posting.
Really a shame that the Seamoth and Prawn are so unreal and scifi-like with their amazing maneuverabilities, infinite air and omnipotent range.
Not that the devs weren't aware of some tight maneuvering problems (some Lost River passage getting fixed), but why the hell did they lock the vertical axis for control (the sub itself can tilt, but you can't control it directly) ? Don't subs have diving planes for that purpose in reality?
And of course we only get engine efficiency upgrades. Instead we could have complete engine upgrades:
Not that I'd want an even faster Cyclops. I'd say that speed and acceleration now would be the upgraded version and the first would be slower than now. The turning time could be reduced to 10 secs though to match that insane acceleration already there, while the old engine has 15 secs turning time. Isn't that sensible?
I dunno, that's an awful lot of mass... if you have access to a boat, try flooding it in shallow water (NOT running water like a river unless it's completely calm where you're doing this, or it would actually be potentially quite dangerous, people have died!). Then try spinning it on its axis, or pushing it sideways. As you'll see, it's a herculean task just doing this with a small 1-3 person boat, let alone anything larger. Which is also why it's dangerous in moving water, the water can easily literally pin and then crush you if you get between the boat and something hard like a log or boulder.
As for the Seamoth and PRAWN being too fast, it's probably gameplay reasons, but then again, the Seamoth is basically all engine, round, and only carries one person. I don't know what would be realistic, but it seems within the realm of possibility. 12.7 m/s is about 28.4 MPH, 45.7 kph, or 24.7 knots... not that fast, really. Here's some personal subs, not sure on their speed, but ~25 knots doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility: https://www.thrillist.com/cars/the-coolest-mini-subs-you-can-actually-buy-pedal-powered-submarines-personal-submarines-real-yellow-submarine
I hate how the Cyclops drives, maneuvers and turns. I play with a standard 104-key keyboard and a standard 2-button mouse. I originally wanted to play SN with a controller, but circa July 2016 enabling the option at the menu screen made the mouse inoperable... I went through hell trying to turn it off - just deleting/reinstalling SN will not change that setting (you've got to change internal settings).
Suffice to say, the Cyclops is too slow and difficult to operate in most places. The fact it rotates on a gimbal instead of being able to strafe (despite the Seamoth being able to strafe) makes navigating tunnels incredibly tedious. I don't have any special keyboard settings conflicting with movement, and mouse precision is not enabled in Windows settings... I mean if it were, then the Seamoth and Exosuit would be a nightmare to pilot, but they are like a dream.
If they could make the Cyclops move more like the Seamoth I would be happy, even if it were less power efficient. But by the time I have it built to progress the story, I lose interest in the game as I dread having to need it for story progression... As such, I have only been able to stomach the trip to the Lava Castle once in my entire 13-month timeframe of playing SN (that's how much I dislike the Cyclops, lol).
But no one can answer the question why the sub can't control its diving planes. There are a few vertical drops where the Cyclops just fits, yet doesn't tilt to fit better. And it can't be controlled, so it dives down vertically with the sub body remaining horizontally, nearly scratching the walls. I played the game often enough now, so I can do this at full speed now and almost blind, but does it feel ok?
@0x6A7232
I thought of engine mk1 doing 8m/s and 16s turning time and engine mk2 doing 12m/s and 12s turning time. Not some fantasy superengine with 20m/s and 5s turning time or what others think - speed and turning like Seamoth.
My greatest annoyance so far is that diving vertical makes cam sight driving a must, as you can see in the direction you are driving, yet some important HUD info is missing as well as emergency buttons for activating shield, engines off or decoy launching. There are only a few places where a leviathan is looming above or below a vertical moving Cyclops and being carefully you can take your time switching, so it's not the major issue, now that all effects are togglable. And once you have ion energy and know how to keep cool for a few minor damages, you can drive without HUD info, but I must confess that the missing HUD info worries me most when I drive in cam mode. And if I drive in milky cockpit mode it always gets an adventure itself when diving vertically or around leviathans.
Though even nothing would change, I'd like to see silent running as a tech upgrade and maybe a general engine upgrade (mk2) intead only an energy efficiency upgrade.
My second dream would be a sight/HUD improvement for the Cyclops.
Third a better control scheme for driving.
Who'd turn a ship with minor thrusters without forward/backward movement when it's done by main engines and rudders/planes? If you have two propellers a bit from each other, you could use a forward/backward combination. A scifi sub could use internal MHD jet streams, but the devs have decided to use a more real and single propeller shaft. So the only turning options are the rudders and planes in combination with the main drive, being the only one to deliver enough power for turning such a mass.
Which shows the physical game simulation failure, as the sub always needs the same turning time of about 15 secs. It doesn't matter if it moves forward at top speed or isn't moving at all. The simulation just applies a fixed turning speed, as it would have turning thrusters for that operation, ignoring any mass physics.
Yes - and reefbacks, due to their thick shells, are not liable to be considered prey. And again, like @Halios said, the Reaper lacks the eyesight needed to distinguish something metal from something living - or the intelligence, for that matter, if the PDA data-entry is any indication. So by all accounts, it actually might not be able to tell.
I beg to differ; it's a key question because it's answer may determine why the devs chose this route. Specifically that, as was mentioned before by @Halios, eyesight is a sense that can atrophy in sea creatures depending on their circumstances - and as this is an alien world where the eyesight of creatures may have developed in unpredictable ways, the only realistic constant would be that they could detect soundwave-vibrations through the water.
Also... that's not actually true - sonar depends on receiving soundwaves as much as it does a solid object to reflect against. If the target has equipment and a hull specifically designed to dampen soundwaves when activated, than the target actually wouldn't be liable to be detected. Sonar very much does play a role in that it's how creatures like the Reaper are factually stated to hunt - but if their target is something that dampens sound at best or is just a dead "brick" at worst, it'd be more effective against something as stupid as the Reaper.
Or to put it simply; rather than it being "out of scope for the devs", it might instead be that such stealth was not needed.
Not true at all, actually; the Seamoth's only that maneuverable because (A) it's got a tapered body for improved hydrodynamics, (B) isn't actually that big compared to the player and (C) is made out of materials so lightweight that it's native crush-depth and durability are rather low.
As for the PRAWN... I'm sorry, but how does something that (A) sinks like a rock with zero free-range movement of it's own and (B) has a waking pace so slow that manual swimming outpaces it possibly count as "amazing maneuverabilities"?
Also, last I checked, they didn't have infinite air and omnipotent range, since both those are tied into their finite power cells - when those die, you lose movement and oxygen. None of what you said feels like it rings true for those two.
With the Cyclops, again, it's likely because of how the thing is built - it's a large oblong "brick" design-wise. Like the blocky modern-day exploration craft used in deep-see diving, it's design makes moving on it's vertical axis too problematic with all the heavy equipment it has aboard, thus it operates more simply.
Another major consideration you're forgetting; the Cyclops is not a single-seater vehicle - and by that, I mean it literally doesn't have any seating. You're standing and driving it from the bridge - we've seen what happens when the ship tilts and is thrown about; the player gets thrown about with it. It's not like a space-ship where such designs have artificial gravity behind them to justify it - you're standing upright on a flat deck controlling a literal submersible brick; it'll never be as nimble/have as wide a range of axial movement as the Seamoth.
Not true at all; forward motion is not the same as rotation. Rotation requires either a propulsion system that can shift and turn, multiple propulsion sources to re-adjust direction with every course change, or both - on the other hand, forward motion simply requires enough thrust directly behind you. In short, the Cyclops very much could accelerate that fast, because fast forward motion and fast turning are not the same things - it's easier to push something forward in water than it is to rotate it, because the momentum of the water around it will help push it ahead with increasing speed; turning around is more liable to kill momentum by contrast, because the rotation causes the water to churn around it rather than push it along.
That doesn't make any sense. I can only repeat what I said earlier.
An apex predator like the leviathan gains nothing from being able to detect or distinguish between extremely slowly moving large objects like the cyclops. The only comparable thing we see are reefbacks. Those aren't a threat and can't be mated with or eaten.
So your saying the leviathans would turn a blind eye to a huge, foreign, possibly dangerous object floating around in its territory?
The shape of the cyclops as well as the sounds and perhaps even the vibrations it makes are drastically different than that of a reefback.
No. That's nothing like what I said.
To repeat myself again, the ONLY large, slow moving creatures which we see are reefbacks. They are not dangerous. They don't look like ideal food for a reaper. They can't be mated with.
That being the case, it makes sense for reapers to ignore the cyclops when it slows down sufficiently. It's likely to think it a reefback and ignore it.
Completely irrelevant.
The ONLY large, slow moving creatures we see are reefbacks. There is absolutely no survival value in being able to detect the things which could distinguish between reefbacks and the cyclops. None at all. So it's very unlikely that a reaper could sense those things.
Whether or not you understand it, the cyclops being able to stealth past big predators like this makes sense. You're of course free to keep attempting to argue otherwise but the devs probably know that you're wrong and won't be bothered in the slightest. Nor can I do any better. I've explained to the best of my ability.
I understand where your coming from but if you wish to end the discussion, then we will.
There's also other Leviathans.
Sea Dragon Leviathans eat other Leviathans, so any large creature detected would be a serious threat.
Not to mention other Leviathans of their species. Which would probably be very territorial, especially the Reaper.
This.
What I was getting at was the fact that most large predators bite first and think later. Sharks do this all the time. Your in its territory? It bites you first. Look like a seal? Bite. I think you get the point. Sure, silent running limits the chance of you being seen when theres lots of distracting things around, but when its you and a leviathan in open water, best not to take any chances.