Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => Announcements => Topic started by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 06:11:52 PM



Title: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 06:11:52 PM
Blog post/download links here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2015/12/04/starsector-0-7-1a-release/).

Changes as of December 05, 2015 (3rd hotfix)

Modding
  • Fixed issue with ship sales not being reported as transactions

Bugfixing
  • Fixed bug where it was possible to get a person bounty by attacking the bounty fleet after another fleet had killed off its flagship
  • Fixed more market procurement mission issues
  • Fixed issue w/ empty bounty reason when causing faction was the independents
  • Fixed bug where player would become hostile with "Knights of Ludd" (which aren't in the game) on accepting a Tri-Tachyon commission
  • Fixed some issues in post-battle crew loss calculation
  • Fixed issue with ship sales on the open/black market not affecting suspicion levels
  • Fixed issue with person bounties not being paid
  • Procurement missions properly show that they're "over" in intel filter
  • Fixed issue with non-combat capital ships being too aggressive


Changes as of December 04, 2015

Campaign
  • Jangala will now always have fresh bounty on game start
  • Can ask mercenary officers what they can do when at officer limit
  • Added military market indication to star system tooltip in intel tab
  • When joining a battle with overwhelming odds in your favor, the allied fleet is more likely to harry instead of pursue
  • Player fleet less likely to be pursued if it consists of ships that easily outpace the enemy in combat
    • Will be harried instead
  • "Low engine interference" bonus is now based on the sensor profile of your fleet, so that hullmods like Augmented Engines properly interact with it

Combat
  • Ship AI
    • Fixed issue where EMP emitter system wasn't generating a proper kind of threat
    • Improved autofire logic when using beam weapons for point defense (less likely to keep turning beam on and off vs a fast moving target)

Bugfixing
  • Your credits will properly update for next officer hire after hiring one officer
  • Fixed bug where allied damage to allied ships could cause friendly fire incidents
  • Fixed visual glitch with accident report dialog



Changes as of November 30, 2015

Campaign
  • Removed half damage option from global settings
  • Easy difficulty in campaign:
    • +50% damage dealt
    • -50% damage taken
    • +500 sensor range
    • +50% extra salvage
    • Halved enemy officer level
    • Extra starting money (10,000)
    • Extra starting ship, with officer
  • Added faction commissions
    • Offered by Hegemony, Tri-Tachyon, Luddic Church, Sindrian Diktat, and the independents
    • Can be accepted via the mission board if your standing is at least favorable
    • Makes you immediately hostile with the faction's enemies
    • Automatically annulled if your reputation with the faction drops to suspicious or below
    • Grants a small bounty for fighting faction's enemies, similarly to a system bounty but not restricted to a specific system
    • Required for most military-market purchases (anything requiring "welcoming" or above)
    • Small monthly reputation penalties for being hostile with neutral factions, and for not being hostile to faction enemies
  • Turned off "faction ties" investigations
  • Added faction hostility events
    • Otherwise non-hostile factions may become hostile to each other for up to a cycle
    • Hostile player actions while holding a faction commission increase the chance of inter-faction hostilities
  • Faction capital ships now available on markets of size 5 and above
    • Tri-Tachyon capital ships available on Ogma in Hybrasil
  • Increased range at which most pirate fleets can be detected by making (D) hull hull-mods increase sensor profile
  • Faint "near sensor range" indicators now shown for fleets that are only at "unidentified contact" level
  • Safety Overrides:
    • Can no longer be installed on civilian-grade hulls
  • Increased number of pirate fleets
  • Coming into market will now automatically turn off Emergency Burn
  • Improved procurement mission variety
    • Increased low-end prices
  • Sensor strength/profile will now show fractional values where necessary (i.e. phase ships, civilian ships, ships with Augmented Engines)
  • Smuggling investigations
    • Take 3-4 months to finish instead of 2-3
    • Won't happen if the faction is already hostile to the player
  • Black market:
    • Reduced number of (D) variants
    • Added ships and weapons drawn from the "independent" faction
    • Slightly higher chance of getting ships/weapons from market's faction, even at high stability
    • Better odds for some specific weapons to spawn:
      • Light Assault Gun
      • IR Pulse Laser
      • Phase Lance
      • Sabot Pods
  • Fleet compositions: reduced number of fighters in carrier groups, improved algorithm to more closely match intended ship distributions
  • Removed reputation decay/increase from not interaction with a faction for a while
  • Boarding: when multiple ships are potentially boardable, more expensive ships have a higher chance of being picked in proportion to their cost
  • Damaging allied fighters no longer causes friendly fire incidents
  • Increased damage threshold for friendly fire incidents
  • Changed "mission accept" shortcut to T
  • Officers now retained upon losing full fleet and respawning
  • Missions the player can't accept are now sorted to the bottom of the list
  • Missions the player can't accept now look dimmer in mission list
  • Market procurement missions show days left in intel filter
  • Added star system and faction to system bounty in intel filter
  • Commodities available for sale on markets reduced to more reasonable quantities
  • Increased "deserter" bounties by 50%
  • Fleets now have a minimum sensor strength of 4; fleets with a lower strength receive a "low engine interference" bonus to make up the difference
  • Immediate area around player should mostly not have hostile fleets on spawn or respawn

Combat
  • Enabled escort commands when selecting allied ships
  • Venting will now interrupt travel drive
  • Gryphon:
    • Reduced ordnance points by 15
    • Missile Autoforge:
      • Increased flux generation
      • Limited to 1 use per battle
      • Removed CR cost
  • Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployed
  • Fortress Shields: now takes 1 second to ramp up to full damage absorption bonus
  • Ship AI:
    • Will now properly turn off missile groups set to autofire instead of leaving them on and firing all missiles at the first target

Modding
  • BattleAPI
    • Map<FleetMemberAPI, CampaignFleetAPI> getMemberSourceMap()
  • Fixed crash caused by spawning ships in campaign battles
  • Ships spawned in the campaign battle via scripts, that aren't added to the member source map, will not show up as "disabled", "destroyer", etc
  • LocationAPI.addTerrain() now returns CampaignTerrainAPI, for clarity/to avoid extra cast
  • Added Misc.getHyperspaceTerrain() method that returns the CampaignTerrainAPI for the main hyperspace terrain
  • MissionBoardAPI
    • void makeAvailableAt(CampaignMissionPlugin mission, MarketAPI market)
  • Fixed issue where procurement missions were made available using the market id instead of an entity id
  • Fixed bug with decorative weapons not rendering properly on fighter wing icons
  • Removed speed cap of 600 on missiles
  • Fixed bug where buffs would not apply to ships in the refit screen or in simulation
  • Fixed bug where calling MarketAPI.removePerson() on a market with no people would crash
  • SettingsAPI:
    • List<RoleEntryAPI> getDefaultEntriesForRole(String role);
    • void addDefaultEntryForRole(String role, String variantId, float weight);
    • void removeDefaultEntryForRole(String role, String variantId);
    • List<RoleEntryAPI> getEntriesForRole(String factionId, String role);
    • void addEntryForRole(String factionId, String role, String variantId, float weight);
    • void removeEntryForRole(String factionId, String role, String variantId);
  • RoleEntryAPI;
    • String getVariantId();
    • void setWeight(float weight);
    • void setVariantId(String variantId);
    • float getWeight();
    • boolean isFighterWing();
    • float getQuality();
    • void setQuality(float quality);
    • float getFPCost();
  • Added "faction crests" - square version of flag for UI use
  • FactionAPI
    • String getCrest()
  • CampaignMissionPlugin.playerAccept() now has a SectorEntityToken parameter
  • Added FleetEncounterContextPlugin.computePlayerContribFraction()
  • Added FighterWingAPI.getWingLeader()


Bugfixing
  • Changed message when clicking on identified contact on map to "... course for unidentified contact" instead of including (as yet invisible) fleet name
  • Fixed issue where transferring ships with officers/yourself assigned to command into storage could result in temporary duplicate officers
  • Fixed issue where person bounty would report full amount when a player only got a share due to ally participation
  • Fixed issue with Tachyon Lance EMP arcs passing through shields
  • Fixed issue where terrain info UI element would sometimes get out of alignment
  • Advanced Tactics perk description no longer mentions crew
  • Fixed assorted typos
  • Fixed issue where boarding a ship with an officer would keep that officer in command of the ship until it was unassigned
  • Fixed issue where player crew casualties weren't being reported after battle
  • Fixed tooltip for "High Maintenance" hullmod
  • Fixed "free port" markets not allowing open transponder-off trade
  • Fixed issue with smuggler fleet commanders sometimes showing independent flag when functioning as pirates
  • Fixed xyphos description referring to phase beam instead of pulse laser
  • Fixed issue where AI could cancel the retreat drive burn by venting
  • Fixed encounter flow where the player joins a battle but their allies elect not to fight
  • Fixed issue where missions would not show up in orbital stations' comm directories
  • Fixed issues with "Volatiles Depot" and "Dissident Population" market conditions
  • Fixed bug with excess casualties from boarding; should now be close to the number of lifesigns detected
  • Fixed bug where autoresolving pursuit without having allies yielded no salvage
  • Fixed issue where ships that are too expensive to be bought after tariff, but not before, could be bought, resulting in negative credits
  • Adjusted help message that mentioned the now-non-existent logistical priority button
  • Burn level tooltip now properly shows slower ships first in the ship list
  • Fixed issue where procurement missions could target markets that had that commodity for sale in sufficient quantity
  • Suspicion chance for smuggling investigations no longer shows "none" for <1% chance
  • Fixed bug with Squall missile launcher getting reduced range from taking Missile Specialization
  • Fixed out-of-memory crashes some players were experiencing (before battle, transitioning jumppoints, taking screenshots)
  • Fixed issue with the Apogee not firing the Squall MLRS due to it pointing at an off angle
  • Fixed issue where if a bounty fleet lost its commander, but wasn't entirely destroyed, the player would still get a bounty for them
  • Updated some obsolete tooltips
  • Fixed 20% chance for fleet tutorial to crash
  • "Military Base" market conditions should properly increase local fuel stockpiles
  • Fixed bug where player fleet could join battle against itself
  • Fixed bug where the confirmation for attacking a non-hostile enemy was using the faction of the combined player-side fleet, which wasn't always the player
  • Fixed later-game framerate stutter issue in campaign
  • Fixed issue where having emergency burn enabled would prevent CR loss from star coronas and hyperspace storms
  • Fixed issue where combat tutorials would end automatically after a couple of minutes
  • Fixed rare case where using phase cloak and venting at the same time could result in both overloading and venting


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 06:12:47 PM
Going to spend a bit of time testing this, see how it goes, and then make a release if all is well. Planning to do a .2 release at some point after that to address other lower-priority issues.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on November 30, 2015, 06:57:36 PM
Will this be compatible with 0.7a saves?


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on November 30, 2015, 06:57:49 PM
Those faction commissions!  Awesome!

Do what you want 'cause a pirate is!...wait, wrong faction. :)


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Abradolf Lincler on November 30, 2015, 06:58:17 PM
Will this be compatible with 0.7a saves?

I hope so...


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on November 30, 2015, 06:58:35 PM
Doh, since I decided to play Ironman for my first .7 game I went with Easy to get the hang of all the new changes but now those easy changes are waaaay too easy for me, lol. Are the Easy mode changes retroactive to current save games or no? If they are is there a way to change it to Normal mode via some command?


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 07:00:56 PM
Will this be compatible with 0.7a saves?

Should be, and as far as I can tell right now it is (i.e. .7a saves load just fine). It's possible I'm missing something obscure, though, so I can't say 100%. 99%, perhaps? :)

Doh, since I decided to play Ironman for my first .7 game I went with Easy to get the hang of all the new changes but now those easy changes are waaaay too easy for me, lol. Are the Easy mode changes retroactive to current save games or no? If they are is there a way to change it to Normal mode via some command?

You can configure every easy mode effect through settings.json:
"easyPlayerDamageDealtMult":1.5,
"easyPlayerDamageTakenMult":0.5,
"easySensorBonus":500,
"easySalvageMult":1.5,
"easyOfficerLevelMult":0.5,

It's also possible to change to normal through code, and iirc the console mod lets you run code, so it should be doable. Also probably a pretty easy save-file-edit.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on November 30, 2015, 07:06:25 PM
The commission mechanic is an elegant way of giving the player incentive to pick a faction. Likewise, factions declaring open hostility draws some lines in the sand that the player will need to make a choice about.

A lot of nice other changes. Can't wait to try it out.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on November 30, 2015, 07:07:00 PM
  • Grants a small bounty for fighting faction's enemies, similarly to a system bounty but not restricted to a specific system

Best news I've heard all day.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on November 30, 2015, 07:09:20 PM
More pirate fleets - thank god, I was starting to run out of cannon fodder and cash. :)

By the way, I feel like the Pirates have been left out of a lot of the faction interaction - if anything, they should also be able to take advantage of this "mercenary" thing the rest of the factions have going for them.  Also, regarding the faction commissions, can those be canceled at any time without dropping down to Suspicious?

...Also, as a side note, can we edit those Easy Mode modifiers to make the game harder, e.g. lower the salvage or up damage multipliers?  Just out of curiosity, if the game can even comprehend what I'm trying to do with that so-called "Easy Mode", heh.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on November 30, 2015, 07:11:07 PM
So can you have a commission with the Independents + one of the big four and still be cool?


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on November 30, 2015, 07:18:21 PM
It seems like it, at least until a temporary faction hostility event ensues.

I probably need to restart a new game.  I am Vengeful with everyone except Hegemony and Independents.  No way to raise relations even after doing bounty work.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Abradolf Lincler on November 30, 2015, 07:29:20 PM
It seems like it, at least until a temporary faction hostility event ensues.

I probably need to restart a new game.  I am Vengeful with everyone except Hegemony and Independents.  No way to raise relations even after doing bounty work.

I wouldn't feel that bad about consoling some relations in the wake of the changes, I felt jipped because of the Investigations(looking at you Diktat) and I wouldn't feel like I was cheating.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 07:30:13 PM
Also, regarding the faction commissions, can those be canceled at any time without dropping down to Suspicious?

No, they can't.

...Also, as a side note, can we edit those Easy Mode modifiers to make the game harder, e.g. lower the salvage or up damage multipliers?  Just out of curiosity, if the game can even comprehend what I'm trying to do with that so-called "Easy Mode", heh.

I like the way you think! Probably; seems like it all ought to work.

So can you have a commission with the Independents + one of the big four and still be cool?

You can only have one commission at a time.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on November 30, 2015, 07:31:11 PM
Aaaaaah, so much awesome. Man I remember the best feeling ever in game dev was watching the bug count fall. Looks like you have been busy.  :)

Wondering about the SO change on civilian hulls, though. Now Kite(o) will no longer be hilarious fast.   :'(

The faction changes sound awesome.  :D


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on November 30, 2015, 07:47:58 PM
The new commission system sounds awesome.

Also I've only encountered some of the bugs you fixed, but that one where you can fight yourself sounds hilarious. Especially if you got it to correspond with the clone yourself to all your ships.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 08:04:40 PM
Also I've only encountered some of the bugs you fixed, but that one where you can fight yourself sounds hilarious. Especially if you got it to correspond with the clone yourself to all your ships.

Sadly, it wasn't as amazing as it could have been. Both sides spawned hostile to you.

Wondering about the SO change on civilian hulls, though. Now Kite(o) will no longer be hilarious fast.   :'(

It was kind of a no-brainer on civ hulls so they could get away in escape scenarios trivially; didn't feel right.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on November 30, 2015, 08:17:06 PM
Ouch, you sure on cutting the Gryphon's OP by 15 isn't going a bit overboard? Seems harsh considering the cost of cruiser class hullmods and it IS a combat cruiser with a large OP-sucking mount.

Maybe, maybe -5 or -10? ;_;



Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: kazi on November 30, 2015, 08:18:41 PM
I have a small request. Can you set it so that the intel map stays centered on the player or is scrollable? This would make it much more viable for mods to fill the deeper reaches of the sector. This could even be an API method that could be turned on by mods if they spawned outside of the normal sector region. I managed to snag a spot inside the intel map, but other mods may not be so lucky, especially if they add multiple systems.

The commission system sounds awesome. Rather than lose penalty with your commissioned faction for being friends with people you're not supposed to, you should take a minor rep hit over time with the hostile factions. After all, how do they know you're not spying for your new faction? (Bonus points if your faction offers missions where you dock with enemy markets to spy on or sabotage them while friendly, reducing stability.)


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on November 30, 2015, 08:19:10 PM
I think Independents or pirates shouldn't require(or offer) commission...right?


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Abradolf Lincler on November 30, 2015, 08:20:26 PM
I know this is a stupid question but what does SO mean? ???


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: kazi on November 30, 2015, 08:25:42 PM
I know this is a stupid question but what does SO mean? ???

Significant other  ;)


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on November 30, 2015, 08:25:57 PM
Safety Override hullmod.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 08:27:45 PM
Ouch, you sure on cutting the Gryphon's OP by 15 isn't going a bit overboard? Seems harsh considering the cost of cruiser class hullmods and it IS a combat cruiser with a large OP-sucking mount.

Maybe, maybe -5 or -10? ;_;

It felt very much like that thing had too many OP to burn. Too easy to get a loadout with maxed vents and capacitors. And according to eldritch internal formulae, it did indeed have too many OP :)

I have a small request. Can you set it so that the intel map stays centered on the player or is scrollable? This would make it much more viable for mods to fill the deeper reaches of the sector. This could even be an API method that could be turned on by mods if they spawned outside of the normal sector region. I managed to snag a spot inside the intel map, but other mods may not be so lucky, especially if they add multiple systems.

That's pretty non-trivial, but I'll take a look the 0.7.2a. Definitely can't do it for the .1.

I think Independents or pirates shouldn't require(or offer) commission...right?

Well, the pirates don't. The independents? I suppose it depends how you look at them. If there's a loose alliance of worlds, it's not out of the question that such an alliance, as a whole, might offer commissions to independent captains.

... mainly, though, the independents offer commissions so that there doesn't need to be some other way to get at their military market hardware. Whether this keeps on or not is TBD.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on November 30, 2015, 08:33:39 PM
Hm.  So in .1 we won't have access to independent military + one faction military markets?  That's a significant nerf to ability to find ships.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cik on November 30, 2015, 08:36:02 PM
so no commission with pirates? it doesn't really fit but pirate campaigns are already very difficult.

can i beg your opinion on the status of fighters directly, by the way? do you think they are balanced? too powerful? not enough?

i really like fighters and want to use them, but you've probably read my opinions already.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on November 30, 2015, 08:40:08 PM
Pirate commission? Immediate hostile with everyone else in the Sector, no access to open markets except those filled with terrible (D)s...
I don't think it's worth it.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: kazi on November 30, 2015, 08:43:46 PM
I have a small request. Can you set it so that the intel map stays centered on the player or is scrollable? This would make it much more viable for mods to fill the deeper reaches of the sector. This could even be an API method that could be turned on by mods if they spawned outside of the normal sector region. I managed to snag a spot inside the intel map, but other mods may not be so lucky, especially if they add multiple systems.

That's pretty non-trivial, but I'll take a look the 0.7.2a. Definitely can't do it for the .1.

Ah, didn't know how hard it would be to implement. It's not a hugely pressing issue, but over the long term it'll mean that modders can add more systems than they could otherwise. Right now, the size of the intel map is a bit of a soft cap on the size of the er, "modiverse".


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on November 30, 2015, 08:47:01 PM
Changes look good. I was hoping Xyphos would end up with a miniaturized Phase Lance, but I guess that's just me being a beam fetishist.
A missile ship by design doesn't use a lot of flux. Gryphon should be fine with less.

So as it is now, the Independents and Pirates just work the old way - you get friendly over time and then get access to their military market? Since they're both loose organizations, I think that'd make the most sense. Less of a 'Leader gave you the golden keycard' and more of a general reputation in the sector.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 08:52:54 PM
Hm.  So in .1 we won't have access to independent military + one faction military markets?  That's a significant nerf to ability to find ships.

Note the part about independent ships being available on the black market more often.


so no commission with pirates? it doesn't really fit but pirate campaigns are already very difficult.

Nope.

can i beg your opinion on the status of fighters directly, by the way? do you think they are balanced? too powerful? not enough?

i really like fighters and want to use them, but you've probably read my opinions already.

Ah, I'm not really prepared to go into it right now. It's a backburner thing, but I am thinking about it.

Ah, didn't know how hard it would be to implement. It's not a hugely pressing issue, but over the long term it'll mean that modders can add more systems than they could otherwise. Right now, the size of the intel map is a bit of a soft cap on the size of the er, "modiverse".

Yeah, definitely will have to deal with this at some point; I'd imagine vanilla will need it as well. Part of the reason I'm hesitant to do much about it now, too, since it'll be more clear just how to do it later...


So as it is now, the Independents and Pirates just work the old way - you get friendly over time and then get access to their military market? Since they're both loose organizations, I think that'd make the most sense. Less of a 'Leader gave you the golden keycard' and more of a general reputation in the sector.

There are no pirate military markets. For independents, you can accept a commission to gain military market access.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on November 30, 2015, 09:07:55 PM
Just think of it as becoming a licensed bounty hunter.

What happens for military submarkets under factions that don't do commissions, such as Pirates?  They've got a couple military submarkets here and there.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 30, 2015, 09:12:51 PM
What happens for military submarkets under factions that don't do commissions, such as Pirates?  They've got a couple military submarkets here and there.

I thought they didn't in vanilla? Perhaps David snuck some in.

Well, either way: just made it so that military markets of factions that don't offer commissions don't require commissions. Seems like a fairly natural way to go, all things considered :)


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: StarSchulz on December 01, 2015, 12:08:27 AM
Just one question -

Say i take a commission with the hegemony, immediately dropping my relations with the tri-tachyon to hostile. later, a faction hostility event breaks out between the hegemony and the Sindrian Diktat. My relations to them drop straight to hostile as expected. but when the event is over, what happens to my relations with them? does  it go back to neutral or stay at hostile?

Especially important with this line:
"Removed reputation decay/increase from not interaction with a faction for a while"


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Linnis on December 01, 2015, 01:03:37 AM
Also a small suggestion. Need a UI addition that tells you what fleets can currently see you. Either through map highlights or a list in campaign layer.



Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 01, 2015, 02:46:13 AM
The commission/faction hostility events system sounds as if it would make for a much more dynamic and exiting endgame, looking forward to it ;D

Say i take a commission with the hegemony, immediately dropping my relations with the tri-tachyon to hostile. later, a faction hostility event breaks out between the hegemony and the Sindrian Diktat. My relations to them drop straight to hostile as expected. but when the event is over, what happens to my relations with them? does  it go back to neutral or stay at hostile?

Pretty sure that you don't become automatically hostile if your commission-faction declared war to it after you joined. Otherwise this would not be there:

Small monthly reputation penalties for being hostile with neutral factions, and for not being hostile to faction enemies

Still, that would mean you have to get hostile with them on you own and then quickly get neutral with them again on your own, otherwise you would get hit with a rep loss for your commission-faction. Seems as if at least some help here would be in order. I wouldn't be much fun if the "right" way to play were to get barely hostile and then don't attack anymore, so you can become neutral again quickly.
Maybe you should get no (or minimal) negative reputation automatically (it's easy to get on your own) upon declaration of war, but a huge reputation boost when your commission-faction ends the hostilities (if you are hostile yourself).



Increased range at which most pirate fleets can be detected by making (D) hull hull-mods increase sensor profile

Faint "near sensor range" indicators now shown for fleets that are only at "unidentified contact" level

Fleets now have a minimum sensor strength of 4; fleets with a lower strength receive a "low engine interference" bonus to make up the difference

These changes should make the early game much fairer, nice :)

I'm also happy about the easy mode changes, they hopefully increase the range of people to which I can recommend Sector.


Boarding: when multiple ships are potentially boardable, more expensive ships have a higher chance of being picked in proportion to their cost

Hope that makes for a noticeable difference, would come in handy for the pirate play stile.
Thinking of that, it would be awesome if being hostile with all major factions would yield a steady increase in pirate relationship.
Oh, and please don't forget the bug where pirate raiders attack you while you are friendly with pirates :)


Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployed

Does this hold true for your site, too? Wouldn't want my timid carrier to charge the enemy, just because I have no other officers deployed.


Gryphon changes sound good, but maybe the system still could use a bit of a delay? Maybe as long as a typical overload. Seems as if the double Reaper/Harpoon barrage would be a very viable option for every battle now, and still OP.



Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on December 01, 2015, 03:38:02 AM
Boarding: when multiple ships are potentially boardable, more expensive ships have a higher chance of being picked in proportion to their cost

Actually, this isn't always preferable. For example, I want every Hyperion, Medusa, Omen and Tempest I can get, but do not particularly care about high tech cruisers or Astral that are likely to be present in the same fleet. Maybe we could get to pick from eligible candidates?


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 01, 2015, 04:09:52 AM
Actually, this isn't always preferable. For example, I want every Hyperion, Medusa, Omen and Tempest I can get, but do not particularly care about high tech cruisers or Astral that are likely to be present in the same fleet. Maybe we could get to pick from eligible candidates?

The overall chance to board hight tech frigates should be considerable increased with this, even if its lower than the chance to board cruisers. Not getting offered the D-variants in a otherwise high-tech fleet will see to that.

Picking manually was suggested, like, a hundred times, I don't think it will happen (anytime soon). Probably for UI reasons.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 05:18:02 AM
From the sounds of the Gryphon, it might become the poor-man's Aurora.

Pirates have a military market at Umbra, or will that be ripped out in 0.7.1?

As for inter-faction relations when you want to kill fleets you are not hostile with, you can always fly with transponder off, although that would mean a triple hit in relations if you want to kill a patrol.  One hit for getting caught (but you want to get caught), second hit for refusing to turn transponder on (you do not want to be identified), then third hit after battle.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Unfolder on December 01, 2015, 05:25:33 AM
Oh wow a new version  ??? well i was about to give info in general on the last version, so if anything has been changed to contradict just ignore lol.

In brief: .7 is good, adds a lot and takes little away. Here is some things to consider. In general the biggest problem with new version is for people that like to fight a space pew pew sim, the new radar blindness, while intimidating and interesting, does cut down on one's ability to run from giant fight to giant fight like in the old versions. I kind of miss this, so here's some suggestions that could add while keeping what we've got.

1. Fights should vastly increase the radar signature of ships, to the point that capital ships fighting should be visible anywhere in realspace, dunno about hyperspace but this would give you more opportunities to rush in.

2. Option to "escort" allied fleets, so that your ship is glued on to theirs while they travel. Would be fun for easily traveling with merchant convoys through hyperspace, since they always get ambushed. Mission potential?

3. I don't know how the AI works in terms of strength calibration, but it looks to me that a fleet of strength 5 and a fleet of strength 5, rather than ganging up on a fleet of strength 10, will both run from it and either be defeated piecemeal or, worse, infinitely run from it, creating no battles fro you to join into. Might be wrong about this.

4. Create more regular spawns of planet defense ships, so if you want to go mess up some enemy capitals you can reliably find them if you're willing to travel around. In fact, you could make an "attack station" mission where once you arrive, a fleet generates to fight you, and if you win it decreases the enemy stability.

5. Hacking relays could allow you to see all radar signatures and scans of that faction in that sector, at least of planets and capitals.

6. High faction loyalty allows you to see  what they see, again at least from their capitals in the sector. Warp space could still be "no man's land"

7. Destroying enemy ships sometimes yields "intel" that allows you to briefly see the location of all their ships in sector, capturing a ship yields a longer buff, maybe as long as a minute or more depending on the caputre size. This is the equivalent of "cracking the enigma code." Could also be a mission, capture x units of intel.

8. in general i would advise against defuffing radar strength. its already very hard to see, so the augmented engine debuff is griefy. IF you want to max out your signature, go for it, i actually prefer to be found a lot of times. In fact

9. Add an option for "hot running" where basically you just send out obnoxious blasts of radar static that anyone had his mother to find you. Would be fun for luring people, particularly in warp space where there's a lot of meandering. An "emergency signal" mode would also be neat, in case you are being pursued or out of fuel and there are some allies near by.  

edit 10: maybe an options for allies to join YOUR battle halfway through? dont know if it's remotely possible but would be hilarious to be fighting a slow frigate grind and suddenly an onslaught bursts on to zap them. Or an enemy onslaught to zap YOU

edit 11: some radar mods for sure. Stealth armor. Sensor suite etc etc

That's it for radar. Let's see, the introduction of rare, slightly buffed ships is great, like the capital of the hegemony (17th fleet?) I would like to see A LOT more of that, basically for all ships. Mods?! It would also be neat to see the introduction of buffed weapons and buffed hull mods. I'm not sure how that would work for balance or programming but it would be real neat. Deluxe augmented engines: increases burn and speed, PLUS making engines more durable. Deluxe auxiliary thrusters, increase maneuverability PLUS acceleration. Overclocked vulcan cannons etc etc. I guess it would be a mod thing but perhaps consider the archetecture to allow this.

Overall good though!


 


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 01, 2015, 05:37:11 AM
4. This will kill smuggler players for sure.

5. Lore-wise, comm relay deals only with inter-system comm

9. Emergency signal? YES PLEASE.
If you want to lure anything, go into a storm, turn your transponder on, send a sensor ping and engage emergency burn. Let the chase begin.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 05:39:00 AM
Boarding: when multiple ships are potentially boardable, more expensive ships have a higher chance of being picked in proportion to their cost

Actually, this isn't always preferable. For example, I want every Hyperion, Medusa, Omen and Tempest I can get, but do not particularly care about high tech cruisers or Astral that are likely to be present in the same fleet. Maybe we could get to pick from eligible candidates?
For high-tech, I probably want Hyperion above all else because it is so freaking rare and powerful!  After that, probably the Paragon, then Medusa or Tempest.

There should be one more consideration for boarding:  Marines we have.  If player has enough to board a small ship, but not a capital, pick the best ship we can board.  Don't pick the capital if we have no chance to board it (due to insufficient marines) if there is another ship we can board and capture reliably.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 01, 2015, 05:52:46 AM
7. Destroying enemy ships sometimes yields "intel" that allows you to briefly see the location of all their ships in sector, capturing a ship yields a longer buff, maybe as long as a minute or more depending on the caputre size. This is the equivalent of "cracking the enigma code." Could also be a mission, capture x units of intel.

I'd like that, especially if not destroying, but capturing a ship would sometimes yield said intel.

I also like the "hot running" idea. You can archive something similar with sensor burst but its dangerous and cumbersome.


There should be one more consideration for boarding:  Marines we have.  If player has enough to board a small ship, but not a capital, pick the best ship we can board.  Don't pick the capital if we have no chance to board it (due to insufficient marines) if there is another ship we can board and capture reliably.

Mh, that sounds like a hidden "capture only frigates" option. And many players would not even realize why they never get the chance to board caps, they wouldn't think of increasing marine numbers.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 01, 2015, 05:52:55 AM
Come on! (D) hulls are bad enough without the sensor profile increase! I can't believe I'm the only one that is yet to be (succesfully) ambushed by a pirate fleet!


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 01, 2015, 06:13:54 AM
Good stuff. And I echo the above, pirate fleets should have a slightly higher chance for a non-D class ship to appear.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: goduranus on December 01, 2015, 06:16:59 AM
It makes very good sense that one lone ship would have crappy sensor range, cuz in space you presumably won't be able to get very good sensor readout unless you have multiple sensors far apart, both to triangulate and to cancel out background noise.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 01, 2015, 06:35:27 AM
It makes very good sense that one lone ship would have crappy sensor range, cuz in space you presumably won't be able to get very good sensor readout unless you have multiple sensors far apart, both to triangulate and to cancel out background noise.
Actually, in real world, you can figure out pretty much about where things are by tracking heat radiation... but that goes off-topic here. Also, science fiction.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Twogs on December 01, 2015, 07:25:44 AM
  • Gryphon:
    • Reduced ordnance points by 15
    • Missile Autoforge:
      • Increased flux generation
      • Limited to 1 use per battle
      • Removed CR cost
Sounds to me like a doubling of ammunition at best, almost nothing at worst (read: to early, AI).

Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?

Like:
75% Hard Flux generation
50% Missiles Refilled
10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented

This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds

(Why does this always end with)[/list]


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 07:32:45 AM
Unlimited as suggested would make it like the old unlimited Fast Missile Racks and 500 damage Salamanders combo of doom.  In other words, stupidly overpowered.

With less OP, maybe it would be nice if Gryphon has more base max flux.  5000 makes it easy to overload.  It is almost starved for OP if you want Safety Override on it.

Actually, that could be one more nerf for Gryphon:  Disable Safety Override for it because missiles do not get the range penalty, and the ballistics will probably be filled with short-ranged Vulcans and Flak.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 07:45:20 AM
If Missile Nanoforge can only be used once for battle, why not replace it by adding a builtin hullmod that doubles missile capacity (and is multiplicative with Expanded Missile Racks)?  That way, the ship has all the missiles available without wastage by premature use, especially by AI.  Then the ship system can be set to flares or none.

EDIT:  Scratch that idea, maybe.  Player with high Missile Specialization might get less one-shot Reapers per mount to brutalize fleets with if Missile Nanoforge is implemented as an extra capacity hullmod.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on December 01, 2015, 07:51:27 AM
Really like the sound of a lot of the changes re: factions and relationships. Campaign is a lot of fun this version and it sounds like 0.7.1 will only make it better. The faction hostility events sound awesome, this is really what people have been asking for - the ability to mess around with the game world.

Few things-

Why remove rep decay? This seems like a good way to forgive/encourage experimentation by the player. Unless you read the forums religiously, you won't know all the rules about factions and relationships; neither do I think that the game should explicitly tell you all these things. Leaving it opaque is fine, but the decay is a mechanic to make sure it isn't too punishing.

There is a Pirate market on Umbra as someone mentioned. Pirates deserve to have their special market so the faction maintains some kind of viability. Getting accepted by the pirates should be hard, and it is, but there should still be rewards for it. Commissions don't fit them, but leave some other way to get into the market by rep alone?


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 08:03:38 AM
Quote
•Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployed
Does the player count as an officer for this purpose?  If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?

Sometimes, in early game, I pilot non-combat ships optimized enough for combat to be mildly effective, or at least to destroy other non-combat ships.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Unfolder on December 01, 2015, 08:26:44 AM
If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?

(http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/2-10-2015/LpxIlg.gif)


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 01, 2015, 08:29:57 AM
Quote
•Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployed
Does the player count as an officer for this purpose?  If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?


Steady.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 08:32:49 AM
Quote
?Small monthly reputation penalties for being hostile with neutral factions, and for not being hostile to faction enemies
One more question:  Hostile includes Vengeful too?  It would be silly if I lose reputation with my faction enemies if they hate me too much.

@ Unfolder: Funny as that classic clip is, that would probably be treated as an Aggressive officer if shoehorned into one of the four options available.  But that does not answer the question I posted earlier.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on December 01, 2015, 08:33:25 AM
@Megas: That change was, I'm guessing, meant as a bug fix for a case where someone randomly encountered a group of pirates who'd rolled all timid commanders and essentially got trolled by pirates who wouldn't fight.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 08:44:05 AM
Ah, yes; I remember.  Of all of the officer types to fight against, the most obnoxious personality is timid.  In a big, slow cruiser, an timid enemy ship is of little threat, but it constant taunts you by staying out of your weapons range.  You cannot totally ignore it because it will steal your captured point if you leave it.  The worst case scenario, I wait minutes until the timid ship runs out of CR and loses its engines, then I kill it.  Aggravating as it is, I cannot blame the AI for doing that, I put a timid officer in a Tempest precisely for that purpose!  That is, to capture points when it is safe or to avoid combat entirely if it is not.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 01, 2015, 08:53:03 AM
Do timid officers ever fire their weapons, then? Also, is their hiring cost affected by their personality? I hadn't had the opportunity to discern.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 08:55:51 AM
Yes, timid officers shoot if forced into a fight, or if they have long-range missiles.  One thing I should try is a fleet of ten Vigilance with level 20 timid officers, and see how well they Pilum spam.

No, personality has no effect on their hiring cost of level * 2000 credits.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 09:18:39 AM
One more question:  Do non-combat ships piloted by Aggressive officers count as combat ships for the purpose of toggling Cautious for Timid officers?


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 01, 2015, 09:21:15 AM
Yes, they should; if they don't, it's an oversight for sure.

Actually, no. Read the patch notes again.  :-[

Regarding the Vigilance fleet: Not quite as good as the H-team were, but my money goes on a whopping success. Delicious spam  :)


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaskow on December 01, 2015, 09:29:14 AM
Maybe, devs should reconsider chances of boarding?  ::) Current 5% chance is too low and makes boarding feature (marines) in game totally useless. I've changed chances to 20% and it makes sense now.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Raion on December 01, 2015, 09:37:29 AM

  • Fleet compositions: reduced number of fighters in carrier groups, improved algorithm to more closely match intended ship distributions

Finally,I will not find a bounty fleet with 4 heron carrier and a annoying number of thunder fighter squads easily


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 11:19:15 AM
    @Unfolder: Thanks for your feedback! For the future, a lot of these should probably go in suggestions.


Say i take a commission with the hegemony, immediately dropping my relations with the tri-tachyon to hostile. later, a faction hostility event breaks out between the hegemony and the Sindrian Diktat. My relations to them drop straight to hostile as expected. but when the event is over, what happens to my relations with them? does  it go back to neutral or stay at hostile?

Pretty sure that you don't become automatically hostile if your commission-faction declared war to it after you joined. Otherwise this would not be there:

Still, that would mean you have to get hostile with them on you own and then quickly get neutral with them again on your own, otherwise you would get hit with a rep loss for your commission-faction. Seems as if at least some help here would be in order. I wouldn't be much fun if the "right" way to play were to get barely hostile and then don't attack anymore, so you can become neutral again quickly.
Maybe you should get no (or minimal) negative reputation automatically (it's easy to get on your own) upon declaration of war, but a huge reputation boost when your commission-faction ends the hostilities (if you are hostile yourself).

Right, it doesn't auto-drop. But, yeah, this could get annoying, being stuck with slow gradual rep loss for becoming hostile during hostilities and not becoming non-hostile after.

I think I'll just make it so that you get up to suspicious when hostilities end, if you're below.


Oh, and please don't forget the bug where pirate raiders attack you while you are friendly with pirates :)

On my list for .2!

Gryphon changes sound good, but maybe the system still could use a bit of a delay? Maybe as long as a typical overload. Seems as if the double Reaper/Harpoon barrage would be a very viable option for every battle now, and still OP.

That sounds reasonable, but I find that kind of bursty missile spam just too much fun.

(Still, I've got a TODO item to set the one-shot Reaper cooldown to 5 seconds, if I can bring myself to do it.)


Come on! (D) hulls are bad enough without the sensor profile increase! I can't believe I'm the only one that is yet to be (succesfully) ambushed by a pirate fleet!

Kind of why they exist, "being bad enough" :)


Sounds to me like a doubling of ammunition at best, almost nothing at worst (read: to early, AI).

Sort of, but it does cost a lot of flux, so there's an element of risk to doing it in the thick of things. The AI handles it fairly well imo.


Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?

Like:
75% Hard Flux generation
50% Missiles Refilled
10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented

This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds

(Why does this always end with)[/list]

One big reason is the AI would not  be able to handle this well.



It is almost starved for OP if you want Safety Override on it.

Sounds about right :)

Actually, that could be one more nerf for Gryphon:  Disable Safety Override for it because missiles do not get the range penalty, and the ballistics will probably be filled with short-ranged Vulcans and Flak.

Seems like a meaningful tradeoff to use SO or not. More speed and less peak time, or more flux capacity for defense and use of system? Or more of something else, I suppose.


Why remove rep decay? This seems like a good way to forgive/encourage experimentation by the player. Unless you read the forums religiously, you won't know all the rules about factions and relationships; neither do I think that the game should explicitly tell you all these things. Leaving it opaque is fine, but the decay is a mechanic to make sure it isn't too punishing.

I don't think it was actually doing that, though. So in my view it's more cleanup of stuff that's in there but, if we're being honest, that I've completely forgotten even existed. Not opposed to possibly bringing this back in some other form eventually, though.


Pirates have a military market at Umbra, or will that be ripped out in 0.7.1?
There is a Pirate market on Umbra as someone mentioned. Pirates deserve to have their special market so the faction maintains some kind of viability. Getting accepted by the pirates should be hard, and it is, but there should still be rewards for it. Commissions don't fit them, but leave some other way to get into the market by rep alone?

As I mentioned earlier, pirate military markets don't require commissions.


Does this hold true for your site, too? Wouldn't want my timid carrier to charge the enemy, just because I have no other officers deployed.

Quote
•Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployed
Does the player count as an officer for this purpose?  If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?

The player counts as "steady".


Quote
?Small monthly reputation penalties for being hostile with neutral factions, and for not being hostile to faction enemies
One more question:  Hostile includes Vengeful too?  It would be silly if I lose reputation with my faction enemies if they hate me too much.

Yeah, it'd be weird if it didn't. I see how the phrasing is confusing, though. In this case just using hostile to mean "will shoot you".

One more question:  Do non-combat ships piloted by Aggressive officers count as combat ships for the purpose of toggling Cautious for Timid officers?

They do count. Basically, timid will only become cautious when noone else in the fleet will be their meatshield.


Maybe, devs should reconsider chances of boarding?  ::) Current 5% chance is too low and makes boarding feature (marines) in game totally useless. I've changed chances to 20% and it makes sense now.

I think the main issue is the "lose 1/3rd of marines" bug. Once you start fighting bigger fleets, boarding kicks in fairly often at 5% already, and if you're fighting small pirates, well, (D) ships aren't exactly worth boarding in the first place. But hey, if you prefer 20%, go for it!


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Twogs on December 01, 2015, 11:23:23 AM
    Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?

    Like:
    75% Hard Flux generation
    50% Missiles Refilled
    10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented

    This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds

    (Why does this always end with)[/list]

    One big reason is the AI would not  be able to handle this well.


    The question is how well will the AI use the system you will implement in the next version.

    And as stated above in the one shot form it's little more than an increased missile rack size, as you can in the best case "only" double the rack size


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
    Post by: Grievous69 on December 01, 2015, 11:28:10 AM
      Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?

      Like:
      75% Hard Flux generation
      50% Missiles Refilled
      10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented

      This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds

      (Why does this always end with)[/list]

      One big reason is the AI would not  be able to handle this well.


      The question is how well will the AI use the system you will implement in the next version.

      And as stated above in the one shot form it's little more than an increased missile rack size, as you can in the best case "only" double the rack size

      Quote from Alex:

      Quote
      The AI handles it fairly well imo.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 11:29:55 AM
      The way it is now, it's hard for the AI to mess it up *too* badly.

      And as stated above in the one shot form it's little more than an increased missile rack size, as you can in the best case "only" double the rack size

      That's huge, though. And the flux cost gives it some tactical considerations to work around, i.e. you can't always just unload everything. Hmm - I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. I mean, I understand what you're saying, but it seems like you're thinking of some implications of what you've said that I'm not thinking of, if that makes sense.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Twogs on December 01, 2015, 11:34:15 AM
      That this is a bit sad, considering you designed this wonderful ship and system just to make it a one shot one in the end. As far as I know no other system is a one shot system.
      This system you could almost fit into a hullmod (but like you said, the flux is missing then). Which kinda makes it a sad case


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 11:57:30 AM
      Yeah, you could make a 2x missile ammo hullmod that stacked with expanded missile racks, this is true. That hullmod would be ridiculously overpowered, though. My point is that there's lots of room for the system to be powerful even if it's best-case is equal to this hypothetical hullmod.

      I do see what you're saying now, though. A one-shot system doesn't offer as many opportunities to make a decision about its use. On the other hand, the decision is more important, so there's that. Kind of need to see how it plays out, I think.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 01, 2015, 12:48:17 PM
      Expanded missile rack is a extremely, mh, economical hullmod for what it does on ships with many missile mounts. Maybe its relative low cost skew how people see the worth of the (in effect similar) auto reloader?


      On my list for .2!

      How are the chances that the pirate way of life in general will see some love in that update? Maybe even a pirate start option?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 12:54:16 PM
      Expanded missile rack is a extremely, mh, economical hullmod for what it does on ships with many missile mounts. Maybe its relative low cost skew how people see the worth of the (in effect similar) auto reloader?

      That makes sense, but since they stack, that's a big difference.

      How are the chances that the pirate way of life in general will see some love in that update? Maybe even a pirate start option?

      I've got an item to look at the various starting options. For one, two of them are kind of traps right now. For a pirate start specifically, I don't know. The game doesn't really have a good way to build up pirate standing right now.

      Hmm. Maybe attacking someone with your transponder off could give you a point or two of pirate standing :) Yeah, going to look at it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 01:39:46 PM
      @ Alex: At least my Timids will remain Timid as long as my ship is on the field.  It seems the toggle will mostly apply to the enemy, to stop their taunting.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 01:42:11 PM
      That's the idea, yes. "Cautious" aren't exactly going to be in a rush to close distance, but at least they will now and again.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Aeson on December 01, 2015, 01:48:19 PM
      Quote
      Removed half damage option from global settings
      Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but would you mind explaining why? The easier you make Easy relative to Normal, the harder it'll be to transition from one to the other, and folding the only other difficulty-customization option we had into the Easy start isn't going to help that at all. Plus, while I might want to play Easy for the additional loot, easier economy, etc, half damage to my own ship and half again to my ship's damage output isn't exactly appealing to me (and yes, I realize that this will be something I can change in one of the settings files if I really want the easier economy but not the better flagship).


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 02:00:22 PM
      Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but would you mind explaining why? The easier you make Easy relative to Normal, the harder it'll be to transition from one to the other, and folding the only other difficulty-customization option we had into the Easy start isn't going to help that at all. Plus, while I might want to play Easy for the additional loot, easier economy, etc, half damage to my own ship and half again to my ship's damage output isn't exactly appealing to me (and yes, I realize that this will be something I can change in one of the settings files if I really want the easier economy but not the better flagship).

      It's just confusing to have multiple options doing the same thing.

      I did think about putting all the "easy" settings into the gameplay settings tab instead, but that's hidden away from someone that needs it most, i.e. a new player. Could do it and have it all default to "easy", I suppose - but some aren't ones you can toggle after the game starts (i.e. half-level enemy officers), and it's not exactly great if a new player is playing on easy and doesn't know that, either.

      All in all, this isn't very straightforward design-wise. Different approaches have different benefits and downsides. This way, it seems friendlier for new players, and as you say, a more experienced played does have the option to fine-tune it if they like. Not set on this being the final version of how difficulty levels are going to work, though - want to see how this plays out.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 01, 2015, 02:20:42 PM
      The game doesn't really have a good way to build up pirate standing right now.

      Hmm. Maybe attacking someone with your transponder off could give you a point or two of pirate standing :) Yeah, going to look at it.

      I suppose you'll nerf this after I tell you about it, but there is a kinda good way to build up pirate standing-- as a smuggler. You can either trade with them at a fairly high volume, smuggle stuff into their enemies markets (in a system where there's a pirate world), and most importantly, do missions. I went to that irish planets system and did tonnes of small drug run missions to operators on the independent worlds, or heavy equipment to Donne, etc. Each mission for them gives me a point of rep, and I just have to make sure an independent patrol doesn't catch me with the dope and my transponder off.

      The normal trading often seems to give me more negatives with the pirate enemies than it gives positives with pirates itself, that's why I prefer the missions.

      It takes a lot of time and its a grind, but earning the trust of organized criminals has never been easy. They can't just let anyone in you know.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 01, 2015, 02:27:33 PM
      I did not bother checking settings when I first got the game, and did not realize why I kept getting 50% for mission score despite perfect play at first.

      Settings are easy to overlook, if you assume how things work instead of checking every last detail.

      I think checking Easy during a new game is best for campaign game, though it does not help mission games.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Typo91 on December 01, 2015, 02:53:28 PM
      Wow yikes.... I just won a fight with 3 pirate frigs..
      one of them was boardable, with 1 lifesign on board.
      I figured, this should be easy right? I've got over 150 marines in my fleet... lets kill that guy and take the ship right?


      67 marines where lost....  This ship in question can't even accomadate 67 people... A Kite Class with a max crew space of 30.

      So no more coffee for my marines.... thats for sure.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: ciago92 on December 01, 2015, 02:54:49 PM
      Wow yikes.... I just won a fight with 3 pirate frigs..
      one of them was boardable, with 1 lifesign on board.
      I figured, this should be easy right? I've got over 150 marines in my fleet... lets kill that guy and take the ship right?


      67 marines where lost....  This ship in question can't even accomadate 67 people... A Kite Class with a max crew space of 30.

      So no more coffee for my marines.... thats for sure.

      known bug fixed soon


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 03:09:34 PM
      The game doesn't really have a good way to build up pirate standing right now.

      Hmm. Maybe attacking someone with your transponder off could give you a point or two of pirate standing :) Yeah, going to look at it.

      ...

      It takes a lot of time and its a grind

      Well, that's sort of what I'm saying here :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 01, 2015, 04:14:32 PM
      So would this then be Normal difficulty, Alex?

      "easyPlayerDamageDealtMult":1,
      "easyPlayerDamageTakenMult":1,
      "easySensorBonus":0,
      "easySalvageMult":1,
      "easyOfficerLevelMult":1,


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 04:16:58 PM
      Mostly. You'd also need to add:
      "runDefaultEasyStartScript":false,

      Which turns off the script that gives you an officer and assigns it to your 2nd ship. And comment out the bit in rules.csv that gives you the 2nd ship, and the 10,000 credits.

      But in terms of actual game difficulty rather than starting conditions, yeah, what you've got there would be identical to normal.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Chaotic-Entropy on December 01, 2015, 04:27:54 PM
      Seems like I picked the right time to buy and start playing. ^^

      Significant pieces of progress and an overall interesting foundation of a game.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 01, 2015, 05:12:28 PM
      I'm just wanting my already active save file to not be made any easier due to the changes to Easy mode. I hope I can just ignore those start game scripts. *knows nothing about coding*

      Thanks for being so active on the forums! :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Abradolf Lincler on December 01, 2015, 06:17:41 PM
      Quote
      Grants a small bounty for fighting faction's enemies, similarly to a system bounty but not restricted to a specific system

      Finally, not just stuck killing those Hegemony B******s in Valhalla, FIGHT DA POWER!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Originem on December 01, 2015, 07:55:16 PM
      Fixed bug where buffs would not apply to ships in the refit screen or in simulation.
      does it mean buff managers? or Mutablestats can be changed in the campaign and brought into combat?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 07:56:53 PM
      Fixed bug where buffs would not apply to ships in the refit screen or in simulation.
      does it mean buff managers? or Mutablestats can be changed in the campaign and brought into combat?

      It's buffs from the BuffManager, yes. They were not being applied in the refit screen and sim.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Achataeon on December 01, 2015, 08:32:10 PM
      What does "low engine interference" do? With the sensor strength minimum set to 4, a few (or only one, can't check) frigates could then be given the augmented engines hullmod. Will the penalties given by AE be overwritten by "low engine interference"?

      Edit: How about increasing the distance at which you can ascertain the faction of a fleet? Might help the player keep tabs on who's who.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: TaLaR on December 01, 2015, 08:40:09 PM
      Interaction of "low engine interference" with hullmods is an interesting question.
      Will single Omen have only 4 sensor strength, ignoring it's bonus?
      What about single civilian grade frigate with augmented engines? still 4?

      Hmm... How about making bonus value not [4 - sensor strength], but [4 - sensor profile]. This will solve all above issues, and works as is for usual military vessels. Slight buff to phase ships as side effect though.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Typo91 on December 01, 2015, 08:42:44 PM
      Is the Onslaught suppose to make missiles?

      I have 4x Pilum LRMs on mine, and during a battle i can see the ammo count going up... it never runs out of missiles...

      It doesn't say anywhere this is a feature of it... do Pilums regenerate or something? 

      edit:
      just tested on the Gryphon with Pilums, they regenerate here to.. only slower, without using the Autoforge at all...


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Achataeon on December 01, 2015, 08:46:59 PM
      Pilums regenerate regardless of the ship you mount it to. It's a support missile and all that jazz.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Typo91 on December 01, 2015, 08:51:25 PM
      Pilums regenerate regardless of the ship you mount it to. It's a support missile and all that jazz.

      thats really cool, i'd like to know if other missiles do that too... man i know what i am putting on all my medium missile slots now.

      OH now i see where it says it does that.... i had thought that was the time it takes to fire another round... Reload time shows 6/min on it... ok i gotcha now


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 01, 2015, 09:15:57 PM
      Question - which files containing texts(for player to see) recieved changes? rules.csv obviously, and what else?
      Translating stuff and, you know, having to check all the files for change is terrible.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 01, 2015, 09:28:00 PM
      Interaction of "low engine interference" with hullmods is an interesting question.
      Will single Omen have only 4 sensor strength, ignoring it's bonus?
      What about single civilian grade frigate with augmented engines? still 4?

      Hmm... How about making bonus value not [4 - sensor strength], but [4 - sensor profile]. This will solve all above issues, and works as is for usual military vessels. Slight buff to phase ships as side effect though.

      Oh, good call. Did that. Slight buff to phase ships from this makes perfect sense, this is nice.


      Question - which files containing texts(for player to see) recieved changes? rules.csv obviously, and what else?
      Translating stuff and, you know, having to check all the files for change is terrible.

      Uhh. Yes it is! Which is why I can't really answer your question definitively. reports.csv, for sure. descriptions.csv, I'd imagine - for typos if nothing else. Pretty sure I also touched strings.json. Beyond that... might I recommend BeyondCompare (http://www.scootersoftware.com/)?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 01, 2015, 10:05:23 PM
      Sounds exactly what I was looking for. Thanks!
      (Confused reports.csv with rules.csv...)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Achataeon on December 01, 2015, 10:33:16 PM
      Interaction of "low engine interference" with hullmods is an interesting question.
      Will single Omen have only 4 sensor strength, ignoring it's bonus?
      What about single civilian grade frigate with augmented engines? still 4?

      Hmm... How about making bonus value not [4 - sensor strength], but [4 - sensor profile]. This will solve all above issues, and works as is for usual military vessels. Slight buff to phase ships as side effect though.

      Oh, good call. Did that. Slight buff to phase ships from this makes perfect sense, this is nice.

      Uhm. Sorry to be a bother but could somebody explain what just happened? To break it down to a layman's point of view, what happens to the sensor strength and sensor profile with the aforementioned changes?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 01, 2015, 11:24:35 PM
      Found simple, repeatable bug/issue.  The Tempest's shield arc is too small to protect it from an Omen's EMP emitter.  It will get fried every time it comes near, even with its shields up.  I'm not sure if this part is a bug or an intended interaction, but if the latter is the case then the issue is that the Tempest doesn't know its shields won't work and will willingly, repeatedly bring itself into EMP range to get its engines turned off.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: TaLaR on December 01, 2015, 11:48:37 PM
      Uhm. Sorry to be a bother but could somebody explain what just happened? To break it down to a layman's point of view, what happens to the sensor strength and sensor profile with the aforementioned changes?

      Having strict 4 minimal sensor strength makes sensor strength of single frigate (or several of them, to lesser extent) not important. For single frigate any value in 0..4 range would work exactly same.
      Changes I proposed preserve hullmod bonuses/penalties to sensors (considering that penalties apply to both sensor strength and visibility), while maintaining same minimum of 4 for ships that have no such hullmods.
      Makes lore sense too, consider this analogy: it's easier to hear things, when you are quiet yourself.

      Found simple, repeatable bug/issue.  The Tempest's shield arc is too small to protect it from an Omen's EMP emitter.  It will get fried every time it comes near, even with its shields up.  I'm not sure if this part is a bug or an intended interaction, but if the latter is the case then the issue is that the Tempest doesn't know its shields won't work and will willingly, repeatedly bring itself into EMP range to get its engines turned off.

      Yes, Tempest's shield is somewhat hard to use even for player. Though it's also a benefit too - you are a smaller target (when you correctly align your hull behind shield).
      Having AI better understand narrow shield limitations would be certainly nice.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Originem on December 02, 2015, 12:12:36 AM
      if the "getDescriptionParam" in hullmods can add a param like Fleetmemer ,it will be great :-\


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 02, 2015, 12:37:38 AM
      Uhm. Sorry to be a bother but could somebody explain what just happened? To break it down to a layman's point of view, what happens to the sensor strength and sensor profile with the aforementioned changes?

      Having strict 4 minimal sensor strength makes sensor strength of single frigate (or several of them, to lesser extent) not important. For single frigate any value in 0..4 range would work exactly same.
      Changes I proposed preserve hullmod bonuses/penalties to sensors (considering that penalties apply to both sensor strength and visibility), while maintaining same minimum of 4 for ships that have no such hullmods.
      Makes lore sense too, consider this analogy: it's easier to hear things, when you are quiet yourself.

      Found simple, repeatable bug/issue.  The Tempest's shield arc is too small to protect it from an Omen's EMP emitter.  It will get fried every time it comes near, even with its shields up.  I'm not sure if this part is a bug or an intended interaction, but if the latter is the case then the issue is that the Tempest doesn't know its shields won't work and will willingly, repeatedly bring itself into EMP range to get its engines turned off.

      Yes, Tempest's shield is somewhat hard to use even for player. Though it's also a benefit too - you are a smaller target (when you correctly align your hull behind shield).
      Having AI better understand narrow shield limitations would be certainly nice.

      Honestly, I don't mind the Tempest having a soft counter in (though another premium high-tech frigate might not be the place where that counter is most needed), but I do mind one of the rarest and most expensive frigates in the game not understanding what is essentially a fixed interaction if it comes within EMP range.  I'm not sure if this is a new thing, because I don't remember it happening before.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 02, 2015, 03:58:46 AM
      Interaction of "low engine interference" with hullmods is an interesting question.
      Will single Omen have only 4 sensor strength, ignoring it's bonus?
      What about single civilian grade frigate with augmented engines? still 4?

      Hmm... How about making bonus value not [4 - sensor strength], but [4 - sensor profile]. This will solve all above issues, and works as is for usual military vessels. Slight buff to phase ships as side effect though.

      Oh, good call. Did that. Slight buff to phase ships from this makes perfect sense, this is nice.


      Wait a minute, if I got this right, it doesn't work out.

      It is nice for most ships, but what about civilian vessels above frigate? For example the Atlas: It has Sensor profile 8 and sensor strength 2. With this formula it would have 2 + (4-8) = -2 sensor strength! A civilian cruiser would have -0.5, destroyers 1. Would that mean big civilian ships are (practically) blind when alone? That doesn't make sense.

      You could of course apply the non interference bonus before the hullmods are factored in, although phase ships would not get any bonus that way. Then the Atlas would have (4+(4-4)=4 )/2 =2. Same with all other civilians.

      This has another problem though, ships with high resolution sensors.
      The Omen would have (1+(4-1) =4)*4 =16 sensor strength, which seems excessive. With hullmod applied first it would have 4+(4-1)=7.


      Mh, maybe the different hullmods have to be applied at different times in the calculation?

      Sensor strength would work out this way, from cap to frigate:
      Civilian Grade, hullmod applied later:
      (4+(4-4)) /2 =2
      (3+(4-3)) /2 =2
      (2+(4-2)) /2 =2
      (1+(4-1)) /2 =2

      Phase Field, hullmod applied first:
      4+(4-(4*0.25))=7
      3+(4-(3*0.25))=6.25
      2+(4-(2*0.25))=5.5
      1+(4-(1*0.25))=4.75

      High Res Sensors, hullmod applied first:
      (4*2)+(4-4)= 8
      (3*2)+(4-3)= 7
      (2*3)+(4-2)= 8
      (1*4)+(4-1)= 7

      Multiple Kite fleet:
      ((1+(4-1))/2)    =2 sensor strength for 1 Kite (currently .5)
      ((1+(3-1))/2)*2=3 sensor strength for 2 Kites (currently 1)
      ((1+(2-1))/2)*3=3 sensor strength for 3 Kites (currently 1.5)
      ((1+(1-1))/2)*4=2 sensor strength for 4 Kites (currently 2)

      Multiple Omen fleet:
      ((1*4)+(4-1))    = 7 sensor strength for 1 Omen (currently 4)
      ((1*4)+(3-1))*2=12 sensor strength for 2 Omens (currently 8 )
      ((1*4)+(2-1))*3=15 sensor strength for 3 Omens (currently 12)
      ((1*4)+(1-1))*4=16 sensor strength for 4 Omens (currently 16)

      Multiple Afflictor Fleet:
      (1+(4-(1*0.25)))     =4.75 sensor strength for 1 Afflictor (currently 1)
      (1+(3-(1*0.25)))*2 =7.5 sensor strength for 2 Afflictors (currently 2)
      (1+(2-(1*0.25)))*3 =8.25 sensor strength for 3 Afflictors (currently 3)
      (1+(1-(1*0.25)))*4 =7 sensor strength for 4 Afflictors (currently 4)

      OK, enough.

      A bit wonky, but more reasonable than blinding civilians or just circumventing hullmods for small fleets, I believe.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 02, 2015, 05:03:39 AM
      Tempest (and Hyperion) almost needs Extended Shields - get it.  You better have a good reason not to use Extended Shields.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 02, 2015, 05:15:47 AM
      0.7 RC10. Hegemony convoys keep jumping into Hybrasil and getting destroyed. With transponder on on their run for lives. Clearly not an intended behavior, but is it even worse - a bug?

      I don't see any reason why would they jump in here.
      *Hybrasil has - or should have - no destination for them.
      *The system is located in a remote area. There is no reasonable route which leads near Hybrasil, unless the departure or destination is Hybrasil. With the exception of Yma - Askonia, but who on earth has business in Yma? Drifting in with empty fuel is not the case here.

      Tempest (and Hyperion) almost needs Extended Shields - get it.  You better have a good reason not to use Extended Shields.
      I guess a Terminator carrier with timid officer is a reason not good enough, right? Aside from the fact that a single Terminator can't really terminate anything with shields

      Another question, does patrols tolerate you with transponder off after you accept the commission?
      Also think that you should be able to accept commission at welcoming or above.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 02, 2015, 06:23:11 AM
      Hybrasil has two Independent markets.  Tri-Tachyon is not the only faction living there, though they dominate that system.

      Tempest (and Hyperion) almost needs Extended Shields - get it.  You better have a good reason not to use Extended Shields.
      I guess a Terminator carrier with timid officer is a reason not good enough, right? Aside from the fact that a single Terminator can't really terminate anything with shields
      If I want to take over and use it myself as a temporary flagship, I do want Extended Shields (unless I attempt double blaster configuration, which AI cannot use effectively).  More aggressive AI using a Tempest benefits from Extended Shields.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: TaLaR on December 02, 2015, 06:34:50 AM
      @Gothars
      I assumed that:
      1)Bonus is applied only if positive
      2)Bonus is calculated once per fleet, not per ship

      So:
      now -> min 4 total -> +max(0, 4-profile)

      (1,1) -> (4,1) -> (4,1) normal frigate
      (4,1) -> (4,1) -> (7,1) single Omen
      (0.5,2) -> (4, 2) -> (2.5, 2) single civilian frigate
      (16,4) -> (16,4) -> (16,4) four Omens, unaffected either way


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Chronosfear on December 02, 2015, 07:13:06 AM
      Hey Alex.
      Can you answer a little question : Does the damage buff and such only apply to the piloted ship or every ship of my fleet ( since its altered to the current game option )

      and maybe you might consider giving us a little more flexibility in choosing the difficulty other then editing the files.
      Like adding a simple question for each of the settings.
      could be like
      In my Universe I´m ...
      ...a master of weapons (easy : 150% player damage)
      ...just normal as everyone (normal : 100% player damage)
      ...happy if that weapon at least tries to do what I want (hard : 50?(75%) player damage)

      the same with damage taken, sensor range and supplies dropped:
      Could also add a question for boarding with different % ( maybe 20% for easy , 10% for normal , and the current 5% for hard )

      Also the sensor range could just be just 150% of base
      ( if your fleet is larger, then bonus is higher i know but who cares , you´re playing on easy anyway)
      and that would add an option for hard ( 75% sensor range )  :o

      also i like the removal of the faction ties feature, while still being "forced" to join a faction via faction commisions.

      Chronosfear



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Morrigi on December 02, 2015, 08:36:44 AM
      Maybe, devs should reconsider chances of boarding?  ::) Current 5% chance is too low and makes boarding feature (marines) in game totally useless. I've changed chances to 20% and it makes sense now.
      Wait, how do I do that?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Aeson on December 02, 2015, 08:54:08 AM
      Maybe, devs should reconsider chances of boarding?  ::) Current 5% chance is too low and makes boarding feature (marines) in game totally useless. I've changed chances to 20% and it makes sense now.
      Wait, how do I do that?
      Find settings.json in Starsector\starsector-core\data\config, search for the variable boardingchance, and change the value from 0.05 to 0.2 (or whatever other value you desire). Note that these are decimal equivalents of the percentage chance to have the ability to board the ship.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 02, 2015, 09:43:56 AM
      What if all ships were theoretically boardable, or "salvageable" after a fight. You would need to repair them at your base of course, and supply a lot of materials for the truly mangled ones. Boarding actions could vary based on how badly damaged ships were, with ships that still have a lot of armor and werent pushed far into "overkill" territory (completely blow up) be much more likely to be operational whereas ships that were wrecked be much more dangerous to board. Also there could  be more marine complements in less damaged ships. You could do mini-text adventure type events, you round the corner-ambush!-security drones pour out of the wrecked air vents-muwhahhaha.

      also marines could gain experience the way crew do, to better deal with these shenanigans


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 02, 2015, 10:00:37 AM
      Tempest (and Hyperion) almost needs Extended Shields - get it.  You better have a good reason not to use Extended Shields.

      Honest answer;  a max-skilled augmented engined Tempest is borderline uncontrollable to me, so I just hand it off to the AI, which is generally a twitch master with shields (especially on a ship fast enough to generally not get hit).  Getting EMP'ed through shields is pretty much the only time it's a problem, and I could probably just solve that by putting a cautious officer into it since my current Tempest loadout is twin Phase Lances with advanced optics and an officer with Gunnery implants.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 02, 2015, 11:42:52 AM
      What if all ships were theoretically boardable, or "salvageable" after a fight. You would need to repair them at your base of course, and supply a lot of materials for the truly mangled ones. Boarding actions could vary based on how badly damaged ships were, with ships that still have a lot of armor and werent pushed far into "overkill" territory (completely blow up) be much more likely to be operational whereas ships that were wrecked be much more dangerous to board. Also there could  be more marine complements in less damaged ships. You could do mini-text adventure type events, you round the corner-ambush!-security drones pour out of the wrecked air vents-muwhahhaha.

      also marines could gain experience the way crew do, to better deal with these shenanigans

      There's this pervasive fixation folk have regarding minigames for boarding.
      Maybe they'd be fun the first few times you did them, but they will quickly become a chore that just got in the way of playing the actual game. Just another thing to be run a quickly as possible, or more likely skipped altogether.

      The single best thing that could be done for the boarding is to crib from SS+ and have back-to-back boarding events for every disabled ship that passes the RNG for any given battle.
      Then the 5% doesn't matter as you get multiple rolls every battle instead of just one.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 02, 2015, 11:54:49 AM
      Found simple, repeatable bug/issue.  The Tempest's shield arc is too small to protect it from an Omen's EMP emitter.  It will get fried every time it comes near, even with its shields up.  I'm not sure if this part is a bug or an intended interaction, but if the latter is the case then the issue is that the Tempest doesn't know its shields won't work and will willingly, repeatedly bring itself into EMP range to get its engines turned off.

      Thanks - taking a look right now. Seems to be an issue with the threat range of the EMP system being too low - once the shield is fully up, it does a good job blocking the arc, but it just doesn't raise it early enough to always work.

      Edit: fixed. It was treating ship system threat as "missile" threat by accident, which made it not raise shields unless there was a direct missile danger or threat from other non-missile weapons...

      @Gothars
      I assumed that:
      1)Bonus is applied only if positive
      2)Bonus is calculated once per fleet, not per ship

      So:
      now -> min 4 total -> +max(0, 4-profile)

      (1,1) -> (4,1) -> (4,1) normal frigate
      (4,1) -> (4,1) -> (7,1) single Omen
      (0.5,2) -> (4, 2) -> (2.5, 2) single civilian frigate
      (16,4) -> (16,4) -> (16,4) four Omens, unaffected either way

      Yep, that's exactly how it works.


      Can you answer a little question : Does the damage buff and such only apply to the piloted ship or every ship of my fleet ( since its altered to the current game option )

      Just your piloted ship.

      and maybe you might consider giving us a little more flexibility in choosing the difficulty other then editing the files.
      Like adding a simple question for each of the settings.

      The issue there is that you're asking a new player to make choices about things before they know what those things are. "A la carte" settings are also more troublesome from a feedback/debugging/meaningful discussion point of view.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Baqar79 on December 02, 2015, 12:35:36 PM
      • Fixed issue where combat tutorials would end automatically after a couple of minutes
      Damn it!, i'm an awful alpha tester.  I noticed this earlier on and I didn't report it.  Instead of reporting it I just tried to play through the tutorial faster (which actually worked).

      There was something else I noticed; the movement of ships on the map sometimes have a spinning movement to them...it looks rather crazy so I don't think it is intentional, since the rate of change in direction is very fast (it's part of the reason those fleeing fleets are so difficult to catch).  I thought I saw you posted something earlier showing a ship on the map just spinning around in circles, but I can't locate that one again.  Anyway that was similar to the movement I observed.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Tarran on December 02, 2015, 08:15:01 PM
      and maybe you might consider giving us a little more flexibility in choosing the difficulty other then editing the files.
      Like adding a simple question for each of the settings.

      The issue there is that you're asking a new player to make choices about things before they know what those things are. "A la carte" settings are also more troublesome from a feedback/debugging/meaningful discussion point of view.
      Well, couldn't you just offer Easy, Standard, and Custom choices when choosing difficulty, where the custom option allows individual choices while Easy and Standard are still fixed? So if new players don't have any idea of what the options do, they can still pick "easy" or "standard"?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 02, 2015, 10:39:57 PM
      • Fixed issue where combat tutorials would end automatically after a couple of minutes
      Damn it!, i'm an awful alpha tester.  I noticed this earlier on and I didn't report it.  Instead of reporting it I just tried to play through the tutorial faster (which actually worked).

      It's all good. Can't really expect everyone to report everything; I just really appreciate the reports I do get :)

      There was something else I noticed; the movement of ships on the map sometimes have a spinning movement to them...it looks rather crazy so I don't think it is intentional, since the rate of change in direction is very fast (it's part of the reason those fleeing fleets are so difficult to catch).  I thought I saw you posted something earlier showing a ship on the map just spinning around in circles, but I can't locate that one again.  Anyway that was similar to the movement I observed.

      Not quite sure what you mean - that is, haven't seen it myself. Unless we're talking with emergency burn, that can get a little crazy sometimes...

      Well, couldn't you just offer Easy, Standard, and Custom choices when choosing difficulty, where the custom option allows individual choices while Easy and Standard are still fixed? So if new players don't have any idea of what the options do, they can still pick "easy" or "standard"?

      There's still the "more troublesome from a feedback/debugging/meaningful discussion point of view" part. You can still tweak it via settings.json if it's something you really care about, though.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Baqar79 on December 03, 2015, 01:09:33 AM
      Not quite sure what you mean - that is, haven't seen it myself. Unless we're talking with emergency burn, that can get a little crazy sometimes...

      I'm pretty certain this occurs when other fleets engage emergency burn.   I've seen on occasion this weird spiral escape pattern (like a corkscrew placed on it's side, ie tilted spiral).

      Most of the times I see this weirdness it is probably just as you describe: 'crazy sometimes...'


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 03, 2015, 01:48:03 AM
      Question - with economy being fixed in 0.7.1, what effect would [the massive stockpiles caused by 0.7.0] have on the game economy?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: zakastra on December 03, 2015, 06:21:16 AM
      Not quite sure what you mean - that is, haven't seen it myself. Unless we're talking with emergency burn, that can get a little crazy sometimes...

      I'm pretty certain this occurs when other fleets engage emergency burn.   I've seen on occasion this weird spiral escape pattern (like a corkscrew placed on it's side, ie tilted spiral).

      Most of the times I see this weirdness it is probably just as you describe: 'crazy sometimes...'

      I have a sneaking suspicion that this is due to damaged/failing engines from low combat readyness, as if one side of the engine is out, and they push an emergency burn, they will start turning because of uneven thrust. which is kind of awesome and hilarious.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 03, 2015, 07:13:12 AM

      There's this pervasive fixation folk have regarding minigames for boarding.
      Maybe they'd be fun the first few times you did them, but they will quickly become a chore that just got in the way of playing the actual game. Just another thing to be run a quickly as possible, or more likely skipped altogether.


      I mean, lol, okay, that's a funny critique. "Boarding games would SUCK, boarding already SUCKS with the minimum amount of work, no need for further improvements in the work to suck ratio"

      I mean, idk, boarding is repeatedly hyped as critical to the game's final form, particularly in regards to capturing these blueprints or w/e, but the thing consistently hasn't been fleshed out and is horribly griefy and it's just funny, cause of all the things that could be fleshed out and ungriefed with the minimum of effort, a thing which is essentially a text adventure with some maths would seem to be high on the "low hanging fruit" list. I mean, text adventures can be quite fun, and given the huge number of ships and possible iterations of situations, you could add a "random generator" system that could create a huge number of situations. For example, boarding in hyperspace, around planets, in asteroid belts could be very dangerous, attacking troop transports could potentially be disasterous as a compartment full of marines you didn't scan burst forth, tri-taychon ships could use advanced robot defenses, on and on and that's just one minute of off the cuff ideas. Plus it provides a huge avenue of potential logistics skills, boarding actions, crew manuver, officers could provide buffs to their crews, with aggressive officers suicide bombing the marines and timid officers immediately surrending, lol.

      idk w/e maybe starsector was just designed to have crappy griefy boarding actions okay lol that's cool i guess reach for those stars


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 03, 2015, 07:22:51 AM

      I mean, lol, okay, that's a funny critique. "Boarding games would SUCK, boarding already SUCKS with the minimum amount of work, no need for further improvements in the work to suck ratio"

      I mean, idk, boarding is repeatedly hyped as critical to the game's final form, particularly in regards to capturing these blueprints or w/e, but the thing consistently hasn't been fleshed out and is horribly griefy and it's just funny, cause of all the things that could be fleshed out and ungriefed with the minimum of effort, a thing which is essentially a text adventure with some maths would seem to be high on the "low hanging fruit" list. I mean, text adventures can be quite fun, and given the huge number of ships and possible iterations of situations, you could add a "random generator" system that could create a huge number of situations. For example, boarding in hyperspace, around planets, in asteroid belts could be very dangerous, attacking troop transports could potentially be disasterous as a compartment full of marines you didn't scan burst forth, tri-taychon ships could use advanced robot defenses, on and on and that's just one minute of off the cuff ideas. Plus it provides a huge avenue of potential logistics skills, boarding actions, crew manuver, officers could provide buffs to their crews, with aggressive officers suicide bombing the marines and timid officers immediately surrending, lol.

      idk w/e maybe starsector was just designed to have crappy griefy boarding actions okay lol that's cool i guess reach for those stars

      Yes the boarding mechanic in SS is pretty useless and should be changed, but relax a bit :).  The issue with the minigames is that SS is a game about exploring the sector, trading, and fighting. If a boarding minigame becomes too elaborate, then SS becomes about boarding spaceships, and maybe that isn't what the developer wants to make a game about, and maybe it isn't what people want to play when they're in the middle of doing other stuff. You could make a whole separate game just about ship to ship boarding combat.

      Have you ever played Escape Velocity (old) or Endless Sky (new)? That's all the boarding needs to be - a single dialog box but with a way to pick which ships you board, and some fairly transparent method of figuring out the odds. And  doesn't interrupt the flow of the rest of the game, unlike some dwarf fortress complex boarding minigame.

      But the thing is, this should all go on the suggestions forum, not here. There are a bunch of threads there about this you can read first for background also.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 03, 2015, 12:35:42 PM
      Question - with economy being fixed in 0.7.1, what effect would [the massive stockpiles caused by 0.7.0] have on the game economy?

      I'm not quite sure what you mean by "economy being fixed". They'd have no effect, though. They didn't before, either. It was just a presentation issue - seems like if you have a ton of stuff on the open market, people tend to assume there's a glut and prices are low, even if they aren't. There was just more stuff on the open markets due to the scale of the economy being larger due to more/larger markets being in play.

      (The thing with the Mimir Siphon Platform having *that* many volatiles seems like it was a bug somewhere, though.)



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Kzanu on December 03, 2015, 01:42:22 PM
      Any change for an eta for that update? I would really love to play even more version .7 but the stuttering issue is really breaking my fun.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 03, 2015, 01:49:17 PM
      :(

      It's not going to be today, but assuming all goes well with the last bits of playtesting - very soon!


      Hmm, you know - if you edit settings.json and change:
      "maxMarketProcurementConcurrent":20;
      To 0 instead, that *may* help the stuttering issue. It'll also stop new procurement missions from being generated, though.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Kzanu on December 03, 2015, 01:52:24 PM
      Thanks !!! No worries, I'm only bounty hunting and fighting around. Not really interested in trading (although my 200 organs from storage "wink wink" do scream OPPORTUNIST).


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 03, 2015, 02:09:07 PM
      Did it actually help? :) Not 100% on whether it will or not.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Kzanu on December 03, 2015, 03:04:35 PM
      "With tears in his eyes"
      Yes, it did help. I just started it a little, because I was trying a new space EA game, BUT IT WORKS OMG. IT WOOORKS. I couldn't get used to my screen not freezing every few seconds. I just flew around for 5 minutes. Just flew. Around. Beautiful.

      Who knew space was such a pleasure to travel?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 03, 2015, 03:26:59 PM
      Sounds like something is messing up the mission generation?

      I saw more-than-5-digits stockpiles only on Mimir. Can't be sure about Eos CGR markets(which had 6-digits stockpile of food in 0m65) tho, since now they hate me badly.
      It does looks like a bug.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 03, 2015, 03:55:42 PM
      Yes the boarding mechanic in SS is pretty useless and should be changed

      I quite like the simple textscroll thing. (http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a224/Tifi78/Smilies/crossarms_zps5652b772.gif)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zhentar on December 03, 2015, 06:53:14 PM
      Sounds like it's a bit late for 0.7.1... but maybe for 0.7.2? I'd love to see some trading and sensor related skills in the Leadership branch. Like lower tariffs, lower smuggling risks, better price intel, lower sensor profile, longer sensor range (maybe make the sensor ones based on fleet size, so it makes more sense under leadership instead of technology).


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 03, 2015, 07:07:38 PM
      "With tears in his eyes"
      Yes, it did help. I just started it a little, because I was trying a new space EA game, BUT IT WORKS OMG. IT WOOORKS. I couldn't get used to my screen not freezing every few seconds. I just flew around for 5 minutes. Just flew. Around. Beautiful.

      Who knew space was such a pleasure to travel?

      :D

      Sounds like it's a bit late for 0.7.1... but maybe for 0.7.2? I'd love to see some trading and sensor related skills in the Leadership branch. Like lower tariffs, lower smuggling risks, better price intel, lower sensor profile, longer sensor range (maybe make the sensor ones based on fleet size, so it makes more sense under leadership instead of technology).

      I'd love to add those kinds of skills, but it's going to be a bit later - feels like the skill system needs a bit of a revamp, so it'd be more efficient not to add new skills before that point, or there'd be even more to redo.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: gozer on December 03, 2015, 10:55:59 PM
      nice changes

      btw, could officer recruiting dialog change a bit? Right now, if you have 10 (which is maximum) officers already recruited, if you speak to mercenary on planet you aren't even able to find out what skills/trait he has, you have to dismiss one of your officers first ... which means if you are looking for new officer to replace one of your old ones (because you want different skills or character trait) you either have to run with 9 officers only to have room for one more, or you have to do a bit of save scumming (dismiss one officer, talk to new one on planet, if he doesn't have skills/trait you want load game).

      So ... could the skills/traits display immediately in the first message?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 04, 2015, 02:16:10 AM
      Agreed. You're not going to hire without seeing what skill he/she have. The 'offer a hire' button in first dialogue is IMO useless and won't make a big difference if you deleted it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: speeder on December 04, 2015, 04:41:17 AM
      nice changes

      btw, could officer recruiting dialog change a bit? Right now, if you have 10 (which is maximum) officers already recruited, if you speak to mercenary on planet you aren't even able to find out what skills/trait he has, you have to dismiss one of your officers first ... which means if you are looking for new officer to replace one of your old ones (because you want different skills or character trait) you either have to run with 9 officers only to have room for one more, or you have to do a bit of save scumming (dismiss one officer, talk to new one on planet, if he doesn't have skills/trait you want load game).

      So ... could the skills/traits display immediately in the first message?

      Alex already stated 2 or 3 times in other threads this is fixed :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 05:19:32 AM
      Better yet, when you click on a merc, he should display his skills instead of asking if you need help.  One less click to do.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: speeder on December 04, 2015, 05:31:21 AM
      Better yet, when you click on a merc, he should display his skills instead of asking if you need help.  One less click to do.

      I disagree with that...

      I like the campaign atmosphere, lore and whatnot, we don't need to make everything super gameplay efficient


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 05:40:16 AM
      Merc hiring is frequent enough that I do not care about the stock spiel they display for the umpteenth time.  All I care is if they have the skills, "You're hired!", and "You're fired!" to one of my officers, if necessary.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 04, 2015, 06:26:45 AM
      I assumed it to be a placeholder for future, more interesting conversation options.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: miljan on December 04, 2015, 10:36:06 AM
      :(

      It's not going to be today, but assuming all goes well with the last bits of playtesting - very soon!


      Hmm, you know - if you edit settings.json and change:
      "maxMarketProcurementConcurrent":20;
      To 0 instead, that *may* help the stuttering issue. It'll also stop new procurement missions from being generated, though.

      Holy crap, i thought that the game lags because of my *** comp (and that the game got a lot higher needs with the new release), but this fixed it, no more lag every 3 sec or so in global map.

      I assumed it to be a placeholder for future, more interesting conversation options.

      Still it will not change the fact that conversation will be fixed, and once you see them all (if you want to read it in first place, as I always skip it)you will want just to jump and see the stats, so really no need for that additional one click


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 10:57:51 AM
      It's out, updated OP.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 11:01:13 AM
      Got it, and will try it when I can.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: JohnDoe on December 04, 2015, 11:01:22 AM
      It's out, updated OP.
      AWWW YEAH


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: TheDTYP on December 04, 2015, 11:17:07 AM
      Well, that was a lot less time than a year :P

      Thanks for the quick update, Alex!!! I'll give you my feedback soon, see if I find any bugs and all that


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euphytose on December 04, 2015, 11:26:11 AM
      I have a problem with the new patch. All delivery missions show "deliver to $market", and the system isn't shown on the small map next to the mission.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 11:40:02 AM
      Argh! Looking at this now.

      Edit: Fixed; hotfix incoming.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 12:03:09 PM
      Hotfix is up.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: TheDTYP on December 04, 2015, 12:06:58 PM
      You're the man, Alex!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: JohnDoe on December 04, 2015, 12:07:16 PM
      That was quick! Thanks for the fix; downloading now  :P


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: MShadowy on December 04, 2015, 12:09:13 PM
      Nifty.  Thanks for the patch, Alex.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euphytose on December 04, 2015, 12:11:54 PM
      Is it normal that we have to redownload and reinstall the whole thing once again? I don't mind since I have unlimited bandwidth but for other people this might be a problem.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 04, 2015, 12:14:02 PM
      The game is like 300 megs; I really hope thats not a problem.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 12:18:52 PM
      Accepting the mission to $market crashed the game with a Fatal Null.  Downloading hotfix now.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 12:27:41 PM
      Forgot to mention:  With Tachyon Lance EMP bug fixed, it is a lame weapon for its cost now.  It is simply a slightly stronger Phase Lance that pays +22 OP for +400 more range and slightly more damage.  Currently, Tachyon Lance would be fine as a 20 or 22 OP weapon, but it is grossly overpriced at 32 OP.  If Tachyon Lance is supposed to be this legendary 32 OP monster weapon, it either needs its 2500 range back or its unfair shield-penetrating EMP (or some other unique and unfair property).  (I prefer the classic long range.)  As is, Plasma Cannon is a no-brainer if I want to spend 30+ OP on an elite weapon.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Schwartz on December 04, 2015, 12:47:21 PM
      I'd be fine with giving it a slight damage buff and reducing its OP cost down a few points. Phase Lance could also use a little bit more range so it's not just in every way inferior to the Pulse Laser. Didn't it have 650 range before?

      Anyway.. just found an Astral at Hybrasil Astropolis. Helloooo.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 12:53:48 PM
      Phase Beam had 700 range.  Current Phase Lance has only 600 range and is totally outclassed by Pulse Laser.  The only time Phase Lance is good is if you can support it with Advanced Optics, then it becomes very good (because Adv. Optics enables a few ships to kite enemies with a Needler and Phase Lance combo).  However, seven points for Advanced Optics is a high opportunity cost just to make Phase Lance viable.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 04, 2015, 12:54:19 PM
      for the hotfix, are you supposed to uninstall then reinstall?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 12:55:39 PM
      You should be able to just install on top of it - the installer deletes the old version automatically prior to installing the new one. It occasionally fails for, let's call it "windows reasons", but in my experience it's rare.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 12:56:16 PM
      I plan to uninstall then do a clean install.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 04, 2015, 12:57:33 PM
      You should be able to just install on top of it - the installer deletes the old version automatically prior to installing the new one. It occasionally fails for, let's call it "windows reasons", but in my experience it's rare.
      Savegames will work, right?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Thaago on December 04, 2015, 12:57:54 PM
      Phase Beam had 700 range.  Current Phase Lance has only 600 range and is totally outclassed by Pulse Laser.  The only time Phase Lance is good is if you can support it with Advanced Optics, then it becomes very good (because Adv. Optics enables a few ships to kite enemies with a Needler and Phase Lance combo).  However, seven points for Advanced Optics is a high opportunity cost just to make Phase Lance viable.

      Disagree - the phase lance fits an entirely different tactical profile than the pulse laser. It is anti armor/overload where the Pulse Laser is constant pressure. Which one is better depends completely on what you have backing it up and what you're fighting.

      @patch: sweet.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 04, 2015, 12:59:16 PM
      just reporting on windows 7, got some instability on trying to run 0.7.1a exe after uninstalling 0.7, will try again


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 12:59:45 PM
      Save games will work.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 01:02:11 PM
      Savegames will work, right?

      Yes, they should. Meaning I did stuff to make sure they do, and tested it, but there may be some set of circumstances where they don't. Kind of a standard disclaimed on me doing anything, though :)

      Is it normal that we have to redownload and reinstall the whole thing once again? I don't mind since I have unlimited bandwidth but for other people this might be a problem.

      Yeah, that's how it works at the moment. Having some kind of auto-updater thing would be a lot of time spent working on it which I think would be better spent on the game proper. If/when it's on Steam, that'd be come a lot less relevant, too.

      The game is like 300 megs; I really hope thats not a problem.

      Hah, scared me. It's only 150ish.


      Re: Tachyon Lance - it's on my list of things to look at for 0.7.2a.


      just reporting on windows 7, got some instability on trying to run 0.7.1a exe after uninstalling 0.7, will try again

      What do you mean by instability?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 01:03:44 PM
      @ Thaago:  If Phase Lance did hard flux damage, I would agree.  Since it does not, you cannot punch above your weight with it, unless you are a Paragon who can focus-fire more than two or three.  I tried Phase Lance Wolf, and it struggled against a Hammerhead because of no hard flux damage.  With Pulse Laser, enemy Hammerhead was much easier because I had a source of hard flux damage to overcome shields.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: JohnDoe on December 04, 2015, 01:04:21 PM
      Already loving the faction commissions  :-*


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 04, 2015, 01:04:36 PM
      What do you mean by instability?

      I might be being real dumb here, but when I click the download to windows link on the front plog post, it downloads something that is 153 megs, when I double click on it, it goes into an infinitie loop wait icon and nothing else happens, computer still running but the program itself is stuck in statis. keep in mind i uninstalled everything


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 01:09:43 PM
      Already loving the faction commissions  :-*

      :D

      What do you mean by instability?

      I might be being real dumb here, but when I click the download to windows link on the front plog post, it downloads something that is 153 megs, when I double click on it, it goes into an infinitie loop wait icon and nothing else happens, computer still running but the program itself is stuck in statis. keep in mind i uninstalled everything

      Ah, hmm. I'd suggest rebooting, perhaps? Or trying to download from a different browser? This sounds like it's failing before the installer can even really run.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 04, 2015, 01:14:21 PM
      foop foop ran as admin now working score one for basic computer literacy


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: JohnDoe on December 04, 2015, 01:16:15 PM
      it goes into an infinitie loop wait icon and nothing else happens

      Usually that means your anti-virus is scanning the file.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Thaago on December 04, 2015, 01:29:07 PM
      @ Megas

      Thats exactly what I mean - they have different tactical profiles, so a direct comparison is impossible. It like saying which is better, a LAG or a Dual Autocannon - you can't really say, because they do different things.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 04, 2015, 01:44:39 PM
      i just bought 50 supplies from maxios for 500 in the black market even though the price per unit is 50, 500 vs 2500

      working as intended?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: The Soldier on December 04, 2015, 01:54:55 PM
      i just bought 50 supplies from maxios for 500 in the black market even though the price per unit is 50, 500 vs 2500

      working as intended?
      I think the price updates on a per-item basis, not on a per-purchase basis.  Some of the stations have such low stability and demands that that can happen.

      Although I do remember there being bug related to this.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 02:00:08 PM
      Just noticed that old 0.7a saves do not have Port Tse Franchise #3 and that pirate market in Yma upgraded to military like in new 0.7.1a games.  I will need to start a new game to benefit from that.

      * * *

      @ Thaago:  Phase Lance and Pulse Laser are both energy weapons and have 600 range.  Phase Lance cannot deal hard flux damage and does less DPS than Pulse Laser.  If Phase Lance could not be upgraded with Advanced Optics, then it would be almost useless like Mining Blaster (and less useful than Mining Blaster for that matter).  If I need to get very close to the enemy and take hits on the shield, I better do some hard flux damage to the enemy's shields so that it sticks when I need to back off to vent.  With Advanced Optics, I can actually kite things with Phase Lance that I cannot with Pulse Laser/Heavy Blaster, but Phase Lance is still useless without hard flux to shields from other weapons (or overstacking by Paragon).

      In other words, Pulse Laser has a far superior "tactical profile" if Phase Lance lacks Advanced Optics.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Troll on December 04, 2015, 02:12:15 PM
      You call it more of a bug fixing and polish update, but there is a lot to dig in here.
      it warrants a full restart and a change in allegiance.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Schwartz on December 04, 2015, 02:38:03 PM
      Burst beams do have one upside that is not immediately apparent through stats: Opportunity damage. A Lance that hits armour for 1 second is much more devastating than 1 second of Pulse Laser shots. An upside in fleet battles that doesn't play out in the Lance's favour in 1v1s. But in general you want to calculate how well a weapon does vs. a fully intact enemy.

      We also can't expect the AI to kill shields & snipe properly. They'll happily waste beam shots on shields and jack up their own flux. We can't take opportunity damage as a major deciding factor because an entire fleet of ships will not use it that way - only the player does. But Lances will get past shields more often in larger engagements.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 04, 2015, 03:02:58 PM
      Interesting update, in brief:

      1. Faction mission loyalty is great. Rather than have a minimum loyalty of 10 to take on missions, simply make 0-10 not pay anything but gain loyalty. You are "proving yourself." this eliminates grief and grind in event that starting faction is offering no bounties, no trade runs, nothing that could possibly boost your loyalty. Tri-tachyon took 20 minutes to generate enough stuff to gain 10 loyalty.

      2. Check pricing in regards to stations accurately updating based on stability, as well as crew casualty numbers, seems a little bugged in its readout.

      3. You need an option to eliminate large ship explosion lense flare in the settings, or tune it down like 90% (acctually 99%). It's unbelievably bad and annoying. It's really, really terrible. If this were a AAA game your legal department would be sending you an order to eliminate it for medical health reasons. Almost makes the game unplayable. This is not Star Trek and you are not JJ Abrams. Please drop everything and do this and release it in 7.2. If it's too complicated just copy and paste the code from SS+  ;D thanks,
      no really, do it

      edit: oh hai i found the setting that allows you to change that in the data files. still, my point stands in how bad it is, should consider bringing the turn off function to the main settings
      actually just get rid of it, or turn it off by default, so bad


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 04, 2015, 03:11:35 PM
      Oy, heathen! I actually revel in blinding explosions critical reactor breaches & failures, so check your blinding-light privilege!

      OT: Wonderful hotfix! The game runs much smoother, there is more action and consistency in the campaign layer, and comissions are neat! Keep up the good work!  :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: mvlbrotherg24 on December 04, 2015, 03:17:45 PM
      Interesting update, in brief:

      1. Faction mission loyalty is great. Rather than have a minimum loyalty of 10 to take on missions, simply make 0-10 not pay anything but gain loyalty. You are "proving yourself." this eliminates grief and grind in event that starting faction is offering no bounties, no trade runs, nothing that could possibly boost your loyalty. Tri-tachyon took 20 minutes to generate enough stuff to gain 10 loyalty.

      2. Check pricing in regards to stations accurately updating based on stability, as well as crew casualty numbers, seems a little bugged in its readout.

      3. You need an option to eliminate large ship explosion lense flare in the settings, or tune it down like 90% (acctually 99%). It's unbelievably bad and annoying. It's really, really terrible. If this were a AAA game your legal department would be sending you an order to eliminate it for medical health reasons. Almost makes the game unplayable. This is not Star Trek and you are not JJ Abrams. Please drop everything and do this and release it in 7.2. If it's too complicated just copy and paste the code from SS+  ;D thanks,
      no really, do it

      edit: oh hai i found the setting that allows you to change that in the data files. still, my point stands in how bad it is, should consider bringing the turn off function to the main settings
      actually just get rid of it, or turn it off by default, so bad

      Is this how people normally tell Alex on how to make changes to the game? Maybe I'm just new here but it seems to set the tone of saying the developer doesn't know what he's doing. Though I believe otherwise.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Network Pesci on December 04, 2015, 03:21:22 PM
      I like the blinding white light on large explosions.  I'd have it as an effect of damage from being close enough to one of those explosions to take damage from it instead of every time it's on the screen, but it's Alex's game.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 03:23:29 PM
      Eh, I like it; whether it's "bad" or not is very much subjective. Can see how it could be annoying if you're playing in the dark or have more sensitive eyesight, though. Or, heck, if you just don't like it. But making it a proper settings toggle seems iffy to me - it's a slight advantage to have it off, so you'd probably want to do it regardless of how you feel about it, at which point you might as well remove it entirely. Which brings us back to the point re: me liking it.


      Is this how people normally tell Alex on how to make changes to the game? Maybe I'm just new here but it seems to set the tone of saying the developer doesn't know what he's doing. Though I believe otherwise.

      I kind of read it as being intentionally over-the-top. Thanks for the vote of confidence, though :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Thaago on December 04, 2015, 03:51:00 PM
      Odd thing: I definitely started a new game one normal mode, but the load game and save a copy buttons are missing.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 04, 2015, 03:57:28 PM
      I like the blinding white flash, but it needs to disappear faster instead of persisting for a few seconds.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Nick XR on December 04, 2015, 04:10:30 PM
      I'd save the blinding white for only the biggest ships.  Make it seem really special when those die.  Everyone else, something less spectacular.  But now when you get a really big battle going it can seem near the end you spend a good amount of time with the screen whited out :/


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 04:32:36 PM
      Odd thing: I definitely started a new game one normal mode, but the load game and save a copy buttons are missing.

      Can you search for "ironMode" in the campaign.xml? And does quickload also not work? Having a hard time seeing how this could happen w/o iron mode being toggled on. Is it possible that you might've clicked on it while trying to turn off campaign help?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: TheDTYP on December 04, 2015, 05:04:34 PM
      No no, keep the explosions just like they are. They're so awesome.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euphytose on December 04, 2015, 05:04:47 PM
      Can you make the shift key behavior a toggle instead of a keep pressed to use? Right now I set AD to strafe and I use the reverse behavior, basically the game plays exactly like SPAZ, which is perfect. However, when I get bigger ships, I'm pretty sure I will have to use the standard mode for some weapons.

      Maybe add a tickbox to either make shift a toggle or current behavior? Or add another key that does that, that I could bind to CTRL for example.

      Concerning the explosions, I do find them annoying. Mostly because it's 100% white with seemingly no transparency. I'm going to use SPAZ as an example again, but this game did "big explosions" right. Not too intrusive, massive, and also an indicator of near explosion danger.

      Reduce the whiteness, increase transparency, or limit it to the actual damage zone, this would be much better.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: JT on December 04, 2015, 05:06:08 PM
      Is this how people normally tell Alex on how to make changes to the game? Maybe I'm just new here but it seems to set the tone of saying the developer doesn't know what he's doing. Though I believe otherwise.

      I've been known to be pretty bad for this too. I chalk it up to momentary indignance and forgetting to wait a bit before posting angrily. Well, that and I'm a frothing loon half the time. ;-P

      But yeah, I think the explosions are one of the selling points of the game, actually. They're extremely satisfying.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Achataeon on December 04, 2015, 05:11:34 PM
      "Why should I buy Starsector?"

      "It has... Explosions"

      "*drools* must... buy..."

      Interesting conversation ain't it? Hahaha.
      But seriously though, is the incapacitation caused by the screen whiteout an actual difficulty thing?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Morrigi on December 04, 2015, 05:22:09 PM
      I like the big explosions.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 04, 2015, 05:24:42 PM
      I don't have problem with the explosion whiteout... Because I don't really have enough situational awareness at the first place.
      Somehow manages through most battles tho, but with tunnel vision on.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: SafariJohn on December 04, 2015, 06:08:21 PM
      I love the whiteout – it reminds me of Empire Earth's nuclear bombs.

      The whiteout in Empire Earth hid everything for several near the explosion. If you had your camera a good distance away or moved it away, the whiteout would fade so you could see. A large number of nuclear bombers attacking could get really crazy with nigh unending whiteout.

      But there was one big, key difference: whiteout in Empire Earth didn't cover the interface. You couldn't see your units, but you could still find them and command them by their health bars and such.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Midnight Kitsune on December 04, 2015, 06:18:37 PM
      Maybe add a tickbox to either make shift a toggle or current behavior? Or add another key that does that, that I could bind to CTRL for example.
      There already is a tick box in the settings tab


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euphytose on December 04, 2015, 07:34:05 PM
      Maybe add a tickbox to either make shift a toggle or current behavior? Or add another key that does that, that I could bind to CTRL for example.
      There already is a tick box in the settings tab

      No, this toggles the default behavior. I'm talking about something that would change the way shift works, from a push to activate, to a toggle.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 04, 2015, 07:39:34 PM
      Aaaaaaaand...it's out.
      Nice.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 04, 2015, 07:43:22 PM
      Another hotfix is up, mainly for this issue (market procurement mission weirdness):
      http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10134.0


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on December 04, 2015, 08:13:42 PM
      I started a new game for 0.7.1a. First impressions: If you've taken a faction commission, it's way easier to gain faction rep now. Instead of having to wait for a bounty, you can just go hunt down faction enemies. I unlocked destroyers from my chosen faction soon after I could afford to field them, which makes the transition from early-game to mid-game quite a bit smoother. I've hit co-operative long before I can afford the really big ships, which I think is good. It makes the biggest hindrance to getting a capital simply being able to afford the thing, rather than having them be locked behind a reputation grind. The commission also gives you something to do other than wait around and maybe do some trading when there aren't any active bounties you'd get paid for.

      On the negative side, if hostilities flare up, you need to get hostile with the opposing faction almost immediately or you'll start losing rep quite quickly; I think it's about 5/month. I actually got dinged because I just couldn't find an appropriate target. Maybe have a 1 month warning/grace period? On the other hand, you can make that up easily just by killing two enemy fleets, so maybe the grace period isn't necessary.

      The early game is still the most difficult part of the game so far, but at least it ends quicker now. I think starting the player with maybe another level's worth of skill points would make it less of a sinkhole. I'm also having a hell of a time finding any Ion Cannons. Nobody seems to sell them, they refuse to show up in salvage, and they're one of the best small energy weapons.

      I agree with Megas about the Tachyon Lance. It just costs way too OP much for what it does now, and given that it has apparently attained mythical status in the sector, I'd prefer to see it buffed up to be on par with the Plasma Cannon rather than have its OP reduced. Beam Weapons in general are a bit underpowered, really, except for the Tactical Laser.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 04, 2015, 09:48:32 PM
      @Tachyon Lance. Used while it is in the buggy state and oh hey, it is actually useful.
      How about:
      *Actual shield-penetration punch: Beam passing through the shield instead of buggy EMP arcs passing by the shield.
      *Reduced energy damage: Maybe 1/3 of currently it is(otherwise it one-shots all frigates, shield up or not). Or any appropriate values that won't cause much armor damage to something bigger than a frigate or destroyer. With EMP damage adjusted or kept to be capable of disabling several weapon/engines.
      *Slightly longer cooldown, more flux

      EDIT: used fixed version. Seems it's useful on DDs or frigates anyway.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: StarSchulz on December 04, 2015, 09:51:03 PM
      So, before i go accepting a commission, one more question  ;)

      If i accept one from the Tri-Tachyon, it will throw my rep to hostile with the hegemony.

      Is there any way to ever possibly repair my rep with the hegmony?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: icepick37 on December 04, 2015, 10:41:41 PM
      NICE. Can probably mark this thread as released now.

      Plays nice. Still hard. But the commission is nice. Makes me feel less hopeless, heh.

      I'm considering using the "suicide exploit" more in the beginning. One wolf is awesome, but two wolves is a bounty hunter fleet. And that hermes(d) must be pretty lonely in that station.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Vinyl Dash on December 04, 2015, 10:42:27 PM
      Been playing around with the new hotfix.

      The commission system is a very nice improvement over the investigations. Getting to choose to opt in or not to all the inter faction drama feels better than having a bounty put on your head by the Hegemony for hunting too many pirates.

      One thing I've noticed, and it really pains me to say so, but with the changes to ship availability in the black market, Medusas are a bit trivially easy to acquire. Given their in-game text about being very rare and being a threat to a system's economy whenever one falls into the wrong hands, it feels a bit wrong to find it in so many black markets. I know there was something said about possibly adding a new destroyer, maybe adding one to the Independents could help make the ship distribution in black markets better?

      Anyway, great update. Commissions are fun. Inter-faction warfare that changes over time is fun. Even as basic as it is now, it makes the sector feel a lot more alive.

      Now, I'm off to find the guy in the Independents who declared war on the Hegemony, the Luddic Church, the Sindrian Diktat and Diable Avionics within two weeks of me signing an Independent commission. I have a sternly worded letter to send them about their diplomatic stance. Delivered via a torpedo.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Originem on December 04, 2015, 11:15:26 PM
      so fast and full of surprise :o


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Thaago on December 05, 2015, 12:22:54 AM
      The commission fixes so many problems! As a bounty hunter, you don't suddenly get stuck without targets for a few months (well, you still get stuck without named bounties, but at least there's something to tide things over). And when you do happen to get a system bounty from your allowed faction, the bonuses stack, which is excellent. The greater ship availability in the black market is also extremely nice.

      I allied with the Hegemony and they immediately declared war on everyone but the independent (who themselves declared war with the Tri-Tach). Needless to say, the sector is a lot more of a dangerous place.

      So far I haven't declared war officially on either Sindria or the Ludd, so each month I get whacked by the 10 rep penalty, but I still hunt those factions with my transponder off. I can make up the 10 rep easily enough if I'm actively hunting trade fleets, and if need be I can turn the transponder on, take a little rep hit, and fly away from the enemy murder fleets (not to mention still trade with them). The Hegemony may not like my devious ways, but they'll still pay good bounty for whacking their enemies.

      Also: I finally used terrain to shake an enemy fleet. I'm kind of ashamed that its taken me this long.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Sabaton on December 05, 2015, 01:46:16 AM
      Must I start a new game or can I continue with the old save?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 05, 2015, 01:55:41 AM
      You can use you old safe, but as it seems at least one minor change (an additional pirate military market) won't appear for you then.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 05, 2015, 02:07:34 AM
      And intel behaves strangely right after loading from 0.7.1 save.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ror on December 05, 2015, 02:11:00 AM
      I just installed 0.71a over 0.7a and it deleted my save file. Very unhappy about that considering that I'd read in several posts that save files would be preserved between versions.

      My level 50 character, 10 fully trained officers and a full fleet of ships, gone.

      Not happy at all.
       :'(


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 05, 2015, 02:15:23 AM
      Are you sure you installed into the same directory?

      If yes, have a look if the backup file still exists.

      You can recover your previous save from the campaign.xml.bak file found in the save's directory ("C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves"). Just move the campaign.xml somewhere, and then remove the ".bak" from the filename of the backup file.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ror on December 05, 2015, 02:38:34 AM
      Are you sure you installed into the same directory?

      If yes, have a look if the backup file still exists.

      You can recover your previous save from the campaign.xml.bak file found in the save's directory ("C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves"). Just move the campaign.xml somewhere, and then remove the ".bak" from the filename of the backup file.


      I'm on OSX though, so is there any way to find a backup in OSX? Appreciate your help in any case!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 05, 2015, 02:54:43 AM
      I'm not sure since I don't work with that OS at all, but it should be wherever you installed the game. "SomethingsomethingOSX\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves"


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Sabaton on December 05, 2015, 03:10:26 AM
      Would using the save transfer mod do the trick?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Raion on December 05, 2015, 03:20:05 AM
      Alex, I love you, seriously, I don't know what you did, but the game is a lot smoother on my ancient computer


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: xenoargh on December 05, 2015, 03:43:33 AM
      Yay!  I love the update thus far; haven't gotten to play it much past reading the patch notes and taking a brief whirl, but it looks good.  I'll have my son try it later and see if Easy is Easy Enough but it definitely feels a lot better from here :)

      One minor quibble:  I honestly feel like you nerfed the Gryphon too hard; taking away the OP missile system of Dewm was fine but the 15 OPs... ouch, yo.  That makes a lot of the better squirrel cases not quite work.  Maybe 5-10 to make it harder to stack quite so much firepower, but 15 made it a lot less flexible and useful as a passive support ship for a fleet where you aren't piloting it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ror on December 05, 2015, 05:42:20 AM
      I'm not sure since I don't work with that OS at all, but it should be wherever you installed the game. "SomethingsomethingOSX\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves"

      I looked at the package contents of the application in the Applications folder, but all folders apart from the main one are empty. So no mods (not that I had any), saves (I had a lot), or anything else.

      Time to start again, I guess.  I won't be updating any more unless I can be sure that saved games are properly saved.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: AlexMaugrim on December 05, 2015, 05:44:41 AM
      I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 05, 2015, 05:57:03 AM
      Commission has no effect. Presumably a bug.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 05, 2015, 06:22:05 AM
      I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?

      Hi,

      Sometimes there's a time delay in payment, because you're far away from a hyperspace relay. But this sounds more like a bug. It would probably help to track it down if you could send your save file to fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com.

      You'll normally find the save under "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves".


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 05, 2015, 06:25:08 AM
      I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?

      Hi,

      Sometimes there's a time delay in payment, because you're far away from a hyperspace relay. But this sounds more like a bug. It would probably help to track it down if you could send your save file to fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com.

      You'll normally find the save under "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves".
      Sounds like you aren't experiencing it.... Right?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: miljan on December 05, 2015, 06:44:00 AM
      Eh, I like it; whether it's "bad" or not is very much subjective. Can see how it could be annoying if you're playing in the dark or have more sensitive eyesight, though. Or, heck, if you just don't like it. But making it a proper settings toggle seems iffy to me - it's a slight advantage to have it off, so you'd probably want to do it regardless of how you feel about it, at which point you might as well remove it entirely. Which brings us back to the point re: me liking it.

      Actually do people like something or not is a subjective thing. How effects look, models and similar can be objectively looked at. In this case, this effect is nothing more than a white screen for a second, compare that to something like a multi explosions with maybe parts falling apart after the ship is destroyed, the effect objectively looks bad.

      Its your game, and you will make it how you like the best, but when it comes to graphical options, I suggest you first to consider that this is not a competitive pvp game, and second more important, you should not look at graphic options do they bring benefit or not, but offer as much as possible customization as you can. Its a very strange logic to say because the game works better without that effect, you should not put it as option in the game and force it on everyone that doesnt look at mods. You can as easy pretty much say that playing the game on minimum graphics options players get benefit as they will have higher frame rate, so let's remove all options (or whenb a lot of games have camera shake, or motion blurs, and most of them its a toggle option, even for competitive online games).

      Put that option in so people can easily remove it, and dont leave it as config option in files that people need to mess around.  

      The effect is problematic because of three things, it doesnt look good (its only a white scree), it happens to often (change it to happen only when capitals are destroyed) and third you cant see anything. Best effects and explosions are those where you can actually see what is happening and how a ship is destroyed/falls apart.

      Anyway the new update made the game a lot more fun, and starting from beginning feels less tedious with a lot more things i can find to fight. Also love that I get $$$ for killing enemies of my allies.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 05, 2015, 06:55:50 AM
      I looked at the package contents of the application in the Applications folder, but all folders apart from the main one are empty. So no mods (not that I had any), saves (I had a lot), or anything else.

      Time to start again, I guess.  I won't be updating any more unless I can be sure that saved games are properly saved.

      You need to open the package and only copy over the contents folder to replace the old one. Otherwise you will replace all of your saves and everything you liked so much.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 05, 2015, 07:20:20 AM
      Seems hostility event occur too often... Now everyone is at war with everyone if Luddic Path declare crusade to CGR.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Talkie Toaster on December 05, 2015, 07:40:12 AM
      I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?
      Yeah, same here.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ror on December 05, 2015, 07:55:48 AM
      I looked at the package contents of the application in the Applications folder, but all folders apart from the main one are empty. So no mods (not that I had any), saves (I had a lot), or anything else.

      Time to start again, I guess.  I won't be updating any more unless I can be sure that saved games are properly saved.

      You need to open the package and only copy over the contents folder to replace the old one. Otherwise you will replace all of your saves and everything you liked so much.

      I realise that now, too late to save Chocomatic and his fleet though...  :'(


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: AlexMaugrim on December 05, 2015, 08:24:07 AM
      I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?

      Hi,

      Sometimes there's a time delay in payment, because you're far away from a hyperspace relay. But this sounds more like a bug. It would probably help to track it down if you could send your save file to fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com.

      You'll normally find the save under "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves".

      I've sent it, thanks.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Wyvern on December 05, 2015, 08:25:50 AM
      I'm on OSX though, so is there any way to find a backup in OSX? Appreciate your help in any case!
      An install on OS X is just copying a folder into place - none of this windows everything-has-to-be-in-the-registry nonsense.  To preserve saves, you have to show package contents and pull the saves folder out of the old copy, otherwise it's overwritten.

      That said, even in case where you didn't do that, you can still get some of your progress back - load up the console commands mod and use it to grant yourself the requisite character level, key ships, reputation levels, cash, etc.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: gruberscomplete on December 05, 2015, 09:03:51 AM
      YOUR GAME LAGS

      I set max market concurrent=0 and increased all fleets maximum by a factor of 10.

      In .65 I could have 5000 fleets without lagging, now I can only have 500 with serious lag???


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 09:35:48 AM
      I realise that now, too late to save Chocomatic and his fleet though...  :'(

      Ugh, sorry :( I'll try to remember to mention OS X/Linux in the future when talking about save compatibility. Just didn't occur to me; was only thinking about whether old saves would be compatible, not what you'd need to do to transfer them over on OS X.


      You'll normally find the save under "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves".

      I've sent it, thanks.

      Thank you, looking at it. Think I'll need to hotfix this one, too.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 05, 2015, 09:44:49 AM
      Ugh, sorry :( I'll try to remember to mention OS X/Linux in the future when talking about save compatibility. Just didn't occur to me; was only thinking about whether old saves would be compatible, not what you'd need to do to transfer them over on OS X.

      Would it be possible to move the saves folder into a library/application support/fractalsoftworks folder?

      This is the industry standard way of placing saves on OSX and would prevent this from happening in the future.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cinth on December 05, 2015, 10:04:43 AM
      Anyone else having problems getting paid for bounties?   I've hunted down quite a few and either get nothing or a fraction of the posted listing.

      I'm running a commission from Hegemony.  I did one for Luddic (0/100) and got nadda.  I did several for Hegemony and I'm getting 1500 - 2700 credits.  All of these should have been easy 20k hunts. 


      It's turning out to not be an easy go of it as a bounty hunter.  In one go at it I had 2 20k hunts in PS.  I figure from Corvus I can make it if I buy up what supplies I could with the 3300 I have and the little I have from pirate hunting at the start.  I set out with ~80 supplies and plenty of fuel.  Between the two bounties some needed repairs and the trip to EE I ended up with no supplies and about 8700 credits.  Well short of the 40k I was expecting.  Those help wanted signs need to come with the disclaimer that you might not get paid in full  ::)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 05, 2015, 10:15:14 AM
      Would it be possible to move the saves folder into a library/application support/fractalsoftworks folder?

      This is the industry standard way of placing saves on OSX and would prevent this from happening in the future.

      yes this needs to be done-- keeping saves inside the program itself is unusual and not optimal for additional reason: Multiple user accounts on 1 computer.

      Programs are usually stored in /Applications/ to be accessible to all user accounts on the computer, so the saves, prefs, etc should be stored separately for each user so people can't accidentally screw up each other's saved games and keybindings.

      It should be in something like Users/<yourusername>/Library/Application Support/StarSector/Saves

      There should also be subfolders for logs, screenshots, etc in the same place. Mods probably not, since having to have a bunch of copies of the same mod in every user directory seems dumb.

      edit:
      com.fs.starfarer.plist has the key bindings, active save, active mods from launcher prefs, etc in /Users/<yourusername>/Library/Preferences.  This is good, kudos.

      But the serial number is also there which would mean you have to reenter the serial number for each user account on the computer. this serial number should probably separately be in <hard drive>/Library/Preferences so all users don't have to reenter the serial number.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 10:20:21 AM
      Anyone else having problems getting paid for bounties?   I've hunted down quite a few and either get nothing or a fraction of the posted listing.

      I'm running a commission from Hegemony.  I did one for Luddic (0/100) and got nadda.  I did several for Hegemony and I'm getting 1500 - 2700 credits.  All of these should have been easy 20k hunts. 


      It's turning out to not be an easy go of it as a bounty hunter.  In one go at it I had 2 20k hunts in PS.  I figure from Corvus I can make it if I buy up what supplies I could with the 3300 I have and the little I have from pirate hunting at the start.  I set out with ~80 supplies and plenty of fuel.  Between the two bounties some needed repairs and the trip to EE I ended up with no supplies and about 8700 credits.  Well short of the 40k I was expecting.  Those help wanted signs need to come with the disclaimer that you might not get paid in full  ::)

      It's a bug. Hotfix soon.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cinth on December 05, 2015, 10:23:53 AM
      It's a bug. Hotfix soon.

      I got a can of Raid, if it'll help  :D


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 10:26:03 AM
      ... with the number of hotfixes I've had to do for this seemingly minor release, I won't say no.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 05, 2015, 10:36:45 AM
      RE: OSX directories. Oops, maybe mods should be stored separately for each user account, since they sometimes have .json settings files that you are intended to edit (like common rader key bindings etc) which different users would have different prefs for.

      and hmm, actually it would also be good if the settings from settings.json in java/settings/config  that CANNOT be changed by mods were parceled out to another file and stored separately for each user account. Anything user would normally modify basically should be stored in user specific places so multiple users of starsector on the computer don't get into fights about changing each others settings :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cinth on December 05, 2015, 10:58:40 AM
      ... with the number of hotfixes I've had to do for this seemingly minor release, I won't say no.

      If I know anything of programming, it is that nothing is ever as minor as it seems. 


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 05, 2015, 11:07:54 AM
      You make a fun game Alex:

      (http://i.imgur.com/x4zH9Xu.jpg)

      Dodged it by 2 pixels. I had to take a breather for a minute after that...


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 11:14:44 AM
      @Gothars: those close calls are always fun :)


      Hotfix is up! Details of changes in the OP.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zhentar on December 05, 2015, 11:14:58 AM
      So crew casualty messages showing up again is nice, but my people are really bad at counting - they just estimated that about 10 of my 20 crew were lost in battle when only one actually was.

      edit: Oh hey, look at those hotfix patch notes!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zaskow on December 05, 2015, 11:39:09 AM
      Thanks for patch! Testing...


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 12:08:00 PM
      Yay!  I love the update thus far; haven't gotten to play it much past reading the patch notes and taking a brief whirl, but it looks good.  I'll have my son try it later and see if Easy is Easy Enough but it definitely feels a lot better from here :)

      I'd love to know how that goes!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 05, 2015, 12:16:33 PM
      Yay!  I love the update thus far; haven't gotten to play it much past reading the patch notes and taking a brief whirl, but it looks good.  I'll have my son try it later and see if Easy is Easy Enough but it definitely feels a lot better from here :)

      I'd love to know how that goes!

      You do great work man! Thank you!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Unfolder on December 05, 2015, 12:17:42 PM
      SS+, running a never ending gauntlet to catch vanilla


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cik on December 05, 2015, 12:37:14 PM
      ANY DAY NOW


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Typo91 on December 05, 2015, 12:49:34 PM
      Reports indicate that XXXXXX was killed in an incident unrelated to the bounty posting....


      Right after i just killed the guy with my transponder on....  this is the 4th time i got denied payment i was owned over some meaningless technicality by whoever has all that money yet is too lazy and chicken to take action against the pirates themselves.


      And yes i've triple checked it... transponder on... even an allied fleet nearby this time, but not in the fight.

      Really killing my early game, trying to work up some credits.

      (was using RC4... getting RC5 now gona try loading from my save i made, right before the bounty kill cause i thought i was going crazy or doing something wrong.)

      *update... RC5 seems to work now... thankx Alex... on with the carnage!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 12:54:17 PM
      Reports indicate that XXXXXX was killed in an incident unrelated to the bounty posting....


      Right after i just killed the guy with my transponder on....  this is the 4th time i got jew'd out of my payday so far.


      And yes i've triple checked it... transponder on... even an allied fleet nearby this time, but not in the fight.

      Really killing my early game, trying to work up some credits.

      There's a hotfix out for this, and also - language, please (bolded).


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 05, 2015, 01:10:08 PM
      Ya download the new hotfix. I didn't get this problem at all myself yesterday and I took out 8ish bounties. Wonder what caused it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 01:11:00 PM
      Wonder what caused it.

      Me fixing the bug where someone *else* taking out the bounty would give you the money if you engaged the remnants of the fleet afterwards :(


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: speeder on December 05, 2015, 01:16:57 PM
      I wonder if you ever had another release that needed that much hotfixes :P


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 05, 2015, 01:25:27 PM
      Did something other than hotfixing happen with RC5?
      Because for the first time since I moved everything over to this machine I've had to put my key in to start SS.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zoya on December 05, 2015, 01:25:36 PM
      Got a very annoying pirate related problem. Getting your rep with pirates up takes an incredibly long time, and can easily be set back by random pirates attacking you before you get up to neutral (you'll lose 2-3 rep no matter what you do if they catch you). That's fine, makes sense. But it takes a lot of time and effort to get to neutral and above.

      .....And then you try to run a procurement mission, probably for the pirates faction itself, and a raiding party spawns as soon as you enter hyperspace and attacks you. If you run away, you only lose a few rep, whatever. But, if your fleet is too large/slow to flee, you have no choice but to fight them -- which counts as a hostile action on a non-hostile faction and you lose 50 rep. I had to reload a save from like 3 hours ago to undo that, because I hadn't been saving  :\


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 01:32:05 PM
      Did something other than hotfixing happen with RC5?
      Because for the first time since I moved everything over to this machine I've had to put my key in to start SS.

      Strange, not sure what would cause that. The key is stored in the registry, and the only way this would happen is if the key from the registry failed to validate. But since you presumably entered the same key when it asked for it, and that validated fine... I did ban a couple of keys that were out in the wild, so to speak, but that shouldn't have affected anything with your key.

      .....And then you try to run a procurement mission, probably for the pirates faction itself, and a raiding party spawns as soon as you enter hyperspace and attacks you. If you run away, you only lose a few rep, whatever. But, if your fleet is too large/slow to flee, you have no choice but to fight them -- which counts as a hostile action on a non-hostile faction and you lose 50 rep. I had to reload a save from like 3 hours ago to undo that, because I hadn't been saving  :\

      Yeah, this is a bug on my list for 0.7.2a. Playing as pirates is just rough going - which I guess is part of the appeal, but it's also not a playtested path at the moment, so things like that tend to slip through.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 05, 2015, 01:41:57 PM
      Weirdness.
      One copypaste later and business as usual.

      An idea for the future:
      Presumably our Pirates will be pretty suspicious of folk wandering in and trying to be friends etc.
      Maybe if they occaisionally offered missions to you via one of thier portmaster characters (or similar) to do something suitably piratey, and successful completion gives you no money but a decent little boost of rep. A test of character if you will.
      If this could include "obtaining" a number of weapons then that would be nice.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: moontan on December 05, 2015, 02:16:59 PM
      double post


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: moontan on December 05, 2015, 02:21:06 PM
      it's a great update.

      but i find the game a little too easy.
      i started a new game today.

      after 4-5 hours, i had 100 000 credits accumulated.
      i found 2 undamaged Wolf to purchase, a Shade,  2-3 Medusa and about 14 Tactical Lasers and a partridge in a pear tree.  ;)
      and i haven't event explored Eos, Akadia, Vahlhalla or Hybrasil and Yma yet.

      TT ships and weaponry should me much harder to find.
      otherwise, there's no incentive to ally with the TT if the stuff is just laying all around the place.  :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Network Pesci on December 05, 2015, 02:23:36 PM
      Just saw an S-class Kite.  Looking in the Codex it's apparently the StarSector version of a classic car.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Blips on December 05, 2015, 02:23:53 PM
      Am I missing something or is there no system map that shows where the factions are.

      I'm trying to buy some fancy ships and I have no idea where to go.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: moontan on December 05, 2015, 02:26:05 PM
      Am I missing something or is there no system map that shows where the factions are.

      I'm trying to buy some fancy ships and I have no idea where to go.

      just check the Intel/Map and hover the cursor over a star


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 05, 2015, 03:17:21 PM
      Mh, what is this thing about officers all being "Independent" when you hire them? If you are commissioned by a faction that is currently at war with the Indies and them hire one of their officers... that feels weird. They could just belong to the faction that owns the market you hire them on.

      I wouldn't mind the Independents going back to being neutral with everybody and keeping out of faction politics.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Typo91 on December 05, 2015, 03:30:28 PM
      possible bug
      50000 credit bounty posted is listed as 75000C on my intel screen...

      Varda Lim by the tri-tachyon.

      Bug?  am am neutral with tri-tachyon.

      I can click the 75000 bounty and it reads 50000 credit at the top.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 05, 2015, 03:44:12 PM
      Independent feels like a major faction that calls itself Independent (with Nortia as its capital) rather than a representation of the remaining non-political entities or those too small to be a faction.

      The only faction that does not totally feel like a major faction is pirates, due to lack of commission.  Even then, they feel somewhat like an organized monolith because they have law enforcement (if they are non-hostile) among other common quirks.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Toxcity on December 05, 2015, 03:47:41 PM
      Yes, Independents shouldn't be getting into wars with other factions, even if they offer commissions. Like Megas said, it makes them feel like a singular unified entity, rather than a number of small factions.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 05, 2015, 04:15:40 PM
      Question:  I noticed Black Market trade at a "Free Port" (e.g., Port Tse Franchise #3 and Tibicena) does not raise suspicion, meaning it stays at "none".  Does this mean no smuggling investigations if I trade at a Black Market with a Free Port?  If so, this is nice!  I can eat an immediate minor reputation penalty for too much trade, but I do not want an investigation that sends cooperative rep crashing down to inhospitable.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: TJJ on December 05, 2015, 04:28:10 PM
      Ugh, sorry :( I'll try to remember to mention OS X/Linux in the future when talking about save compatibility. Just didn't occur to me; was only thinking about whether old saves would be compatible, not what you'd need to do to transfer them over on OS X.

      Would it be possible to move the saves folder into a library/application support/fractalsoftworks folder?

      This is the industry standard way of placing saves on OSX and would prevent this from happening in the future.

      The same with Windows tbh; saving in the game's installation folder is really bad practice. (completely ignores user access rights, and multi-user environments)
      Likewise, mods shouldn't be where they are either.

      Though what's considered 'good practice' depends upon who you ask.
      Many games write save game data to "%UserProfile%\Documents\My Games".
      Yet typical application data should be placed in "%AppData%".
      Then there's "%UserProfile%\Saved Games", which seems the most appropriately named folder, yet very few games actually use this location.

      The only constant, is that there's no convention for name-spacing your game's folder.
      Some games use \Publish\Full Game Name".
      Some use just "\Full Game Name"
      Others use "\AbbreviatedGameNameInCamelCase".
      A right royal f**king mess if you ask me.

      Steam's \SteamApps\ folder is equally slapdash & lacking any kind of convention, though at least that's all governed by a central authority. (Valve)


      It all makes the simplicity & durability of Java's name spacing convention (reversedCompanyDomain.package.Class) look positively idyllic.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Blips on December 05, 2015, 04:30:09 PM
      just check the Intel/Map and hover the cursor over a star

      Ah thanks, that helped. :D


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 05, 2015, 05:08:28 PM
      Yes, Independents shouldn't be getting into wars with other factions, even if they offer commissions. Like Megas said, it makes them feel like a singular unified entity, rather than a number of small factions.

      Seconding this.
      Also not having the Indies join in the faction soap opera allows the player to remain unbound if they feel so inclined.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: behrooz on December 05, 2015, 05:30:07 PM
      I think of hostilities involving the independent faction as a result of the other faction authorizing attacks against neutrals from their side.

      Something like "Unrestricted Hegemony attacks on neutral shipping have resulted in a state of hostility between most independent groups and the Hegemony navy."

      Independents don't have to be a unified faction to have a de-facto state of war with a faction that is, whether that is ranging from "Hegemony forces have banned neutral shipping in the Corvus system." to "Tri-tachyon is reacting to recent attacks from disguised Luddic Path forces by treating all unaffiliated ships in the sector as hostile."

      Gameplay wise, it should be rarer, and hostilities should be initiated only by organized factions who have some reason to do so.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: theSONY on December 05, 2015, 05:31:08 PM
      I think independents & smugglers  shouldn't been an faction, i mean they should be everyone for himself
      like you attack one independent/smuggler & there should be no reputation drop


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 05, 2015, 06:58:32 PM
      I think independents & smugglers  shouldn't been an faction, i mean they should be everyone for himself
      like you attack one independent/smuggler & there should be no reputation drop

      Unaffiliated traders probably have very strong opinions about people who habitually attack unaffiliated traders

      The usual term for them is 'Pirates'.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Vlitzen on December 05, 2015, 07:37:40 PM
      Yeah I like that independents can actually defend themselves if the hegemony goes after them, and it makes lore sense that the hegemony and other factions would at least sometimes be annoyed with unaffiliated individuals. I do think it should be mildly rare though, since independents mostly mind their own business and don't associate with any one faction anyway.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: swicked on December 05, 2015, 08:49:42 PM
      • Fixed issue where if a bounty fleet lost its commander, but wasn't entirely destroyed, the player would still get a bounty for them
      ...uh, what?
      But the bounties are for the commanders. They read that "[faction] authorities on [planet] have posted a bounty for bringing [commander's name], [crime], to justice."
      You shouldn't need to destroy the fleet. Only the commander.
      Should the bounty notifications be re-written to specify they are for the commander and everyone in their present company?

      In any case, how do bounties work, now?
      Every time I hunt one down, even one for the faction I've accepted a commission for, I seem to get "Reports indicate that [enemy] was killed in an incident unrelated to the bounty posting."
      I tried going to the planet the bounty was first posted by but there's no option I can see to accept it.
      Am I not allowed to bounty hunt under commission?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 08:55:34 PM
      Question:  I noticed Black Market trade at a "Free Port" (e.g., Port Tse Franchise #3 and Tibicena) does not raise suspicion, meaning it stays at "none".  Does this mean no smuggling investigations if I trade at a Black Market with a Free Port?  If so, this is nice!  I can eat an immediate minor reputation penalty for too much trade, but I do not want an investigation that sends cooperative rep crashing down to inhospitable.

      That's right, no smuggling investigations at free ports.


      • Fixed issue where if a bounty fleet lost its commander, but wasn't entirely destroyed, the player would still get a bounty for them
      ...uh, what?
      But the bounties are for the commanders. They read that "[faction] authorities on [planet] have posted a bounty for bringing [commander's name], [crime], to justice."
      You shouldn't need to destroy the fleet. Only the commander.
      Should the bounty notifications be re-written to specify they are for the commander and everyone in their present company?

      In any case, how do bounties work, now?
      Every time I hunt one down, even one for the faction I've accepted a commission for, I seem to get "Reports indicate that [enemy] was killed in an incident unrelated to the bounty posting."
      I tried going to the planet the bounty was first posted by but there's no option I can see to accept it.
      Am I not allowed to bounty hunt under commission?

      Sorry that wasn't clear - you'd still get a bounty is *someone else* killed the commander, and then you mopped up the now commander-less fleet.

      As for not getting any bounties: yeah, that's a bug. The hotfix for it (0.7.1a-RC5) is up.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 05, 2015, 09:07:55 PM
      Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments?  Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: swicked on December 05, 2015, 09:09:29 PM
      Sorry that wasn't clear - you'd still get a bounty is *someone else* killed the commander, and then you mopped up the now commander-less fleet.

      As for not getting any bounties: yeah, that's a bug. The hotfix for it (0.7.1a-RC5) is up.
      Oooooh, okay.
      Thank you!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: The Soldier on December 05, 2015, 09:10:05 PM
      Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments?  Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.
      You can check that before the battle actually starts, when you first engage the fleet (spot out the star).  I had to fight a level 20 Tri-Tachyon Deserter Officer in a Hyperion without any Hyperion of my own, and I destroyed him, so it's not impossible.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 05, 2015, 09:14:08 PM
      possible bug
      50000 credit bounty posted is listed as 75000C on my intel screen...

      Varda Lim by the tri-tachyon.

      Bug?  am am neutral with tri-tachyon.

      I can click the 75000 bounty and it reads 50000 credit at the top.

      It's a bug - fixed, thank you. The actual bounty amount is the higher one.


      Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments?  Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.

      I've run into similar stuff in playtesting and the solution has been to make sure you take them out early on in the battle before they run. It's harder, but also mixes up the things you actually need to do in battle. So I'm not entirely sure this is something that needs to be sanity-checked or fixed - just something that requires an adjustment in tactics to deal with.

      If that gets to a pursuit scenario, that's basically a loss condition... well, not quite, even then. You could harry them instead (to avoid a long and pointless pursuit) and if you catch them enough times and harry their CR down, they should stand and fight eventually. Or crash-mothball when they flee and become easily catchable. Or not crash-mothball and explode from critical malfunctions. This would get more expensive with all the emergency burns and such, but if it's a big bounty, it's probably still worth it.

      So you've got an initial tactic, and then a fallback if that doesn't work out. Seems reasonable to me; thoughts?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 05, 2015, 09:46:22 PM
      So you've got an initial tactic, and then a fallback if that doesn't work out. Seems reasonable to me; thoughts?

      Agreed. Anyway if being in a fast phase ship makes the admiral so hard to catch, of course they'd always choose to be in such a ship.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: JJ842 on December 06, 2015, 12:24:37 AM
      Would it be possible to make the Independents excempt from the newly added hostility events between factions? Or at least make it so that for them there's no penalty for being non-hostile with their enemies? I just wanna chase bounties and have _one_ faction where accepting a commission with them doesn't result in you eventually being hostile to everyone else.

      Seriously, it's killing my enjoyment with the otherwise awesome patch that the game keeps taking control away from me when all I wanted to do was play the neutral bounty hunter (and getting good gear/ships pretty much requires you to take a commission with someone, give us a truly neutral option dammit!). Can we at least get an option to resign a commission to avoid the punishing rep hits and then re-commission when the random war's ended?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Grievous69 on December 06, 2015, 12:59:05 AM
      Did something other than hotfixing happen with RC5?
      Because for the first time since I moved everything over to this machine I've had to put my key in to start SS.

      Strange, not sure what would cause that. The key is stored in the registry, and the only way this would happen is if the key from the registry failed to validate. But since you presumably entered the same key when it asked for it, and that validated fine... I did ban a couple of keys that were out in the wild, so to speak, but that shouldn't have affected anything with your key.

      Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 06, 2015, 02:55:37 AM
      I just wanna chase bounties and have _one_ faction where accepting a commission with them doesn't result in you eventually being hostile to everyone else.
      This is pretty much exactly how I'd usually prefer to play.
      I want to do my own thing at my own pace, and not be penned in / dragged along by mandated actions.

      It would be really nice if the player had the option of playing like this in this wonderful single player game, even if it's not the default means of doing so.

      Normal RP play --> Named Faction
      Hard RP play --> Pirates
      Casual Play --> Independants

      Everyone always forgets / ignores us casuals.... :'(

      Failing that, I suppose I can always change value for "engagesInHostilities" in the independant.faction file to false.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Tartiflette on December 06, 2015, 04:27:48 AM
      Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)
      Some people have no shame or decency...


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: TJJ on December 06, 2015, 05:00:15 AM
      Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)

      If you enjoyed the game as much as you say, surely $15 is a worthwhile investment of your money?
      (Not to mention a reasonable reward to the creator(s) of said work!)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 06, 2015, 05:24:34 AM
      Annoying as phase ships are, they are not unbeatable.  Get a fast ship (put Safety Override if you must), and a weapon with high damage and no windup.  A few homing missiles may be useful for keeping them phased until overload.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Sabaton on December 06, 2015, 05:27:40 AM
      ^ Beam weapons also do wonders against phase ships. The bastard will be trapped in phase until bzzzzzzzzzzzzt.....


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: TaLaR on December 06, 2015, 05:48:11 AM
      AI piloted phase ships have 1 big vulnerability - they never interrupt unphasing (like player can). So the simplest way to kill them, is to park your ship pretty much on top of phase ship and fire as soon as you see it begin unphasing (preferably something like heavy blaster).



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 06, 2015, 06:26:42 AM
      Beam weapons are okay for pinning phase ships down as homing missiles do, but they do not hurt fast enough once they overload or vent, except the burst beams, but those have a weakness akin to windup weapons - you cannot hit with the full burst until they cannot phase anymore.

      AM/Mining/Heavy Blasters, Heavy Mauler, Hellbore, and Mjolnir are ideal for blasting phase ships as they uncloak.

      P.S.  Burst PD is also good for chipping away at phase frigates.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Grievous69 on December 06, 2015, 06:54:08 AM
      Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)

      If you enjoyed the game as much as you say, surely $15 is a worthwhile investment of your money?
      (Not to mention a reasonable reward to the creator(s) of said work!)

      Don't get me wrong, I'm buying this game 100%. It's one of the best single player games I've ever played, even better than some AAA games. It's just that I'm currently unable to buy it (long story, nevermind that now). But hey at least I talked some friends into it. So yeah, sorry for being an ass, i know it's hard for indie developers. Keep up the phenomenal work Alex :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: pyg on December 06, 2015, 09:07:33 AM
      Quote
      Fixed bug where player would become hostile with "Knights of Ludd" (which aren't in the game) on accepting a Tri-Tachyon commission

      It's a bit hard for me to tell which fixes are in which release candidate but I'm playing RC5 and losing rep from TT from going too easy on the Knights of Ludd.  I'm going to assume changes posted on Dec. 5th are in a forthcoming release and not in RC5.

      Also IMO commission bounties are unsustainably low.  I can't seem to keep up with CR recovery by just raiding Eos and TT only rarely issues a regular bounty.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 10:14:25 AM
      Would it be possible to make the Independents excempt from the newly added hostility events between factions? Or at least make it so that for them there's no penalty for being non-hostile with their enemies? I just wanna chase bounties and have _one_ faction where accepting a commission with them doesn't result in you eventually being hostile to everyone else.

      Seriously, it's killing my enjoyment with the otherwise awesome patch that the game keeps taking control away from me when all I wanted to do was play the neutral bounty hunter (and getting good gear/ships pretty much requires you to take a commission with someone, give us a truly neutral option dammit!). Can we at least get an option to resign a commission to avoid the punishing rep hits and then re-commission when the random war's ended?

      Yeah, I think I'll actually turn off independent commissions. For now, to do what you want, don't take on any commissions - you can still get good ships gear from the black market.


      Quote
      Fixed bug where player would become hostile with "Knights of Ludd" (which aren't in the game) on accepting a Tri-Tachyon commission

      It's a bit hard for me to tell which fixes are in which release candidate but I'm playing RC5 and losing rep from TT from going too easy on the Knights of Ludd.  I'm going to assume changes posted on Dec. 5th are in a forthcoming release and not in RC5.

      This is actually a slightly different (and worse) bug. Thanks for bringing it up!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 06, 2015, 12:19:28 PM
      Yeah, I think I'll actually turn off independent commissions. For now, to do what you want, don't take on any commissions - you can still get good ships gear from the black market.

      The independents I think of sort of like the EU-- even the flag is a bit similar. I don't quite see why they wouldn't have commissions. If you're going to turn off commissions for them, they shouldn't have as much good stuff in their military markets as a way to balance the appeal of playing as an independent.

      The pirates military markets are balanced by how hard it is to get in their good graces. The other factions are balanced by having to do commissions to get the military markets.

      There however does need to be a way to resign commissions for a drop down to neutral rep (or negative rep, if its a prickly faction like diktat)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 12:31:23 PM
      The independents I think of sort of like the EU-- even the flag is a bit similar. I don't quite see why they wouldn't have commissions. If you're going to turn off commissions for them, they shouldn't have as much good stuff in their military markets as a way to balance the appeal of playing as an independent.

      Yeah, conceptually I think commissions make sense for them. It's more a question of it becoming rather inconvenient to be hostile to them.

      The pirates military markets are balanced by how hard it is to get in their good graces. The other factions are balanced by having to do commissions to get the military markets.

      Good point, although you already have access to most independent military stuff via the black market, so getting in their good graces is less important as far as getting their gear.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Tartiflette on December 06, 2015, 12:36:48 PM
      The pirates military markets are balanced by how hard it is to get in their good graces. The other factions are balanced by having to do commissions to get the military markets.
      But it's hard to get a good reputation with the independents, and fewer military markets mean much less choice. I think it would balance out in the end.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 06, 2015, 12:53:05 PM
      Yeah, conceptually I think commissions make sense for them. It's more a question of it becoming rather inconvenient to be hostile to them.
      Code:
      "custom":{
      "allowsTransponderOffTrade":true,
      "offersCommissions":true,
      "engagesInHostilities":false,

      Seems to work okay.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 12:57:54 PM
      Problem with that is, you pick an independent commission, and then you're stuck with not having any faction-level enemies.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euphytose on December 06, 2015, 01:17:37 PM
      Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)
      Some people have no shame or decency...

      When you have the choice between paying 15 euros or googling "Starsector key", I think it's pretty obvious.
      I'm not going to lie, I was using one of the banned keys, but I bought the game after I realized the key was banned.
      That's probably how he found the keys, too. A simple google search.
      I didn't want to buy the game because it's still not complete, and I've had only bad experiences with unreleased titles.
      In my opinion, "early access" games should be free, you're basically asking people to pay to betatest your game, which is wrong.
      I would have bought the game on release anyway, since I really enjoyed it as it's very similar to SPAZ which is a game I played for around 150 hours.

      I'll probably get banned for this but I don't mind, at least I was honest.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 01:33:42 PM
      No talking about software piracy here, full stop. It's against the forum rules and will result in disciplinary action.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 06, 2015, 01:38:18 PM
      Problem with that is, you pick an independent commission, and then you're stuck with not having any faction-level enemies.

      Does a commission force you to be neutral or friendly to others as well as enforcing hostility?
      If it doesn't you can still make your own trouble.
      If it does deserter bounties still pop up frequently enough. (Eventually.)

      Tbh, it doesn't really matter if Independants have a commission or not as access is still dependant on maintaining decent rep with them either way. (it would be a nice flavour addition though.)
      Maybe it would be better mechanically to do without it though. I'll keep going with this and see how it plays out.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 06, 2015, 01:38:36 PM
      Gothars! I see what you did there... :D


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Tartiflette on December 06, 2015, 01:42:51 PM
      In my opinion, "early access" games should be free, you're basically asking people to pay to betatest your game, which is wrong.
      Yeah right, and you should never pay MMO subcriptions because the game will always continue to evolve, or teachers because you always learn something new everyday, or doctors because you are still going to die someday...

      (But my remark was less about his choice and more about rubbing it in the face of the developer.)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euphytose on December 06, 2015, 01:50:50 PM
      In my opinion, "early access" games should be free, you're basically asking people to pay to betatest your game, which is wrong.
      Yeah right, and you should never pay MMO subcriptions because the game will always continue to evolve, or teachers because you always learn something new everyday, or doctors because you are still going to die someday...

      (But my remark was less about his choice and more about rubbing it in the face of the developer.)
      MMOs need steady income for server infrastructure. Teachers and doctors I'm not even going to bother as they're ridiculous comparisons. Last time I checked, a playtester was actually paid to play a game, not the other way around. I know every penny helps development, but 15 to 20 euros is what I'd pay for a finished product. If the game was free to download and play and donations were possible I would have actually donated 5 euros.
      As I said, I bought the game now, can even show you the mail if you so desire. I'm just very cautious as to where I spend my money since many other "early access" titles never took off, and some of them stopped development altogether. If you have an infinite supply of money, good for you. But 15 euros for me is potentially two other (finished) games.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 02:05:18 PM
      (He did indeed buy the game. Thanks for your support, btw!)

      Feedback/bug reports are useful and great, and I appreciate them very much, but no-one is obligated to provide those, and I make every effort to make individual releases playable and enjoyable stand-alone. Plus there's the "minor" point that preorders are what allows the game to exist at all - saying it ought to be free is, in real terms, saying it shouldn't exist. Is this a good opportunity to thank everyone involved for their support? I think it is. So: thank you! It makes a  huge, huge difference, and I'm very grateful.

      Now, let's stay on topic!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 06, 2015, 02:16:57 PM
      Alex, could you please tell us the reason behind increasing the sensor profiles for (D) hulls? I think it is really unnecessary to further affirm their status of being the worst ships in the game.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 02:27:19 PM
      Alex, could you please tell us the reason behind increasing the sensor profiles for (D) hulls? I think it is really unnecessary to further affirm their status of being the worst ships in the game.

      In-fiction reason: leaky reactors, "noisy" (in terms of emissions) engines, etc.

      Gameplay reason: make the primary early-game enemy - i.e. pirates - easier to see. Early-game fleet visibility range was an issue.

      If you're looking at (D) hulls as something the player ought to be using right now... don't :) I'm not necessarily opposed to making them a viable choice in certain situations, but right now they're not, and it's very much not the reason they were put in the game in the first place. They exist to make pirates easier to fight.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 06, 2015, 02:37:29 PM
      They exist to make pirates easier to fight.

      Which is funny, because the olden Buffalo MK.II/Hound pirates were easier to fight than the current D-Enforcers/-Wolfs/-Kites combos. Not that I'm complaining about the challenge (and added variety)...




      BTW, I think the problem I've run into most often in .7 was being caught with my transponder offline while not being aware that it was offline. There were some suggestions about that, like an altered fleet circle to indicate its status. Something like that for .2 would be really nice :)



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euphytose on December 06, 2015, 02:38:06 PM
      Feedback/bug reports are useful and great, and I appreciate them very much, but no-one is obligated to provide those, and I make every effort to make individual releases playable and enjoyable stand-alone. Plus there's the "minor" point that preorders are what allows the game to exist at all - saying it ought to be free is, in real terms, saying it shouldn't exist.

      Feedback and bug reports are what early access is for. I don't expect to have a bug free game, and I report bugs that I find. That's how the product will improve. Currently the only way for people to test your game, is to either do what I did previously, which is obviously not a good thing to do, or buy the game. If I can't try it out it's very hard for me to judge how good it is. And to be perfectly honest once again, I bought it because I was able to test it and see that it's already good and enjoyable despite being in alpha. Had I not found this "alternate" way of testing, the game would have stayed in my "currently monitoring" folder in my browser, or my wishlist on Steam if it had been on it. Demo versions are something of the past now, but they were the best way to make people buy your game. I actually bought SPAZ soon after trying the demo. Otherwise I probably wouldn't have bothered and would have missed out on a very good game, and also this one, since it's SPAZ that got my interested in that type of game.

      edit: I understand I should probably stop talking about that, so if you want to continue via PM send me one.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Tartiflette on December 06, 2015, 02:41:04 PM
      BTW, I think the problem I've run into most often in .7 was being caught with my transponder offline while not being aware that it was offline. There were some suggestions about that, like an altered fleet circle to indicate its status. Something like that for .2 would be really nice :)
      I vote for the player color being the old Flashy Happy Green when transponder is on and that new Shady Sneaky Smuggler-like grey when it's off.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: TJJ on December 06, 2015, 02:42:04 PM
      Can we have "defending yourself from pirate attack, not pursuing them, and even allowing the escape of their disabled & capturable ship" not result in a -2 reputation hit?
      It doesn't seem particularly reasonable for the pirates to begrudge you defending yourself, and allowing their wounded to flee should count for something, no?

      On the road to being a pirate, the biggest obstacle is in fact the pirates themselves!
      Earning enough rep with the pirates through trading/smuggling/missions, while simultaneously *never* being engaged by *any* of their fleets can be quite..... tiresome.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 06, 2015, 02:50:53 PM
      Fleet circle should not rely on color to indicate transponder status.

      Why?  It would be a nice feature if after you accept a commission, your fleet color changes to match (or be a slightly different shade of) the color of your patron faction.

      P.S.  The current player faction color almost matches Tri-Tachyon color.  It feels almost natural to join them.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: TJJ on December 06, 2015, 02:52:47 PM
      Fleet circle should not rely on color to indicate transponder status.

      Why?  It would be a nice feature if after you accept a commission, your fleet color changes to match (or be a slightly different shade of) the color of your patron faction.

      You can't hold multiple commissions, right?

      Some kind of decoration, or heraldry might be a better way to go IMO.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 06, 2015, 02:56:04 PM
      I do not think so.  I do not remember seeing Independent commission offered (even though I am friendly with them) while I am commissioned by Tri-Tachyon.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 06, 2015, 02:57:02 PM
      Gameplay reason: make the primary early-game enemy - i.e. pirates - easier to see. Early-game fleet visibility range was an issue.

      Hey that's not fair! It makes it even harder to be a pirate or smuggler :) We accept, nay approve, of our own faction trying to abort us as soon as we start the game because only the strong deserve to survive, but enough is enough:

      As a pirate or smuggler you rely more than other factions on stealth, yet all our ships are now the least stealthy. Our shielded cargo holds are now canceled out by the D sensor profile. You need that for going dark when you bring contraband into a market for pirate missions. Lorewise it's also hard to imagine why pirates wouldn't put all their resources into stealth since their prosperity and indeed survival depends on it with the whole sector arrayed against them.

      Perhaps* people who have problems either getting jumped by pirates or not being able to catch any just aren't good enough at SS yet. There is stealth, there are terrain effects, there are ally battles. When you're weak, it isn't hard to join chases with police fleets if you want to fight pirates to get XP, or stick close to safe areas and patrols if you want to avoid them. SS has a real, lovely challenge at the beginning with delicious complexity and reverses. Why can't people just think critically, scheme, and machinate better instead of whinging for easier fodder? I know a lot of people complain about difficulty, but at least one person really, really likes that difficulty and nigh perverse challenge.

      (I've been play testing as a smuggler/pirate for ideological reasons since the game falsely portrays them as bloodthirsty raiders when in fact they're just a separate polity whose  pluralistic philosophy threatens regimes like the loathed authoritarian diktat or the totalitarian church)

      But yea re: fleeing pirates, no faction should give you a rep hit for fleeing battle. I can't explain why; just that it's like fried eggs with the flavour of strawberries. Seems out of kilter.

      *definitely


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 06, 2015, 03:01:01 PM
      Quote
      (I've been play testing as a smuggler/pirate for ideological reasons since the game falsely portrays them as bloodthirsty raiders when in fact they're just a separate polity whose  pluralistic philosophy threatens regimes like the loathed authoritarian diktat or the totalitarian church)
      This is why would-be pirates who want the best gear enlist at their <major faction of choice>'s military and act as pirates to their enemies.  If they join with so-called pirates, all they get is junk and enmity from everyone.  In Starsector, there is no meaningful difference between pirate and privateer aside from the military market you can shop at.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: JT on December 06, 2015, 03:45:06 PM
      Hey that's not fair! It makes it even harder to be a pirate or smuggler :) We accept, nay approve, of our own faction trying to abort us as soon as we start the game because only the strong deserve to survive, but enough is enough:

      As a pirate or smuggler you rely more than other factions on stealth, yet all our ships are now the least stealthy. Our shielded cargo holds are now canceled out by the D sensor profile. You need that for going dark when you bring contraband into a market for pirate missions. Lorewise it's also hard to imagine why pirates wouldn't put all their resources into stealth since their prosperity and indeed survival depends on it with the whole sector arrayed against them.

      Perhaps* people who have problems either getting jumped by pirates or not being able to catch any just aren't good enough at SS yet. There is stealth, there are terrain effects, there are ally battles. When you're weak, it isn't hard to join chases with police fleets if you want to fight pirates to get XP, or stick close to safe areas and patrols if you want to avoid them. SS has a real, lovely challenge at the beginning with delicious complexity and reverses. Why can't people just think critically, scheme, and machinate better instead of whinging for easier fodder? I know a lot of people complain about difficulty, but at least one person really, really likes that difficulty and nigh perverse challenge.

      (I've been play testing as a smuggler/pirate for ideological reasons since the game falsely portrays them as bloodthirsty raiders when in fact they're just a separate polity whose  pluralistic philosophy threatens regimes like the loathed authoritarian diktat or the totalitarian church)

      But yea re: fleeing pirates, no faction should give you a rep hit for fleeing battle. I can't explain why; just that it's like fried eggs with the flavour of strawberries. Seems out of kilter.

      *definitely

      I'll note that playing as a pirate isn't currently part of the vanilla content -- it requires a mod to realise as a starting scenario.  That said, you shouldn't simultaneously complain about difficulty and ad hominem on others for not being good enough. A logician would pounce on that one with tooth and flame. ;-)

      The vast majority of pirates are sloppy, unregulated, and inexperienced people who resorted to piracy out of either desperation -- too poor to afford good stuff -- or a simple lack of basic decency -- so they're lacking in the sort of rigid discipline and structure that would promote proper maintenance.  The D-hulls also suit a very plausible in-lore explanation: these are ships that would have been brought to the breakers but have instead, through creative bookkeeping, been "disposed of".

      Really, the only thing I see that needs to be fixed here is to make regular non-degraded hulls available for purchase in pirate ports on (more frequent) occasion -- so a player pirate can pick those up as he goes, and perhaps even start out with one (rather than a D-hull) on the basis of being a cut above the rest.  The "elite" pirates are noble browncoats who care more about personal freedoms and independence against increasingly totalitarian regimes, and are both cunning and intelligent enough to maintain consensual chains of command and discipline... translating to properly refitted hulls, repaired through old-fashioned sweat and blood, that are the rival of mainline autofactories.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 06, 2015, 03:56:09 PM
      Really, the only thing I see that needs to be fixed here is to make regular non-degraded hulls available for purchase in pirate ports on occasion -- so a player pirate can pick those up as he goes, and perhaps even start out with one (rather than a D-hull) on the basis of being a cut above the rest.  The "elite" pirates are noble browncoats who care more about personal freedoms and independence against increasingly totalitarian regimes,

      Haha, hear hear. Yes I'd settle for that :) They should also show up in pirate fleets now and then to surprise complacent players. But really any faction that relies so much on aggression or subterfuge would be sure to have their gear well polished and maintained, or they'd never outlive their first day on the job. Ships fitted for piracy in history were well armed and equipped for speed and surprise.

      It's the profit watching pinch-a-penny merchants who would have the fleets full of aftermarket refurb D freighters and rentacop D escort frigates-- if your fleet gets destroyed just declare bankruptcy or skip town.

      I guess the takeaway is that maybe small pirate fleets of just a 1-3 ships should be all Ds (the aspiring pirates) but the bigger fleets should be more high quality ships.


      This is why would-be pirates who want the best gear enlist at their <major faction of choice>'s military and act as pirates to their enemies.  If they join with so-called pirates, all they get is junk and enmity from everyone.  In Starsector, there is no meaningful difference between pirate and privateer aside from the military market you can shop at.

      Didn't you see my post. It's a matter of principle man! You'd think I'd sell out to the stinking Diktat gulag state, or punch a timecard for Tri-Tach?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 06, 2015, 04:21:02 PM
      possible bug
      50000 credit bounty posted is listed as 75000C on my intel screen...

      Varda Lim by the tri-tachyon.

      Bug?  am am neutral with tri-tachyon.

      I can click the 75000 bounty and it reads 50000 credit at the top.

      It's a bug - fixed, thank you. The actual bounty amount is the higher one.


      Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments?  Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.

      I've run into similar stuff in playtesting and the solution has been to make sure you take them out early on in the battle before they run. It's harder, but also mixes up the things you actually need to do in battle. So I'm not entirely sure this is something that needs to be sanity-checked or fixed - just something that requires an adjustment in tactics to deal with.

      If that gets to a pursuit scenario, that's basically a loss condition... well, not quite, even then. You could harry them instead (to avoid a long and pointless pursuit) and if you catch them enough times and harry their CR down, they should stand and fight eventually. Or crash-mothball when they flee and become easily catchable. Or not crash-mothball and explode from critical malfunctions. This would get more expensive with all the emergency burns and such, but if it's a big bounty, it's probably still worth it.

      So you've got an initial tactic, and then a fallback if that doesn't work out. Seems reasonable to me; thoughts?

      The current system is still prone to some serious edge-case shenanigans and your ability to kill the Admiral often depends on the AI making unnecessary decisions that make it possible for you to kill him.  For instance, I had one case where the bounty Admiral was in a Medusa who deployed himself in the second wave of the main battle, just as the enemy fleet decided to retreat, so there was never a chance to headhunt him in the field, and killing a Medusa with a level 20 office in a pursuit is one hell of a long shot.

      Repeatedly harrying them on the strategic level is a bad and unreliable option.  The fleets you take to hunt lategame bounties aren't going to be able to match burn speeds with whatever jackass ships manage to escape the first engagement and forcing the player to light supplies on fire mashing Emergency Burn on a full sized fleet in order to maybe jink the AI into touching bubbles with the stragglers isn't a fun or satisfying experience.  The AI doesn't seem to care about time or resources at all while you've just put a huge amount of work into making sure the player does, so forcing the player into what are essentially contests of spite is probably not a great outcome for bounty fights.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 04:50:35 PM
      Really, the only thing I see that needs to be fixed here is to make regular non-degraded hulls available for purchase in pirate ports on occasion -- so a player pirate can pick those up as he goes, and perhaps even start out with one (rather than a D-hull) on the basis of being a cut above the rest.  The "elite" pirates are noble browncoats who care more about personal freedoms and independence against increasingly totalitarian regimes,

      That's already how it works in 0.7.1a - a decent number of independent hulls and weapons are available on black markets in pirate ports and elsewhere.


      @Voyager I: I see your point re: the chasing the stragglers down. Having just given it a try, I think it's more that there's no good way to actually chase down a fleet like that, if it happens to be orbiting a world without any terrain around it to take advantage of. If you could just EB a couple of times and reliably catch them, that'd one one thing - but it really is pretty difficult to pull off without nearby terrain. "Don't put fleet commanders into Medusas" doesn't sound like a good solution, though; it's solving an edge case with something that will itself have edge cases and that doesn't seem like actual progress.

      I think a good solution here would be either skills that improve abilities, or more abilities for more pursuit options in the absence of terrain. And perhaps adding more terrain in overall. As you say, that particular type of chase is not a satisfying experience, but it probably could be.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 06, 2015, 06:04:45 PM
      I'm not sure how much terrain can solve this.  Imagine something like an end-game bounty battle where cruisers or even capitals are legitimately being deployed by both sides.  Even when they have a Paragon on the field, the enemy Admiral might be a level 20 officer commanding from an Afflictor, which depending on how the AI feels like flying it is pretty likely to live through the main battle and survive a pursuit scenario, probably either by itself or with some other phase frigates and such.  The heavy duty fleet you brought for the primary battle can't and shouldn't be able to chase down a handful of burn 10 frigates, and any scenario where it can probably just means the AI is making unnecessary mistakes or doesn't understand some new game mechanic.  Of course, as it currently stands you can't park your cruisers and split off with your own fast movers for an exhilarating chase sequence, so instead what happens is that if the enemy Admiral happened to be one of those escaping frigates then you just don't get paid for wiping out a deserter's band the size of a system defense fleet (or sometimes you do, but only because the AI flew back into your fleet of its own accord for no discernible reason, which isn't really a satisfying way to achieve your goals).  "Destroy this large enemy fleet" is a very different job from "hunt down this fast moving enemy frigate" and you probably shouldn't be able to be good at both with the same fleet, but sometimes you come to do one and end up having to do the other and you don't have any way to switch fleets on the fly.

      A simple, short-term fix might just be putting the Admiral into the largest non-civilian hull in their fleet.  Later on, when you add more detailed mechanics around pursuit etc, you can look at adding more depth to admiral assignments.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 06, 2015, 06:10:00 PM
      Something must be off about these commissions.

      I just got punished -5 for not being hostile with the independents from Hegemony. I thought the idea was you didn't have to pick only one. And I am being punished so frequently I don't have a chance to run around the galaxy picking fights with every single other faction to maintain my standing with one.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euqocelbbog on December 06, 2015, 06:26:00 PM
      I feel like something has to be wrong with smuggling investigations. A while ago I incurred an investigation after picking up a couple of AM blasters and disregarded it because it's just a pair of guns, who cares. Later the investigation hit me with an about 100 point penalty, breaking my almost cooperative relations and my commission, but I was able to load just far enough back to burndrive over and pay a big ass bribe. More recently, I incurred another investigation after offloading 40 units of drugs and tried to go pay the bribe, but a patrol decided to orbit the respective planet for at least an ingame month. I eventually loaded back and went off to do other stuff before returning, where I had the choice of eating a 124 point penalty or paying a bribe of 192,000 credits.

      It seems that investigations that find you guilty always set you to about -30 relations and always entail absolutely enormous bribes. I could understand if it was a neutral faction and I was drowning their black markets in drugs, weapons, and organs, but in this case the most I'm doing is occasionally buying the odd rare weapon or offloading some drugs looted from pirates and with a faction that I'm cooperative with and hold a commission. Honestly, the smuggling investigation system right now feels just as random and arbitrary as the old boarding system and likewise only results in frustration.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 06:41:37 PM
      I'm not sure how much terrain can solve this.  Imagine something like an end-game bounty battle where cruisers or even capitals are legitimately being deployed by both sides.  Even when they have a Paragon on the field, the enemy Admiral might be a level 20 officer commanding from an Afflictor, which depending on how the AI feels like flying it is pretty likely to live through the main battle and survive a pursuit scenario, probably either by itself or with some other phase frigates and such.  The heavy duty fleet you brought for the primary battle can't and shouldn't be able to chase down a handful of burn 10 frigates, and any scenario where it can probably just means the AI is making unnecessary mistakes or doesn't understand some new game mechanic.  Of course, as it currently stands you can't park your cruisers and split off with your own fast movers for an exhilarating chase sequence, so instead what happens is that if the enemy Admiral happened to be one of those escaping frigates then you just don't get paid for wiping out a deserter's band the size of a system defense fleet (or sometimes you do, but only because the AI flew back into your fleet of its own accord for no discernible reason, which isn't really a satisfying way to achieve your goals).  "Destroy this large enemy fleet" is a very different job from "hunt down this fast moving enemy frigate" and you probably shouldn't be able to be good at both with the same fleet, but sometimes you come to do one and end up having to do the other and you don't have any way to switch fleets on the fly.

      A simple, short-term fix might just be putting the Admiral into the largest non-civilian hull in their fleet.  Later on, when you add more detailed mechanics around pursuit etc, you can look at adding more depth to admiral assignments.

      Did that. A good thing for now, regardless of how stuff pans out; thanks for the suggestion.


      I just got punished -5 for not being hostile with the independents from Hegemony. I thought the idea was you didn't have to pick only one. And I am being punished so frequently I don't have a chance to run around the galaxy picking fights with every single other faction to maintain my standing with one.

      You're limited to one, and it opens up lots of hostilities. The point is that you pick one, rather than it happening through investigations and such. But once you pick a faction, yeah, that's how it's going to go.

      I feel like something has to be wrong with smuggling investigations. A while ago I incurred an investigation after picking up a couple of AM blasters and disregarded it because it's just a pair of guns, who cares. Later the investigation hit me with an about 100 point penalty, breaking my almost cooperative relations and my commission, but I was able to load just far enough back to burndrive over and pay a big ass bribe. More recently, I incurred another investigation after offloading 40 units of drugs and tried to go pay the bribe, but a patrol decided to orbit the respective planet for at least an ingame month. I eventually loaded back and went off to do other stuff before returning, where I had the choice of eating a 124 point penalty or paying a bribe of 192,000 credits.

      It seems that investigations that find you guilty always set you to about -30 relations and always entail absolutely enormous bribes. I could understand if it was a neutral faction and I was drowning their black markets in drugs, weapons, and organs, but in this case the most I'm doing is occasionally buying the odd rare weapon or offloading some drugs looted from pirates and with a faction that I'm cooperative with and hold a commission. Honestly, the smuggling investigation system right now feels just as random and arbitrary as the old boarding system and likewise only results in frustration.

      The bribe amount sounds way wrong. It's supposed to max out at 100k credits when the investigation has a maxed out chance of starting/finding you guilty. If it's just a minor BM purchase here and there, the bribe shouldn't rise much about 10k.

      Checked into it a bit - looks like there's a bug where it wasn't being properly capped, but still, to get to 192k credits, the probability of an investigation (i.e. suspicion level) had to go to almost 200%. Which would require selling a *lot* of stuff on the black market, or for the market to be really small. So I suppose it's possible that this is a legitimate outcome - if you sold 40 drugs at a premium to a very small market, then this might have happened, but it still sounds unlikely. I just tried selling 40 drugs to a size 5 market, and the investigation chance from that was 20%. so to get to 190% or so? I suppose it is possible, with a market with a lower trade volume and high stability. Are you sure that black market ship purchases and such weren't involved?

      Anyway, the major difference in effect from selling the same amount on a small vs large market is rather hidden from the player... hm. Something I'll need to look at, for sure. Right now smuggling investigations are there so that there's a real risk to smuggling (plus, sneaking into a market to pay a bribe can be fun, though the issue there is it just interrupts whatever you were doing, and that can be annoying, hence the long duration); but might be able to find another way of accomplishing the same thing.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 06, 2015, 06:58:37 PM
      I just got punished -5 for not being hostile with the independents from Hegemony. I thought the idea was you didn't have to pick only one. And I am being punished so frequently I don't have a chance to run around the galaxy picking fights with every single other faction to maintain my standing with one.

      You're limited to one, and it opens up lots of hostilities. The point is that you pick one, rather than it happening through investigations and such. But once you pick a faction, yeah, that's how it's going to go.

      Shouldn't this punishment be based on the actual diplomatic relations of the faction you get a commission with? Why should I be punished for not hitting the independents when the Hegemony are Neutral with them? This opens up a greater flexibility with the diplomatics of these factions and gives the player an incentive for paying attention to the changing politics.

      There is no possible way a player can pick a commission and then go out and immediately create hostilities with every single other faction in the game, so by this logic the player should automatically be reduced to hostile with every other faction...but again this logic gets muddy because you have factions sending mercantile fleets between them and now I'm getting punished for not hitting food shortage fleets coming to my own faction?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 07:00:43 PM
      Shouldn't this punishment be based on the actual diplomatic relations of the faction you get a commission with?

      It is - guessing that in your game, the Hegemony is currently hostile to independents. Check "Events" for current faction hostility updates, or the "factions" intel tab. Note that if you do attack them, you'll recover some standing with the independents once hostilities end.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 06, 2015, 07:07:32 PM
      Note that if you do attack them, you'll recover some standing with the independents once hostilities end.

      Well that's nice to know  :) Yea I just opened it up and checked, I was already well in the negative with independent so the punishment makes no sense, Sindrian Dictat I get, but I'm neutral with them.

      I think I'm just trying to express that it's frustrating when I just took out 5 or 6 large pirate fleets my own faction comes chewing at me to throw my fleet at someone else, and they're not even paying me enough to be hitting enemies regularly.

      I do like how this adds depth, I definitely would not suggest someone becomes a commission with any of the powers that be at this point. I only had access to the better weapons for the course of a few days before they started docking me for not hitting everyone.

      Maybe private objectives (similar to drox operative) that you have no choice but take just to keep your rep up and they send these special missions (with a few credits) on some sort of random basis.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 07:12:07 PM
      I'm not sure what you're saying, why do you need to be come hostile with "everyone"? Unless you're joining the faction at a time when it's hostile with everyone, I suppose.

      ... thinking about just making hostility automatic, though, i.e. w/o making you need to hunt down that faction's fleet. Have a commission, and the other faction is at war with yours? Hostile!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 06, 2015, 07:16:23 PM
      I'm not sure what you're saying, why do you need to be come hostile with "everyone"? Unless you're joining the faction at a time when it's hostile with everyone, I suppose.

      ... thinking about just making hostility automatic, though, i.e. w/o making you need to hunt down that faction's fleet. Have a commission, and the other faction is at war with yours? Hostile!

      I don't honestly know. It was behavior I was unaware the game was going to take, with -5 discipline every time for every faction (sometimes two or three at the same time) and without warning. At least they give me a friendly reminder about the transponder... With this game behavior I do believe I'll be uninstalling the extra faction mods as that is only going to make it impossible for me to please a faction...most definitely those darn Templars.

      Been loving the new update though. It really has become a very well balanced game. Cheers!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 06, 2015, 07:19:21 PM
      That would be convenient, usually, if you are grinding enemies in your faction's system.  On the other hand, that might lead to an uncommon case where a previously peaceful defense fleet or three turns on you and attacks before you react, possibly before you get the news, if you are elsewhere.  (For example, Sindrian fleets gang-up on you suddenly just as you are ready to shop at Sindria.)

      Perhaps the safe option is to let player opt into the hostilities, so player does not rage quit if big fleets turn killer at a bad place.  Taking penalties for lack of hostilities is probably lesser of two evils than getting wiped if you are deep in friendly-turned-hostile space.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 06, 2015, 07:29:29 PM
      Taking penalties for lack of hostilities is probably lesser of two evils than getting wiped if you are deep in friendly-turned-hostile space.

      True but at two factions a piece that's -10 at a regular interval and enough to reduce you from getting any of the equipment benefits you opted into getting.

      I just don't think there's enough benefit outside of equipment for picking a side. Maybe if the tariffs were less stiff (that would make up for the measly 300 per ship they toss at my begging hands) or if I got military weapons at a reduced rate... there needs to be some extra benefit if I am going to sacrifice all of my sanity tracking down fleets to continually attack.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Vinyl Dash on December 06, 2015, 08:00:00 PM
      On the other hand, that might lead to an uncommon case where a previously peaceful defense fleet or three turns on you and attacks before you react, possibly before you get the news, if you are elsewhere.  (For example, Sindrian fleets gang-up on you suddenly just as you are ready to shop at Sindria.)

      That's a good point. A neat solution might be to have your faction warn you in advance that they plan to declare war. Maybe give the player a week to prepare.

      True but at two factions a piece that's -10 at a regular interval and enough to reduce you from getting any of the equipment benefits you opted into getting.

      I just don't think there's enough benefit outside of equipment for picking a side. Maybe if the tariffs were less stiff (that would make up for the measly 300 per ship they toss at my begging hands) or if I got military weapons at a reduced rate... there needs to be some extra benefit if I am going to sacrifice all of my sanity tracking down fleets to continually attack.

      Does it really happen that often? I've been playing with the commissions a bit, and my faction doesn't seem to declare war THAT often. Maybe once every couple of months.

      Though the first time I picked up a commission (with the Independents), they went from no special hostilities to war with the Hegemony, the Sindrian Diktat, the Luddic Church and a mod faction (Diable Avionics) within the first two weeks. That had me scrambling around a bit. Beside that madness, it's pretty smooth sailing.

      Also, I've found I can often just power through the penalties. -5 every now and then hurts, but I can make that up by hitting 2-3 fleets. That's usually easy enough to do.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zaphide on December 06, 2015, 08:09:44 PM
      That would be convenient, usually, if you are grinding enemies in your faction's system.  On the other hand, that might lead to an uncommon case where a previously peaceful defense fleet or three turns on you and attacks before you react, possibly before you get the news, if you are elsewhere.  (For example, Sindrian fleets gang-up on you suddenly just as you are ready to shop at Sindria.)

      Perhaps the safe option is to let player opt into the hostilities, so player does not rage quit if big fleets turn killer at a bad place.  Taking penalties for lack of hostilities is probably lesser of two evils than getting wiped if you are deep in friendly-turned-hostile space.

      Perhaps player v faction hostilities just start on a timer? 10 days or something?

      e.g. "You have declared loyalty for <faction>. <other_faction> will actively expel you from their controlled space in <number of days>".


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Histidine on December 06, 2015, 08:45:16 PM
      Smuggling investigation penalties sound like they should scale with market size.

      I mean, it's hard to imagine the central Hegemony authorities really caring about even seriously destabilizing smuggling on some random size 3 station (probably happens every other week), and in the larger scheme of things the effect isn't all that significant.
      But if you somehow smuggle enough to get the full 5 point penalty on Chicomoztoc and get convicted of it, you should get declared enemy of the state and go straight to vengeful status instantly.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 06, 2015, 08:47:36 PM
      Perhaps player v faction hostilities just start on a timer? 10 days or something?

      e.g. "You have declared loyalty for <faction>. <other_faction> will actively expel you from their controlled space in <number of days>".

      That sounds good.

      Smuggling investigation penalties sound like they should scale with market size.

      I mean, it's hard to imagine the central Hegemony authorities really caring about even seriously destabilizing smuggling on some random size 3 station (probably happens every other week), and in the larger scheme of things the effect isn't all that significant.
      But if you somehow smuggle enough to get the full 5 point penalty on Chicomoztoc and get convicted of it, you should get declared enemy of the state and go straight to vengeful status instantly.

      That also sounds good.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Troll on December 07, 2015, 02:40:43 AM
      Still haven't tried the build but I have one thing to say.
      It has already been discussed a dozen pages ago but I'd like a way to tone down or maybe filter the explosions. I totally love big explosions but years ago I had something bad happen and since then I'm even more photo sensitive (not to the point of headache anymore though), which makes me squint playing in the dark to avoid blinding. Having this option would be something epileptics might appreciate as well, as multiple big ships exploding one after another blankets the screen in white repetitively.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 07, 2015, 03:01:05 AM
      Perhaps player v faction hostilities just start on a timer? 10 days or something?

      e.g. "You have declared loyalty for <faction>. <other_faction> will actively expel you from their controlled space in <number of days>".

      That sounds good.


      Hm, what I don't like about it is that you have no choice in the matter anymore. Sometimes I care more about doing my own stuff than participating in my faction's silly (or scary) wars, which would be hard with that change. Bounties, missions or explorations that lead me into the space of the other_faction (which is in some cases almost everywhere) will become very hard to reach. This is especially true if your fleet is still small (you can easily get commissioned while in the starter frigate) and you can't really trade blows with other_faction's patrols yet. And that, after all, is the time where you most need the bounties/missions to grow.

      I was thinking, maybe it would be enough if you get automatically dropped to "inhospitable" with other_faction, at which point your relationship to your faction is stable. You couldn't trade with the others anymore, but still traverse their space without being outright killed. Or you can actively decide to attack and take it to "hostile", at which point your faction might "welcome you to the war" with a reputation bonus (once per war). (Rewards are always more fun than punishments.)


      It would also make sense for inhospitable (and  suspicious?)  factions to make random inspections even if your transponder is on (without the old waiting bar please) so smuggling in their space gets a bit more exciting.




      It has already been discussed a dozen pages ago but I'd like a way to tone down or maybe filter the explosions.


      Got to "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\starsector-core\data\config\", open the file "settings.json" with a text editor and find "enableShipExplosionWhiteout":true. Change it to false. Voilà :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Achataeon on December 07, 2015, 05:22:10 AM
      Ooh, I'd really like for random shakedowns to have a comeback, with some new shiny hullmods that reduce sensor profile. Would make sense to have a fleet dedicated to stealth, no? Possibly even have a whole faction dedicated to stealth. (yes, there's phase frigates) But I'd like to see a greater variation to the stealthy line of ships. Currently we only have 3 phase ships, 2 frigates and a cruiser. Maybe at least expand the lineup to a whole fighter to capital series?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 07, 2015, 05:28:24 AM
      Ooh, I'd really like for random shakedowns to have a comeback, with some new shiny hullmods that reduce sensor profile. Would make sense to have a fleet dedicated to stealth, no? Possibly even have a whole faction dedicated to stealth. (yes, there's phase frigates) But I'd like to see a greater variation to the stealthy line of ships. Currently we only have 3 phase ships, 2 frigates and a cruiser. Maybe at least expand the lineup to a whole fighter to capital series?
      We have phase destroyers missing. Capitals? Dunno. Capitals don't seem to have enough mobility to disengage in time - life or death matter to a phase ship.
      Fighters - see Terminator Drones on Tempest. Those little things are extremely hard to pop - the best solution is, as the Codex says, go pop the mothership. Which is waaaaay easier. Phase fighters? Going to be a nightmare.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 07, 2015, 05:32:33 AM
      Random shakedowns were aggravating to say the least; I am glad to see them gone!  The current way is better if you really need to sneak.

      @ Gothars:  Would dropping relations down to inhospitable satisfy your faction?  If not, then this is useless since you still lose reputation with your faction.  Your idea would be good, if inhospitable is enough to keep the boss happy.

      P.S.  Suggestion:  When you take a relations penalty from your faction for not being hostile with enemies, your relations with enemy factions worsen at the same time, perhaps to hostile so that you only get dinged once.  That way, you have one month grace period to get out of enemy space if you cannot handle enemy fleets.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 07, 2015, 05:58:00 AM
      Currently not. Need to be at hostile level it seems.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 07, 2015, 06:53:12 AM
      @ Gothars:  Would dropping relations down to inhospitable satisfy your faction?  If not, then this is useless since you still lose reputation with your faction.  Your idea would be good, if inhospitable is enough to keep the boss happy.

      Yeah, sure, as I wrote: "I was thinking, maybe it would be enough if you get automatically dropped to "inhospitable" with other_faction, at which point your relationship to your faction is stable."

      Of course, if you get all cuddly with the other_faction, above "inhospitable", you would again be hit with regular rep penalties by your faction.


      Random shakedowns were aggravating to say the least; I am glad to see them gone!  The current way is better if you really need to sneak.

      I completely agree, but that was largely because they were ubiquitous, felt completely arbitrary and took forever to get through.

      If you bind them to a very specific condition where they make sense and make them more succinct they might be fun. If you're in the space of an inhospitable faction I think it would make sense to get inspected because
      - you can't trade legally and the likelihood you're there for illegal business is indeed high, and
      - the faction doesn't like you and wants to make your life hard.

      I mean, atm running with illegal goods is pretty much risk free (read: boring) if you always keep your transponder on. Some more need for sneakiness from time to time would not hurt.
      Neither would clearer differentiation between faction reputation levels.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Schwartz on December 07, 2015, 07:39:45 AM
      One way to make shakedowns situational and tie them into the black market system would be that if you end up getting caught black market trading (losing rep; no full investigation), one result is that the patrols of that faction may pull you over if they see you close-by with a transponder on.

      But then I've never understood these two vastly different outcomes. If you lose a small amount of rep black market trading, that means they 'caught' you and they know who you are. Is an investigation considered an information leak that goes 'public', as in, media coverage? Forcing a faction's hand?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: nomadic_leader on December 07, 2015, 07:42:56 AM
      I'm not sure what you're saying, why do you need to be come hostile with "everyone"? Unless you're joining the faction at a time when it's hostile with everyone, I suppose.

      ... thinking about just making hostility automatic, though, i.e. w/o making you need to hunt down that faction's fleet. Have a commission, and the other faction is at war with yours? Hostile!

      This probably makes sense-- but after the hostility events and the general amnesties, your relations with the formerly hostile factions should drop back to merely suspicious.

      In this way taking a comission makes it like you're really joining the faction and your relations with other factions will be determined by the interstellar politics, not your own actions.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 07, 2015, 07:46:19 AM
      If you lose a small amount of rep black market trading, that means they 'caught' you and they know who you are.

      Pretty sure that just means they got a little bit suspicious. It's reputation we talking about, so it can all be based on hearsay, rumors and being at the wrong place at the wrong time. Investigations happen when you're caught.




      after the hostility events and the general amnesties, your relations with the formerly hostile factions should drop back to merely suspicious.

      That is what happens :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 07, 2015, 08:03:00 AM
      Perhaps player v faction hostilities just start on a timer? 10 days or something?

      e.g. "You have declared loyalty for <faction>. <other_faction> will actively expel you from their controlled space in <number of days>".

      That sounds good.


      Hm, what I don't like about it is that you have no choice in the matter anymore. Sometimes I care more about doing my own stuff than participating in my faction's silly (or scary) wars, which would be hard with that change. Bounties, missions or explorations that lead me into the space of the other_faction (which is in some cases almost everywhere) will become very hard to reach. This is especially true if your fleet is still small (you can easily get commissioned while in the starter frigate) and you can't really trade blows with other_faction's patrols yet. And that, after all, is the time where you most need the bounties/missions to grow.

      I was thinking, maybe it would be enough if you get automatically dropped to "inhospitable" with other_faction, at which point your relationship to your faction is stable. You couldn't trade with the others anymore, but still traverse their space without being outright killed. Or you can actively decide to attack and take it to "hostile", at which point your faction might "welcome you to the war" with a reputation bonus (once per war). (Rewards are always more fun than punishments.)


      It would also make sense for inhospitable (and  suspicious?)  factions to make random inspections even if your transponder is on (without the old waiting bar please) so smuggling in their space gets a bit more exciting.

      I'm with you Gothars, this sounds rational and interesting. Also adds a bit to the game. Plus add in the possibility of doing real smuggling runs!

      Think about doing those burns trying to get past patrols and drop planet side to leave some illegal weapons and stims with the local rebels to destabilize their planet even more (nice rep bonus maybe from faction). Then trying to outrun them as you leave the system!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: miljan on December 07, 2015, 10:49:44 AM
      A stupid question, but how can I change faction commission? I am with hegemony (have around 90 reputation), but want to change it to Independent  (with witch i have 100), so how can I do it? Do i need to attack hegemony?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 07, 2015, 10:53:57 AM
      Hm, what I don't like about it is that you have no choice in the matter anymore. Sometimes I care more about doing my own stuff than participating in my faction's silly (or scary) wars, which would be hard with that change. Bounties, missions or explorations that lead me into the space of the other_faction (which is in some cases almost everywhere) will become very hard to reach. This is especially true if your fleet is still small (you can easily get commissioned while in the starter frigate) and you can't really trade blows with other_faction's patrols yet. And that, after all, is the time where you most need the bounties/missions to grow.

      I was thinking, maybe it would be enough if you get automatically dropped to "inhospitable" with other_faction, at which point your relationship to your faction is stable. You couldn't trade with the others anymore, but still traverse their space without being outright killed. Or you can actively decide to attack and take it to "hostile", at which point your faction might "welcome you to the war" with a reputation bonus (once per war). (Rewards are always more fun than punishments.)

      It would also make sense for inhospitable (and  suspicious?)  factions to make random inspections even if your transponder is on (without the old waiting bar please) so smuggling in their space gets a bit more exciting.

      Hmm. Yeah, that does make sense. I've been thinking about the "transponder on smuggling" stuff - considering inspections when there's any suspicion of smuggling. Adding "or inhospitable" to that might make sense, too.

      One potential problem is that if you're smuggling stuff that's not illegal, but you're just planning to sell on the black market, contraband scans won't do anything to deter you. Having to go transponder off to reduce investigation chances is a way to at least partially get around that, but investigations are a bit of an, ah, blunt instrument. Customs also charging tolls - once you're being watched, that is - might do the job, though.


      A stupid question, but how can I change faction commission? I am with hegemony (have around 90 reputation), but want to change it to Independent  (with witch i have 100), so how can I do it? Do i need to attack hegemony?

      At the moment, yeah. Anything that drops you to suspicious with them will do it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: miljan on December 07, 2015, 11:21:35 AM
      I would really like to see inspections/shakedowns   in some form back in the game, both for you, and to see when AI does it to others. It makes the world feel a lot more alive and active. If it can be implemented in some way, would be great.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Toxcity on December 07, 2015, 11:57:03 AM
      Don't luddic path fleets do something like that now? Maybe their tithe mechanic could be extended to pirates (with a different name of course).


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 07, 2015, 11:59:02 AM
      In 0.7a, I carried contraband (organs) not to sell on black market, but to deliver (to doctors) in missions.  If I got stopped by customs, my response would be to attack the patrol (or more accurately, refuse the scan and get attacked) because I would not let the patrol seize half million credits worth of organs sitting in my cargo space.

      I would sell supplies and fuel to the black market.  Dealing with anything aside from food fuel, supplies, and organs were more trouble than they were worth.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Aeson on December 07, 2015, 01:03:38 PM
      Quote
      One potential problem is that if you're smuggling stuff that's not illegal, but you're just planning to sell on the black market, contraband scans won't do anything to deter you.
      Cargo inspections could be used to catch the player smuggling goods out of a market rather than into it; the local patrol knows that the player purchased X credits of stuff on the open market and the player (is assumed to have) declared Y credits worth of specified (legal) cargoes that the player had coming into the port and did not sell prior to departure. Patrol scans the cargo bay and finds Z > X + Y credits worth of cargo (using open-market prices as of the time the player left the port, or more likely just using the number of units of cargo rather than the value, possibly with a fudge factor involved and maybe some allowance for engagements). If Z is only a little greater than X + Y (say, 10% or less), that's maybe a little suspicious, but nothing to be too concerned about. If Z is a lot greater than X + Y (say, between 10% and 50%, then that's a strong indication that the player is involved in smuggling activity and will make it more likely for the player's activities to be investigated in the (near) future, but perhaps not enough that the patrol is (legally) entitled to take any immediate overt action against the player (either demanding payment of tariffs or attacking the player). If Z is enormously greater than X + Y (say, greater than 50%), the patrol is legally entitled to (attempt to) collect either the unpaid tariffs or the illegally-acquired cargo (i.e. the patrol gets to demand money and attack the player if payment is refused, and the player gets flagged as likely being engaged in smuggling activity at this planet). And maybe for any of this you can (try to) bribe the patrol to go bother someone else and not report the transgression, or at least understate it, resulting in a lower likelihood of suffering an investigation for the smuggling.

      I also think that if the player accepts a legal mission requiring an illegal cargo, and that mission was offered by the faction to which the patrol belongs, then illegal cargo of the type requested by the mission should be at least partly ignored by the patrol (maybe not to the extent that having a mission for 10 units of organs will cover you when you're caught with 1000 units of organs, but that contract might cover you if you get caught with 20 units of organs).


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Troll on December 07, 2015, 01:14:49 PM
      Got to "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\starsector-core\data\config\", open the file "settings.json" with a text editor and find "enableShipExplosionWhiteout":true. Change it to false. Voilà :)

      Thanks will notepad it to keep it close.
      I take it completely removes the fireworks, hence the request for some sort of filter to make it less bright. Still, many thanks this will be put to good use. :D


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Euqocelbbog on December 07, 2015, 02:27:16 PM
      The bribe amount sounds way wrong. It's supposed to max out at 100k credits when the investigation has a maxed out chance of starting/finding you guilty. If it's just a minor BM purchase here and there, the bribe shouldn't rise much about 10k.

      Checked into it a bit - looks like there's a bug where it wasn't being properly capped, but still, to get to 192k credits, the probability of an investigation (i.e. suspicion level) had to go to almost 200%. Which would require selling a *lot* of stuff on the black market, or for the market to be really small. So I suppose it's possible that this is a legitimate outcome - if you sold 40 drugs at a premium to a very small market, then this might have happened, but it still sounds unlikely. I just tried selling 40 drugs to a size 5 market, and the investigation chance from that was 20%. so to get to 190% or so? I suppose it is possible, with a market with a lower trade volume and high stability. Are you sure that black market ship purchases and such weren't involved?

      Anyway, the major difference in effect from selling the same amount on a small vs large market is rather hidden from the player... hm. Something I'll need to look at, for sure. Right now smuggling investigations are there so that there's a real risk to smuggling (plus, sneaking into a market to pay a bribe can be fun, though the issue there is it just interrupts whatever you were doing, and that can be annoying, hence the long duration); but might be able to find another way of accomplishing the same thing.

      For context, the drug sale was to Coatl, the Hegemony military base in the Aztlan system. I don't remember the size of the market offhand but I imagine it's fairly small. Coatl did have a significant demand for drugs when I sold, as I was holding onto them for a big payday. I don't remember exactly, but the profit was probably around 30-35k for the load of 40. Didn't do any other smuggling during that trip.

      I dig the system of smuggling being a risk, but I think the game just needs to better communicate the gravity of how serious an investigation might be. Something as simple as an added note to the log notification that "hey, all the evidence is arrayed against you and if you don't bribe the investigator you're gonna get canned" would go a long, long way towards making the system appear more logical and would alleviate a lot of the associated frustration. When bounties on pirate and deserter fleets that aren't too intimidating net rewards in the realm of hundreds of thousands of credits, a smuggling run worth 30k is not immediately apparent as something of significant consequence.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 07, 2015, 02:31:24 PM
      Thanks for the added info - funny, Coatl is the exact market I was using to test this out. What you're saying makes sense, need more transparency here at the very least.

      Well, I guess at least for now you know that smuggling investigations are serious business :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 07, 2015, 02:37:08 PM
      Re: smuggling
      I would not want my reputation crashing down from Cooperative to Vengeful just because I did too much commerce with a big Black Market.  If anything, the minimum penalty should be greater (i.e, more than -5) if the transaction is extreme.  It should not lower relations to Vengeful unless there is a way to improve relations from there.

      Going down to inhospitable is serious enough for most factions because that makes trading harder (no missions, cannot use open market).


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 07, 2015, 02:49:03 PM
      I've been thinking about the "transponder on smuggling" stuff - considering inspections when there's any suspicion of smuggling. Adding "or inhospitable" to that might make sense, too.
       Customs also charging tolls - once you're being watched, that is - might do the job, though.

      Please don't overdo it, though :) Suspicion triggered inspections seem like something a genuine smuggler character could commonly face as part of his challenge. But a bounty hunter who's just getting some supplies on the black market when they're not available legally shouldn't be stopped henceforth. I think its better to err on the side of giving the player a little too much advantage through smuggling than risking to annoy him all the time with inspections.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 07, 2015, 02:51:52 PM
      It's also just become kind of a gaming convention over the years that consequences don't really stick to the player character.  The penalty for murder in most games that even care about those things is usually a modest fine, after which your crimes are entirely forgotten by society, and if you happen to kill a few guards before they can coerce you into compliance then it's no big deal; the fine just gets bigger.

      Now suddenly we're in a game where some harmless organ smuggling can get you put on the serious naughty list, and you won't get off without putting in some serious work.  This definitely isn't a bad thing, but the game may want to be more forward in letting people know that their expectations may need to be reevaluated.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zhentar on December 07, 2015, 05:55:38 PM
      I'm in a pursuit, fleeing from a significantly superior pirate force. I give the "retreat" order to a Cerberus, piloted by a 'Steady' officer. Rather than doing anything vaguely resembling a retreat, the ship does a u-turn and dives into the opposing forces, and 10 seconds later it's disabled. That was definitely NOT the intent of my retreat order...


      edit: Also, I think I've only seen a tempest for sale once in all my .7 game time. What file do I have to edit to make the things show up on the market occasionally!?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 07, 2015, 07:36:02 PM
      This is starting to look like a new bug; the significant majority of officers I've seen available so far have had aggressive personalities.  My first officer has hit level 20 and I have yet to hire a second despite hitting up every planet I see because they have consistently had unusable personalities.  In fact, I think I've only seen one steady personality on this entire playthrough (who I didn't hire, because was level 7 with bad skills).

      I'm also paying the -5 rep/month Knights of Ludd tax, though that's fairly manageable overall.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 07, 2015, 08:07:06 PM
      This is starting to look like a new bug; the significant majority of officers I've seen available so far have had aggressive personalities.  My first officer has hit level 20 and I have yet to hire a second despite hitting up every planet I see because they have consistently had unusable personalities.  In fact, I think I've only seen one steady personality on this entire playthrough (who I didn't hire, because was level 7 with bad skills).

      That sounds odd, hmm. Tri-Tachyon markets should have a roughly 2:2:1 ratio for cautious/steady/aggressive, with a few timid sprinkled in. Hegemony is a bit more even between steady and aggressive. Not seeing anything that looks off in the code that picks personalities, and it hasn't changed recently/has worked in the past. Possibly just bad luck?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 07, 2015, 08:12:08 PM
      Seems normal to me. I have 2 aggressive, one cautious and 5 steady. Almost all were hired from Jangala or Asharu.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 07, 2015, 10:18:00 PM
      This is starting to look like a new bug; the significant majority of officers I've seen available so far have had aggressive personalities.  My first officer has hit level 20 and I have yet to hire a second despite hitting up every planet I see because they have consistently had unusable personalities.  In fact, I think I've only seen one steady personality on this entire playthrough (who I didn't hire, because was level 7 with bad skills).

      That sounds odd, hmm. Tri-Tachyon markets should have a roughly 2:2:1 ratio for cautious/steady/aggressive, with a few timid sprinkled in. Hegemony is a bit more even between steady and aggressive. Not seeing anything that looks off in the code that picks personalities, and it hasn't changed recently/has worked in the past. Possibly just bad luck?

      I'm also playing Tri-Tachyon for this playthough, so I've been mostly hitting up their stations and Independents.  It's an odd outcome for sure, but I've probably still only seen maybe ten officers in my playthrough so far so I guess I'll chalk this one up to the joys of small sample sizes.  If I make it through another fives hours of the same I'll make another post.

      Thanks for taking the time to check, anyhow! 


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 07, 2015, 10:30:31 PM
      I'm also playing Tri-Tachyon for this playthough, so I've been mostly hitting up their stations and Independents.  It's an odd outcome for sure, but I've probably still only seen maybe ten officers in my playthrough so far so I guess I'll chalk this one up to the joys of small sample sizes.  If I make it through another fives hours of the same I'll make another post.

      Thanks for taking the time to check, anyhow! 

      Thanks for keeping an eye out and letting me know :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 07, 2015, 11:07:30 PM
      Happy to help!  In case it wasn't implicit, I'm very happy with the game as it is and with the direction it's moving in the future.

      Here's a question I have about a long-term design goal.  What mechanics do you see around the player absorbing losses in a more complete version of the game?  Right now I'm a fairly shameless savescummer because loss is so devastating.  Unless you have a significant nest-egg banked or a spare fleet in storage, one wipe can be a practical game reset in terms of material progression.  Even if it's not something so extreme, with the current scarcity of ships and equipment, losing a high-end ship like a Tempest comes with no guarantee that you'll get to own one again in the foreseeable future, meaning you might be permanently out a gameplay option.  I don't want to play like this, but I'll often F9 over something as trivial as a Lasher with a Light Needler on it blowing up just because of how long it will take to find a new one (though nowadays I mostly just avoid putting rare weapons on frigates, which might be the intended dynamic).

      The game that Starsector seems to draw the closest parallels to is Mount & Blade, another game I enjoyed.  Getting a well-developed army wiped out was a frustrating experience that often undid hours of work, but I would usually stick with the outcome because there was a clear, viable path towards recovery.  The player escaped captivity with their horse and gear, meaning they kept a significant portion of their material progression and were capable of winning small encounters by themselves (which was necessary, since training new recruits usually meant doing all the work for a few battles) and you always knew you would be able to find more recruits and get back what you had lost.  Similarly, it was annoying when one of your elite cavalrymen got themselves killed in a trivial battle mopping up river bandits or some such, but it was nothing worth quickloading over since none of your troops were irreplaceable, even if some of them took some work to develop

      Nothing's strictly irreplaceable in the current version of Starsector, but plenty of things are currently rare enough that the difference becomes rather fine.  In a game where the player generally isn't in direct control of whether or not any individual ship survives a battle, this can lead to either excessive frustration for the player, or players being driven to play in ways that violate the core gameplay experience.  Restarting a player who is already struggling with the early game difficulty curve (as demonstrated by them dying) in a shuttle almost seems like some kind of cruel joke.


      To make another analogy, it seems like the game is meant to handle loss like XCOM; sometimes your best soldier dies, and it's a bad thing with meaningful consequences, but you deal with it and keep on going and working around loss is a core part of the game.  Right now it works like Baldur's Gate, where your favorite party member dying is essentially a Game Over condition that results in your most recent save being loaded.  I want to play a Starsector where sometimes I lose ships and battles and that loss becomes part of the narrative for my story, and I'm pretty sure that's also how you want people to play Starsector, so I'm curious as to what your plans are to make that part of the experience a bit more sustainable in the future.

      I'm imagining industry might tie into this (ie, you find the blueprint for [cool thing] and gain the ability to make them yourself at some significant cost, so losing a fun toy doesn't mean it's gone forever) and I understand if I'm asking too far forward for there to be any concrete answers, but it seems almost certain that this is something you have thoughts on.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 07, 2015, 11:56:26 PM
      Happy to help!  In case it wasn't implicit, I'm very happy with the game as it is and with the direction it's moving in the future.

      Thanks for the kind words :)

      Here's a question I have about a long-term design goal.  What mechanics do you see around the player absorbing losses in a more complete version of the game?  Right now I'm a fairly shameless savescummer because loss is so devastating.  Unless you have a significant nest-egg banked or a spare fleet in storage, one wipe can be a practical game reset in terms of material progression.  Even if it's not something so extreme, with the current scarcity of ships and equipment, losing a high-end ship like a Tempest comes with no guarantee that you'll get to own one again in the foreseeable future, meaning you might be permanently out a gameplay option.  I don't want to play like this, but I'll often F9 over something as trivial as a Lasher with a Light Needler on it blowing up just because of how long it will take to find a new one (though nowadays I mostly just avoid putting rare weapons on frigates, which might be the intended dynamic).

      The game that Starsector seems to draw the closest parallels to is Mount & Blade, another game I enjoyed.  Getting a well-developed army wiped out was a frustrating experience that often undid hours of work, but I would usually stick with the outcome because there was a clear, viable path towards recovery.  The player escaped captivity with their horse and gear, meaning they kept a significant portion of their material progression and were capable of winning small encounters by themselves (which was necessary, since training new recruits usually meant doing all the work for a few battles) and you always knew you would be able to find more recruits and get back what you had lost.  Similarly, it was annoying when one of your elite cavalrymen got themselves killed in a trivial battle mopping up river bandits or some such, but it was nothing worth quickloading over since none of your troops were irreplaceable, even if some of them took some work to develop

      Nothing's strictly irreplaceable in the current version of Starsector, but plenty of things are currently rare enough that the difference becomes rather fine.  In a game where the player generally isn't in direct control of whether or not any individual ship survives a battle, this can lead to either excessive frustration for the player, or players being driven to play in ways that violate the core gameplay experience.  Restarting a player who is already struggling with the early game difficulty curve (as demonstrated by them dying) in a shuttle almost seems like some kind of cruel joke.


      To make another analogy, it seems like the game is meant to handle loss like XCOM; sometimes your best soldier dies, and it's a bad thing with meaningful consequences, but you deal with it and keep on going and working around loss is a core part of the game.  Right now it works like Baldur's Gate, where your favorite party member dying is essentially a Game Over condition that results in your most recent save being loaded.  I want to play a Starsector where sometimes I lose ships and battles and that loss becomes part of the narrative for my story, and I'm pretty sure that's also how you want people to play Starsector, so I'm curious as to what your plans are to make that part of the experience a bit more sustainable in the future.

      I'm imagining industry might tie into this (ie, you find the blueprint for [cool thing] and gain the ability to make them yourself at some significant cost, so losing a fun toy doesn't mean it's gone forever) and I understand if I'm asking too far forward for there to be any concrete answers, but it seems almost certain that this is something you have thoughts on.

      As you say, it can't be anything concrete, but I think a big part of the answer is going to be the player having high-level goals. The player's fleet is a tool, but right now the only goal the player has is to make that tool better, and so any damage sustained by it really hurts. It's exactly counter to what you're trying to achieve at any given time. But suppose you're trying to defend your fledgling outpost, or finish some kind of story mission, or... really, anything where the outcome doesn't compare so easily against your fleet's losses. Some kind of accomplishment along a different axis than just making your fleet better.

      To continue with a Mount & Blade analogy, if you lose most of your army but manage to take a castle, that may well be worth it. If you lose most your army while trying to level it up, that's just a failure.

      Running around the Sector trying to find specific shinies is what one does now because that's almost the only thing to do. I think once you can accomplish concrete and lasting things with your fleet, it should become less about having the perfect fleet and more about having one that can do the job, and whether it's got a needler or a light AC in a small ballistic slot somewhere won't matter as much.

      Will have to see exactly how things work out, though. This makes sense to me in theory, but there's a reason they call it theory.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: FooF on December 08, 2015, 06:58:35 AM
      I don't think you're far off, though, if you are at all. Right now the game lacks "permanence:" anything you do can be undone or replicated given enough time/credits. Lose a Wolf? Replace the hull, find the exact weapons, refit it identically and said Wolf is replaced identically. You can even put the same officer in it and re-name it to the old one. Nothing is inherently unique. When the game revolves around the fleet, as you rightfully said, the Wolf, its crew, its weapons, etc. isn't important so much as the ideal of having a fast harasser in the fleet. In fact, that's what we're really chasing at present: some Platonic ideal fleet that we've all cooked up in our own minds (and debate over ad nauseum!) If we ever get close enough to our thoughts of perfection, the game has little else to offer.

      However, when overarching goals like creating outposts, going on quests, discovering jump points, etc. that have permanent effects on the game come to the fore, losing the Wolf or chasing after the ideal of fleet perfection no longer has the same allure. If losing a huge battlegroup meant opening up a new part of the sector (with new systems/ships/weapons/factions, etc.), then you're right: that's an acceptable loss. I might save-scum to have fewer losses but if the battle appears unwinnable by the standards of today (i.e. zero-losses), I'll move-on, especially if the next phase of the game promises newer/better ways of playing (i.e. new ships, new weapons, more income, trade, etc.) That carrot-on-a-stick doesn't exist yet, though. I'm sure it is in the works or planned somewhere down the line.

      I don't think that's "theory" per se: it's been done proven plenty of times before in other games but for SS, there is risk in moving on from what has worked (and worked quite well, IMO). I, for one, would love to see more lasting/permanent decisions in the game and more dynamism in the sector at-large.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Bastion.Systems on December 08, 2015, 07:28:19 AM
      Having played .7.1 for some time, I feel like the amount of supplies needed to repair/get the fleet battle-ready is way too much. In early-game your cargo capacity/monetary situation is not good enough to carry enough supplies for more than one battle. In some systems you may not have any friendly systems so the only place you can get supplies may be the black market and even there the base amount is 50, in some the price supplies can be horridly inflated, going for upwards of 400c. , often too less to get your ships battle ready. And when you try to escape the supply-bare system you are hit with numerous malfunctions that will lower your CR to such lows that you might need hundreds of supplies to repair at the station, costing you a fortune.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 08, 2015, 07:53:37 AM
      To add to the previous post, it is easy to hit the 25 ship limit late in the game (but not well into endgame when player can afford cruisers and battleships), when it may be more economical to use destroyer and frigate fleets, which leave little room for freighters (to loot and carry supplies you need) and/or additional room for boarded ships.  The limit needs to expanded to 30 or 35 ships.

      Quote
      in some the price supplies can be horridly inflated, going for upwards of 400c.
      I would love to see such places.  I saw a few at the upper 200s, in which I sell as much as I can spare.  This is the kind of opportunistic trade I exploit.  No need to bother with commodities that do not maintain your war fleet, aside from maybe organs.

      One time, I saw supplies sell for 9 credits, but I could not exploit it because I had insufficient cargo space to carry much more, and I could not afford to spend credits on another ship for more space (and I might have been at the 25 ship limit anyway so I could not buy a ship even if I wanted to).


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Bastion.Systems on December 08, 2015, 08:07:24 AM
      The high cost to combat makes trading take the most of your early game time. I mean the money you get from commissions is laughably small, way too little pay for the supplies and the opportunity cost to get more supplies. It's far easier to make money transporting goods.

      Also joining in battles gives you near nothing while still costing you everything, maybe up the rewards/loot a bit to make it actually worth it.

      Combat should be more rewarding to the player as it's the fun part of the game, realizing that you spent far more credits than you gained in a epic fleet-fight feels wrong.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 08, 2015, 08:12:41 AM
      High-tech ships cost a lot more to deploy than others as Medusa is like 20% CR while the Enforcer is just 12% CR per battle. You run with pure High-tech fleets? I have 3 frigates, 4 destroyers and 2 cruisers in my fleet and its only costing me 2.4 supplies per day to run around with all that.

      You really should take some points into the Leadership tree for the reduced ship supply cost if you're having issues with supplies.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 08, 2015, 08:35:27 AM
      Leadership bonuses apply to ship maintenance, which is a minor drain of supplies.  The greatest drain of supplies is repairs (CR or other).  Combat Aptitude 10 is probably the best mitigation for CR deployment costs.  Not sure if faster repairs means less supplies used or proportionately faster supply drain over time.

      Tri-Tachyon players have limited access to low-tech ships bigger than frigates.  (They make up for this by stocking more high-tech stuff than anyone else.)  Personally, I like a mix of epochs, but factions other the Tri-Tachyon barely, if at all, stock high-tech aside from Wolf.  Even Independents, who can theoretically use anything, seem to favor more low-tech and midline than high-tech.  Tri-Tachyon also have smaller markets, and getting some of the better ballistics may be hard or impossible.  In particular, I have not found HVDs (the best medium kinetic ballistics) for sale at Tri-Tachyon markets.

      In my Tri-Tachyon game, all of my Enforcers so far came from Black Market.  At least I can find much more low-tech than high-tech there.

      I agree joining battles is mostly a trap.  If you are weak enough that you need the help, you will leave combat at a loss; and if you are strong enough, the others will mooch off of your loot.  Extended battles is mostly a tool to combine multiple enemy fleets into one big ball of death.

      The best way to profit from combat is to solo everything with one overpowered ship.  This is harder to do in 0.7a+ than in 0.65, thanks to enemies with officers and the change to the Maximum Power perk.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Bastion.Systems on December 08, 2015, 09:16:16 AM
      I agree with this, repair is by far the biggest drain of supplies, I assume the repair speed bonuses help reduce the cost (otherwise these would be more harmful than useful) and in that sense the repair ship is essential to not go bankrupt pirate hunting. Overall it seems that having smaller ships or ones without shields is a supply suicide.

      I think one thing that could make the situation better would be free or discounted repairs at the factions shipyards you are commissioning (or maybe have friendly rep.) for.

      Overall seems like a design that makes early game combat far harder than late game where you have a arsenal of support perks, the repair ship, some freighters and a strong main ship so you don't have to employ several shoddy frigates witch cost piles of supplies to repair after every engagement.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 08, 2015, 09:44:07 AM
      The game is going for something of a survival atmosphere.  To that end, while combat is the real meat of the game, it's still meant to be used primarily as a means to an end.  Slamming into military fleets should not be a reliable avenue to monetary gain.  If you're fighting, it's generally because an enemy fleet got in the way of something else you want to do, or you're chasing a bounty, or you're trying to make friends with people who don't like the people you're shooting at.

      Combat rewards are still pretty carefully tuned so that you can roughly cover your expenses if fights go well.  You shouldn't be needing major repairs on multiple ships after every engagement, and if this is happening to you it probably means you're still climbing the difficulty cliff.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Thaago on December 08, 2015, 09:47:37 AM
      I find the expanded battles a good way to make money in the early game, when its just me and one or two other frigates. The other fleets do lower the amounts somewhat, but risk is far reduced and the main source of bounty is kills, which the player has a large advantage with. Once I have a fleet that can take most of the random small fleets, then I shy away from expanded battles against anything but huge enemies.

      The biggest reason I join those battles though is reputation and experience. You can easily get 3 rep bumps from a single fight - commission, bounty, and helping a fleet. If somehow its a named bounty, you can get 4, though I haven't managed it. I'm not sure what the exact formula is for experience from a fight is, but larger fights give more, letting me and my new officers level up fast. (To me this makes a lot of sense - getting experience from participating in a bigger battle and watching an allies tactics and all that...)

      On supply use in battles: I tend to, when fighting pirate combat fleets, make back around the number of supplies I spent, assuming damage falls within the CR regen period. Heavy damage of course wrecks that, but I think it should. When I'm hunting trade fleets, I can make HUGE profits.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 08, 2015, 09:59:37 AM
      I am beginning to dislike joining battles.  I just finished a big battle where my lone Medusa slaughtered most of the ships.  My allies managed to get themselves slaughtered, and the survivors were out of CR.  By the end, while I got my share of supplies and XP.  I did not get ANY of the enemy weapons!  It is like my allies are like "Thanks, suckers!  We took all of the good stuff like all of the Needlers the enemy had!"  The only good part of the battle was boarding an enemy Heron, and with marines about 250 a pop at Decivilized worlds, that is quite a bargain.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 08, 2015, 11:44:01 AM
      I've been playing with a Gryphon as my flagship for some time now, and I have to say despite the nerf it does not feel weak at all. While due to lowered OP it is not easy to fit it with everything you might want, it performs great even with sub-par equipment. With Missile Spec 10 and the the corresponding hullmods it can easily take on any cruiser with a level 20 officer. It's also great fun popping a dozen or so flimsy pirates within a minute.
      On the other hand I rarely feel so confident that I can just spam my missiles, it still requires thought. So, overall it seems in a relatively good place now.
      Further balancing should maybe address the very powerful missile skills more than the cruiser.







      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 08, 2015, 02:21:06 PM
      Large missile weapons are super rare in my game. I went to like 6 different systems and checked ALL the markets and out of all of them only Volturn, of all places, had two Cyclone reaper launchers.

      That is all I can find; the two new large missile weapons are nonexistant thus far. Granted, the Cyclone launcher is fine but still! =/


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: SafariJohn on December 08, 2015, 06:04:59 PM
      I've seen all the large missiles, but they are rare. There's not that many large missile mounts to put them on, though.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 08, 2015, 08:05:13 PM
      Just remembered:
      Quote
      ?Improved autofire logic when using beam weapons for point defense (less likely to keep turning beam on and off vs a fast moving target)
      Beam PD is more effective than ever.  Tactical lasers with IPDAI are extremely effective, noticeably more than before.  Only reasons to use alternatives is lack of Tactical Lasers, lack of OP to support the Adv. Gyros and IPDAI hullmods, or flux cost is too much.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: AeusDeif on December 08, 2015, 09:31:38 PM
      So glad to have found this thread, did not realize the patches were coming so rapidly. +1 for Faction rep changes!

      Why remove rep decay? This seems like a good way to forgive/encourage experimentation by the player. Unless you read the forums religiously, you won't know all the rules about factions and relationships; neither do I think that the game should explicitly tell you all these things. Leaving it opaque is fine, but the decay is a mechanic to make sure it isn't too punishing.

      I don't think it was actually doing that, though. So in my view it's more cleanup of stuff that's in there but, if we're being honest, that I've completely forgotten even existed. Not opposed to possibly bringing this back in some other form eventually, though.

      Idea for 'repairing' bad rep: You go to the faction, open comm links, find an official, and 'offer your services'. You get a special smuggling, trading, or bounty event ('mission') which pays less based on how bad your rep is (0 if hostile). Upon success your rep with that individual gets a big +, and you can get more missions from them. When it's high enough they start 'lobbying' or putting in a good word for you. 'Your reputation with X faction has improved by Y due to your work with (Quartermaster Ericcson or w/e)'.

      Consider also the ability to offer money, goods, a ship, an officer, etc. but they might turn those down and offering services seems like it should be the most reliable (if time intensive) way to build rep with individuals. If your rep with an individual is high enough, perhaps you could ask them 'how can I serve the hegemony / make amends / clear my record' and they offer you a really tough or unprofitable mission which has big impact with faction. They might ask you to do something which hurts your rep with a hostile faction. If you had to sneak into port to talk to them it has a nice little spy feel to it.

      sidenote on the gryphon's ability: instead of only 1 use, you could give it a sizable cooldown that is multiplied by how many missiles it replaced. So first use is 'free' but if it replaced all the missiles, a very long cooldown. This might even make it easier on the AI as an 'early' use wouldn't get as much cooldown.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 08, 2015, 09:54:30 PM
      Question: did the crashes some people were experiencing on transition to hyperspace/star system/taking a screenshot stop with this release?


      sidenote on the gryphon's ability: instead of only 1 use, you could give it a sizable cooldown that is multiplied by how many missiles it replaced. So first use is 'free' but if it replaced all the missiles, a very long cooldown. This might even make it easier on the AI as an 'early' use wouldn't get as much cooldown.

      Hmm, interesting idea. I think it's probably in good shape right now, though. Seems to be a potent cruiser, and the ability - while not something you can use often (duh) - is unique.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Midnight Kitsune on December 08, 2015, 10:04:00 PM
      Not sure if faster repairs means less supplies used or proportionately faster supply drain over time.
      Sadly this is the latter version and it sucks, especially with Hyper storms and such


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: AeusDeif on December 08, 2015, 10:07:29 PM
      I still think players should have room to break with a faction. Commissions seem to make you an official member of a faction, which makes me wonder why there are privateers in the game as privateers are basically hired pirates. Shouldn't there be some 'sneakier' way to work with a faction, via a temporary contract or something -- 4 to 8 months, still limited to one faction, still gaining rep and credits, but maybe not access to anything over favorable? Also, the ability to downgrade from a commission to a temporary contract would be great. A little rep loss (-10 or 20) and if you break the contract before it ends, faction goes inhospitable.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 08, 2015, 10:10:09 PM
      I still think players should have room to break with a faction. Commissions seem to make you an official member of a faction, which makes me wonder why there are privateers in the game as privateers are basically hired pirates. Shouldn't there be some 'sneakier' way to work with a faction, via a temporary contract or something -- 4 to 8 months, still limited to one faction, still gaining rep and credits, but maybe not access to anything over favorable? Also, the ability to downgrade from a commission to a temporary contract would be great. A little rep loss (-10 or 20) and if you break the contract before it ends, faction goes inhospitable.

      The commission mechanics are intentionally pretty bare bones - the minimum so they work (though they need a few tweaks for sure, regarding how hostility is handled etc). The kind of thing you're suggesting sounds reasonable, but would be a good bit of work, and might need to be redone when there are more proper "warfare" mechanics in place. Keeping it lean now is going to make it easier going forward.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: AeusDeif on December 08, 2015, 11:05:21 PM
      thanks for the quick response!

      Am I correct in thinking that the independents now offer commissions and go to war with factions? This makes them seem like they are another faction, not scattered independent ports. How hard would it be to implement independent market behavior for the independent faction? As in, Asharu is effectively its own little faction with its own reputation set, and your commission/faction wars with Asharu only pertain to Asharu and not Nortia or Maxios. If you still want it to effect general independent reputation, Asharu reputation could be averaged with all other independent market reputations, and that would be the +/- to independent reputation. So Asharu might be inhospitable regardless, but several other ports would have to be hostile too before all independent markets refused trade to the player.

      Maybe it would be simpler to have independents behave like pirates with no commissions or faction wars.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cik on December 09, 2015, 02:52:22 AM
      officers are really neat, but a bit crazy. i don't mind the actual skill buffs they give to the ships, but they seem too common in "low-order" fleets. i just encountered a random picket fleet wandering through space that had 6+ officers over level 10, and i think 3-4 of them were level 20. at least to me that seems a little silly, besides the problem of having huge problems gauging what is possible for me to engage, it's a little weird lore-wise; at least as i understood it, a level 20 officer should be pretty rare, just living through so many battles must be a huge rarity, plus who even can say if most people are even capable of getting to that level? seems to me like it'd be better to have officers be more common and less skilled, except perhaps in huge warfleets that can of course pick and choose their soldiers from the entire faction, like system defense fleets, massive supply fleets, etc. discarding all that though, level 20 officers are incredibly ludicrously powerful, so making them rarer might help players climb the ladder, and also make engaging non-pirate fleets less of a horrific gamble.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Plantissue on December 09, 2015, 05:06:36 AM
      Large missile weapons are super rare in my game. I went to like 6 different systems and checked ALL the markets and out of all of them only Volturn, of all places, had two Cyclone reaper launchers.

      That is all I can find; the two new large missile weapons are nonexistant thus far. Granted, the Cyclone launcher is fine but still! =/
      Aren't there normally loads in military markets? Time to take that commission so you can more easily equip your black market cruiser I suspect.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 09, 2015, 07:28:16 AM
      I'm commissioned with Hegemony (100/100 cooperative) and they have zero large missiles in all their systems military and open markets. Only ones I've found are those two Cyclone reaper launchers on Volturn's black market. Heh


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 09, 2015, 07:30:28 AM
      None on ALL Hegemony markets? Sounds weird.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on December 09, 2015, 07:56:58 AM
      I know right? Thats why I went ahead and made a post about it! RNG can be a real bastard it seems.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 09, 2015, 08:28:43 AM
      Hates you, I'd guess, considering Hegemony even has a size 8 market.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 09, 2015, 08:39:49 AM
      Might be more than that, I also have found big missiles to be extremely rare. In my 7.1 playthrough I have seen three in total, and that is while actively looking for them and having access to the Heg military markets from early on.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 09, 2015, 09:01:40 AM
      Just remembered:
      Quote
      ?Improved autofire logic when using beam weapons for point defense (less likely to keep turning beam on and off vs a fast moving target)
      Beam PD is more effective than ever.  Tactical lasers with IPDAI are extremely effective, noticeably more than before.  Only reasons to use alternatives is lack of Tactical Lasers, lack of OP to support the Adv. Gyros and IPDAI hullmods, or flux cost is too much.



      A Disco Wolf with Advanced Optics, Integrated Point Defense, Advanced Gyros, Integrated Targeting Unit, and an officer with Gunnery Implants makes for a pretty big "no missiles/fighters allowed" radius.  It's sweet watching Salamanders get bopped out of the air immediately after they leave the tubes.

      Wonder if it might be better off without Optics though.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 09, 2015, 12:06:15 PM
      officers are really neat, but a bit crazy. i don't mind the actual skill buffs they give to the ships, but they seem too common in "low-order" fleets. i just encountered a random picket fleet wandering through space that had 6+ officers over level 10, and i think 3-4 of them were level 20. at least to me that seems a little silly, besides the problem of having huge problems gauging what is possible for me to engage, it's a little weird lore-wise; at least as i understood it, a level 20 officer should be pretty rare, just living through so many battles must be a huge rarity, plus who even can say if most people are even capable of getting to that level? seems to me like it'd be better to have officers be more common and less skilled, except perhaps in huge warfleets that can of course pick and choose their soldiers from the entire faction, like system defense fleets, massive supply fleets, etc. discarding all that though, level 20 officers are incredibly ludicrously powerful, so making them rarer might help players climb the ladder, and also make engaging non-pirate fleets less of a horrific gamble.

      More or less how it works, but some fleets - such as Lion's Guard - have high-level officers despite their small size, to reflect their elite status.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 09, 2015, 12:45:48 PM
      @ Voyager I: Tactical Lasers are a bit on the slow side.  They are not always able to keep up with Salamanders.  This is another reason to use other beam PD sometimes.

      Advanced Optics makes them a bit slower, but they are fast enough if you have Advanced Turret Gyros.  If you have a good reason for 1200 range beams (such as matching Gauss Cannon), then keep Advanced Optics.  I usually use Advanced Optics on PD lasers and Phase Lance.  I occasionally use Advanced Optics on Tactical Lasers and Graviton Beams for Eagle and Conquest.  Those ships can be built to kite from extremely long range.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 10, 2015, 01:24:20 PM
      I've not noticed before, but enemy ships which get flagged for boarding always seem to have thier entire skeleton crew intact.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Plantissue on December 10, 2015, 01:38:33 PM
      Might be more than that, I also have found big missiles to be extremely rare. In my 7.1 playthrough I have seen three in total, and that is while actively looking for them and having access to the Heg military markets from early on.
      I found 7 MIRV in the first miltary market I looked (Port Franchise #3). Maybe Hegemony just doesn't have very many large missiles on offer or I am just lucky.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 10, 2015, 03:10:54 PM
      Possible. Are there any Mastery Epoch vessel has a large missile mount? I can recall none.
      If that's the case, they simply don't need it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Aeson on December 10, 2015, 06:20:26 PM
      Possible. Are there any Mastery Epoch vessel has a large missile mount? I can recall none.
      You can't recall any because there aren't any. Only the Apogee, Aurora, Gryphon, Conquest, and Astral have large missile mounts.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 10, 2015, 07:19:12 PM
      Hegemony isn't interested in them, except Gryphon(I've seen they field it), right?
      So... that kinda justifies it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Originem on December 10, 2015, 11:21:02 PM
      The whole World is Hostile?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Plantissue on December 11, 2015, 01:10:42 PM
      Possible. Are there any Mastery Epoch vessel has a large missile mount? I can recall none.
      What is a Mastery Epoch vessel? that's not a phrase I have seen before here.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: The Soldier on December 11, 2015, 01:19:40 PM
      What is a Mastery Epoch vessel? that's not a phrase I have seen before here.
      Mastery Epoc ships are the "low-tech" ships.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Plantissue on December 11, 2015, 04:24:29 PM
      How does that work out? I have never come across low tech ships being refered to as such in the game anywhere before.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 11, 2015, 05:10:13 PM
      Yeah, it's old lore from the game's former writer Ivaylo, not reflected in the game proper. I'm not sure if it can even be considered canon anymore.

      Back then it was:

      Mastery-epoch = low-tech
      Core-epoch = midline
      Expansion-epoch = high-tech

      But for example the Gryphon, which is visually a midline design, is now described as being used just before the Gates collapsed, which would put it in the Expansion-epoch. I don't know if that's a mistake or if David is throwing those old concepts over board.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Aeson on December 11, 2015, 06:29:19 PM
      Spoiled because I don't think that a discussion of whether or not the tech level-Epoch equivalencies are still canonical is really appropriate for this thread.
      Yeah, it's old lore from the game's former writer Ivaylo, not reflected in the game proper. I'm not sure if it can even be considered canon anymore.
      I'd argue that it can't really be considered canon anymore. For starters, as far as I know the Mastery Epoch is no longer referenced anywhere within the game, and searching descriptions.csv for 'mastery' didn't turn anything up. Then you have the description of the Hammerhead making things somewhat blurry, as it would be redundant, though not wrong, to describe the vessel as a 'Core Epoch midline destroyer' if Core Epoch implied midline and midline implied Core Epoch. You also have the Sunder, which at least in my opinion is a midline destroyer (visual appearances match midline, armament of mixed ballistics and energy is typical of midline, though the flux capacity and dissipation is perhaps a bit on the high side for a midline ship of its armament and the defenses couple the thin armor of high tech ships with the inefficient shields of low tech ships instead of the more typical midline approach of moderately efficient shields coupled with average armor), but which is explicitly stated to be an (early) Expansion Epoch design; if the Sunder is midline, then midline very definitely cannot imply Core Epoch, though Core Epoch could still imply midline (but, of course, the Gryphon and Heron cast doubt upon that).

      But for example the Gryphon, which is visually a midline design, is now described as being used just before the Gates collapsed, which would put it in the Expansion-epoch. I don't know if that's a mistake or if David is throwing those old concepts over board.
      The Heron is another example of this; it is by appearances, stats, system (midline drones like the Gemini or Atlas rather than high tech drones like the Apogee, Astral, or Tempest), and armament a midline ship, but as the embodiment of a doctrinal shift which was interrupted by the Collapse it'd be somewhat odd for it to be a Core Epoch design since the Collapse ended the Expansion Epoch.

      The Monitor is another ship that casts doubt upon the Epoch-tech equivalency, as it is a more-or-less midline design whose description can be read in a way that implies it to be a post-Collapse and thus post-Expansion Epoch design.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 11, 2015, 06:57:50 PM
      for purposes of faction loyalty having all three branches of the lud count separately is killing me. That's -15 at a regular interval until you find all three branches and hit them. You would think that by attacking one the other two would become hostile with you.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 11, 2015, 07:04:47 PM
      for purposes of faction loyalty having all three branches of the lud count separately is killing me. That's -15 at a regular interval until you find all three branches and hit them. You would think that by attacking one the other two would become hostile with you.

      Yeah, adjusting how this all works is very much a TODO item for 0.7.2a.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 11, 2015, 09:03:42 PM
      for purposes of faction loyalty having all three branches of the lud count separately is killing me. That's -15 at a regular interval until you find all three branches and hit them. You would think that by attacking one the other two would become hostile with you.

      Yeah, adjusting how this all works is very much a TODO item for 0.7.2a.

      Thanks man! I think you did a fantastic job bringing this dynamic in! I look forward to seeing how the tweak works. Is there a way I can turn that sub faction off within the save file? I don't think I've even interacted with the Knights...only church and path


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cik on December 11, 2015, 10:00:35 PM
      Spoiled because I don't think that a discussion of whether or not the tech level-Epoch equivalencies are still canonical is really appropriate for this thread.
      Yeah, it's old lore from the game's former writer Ivaylo, not reflected in the game proper. I'm not sure if it can even be considered canon anymore.
      I'd argue that it can't really be considered canon anymore. For starters, as far as I know the Mastery Epoch is no longer referenced anywhere within the game, and searching descriptions.csv for 'mastery' didn't turn anything up. Then you have the description of the Hammerhead making things somewhat blurry, as it would be redundant, though not wrong, to describe the vessel as a 'Core Epoch midline destroyer' if Core Epoch implied midline and midline implied Core Epoch. You also have the Sunder, which at least in my opinion is a midline destroyer (visual appearances match midline, armament of mixed ballistics and energy is typical of midline, though the flux capacity and dissipation is perhaps a bit on the high side for a midline ship of its armament and the defenses couple the thin armor of high tech ships with the inefficient shields of low tech ships instead of the more typical midline approach of moderately efficient shields coupled with average armor), but which is explicitly stated to be an (early) Expansion Epoch design; if the Sunder is midline, then midline very definitely cannot imply Core Epoch, though Core Epoch could still imply midline (but, of course, the Gryphon and Heron cast doubt upon that).

      But for example the Gryphon, which is visually a midline design, is now described as being used just before the Gates collapsed, which would put it in the Expansion-epoch. I don't know if that's a mistake or if David is throwing those old concepts over board.
      The Heron is another example of this; it is by appearances, stats, system (midline drones like the Gemini or Atlas rather than high tech drones like the Apogee, Astral, or Tempest), and armament a midline ship, but as the embodiment of a doctrinal shift which was interrupted by the Collapse it'd be somewhat odd for it to be a Core Epoch design since the Collapse ended the Expansion Epoch.

      The Monitor is another ship that casts doubt upon the Epoch-tech equivalency, as it is a more-or-less midline design whose description can be read in a way that implies it to be a post-Collapse and thus post-Expansion Epoch design.

      i thought it was core was the earliest, which roughly translates to the battleship era, then mastery, which was a shift towards the 'cruiser school' (talked about, i believe, in one of the mission briefings) and a sort of more modern-esque naval doctrine of force projection using faster, higher-tech carrier/cruiser groups, and then the expansion which was even higher-tech where a bunch of mega-engineering projects were started in the local sector. the gate collapse ended the expansion epoch because it cut everyone off. am i wrong?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 12, 2015, 02:13:46 AM
      Spoiled because I don't think that a discussion of whether or not the tech level-Epoch equivalencies are still canonical is really appropriate for this thread.

      Right, I copied it over to the lore thread.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Xeroshiva1029 on December 12, 2015, 07:09:45 AM
      Does INDUSTRY do anything yet? or am i a box of rocks that doesnt notice anything?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Sproginator on December 12, 2015, 07:58:32 AM
      I'm finding it really quite difficult to get weak pirate spawns to slaughter around the starter system.... I just cant find ANY :/


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Psilous on December 12, 2015, 09:04:54 AM
      Does INDUSTRY do anything yet? or am i a box of rocks that doesnt notice anything?

      Doesn't do anything... there have been a few mods that use it, but they are few and far between.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: BHunterSEAL on December 12, 2015, 09:19:51 AM
      I'm finding it really quite difficult to get weak pirate spawns to slaughter around the starter system.... I just cant find ANY :/

      Try parking yourself in the asteroid field around the pirate planets/station in Corvus and switching your transponder off, preferably on the far side so the Hegemony authorities don't yell at you. Run scans intermittently and with any luck smallish pirate scout fleets (or better yet, lone pirate smugglers) should come by relatively often. The local security forces are pretty good about cleaning up pirate activity but in the hyperspace surrounding the system things are a little more spread out, check around the edges of the Deep Hyperspace.

      You can also team up with Hegemony / Mercenary patrols to take on larger fleets, although bounties are proportional to your fleet's contribution to the battle (from what I can tell, on a hull damage basis).

      Also watch out for medium- and large-size patrols boosting around like crazy, there's a pretty good chance they're chasing pirate fleets they can't keep up with--sometimes these are the nasty fast attack fleets with 3-4 frigates and fighters, but a lot of times they'll be 1-2 frigate scouts.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Plantissue on December 12, 2015, 01:09:26 PM
      Yeah, it's old lore from the game's former writer Ivaylo, not reflected in the game proper. I'm not sure if it can even be considered canon anymore.

      Back then it was:

      Mastery-epoch = low-tech
      Core-epoch = midline
      Expansion-epoch = high-tech

      But for example the Gryphon, which is visually a midline design, is now described as being used just before the Gates collapsed, which would put it in the Expansion-epoch. I don't know if that's a mistake or if David is throwing those old concepts over board.

      Thanks.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: RawCode on December 13, 2015, 06:54:35 AM
      Game is improved greatly during 2015, but still same two words to describe vanilla campaign mechanics:

      1) Boring - if you want hull A and weapon B, relax, take a deep breath, go to 2
      2) Frustrating - sorry mate, you hull and weapon is in another station!

      With addition of officers and "military comissions" one more word is added: Illogical.

      "Military market" with reputation and comission restriction is great addition to sandbox style game where player can purchase nuclear weapons and ever people on "black market".

      Civilization is collapsed, entire worlds struggle to survive, starvation is pretty common event, pirates fly around and killing everyone on spot reapers are coming
      sorry commander shepard, please grind reputation for 120 minutes first!
      Really?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 13, 2015, 07:09:54 AM
      The thing I dislike most about commission is I no longer care about reputation above suspicious for non-hostiles aside from my adopted faction because I cannot buy anything that requires high reputation.  Open market is only useful for mitigating chance of investigation and/or buying supplies/fuel/crew in an emergency.  Even if I get caught, the rep penalty is minimal (i.e., does not take too much to go from suscipious to inhospitable and vice versa).

      Most of my shopping is done at black markets in 0.7.1a.

      Black Markets seem to be stocking the same old weapons and ships.  They seem to stock fewer heavy weapons and other unusual items than before.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 13, 2015, 07:20:57 AM
      Would it be kinda improved on 0.7.2, with Independents not requiring commission?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cik on December 13, 2015, 08:29:54 AM
      interesting idea. the independent faction is very wide. i think it would be interesting to see them have more military markets, some of which don't require a commission, which are sort of semi-legal mercenary havens, security contractors, or military surplus (spaceship edition!) where you could get mid-tech ships and weapons without strings attached.

      i assume at least that the independents already have this kind of infrastructure, considering they field a fairly large amount of ships themselves not attached to any sector power. it just isn't usable by the player.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 13, 2015, 10:06:13 AM
      After reading "Enemy ships tagged with orders are visible under fog of war" at the bugs forum, Avoid order has a nice side-effect (for those who chain flagships), marking enemies you want dead but you lose from fog-of-war because you got distracted by a higher priority threat.

      I think I will use the Avoid order mostly to mark and track a priority enemy I want dead but cannot deal it immediately.  Lately, I have been soloing almost every enemy fleet with a lone Dominator or Paragon.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: BHunterSEAL on December 13, 2015, 03:33:53 PM
      Is there any way to tell how far out the system bounty range extends in hyperspace? I just had an absolutely epic battle that would have netted me 30k+ if the payment triggered, instead I'm left trying to pick up the pieces of my fleet with zero cash :( Gravity wells from the issuing system (Eos Exodus) were close enough to be seen on the same screen as the battle site--the battle didn't have the grav well backdrop though.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 13, 2015, 03:35:21 PM
      Is there any way to tell how far out the system bounty range extends in hyperspace? I just had an absolutely epic battle that would have netted me 30k+ if the payment triggered, instead I'm left trying to pick up the pieces of my fleet with zero cash :( Gravity wells from the issuing system (Eos Exodus) were close enough to be seen on the same screen as the battle site--the battle didn't have the grav well backdrop though.

      There isn't, and yeah, that's a bit of a problem. IIRC it's 2000 units, or one map grid cell.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Voyager I on December 13, 2015, 04:59:49 PM
      Game is improved greatly during 2015, but still same two words to describe vanilla campaign mechanics:

      1) Boring - if you want hull A and weapon B, relax, take a deep breath, go to 2
      2) Frustrating - sorry mate, you hull and weapon is in another station!

      With addition of officers and "military comissions" one more word is added: Illogical.

      "Military market" with reputation and comission restriction is great addition to sandbox style game where player can purchase nuclear weapons and ever people on "black market".

      Civilization is collapsed, entire worlds struggle to survive, starvation is pretty common event, pirates fly around and killing everyone on spot reapers are coming
      sorry commander shepard, please grind reputation for 120 minutes first!
      Really?

      Buying nuclear weapons on the black market is highly illegal and if the local authorities get proof that you did it they will ban you from their stations and their fleets will try to kill you.

      There are serious cracks in civilization, but it's not all gone yet and the people trying to hold things together in the apocalypse aren't *** around.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 13, 2015, 06:43:47 PM
      I have used the Avoid order to mark and track enemy carriers that appear briefly then disappear.  For players who solo or chain flagships, Avoid order is most useful for marking enemies and make them always visible on the map.

      I also used Avoid to mark an Onslaught I wanted to flee from.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: BHunterSEAL on December 13, 2015, 07:08:14 PM
      Is there any way to tell how far out the system bounty range extends in hyperspace? I just had an absolutely epic battle that would have netted me 30k+ if the payment triggered, instead I'm left trying to pick up the pieces of my fleet with zero cash :( Gravity wells from the issuing system (Eos Exodus) were close enough to be seen on the same screen as the battle site--the battle didn't have the grav well backdrop though.

      There isn't, and yeah, that's a bit of a problem. IIRC it's 2000 units, or one map grid cell.

      Thanks, that's really helpful--I've noticed hyperspace tends to have a greater number and variety of potential targets so it's where I spend most of my "hunting" time.

      I'd actually thought of this when I found myself chasing down fleets after system bounties expired--the message isn't hard to miss if you're not keeping an eye out--but it might be beneficial to add a small 'bounty eligible' indicator to the campaign view. Maybe a small logo a the corner of the screen that appears when in an active bounty system or the hyperspace area. The logo would be that of the issuing faction, and its tooltip could provide important details like expiry, frigate value and valid target factions. Just a thought, I have no idea how much work something like that would be to implement.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 13, 2015, 07:24:19 PM
      Small CREDIT icon that flickers in somewhere when you'll get paid  if you fight someone off. Preferably with the faction icon of whoever holds the bounty.
      Sounds like a good idea.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: RawCode on December 14, 2015, 01:12:42 AM
      Really?

      Buying nuclear weapons on the black market is highly illegal and if the local authorities get proof that you did it they will ban you from their stations and their fleets will try to kill you.

      There are serious cracks in civilization, but it's not all gone yet and the people trying to hold things together in the apocalypse aren't *** around.

      This little picture with some [sarcasm] will explain why "neutrals" and "pirate" faction reputation, comission and "military" market is really bad move that violate game's lore and probably violate "suspension of disbelief".




      [attachment deleted by admin]


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 14, 2015, 02:24:38 AM
      Small CREDIT icon that flickers in somewhere when you'll get paid  if you fight someone off. Preferably with the faction icon of whoever holds the bounty.
      Sounds like a good idea.

      If the mouse-over tooltip could show how much bounty a fleet is worth at the given moment/position that would be tremendously helpful. Even in-system you often don't notice when a system bounty runs out or a new one starts.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 14, 2015, 03:51:06 AM
      Small CREDIT icon that flickers in somewhere when you'll get paid  if you fight someone off. Preferably with the faction icon of whoever holds the bounty.
      Sounds like a good idea.

      If the mouse-over tooltip could show how much bounty a fleet is worth at the given moment/position that would be tremendously helpful. Even in-system you often don't notice when a system bounty runs out or a new one starts.
      Preferably with durations measured in days.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: miljan on December 15, 2015, 01:08:03 PM
      Any update on next 0.7.2v?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 15, 2015, 02:13:37 PM
      Any update on next 0.7.2v?

      Taking a little more time with it because 0.7.1a seems to be in a decent place (still some issues, definitely, but nothing super-immediate) and using this as an opportunity to work in some "bonus" things.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 15, 2015, 03:44:00 PM
      work in some "bonus" things.


      Oh my, when you say something like that I immediately have ten voices in my head who shout over each other "Waaah, could he mean sinking ships/codex overhaul/enlarge llustrations/fighterascarrierweapons/operation time/station battles/yadayada...!"



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 15, 2015, 03:53:44 PM
      That's quite the list! I'd be hard-pressed to think of all those things that quickly :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Wyvern on December 15, 2015, 04:08:49 PM
      work in some "bonus" things.
      Oh my, when you say something like that I immediately have ten voices in my head who shout over each other "Waaah, could he mean sinking ships/codex overhaul/enlarge llustrations/fighterascarrierweapons/operation time/station battles/yadayada...!"
      Mudskipper variant hulls with phasing cloaks!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on December 15, 2015, 04:18:10 PM
      as of right now the game is basically "complete" to me with enough mods, particularly SS+ and omnifactory, so any new additions are just bonuses. I just ask for mod oriented optimization for 7.2


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 15, 2015, 04:22:52 PM
      I like to see industry, outposts, and a fully fleshed out skill set.  I do not see that much happening until after 0.7.2.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Taverius on December 15, 2015, 06:37:29 PM
      I might have missed this being mentioned - its quite minor - the Hound Luddic variant is missing the [Luddic Path] in the name.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 15, 2015, 06:41:52 PM
      I might have missed this being mentioned - its quite minor - the Hound Luddic variant is missing the [Luddic Path] in the name.

      Thanks - added that in.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 15, 2015, 07:09:47 PM
      Luddic Path doesn't consider Volturnian Lobster illegal. Doesn't sound right, I'd say. Was it a mistake?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 15, 2015, 07:30:01 PM
      That's got no gameplay effect, doesn't it? I mean, aside from showing up in the intel tab. Still, it probably should.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 15, 2015, 07:35:29 PM
      Well, let's consider it like a typo.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 15, 2015, 07:51:20 PM
      Fair enough :) Added.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on December 18, 2015, 02:26:45 PM
      I wish to be able to join battles on pirates' side with my transponder turned off. Could we get that for the next update, please?  :)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: BHunterSEAL on December 18, 2015, 04:02:41 PM
      Another small request--it'd be nice to be able to click on a notification and be taken to the full story in the Log screen, regardless of what filter is set on the Intel tab. Depending on how I'm playing at the moment, I either have the map filter set to Prices or Bounties, so it's a little annoying having to switch to All in order to read an event description. Not a huge deal, but something that comes up every few minutes while playing.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 18, 2015, 04:21:16 PM
      Another small request--it'd be nice to be able to click on a notification and be taken to the full story in the Log screen, regardless of what filter is set on the Intel tab. Depending on how I'm playing at the moment, I either have the map filter set to Prices or Bounties, so it's a little annoying having to switch to All in order to read an event description. Not a huge deal, but something that comes up every few minutes while playing.
      Seconding this. Kept forgot to suggest it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 18, 2015, 04:30:40 PM
      Another small request--it'd be nice to be able to click on a notification and be taken to the full story in the Log screen, regardless of what filter is set on the Intel tab. Depending on how I'm playing at the moment, I either have the map filter set to Prices or Bounties, so it's a little annoying having to switch to All in order to read an event description. Not a huge deal, but something that comes up every few minutes while playing.
      Seconding this. Kept forgot to suggest it.

      Yeah, this one has been on my to-fix list for a while...


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 19, 2015, 01:50:41 AM
      Quick random thought: I bet at least half of the complaints about civilian ships being made unattractive by their "civilian grade" hullmod would be silenced if the mechanic was reversed and military ships would instead get a "military grade" mod providing a sensor boost.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Pushover on December 19, 2015, 02:00:53 AM
      The "It's not a penalty, it's a bonus" might work. I certainly don't have an issue with civilian ships, since it's not like you can fill a lot of their roles with other ships. I'm willing to take a sensor penalty for the Buffalo's efficiency at carrying stuff.

      My big issue right now is the fact that the Buffalo is crowding out the other ship options, since having 2 ships take the role of 1 now carries an additional sensor penalty. The Phaeton also is better than any of the other tankers.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 19, 2015, 10:31:36 AM
      Quick random thought: I bet at least half of the complaints about civilian ships being made unattractive by their "civilian grade" hullmod would be silenced if the mechanic was reversed and military ships would instead get a "military grade" mod providing a sensor boost.

      Yeah, you're probably right about that :(

      I don't want to clutter up the majority of hulls with that, though. It's supposed to be a "marker" hullmod to indicate, "hey, this is different than standard" and it just makes more sense to have that on the fewer number of ships.

      It does feel like people may be overestimating the impact of it, especially on larger fleets. Probably a consequence of the "actual sensor range is something like a log scale of the strength/profile", which isn't explained very well. Need to explain this better somewhere, I think. Perhaps right on the civ-grade hullmod's tooltip. Hmm. Just not sure about how to phrase it so that it's sufficiently clear and doesn't "break character" too much.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 19, 2015, 11:39:58 AM
      It does feel like people may be overestimating the impact of it, especially on larger fleets. Probably a consequence of the "actual sensor range is something like a log scale of the strength/profile", which isn't explained very well. Need to explain this better somewhere, I think. Perhaps right on the civ-grade hullmod's tooltip. Hmm. Just not sure about how to phrase it so that it's sufficiently clear and doesn't "break character" too much.

      Mhh...maaaybe it would not be a bad idea to hide the whole sensor profile/strenght thing completely and always refer to sensor/detection range. Even if players understand the mechanic (and that's a big if), converting between these two, and be it just as a rule of thumb estimate, is just not something players want or realistically can do.
      Instead of saying "this thing doubles sensor profile" how about saying something like "this thing increases detection range, a lot in small fleets and a little in big fleets". With nicer words. I think that would help clear things up. (To be honest, that is how precise I do the conversion in my head at the moment. So, not precise at all, but its serviceable.)

      Then the sensor/detection range tooltip could list how much the sensor/detection range of the fleet would decrease/increase if a specific ship would be removed from the fleet. That's tangible, practical information.

      Since I'm already typing, two more things for the tooltip: It would be useful if
      a) besides the medium sized fleet (maybe use a patrol as example?) also the detection range for a typical small fleet (for early pirate hunting) and big fleet (trade convoy) would be mentioned. Besides being "good to know" that would drive home the point that this is a variable, dependent value.
      And b) if this range could be visualized (when hovering over it?) with a circle or somesuch. The "2000 units = 1 map grid" doesn't really cut it.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 19, 2015, 11:59:48 AM
      It would be nice to see circles on the map akin the Star Control 2's spheres of influences used by the races.  Too many times, I thought I was far away enough to slaughter a bunch of patrols and detachments without penalty only to discover that I was indeed still too close to the station and be locked out for "many months" yet again.

      Actually, is there a cap on how much time a player needs to wait?  In other words, if I kill too many ships from several 30+ ship detachments too quickly, no more time gets added beyond the max?  One time, I slaughtered so many fleets near Jangala that I should have be banned for years, yet I was able to sneak successfully after several months passed.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 19, 2015, 02:03:35 PM
      @Gothars: hmm, yeah, that makes sense. I wonder if it'd raise different questions (i.e. why do the numbers for each ship keep changing as you add/remove ships?) but even so, might be more useful to see.


      @Megas: it's capped at half a year.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 19, 2015, 02:40:45 PM
      I wonder if it'd raise different questions (i.e. why do the numbers for each ship keep changing as you add/remove ships?)

      Probably, but that would be musings about the inner workings of the game, as opposed to questions about how to properly play the game (e.g. "Why can't I see further despite adding an Omen to my big fleet?" or "Should I add this civilian freighter to my tiny smuggler fleet?").
      BTW, for this mechanic it would be great if the tooltip would update instantly while buying a new ship and show its potential influence on your sensors before you pay.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 19, 2015, 03:43:20 PM
      @ Alex:  Good to know.  At least I can hang around markets I do not care to shop at and slaughter fleets until I fill up on something.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ChaseBears on December 19, 2015, 07:24:13 PM
      while i'm not opposed to psychological trickery, i don't think having a 'military sensor bonus' is a good idea. The run of the mill Starsector ship is a military vessel; it's the Civilian-grade hulls that stand out for being relatively few in number. The squeaky wheel should get the grease.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on December 19, 2015, 08:05:44 PM
      No 0.7.2 patch notes yet?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 20, 2015, 12:31:38 AM
      re: civilian vs. military and scans etc.

      Is there / Could there be a way of displaying on the ship info panel explicity how much a given ship will increase sensor and profile range so there is no ambiguity at all?
      eg:
      (http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a224/Tifi78/sensor_zpsofkl5iaw.png)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 20, 2015, 05:31:28 AM
      In the codex? That wouldn't make sense for a value dependent on context. And even in campaign it would be misleading.






      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cik on December 20, 2015, 05:41:03 AM
      problem is that it's a sliding scale afaik, which makes it impossible to display without knowing what the sensor strength of the enemy fleet is relative to your signature.

      the system we have now (the wavey lines denoting extent of sensor range) seems like maybe the best you could do.. displaying it numerically is super misleading already just because your signature will be  detected at a huge variety of ranges depending on enemy fleet strength and composition.

      you could maybe model a system sort of like the system in modern aircraft (radar warning receiver, chiefly) that would passively detect enemy sensors (that are active) at long range, and then your sensors behave independently of that.

      which is KIND of what we have already. kind of. but the wavey lines only appear as you are about to enter the sensor range which is a little weird.

      so in this theoretical system you would have two ways to detect the enemy: passively via a sensor warning system which detects active enemy sensors passively, and an active sensor system (basically what we have now running all the time) which sends out pulses and gets returns. the active sensor system probably should have longer range, but make you far more vulnerable to detection because you are emitting something.

      tl;dr there's a few ways to model it, you could make it more like a passive/active sonar system, or an aircraft's RWR/RADAR complex, or many other things i'm sure.



      man i branch from topic fast.

      anyway, without making every fleet on the map project a circle of it's sensor range vs your signature (which isn't really a great solution in the first place) i don't think it's possible to make it clearer, at least at the moment.

      juggling the way it works a little might make it easier but i'd have to think about it, and the current system is pretty good anyway.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on December 20, 2015, 07:07:06 AM
      the problem with civilvian grade ships weak/vulnerable sensors is that civilian grade ships suck and further suckifying them is already tipping the scale against avoiding them outright.

      in particular, one of the key times to use civilian grade ships (when you need your first transport cargo but can't afford anything good so you buy a mudskipper) is apparently when this penalty is the most egregious (i think) and also the time when you're most vulnerable to gettign wiped by by gank faste attack pirates so all of that's real  bad.

      In general i oppose anything that nerfs your stealth and sensor strength since there's already so many dangers and penalties in regards to these systems in terms of emergency burning/beaconing/environmental effects on and on and on that just adding more on top of it is griefing and pretty gratitutous griefing at that (sensor dynamic penalties are pretty estoric and unfun). same goes for augmented engines, uh those things already cost a crap ton of ordanance points and now your blinding the ships in addition? Wow... Also augmented engines weaken your sensors but jury rigged unstable injectors (the initial mod) don't? makes no sense

      If you MUST add difficultly through stealth/senor penalties, do the following: add a penalty based on the fleet point RATIO of military to civilian. For example, if you have one frigate and one civilian, there's is little to no penalty to your sensors. If you have one frigate and ten mudskippers, the penalty is maxed out. Basically, military ships have the ability to mask and augment the sensor profiles of civilian ships through their algorithims w/e. This penalizes people that are flying low cost high profit fleets of buffalos or w/e which is what you expect and rewards those who have proper escorts.  This also opens a roll for EWARS ships specifically designed to mask and augment a large number of civilian ships.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cik on December 20, 2015, 07:37:57 AM
      the AE signature increase is fine. once you get to a fleet with more than a few ships losing a teensy bit of sensor superiority once you can see any fleet that's capable of killing you a long way off is worth the ability to engage and disengage at will, and it makes sense lore-wise.

      as to more complicated sensor options: electronic warfare seems like a neat option, though i'm not sure what sort of effect you'd want. signature increase (due to more emission) but muddled ability to determine fleet size (basically what a real jammer does)

      flat lower signature? lower signature at cost of supplies?

      there's a ton of stuff you could add on top of the sensor system without changing it's base components.

      i'd really like the individual sensors to be more granular. having distinct passive/active sensors that behave differently, electronic warfare systems that interact in interesting ways etc, would be pretty neat.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 20, 2015, 10:15:46 AM
      If you MUST add difficultly through stealth/senor penalties, do the following: add a penalty based on the fleet point RATIO of military to civilian. For example, if you have one frigate and one civilian, there's is little to no penalty to your sensors. If you have one frigate and ten mudskippers, the penalty is maxed out.

      That's pretty much exactly how it works out given the formulas involved.

      Also, it's true that adding on a civ ship in the early game is a more noticeable penalty, but the enemies you face in that phase - i.e. pirates - have much higher penalties than that due to their (D) hulls. Adding on a freighter or two merely serves to slightly reduce the sensor advantage you already have over them.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on December 20, 2015, 11:35:01 AM
      That's pretty much exactly how it works out given the formulas involved.

      really? Then I literally have no idea how sensor profiles work? That might be a problem? Perhaps someone could post a sensor profile graph showing the log scale of military ships versus civilian ships versus 50/50 mixed ships???

      By the way, could you briefly explain what the enemy sensor "radar rings" actually mean. If you see their radar ring , that means you can see them right? That is to say, you see the radar ring emanating from their "center" position, which is revealing a previously invisible enemy fleet. That is really confusing to me, because radar does not function that way "intuitively," it emanates from you, that's how you detect. So really, you shouldn't see any enemy's "ring" you should see an enemies "blip" which is a disturbance in your ring. Unless your not detecting the enemy but triangulating based on their own electromagnetic signature (their ring???)

      That's a confusing question cause its totally different from the "radar burst" special function that both you and the enemy can do, THAT makes sense, that's exactly how radar works intuively. What I don't understand is the normal "background" radar dynamics. If you see the enemy radar rings, im pretty sure that means you see them, but they dont necessarily see you right?

      Also, when they do their own radar burst, how can you tell if they did or did not see you from the interface? For instance sometimes I see the strong radar ring waver over my fleet, does that mean detection? Other times I see an outer solid small radar ring  in addition to the main ring, does THAT mean detection?

      Fuuuuh, an explanatory youtube radar tutorial video would be appreciated...


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 20, 2015, 11:44:50 AM
      By the way, could you briefly explain what the enemy sensor "radar rings" actually mean.

      That indicates the outer edge of the range at which they can detect you, and is only shown when you're near that range. If you're outside it, they can't see you (yet). If you're inside it, they can see you. You also have to see *them* to get this indicator in the first place.

      really? Then I literally have no idea how sensor profiles work? That might be a problem? Perhaps someone could post a sensor profile graph showing the log scale of military ships versus civilian ships versus 50/50 mixed ships???

      This (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=9895.0) thread in the modding subforum has a bit more info.

      Basically, adding +2 or whatever to your sensor profile matters progressively less and less as the total value goes up, beyond it just being a smaller fraction of the total.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 21, 2015, 03:30:13 AM
      There are two problems I have with the sensor mechanic - one is minor and down to preference/play style, the other is a fair bit bigger of a deal.

      Firstly the minor: You can't pick your targets any more.
      Without being able to "see" everything it is almost impossible to pinpoint juicy targets. Almost.
      You can still do this to a degree but the synergy with the E-Burn means you simply cannot skirt (or even go anywhere near) hostile markets looking for targets anymore, because if you do you get ganked hard.
      So you are limited to targets which are "in transit" which costs a lot more fuel and supplies (and time!) to locate as you cannot see anything that isn't right next to you, meaning you are more dependant on finding a good target, which is much harder to find as you can't go near where most of the targets are.

      The combination of Sensors & E-Burn has basically made playing the aggressor both much harder and much more tedious.
      (Sensors only would work pretty well, it would still be a pain to find stuff but at least you wouldn't get dogpiled.)

      The biggest problem though is the whole mechanic is opaque.
      Terrain is pretty straightforward. Hiding in stuff makes you harder to see.

      I can see sensor ranges change as I change my fleet, but I have no idea how it works. Nor do I have any idea how much a given ship will help/hinder me in that regard.
      There is no indication on the screen of how far I can see or be seen, save for a pair of numbers for the ranges. But without anything visually telling me how far that is it is not of much use.
      There is no clear indication of what anything does save terrain, and the whole thing is pretty confusing tbh.

      As to not being able to display sensor/profile values for individual ships, why not?
      Those numbers must be available somewhere otherwise how does the game come up with the values to add to the detection ranges in first place? Every ship will have a base value somewhere for how much it adds to those two numbers above just for existing.
      Literally anything that gives some indication of the relative difference between ship A and ship B would be helpful, and context really wouldn't matter as all it would be is a means to say "this ship can see further than that one".


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cik on December 21, 2015, 04:24:31 AM
      There are two problems I have with the sensor mechanic - one is minor and down to preference/play style, the other is a fair bit bigger of a deal.

      Firstly the minor: You can't pick your targets any more.

      So you are limited to targets which are "in transit" which costs a lot more fuel and supplies (and time!) to locate as you cannot see anything that isn't right next to you, meaning you are more dependant on finding a good target, which is much harder to find as you can't go near where most of the targets are.

      this can be alleviated by adding an intelligence system. you already gain access to secure comms access, so have it require that and it taps you into the military intelnet of the faction you're working for.

      so if you're a privateer, you would get alerts from friendly fleets calling out enemy locations through the net.

      hegemony fast picket spotted sindrian merchant fleet in hyperspace 1 day ago. likely destination:hybrasil

      or something like that.

      i suppose you'd have to fill in the sensornet of everyone in their own territories so that they can actually spot things for you, but then you could add sensor platforms which would be a good addition anyway.

      then you could chill on go dark in hyperspace and pounce passing mercantile convoys without having to directly see them.




      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 21, 2015, 04:38:57 AM
      As to not being able to display sensor/profile values for individual ships, why not?
      Those numbers must be available somewhere otherwise how does the game come up with the values to add to the detection ranges in first place? Every ship will have a base value somewhere for how much it adds to those two numbers above just for existing.

      You could at best show the value one ship would add/subtract for the exact fleet you have right now. That's what I suggested on the last page. The individual sensor performance is mostly dependent on the fleet the ship is part of.
      The base value is the same for each ship of a size class, influenced by hullmods. You can see that in the Tripad sensor tooltips, but it doesn't really tell you anything.

      Agree on sensors needing a better visual indication of range. I would not even mind a key to bring up this ruler like element we saw in the blogpost.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: RawCode on December 21, 2015, 06:28:12 AM
      It will be a lot better and more simple to understand if:

      1) Both scanner and profile use stepping (range 1-10 instead of raw value).

      2) Ships have clear and fixed profile effect:
      frigates 1-3
      destroyer 4-5

      3) Civilian ships instead of rawval bonus\penalty should have "destroyer profile".

      It will be clear and simple, as long as player dont have any destroyers (or civilian ships) profile defined by just number of frigates:

      1-4 frigates == profile 1
      5-7 frigates == profile 2
      8++ == profile 3

      as long as player want to sneak around with minimal profile, he should not pick more then 4 frigates.

      as soon as player get any destroyer or civilian ship, tooltip change into destroyer version (that defined by number of destroyers):
      1-4 destroyers == profile 4
      5++ destroyers == profile 5
      number of lesser ships is ignored completely for profile calculation.

      this will eliminate issues related to "system is overcomplicated, can't understand, unable to enjoy game cos this".

      effect is clear, (number of ships with hullsize X) > value ? Y : Z

      4) Scanner is property of ship like burn level and best scanner is used at all times, effects do not stack in any way.

      This will result in fixed sensor power faction wide, making "sneaking" predictable.
      It will be easy to sneak pirates and independant, harder for hegemony, ever harder with tritach and nearly impossible around elite fleets of minifactions like lion guard.


      Currently size of enemy fleet have greater effect then player's actions related to fleet assembly.




      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ChaseBears on December 21, 2015, 07:26:26 AM
      Quote
      It will be clear and simple, as long as player dont have any destroyers (or civilian ships) profile defined by just number of frigates:
      I don't like this at all.  why should a fleet of 9 frigates have less profile than a single Hammerhead?    It's a set of arbitrary rules relating to not taking a particular type of ship rather than emergent gameplay like the current system.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 21, 2015, 09:41:45 AM
      I can see sensor ranges change as I change my fleet, but I have no idea how it works. Nor do I have any idea how much a given ship will help/hinder me in that regard.
      There is no indication on the screen of how far I can see or be seen, save for a pair of numbers for the ranges. But without anything visually telling me how far that is it is not of much use.
      There is no clear indication of what anything does save terrain, and the whole thing is pretty confusing tbh.

      As to not being able to display sensor/profile values for individual ships, why not?
      Those numbers must be available somewhere otherwise how does the game come up with the values to add to the detection ranges in first place? Every ship will have a base value somewhere for how much it adds to those two numbers above just for existing.
      Literally anything that gives some indication of the relative difference between ship A and ship B would be helpful, and context really wouldn't matter as all it would be is a means to say "this ship can see further than that one".

      Just to make sure - have you checked the tooltips for those values? They show the contributions of each ship to your sensor strength/profile.

      Larger ships are both easier to see and have better sensors, in equal measure.

      The actual impact of your sensor strength on the detection *ranges* you see is non-linear, i.e. a strength of 20 will see far less than double compared to strength 10. And the ranges depend on the size of the thing you're looking at/is looking for you, so they're dynamic. There's really no single useful value there; there one that's shown is for reference only so you can see that adding ship X increased your detection range by a certain percentage.


      I think Gothars' earlier suggestion to show the current impact each ship has on ranges is promising, though I still want to think through it. It'd involve not showing the base profile/strength values at all, probably, which... just not sure about it, really haven't given it enough thought.

      Hmm. Maybe it would make sense to show the "range" values as a percentage instead. Yeah. 100% sensor range would mean "exactly average for a fleet of your size", under 100% would mean something like "you've got a civ ship or two dragging you down", while over 100% might mean dedicated sensor ships. Yeah. This seems like a good first step regardless of anything else - at least you get an at-a-glance "your sensor stuff is comparatively good or bad" evaluation. And it wouldn't confuse by showing a range number that's not useful aside from self-comparison purposes. Wrote this down.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: speeder on December 21, 2015, 09:55:55 AM
      I have a suggestion to fix Serenitis complaint of thigns being unclear:

      Make the sensor range actually visible on the map!

      Although you tried to add some information on the tooltip (saying that 2000 units = 1 square or something like that), it would be great if you just pressed "m" and could see a circle around your fleet.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Cik on December 21, 2015, 10:02:56 AM
      sensor detection is adversarial though, so your fleet doesn't have a 'set range'. it only has a set range against a certain fleet size and composition.

      which is what is making it opaque in the first place. it's one thing to know that's how it works but there's no real way for the player to say "if there were two onslaughts running dark in position to my left, i would be able to see them at THIS range.

      and displaying that isn't an easy task.

      intuition eventually gives the player a coarse understanding of at what range he should be able to detect a fleet of his rough size, but a precise ability to predict detection range against a huge variety of fleets seems pretty impossible.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on December 21, 2015, 11:06:09 AM
      maybe you could toggle your sensor ring to "threat range" and "sensor range" with threat range determining what range at which fleet size X can probably detect you and sensor range determining at what range you can probably detect fleet size X. You can plug in a fleet size of your choosing depending on the situation.

      For example if you are fleet size 5, you are not really worried about fleet size 5, but fleet size 10 would be a problem, so you set your threat range to 10, a ring surrounds your ship. you intuitively know that any signatures outside that ring is bigger than 10, and too be avoided (or investigated).

      if you get really CR trashed after a fight and need to hide you can set your threat range to 1, basically showing the safety "bubble" you have and what you need to keep away from any fast attack enemies

      I dunno, i think right now there is no accounting intuitively for steathl bonuses or penalties in the UI outside of that little tiny number box at the bottom, so...meh



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 21, 2015, 12:05:53 PM
      Hmm. Maybe it would make sense to show the "range" values as a percentage instead. Yeah. 100% sensor range would mean "exactly average for a fleet of your size", under 100% would mean something like "you've got a civ ship or two dragging you down", while over 100% might mean dedicated sensor ships. Yeah. This seems like a good first step regardless of anything else - at least you get an at-a-glance "your sensor stuff is comparatively good or bad" evaluation. And it wouldn't confuse by showing a range number that's not useful aside from self-comparison purposes. Wrote this down.


      How would that reflect that a frigate with 100% has far less actual range than a fleet of cruisers with 100%? Or worse, how could anyone guess that a Omen with ~150% has less range than a fleet of freighters with ~70%? And when you buy a freighter your sensor range goes up but your percentage goes down, that will confuse people.
      I'm not opposed to normalizing the numbers, but if you do it on "average fleet of this size" base that could lead to a lot of confusion.

      Mh, maybe you could weave it into the UI as secondary information, like coloring the range green when its over and red when its under "average".

      But I think the really important info is indeed how far you can see what you're interested in (and how far it can see you), not how relatively well-sensored your fleet is. That's why I suggested the additional example fleets beside the "medium sized" one for the tooltip.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 21, 2015, 01:41:41 PM
      maybe you could toggle your sensor ring to "threat range" and "sensor range" with threat range determining what range at which fleet size X can probably detect you and sensor range determining at what range you can probably detect fleet size X. You can plug in a fleet size of your choosing depending on the situation.

      For example if you are fleet size 5, you are not really worried about fleet size 5, but fleet size 10 would be a problem, so you set your threat range to 10, a ring surrounds your ship. you intuitively know that any signatures outside that ring is bigger than 10, and too be avoided (or investigated).

      This makes me think of a drastic simplification of the whole sensor system, where there are only like five sensor/detection ranges. Similar to the discretization that happened to burn speeds a few updates ago. Then you could display the real value at which a fleet of any of the five sensor strengths could detect you/be detected by you.
      Don't know how much fun such a coarse system would be though, and if it would leave enough room for interactions with skills and environment.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 21, 2015, 01:45:53 PM
      This makes me think of a drastic simplification of the whole sensor system, where there are only like five sensor/detection ranges. Similar to the discretization that happened to burn speeds a few updates ago. Then you could display the real value at which a fleet of any of the five sensor strengths could detect you/be detected by you.

      Actually did consider this at the very start - problem is that gets weird with the edge cases where adding/removing a ship would take you from one category to another. Doesn't seem like the sort of thing you want optimal play to revolve around.

      Burn doesn't have the same problem since it's just the lowest value, but you couldn't do the same sort of thing with sensors where the goal is for it to be explicitly tied to fleet size.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dark.Revenant on December 21, 2015, 04:01:32 PM
      It may be worth adding to fleet tooltips on the main campaign screen, something along these lines:
      Sensor Profile: 12 (2 lower than your sensor strength)
      Detection Range: 1842 (+1000)

      And maybe do something along the same lines for sensor strength and the range you can be detected at.

      I think this would clarify a lot of the sensor mechanics for people.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on December 22, 2015, 03:54:57 AM
      I wonder if it'd raise different questions (i.e. why do the numbers for each ship keep changing as you add/remove ships?)
      Hmm. Maybe it would make sense to show the "range" values as a percentage instead. ... And it wouldn't confuse by showing a range number that's not useful aside from self-comparison purposes. Wrote this down.

      Maybe a combination of percentage and total range for the tooltip, like this:



      ______
      Your total sensor range is 1500 SU against a typical medium fleet, 1000 SU against a typical small fleet and 2000 SU against a typical big fleet.

      Your fleet has 80% of the sensor range of a typical fleet of its size.

      Contribution by ship:

      Dominator 30%
      Omen 30%
      Tarsus 10%
      Buffalo 10%
      ______



      Another example:
      ______
      Your total sensor range is 1000 SU against a typical medium fleet, 700 SU against a typical small fleet and 1300 SU against a typical big fleet.

      Your fleet has 130% of the sensor range of a typical fleet of its size.

      Contribution by ship:

      Apogee 100%
      Wolf 15%
      Wolf 15%
      ______



      Percentage might be clearer than specific numbers, as it better indicates that the contribution of each ship can only be seen in the fleet context. Then again, maybe you meant that and I just misunderstood.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on December 22, 2015, 05:26:23 AM
      <tooltip stuff>
      This would make things a bit clearer.
      The %age "your fleet is good/bad compared to average" I can imagine being helpful.

      And would it be a hassle to have a sensor overlay you could activate/toggle on both the campaign and mini maps?
      A pair of coloured/shaded circles centered on your fleet - green for how far you can see, red for how far you can be seen.

      Space submarine simulator is pretty fun, but it is damn frustrating trying to figure out how to set things up when it's all black-boxy and mysterious. :P
      Thank you all for being so cool.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on December 22, 2015, 05:31:45 AM

      That indicates the outer edge of the range at which they can detect you, and is only shown when you're near that range. If you're outside it, they can't see you (yet). If you're inside it, they can see you. You also have to see *them* to get this indicator in the first place.


      needs an ingame tooltip thingy


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on December 22, 2015, 12:57:51 PM
      Going to reply to sensor stuff in this thread (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10438.0) to avoid pretty much repurposing this one.

      But one more reply here :)

      And would it be a hassle to have a sensor overlay you could activate/toggle on both the campaign and mini maps?
      A pair of coloured/shaded circles centered on your fleet - green for how far you can see, red for how far you can be seen.

      That's the thing - there's no such range because it depends on the other fleet. You'll see larger fleets from farther away, and vice versa. So a circle like that would be very misleading - hence the per-fleet indicators when you're at the edge of their sensor range.

      I actually did try an overlay in the beginning - a nice-looking one with tick marks for "this is the range at which you'll detect a size X fleet", etc. It was just not helpful at all in playtesting, unfortunately, for various reasons.

      Space submarine simulator is pretty fun, but it is damn frustrating trying to figure out how to set things up when it's all black-boxy and mysterious. :P

      The baseline is just more ships = you'll see and be seen from farther away. The exact impact of individual ships varies slightly - phase ships, sensor ships, civ ships, augmented engines. If you have bonuses, you'll see other fleets before they see you (unless they also have bonuses). If you have penalties, you'll be seen before you see them.

      If you have the transponder on, its impact is high enough to override pretty much anything else.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on December 24, 2015, 07:41:09 AM
      After 63 levels, finally acquired a Hyperion!  Had to save-scum a deserter bounty fleet to board it.  Each attempt, I parked outside of Aztlan system, then gate in and travel about two weeks for Toci, where the bounty fleet sat.  If random events vary in that time frame or less, then ships eligible for boarding change too.  (I noticed that after my previous Onslaught capture attempt, which I finally boarded thanks to Special Ops perk.)

      First attempt, I had a chance to board Aurora.  Nice, but I really want that Hyperion!

      Second attempt, chance to board Falcon.  Ugh! No thanks!

      Third attempt, nothing, just salvage.

      Forth attempt, Hyperion offered!  Time to act like Gollum!


      I have yet to configure it since I do not have the weapons available deep in enemy territory and since I brought three Atlas with me, I will make it worth their while by grinding Hegemony detachments until they fill up with loot.  Maybe I will board a XIV ship while I am at it.

      One more thing:  Special Ops perk is very, very nice!  No need to bring 500 or so marines in a liner in case a capital gets offered for boarding.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Salient on January 03, 2016, 04:16:26 PM
      I just want to say that i like the direction the game is going. Feel like a whole new game from the last time i played. I have to say this the biggest bang for my 10 bucks i've gotten in awhile.

      Ran into a bug, I took the tri-tach commission, and they are upset i am friendly with knights of ludd. I installed the latest hot patch.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on January 03, 2016, 04:58:34 PM
      I just want to say that i like the direction the game is going. Feel like a whole new game from the last time i played. I have to say this the biggest bang for my 10 bucks i've gotten in awhile.

      Ran into a bug, I took the tri-tach commission, and they are upset i am friendly with knights of ludd. I installed the latest hot patch.
      The issue was addresed already and will be fixed in the next version.
      You can work around the issue yourself very easily tho :)
      1)Make sure you have the Console Commands mod up and running.
      2)Open the console in your current game, type setrelationship knights_of_ludd player -100
      Cheers!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Clockwork Owl on January 03, 2016, 07:01:05 PM
      No patch notes for 0.7.2 yet?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 03, 2016, 07:14:59 PM
      No patch notes for 0.7.2 yet?

      Not quite yet :) Thinking about it, though.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zaphide on January 03, 2016, 09:57:42 PM
      No patch notes for 0.7.2 yet?

      Not quite yet :) Thinking about it, though.

      Hah, Alex can't resist a good tease...   :D


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: StarSchulz on January 04, 2016, 01:02:38 AM
      I feel like isn't extreme enough for an actual bug report, but i might as well mention somewhere:

      (http://i.imgur.com/YVXxe4X.png)

      Things like that *probably* shouldn't happen  :P  breaks the immersion, right?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Weltall on January 04, 2016, 05:39:46 AM
      I am so lost @.@ I am looking at the picture trying to figure out what it wrong and I can't. This feels like one of those puzzle games, that the solution is easier than breathing and yet I can't figure it out >.<


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on January 04, 2016, 05:55:56 AM
      The problem is that the "bug" makes no sense at all when described as a bug.

      Is this the start of #PortraitDiversity movement?  :P

      So yeah, give it a break. If you want to go hardcore nitpicking, there are many other tiny things that break immersion aswell.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: StarSchulz on January 04, 2016, 10:18:11 AM
      Just that two of the same portrait are having roles on the same planet x.x

      I already am the kind of person that makes sure all of their officers have different portraits, lol.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: zakastra on January 04, 2016, 02:53:44 PM
      Secha and Casey are twins. but only one got married ;)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Gothars on January 04, 2016, 02:57:28 PM
      Quadruplets?

      (http://i.imgur.com/GxA3inw.jpg)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 04, 2016, 03:08:15 PM
      The Hegemony Personnel Assignment Bureau amusing itself, no doubt.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on January 04, 2016, 05:58:03 PM
      when is starsector gonna be finished anyway? I'm not being a jerk im just wondering since it's arleady got the effort of ten indie games put into it and im just wondering if it's gonna be done by the end of 2016 or if this is basically a dwarf fortress in space timeline


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on January 04, 2016, 06:24:17 PM
      Probs another 2 years.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: StarSchulz on January 04, 2016, 07:15:56 PM
      Pretty sure its gonna be a while longer  :P  But each update is always amazing, even if it is a year in-between.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on January 05, 2016, 02:38:56 PM
      solar shielding is lame haha, especially since tactically beams are a threat to shield flux, not armor (if they are freely beaming your armor your already doomed!)

      unless beam damage resistance stacks with armor ablation? is the beam damage resistance calculated before or after armor check? is it that 100 armor counts at 110 against beams? Or is it that 100 beam dps counts as 90 damage against 100 beam protected armor?

       how does armor damage reduction work in terms of beam, is it a flat reduction that eventually scales down as the armor is whittled away, so that a beam only does full damage against exposed hull? Hmmmm...

       also what was the maximum damage reduction that armor gives again, is it 80% (20% gets through?)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dark.Revenant on January 05, 2016, 04:54:23 PM
      Maximum reduction is 85%.  Damage reduction from stat buffs is applied before armor calculation.  Solar Shielding's buff stays the same regardless of armor level.  For example, if a 250-damage beam is hitting your normal 500-armor ship, 80% is reduced and the final dps is 50.

      With solar shielding, that becomes effectively 225 dps, with 81.6% reduction, for final dps 41.3.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Weltall on January 05, 2016, 07:36:20 PM
      Just that two of the same portrait are having roles on the same planet x.x

      I already am the kind of person that makes sure all of their officers have different portraits, lol.
      Quadruplets?

      (http://i.imgur.com/GxA3inw.jpg)

      Well with so little portraits, you are bound to find twins eventually at least XD.  I personally took Trashman's picture pack, that is with his Ironclads addon, and added it to my game. It is good to at least see more portraits XD


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Taverius on January 06, 2016, 01:20:12 PM
      Another small one Alex, the Hegemony Auxiliary Buffalo still has the civ hull mod.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on January 06, 2016, 02:20:05 PM
      Maximum reduction is 85%.  Damage reduction from stat buffs is applied before armor calculation.  Solar Shielding's buff stays the same regardless of armor level.  For example, if a 250-damage beam is hitting your normal 500-armor ship, 80% is reduced and the final dps is 50.

      With solar shielding, that becomes effectively 225 dps, with 81.6% reduction, for final dps 41.3.

      thanks!

      interesting...so not entirely useless then. still, would rather have environmental armor shield against flux storms then solar flares, i mean really, even in SS+ there's just not enough suns for that to be relevant. if you flying close to suns, ur dumb lol


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 07, 2016, 12:17:54 PM
      Another small one Alex, the Hegemony Auxiliary Buffalo still has the civ hull mod.

      Thanks - looks like it's already fixed in the dev version :)


      still, would rather have environmental armor shield against flux storms then solar flares,

      Looking at the code, it actually does protect against both. Not 100% sure if that's just a dev version thing, though.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ArkAngel on January 07, 2016, 10:40:40 PM
      still, would rather have environmental armor shield against flux storms then solar flares,

      Looking at the code, it actually does protect against both. Not 100% sure if that's just a dev version thing, though.
      If thats the case, that made it soooo much more useful. Though, I'd reccomend renaming it to something to tell the player that it does protect against both.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: RawCode on January 08, 2016, 03:15:22 AM
      solar shielding is extremely weak for 10th level feat.

      there is no realible way to lure enemy fleet into corona and beam resistance is joke compared to other feats.

      basically it is 10% beam resistance only vs 200 range for 7th level optics or 50-20 movespeed for aug engines.

      i wont ever try to mention 0.5% hp regen on high hp capital that can provide more regen that some ships have dps.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 08, 2016, 06:28:02 AM
      solar shielding is extremely weak for 10th level feat.
      So is Omni Shield Emitter, given its exorbitant OP cost and shield arc cut.  I post this to mean this needs fixing too.

      Most beams are already weak, thanks to low DPS and no hard flux to shields, without any help from Solar Shielding.  If Solar Shielding cut beam damage more, then beams will be too unreliable except against fighters and missiles.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: RawCode on January 08, 2016, 07:23:13 AM
      balance is not issue for alpha state game, issue is generic concept of useless "skills".

      there is simply no reason to pick some skills, no matter how game will develop and what will be implemented, some skill will remain completely useless no matter what.

      ever if solar shielding will provide complete immunity to beams, reasonable player wont pick it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Taverius on January 08, 2016, 09:29:06 AM
      Given that Alex is working on an overhaul of the skills - and anyway, we can't really judge the value of a skillpoint without the industry line and the skills/gameplay that go with them - I'm not sure there's a great deal of point in arguing about the skills themselves. They mostly work, they're mostly fine, and it'll all be changing anyway sometime in the future.

      Hull mods is another thing, and sure, Solar Shielding is pretty weak, and I don't think flux storm protection will change its value greatly except for smuggler playstyles. But then we also get into what the point of vanilla beams is currently, and I don't think this is the right place for that.

      Storms make me think of another thing I've been reflecting on lately, how AI fleets travel in hyperspace - I blessedly never had to do path-finding when I was coding for a living but campaign-level hazard avoidance looks to be a real gem of an issue Alex, I don't envy you. Well, except in an abstract "ooh what a neat and difficult issue I get to try lots of things for" way.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 08, 2016, 09:50:07 AM
      ever if solar shielding will provide complete immunity to beams, reasonable player wont pick it.
      If it did that and the hullmod would be common on endgame threats like say, elite Sindrian detachments, that means I need to reconfigure my ships to not use beams.  For example, sniper beam Eagle would be ruined, and I would either need to use a configuration more useful against everyone or abandon Eagle and use Dominator instead.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on January 08, 2016, 09:51:13 AM
      solar shields become solar nanites, increase CR recovery in the presencne of suns  ;D

      haha, another terrible idea

      edit: it is interesting how some hullmods are OP compared to others. Pretty sure all my ships, no matter what, get augmented engines and integrated range extender. Most get stabilized shields too because flux venting is pretty much the be all end all besides speed, and stabilized shields are de facto more flux vents, sometimes many more flux vents per unit OP, than just tacking on more vents directly. armor is usually neglected entirely

      speed, vents, range and manuverability in that order of importance in terms of OP and hullmods


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: The Soldier on January 08, 2016, 10:49:49 AM
      For example, sniper beam Eagle would be ruined, and I would either need to use a configuration more useful against everyone or abandon Eagle and use Dominator instead.
      Seems reasonable if you ask me.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 08, 2016, 12:24:37 PM
      @ The Soldier:  How so?  If only beams become victim of immunity, that is yet another strike against beams, and immunity would reduce variety in ships and configurations.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: The Soldier on January 08, 2016, 12:53:57 PM
      @ The Soldier:  How so?  If only beams become victim of immunity, that is yet another strike against beams, and immunity would reduce variety in ships and configurations.
      Beams have a massive range advantage in the small slots, fairl advantage in medium (they outrange 90% of the weapons in the medium slot), and fall behind a bit in large.  Range itself is valuable, and depending on the situation, better than DPS.  So there's that.

      The fact that beams don't make hard flux is effectively the same as Fragmentation damage doing 25% damage to shields and hulls - use it where it will be effective.  So for example, don't use beam weapons against ships outfitted with Solar Shielding (might be good to mention when targeting a ship or having a small visual effect on the hull to indicate that Solar Shielding has been fitted, though) until you've stripped away the armor.  Doesn't seem very terrible at all if you ask me.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 08, 2016, 01:35:28 PM
      I have not tried Solar Shielding (due to being in a skill I never put points in)... The beam works only against armor?  Not shields, not hull?  (Nevermind shields, shields usually hard counter beams already.)

      Quote
      So for example, don't use beam weapons against ships outfitted with Solar Shielding (might be good to mention when targeting a ship or having a small visual effect on the hull to indicate that Solar Shielding has been fitted, though) until you've stripped away the armor.  Doesn't seem very terrible at all if you ask me.
      That is a problem because that tells me do not use beams.  Use more low-tech or midline ships, or fit high-tech shields with nothing but pulse lasers and blasters, which I generally do anyway.  In other words, this reduces the variety of viable ships.

      If hullmod gave immunity, player would need something to mark an enemy with immunity.

      Fragmentation is not a good example.  Of what we have, Vulcan has extremely high DPS and outperforms all small beams at close-range PD for less.  Dual Flak is basically an area-of-effect Vulcan with more range.  Single flak is still good PD, though not top tier.  Thumper is the only bad weapon.  Most fragmentation weapons are extremely damaging once they hit hull, and all except Thumper excel at PD.  (Vulcan is a no brainer PD option for Hammerhead - low OP cost and excellent stopping power; Burst PD is too expensive, the rest lack stopping power if coming from only one turret.)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 08, 2016, 02:56:53 PM
      Vulcan Cannons do 500 DPS. Even after the 1/4 modifier vs shields and armor, that's 125 DPS for 20 FPS, which has to be the most flux-efficient weapon in the game. Its only downfall is the 250 range, but missiles and fighters like to get real close anyway. Vulcans are far more effective at protecting the targeted ship than any beam-based PD.

      Beams that aren't Tactical Lasers are underpowered, and Tactical Lasers aren't particularly amazing either. Not dealing hard flux is crippling, even with their high range. Graviton Beams are kind of a joke, being only slightly more effective vs shields than 2 Tactical Lasers and less effective vs armor and hull. Their only good point is that they're flux efficient, but they do so little that their flux efficiency is wasted. They're only good on Close Support Wolves, and only then because the Wolf has bad flux stats, and CS Wolves are only really good against other Frigates anyway. I would honestly rather leave the weapon slot empty than use a Graviton Beam on anything other than a Wolf, they're wasted OP. High Intensity Lasers are even more of a joke; it's just 3 Tactical Lasers that can't turn as fast while firing. Tachyon Lances are terrible now that the EMP-Arc bug has been fixed. It's just a Phase Lance with more range and 50% higher DPS that costs 3 times as much OP. A good starting change would be to double or triple the damage of Graviton Beams, High Intensity Lasers, and Tachyon Lances, see how that effects the game, and work from there.

      Phase Lances are half-decent. They're sort of like Harpoons, in that they're best used on ships that are about to overload, but they need to be supported by other weapons that deal hard flux damage. The issue is, they take up a medium slot and high-tech ships don't have the medium slots to spend on dedicated finisher weaponry. I'd suggest either making them a small weapon and reducing the refire rate from 10 to 6.5 shots a minute, making them a high OP small weapon with a specialized purpose sort of like the Antimatter Blaster and Light Needler, or leaving them a medium weapon and increasing their refire rate to 15 shots per minute, making them more able to bust through shields on their own.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Schwartz on January 08, 2016, 03:37:20 PM
      Disagree about Tac Lasers and Tachyon Lances. They're both very good. Endgame, I flew an Odyssey with an all-out Tac Laser & Tachyon Lance layout and it works amazingly well.

      I've also never warmed up to Graviton Beams; giving a beam kinetic damage is like one step forward, two steps back. For a shield-threatening beam, it's not good enough against shields, and the damage type also makes it weak vs. armour.

      Phase Lances are excellent because you can give them two range buffs. I use them frequently and wouldn't want to see them changed, except for maybe upping the range by 50-100 units. I seem to recall they used to have a little more range, anyway?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 08, 2016, 03:59:20 PM
      All end-game loadouts work well because you're overpowered. The question is how well a given endgame loadout works compared to other endgame loadouts, and a ship built around PRAZMA or Autopulse shreds things a lot better than a ship built around Tac Lances or HILs.

      I agree that Graviton Beams being kinetic-type is a broken kneecap on top of a spinal cord injury.

      A particular weapon being dependent on a hull-mod isn't a good thing for the game; the hullmod just becomes an OP tax for using the weapon, and Advanced Optics is even more of an OP tax than you'd think because it needs to be paired with Advanced Turret Gyros.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 08, 2016, 04:08:36 PM
      Tactical Lasers are generally weak, but useful.  Graviton Beam is too weak for its cost (it should cost no more than 8 OP with its current stats); I will happily replace Graviton Beam with Tactical Laser if I do not have enough OP.  Current Tachyon Lance would be fine if it costs 20 OP instead of the exorbitant 32 OP; personally, I like Tachyon Lance to get its 2500 range back (and still do 250-300 DPS) and keep its 32 OP cost.  For 0.7.1, I will always take plasma cannon or even autopulse over tachyon lance.

      @ Schwartz:  Phase Lance had 700 range when it used to be a continuous Phase Beam.

      I would like to see Phase Lance with more range.  Currently, if I do not have Advanced Optics, I never use Phase Lance because Pulse Laser and Heavy Blaster have the same range and cause hard flux - critical when waging the flux war.  If I get Advanced Optics, I occasionally use Phase Lance because ships like Medusa and Eagle can then kill things at 800 range with Phase Lance/kinetics combo instead of 600 range with non-beam energy weapons.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Ranakastrasz on January 08, 2016, 06:56:49 PM
      I still wish that beams would do a small fraction of their DPS as hard flux to shields. It doesn't have to be 100%, and probably would be OP if it was, but 10% or 25% would be plenty.

      Unfortunately getting beam DPS via script is a lot harder than it should be.

      ---
      Giving Graviton beams a small amount of hard flux damage, or else some kind of snare effect might be interesting. First would make it something of a shield breaker, while the second would make it an interesting anti-fighter option (or possibly anti-frigate depending on power)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ChaseBears on January 08, 2016, 07:10:58 PM
      Quote
      I agree that Graviton Beams being kinetic-type is a broken kneecap on top of a spinal cord injury.

      why? the whole point is that they are long range support weapons, and kinetic is an ideal damage type for support.

      it's also unique for energy weapons; though i guess isn't as important as it used to be, since regular weapons don't use ammo anymore.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 08, 2016, 07:51:12 PM
      Quote
      I agree that Graviton Beams being kinetic-type is a broken kneecap on top of a spinal cord injury.

      why? the whole point is that they are long range support weapons, and kinetic is an ideal damage type for support.

      it's also unique for energy weapons; though i guess isn't as important as it used to be, since regular weapons don't use ammo anymore.
      Beams don't do hard flux damage to shields, making them very bad vs shields. Graviton Beams do kinetic damage which, combined with beams being considered to do half their DPS for the armor damage reduction calculation, makes them completely worthless vs armor. What are they even supposed to be fired at? They're only good for bullying (D) ships with terrible flux stats.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: JohnDoe on January 08, 2016, 07:56:23 PM
      All continuous beams are kind of lame ever since the flux damage bonus was removed. Burst beams are good when the enemy is about to overload or when you're already shooting at armor, but otherwise they won't help you win a flux war against anything bigger than an average destroyer.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on January 08, 2016, 08:10:30 PM
      While beams are no good on an individual ship basis I've found in aggregate they are devastating on a fleet level. A wolf with three tac lasers and a grav beam can bleed most destroyers shields down, without exposing themselves to any real danger. Then the ground and pound lashers or antimatter boats come in. Yes you can achieve similar buy making the wolves autopulse boats but its messier do to range and higher flux costs. Brawling wolves may die where beam wolves live. Also beams are extremely effective against most fighters due to know target leading penalties. So one beam against one pulsr will lose, but ten beams against ten pulses?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ChaseBears on January 08, 2016, 08:27:49 PM
      Quote
      I agree that Graviton Beams being kinetic-type is a broken kneecap on top of a spinal cord injury.

      why? the whole point is that they are long range support weapons, and kinetic is an ideal damage type for support.

      it's also unique for energy weapons; though i guess isn't as important as it used to be, since regular weapons don't use ammo anymore.
      Beams don't do hard flux damage to shields, making them very bad vs shields. Graviton Beams do kinetic damage, making them worthless vs armor. What are they even supposed to be fired at? They're only good for bullying (D) ships with terrible flux stats.

      They're very good at shield pressure against an enemy actually using their weapons, which is why they're a support weapon - they don't get the job done by themselves. That's okay though since you have flux to spare when using them.

      Sunder - 2x Graviton beams - 400 DPS vs shields, (600 using ability.)

      Against a Balanced-variant Enforcer, that works out to 480 DPS versus 320 dissipation. Even without causing hard flux, it's enough to overwhelm the shields just by themselves.  Now, obviously, an Enforcer captain can just drop their shields; but that leaves them up to the Autopulse laser or Tachyon lance or missile mounts or w/e.









      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 08, 2016, 08:58:49 PM
      They're very good at shield pressure against an enemy actually using their weapons, which is why they're a support weapon - they don't get the job done by themselves. That's okay though since you have flux to spare when using them.

      Sunder - 2x Graviton beams - 400 DPS vs shields, (600 using ability.)

      Against a Balanced-variant Enforcer, that works out to 480 DPS versus 320 dissipation. Even without causing hard flux, it's enough to overwhelm the shields just by themselves.  Now, obviously, an Enforcer captain can just drop their shields; but that leaves them up to the Autopulse laser or Tachyon lance or missile mounts or w/e.

      Balanced-Variant Enforcers actually have 400 Flux dissipation, so you're not off to a good start. They've got 1390 FPS in weapons+shields and 6800 flux capacity, so they'll naturally max out on flux in 6.9 seconds if they're within 450 range and firing everything, 35.8 seconds if they're within 700 range and firing only their Arbalests. 480 additional FPS changes those numbers to 4.6 seconds and 10.1 seconds respectively. If you're actually trying to use the range of the Graviton Beam and they're not firing, it'll take you 85 seconds to max out their flux.

      Or you could just fire your HEF-boosted Autopulse Laser, overload it in 3 seconds even if it doesn't fire, then punch right through its armor with two HEF-boosted Pulse Lances. Or do 600 Hard Flux DPS with the two Light Needlers you can put on the front ballistic mounts, then move in with the Autopulse. I really don't know why you chose a Sunder, it's probably the worst thing to mount Graviton Beams on. Its energy weapons benefit from being bursty to take full advantage of the HEF, and it has access to Light Needlers which have 800 range, do hard flux, and go in a small ballistic slot.

      Edit: Keep getting the numbers wrong, math is hard and it's late where I am. Should be correct now.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Vind on January 08, 2016, 10:44:49 PM
      People complaining about beams not mention their main advantage - accuracy compared to ballistic weapons. Officers without ordnance 5 skill will miss most of ballistic shots even on slow targets but will hit well with beams.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ChaseBears on January 08, 2016, 10:47:47 PM
      Enforcers have 80 shield cost -  so they only have 320 dissipation while their shield is up.  Also, their max flux usage is highly misleading owing to so much of it being tied up in its Assault Chainguns.

      Quote
      Or you could just fire your HEF-boosted Autopulse Laser, overload it in 3 seconds even if it doesn't fire, then punch right through its armor with two HEF-boosted Pulse Lances. Or do 600 Hard Flux DPS with the two Light Needlers you can put on the front ballistic mounts, then move in with the Autopulse. I really don't know why you chose a Sunder, it's probably the worst thing to mount Graviton Beams on. Its energy weapons benefit from being bursty to take full advantage of the HEF, and it has access to Light Needlers which have 800 range, do hard flux, and go in a small ballistic slot.
      Light Needlers are great, but there's a pretty significant range and accuracy difference between them and Graviton beams.  You also arn't prevented from using both of them at the same time so ?.

      I went ahead and scrimmaged an Assault Sunder (autopulse/pulse/sabot/needler) vs a similar Sunder with autopulse/graviton/sabot/vulcan. The second Sunder (on Autopilot) won 4/5 fights; though for some reason it was using its Sabots more than the Assault Sunder. So I took off the Sabots (without adding more vents etc.), and the second Sunder still won 2/3 fights.  Although the real reason for its victory seemed to be higher flux reserves owing to less OP spent on Needlers and less flux spent on offense; this gave it just enough shield flux to withstand an autopulse barrage.  The Pulse Lasers were completely useless for the Assault Sunder.

      Note: The only Technology effect in play was +10% hull armor, which I judged to make no difference to the outcome of any of the fights.

      Point is, Graviton beams are support weapons. They are pure Gravy and highly defensive, letting you control fights with long range, high accuracy and great sustain.


      People complaining about beams not mention their main advantage - accuracy compared to ballistic weapons. Officers without ordnance 5 skill will miss most of ballistic shots even on slow targets but will hit well with beams.
      This is a good point. Graviton and Tachyon beams have suffered (relatively speaking) from the projectile speed and accuracy buffs given by Officers.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 08, 2016, 11:17:19 PM
      Enforcers have 80 shield cost -  so they only have 320 dissipation while their shield is up.  Also, their max flux usage is highly misleading owing to so much of it being tied up in its Assault Chainguns.

      Quote
      Or you could just fire your HEF-boosted Autopulse Laser, overload it in 3 seconds even if it doesn't fire, then punch right through its armor with two HEF-boosted Pulse Lances. Or do 600 Hard Flux DPS with the two Light Needlers you can put on the front ballistic mounts, then move in with the Autopulse. I really don't know why you chose a Sunder, it's probably the worst thing to mount Graviton Beams on. Its energy weapons benefit from being bursty to take full advantage of the HEF, and it has access to Light Needlers which have 800 range, do hard flux, and go in a small ballistic slot.
      Light Needlers are great, but there's a pretty significant range and accuracy difference between them and Graviton beams.  You also arn't prevented from using both of them at the same time so ?.

      I went ahead and scrimmaged an Assault Sunder (autopulse/pulse/sabot/needler) vs a similar Sunder with autopulse/graviton/sabot/vulcan. The second Sunder (on Autopilot) won 4/5 fights; though for some reason it was using its Sabots more than the Assault Sunder. So I took off the Sabots (without adding more vents etc.), and the second Sunder still won 2/3 fights.  Although the real reason for its victory seemed to be higher flux reserves owing to less OP spent on Needlers and less flux spent on offense; this gave it just enough shield flux to withstand an autopulse barrage.  The Pulse Lasers were completely useless for the Assault Sunder.

      Note: The only Technology effect in play was +10% hull armor, which I judged to make no difference to the outcome of any of the fights.

      Point is, Graviton beams are support weapons. They are pure Gravy and highly defensive, letting you control fights with long range, high accuracy and great sustain.
      I took that into account in my revised edit, which I made before you posted. I also calculated for only firing the Arbalests, and not firing at all.

      You're not prevented from using them at the same time, but Light Needlers cover your shield-stripping needs very well indeed. Graviton Beams are both redundant and still not very good, so you might as well use the slot for something else, preferably something that's good vs armor like Phase Lances.

      The default Assault Variant uses IR Pulse Lasers. Please tell me you actually swapped those out for medium-sized Pulse Lasers and didn't just use the default Assault Variant. Oh wait, you can't, the simulator doesn't let you. The AI also doesn't even bother moving in slightly closer to use Phase Lances if you give it some. The AI does not know how to fly or equip a Sunder. The Assault Sunder is particularly terrible; it has Sabots and Light Needlers, wasting its missile slots on more kinetic when what it really needs is some high explosive.

      Additionally, Sunders are not designed to be fighting other Sunders 1v1. That's not what they're for. They're glass cannons, strike craft designed to hit hard targets that are busy shooting at other stuff, and are countered by anything that's able to get on their flank and shoot them. Trying to measure a Sunders effectiveness by whether it's able to blow up a different Sunder 1v1 is missing the point of the ship.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: TaLaR on January 08, 2016, 11:50:16 PM
      Please tell me you actually swapped those out for medium-sized Pulse Lasers and didn't just use the default Assault Variant. Oh wait, you can't, the simulator doesn't let you.

      It is possible to modify ship list available in simulator, just add previously saved variant to sim_opponents.csv (cleaner approach would be doing it in a mod)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Wyvern on January 09, 2016, 01:03:56 AM
      Honestly, I've had good luck with a variety of Sunder builds - though almost all use some form of kinetic gun in the front small ballistic turrets.  HIL and 2x Pulse Laser works well - the HIL can take out fighters that'd otherwise be pesky, and helps force your opponents to keep shields up when you back off to vent.  Tachyon lance and 2x graviton beam works well; they may do soft flux to shields, but even cruisers can't shrug off that much damage, the lance rips through armor (and fighters), and the graviton beams keep the pressure up inbetween lance shots.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 09, 2016, 01:47:48 AM
      Honestly, I've had good luck with a variety of Sunder builds - though almost all use some form of kinetic gun in the front small ballistic turrets.  HIL and 2x Pulse Laser works well - the HIL can take out fighters that'd otherwise be pesky, and helps force your opponents to keep shields up when you back off to vent.  Tachyon lance and 2x graviton beam works well; they may do soft flux to shields, but even cruisers can't shrug off that much damage, the lance rips through armor (and fighters), and the graviton beams keep the pressure up inbetween lance shots.
      I just ran a test in-sim using my max-skill testing character. Without an officer in the Sunder, using only the Tachyon Lance and Graviton Beams, and attempting to activate HEF whenever a Tac Lance shot was about to fire, it took 64 seconds for a Tachyon Lance 2x Graviton Beam Sunder to force a Support Dominator to drop its shields. When using only Light Needlers, the same Sunder took 30 seconds to force the same Dominator to drop shields. When using only Dual Autocannons, it took 36 seconds to force the same Dominator to drop shields.

      It's mostly the ballistics.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 09, 2016, 06:27:02 AM
      There are three or four main uses of beams, if player kills fleet with one ship:
      • Missile defense
      • Anti-fighter/anti-shieldless
      • Forcing AI to keep shields up past 600 range (only need one beam for that)
      • Pile extra damage to armor/hull after 1000+ range ballistics do the work (for midline ships)

      Phase Lance (and Tachyon Lance) can be used for assault against anything provided the attacker has kinetics pounding shields for hard flux (or over-stacking eight beams in case of Paragon).

      Paragon can mount enough beams to overwhelm dissipation of an enemy ship, except an enemy Paragon with Fortress Shield.

      Quote
      All continuous beams are kind of lame ever since the flux damage bonus was removed.
      I doubt it; they were side-graded.  Cheaper OP cost (and longer range for some beams) means I can spend more OP on other stuff to enable my ship kill things and/or defend itself more efficiently.  Most beams are still weak, and some are still bad.  LR PD Laser is underpowered and/or overpriced, Burst PD has too few charges and is overpriced.  Heavy Burst PD is barely stronger than the light version.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on January 09, 2016, 03:29:58 PM
      Tac Lasers are my go-to filler weapon for small energy slots when I don't have anything particular I want to put in them. I like'em; the enemy AI doesn't know how to handle their long range very well.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Ranakastrasz on January 09, 2016, 03:46:55 PM
      Hmm, interesting. Odd how before people kept saying that beams were useless, which I disagreed with, and now, when I find them quite lackluster, and state as such, people now have a bunch of reasons why they don't suck.

      They are good if you are larger than your target, or if they lack shields. IF they have shields, you need at least one size class on them, ideally more, otherwise shields can shrug off most beams. If they have no shields, beams, due to perfect accuracy, tear through armor eventually, and no amount of good flying can do anything.

      ~
      This is why I am trying to make a mod that gives beams hard flux damage, and already made a global armor regeneration mod.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 09, 2016, 03:59:43 PM
      Just because beams are weak does not always mean they are useless, especially if there are no viable alternatives.  For example, if I mount HVDs and Mauler on an Eagle, what else can I use in its energy mounts?  Pulse lasers and blasters do not have enough range (plus Eagle cannot use blasters effectively unless built for it).  Tactical and graviton beams have matching range.  Yes, they are weak, but some damage is better than none if I kite-and-snipe at maximum range.

      Continuous beams that hit for hard flux is overpowered because the AI has no idea how to counter it.  AI will keep shields up until it overloads, every time.  Burst beams that can hit for hard flux should be okay because AI has a chance to recover between bursts.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Ranakastrasz on January 10, 2016, 12:40:00 PM
      Just because beams are weak does not always mean they are useless, especially if there are no viable alternatives.  For example, if I mount HVDs and Mauler on an Eagle, what else can I use in its energy mounts?  Pulse lasers and blasters do not have enough range (plus Eagle cannot use blasters effectively unless built for it).  Tactical and graviton beams have matching range.  Yes, they are weak, but some damage is better than none if I kite-and-snipe at maximum range.

      Continuous beams that hit for hard flux is overpowered because the AI has no idea how to counter it.  AI will keep shields up until it overloads, every time.  Burst beams that can hit for hard flux should be okay because AI has a chance to recover between bursts.

      If they are mostly only good if you don't have alternatives, then that might be a problem. Yes, those two weapons are at least OK due to range and accuracy, which generally isn't possible for most balistics.

      Oh god, You are really using AI as an argument for why hard flux beams are a bad idea? Does the AI do the same thing with, say, Autopulse laser, or... Something else which does a lot of damage really fast? I mean, if the AI having trouble is the problem, improve the AI.
      Its not like projectile weapons can't keep firing until the target overloads, or they drop their shield, the only difference is that slower projectile weapons are possible to dodge at max range and the damage is like a rapid-fire pulse beam instead of continuous.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Wyvern on January 10, 2016, 01:03:06 PM
      Oh god, You are really using AI as an argument for why hard flux beams are a bad idea?
      Unless you want to write your own AI, it's a pretty good reason.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 10, 2016, 01:20:16 PM
      If you have continuous beams do hard flux damage while keeping their range, they become hard counters to a lot of things. The issue is mainly qualitative, so tuning things like DPS or flux costs wouldn't be very effective. I.E. you'd have to tune their stats to be bad enough that a ship using them would run into peak performance problems; otherwise all it's doing is just making the kills slower but no less inevitable. To keep some kind of balance, you'd have to reduce beam range, which in turn would make them very similar to other energy weapons.

      As it is, their intended niche is as a support weapon, whether as extras on a single ship, or on a dedicated support ship. They're not intended to function as primary weapons for combat between evenly-matched ships. That they don't largely work in this role is a sign they're working as intended. On the other hand, they *do* work well in conjunction with other weapons.


      (It's not so much an AI issue, I think - not that the AI couldn't respond to this sort of pressure marginally more effectively, but a lot of situations come up where there aren't *any* good options to counter hard-flux beams. Unless their range was lowered, but then, it's back to them being basically more of the same.)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Ranakastrasz on January 10, 2016, 02:30:53 PM
      Main issue with beams is that they are massively effective vs unshielded ships. This is, as you said, mainly because of the range bonus, but it makes playing anything without shields a horrid idea. Even a graviton beam can... Wear down armor unless you hit the Combat readiness threshhold.

      I suppose its more that they... Are extremely polarized. In the old mod Vacuum, due to the way the hull mod system was setup, it was really common to have weapons destroy an enemy ship in a single shot unless that ship had massive durability stuff (and destroy the hull with a second shot) or else be entirely invulnerable unless you used excessively heavy weapons.

      Here, beam weapons are not quite that bad, but they are exactly as bad as you claim hard flux beams would be vs shields already, Vs Armor. Armor doesn't regenerate, and hence unless you backup armor with shields, or else the armor is very high quality (meaning cruiser or heavier) then even light beams are a massive threat.

      Vs shields, the polerization is when you deal more soft flux than dissipation,which causes you to suddenly go from zero damage to massive damage. That kind of thing is not really seen in other weapons. Other weapons, hard flux builds up, eventually breaking the shield. Beams, its no apperent damage until its massive damage, which I think is a problem.

      Not really sure how to explain my thoughts on the situation. Still wish I could get the beam hard flux script to work...


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 10, 2016, 02:35:16 PM
      Quote
      Oh god, You are really using AI as an argument for why hard flux beams are a bad idea? Does the AI do the same thing with, say, Autopulse laser, or... Something else which does a lot of damage really fast? I mean, if the AI having trouble is the problem, improve the AI.
      Unless Alex spends time to improve AI, the AI we have is what we are stuck with.

      AI does better against rapid-fire shots; it will lower shields instead of allowing itself to get overloaded.  As someone who has not read Starsector's code aside from snippets posted here and there, the AI... just... knows.

      Another attack form that can be overpowered against AI despite appearing balanced on paper is shots that hit for unusually high damage to shields.  When AI gets high on flux, it dissipates a little flux, but otherwise tends to maintain flux at an acceptably high level if forced to keep shields up.  Shots that hit for big damage will exploit this and overload the AI.  This is why Antimatter Blaster costs more to mount than IR Pulse Laser despite the former having inferior DPS and range to the latter on paper - and limited ammo.  This is a hidden benefit of the Target Analysis 10 perk (that does +25% damage to shields); you can overload ships more easily with that perk.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Ranakastrasz on January 10, 2016, 02:38:11 PM
      Quote
      Oh god, You are really using AI as an argument for why hard flux beams are a bad idea? Does the AI do the same thing with, say, Autopulse laser, or... Something else which does a lot of damage really fast? I mean, if the AI having trouble is the problem, improve the AI.
      Unless Alex spends time to improve AI, the AI we have is what we are stuck with.

      AI does better against rapid-fire shots; it will lower shields instead of allowing itself to get overloaded.  As someone who has not read Starsector's code aside from snippets posted here and there, the AI... just... knows.

      Another attack form that can be overpowered against AI despite appearing balanced on paper is shots that hit for unusually high damage to shields.  When AI gets high on flux, it dissipates a little flux, but otherwise tends to maintain flux at an acceptably high level if forced to keep shields up.  Shots that hit for big damage will exploit this and overload the AI.  This is why Antimatter Blaster costs more to mount than IR Pulse Laser despite the former having inferior DPS and range to the latter on paper - and limited ammo.  This is a hidden benefit of the Target Analysis 10 perk (that does +25% damage to shields); you can overload ships more easily with that perk.
      The AI doesn't seem to treat high alpha weapons as a threat requiring them to maintain lower flux, true. I would say that in part, absorbing attacks like that even if it causes an overload might be a good idea, since that level of damage is easily able to tear through armor and deal critical damage.  It is still situational, but A frigate should always try to take a reaper on it's shield if it can't dodge, rather than drop the shield and explode.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 10, 2016, 02:46:39 PM
      Another thing that was overpowered for a while was shield ramming by the Monitor.  AI had no idea how to counter it, and it kept shields up to the point of overload (just like continuous beams that hit for hard flux).  Before, ramming did enough damage that cruisers and capitals died quickly.  The only ship class that could counter the Monitor was a destroyer because it was light enough that shield ramming was not damaging enough, and it had enough toughness that it took over a minute to kill with IR pulse lasers.

      The last time I tried shield ramming, capitals did not take as much damage as they used to.  You can still shield ram big ships to death, but it is not as damaging, takes longer, and you may not win the flux war before Monitor needs to back off and vent.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 10, 2016, 09:39:08 PM
      Main issue with beams is that they are massively effective vs unshielded ships. This is, as you said, mainly because of the range bonus, but it makes playing anything without shields a horrid idea. Even a graviton beam can... Wear down armor unless you hit the Combat readiness threshhold.

      ...

      Here, beam weapons are not quite that bad, but they are exactly as bad as you claim hard flux beams would be vs shields already, Vs Armor. Armor doesn't regenerate, and hence unless you backup armor with shields, or else the armor is very high quality (meaning cruiser or heavier) then even light beams are a massive threat.

      Well, yeah - lots of things make flying an unshielded ship a dangerous proposition; beams are hardly unique in that. EMP damage is essentially a hard counter, for example. There's a reason they're the exception and not the rule! If someone is making a shieldless combat ship without accounting for beams (and without intending for beams to counter that ship), that's an issue with the ship design. What you're talking about re: regenerating armor sounds like a possible way to address that, though I'd imagine that'd be tough to balance so that it's effective vs beams but not over-effective vs everything else.

      And, right, that's very much what things would be like across the board if beams did hard flux damage. Which makes it a bad thing, no? I'm not saying it couldn't work somehow, but it'd require a pretty major redesign.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: superhotdogzz on January 11, 2016, 01:48:49 AM
      Main issue with beams is that they are massively effective vs unshielded ships. This is, as you said, mainly because of the range bonus, but it makes playing anything without shields a horrid idea. Even a graviton beam can... Wear down armor unless you hit the Combat readiness threshhold.
      .
      .
      .
      Vs shields, the polerization is when you deal more soft flux than dissipation,which causes you to suddenly go from zero damage to massive damage. That kind of thing is not really seen in other weapons. Other weapons, hard flux builds up, eventually breaking the shield. Beams, its no apperent damage until its massive damage, which I think is a problem.

      Not really sure how to explain my thoughts on the situation. Still wish I could get the beam hard flux script to work...

      I think this is exactly how beam weapon is being used.
      When their shield is up;
      Your beam either is thick enough to overcome their soft flux dissipation or don't bother to kill them with it at all(unless you are using it to build up their flux or harassing them).

      Other time, it is geared up to murder those who do not have a shield(Hound). It is just non-sense throwing a Hound at Wolf's tactical laser  embrace.

      It is an excellent choice to deal with rag tag pirate ship whose flux dissipation capability is universally bad or has no shield at all.  


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on January 11, 2016, 11:08:36 AM
      Any chance of bringing back multi ship boarding, if only for mods?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Ranakastrasz on January 11, 2016, 01:28:42 PM

      Well, yeah - lots of things make flying an unshielded ship a dangerous proposition; beams are hardly unique in that. EMP damage is essentially a hard counter, for example. There's a reason they're the exception and not the rule! If someone is making a shieldless combat ship without accounting for beams (and without intending for beams to counter that ship), that's an issue with the ship design. What you're talking about re: regenerating armor sounds like a possible way to address that, though I'd imagine that'd be tough to balance so that it's effective vs beams but not over-effective vs everything else.

      And, right, that's very much what things would be like across the board if beams did hard flux damage. Which makes it a bad thing, no? I'm not saying it couldn't work somehow, but it'd require a pretty major redesign.
      Hmm. So none of the vanilla game ships without shields/phaseshifting are intended for combat? There are quite a few of them at low level, although admittely at high level not so much. EMP is more of a hard counter, but unless its, heh, a beam, you can still outrange and/or dodge it.
      As for regeneration, I found that out when trying to make my mod for regen. I pretty much made it really small and not scale up with size or armor level at all, which actually seemed to work.

      I suppose what I really want is to be able to turn beam hard flux on as an option, global or script, so that I and others can actually know that it would really be a problem. The partial mod showed that 20% hard flux had interesting effects on most combat, but hull mods, skill levels, abilities, and multibeams all failed to work as intended.



      I think this is exactly how beam weapon is being used.
      When their shield is up;
      Your beam either is thick enough to overcome their soft flux dissipation or don't bother to kill them with it at all(unless you are using it to build up their flux or harassing them).

      Other time, it is geared up to murder those who do not have a shield(Hound). It is just non-sense throwing a Hound at Wolf's tactical laser  embrace.

      It is an excellent choice to deal with rag tag pirate ship whose flux dissipation capability is universally bad or has no shield at all. 
      Yes, it is. That is how it is currently. It used to be that good flying could allow you to use unshielded ships vs beam ships since you could outrange them (albiet it being hard to get enough hits in) I understand why that was changed.
      The point I was trying to make, aside from beam damage not scaling with firepower, either being all or nothing, was that you can get the same exact effect with rapid-fire ballistic weapons, and they DO deal hard flux.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 11, 2016, 02:15:44 PM
      Hmm. So none of the vanilla game ships without shields/phaseshifting are intended for combat? There are quite a few of them at low level, although admittely at high level not so much.

      We've got what, Hound, Cerberus, and Buffalo Mk.II - all pretty clearly not intended to be great for a primary-combat role. Doesn't mean they have no uses, but the beam/EMP vulnerabilities are major weaknesses that need to be accounted for.


      The point I was trying to make, aside from beam damage not scaling with firepower, either being all or nothing, was that you can get the same exact effect with rapid-fire ballistic weapons, and they DO deal hard flux.

      The thing to consider here is what kinds of ships generally carry which kinds of weapons. Beam weapons are mostly mounted on high-tech ships, which are more mobile. E.G. an Enforcer with HVDs has the ability to deal hard flux at range, sure, but it's not going to be the same kind of uncounterable it would be if the Medusa could do it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on January 11, 2016, 02:24:57 PM
      New patch notes... please. *gasp*


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 11, 2016, 03:08:39 PM
      The point I was trying to make, aside from beam damage not scaling with firepower, either being all or nothing, was that you can get the same exact effect with rapid-fire ballistic weapons, and they DO deal hard flux.

      The thing to consider here is what kinds of ships generally carry which kinds of weapons. Beam weapons are mostly mounted on high-tech ships, which are more mobile. E.G. an Enforcer with HVDs has the ability to deal hard flux at range, sure, but it's not going to be the same kind of uncounterable it would be if the Medusa could do it.
      The Medusa can mount Light Needlers, which have only 200 less range than most beams and are only slightly worse than Heavy Needlers. Integrated Targeting Unit and Gunnery Implants 5 pushes that well over 1000 range. The Medusa totally can do it.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 11, 2016, 03:21:57 PM
      The Medusa can mount Light Needlers, which have only 200 less range than beams and are only slightly worse than Heavy Needlers. Integrated Targeting Unit and Gunnery Implants 5 pushes that well over 1000 range. The Medusa totally can do it.

      Light Needlers are a special case - their per-shot damage, combined with the kinetic damage type, is why it's ok for them to have such long range for a small slot. It's not practical to grind down something with Light Needlers from range because their armor damage is too low. It can combine nicely with beams in the other slots, though. But, well, this sort of thing is exactly why universal slots are used sparingly. Small universal slots on the Medusa? Neat and powerful, but not unreasonable. Medium universals on it, on the other hand, would be way overpowered.

      (I'm not just coming up with these reasons now, btw. It's all stuff that was considered at the time the ships/weapons were put together.)

      (There's still an argument to be made for the Medusa's universals being changed to something else, though.)

      New patch notes... please. *gasp*

      Soon! (tm)


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 11, 2016, 04:03:08 PM
      Quote
      The Medusa can mount Light Needlers, which have only 200 less range than most beams and are only slightly worse than Heavy Needlers. Integrated Targeting Unit and Gunnery Implants 5 pushes that well over 1000 range. The Medusa totally can do it.
      Light Needlers are rare.  That said, Medusa (and Shade) are prime candidates for Needlers because they use them well and there is no substitute.  I mount Arbalests instead of Railguns or Needlers on Hammerhead/Falcon/Eagle because Arbalest is common as dirt but high-grade kinetics are rare and are needed by ships with smaller mounts.

      I often use railguns instead of needlers on Medusa because OP is tight if I mount blasters.  Light Needlers are expensive; it is effectively a medium weapon crammed into a small slot.

      Quote
      Light Needlers are a special case - their per-shot damage, combined with the kinetic damage type, is why it's ok for them to have such long range for a small slot. It's not practical to grind down something with Light Needlers from range because their armor damage is too low.
      Before 0.6, Afflictor with four Needlers could kite and shred anything to death with them, despite armor resistance (because the armor eventually broke down and hull gets hit).  Some time later, armor was made more effective.  With Target Analysis 10, Afflictor can shred things with Needlers like it used to.

      That said, I do not get Target Analysis (and do not let my officers learn it) because I cannot afford to max every skill.  I do not need to spend ten points just to enable a few fringe configurations.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 11, 2016, 06:16:40 PM
      The Medusa can mount Light Needlers, which have only 200 less range than beams and are only slightly worse than Heavy Needlers. Integrated Targeting Unit and Gunnery Implants 5 pushes that well over 1000 range. The Medusa totally can do it.

      Light Needlers are a special case - their per-shot damage, combined with the kinetic damage type, is why it's ok for them to have such long range for a small slot. It's not practical to grind down something with Light Needlers from range because their armor damage is too low. It can combine nicely with beams in the other slots, though. But, well, this sort of thing is exactly why universal slots are used sparingly. Small universal slots on the Medusa? Neat and powerful, but not unreasonable. Medium universals on it, on the other hand, would be way overpowered.

      (I'm not just coming up with these reasons now, btw. It's all stuff that was considered at the time the ships/weapons were put together.)

      (There's still an argument to be made for the Medusa's universals being changed to something else, though.)
      I'm glad to hear that this has all been thought out beforehand. While I might disagree with some decisions you've made, hearing the reasons behind those decisions has helped me better understand why things work the way they do and helped me to see the shape of the system you're designing. Thanks for taking part in this discussion, it's nice to be able to directly talk about balance with game devs.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zelnik on January 11, 2016, 11:15:43 PM
      Still waiting on my torpedo bombers :<


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Dri on January 12, 2016, 09:16:33 AM
      Whatever do you mean? Dagger Torpedo Bomber Wings are great!

      Tridents aren't going to be worth much unless: player/officer skills somehow effect fighter wings, fighter wings can no longer be hit by nonPD weapons and/or Atropos torpedoes are buffed.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: xenoargh on January 12, 2016, 11:49:32 AM
      Quote
      If you have continuous beams do hard flux damage while keeping their range, they become hard counters to a lot of things. The issue is mainly qualitative, so tuning things like DPS or flux costs wouldn't be very effective. I.E. you'd have to tune their stats to be bad enough that a ship using them would run into peak performance problems; otherwise all it's doing is just making the kills slower but no less inevitable. To keep some kind of balance, you'd have to reduce beam range, which in turn would make them very similar to other energy weapons.
      ...which is why, when I made that work in Vacuum, Beams had the lowest range band or had a very long recharge time; that kept them nice and balanced in their niche; good in their prime roles (PD / anti-fighter) good for close assaults and DPS trading... but bad for kiting, where they're a real problem.

      As it stands, Beams are potentially the most OP things in the game atm; a swarm of Beam-carrying ships can concentrate enough firepower to kill anything whilst kiting everything but the highest-range Large-slot weapons, which is bad.  I've watched that happen with packs of Hegemony Wolves that spawned near Pirate Eagles; they crushed it easily.  I haven't built a Wolf pack designed for that task myself this build, as I've been trying out everything else, but it's obvious that once the threshold has been reached, Beams are optimal killing devices.  Pretty sure Wolf packs with 3 Tac Lasers, 1 PD in the center turret and all else built around range and survival are pretty powerful though.

      The only thing that prevents this from being a major problem is largely the lack of enough High Tech ships with configurations that aren't terrible.  If High Tech's Cruiser wasn't basically junk, if the Medusa wasn't more optimized as an alpha-strike machine, etc., this discussion would be quite different in nature, because the obvious issues with Beams having superior range to practically everything that matters would be more apparent.  I'm still not entirely happy with this uncomfortable set of squirrel-cases; it means that High Tech will always need to be weirdly crippled to stay sane, rather than having flexible options.

      I totally agree with Megas on LRPD / Burst PD / Heavy Burst PD, in terms of their current balance; there literally aren't good reasons to use any of them atm. 

      LRPD simply needs to rotate quickly enough to engage nearly instantly and have slightly higher DPS, so that its inefficiency isn't quite so crippling and its cost is justified.

      Burst PD should get a buff to DPS or quite a few more charges or a faster charge rate when it hasn't been firing for X period, so that it's more like what it says on the tin.

      Heavy Burst PD should get a 200 SU range buff and a bit more DPS, so that it has a distinct role from the lighter version, because it can hit things further out and be a better PD system in general.  Right now it's largely a waste of OPs and because of the dearth of ships that can even mount it, it's not terribly relevant.

      That leaves out the Beam nobody really uses, the Guardian, which is one of the most awesome-looking disappointments in the game, because it's sub-optimal for any of its purposes.  I'd just drop the charges mechanic from it; then it would be useful in its role... if any High Tech ship was willing to give up a Large slot to a weak-DPS turret that doesn't do Hard Flux or if any Midline ships had Hybrid Large slots. 

      As things stand, I can't imagine a real role for it that is sensible in a serious game; the one-ship-fleet Paragon model pretty much requires the Large slots be used for DPS, and the Odyssey (which I have yet to encounter / buy in my current game) doesn't have good enough turret locations to make it work.  Neither the Apogee nor the Aurora can mount one, so it's a weapon that literally doesn't have a sensible use case atm.

      The best way to see it get used would be to fix up the Odyssey's turrets so that they're sensible, with the middle turret having a 360 and the others having appropriate dead spots to reflect that it's "higher", since that's the general idea behind the turret designs; that alone would probably make the Odyssey more viable in general and at least present one case where the Guardian might have an actual use, since that's a ship designed for broadside combat.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 12, 2016, 12:55:28 PM
      @xenoargh:
      I get what you're saying, and it seems like a reasonable way to go about doing beams. It does give up on the idea of "support" beams more or less, though.

      In practice, the main thing that'd make stacking beams overpowered like that is Advanced Optics. Without that, beam range is matched by medium ballistics. AO should probably have a ship speed debuff, honestly - maybe of the "speed above <cutoff> reduced by <x>" variety. With a severe enough debuff, it could have a higher bonus, too, which might make it more interesting all around.

      I've got some TODO items re: energy PD. Going to take a look at the Odyssey to see if a 360 slot works visually; the Guardian's problem is definitely a lack of ships that can use it well rather than a lack of effectiveness. It's not bad already, it's just... a large slot for PD? No thank you.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 12, 2016, 01:03:15 PM
      The only reason to use Burst PD is if the ship only has one or two mounts for coverage, such as Afflictor, and cannot use Vulcan Cannon instead.  In that case, only a charged burst PD has enough stopping power to kill a missile.  All other PD beam weapons are weak enough for a single beam to be ignored by an incoming missile.  If the ship has enough mounts, it should use either PD Laser for low OP and/or flux cost or Tactical Lasers instead.  For ships with high Gunnery Implants, IR Pulse Laser plus IPDAI is even better PD than beams, if it has flux to spare.

      It is possible for Odyssey to rely on IR Pulse Laser and missiles for DPS, and use Guardian for PD.  It is not the best configuration, but it is viable, and I have used it a few times (during 0.65) when my other ships took the best heavy weapons, leaving my Odyssey with the Guardian PD.  Guardian PD has enough DPS to serve as an improvised assault weapon if you get an opening.

      Paragon can make good use of Guardian PD if you want to build for defense, or would if Guardian PD was not such a flux hog.  I tried that after seeing how successful the seven dual flak Onslaught performed.  Unlike over-flak for Onslaught, over beam PD for Paragon was not as useful due to Guardian PD being a pig.

      The thing that gets me about LR PD Laser is I pay more OP for less damage, and it is weak enough that I might as well use Mining Laser instead!  Mining Laser is weak, but at least you get what you pay for, and it is passable for stopping Swarmers and 0.7's flimsier Pilums.  I have more to say about various weapons, but I will leave that for another topic.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Mudanzas Valencia on January 12, 2016, 02:03:44 PM
      i think beams are great and work really well, it's solar armor that sucks lol

      ALEX GIVE MULTI-BOARDING MOD OPTION FOR SS+ plzzzz


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 12, 2016, 02:12:09 PM
      ALEX GIVE MULTI-BOARDING MOD OPTION FOR SS+ plzzzz

      Mods can do whatever they want, boarding-wise.


      @Megas: Thanks for the feedback!


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Zaphide on January 12, 2016, 03:20:55 PM
      Regarding LRPD, it could probably be removed from the game and not really be missed.

      It's not fundamentally different enough from the normal PD laser, and changing it (and keeping it's design intent as a longer range point defense laser) is constrained a bit by the fact that you don't want to encroach on the normal PD Laser and Burst PD Laser.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 12, 2016, 03:27:42 PM
      Just give Mining Laser more damage and slightly faster turning and remove LR PD Laser from the game.  The two are too similar.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ChaseBears on January 12, 2016, 03:43:04 PM
      re: EMP versus unshielded ships;

      Maybe it's just me, but the entire early game of fighting pirates is fight after fight against Wolf (D)s with Ion Cannons.  IME they show up more often than the other pirate frigates (for whatever reason- fleet point efficient?) and - if the Annihilators weren't enough - are completely deadly to anything with no shields between the ion cannon and the phase jump to get them out of trouble.  I modded in a couple Wolf-D variants that use different mixes of black market weapons to change it up a bit.

      Incidentally, personal opinion, but if Pirates are to ease people into combat, maybe the Wolf (D)s could have a degraded phase system too.



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Taverius on January 12, 2016, 04:11:18 PM
      Alex, any chance of a settings toggle to stop the AI changing my autofire settings on weapon groups?

      I spend more time finding the arcane weapon combination that stops the AI from (for example) putting Hellbores on autofire than anything else ... I'm pretty sure I can figure these things out better than the AI, and having to work around the mystery behind the decisions gets a bit dull. For every ship I have several set-ups I know work except for the AI autofire overrides breaking them.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 12, 2016, 04:53:21 PM
      Honestly, I don't see doing that. Autofire state isn't meant to be static; it's something that you end up toggling on and off a fair bit during combat. The type of toggle you're asking for would be a bandaid and, I'm pretty sure, would cause other problems. If you have specific examples of where the AI should do a better job with this, though, I'd love to hear 'em - but perhaps not in this thread.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 12, 2016, 05:47:23 PM
      I forgot to mention I did most of my Guardian PD testing in 0.65, when other heavy weapons were weaker.  For a Paragon that wants more PD than nine Tactical/Burst PD lasers, two dual flak cannons will give area PD and high finisher DPS in one.  I just tried Guardian PD on a Paragon, and it was unnecessary.  Autopulse simply gives more bang for your OP buck if you already have PD covered (which two dual flak and nine small beam PD should).

      Currently, Guardian PD is for the Odyssey that does not have access to enough weapons, yet has three Guardian PD laying around (which happened to me during 0.65).

      What would be fun and neat for Guardian PD to do and compete with dual flak is to have the five or so beams that are part of the weapon system multi-target and zap multiple targets simultaneously.  As long as flak remains the only PD that can blast multiple shots, it will remain the PD king in the game, beating even Guardian PD.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Adraius on January 12, 2016, 11:03:33 PM
      Honestly, I don't see doing that. Autofire state isn't meant to be static; it's something that you end up toggling on and off a fair bit during combat.

      Uh, whoa.  That's not at all how I use autofire, nor how I see the AI using it. (except when it turns everything off, reducing its DPS to nothing and disabling its PD) I've actually been holding off making a big "the AI badly misuses weapon groups and autofire" post for awhile now, as once I start typing it up a fair bit of rage is gonna leak out. =P Maybe I'll start on that tomorrow.

      But seriously, you play toggling auto-fire on and off in battle?


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Network Pesci on January 13, 2016, 04:00:23 AM
      In the early game, I try to fit my starter Heavy Blaster Wolf out with 2x Tac Lasers in the side mounts, an Ion Cannon in the front small energy mount, and Reapers in the missile mounts.  The Tac Lasers are in weapon group 4 and stay on autofire all the time.  The Ion Cannon is in group 3 on its own because it varies wildly in usefulness, depending on whether I'm facing pirate Kites and Wolf(D)s or Hounds, Cerberuses, and fighters.  Against shielded craft, I hit Ctrl-3 to turn autofire off for my Ion Cannons but leave my Tac Lasers on.  So at the very least I'm changing my autofire settings every time I go from targeting one ship to another, multiple times per minute unless I happen to get a pirate fleet that's all one kind of ship.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on January 13, 2016, 04:37:15 AM
      Honestly, I don't see doing that. Autofire state isn't meant to be static; it's something that you end up toggling on and off a fair bit during combat.

      Uh, whoa.  That's not at all how I use autofire, nor how I see the AI using it. (except when it turns everything off, reducing its DPS to nothing and disabling its PD) I've actually been holding off making a big "the AI badly misuses weapon groups and autofire" post for awhile now, as once I start typing it up a fair bit of rage is gonna leak out. =P Maybe I'll start on that tomorrow.

      But seriously, you play toggling auto-fire on and off in battle?
      With some ships and weapons, yes. E.g. I've got 4 Swarmer SRMs on my Paragon that I toggle autofire depending on whether there's a bunch of frigates or fighters near me. I don't want to waste them on destroyers or cruisers, but I don't want to have to switch from the main guns every few seconds to hit the fire button when I'm surrounded by frigates. So I just turn autofire on when they're useful, and turn it off when they're not. Or with the Vindicator, a SS+ added ship, I turn the autofire guns off when I need to start spamming Fast Missile Racks so I don't flux-cap myself.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Alex on January 13, 2016, 10:08:49 AM
      But seriously, you play toggling auto-fire on and off in battle?

      Mostly I manage it using "hold fire". But (especially from the AI's point of view, where control convenience isn't a factor) that amounts to the same thing.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Tartiflette on January 13, 2016, 12:23:22 PM
      But seriously, you play toggling auto-fire on and off in battle?
      Yes, I play like that all the time too.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Taverius on January 13, 2016, 03:12:25 PM
      With some ships and weapons, yes. E.g. I've got 4 Swarmer SRMs on my Paragon that I toggle autofire depending on whether there's a bunch of frigates or fighters near me. I don't want to waste them on destroyers or cruisers, but I don't want to have to switch from the main guns every few seconds to hit the fire button when I'm surrounded by frigates. So I just turn autofire on when they're useful, and turn it off when they're not. Or with the Vindicator, a SS+ added ship, I turn the autofire guns off when I need to start spamming Fast Missile Racks so I don't flux-cap myself.
      That's another issue for an AI thread, I guess - a missile marked anti-fighter with limited ammo shouldn't be shot at anything larger than a frigate really ...


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 13, 2016, 03:26:40 PM
      Quote
      That's another issue for an AI thread, I guess - a missile marked anti-fighter with limited ammo shouldn't be shot at anything larger than a frigate really ...
      Swarmers backed by max Missile Specialization can hurt glass cannon destroyers (i.e., Sunder and Medusa).

      I can agree with the general idea provided small enemy ships are left.  If only big ships are left, unload the Swarmers anyway.  When I used to use frigate swarms, I had more than twenty frigates (Wolves and Lashers) fire Swarmers at cruisers (usually Eagle or Dominator).  Death by a thousand cuts, or at least half hull.

      I would like to see fighters' unlimited dual Swarmer as an (more expensive) alternative to the limited quad Swarmers other ships use.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ahrenjb on January 15, 2016, 09:22:07 AM
      Now that I've had some time to really dig into and play 0.7.1a, I feel like I'm ready to provide some feedback. Honestly, I don't have a whole lot. It comes down to feeling like everything is just a little "better". Quality of life improvements across the board, better balance, and the beginnings of a game universe that feels "alive". It's getting there. All the new features just serve to help fill out the world, and I think Alex's artistic vision (though I'm sure it has evolved much since he started this project) seems like it's coming together now.

      AI officers make fleet ships much more useful, and there is less incentive now than there was before in my opinion to just optimize a flagship and do all the heavy lifting yourself. It's now pretty rewarding to get an actual coordinated fleet in. You can train officers for various roles or to pilot certain archetypes of ships effectively, and that's a great mechanic. The mission and communication board present now at ports seems like a pretty good implementation of something the game was going to need at some point, and it's perfectly effective. Very similar to  the way it's handled in the "X" series. The modding community is already doing a great job with it too (notably SS+ unique bounties), and that's a good sign of what the vanilla game will have to offer. I would, however, like to see a feature on the campaign layer that allows me to target and hail fleets that I'm not actually "touching". The new graphic features (coronas, fleet trails, etc) are all excellent.

      New hyperspace terrain adds a little bit of old world "high seas navigation" appeal to traveling between systems, and I think it's a good start. I'd like to see hyperspace storms have some minor visual indication that they're about to start, but that might just be my laziness talking. A little more variety in terrain and I think its there.

      Criticisms / complaints are minor. Notably, with some of the changes to missile weapons, it's a little hard to tell now which ones are "endless" and which are ammo limited from the stats. You've got weapons like the Salamander which do not utilize an ammo "magazine", they work more like a regular ballistic weapon, and there is no "Reloaded / minute" stat, just the regular RoF stat "4.8 shots / minute" or what have you. On the other hand, you have missile weapons that have the "Reloaded / minute" stat, giving an indication of sustained fire. I recognize that's down to the distinction of whether a weapon has a magazine or not, but I've been playing the game long enough that I have a pretty good idea what weapons perform in what ways. To a newer player it may not be extremely clear what's what.

      The only other thing that I feel still needs some attention is the intel screen. Particularly the map, but I recognize this is a known issue. Additionally, I have a "feeling" that there is a better way to handle filters for the log screen, though I don't have any useful suggestions on how so that's not terribly useful.

      This was all pretty much stream of consciousness, so pardon any rambling. I'm sure I forgot some things, but I'll update as I continue to play.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Serenitis on January 17, 2016, 06:36:05 AM
      New hyperspace terrain adds a little bit of old world "high seas navigation" appeal to traveling between systems, and I think it's a good start. I'd like to see hyperspace storms have some minor visual indication that they're about to start, but that might just be my laziness talking.
      They flash briefly before starting. Although it seems pretty sketchy as to how briefly, as I frequently get caught in storms which are still in thier "warning" state and get hit for -50 (or more) maint. for not avoiding something that shouldn't even be there yet.
      Storms really need a bit of attention. As it stands they are too easy to get stuck in, and far far too harsh when you do end up in one.

      Fun fact: I have never toggled autofire on a weapon in battle, or even cared about it at all. :P


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Megas on January 17, 2016, 07:05:05 AM
      There were times when I get stuck in storms just by being near or grazing them with my circle.  Collision detection with storms is very unforgiving.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ChaseBears on January 17, 2016, 05:23:37 PM
      IMO: I like that storms are tough to reliably evade when traveling in Deep Hyperspace. This gives players the choice of taking the safe route or the faster but more dangerous deep route.




      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: JohnDoe on January 17, 2016, 07:48:34 PM
      They are fairly predictable; just watch the color. Brighter = about to erupt.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ChaseBears on January 17, 2016, 11:31:44 PM
      'Better warning time on storms' might make a good player skill~



      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: TJJ on January 18, 2016, 03:06:02 AM
      They are fairly predictable; just watch the color. Brighter = about to erupt.

      The boundaries are fuzzy, the effect is binary; that's where the problem arises.

      If the effect was gradated, there wouldn't be an issue.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: Schwartz on January 18, 2016, 05:06:03 AM
      This is mostly something the player learns while playing the game. You end up being trapped in storms much less often, but for a newbie the speed reduction coupled with the 'black hole of supplies' make these brutal.

      Suggestion:

      Nerf hyperspace storms to 1/2 of their current speed penalty. Rework navigation skill so that at level 10, *all* terrain penalties are reduced to (or much closer to) 0.


      Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
      Post by: ahrenjb on January 19, 2016, 10:51:20 AM
      They are fairly predictable; just watch the color. Brighter = about to erupt.

      I can't believe I didn't notice that myself. This is actually exactly the kind of indicator I was talking about, I just looked it over somehow. Thanks!