Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => Announcements => Topic started by: Alex on February 01, 2016, 01:26:07 PM

Title: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2016, 01:26:07 PM
Blog post/download links here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2016/02/26/starsector-0-7-2a-release/).

Changes as of March 03, 2016 (hotfix, -RC3)

Bugfixing:


Changes as of March 01, 2016 (hotfix, -RC2)

Bugfixing/other


Changes as of February 26, 2016

Campaign

Combat

Modding

Bugfixing



Changes as of February 22, 2016

Campaign:

Miscellaneous

Hull mods

Combat

Modding

Bugfixing



Changes as of February 01, 2016

Campaign

Ships and weapons

Combat

Modding

Bugfixing
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: JohnDoe on February 01, 2016, 01:27:38 PM
My body is ready.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cik on February 01, 2016, 01:39:22 PM
looks pretty good, but i don't see any fighter changes! surely you want to help the poor, starving fighters, don't you?

don't make me bring out the puppy dog eyes. i will, you know.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2016, 01:42:46 PM
looks pretty good, but i don't see any fighter changes! surely you want to help the poor, starving fighters, don't you?

Been thinking about it, but don't think I'll be able to squeeze it in, unfortunately. Just too many other things still left to do.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on February 01, 2016, 01:47:32 PM
  • Added view panning, right-click to toggle

Is this referring to the Intel map?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 01, 2016, 01:47:48 PM
Nice changes all around, especially the AI stuff. Interesting.

Quote
Added Centurion-class frigate (system: Damper Field)

Is this the midline combat frigate I've been craving since 2012?

Quote
Conservation efforts have been successful and a small number of Buffalo Mk.II's have been spotted in the wild

(http://i.imgur.com/08Kdcvt.gif)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cik on February 01, 2016, 01:50:20 PM
looks pretty good, but i don't see any fighter changes! surely you want to help the poor, starving fighters, don't you?

Been thinking about it, but don't think I'll be able to squeeze it in, unfortunately. Just too many other things still left to do.

as long as it's in the pipe somewhere. recent additions, while pretty cool crowded them out of the battlefield IMO.

without specifically quoting out half of your OP, pretty much every change looks excellent. i especially like the changes to supply-based malfunctions, which will make far more sense now. top notch stuff.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 01, 2016, 01:52:34 PM
The removal of fighter 0 flux boost and then the addition of Officers were the two nails in the Fighter coffin imo. Simply reverting the flux boost change or globally boosting fighter speed would go a long way towards making them better again.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 01, 2016, 01:53:10 PM
Quote
Improved behavior for detecting when it's safe to lower shields; analyzes statistics/trends to see if current behavior is working

Is it.. is it learning? Is it aware?

I can't wait to see these AI changes in action.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Nanao-kun on February 01, 2016, 01:53:55 PM
Hell yes.

Quote
Improved behavior for detecting when it's safe to lower shields; analyzes statistics/trends to see if current behavior is working

Is it.. is it learning? Is it aware?

I can't wait to see these AI changes in action.

Alex has doomed us all!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on February 01, 2016, 02:06:17 PM
I expect fighter fixes will come with the eventual skill revamp - it was skills (and especially officers with skills) that pushed them towards irrelevance.  In the meantime, some mods (SS+, for example) do add some skills that boost fighters.
Or, for quick fixes to a small subset of the fighter problems: maybe fighters shouldn't count towards that 25 ship limit?  Or maybe AI fleets should actually respect said limit?  One or the other should make a difference here.

Brawler: Unless the "Damper Field" significantly improves flux stats somehow, this looks like a pretty severe nerf to an already rather niche vessel.  I guess we'll see how it plays out, though, given that I don't actually know what that ship system does.

HEF changes are interesting; makes it merge pretty well with burst damage weapons like the plasma cannon.  Now if only I could actually make a good plasma cannon Sunder again... the (relatively) recent flux cost increase made that pretty much a non-starter, though; you need SO and a lot of vents to have the dissipation - and then you find that firing the thing fills up 2/3 of your flux bar and any incoming damage locks you out of using your main gun.

Tachyon Lance changes are also interesting; I was one of the people who thought its current state worked pretty well, so I'm looking forward to seeing what I can do with a buffed version.  (Specifically, it's great on a Sunder in the early game, when you're mostly going up against pirate ships that can't just laugh off the soft flux.)

You listed weapon slot covers twice.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2016, 02:10:13 PM
Nice changes all around, especially the AI stuff. Interesting.
I can't wait to see these AI changes in action.

I don't want to oversell this change. It's not learning, really (that's a whole other thing, and probably not a good fit) - just some cases where it can look back to examine trends. For example, it can now answer a question like "am I being successful in pulling away from an enemy, over the last X seconds?" and then use that information to make a decision, instead of all decisions being based on data from the current instant.

It only does this in a handful of places to resolve cases where the AI gets "stuck" with a bad behavior and doesn't realize it's not doing what it wants to accomplish.


Quote
Added Centurion-class frigate (system: Damper Field)

Is this the midline combat frigate I've been craving since 2012?

It just might be.


Or, for quick fixes to a small subset of the fighter problems: maybe fighters shouldn't count towards that 25 ship limit?  Or maybe AI fleets should actually respect said limit?  One or the other should make a difference here.

Hmm - don't really want to muck around with "quick" fixes here. As you say, there's a pretty clear time to address this anyway.

Brawler: Unless the "Damper Field" significantly improves flux stats somehow, this looks like a pretty severe nerf to an already rather niche vessel.  I guess we'll see how it plays out, though, given that I don't actually know what that ship system does.

It's a defensive system, and the main reason for boosting the Brawler's flux stats was to allow it to stand up to larger ships in direct combat. One nice thing the system does is make the Brawler's frontal shield and lack of PD less of a liability.

You listed weapon slot covers twice.

Oops! Cleaned that up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: HELMUT on February 01, 2016, 02:12:17 PM
  • Added Centurion-class frigate (system: Damper Field)

RIP, imperial Centurion.

Also that new Tachyon lance is going to be terrifying. Brawling against a Paragon will be impossible.

And those MIRVs scaling with skills, Jesus... It reminds of something... (http://i.imgur.com/T94YR8n.gif)

Otherwise, lot of very interesting change. I'm eager to see those AI improvements.

Edit: Also, +1 for Cyc's suggestion about fighters. It shouldn't be too hard to squeeze it in the patch and would make fighters a bit more worth it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2016, 02:17:05 PM
RIP, imperial Centurion.

Oh dear. The "namespace" for this stuff is surprisingly small.

Edit: Also, +1 for Cyc's suggestion about fighters. It shouldn't be too hard to squeeze it in the patch and would make fighters a bit more worth it.

The problem with that was it made fighters really aggravating to fight against in a frigate.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cik on February 01, 2016, 02:19:53 PM
fighter lobby, assemble!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on February 01, 2016, 02:24:23 PM
Brawler: Unless the "Damper Field" significantly improves flux stats somehow, this looks like a pretty severe nerf to an already rather niche vessel.  I guess we'll see how it plays out, though, given that I don't actually know what that ship system does.

It's a defensive system, and the main reason for boosting the Brawler's flux stats was to allow it to stand up to larger ships in direct combat. One nice thing the system does is make the Brawler's frontal shield and lack of PD less of a liability.
Hm... It occurs to me, there may be a miscommunication here: I look at "flux stats" and my mind immediately goes to "flux dissipation", as that's the primary flux stat that I pay attention to, since it directly governs a ship's sustained offense.  It sounds like what you actually adjusted was flux capacity and/or shield efficiency, which are still "flux stats", but which give a very different feel to what sort of adjustment is actually being made.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 01, 2016, 02:32:05 PM
Wow, so all 4 of those small missile slots on the Aurora could be replaced with, say, AM Blasters? Wowza, talk about alpha strike city... toss up your shields, plow into an enemy ship and unload 6+ AM Blasters into its face - Aurora has the flux stats and speed to do it. :O

Lotsa of neat stuff here! Wasn't expecting two new frigates in addition to the other 2 ships that were revealed. Sad about the Brawler's flux stats nerf though, poor little guys have it rough now (I thought their high flux stats was their defining feature) but hopefully that new Damper Field is a good system. Also, no more Burn Drive cancelling, nooooo! D:

Improvements to the AI are always welcome! Looking forward to the hopefully soon release!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 01, 2016, 02:55:48 PM
As a member of the fighter lobbyTM, I feel that fighters aren't as bad as people make them out to be. Fighter-heavy fleets work just fine. Leave 'em as they are until officer speed & mobility skills are nerfed and we should see fighter efficiency come back up a little bit.

But yeah, a little speed push wouldn't hurt I suppose. Just nothing drastic. Sensible speed reduction of the worst offenders instead of a speed 'arms race' please!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Taverius on February 01, 2016, 02:57:44 PM
  • Bigger main intel map
Inquiring minds want to know - can we pan it now? There's mod systems as close to the edge of the map as you can be while not being in a storm.

  • Burn Drive: now disables venting while active
Well, that's one way to solve the "burn drive AI needs to learn to vent-cancel" complaint, that's for sure :D

RE: AI: I hope the changes improve the tendency of steady captains to move into hitting-them-with-pd range at inopportune moments ...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxd1e on February 01, 2016, 03:07:44 PM
  • Bigger main intel map
Inquiring minds want to know - can we pan it now? There's mod systems as close to the edge of the map as you can be while not being in a storm

That would certainly make using SS+ And Nex easier

Also I am excited for the jump destination tool-tips, If it shows nearby abandoned planets it will make figuring out which jump point to use for bounties easier.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on February 01, 2016, 03:39:19 PM
Cool patch notes.

Is this what you expect to release with 0.7.2a or is there another big batch of changes still incoming?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 01, 2016, 03:47:22 PM
So, when you go auto-hostile with the -20 rep, does that mean that eventually you'll go into vengeful if you don't recover at least 20 rep during peacetime, even if you don't attack them? If so, that'd kinda suck. I can deal with being knocked to say -60 or -50 but inevitably going past that into vengeful even when ignoring that faction is a bummer.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on February 01, 2016, 04:05:40 PM
It probably caps off at Hostile due to how rep changes work
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on February 01, 2016, 04:10:17 PM
Can you play with a savefile from the previous version without issues?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2016, 04:27:15 PM
Hm... It occurs to me, there may be a miscommunication here: I look at "flux stats" and my mind immediately goes to "flux dissipation", as that's the primary flux stat that I pay attention to, since it directly governs a ship's sustained offense.  It sounds like what you actually adjusted was flux capacity and/or shield efficiency

Both flux dissipation and capacity were reduced.

Also I am excited for the jump destination tool-tips, If it shows nearby abandoned planets it will make figuring out which jump point to use for bounties easier.

They do show that info, yeah.

Is this what you expect to release with 0.7.2a or is there another big batch of changes still incoming?

Still working on a couple more things.


So, when you go auto-hostile with the -20 rep, does that mean that eventually you'll go into vengeful if you don't recover at least 20 rep during peacetime, even if you don't attack them? If so, that'd kinda suck. I can deal with being knocked to say -60 or -50 but inevitably going past that into vengeful even when ignoring that faction is a bummer.

It caps out at "hostile" - the -20 penalty is capped by what the original change in reputation was, meaning if there's no change due to making you hostile (i.e. you were already hostile) there's no penalty at the end, either.

Can you play with a savefile from the previous version without issues?

At this point, yes. Being pretty careful about this; won't break it unless it's really necessary.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 01, 2016, 04:33:47 PM
Quote
CombatEngineAPI
MutableStat getTimeMult();

Is there no setTimeMult(float m)

Because you know, ships that can alter the fabric of time and space?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on February 01, 2016, 04:38:32 PM
I'm guessing it can be modified like any other stat can.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 01, 2016, 04:52:04 PM
I'm guessing it can be modified like any other stat can.

Hm, true that it is a mutable stat.

Hm I guess what I mean is there are two frames of reference of time.

If I am in a normal ship and I see a phase ship 'phase' they start moving at 3x and get 3x AI etc. what is the trick to speeding things up for a AI ship?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 01, 2016, 04:57:51 PM
woah, 3 new frigates! O:
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on February 01, 2016, 04:58:51 PM
Overall seems like some solid bugfixes. The hostility/commissions make sense now, and the linear vs quadratic hostilities increase also seems good since hostilities last a long time and even in vanilla everyone always seems to be at war with everyone in .71. edit: I'm a little curious about new ships being added while there are lots of major features that need implementation or overhaul. I think we may hit a point of diminishing returns with new ships.

Quote
Luddic Path ships now have built-in "Ill-Advised Modifications" hullmod that gives a small chance of critical weapon malfunctions
Is there no positive effect? If not why would LP make these modifications? Turning certain factions into "hi just kill us so you can level up" is immersion breaking and a genre convention that doesn't fit with starsector's campaign, where it usually feels like the universe is living for itself. Difficulty wise, does anyone have problems with LP? They aren't very plentiful.

Quote
Faction commission and hostilities changes
What about cutting the -2 rep when you flee from pirates? It's a slap in the face to people trying to be pirates, and it doesn't make sense that any faction angry enough to attack/kill you would get more angry just from you running away. It feels odd. If pirates let you pay them a bribe with no rep hit, then -2 for fleeing would make sense.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gezzaman on February 01, 2016, 05:12:19 PM
thankyou for the phase cloak changes!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2016, 05:36:29 PM
If I am in a normal ship and I see a phase ship 'phase' they start moving at 3x and get 3x AI etc. what is the trick to speeding things up for a AI ship?

I'm not sure what you're asking. I suspect the answer is "some combination of adjusting the engine and ship time multipliers", though :)


I'm a little curious about new ships being added while there are lots of major features that need implementation or overhaul. I think we may hit a point of diminishing returns with new ships.

I don't think we're at that point yet, and it's always been part of the plan to add a few ships here and there, along the way. These are all filling in various ship design gaps.


Quote
Luddic Path ships now have built-in "Ill-Advised Modifications" hullmod that gives a small chance of critical weapon malfunctions
Is there no positive effect? If not why would LP make these modifications? Turning certain factions into "hi just kill us so you can level up" is immersion breaking and a genre convention that doesn't fit with starsector's campaign, where it usually feels like the universe is living for itself. Difficulty wise, does anyone have problems with LP? They aren't very plentiful.

It's a side effect of getting "Safety Overrides" for free, so that's the benefit. LP ships are still extremely good, but this adds a different way to handle them ships, especially at game start when they can be very dangerous.

Plus it's a good thematic fit - very effective modifications (but borderline suicidal, which explains why everyone doesn't just go in for "free SO"), and a counter-strategy of exploiting that weakness.

Quote
Faction commission and hostilities changes
What about cutting the -2 rep when you flee from pirates? It's a slap in the face to people trying to be pirates, and it doesn't make sense that any faction angry enough to attack/kill you would get more angry just from you running away. It feels odd. If pirates let you pay them a bribe with no rep hit, then -2 for fleeing would make sense.

Haven't looked at it (yet?), so no comment at the moment.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on February 01, 2016, 05:53:36 PM
Quote
Conservation efforts have been successful and a small number of Buffalo Mk.II's have been spotted in the wild

Yay! Also lol!
Quote
Accidents now occur when ships are at 0% CR (and only affect those ships) instead of happening when your fleet is out of supplies

That is a godsend. Thank you.
Quote
"Timid" officers no longer show up in AI fleets; replaced with "Cautious"

YAY! No more incridbly lame and boring timid fights, heh.

Quote
Phase Lance: removed EMP damage component

D'AAWWW. Guess it makes sense given the new emp weapons. :D

Quote
Added Harbinger-class destroyer (system: Entropy Amplifier)
Added Centurion-class frigate (system: Damper Field)
Added Scarab-class frigate (system: Temporal Shell)
Added Wayfarer-class frigate (combat freighter, system: Flare Launcher)
Daaaang look at all the new ships!

Quote
Wolf (D) variants now have Degraded Engines hullmod

Boooooo! Probably kind of a neccessary nerf, though.

Quote
Added a converted version of the Mudskipper to pirate fleets
This might be my favorite change.  XD

Quote
Added "weapon slot cover" graphics for empty weapon slots

I'm excited to see this!

Quote
Phase skimmer: removed flux cost

Oooooo nerf the wolf(d) but buff the system. I am okay with this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxd1e on February 01, 2016, 05:56:42 PM
Quote
Faction commission and hostilities changes
What about cutting the -2 rep when you flee from pirates? It's a slap in the face to people trying to be pirates, and it doesn't make sense that any faction angry enough to attack/kill you would get more angry just from you running away. It feels odd. If pirates let you pay them a bribe with no rep hit, then -2 for fleeing would make sense.

I agree losing rep with an entire faction because you refused to engage them doesn't make sense. Losing rep with the Captain who engaged you would make sense though because you denied his bloodlust.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bribe Guntails on February 01, 2016, 05:59:39 PM
Campaign map PANNING?! That will be a big help in Navigation!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 01, 2016, 06:00:58 PM
Quote
I'm not sure what you're asking. I suspect the answer is "some combination of adjusting the engine and ship time multipliers", though Smiley

Ah huh, so if per say I wanted to make time slow to near a stop, and make a 'time ship' keep moving at normal rate as if outside the time bubble I just have to amp up it's speed/acceleration proportional to the amount time is slowing. That could be cool.

Nice.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaphide on February 01, 2016, 06:13:16 PM
As usual, StarSector 0.x.2a delivers the goods :D

Quote
Luddic Path ships now have built-in "Ill-Advised Modifications" hullmod that gives a small chance of critical weapon malfunctions
Is there no positive effect? If not why would LP make these modifications? Turning certain factions into "hi just kill us so you can level up" is immersion breaking and a genre convention that doesn't fit with starsector's campaign, where it usually feels like the universe is living for itself. Difficulty wise, does anyone have problems with LP? They aren't very plentiful.

It's a side effect of getting "Safety Overrides" for free, so that's the benefit. LP ships are still extremely good, but this adds a different way to handle them ships, especially at game start when they can be very dangerous.

Plus it's a good thematic fit - very effective modifications (but borderline suicidal, which explains why everyone doesn't just go in for "free SO"), and a counter-strategy of exploiting that weakness.

I'm not sure I like this either. RNG-based critical weapon malfunctions sound horrendous, especially in fast ships designed for strike combat where time on target may be quite limited. It makes the ships undesirable as a player, and we already have a number of '-D' variants for this purpose.

Perhaps a reduction in flux stats and/or armor/hull might be a different option?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on February 01, 2016, 06:18:50 PM
  • Added view panning, right-click to toggle

Is this referring to the Intel map?

Cough cough
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 01, 2016, 06:31:43 PM
At least Doom can be configured as a pure brawler.  I disliked missiles and Fast Missile Racks, and simply mounted Pilums as filler.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2016, 06:35:04 PM
It makes the ships undesirable as a player ...

I'm ok with that for the moment; more concerned with how they feel to fight against. Something like a pure flux stats nerf isn't interesting in that regard.

  • Added view panning, right-click to toggle

Is this referring to the Intel map?

Cough cough

Oh, right, you were asking about intel map panning: it can pan if the right settings in settings.json are adjusted. By default, it doesn't.

(And no, the above doesn't refer to the intel map, but the main campaign view.)

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on February 01, 2016, 06:37:29 PM
  • Added view panning, right-click to toggle

Is this referring to the Intel map?

Cough cough

Oh, right, you were asking about intel map panning: it can pan if the right settings in settings.json are adjusted. By default, it doesn't.

(And no, the above doesn't refer to the intel map, but the main campaign view.)



Double awesome!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 01, 2016, 07:34:37 PM
I'm a little curious about new ships being added while there are lots of major features that need implementation or overhaul. I think we may hit a point of diminishing returns with new ships.


I do agree that that we're getting near that point for frigates but for destroyers, cruisers and capitals? Heck no!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on February 01, 2016, 07:48:13 PM
I'm a little curious about new ships being added while there are lots of major features that need implementation or overhaul. I think we may hit a point of diminishing returns with new ships.


I do agree that that we're getting near that point for frigates but for destroyers, cruisers and capitals? Heck no!

Well we don't even have features for many of the ships already in the game:
-Every fighter
-All these passenger ships with no passengers in the game or missions to carry them

Each additional ship makes the game a small but ever decreasing percent better, but as long as the developer has time to add new ships AND new gameplay features, why not? Except that it becomes a parabola at some point, where bazillions of new ships don't add to the game, but just increase confusion, learning curve, performance demands, etc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 01, 2016, 08:00:45 PM
We do need an actual military grade drone tender though. Imagine a cruiser launching 4 Terminator drones... oh yisss.

Speaking of Terminator drones, how are they doing with the new phase cloak changes? They arn't dying too fast now, are they? :O
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 01, 2016, 08:10:02 PM
More ships, more weapons = more fun. That's the selling point of mods for me. The game hasn't nearly reached a point where there's good variety on every size level. It could have twice as many ships and weapons and still not reach a point of diminishing returns IMO.

I honestly don't get what could possibly be bad about more ships. Combat is the one mechanic that has been polished quite well early on, and the one around which Starsector revolves. Stuff to use in combat broadens that experience. Other mechanics and modes of entertainment are fine, but we're all here because we dig the combat.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on February 01, 2016, 08:46:30 PM
Other mechanics and modes of entertainment are fine, but we're all here because we dig the combat.

Maybe you, but not me. I actually find combat pretty limited when you try to tie it in with campaign. Campaign is rich, beautiful, full of wonder and exploration. Combat's fun as a casual game (the main menu missions) but in  campaign,  combat is just a mini-game in a little box. So I'd like to see some more mechanics like the expanded battles, to make combat actually feel like its part of the bigger game - campaign. Until then, I mostly avoid it.

I'll admit that a military drone tender would be cool, (carriers can't fill this role since fighters are like deflating, week-old balloons farting melancholically across the map) but other than that, more = better is a pretty limited, uncritical concept of fun.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 01, 2016, 09:19:17 PM
Ships are pretty easy to crank out in little time now, especially the small ones. This set was made to fill in some gaps, particularly the Wayfarer to fill in the gap that the Cerberus failed to fill. Roughly speaking.

And we've got a list of ship roles to fill in, generally larger from here on out, though of course the larger they are the more time they take. That said, and now that this set is done, I'm going to try to focus for a bit on other things.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 01, 2016, 09:31:58 PM
Soooo....David could you tell us what the 'larger' ships are and the 'roles' they are going to be filling out? Please?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on February 01, 2016, 09:34:57 PM
That said, and now that this set is done, I'm going to try to focus for a bit on other things.

Yep, more cool graphics for campaign I hope!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 01, 2016, 09:47:21 PM
Ah, David has brought good news. Rejoice! He has also dropped some teasers that are sure to torment us, the devil!

Glad to hear that larger ships are now nearer to the top of the to-do list.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 01, 2016, 09:48:34 PM
Soooo....David could you tell us what the 'larger' ships are and the 'roles' they are going to be filling out? Please?

Well, more awesome and cool stuff that's super useful while being at least very slightly larger. So mostly that.  ;)

 :-X

Glad to hear that larger ships are now nearer to the top of the to-do list.

(Not quite what I said!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 01, 2016, 11:24:43 PM
Nice changes all around, especially the AI stuff. Interesting.
I can't wait to see these AI changes in action.

I don't want to oversell this change. It's not learning, really (that's a whole other thing, and probably not a good fit) - just some cases where it can look back to examine trends. For example, it can now answer a question like "am I being successful in pulling away from an enemy, over the last X seconds?" and then use that information to make a decision, instead of all decisions being based on data from the current instant.

It only does this in a handful of places to resolve cases where the AI gets "stuck" with a bad behavior and doesn't realize it's not doing what it wants to accomplish.

Oh, wow, this reminds me about a conversation we had some years ago about the AI analyzing the success of its current behavior and potentially switching tactics. I would be very interested in hearing more about the specific cases this occurs in.


High Energy Focus
Removed downside (increased damage to own weapons/engines)
Now has 3 charges, regenerating a 1/20 seconds
Each charge lasts 3 seconds

I like this. The downside was never really noticeable.

Although both this and the phase ship two-second-attack-window changes reduce the usefulness of beams. I doubt I'll be using them on the Sunder anymore. Maybe the eventual fighter buffs will carve out a anti-fighter niche for beams?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: JohnDoe on February 01, 2016, 11:30:05 PM
Burst beams are beams too!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on February 02, 2016, 12:02:15 AM
Speaking of the jump point tooltip, it is possible to have some place hidden from it? I think pirate stations or abandoned ones (and a lot of modded stuff) would be better if not directly exposed to the player. It kinda defeat the goal of having limited sensor range if you "knowk their global location from hyper. Also, I have in my mod a triangular wormhole and I have no doubt it will mess that tooltip up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 02, 2016, 05:26:38 AM
Frigates have many high-tech options, but limited combat low-tech (Lasher and the two hybrids) and midline (Vigilance, Brawler, maybe Kite (A)).

Destroyers have one dedicated combat ship per epoch, plus Sunder (looks midline, but plays like high-tech).

Cruisers, low-tech just has Dominator (which is best-in-class).  High-tech has a bunch of mediocre, unless going for missile boats.

Capitals, low-tech just has Onslaught (rivals Paragon) and midline just has Conquest (which is not even a battleship).


Much as I like to see more carrier options, they are moot with current fighter balance.  Fighters are too weak to use by endgame.


As for beams on the Sunder, the main point of beams is to prevent enemy from dropping shields when range from target is between 600 and 1000, when trying to pound shields with blasters or pulse lasers.  They were never that great on the Sunder as an attack weapon.  Well, triple phase lance is okay, if backed by Advanced Optics and light needlers.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 02, 2016, 09:11:18 AM
So what is the Cerberus now that the frigate-sized combat freighter, Wayfarer, is being added? Is the Cerberus gonna get a few stat tweaks to make it more of a combat ship and less of a freighter?

Is the pirate Mudskipper simply called Mudskipper Mk 2?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on February 02, 2016, 09:25:49 AM
I was thinking it was probably just a Mudskipper (d)

EDIT: Also, the Cerberus mainly lacks the 'combat' part of combat freighter, methinks.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 02, 2016, 10:44:32 AM
Cerberus needs Front Shield Generator and plenty of capacitors and vents before it becomes viable as a combatant.  To get enough OP, you almost need +30% OP AND Optimized Assembly perk.  Until then, it is simply a faster freighter that can outrun almost anything.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 02, 2016, 12:17:29 PM
Didn't see it in the notes, you chose not to give the Odyssey a 360 arc for one of its large turrets? =/
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Takion Kasukedo on February 02, 2016, 01:48:42 PM
  • Added Centurion-class frigate (system: Damper Field)

RIP, imperial Centurion.

Also that new Tachyon lance is going to be terrifying. Brawling against a Paragon will be impossible.

And those MIRVs scaling with skills, Jesus... It reminds of something... (http://i.imgur.com/T94YR8n.gif)


...What are those missiles? Clarents?

And as for the TL, that's going to be deadly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Issac Fisher on February 02, 2016, 02:05:03 PM
Nice changes all around, especially the AI stuff. Interesting.

Quote
Added Centurion-class frigate (system: Damper Field)

Is this the midline combat frigate I've been craving since 2012?

Quote
Conservation efforts have been successful and a small number of Buffalo Mk.II's have been spotted in the wild

(http://i.imgur.com/08Kdcvt.gif)

Still appreciating this so much xD
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 02, 2016, 02:19:46 PM
...What are those missiles? Clarents?
the ones in the gif? just the vanilla small 2-OP 'single shot' Reapers.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 02, 2016, 02:37:21 PM
Oh, wow, this reminds me about a conversation we had some years ago about the AI analyzing the success of its current behavior and potentially switching tactics. I would be very interested in hearing more about the specific cases this occurs in.

There are two similar cases. The first is if it's failing to back off successfully, but hard flux levels are stable and it's not taking much damage (and a few other factors), it will lower shields.

The other case is like the above, but in the case of a slower ship - that's not trying to back off - also not being closed in on by a faster enemy.

In both cases, the idea is to mitigate/avoid the "keeping shields up and preventing flux dissipation for no visible reason" behavior, which can also lead to ships trying to back off continually.


Speaking of the jump point tooltip, it is possible to have some place hidden from it? I think pirate stations or abandoned ones (and a lot of modded stuff) would be better if not directly exposed to the player. It kinda defeat the goal of having limited sensor range if you "knowk their global location from hyper. Also, I have in my mod a triangular wormhole and I have no doubt it will mess that tooltip up.

Not at the moment, as stations and such are always visible on the map anyway. If that changes, I'd imagine the tooltip would get some work as well.


So what is the Cerberus now that the frigate-sized combat freighter, Wayfarer, is being added?

Exactly what it was before :)

Is the pirate Mudskipper simply called Mudskipper Mk 2?

Indeed it is.


Didn't see it in the notes, you chose not to give the Odyssey a 360 arc for one of its large turrets? =/

Looked at the sprite; I don't think it'd look good.


Still appreciating this so much xD

:D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 02, 2016, 03:28:26 PM
Hey Alex, on an excitement meter numbered 1 through 10, how excited are you over the stuff you'll be working on for the next 4ish months? :O David has hinted at exciting things.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 02, 2016, 03:51:41 PM
Probably 11.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 02, 2016, 03:55:47 PM
You ain't messin' are you? If not... SNAPS, can't wait for that future blog post unvieling the goods! >8D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaphide on February 02, 2016, 04:20:59 PM
... Alex and David are actually having a competition to see who can be the biggest tease... :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 02, 2016, 04:36:36 PM
... Alex and David are actually having a competition to see who can be the biggest tease... :D
...and they are both winning!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solinarius on February 02, 2016, 08:09:54 PM
More ships, more weapons = more fun. That's the selling point of mods for me. The game hasn't nearly reached a point where there's good variety on every size level. It could have twice as many ships and weapons and still not reach a point of diminishing returns IMO.

In my opinion, there can't ever be enough weapons, but I prefer a more realistic, military-esque selection where there's niches within niches within niches, rather than a smaller, arcade-esque selection where most weapons try to be unique snowflakes. That's one thing I really liked about Ironclads. Weapons, weapon everywhere. Also, choices, choices everywhere.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on February 02, 2016, 08:25:01 PM
I don't think trying to aggressively fill every niche is a good thing. It leads to balance problems, and bloats weapon choices with redundant and unusable options.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 03, 2016, 08:33:21 AM
Probably 11.

How can there be any excitement left after the mudskipper mk. II?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 03, 2016, 08:59:59 AM
How can there be any excitement left after the mudskipper mk. II?
Mudskipper mk III confirmed! \o/
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 03, 2016, 09:00:54 AM
How can there be any excitement left after the mudskipper mk. II?

That's ... a fair point. "11 in a post-Mudskipper Mk. II world, where everything is gray", then.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 03, 2016, 02:17:27 PM
In both cases, the idea is to mitigate/avoid the "keeping shields up and preventing flux dissipation for no visible reason" behavior, which can also lead to ships trying to back off continually.


Interesting. I really can't think of any other game that does something like this (although you would't necessarily notice it).It sounds like the AI is collecting a lot of data for a fairly minor action (although with potentially big consequences). Do you think this could be the base for further and bigger dynamic behavior changes?

Things like "keep shields up longer if you've been hit on armor for x damage in the last x seconds despite low flux" for cases were you can circumvent an enemies shield with some trickery (like facing away and then turning in quickly). Or a more general "change behavior to b when taking x damage while dealing less than y damage" to make enemies less predictable.

You could even link it to personalities, e.g. an aggressive officer reducing desired target distance after dealing some damage (bloodlust) or a timid officer increasing desired target distance after being hit (scared).

Well, lots of possibilities. Are you interested in exploring them further?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 03, 2016, 03:40:43 PM
The data collecting isn't at all expensive, actually - had some concerns about that at the start, but those turned out to be unfounded.


...

Well, lots of possibilities. Are you interested in exploring them further?

Maybe? I don't want to get sucked into redoing things because there's this theoretically better way of doing things - or, at least, more data that could be considered. Simpler solutions are generally best, and I think this'll just be one more tool to use when fixing issues. It's pretty easy to use trends to come up with nonsensical behavior, too, so it's not exactly a silver bullet and one has to be careful.

For example, the "bloodlust" vs "scared" example - doing something like that might open up the door to the behavior being gamed by the player. That might sound neat (lure them into a false sense of security! it's a neat concept when the AI actually has awareness of that concept) but in practice stuff like that would be a repetitive exploit.

Something like countering "circumvent shield trickery", on the other hand, sounds like it would be a good use for this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 03, 2016, 06:50:39 PM
Could ya post a pic of the updated Hyperion? Was it made a bit thicker/larger so as to not appear like it was more weapon than ship when you had it fully equipped? heh
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 03, 2016, 07:10:44 PM
It's a bit more substantial, yeah.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 03, 2016, 10:16:54 PM
Could ya post a pic of the updated Hyperion? Was it made a bit thicker/larger so as to not appear like it was more weapon than ship when you had it fully equipped? heh

What and ruin the surprise?  ???
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 03, 2016, 10:31:20 PM
This patch is probably still at least 2 weeks away, thats too long to wait for a surprise. Cruel!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TheDTYP on February 04, 2016, 07:30:45 AM
This patch is probably still at least 2 weeks away, thats too long to wait for a surprise. Cruel!

Hate to burst your bubble, but I think it's quite a bit more far off than that...

I LOVE that so many new ships are being added, nice work, you guys!!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gezzaman on February 04, 2016, 10:11:56 PM
More ships are always very welcome  :D

adds to faction variations and immersion. The biggest gripe i have with playing vanilla is that nearly all factions launch attack fleets etc with very similar compositions
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 07, 2016, 07:36:34 AM
By the way, since you are removing the flux cost of Phase Skimmers, you should consider nerfing some aspect of the Medusa. It's been the uncontested top destroyer forever, and if I get one when I play vanilla, it takes several strokes of extremely bad luck to stop me from snowballing out of control. I don't mean that you should dethrone it, I just think it's an unwarranted buff for a ship that already is extremely strong. Now that you don't lose 0-flux boost from skimming, the Wolf and Medusa will have an even bigger mobility advantage, as if you had one of the big upsides of Safety Override on every variant. A tiny decrease in speed or flux dissipation would at least keep it on its current power level.

This goes for the Wolf too, but we'll have to see how much the other new frigs shift the power balance.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 07, 2016, 08:22:56 AM
I do not think removal of flux cost is a big deal, not enough to weaken Wolf or Medusa.  It is not often that flux cost stopped me from skimming.  Three charges is the primary limit that prevents skim abuse.  Now if skimming became unlimited, then there could be a problem.

Medusa is really good as a flagship, but for AI, I do not think Medusa is much better than an Enforcer.  I prefer to use Enforcer for AI because they and their weapons are more common and cheaper to deploy.  If Medusa gets weakened, I want deployment and supplies costs lowered to match other destroyers.  Being limited to 600 range with most of the best configurations kind of hurts.

As for Wolf, it is not that great a frigate.  I do not use any for endgame.  It is not as cheap as a Lasher, and it is not as fast and powerful as Afflictor, Tempest, and Hyperion.  It is good early in the game, but its weaknesses hurt it later.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 07, 2016, 02:03:49 PM
i agree with Cycerin. the Skimmer change is not a big buff by any means, but Medusa was already one of the best vanilla flagships. since the main reason for why it's so powerful when piloted by the player, while not being amazing in ai hands, is its speed, a small nerf to base speed could bring it more in line with other destroyer flagships, without hurting the ai too much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 07, 2016, 03:30:51 PM
Speed alone is not why Medusa is great, it is that combined with good shields and phase skimmer.

I like the Medusa's fast speed.  It has worse armor, shot range, and CR/deployment costs than other destroyers.  It should be best-in-class all-around to compensate for the weaknesses it has.

For Medusa to kite effectively, it needs Advanced Optics, a huge opportunity cost, to get phase lance to hit at 800 range with light needler.  Otherwise, it is pain to fight against bigger ships that outrange the Medusa.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zoltanke on February 07, 2016, 09:23:31 PM
Great game, Great fun, (it's like Mount & Blade, in space!)  and great work so far. My only question is: When is this patch coming?  (Need to set an alert on my phone - so I Can download it as soon as it's available).

Thanks
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 07, 2016, 09:55:50 PM
Great game, Great fun, (it's like Mount & Blade, in space!)  and great work so far. My only question is: When is this patch coming?  (Need to set an alert on my phone - so I Can download it as soon as it's available).
Thanks
Alex has a habit of not giving us ETAs on patches so you will just have to wait. However! there IS an alert system set up that will email you when the patch drops but sadly I don't know how to use it...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: sycspysycspy on February 09, 2016, 05:44:19 PM
Alex has a habit of not giving us ETAs on patches so you will just have to wait. However! there IS an alert system set up that will email you when the patch drops but sadly I don't know how to use it...


You mean the notify function?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gozer on February 10, 2016, 01:29:52 AM
some really interesting changes there. Can't wait for the patch release.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 10, 2016, 02:37:30 PM
Curious about the XIV balance changes - was it nerfs all around or were certain ships buffed while others brought down?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on February 11, 2016, 03:31:25 AM
I got another question regarding saves after patching. What happens if a ship is at 100/100, and then one of the weapons equipped has its cost increased? Does the save break? Does the ship explode into a million pieces? Does it go 105/100?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Spoorthuzad on February 11, 2016, 05:47:18 AM
Does it go 105/100?
That happens.
Nothing will break... atleast not because of that.
It will act the same as if you were maxed out.

edit: the templar mod uses this quirk to create stronger npc fleets.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on February 11, 2016, 02:35:57 PM
So as long as you don't change anything afterwards, you can have an overpowered ship for the current patch? Better take good care of it then.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Spoorthuzad on February 12, 2016, 02:13:06 AM
So as long as you don't change anything afterwards, you can have an overpowered ship for the current patch? Better take good care of it then.

Hmm, yeah sort of. You aren't able to add any more weapons/vents/etc anymore though. and removing weapons will not be able to be replaced untill you go back to 100/100.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on February 15, 2016, 12:13:54 AM
Great game, Great fun, (it's like Mount & Blade, in space!)  and great work so far. My only question is: When is this patch coming?  (Need to set an alert on my phone - so I Can download it as soon as it's available).

Thanks

Just sign up for the Starsector newsletter from the game's page (fractalsoftworks.com)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 16, 2016, 10:37:12 PM
Ergg! Half a month since patch notes posted. Starting to get into the "painful wait" period, you'd think I'd be used to it by now... :'(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on February 16, 2016, 11:07:17 PM
you'd think I'd be used to it by now... :'(

I think nobody does. The best we can do to alleviate the symptoms would be to pester Alex for some extra patch notes. But that would only end up delaying the release even further because of reasons.

Maybe you could busy yourself with other games?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 16, 2016, 11:47:53 PM
Well it doesn't help that this upcoming patch has a bunch of really nice goodies. Heh
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 17, 2016, 06:50:20 AM
Maybe you could busy yourself with other games?
there are other games?!! *gasps*

Well it doesn't help that this upcoming patch has a bunch of really nice goodies. Heh
agreed, but isn't that the case for at least every other release? ^^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 17, 2016, 01:55:09 PM
^ pretty much the same for me. phase ships suddenly seem really boring now, knowing the upcoming changes, and the reputation/commission system is kinda annoying at the moment. but 7.0 added so much new stuff, with sensors, officers, joining allied battles, etc, that there's still a lot to do.

and it helps that with the ridiculous amount of quality mods available, there's always new ships, weapons, places and lore to check out!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on February 17, 2016, 06:06:07 PM
"And here we see forum members encouraging one another to play EVEN MORE of the game."
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: HELMUT on February 19, 2016, 11:42:00 AM
I recently thought about that arming time change for torpedoes, and i'm a bit curious of why it is implemented, and the consequences.

The main reason to fire point blank torpedoes at a target is usually to go past its omni-shields. There are currently 4 ships that can do that trick, 3 of those are phase ships and won't be able to do it with 0.7.2 due to the cloak change. The last one is the Hyperion, that can teleport and fire before the AI can raise its shield. With the arming time, it won't be able to do that trick anymore. Fair enough.

However i don't know how long that "short" arming time is, and if it can potentially screw with the Missile specialization skill, that can increase the speed of torpedoes by 50%, also, most importantly, bombers. It's not unusual seeing a trio of Daggers unloading their payload at point blank range, if not straight on top of the enemy ship. Will the arming time affect them? Also, does the torpedoes that bounce back on armor can still be armed? Because i can totally see a bunch of Reapers coming back at your own fleet, with salty consequences.

Not sure yet if it'll causes issues, but i'm curious.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 19, 2016, 12:23:21 PM
Normally when the new patch notes are released, I lose all desire to play the current version, but for some reason that's not happening this time.  I have lost all desire to deal with the faction rep system and use Console Commands to cheat things the way I feel they "should" be, but still putting 20+ hours a week into this game.

:D This makes me happy.


I recently thought about that arming time change for torpedoes, and i'm a bit curious of why it is implemented, and the consequences.

The main reason to fire point blank torpedoes at a target is usually to go past its omni-shields. There are currently 4 ships that can do that trick, 3 of those are phase ships and won't be able to do it with 0.7.2 due to the cloak change. The last one is the Hyperion, that can teleport and fire before the AI can raise its shield. With the arming time, it won't be able to do that trick anymore. Fair enough.

IIRC that was changed before the cloak got a cooldown. I think? Either way, this seems like a positive change, though the numbers are low enough that I don't expect it to majorly change how things work. Just to create some more memorable moments now and again.


However i don't know how long that "short" arming time is, and if it can potentially screw with the Missile specialization skill, that can increase the speed of torpedoes by 50%, also, most importantly, bombers. It's not unusual seeing a trio of Daggers unloading their payload at point blank range, if not straight on top of the enemy ship. Will the arming time affect them?

It's half a second, but warheads are also disarmed by EMP arc impacts. I don't think it's long enough to cause issues even w/ missile spec. Good point re: Daggers, will have to see how that works.

Also, does the torpedoes that bounce back on armor can still be armed? Because i can totally see a bunch of Reapers coming back at your own fleet, with salty consequences.

I think you mean hilarious consequences. Ahem. But: yes, that could happen, though it's very unlikely. Also, after a bounce, there's a decent chance of another impact on the target, depending on the angle of incidence.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 19, 2016, 12:34:40 PM
i'd say bombers unloading their payload at point-blank range is problematic anyway, since it makes it impossible (or at least much harder than it otherwise would be) for PD to take out the torpedo or bomb. and while it makes sense that bombers would use their weapons in a way that gives the highest chance of dealing damage, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense that they don't have to worry about getting caught in their own weapon's explosion.

so i think it would be a good idea for bombers to have a minimum distance below which they will not fire.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 19, 2016, 10:31:50 PM
So, the two phase frigates had their armor buffed which makes their armor values second only to the Brawler as far as other frigates go. Could you share the armor value of the new phase destroyer? Is it up there with the Enforcer? Will the Doom phase cruiser be seeing an armor buff as well, perhaps?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 19, 2016, 10:43:09 PM
The Harbinger's at 600; Doom is (still?) at 1250.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 19, 2016, 11:41:39 PM
Thanks.

So the phase destroyer only has 250 more armor than the frigates and the Enforcer's armor (750) still reigns supreme for its class! Can't wait to play around with all the new ships and try out the new phase cloak changes. Ya know, if you or David feel like doing a spoiler for any of the new frigates... go for it! :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 22, 2016, 10:52:42 AM
Updated OP. The last big batch of changes before the actual release.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 22, 2016, 11:02:12 AM
Quote
Hardened Shields now reduces the chance for shields to be pierced by Ion Beams and other similar weapons
Is this an addition or is this a replacement effect for the mod?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on February 22, 2016, 11:09:01 AM
  • PD AI will no longer attempt to fire at missions with collisionClass "NONE"
Missions have a collision class now?
  • AI specified in a phase cloak's .system file will now be used when the system is a right-click phase cloak
Hm.  Does this help with trying to make a completely custom right-click ability, or is it orthogonal to such efforts?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 22, 2016, 11:24:17 AM
Quote
Hardened Shields now reduces the chance for shields to be pierced by Ion Beams and other similar weapons
Is this an addition or is this a replacement effect for the mod?

In addition.

  • PD AI will no longer attempt to fire at missions with collisionClass "NONE"
Missions have a collision class now?

They always did - MISSILE or MISSILE_FF, generally.


  • AI specified in a phase cloak's .system file will now be used when the system is a right-click phase cloak
Hm.  Does this help with trying to make a completely custom right-click ability, or is it orthogonal to such efforts?

Yeah, this is specifically to help make right-click systems - you can now do that without having the phase cloak AI running for them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on February 22, 2016, 11:26:40 AM
  • PD AI will no longer attempt to fire at missions with collisionClass "NONE"
Missions have a collision class now?

They always did - MISSILE or MISSILE_FF, generally.
Ah, sorry, should've spelled it out rather than joking around: I think you meant "missiles" rather than "missions".  :-P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 22, 2016, 11:29:35 AM
High Intensity Laser is now HE! :o Well, now it might actually get used. Also, wow, 800 range for a small mount PD weapon, thats pretty nuts!

Lots of stuff here and almost all of it good. I hope release is just around corner!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpacePoliticianAndaZealot on February 22, 2016, 11:58:59 AM
Damn, these new patch notes are on fire! I'm legitimately sweating.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 22, 2016, 12:05:42 PM
hooooly crap, those weapon changes... O:

finally some Atropos love, and Reaper firing delay! awesome! \o/
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 22, 2016, 12:06:16 PM
  • LR PD Laser: range increased to 800, flux/second increased to 100
This looks like a flux hog for (LR) PD, especially for low DPS.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 22, 2016, 12:17:45 PM
Yeah, the LR PD is a flux hog but dat range...

Are we gonna see a medium and large mount weapon for the new and improved Atropos in the future? With greater speed and tracking its just been potentially put into the "will use" category!

Will the Atropos changes also herald the return of the Trident bomber wing?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 22, 2016, 12:27:04 PM
the High Intensity Laser changes sound dangerous as well, but i think it needs one more buff: increased turret turn speed. it turns way slower than even Tachyon Lance or Plasma Cannon, which makes it pretty useless for the Odyssey and the side mounts of the Paragon, which can't just aim by turning the whole ship.

Will the Atropos changes also herald the return of the Trident bomber wing?
probably! and it might actually be a good idea to have both Daggers and Tridents in one fleet. Reapers against big/slow ships, Atropos against smaller/faster ones.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 22, 2016, 12:55:11 PM
Yeah, the LR PD is a flux hog but dat range...
...which is less than Tactical Laser.  It is not much more OP to get Tactical Laser plus hullmods or PD Laser plus Advanced Optics than LR PD alone to get better PD.

Tactical Lasers cost 75 flux per second.  I often do not use Tactical Lasers (and use normal PD lasers instead) for ships that have enough OP to support tactical lasers, max vents, and everything else I need because the flux load is too high (due to the best energy weapons being very flux hungry).  I doubt I want to use LR PD laser when it becomes even more flux-intensive.

It looks like LR PDs niche will continue to be longer range PD for those with no skills.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 22, 2016, 01:04:00 PM
  • LR PD Laser: range increased to 800, flux/second increased to 100
This looks like a flux hog for (LR) PD, especially for low DPS.

The idea is you'd only really want to mount it on a dedicated point defense/escort ship. Or on a larger ship, where it's not as big a deal. It's now basically a support weapon.

It does get somewhat outperformed by Tactical + Turret Gyros + IPDAI, but I don't really want to balance against that being always available.


Are we gonna see a medium and large mount weapon for the new and improved Atropos in the future? With greater speed and tracking its just been potentially put into the "will use" category!

Not sure; might not be a great idea to have even more guided firepower of that magnitude.


the High Intensity Laser changes sound dangerous as well, but i think it needs one more buff: increased turret turn speed. it turns way slower than even Tachyon Lance or Plasma Cannon, which makes it pretty useless for the Odyssey and the side mounts of the Paragon, which can't just aim by turning the whole ship.

I think that'd be too good vs frigates and other such. It's still got all the benefits of being a beam weapon vs smaller targets; the slow turn rate has always been intended to offset that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 22, 2016, 01:32:54 PM
Everyone kinda focuses on combat changes but I reread the notes and the ones from the 1st and I have to say there are a lot of great campaign changes as well! I'll start a new game for this patch even if I don't have to (does this patch still support .7 saves?).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 22, 2016, 01:41:27 PM
Everyone kinda focuses on combat changes but I reread the notes and the ones from the 1st and I have to say there are a lot of great campaign changes as well!

:D

I'll start a new game for this patch even if I don't have to (does this patch still support .7 saves?).

They'll definitely load, but I'm not 100% sure every single new feature will be there. There may be one or two things you won't get, though I can't think of what that'd be at the moment.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: DrakonST on February 22, 2016, 01:58:41 PM
Instability Java 8 consisted in that that the computer hangs(The picture freezing, the sound vanishes, doesn't react to buttons.)?
The game started on Java 7 will have bigger FPS than Java 8?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 22, 2016, 02:03:11 PM
I think that'd be too good vs frigates and other such. It's still got all the benefits of being a beam weapon vs smaller targets; the slow turn rate has always been intended to offset that.
then maybe the Tachyon Lance needs to turn slower? with the upcoming buffs to both weapons they will still have around the same dps, but the TL has the advantage of doing high burst damage (making it especially strong against low capacity shields, like those of frigates) and emp damage.

i still feel the turn speed is too low, though. not because TL or HIL seem too weak overall, but because the difference between having them mounted in the hardpoint of a Sunder or Apogee compared to having them mounted in a turret of an Odyssey or Paragon seems too big. even without officer skills, Sunder and Abogee can turn pretty quickly. it feels really weird to me that a cruiser can turn its front mounted laser faster than a battlecruiser can turn its turret.

maybe both weapons should instead have slow beam travel speed (or however the stat that governs how long a beam takes to reach full length is called ^^), so that small and mobile ships have a better chance to avoid a full hit.

Everyone kinda focuses on combat changes but I reread the notes and the ones from the 1st and I have to say there are a lot of great campaign changes as well! I'll start a new game for this patch even if I don't have to (does this patch still support .7 saves?).
i'm definitely looking forward to the various campaign changes as well, particularly regarding commissions and smuggling. :]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 22, 2016, 02:40:26 PM
I do not want slow beams.  If anything, they, or at least Tachyon Lance, should hit at full range instantly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: StarSchulz on February 22, 2016, 04:16:37 PM
"Possible to start non-hostile with pirates"

I know what start ill be using! *Raises Black flag*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 22, 2016, 04:24:23 PM
"Possible to start non-hostile with pirates"

I know what start ill be using! *Raises Black flag*

My first 0.7.2a character is going to be Blackbeard Dickerson.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 22, 2016, 04:41:09 PM
I like the beam buffs, they should make using beams other than Tac Lasers or Phase Lances a lot more viable. I'm particularly excited for the High Intensity Laser and Tachyon Lance changes, as there's now real competition for Large Energy Weapon slots; I'm going to enjoy figuring out my new preferred Paragon loadout. While you're at it, could you take a look at the Hephaestus Assault Gun being terrible? Halving the shots/minute and doubling the per-shot damage and flux cost (DPS and flux/sec stay the same) might make it possibly useful.

The Campaign AI changes are sorely needed and I'm glad to see them implemented. Having AI fleets just ignore storms and spam EBurn like CR doesn't matter and supplies are free was both immersion breaking and exploitable. The other changes to transponder functioning and cargo scans are similarly appreciated.

The changes to Atropos torpedoes look like an interesting way to increase their usability as well as differentiating them more from the other HE missiles. I'll have to see how well the AI uses them before I pass judgement, though.

This entire patch looks great, so I'll just stop typing before I write 2000+ more characters of "you're doing a good job, please release the new version soon".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 22, 2016, 06:43:11 PM
Instability Java 8 consisted in that that the computer hangs(The picture freezing, the sound vanishes, doesn't react to buttons.)?

It may, although this sounds like something that might also be fixed by installing a good version of OpenAL on your system:
https://www.openal.org/downloads/

The game started on Java 7 will have bigger FPS than Java 8?

Probably not if it was already running well. But, for example, it'll flat out not work on some windows 10 system w/ Java 8.

i still feel the turn speed is too low, though. not because TL or HIL seem too weak overall, but because the difference between having them mounted in the hardpoint of a Sunder or Apogee compared to having them mounted in a turret of an Odyssey or Paragon seems too big. even without officer skills, Sunder and Abogee can turn pretty quickly. it feels really weird to me that a cruiser can turn its front mounted laser faster than a battlecruiser can turn its turret.

Ah, do you see maneuvering thrusters attached to the HIL? :) Honestly, I don't see this as a problem. It's slow, yes, but that's the point, and it's quite usable provided you take this slowness into account tactically. It already got a massive buff.


@ANGRYABOUTELVES: :D

Re: Hephaestus, I had an item to look at it but just didn't get to it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 22, 2016, 07:20:53 PM
Hephaestus is not terrible per se.  It is the Heavy Needler of heavy HE.  It is a faster, more efficient version of Hellbore, which means... you usually take Hellbore much like you usually take Heavy Autocannon over Heavy Needler, unless you need the turn speed badly or accuracy badly.

Hephaestus is poor man's Mjolnir, and can sub in a pinch, but that means no Heavy Mauler in the medium ballistics slot to complement HAG.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 22, 2016, 07:21:05 PM
Saying you just didn't have time to give the Hephaestus a looking over makes me think the patch is virtually upon us, or it takes a great deal more effort to tweak a weapon than I thought. O_o
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on February 22, 2016, 07:52:22 PM
Quote
Fighting pirates that occasionally attempt to take your cargo will no longer ruin your reputation with the pirates, though it will still result in a slight penalty
Does this mean a new memory key that modders can set to tell the reputation plugin "don't insta-drop status to hostile for fighting this fleet" or is it hardcoded/tied to something else?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 22, 2016, 08:43:05 PM
It does get somewhat outperformed by Tactical + Turret Gyros + IPDAI, but I don't really want to balance against that being always available.
I used to think this was a sweet combo, but they're not that good in actual play. Tac Lasers cannot handle IPDAI because they turn slowly while firing - too slow for missile duty. Resulting in repeated on-off-on-off cycles. This isn't a bad thing by the way, Tac Lasers are fine. But ideally you'd use them with Gyros only, that way they make quick work of fighters without being distracted by (and awkwardly dealing with) missiles. Considering fighters also produce missiles, this works fairly well for hightech ships that can afford to shield tank missiles otherwise.

The weapon changes are good. Medium Burst PD in particular needed the buff. HIL is gonna be another nasty sniper for fleet action. EMP through raised shields will probably tip the Tach Lance over the edge again, but I'm just happy to get to use it more.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 22, 2016, 08:58:42 PM
Saying you just didn't have time to give the Hephaestus a looking over makes me think the patch is virtually upon us, or it takes a great deal more effort to tweak a weapon than I thought. O_o

It's more of an "I already switched gears from a 'making weapons changes' mindset". Stuff like that comes out better in batches because there's more time to iterate all the changes while working on all of it together, since it's almost never the *first* set of changes for any given weapon that ends up being "the one".

Does this mean a new memory key that modders can set to tell the reputation plugin "don't insta-drop status to hostile for fighting this fleet"

That's exactly it, yeah.

I used to think this was a sweet combo, but they're not that good in actual play. Tac Lasers cannot handle IPDAI because they turn slowly while firing - too slow for missile duty. Resulting in repeated on-off-on-off cycles. This isn't a bad thing by the way, Tac Lasers are fine. But ideally you'd use them with Gyros only, that way they make quick work of fighters without being distracted by (and awkwardly dealing with) missiles. Considering fighters also produce missiles, this works fairly well for hightech ships that can afford to shield tank missiles otherwise.

Just to make sure: when's the last time you used Tac Lasers w/ IPDAI and Gyros? Due to some changes in the autofire AI (i.e. it keeps firing them) they can absolutely maul missiles now, even doing some pretty neat "sweeping" stuff - not entirely intentionally, but rather effectively for all that. At least, that was my experience when testing that combination after that autofire changes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 23, 2016, 12:03:27 AM
Ah, do you see maneuvering thrusters attached to the HIL? :)
now that i'm thinking of thrusters attached to giant lasers... why not go one step further and let us chain torpedos to our ships for some extra boost? imagine a Dominator riding into battle pulled by a swarm of Reapers, chariot style! \o/

It's more of an "I already switched gears from a 'making weapons changes' mindset".
are you still working on some big change or new feature (as in, potentially blog post worthy) for the next release, or 'just' various improvements here and there?
Quote
Just to make sure: when's the last time you used Tac Lasers w/ IPDAI and Gyros? Due to some changes in the autofire AI (i.e. it keeps firing them) they can absolutely maul missiles now, even doing some pretty neat "sweeping" stuff - not entirely intentionally, but rather effectively for all that. At least, that was my experience when testing that combination after that autofire changes.
huh. i was about to agree with Schwartz, but looks like i hadn't tried the combination in a while. testing it on a Hammerhead now, it really does work very well. O:

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 23, 2016, 04:20:31 AM
Hephaestus is not terrible per se.  It is the Heavy Needler of heavy HE.  It is a faster, more efficient version of Hellbore, which means... you usually take Hellbore much like you usually take Heavy Autocannon over Heavy Needler, unless you need the turn speed badly or accuracy badly.

Hephaestus is poor man's Mjolnir, and can sub in a pinch, but that means no Heavy Mauler in the medium ballistics slot to complement HAG.
It's not more efficient than the Hellbore, though. Because of the way armor mechanics work, burst is king, and the Hellbore has enough burst to blast through any armor in the game in one to two shots. The HAG takes much longer to bust through cruiser-to-capital grade armor or even the kind of armor the Enforcer can get, which is what you're going to be using it against since it's a large ballistic weapon. Sure, it's slightly more flux-efficient on paper, but it's nowhere near as time-efficient, which means you're going to be spending more total flux in practice. On top of that, it costs 4 more OP than the Hellbore, so with the Hellbore you can get 40 more flux dissipation worth of vents to almost totally make up for the decreased flux efficiency.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 23, 2016, 05:37:09 AM
On top of that, it costs 4 more OP than the Hellbore, so with the Hellbore you can get 40 more flux dissipation worth of vents to almost totally make up for the decreased flux efficiency.
Not really, I have max vents either way, which means I do not have 40 more dissipation per gun.

Armor is not the only thing I need to hit with guns.  I need to hit hull too.

The most dangerous enemy to a souped-up Dominator or Onslaught is not another capital, but a swarm of high-tech frigates.  Eight or more Wolves, Tempests, and phase ships will wreck your low-tech ship if not dealt with.  Hellbore is probably better against phase ships.  Against other frigates, HAG is easier to use.

That said, I think Hellbore is the better gun overall, especially if OP is scarce.  HAG costs enough OP that if I have Mjolnir available, I use the latter instead.  Basically, Hellbore if going cheap, Mjolnir otherwise.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 23, 2016, 06:04:40 AM
Nice changes all around, I'm looking forward to a much smoother campaign experience.

Quote
Added "cargo scan" patrols may perform when the player's transponder is on
Chance to happen if player has been doing smuggling at patrol's source market

Don't forget to make that relation transparent, maybe just by having the patrol captain state the reason for his suspicions :)


Quote
Rewrote game launcher in OpenGL (was in Swing)
Any chance you can add a direct link to the mod folder in the launcher? That's about the only feature I've been missing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 23, 2016, 06:07:33 AM
  • Added "cargo scan" patrols may perform when the player's transponder is on
    • Chance to happen if player has been doing smuggling at patrol's source market
Is this permanent, or does this go away after the player stops smuggling at that market for a while?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 23, 2016, 06:08:57 AM
Well, this is interesting.. I did some Tac Laser test runs with Astral and Heron. That weird flickering thing doesn't happen much anymore. They seem to favour continuous fire and sweeping hits instead. Some missiles they catch, some they ignore. Some, they will trail behind without making contact. I assume this happens when they don't have anything 'better to do' and hope to catch up. Fast movers like Salamanders will be chased unsuccessfully if they're circling. So yeah, Tac Lasers have been improved and can be used with IPDAI if the ship is kitted for turret turn speed. Still, PD Lasers are more precise; they catch more stuff and never trail behind anything, even with Optics.

Tac Lasers don't seem awkward in a PD role anymore. When they're out of their league, it is because of turret turn speed, but the glitches are gone. I'd probably let them handle PD now, if I had the spare OP. I tried this against a simulator army, so against officers some more precise or more burst-y solution may be required.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 23, 2016, 06:17:40 AM
Not really, I have max vents either way, which means I do not have 40 more dissipation per gun.

Armor is not the only thing I need to hit with guns.  I need to hit hull too.

The most dangerous enemy to a souped-up Dominator or Onslaught is not another capital, but a swarm of high-tech frigates.  Eight or more Wolves, Tempests, and phase ships will wreck your low-tech ship if not dealt with.  Hellbore is probably better against phase ships.  Against other frigates, HAG is easier to use.

That said, I think Hellbore is the better gun overall, especially if OP is scarce. HAG costs enough OP that if I have Mjolnir available, I use the latter instead.  Basically, Hellbore if going cheap, Mjolnir otherwise.

So you've got 800 more flux capacity per gun. Or you can drop 1 vent and swap out a Heavy Autocannon for a Heavy Needler, which will drop your weapon flux/second by a total of 30. There's a bunch of things you can do with 4 extra OP.

The Hellbore has 20 more DPS than the HAG. It's very, very, very slightly more effective vs hull than the HAG. I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.

Why are you deploying a Dominator or Onslaught vs swarms of high tech frigates? That's not what those ships are for. Bring along some Enforcers or Medusas or something and deploy those instead, they're much better at killing frigates. Why are you trying to hit high-tech frigates with a large ballistic weapon? You've got a bunch of small and medium ballistic slots to put kinetics and maybe some Maulers in, they're much better at killing frigates. Why are you trying to kill high-tech frigates with a High Explosive weapon? They have terrible armor and great shields, HE is overkill vs their armor and bad vs shields.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 23, 2016, 07:31:34 AM
So you've got 800 more flux capacity per gun. Or you can drop 1 vent and swap out a Heavy Autocannon for a Heavy Needler, which will drop your weapon flux/second by a total of 30. There's a bunch of things you can do with 4 extra OP.

The Hellbore has 20 more DPS than the HAG. It's very, very, very slightly more effective vs hull than the HAG. I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.

Why are you deploying a Dominator or Onslaught vs swarms of high tech frigates? That's not what those ships are for. Bring along some Enforcers or Medusas or something and deploy those instead, they're much better at killing frigates. Why are you trying to hit high-tech frigates with a large ballistic weapon? You've got a bunch of small and medium ballistic slots to put kinetics and maybe some Maulers in, they're much better at killing frigates. Why are you trying to kill high-tech frigates with a High Explosive weapon? They have terrible armor and great shields, HE is overkill vs their armor and bad vs shields.
More capacity or convenience hullmods are luxuries, just like getting HAG over Hellbore.  I do not want too much capacity because that just makes venting take too long if flux is high.  Hellbore is more vent-spam friendly, but HAG is good if you are forced to fire continuously or want to swat down small, fast, and nimble targets.

Because 20 more DPS means nothing if I cannot hit the target.  It is easier to hit enemies with HAG - faster shots, faster fire rate.  HAG may be a good idea if my only kinetic is HVDs.  (If I want to substitute Mjolnir+Heavy Mauler but keep 900+ range, HAG+HVD is the closest substitute.  Hellbore+HVD is agonizingly slow.)

I solo fleets with one ship - that one ship needs to be able to handle everything.  I solo fleets because it minimizes costs and maximizes profit.  Soloing fleets means I can chain-battle longer.  If I fight a simulator-sized fleet (extended battle against six or so fleets), only a battleship has the stamina to solo it.  When I fight, I either deploy one or all.  As for Onslaught, it can outperform Paragon, given the proper skills and configuration.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 09:51:17 AM
are you still working on some big change or new feature (as in, potentially blog post worthy) for the next release, or 'just' various improvements here and there?

Playtesting!

Don't forget to make that relation transparent, maybe just by having the patrol captain state the reason for his suspicions :)

Yep, they mention that right off the bat. "Your fleet matches the profile of a suspected smuggler provided by <market> authorities", that sort of thing.

Any chance you can add a direct link to the mod folder in the launcher? That's about the only feature I've been missing.

Oh, that's a good one; I'll note it down. One potential problem here is that the default Java way of doing this involves using AWT, which would obviate some of the reason to switching to OpenGL in the first place - i.e. it'd likely stop working on some OS X and Linux installs. (The deal is, I'm *fairly* sure, that anything using AWT will only work with Java 8 on the latest OS X release. Which is a problem because Java 8 is a problem.)

There are probably workarounds, but I'd imagine they're platform-specific and so rather fiddly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on February 23, 2016, 10:12:05 AM
Ok, looks like a lot of good changes to rep and attention to 'pirate' players. thanks! Couple Qs:

Quote
Removed reputation penalty for escaping w/o dealing major damage

What about when you escape from combat before it even starts, with the dialog box option 'disengage' or flee or whatever it is? e.g. when a pirate fleet catches up to you. That currently gives you a -2 hit. Complaining about that has been my drum to bang for the last 6 months, so much thanks if you changed or will change that. :)

Quote
Player fleet able to interact with objects immediately after battle, i.e. now possible to escape through a jump-point after retreating from battle w/o always being re-engaged by enemy fleet

This sounds interesting, from the brief description I'm not sure quite what it means overall though. Can't we already interact with objects after battle? But fleets don't chase the player with as much tenacity now?

Quote
Reputation loss if patrol judges cargo to be likely destined for black market, even if it's otherwise legal

This could be one of those thing where some unexpected behavior leads to players getting constantly profiled by the cops for being 'suspicious looking' and human rights lawyers will have to become involved. Maybe punishing players for possible, future crimes is a bit harsh and a little too realistic? I.e. if a player decides to 'go straight' and start legitimate trading then they still keep getting punished for their past misdeeds.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 10:27:32 AM
Is this permanent, or does this go away after the player stops smuggling at that market for a while?

It goes down very gradually. IIRC the trade volume that's "remembered" about goes down by 10% each month or so, and the smuggling scan won't kick off until the suspicion is above a small threshold, so even though multiplying by 0.9 each month won't ever take it to 0, it'll still effectively go away. After a while.


What about when you escape from combat before it even starts, with the dialog box option 'disengage' or flee or whatever it is? e.g. when a pirate fleet catches up to you. That currently gives you a -2 hit. Complaining about that has been my drum to bang for the last 6 months, so much thanks if you changed or will change that. :)

Right, same deal, no penalty.

This sounds interesting, from the brief description I'm not sure quite what it means overall though. Can't we already interact with objects after battle? But fleets don't chase the player with as much tenacity now?

It's when you're on top of a jump-point, and there's an enemy fleet on top of you. Currently it's very likely the interaction with the enemy fleet would take precedence, preventing you from jumping out even after a successful retreat.

This could be one of those thing where some unexpected behavior leads to players getting constantly profiled by the cops for being 'suspicious looking' and human rights lawyers will have to become involved. Maybe punishing players for possible, future crimes is a bit harsh and a little too realistic? I.e. if a player decides to 'go straight' and start legitimate trading then they still keep getting punished for their past misdeeds.

The point here is to add a risk to selling perfectly legal goods, but on the black market. It's not going to affect a player that doesn't use the black market, and the chance of getting nailed for this depends heavily on the existing suspicion level. Finally, the only punishment is a reputation hit, not confiscation.

Frankly, I'm not sure it's quite severe enough :) Ultimately, it's supposed to be a check on "I'm going to smuggle with my transponder on and no one will stop me".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 23, 2016, 10:41:15 AM
What do all these smuggling changes mean to someone who only uses the black market to buy a single rare ship or weapon? Like, probably going months before buying another item from the same black market.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 10:51:35 AM
What do all these smuggling changes mean to someone who only uses the black market to buy a single rare ship or weapon? Like, probably going months before buying another item from the same black market.

Probably nothing much. Might result in an odd cargo scan once in a while, but nothing major, and the rep penalty (which is unlikely even in the event of a scan, if you haven't been doing heavy smuggling) won't mean much taken by itself.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 23, 2016, 11:01:57 AM
There are probably workarounds, but I'd imagine they're platform-specific and so rather fiddly.

You could just disable it on non-windows machines (and allow re-enabling via settings.json) ;D


What would also be great would a automatic "new version" check/alarm in the launcher. I think especially the hotfix releases are missed by a whole lot of people.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 11:26:38 AM
You could just disable it on non-windows machines (and allow re-enabling via settings.json) ;D

Hah!

What would also be great would a automatic "new version" check/alarm in the launcher. I think especially the hotfix releases are missed by a whole lot of people.

Hmm, yeah. Another good one :) Something for mod dependency-checking would be good, too. The good news is with the launcher being in OpenGL, these things are much more doable now... finding time to do all of them is the main obstacle. Well, one step at a time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 23, 2016, 12:35:53 PM
  • Independent faction no longer offers commissions or engages in faction hostilities
    • Military market access doesn't require commission, just reputation
Does this all military markets no longer require commission or just Independents?

No commission required means I can be friends with (almost) everyone and buy the best stuff, unlike today where reputation for factions are other than yours is mostly useless.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 12:46:55 PM
Just independents.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 23, 2016, 01:10:40 PM
If you're in the playtesting phase then that must mean the patch is close! Raaaahh! >8D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SierraTangoDelta on February 23, 2016, 01:13:01 PM
Any improvements for performance on AMD cards and CPUs, or do I have to keep telling AMD to work on it?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 01:26:52 PM
Any improvements for performance on AMD cards and CPUs, or do I have to keep telling AMD to work on it?

The latter, unfortunately. AFAIK it's fine on some AMD cards and not on others and I'm just not sure what, if anything, I can do about it on my end. The game is not using anything fancy as far as OpenGL features go. I'll keep an eye out for any information about whether something specific (and thus work-aroundable) is causing this, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 01:27:26 PM
Any improvements for performance on AMD cards and CPUs, or do I have to keep telling AMD to work on it?

The latter, unfortunately. I'm just not sure what, if anything, I can do about it on my end. The game is not using anything fancy as far as OpenGL features go. I'll keep an eye out for any information about whether something specific (and thus work-aroundable) is causing this, though. I'm also not sure whether it's all AMD cards/drivers or just some that are having problems.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SierraTangoDelta on February 23, 2016, 02:02:24 PM
I don't even have a particularly weak GPU, I would think 1.5 gb of vram is enough to handle the game+mods and the extra effects from stuff like ShadersLib.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 02:04:28 PM
It's not a vram issue, it's a "their opengl driver code is slow for whatever things Starsector is doing" issue.

But: does it run ok for without mods? Because that's a very important distinction to make, whether the performance issues you're having are with mods or without.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 23, 2016, 02:19:36 PM
I just opened up weapon.csv and made the patch changes to HIEs and Tach Lances myself, then did some quick rounds in the simulator and vs whatever hostile fleets I could find on short notice. It seems like an all-beam Paragon is now viable. It even works vs simulator Paragons even though you can't out-damage their flux dissipation because they toggle Fortress Shield on for absolutely no reason. I hope that the changes to how the AI handles Fortress Shield fixes that. It might not work vs Odysseys because they don't have Fortress Shield, but there's no Odyssey in the simulator to test against.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 23, 2016, 02:26:01 PM
Trident bombers have 3x LR PD lasers - they'll be able to fire all 3 of them for about 5 seconds before they flux out. Maybe the flux isn't an issue but perhaps the range would be? Or is it all fine the way they are?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SierraTangoDelta on February 23, 2016, 02:40:59 PM
It's not a vram issue, it's a "their opengl driver code is slow for whatever things Starsector is doing" issue.

But: does it run ok for without mods? Because that's a very important distinction to make, whether the performance issues you're having are with mods or without.
I'd have to check the performance again without mods.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 03:15:29 PM
Trident bombers have 3x LR PD lasers - they'll be able to fire all 3 of them for about 5 seconds before they flux out. Maybe the flux isn't an issue but perhaps the range would be? Or is it all fine the way they are?

Riight - changed them all to regular PD Laser for the time being. They're not really in the game (except in 1 mission, IIRC?), though, so something of a moot point.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Auraknight on February 23, 2016, 03:24:17 PM

Don't forget to make that relation transparent, maybe just by having the patrol captain state the reason for his suspicions :)

Yep, they mention that right off the bat. "Your fleet matches the profile of a suspected smuggler provided by <market> authorities", that sort of thing.
So what happens if we vastly change our fleet composition? that's something I've always wondered. if they are chasing us based on what they have in intel, say a fleet with a few cruisers, and we scuttle/store them in exchange for a capital and a few frigates, we're no-longer matching whatever report went out on us, right? (So long as we do it someplace safe from prying eyes...)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 23, 2016, 03:28:01 PM
Riight - changed them all to regular PD Laser for the time being. They're not really in the game (except in 1 mission, IIRC?), though, so something of a moot point.
shouldn't they be in again now that Atropos are actually useful? or was there another reason for not using Tridents?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 03:29:50 PM
So what happens if we vastly change our fleet composition? that's something I've always wondered. if they are chasing us based on what they have in intel, say a fleet with a few cruisers, and we scuttle/store them in exchange for a capital and a few frigates, we're no-longer matching whatever report went out on us, right? (So long as we do it someplace safe from prying eyes...)

The part of the "fleet profile" matching reports of suspected smuggling is you being in command of it :) They're just not accusing you of being a smuggler directly to make it sound like a more routine thing than it actually is.


shouldn't they be in again now that Atropos are actually useful? or was there another reason for not using Tridents?

I'm not a fan of how they feel, torpedo payload entirely aside. Will probably take another look at some later point and decide one way or another.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 23, 2016, 05:30:06 PM
Hey Alex, which of the new frigates are you most pleased with how it turned out? Can the Scarab pretty much wipe the floor with the other frigates in combat?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 23, 2016, 06:05:31 PM
Hmm. Probably the Scarab. It's a surprisingly fragile ship, despite ostensibly decent armor and high hull, and due to the nature of the Temporal Shell, it's easy to get carried away and caught out. The are also more-pronounced-than-usual choices to be made when deciding how to fit it, especially in terms of whether to leave some slots empty. For all that, the Temporal Shell gives it some unique tactical opportunities.

I'm not entirely sure how powerful it is, to be honest. Which is why I'd say it's one I'm most pleased with - I think there's a good deal about it to figure out. (And perhaps tweak, later!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 23, 2016, 06:47:10 PM
Well, hopefully the Scarab can be bought from a black market and not just from Tri-Tachyon military markets!

Playtest harder, Alex! >_<
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on February 23, 2016, 07:35:28 PM
Well, hopefully the Scarab can be bought from a black market and not just from Tri-Tachyon military markets!

Playtest harder, Alex! >_<

Perhaps Alex should playtest aboard a Doom.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 23, 2016, 08:35:39 PM
I've heard repeated phase shifts can really mess up your mind.

E: Scarab sounds cool. What about the other two?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 23, 2016, 10:30:43 PM
I've heard repeated phase shifts can really mess up your mind.

E: Scarab sounds cool. What about the other two?

I've really enjoyed playing as a smuggler in the Wayfarer, personally.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on February 24, 2016, 04:13:21 AM
Perhaps Alex should playtest aboard a Doom.
Aww, just got that joke now. :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 24, 2016, 08:16:00 AM
I've heard repeated phase shifts can really mess up your mind.

E: Scarab sounds cool. What about the other two?

I've really enjoyed playing as a smuggler in the Wayfarer, personally.

Millenium Falcon vibes?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 24, 2016, 08:41:19 AM
Yeah, I suppose the MF would be considered a combat/freighter frigate, huh?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 24, 2016, 11:46:16 AM
Corvette, I believe.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 24, 2016, 12:29:23 PM
Perhaps Alex should playtest aboard a Doom.

That took me embarrassingly long to figure out. Nice :)


Millenium Falcon vibes?

It just feels cozy to me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Aeson on February 24, 2016, 09:22:37 PM
Corvette, I believe.
Personally, if I had to pick a warship classification for the Millenium Falcon, I'd be inclined to go with something more along the lines of an MTB or PT boat or other very light craft, at least if we're classifying it as it compares to other Star Wars combatants (though in all honesty I would sooner class it as an armed light freighter than as anything actually intended to see combat).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 24, 2016, 09:36:29 PM
iirc the Millenium Falcon is canonically a light freighter
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: JohnDoe on February 25, 2016, 06:36:39 AM
Quote
High Intensity Laser:
Damage type changed to "high explosive"
Dps and flux/second doubled to 500
OP cost increased to 20 (from 16)

My god..
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 25, 2016, 08:17:58 AM
But the High Intensity Laser still does soft flux, yeah? Its not such a massive buff if its all still soft flux - it'll do the same DPS to shields as before. This is only a buff for when the laser isn't hitting shields.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 25, 2016, 08:40:52 AM
But the High Intensity Laser still does soft flux, yeah? Its not such a massive buff if its all still soft flux - it'll do the same DPS to shields as before. This is only a buff for when the laser isn't hitting shields.
and it generates twice as much flux now. but it means you really have to tank it with your shield, as just a couple seconds of unshielded damage will demolish even heavy armor, at 1k range, with perfect accuracy.

i think it's a very interesting change, should give the weapon a much better defined role. now Sunders with HIL staying behind the enemy line can't just be ignored until you've dealt with their frontline ships.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 25, 2016, 08:54:23 AM
I hope the weapon's lore description and the color of the beam or other FX were changed a bit to match the new HE damage type it has - maybe give it a slight reddish tint.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 25, 2016, 10:11:59 AM
I hope the weapon's lore description and the color of the beam or other FX were changed a bit to match the new HE damage type it has - maybe give it a slight reddish tint.

I don't suppose it could be red and whispy, ala Emo Ren's lightsaber from the most recent star wars? You know you want to...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 25, 2016, 10:46:10 AM
orange-y red seems HE-like, but it's also the color of the PD Lasers, which are the very weakest beams. that could be a bit counterintuitive.

personally, i'd like to see some consistent coloring for all beam weapons that relates to their damage type and/or role.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sonlirain on February 26, 2016, 05:59:09 AM
Well power wise real life lasers actually are classified by color (wavelength).
Red is the weakest (but we managed to get red lasers more focused than more powerful blue beams) carrying the least energy.
Green is intermediate.
Blue is the most powerful but also the least focused.
I don't know where yellow stands but probably near red.

With that in mind i'd suggest keeping the blue beam on the HIL. Just add some extra effects to it to make it look powerful but unfocused
Something like this perhaps.
Spoiler
(http://www.kultloesungen.de/lib/exe/fetch.php/simulationen:freespace2:logo.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on February 26, 2016, 09:38:17 AM
Alex did you change the way that the Combat skill tree interacts with CR at all?

I know that the skill tree revamp isn't coming yet but this seems like a pretty important change, considering those findings that the more you level the worse it is for your CR/Supplies.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 09:48:44 AM
Alex did you change the way that the Combat skill tree interacts with CR at all?

I know that the skill tree revamp isn't coming yet but this seems like a pretty important change, considering those findings that the more you level the worse it is for your CR/Supplies.

IIRC what I did is make it so that when a ship needs repairs but not CR recovery, the cost/day reverts to the base rate. Still some kinks to work out (especially pertaining to phase ships and SO builds losing CR during long deployments, and that being more expensive), but I think it'll keep.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 10:59:01 AM
It's out! Link in the OP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on February 26, 2016, 11:12:34 AM
CLICK!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 11:15:22 AM
Updating the javadoc, which involves deleting it first. It'll be up shortly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 26, 2016, 11:27:06 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/anMyiwP.gif)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nanao-kun on February 26, 2016, 11:34:20 AM
Nice.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on February 26, 2016, 11:49:19 AM
Woah that caught me off guard.

Time to fire up vanilla again.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 26, 2016, 11:51:10 AM
Aww, damn! I'm at work, someone please post screens of the new ships and updated Hyperion!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: mendonca on February 26, 2016, 11:55:58 AM
Cool  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 26, 2016, 11:59:40 AM
The officer you can gain at game start seems bugged - doesn't gain any exp, and when unassigned, he vanished forever.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 12:04:56 PM
Could've sworn I tested that - ahhh, that explains an oddity I saw but couldn't reproduce at the time.

Fixed that up; probably hotfix-worthy, but might wait to see if a couple more things come up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on February 26, 2016, 12:26:41 PM
Could've sworn I tested that - ahhh, that explains an oddity I saw but couldn't reproduce at the time.

Fixed that up; probably hotfix-worthy, but might wait to see if a couple more things come up.

I came to report that as well.

Holy crap the new char creation! And the scarab! And the ill-advised mudksipper mods!  :)

Congrats on the release. So far it's entirely awesome.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: gozer on February 26, 2016, 12:34:24 PM
awesome, 0.7.2 released ... I'm SO glad I decided to check forum today :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 12:39:46 PM
And the ill-advised mudskipper mods!  :)

:D Those might be my favorite part. Entirely David's idea, btw.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on February 26, 2016, 12:41:00 PM
Hyperspace movement feels different somehow.. smoother is the word maybe? Especially when running while compressing time.
AI fleets fly differently now too. Really digging the way things are right now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on February 26, 2016, 12:44:50 PM
:D Those might be my favorite part. Entirely David's idea, btw.

Well you are both geniuses. Mad geniuses even.

I want to play with the wayfarer, but I SHOULD be working/homeworking.  :p  Soon, though. Sooooooon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 12:46:51 PM
Hyperspace movement feels different somehow.. smoother is the word maybe? Especially when running while compressing time.

Sounds like it's probably due to a higher framerate from the fleet AI optimization - hyperspace would be the area most affected since it tends to have the most fleets in it.

(PSA: right click to pan the view in the campaign, in case you missed it in the patch notes.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on February 26, 2016, 12:59:44 PM
Sorry, meant Campaign in general, not Hyperspace. But yeah, that might be it. I have quite an old CPU so maybe that was the main problem, even though my VGA is pretty new. Can't wait to try this out with several mod factions.

Edit. This is a bit odd, in the changelog you are stating that "Updated ships the player can restart in: now Lasher, Wayfarer, Centurion, and Wolf".
But wasn't the Wolf removed from all starting options when creating a new game? I find it a bit odd that you have a choice to kill yourself to still start with that ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 01:05:10 PM
i thought it would still be some time until we get to play this. much yay! \o/

also: Damper Field's description states "Briefly activates activates an energy field ...".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 01:15:56 PM
Edit. This is a bit odd, in the changelog you are stating that "Updated ships the player can restart in: now Lasher, Wayfarer, Centurion, and Wolf".
But wasn't the Wolf removed from all starting options when creating a new game? I find it a bit odd that you have a choice to kill yourself to still start with that ship.

Hmm, yeah, I suppose it is. I'd like to eventually rework how restarting works (though not quite settled on how). For the moment, it remains somewhat exploitable, and this is one more aspect to it...

also: Damper Field's description states "Briefly activates activates an energy field ...".

Thank you, fixed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Harmful Mechanic on February 26, 2016, 01:30:51 PM
Not gonna lie, I'm sad that you couldn't hear the noises I made when I saw the modified Mudskipper. That thing is great.

Is there anything in the base game that uses Composite slots? I could see those being really good on something like the Gryphon or Kite [A]; also would be nice to see one or two new flexible low-tech ships using them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Trylobot on February 26, 2016, 01:34:45 PM
Damn Alex you're really cranking it out lately  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Taverius on February 26, 2016, 01:44:58 PM
Phase lance description still says 'with a significant EMP component' :3

Also kind of sad that the EMP is gone without a reduction in flux usage :( - unless you forgot to note it in the changes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 26, 2016, 01:45:12 PM
Wheres Megas with his rundown on the new ships? Haha

Still at work, damnit!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 01:48:23 PM
Aww, damn! I'm at work, someone please post screens of the new ships and updated Hyperion!
here you go:
Spoiler

updated LR PD and HIL, new Ion Pulser and Ion Beam
(http://i.imgur.com/OkYE5kc.jpg)

new Wayfarer, Centurion, Scarab, Harbinger and Mudskipper MK.II (featuring only a single large mount!), and updated Hyperion
(http://i.imgur.com/5DjG7b0.jpg)

new ship systems for Centurion and Brawler, Scarab, Harbinger, Afflictor, and Doom
(http://i.imgur.com/0kyDSDL.jpg)

some more weapon slot cover examples
(http://i.imgur.com/nCvSGs7.jpg)

some new starting options
(http://i.imgur.com/xzYEZj2.jpg)
[close]

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 01:50:11 PM
Not gonna lie, I'm sad that you couldn't hear the noises I made when I saw the modified Mudskipper. That thing is great.

As long as you're not lying: did you see it? Or did it shoot you first?

Is there anything in the base game that uses Composite slots? I could see those being really good on something like the Gryphon or Kite [A]; also would be nice to see one or two new flexible low-tech ships using them.

Not at the moment, no. Probably at some point, but I'd like to be sparing with the oddball slot types, so that it doesn't become a question of "which special slots does this ship have"? Rather, I'd like to keep these as something that makes the ship special by virtue of having *any*.

(That said, the new ships haven't exactly been very sparing with these; I'd like to dial that back going forward.)


Damn Alex you're really cranking it out lately  ;D

It's that post-big-release period where it's mostly focused on polishing/cleaning up existing stuff, so it's much easier to get something into releasable shape.

Phase lance description still says 'with a significant EMP component' :3

Also kind of sad that the EMP is gone without a reduction in flux usage :( - unless you forgot to note it in the changes.

Fixed, thank you.

I think the Phase Lance is still good; in any case, balance is never in such a fine-tuned place that any minor change requires a counterbalance in some way. It's not quite as good as it was before, sure, but the EMP damage wasn't a big deal in the first place.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Taverius on February 26, 2016, 02:00:24 PM
I won't argue with you there, I'm just gonna go be emo in the corner about it :P

The 2-of-3 slot types are probably going to be mostly used by mods; its already that way for hybrid.

If your faction is all "RAR LAZORS AND MIZZILES ONRY" then you use synergy where universal would normally be used, doubly so for the factions designed around wide availability of universal slots.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 02:04:00 PM
i noticed while taking screenshots that the "More recently, you've..." part of some of the starting options doesn't appear in the small log.. clearly this new release is unplayably broken! :P

(and yes, i wouldn't post all the shiny new stuff without spoiler tags, since i imagine quite a few people would really not want seeing those things spoiled.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Harmful Mechanic on February 26, 2016, 02:08:52 PM
Not gonna lie, I'm sad that you couldn't hear the noises I made when I saw the modified Mudskipper. That thing is great.
As long as you're not lying: did you see it? Or did it shoot you first?

I rolled up on a pirate fleet, and the first sign of trouble was Hellbore rounds coming out of nowhere. Didn't lose anything, but I almost died laughing when I saw what they were coming from.

Is there anything in the base game that uses Composite slots? I could see those being really good on something like the Gryphon or Kite [A]; also would be nice to see one or two new flexible low-tech ships using them.

Not at the moment, no. Probably at some point, but I'd like to be sparing with the oddball slot types, so that it doesn't become a question of "which special slots does this ship have"? Rather, I'd like to keep these as something that makes the ship special by virtue of having *any*.

That's what I figured; you can leave the wretched excess to modders (I found a couple of places to stick them; still working out how dumb that was). I was just eyeing a few edge cases like the Gryphon's medium ballistic turret as a good slot for, say, a medium Annihilator, and perhaps the tip of the left arm as a good spot to stick a ballistic weapon. And of course it would be neat if you could sub a Dual LMG or LAG in for the Kite's right missile slot.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ahne on February 26, 2016, 02:10:35 PM
wow nice surprise!  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 26, 2016, 02:17:47 PM
Yes! The WRATH OF THE MUDSKIPPER MK2 is unleashed!  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 02:20:29 PM
I won't argue with you there, I'm just gonna go be emo in the corner about it :P

Fair enough :)

i noticed while taking screenshots that the "More recently, you've..." part of some of the starting options doesn't appear in the small log.. clearly this new release is unplayably broken! :P

Thank you - fixed. It had a 50% chance of showing up, due to rules.csv things.

(and yes, i wouldn't post all the shiny new stuff without spoiler tags, since i imagine quite a few people would really not want seeing those things spoiled.)

Yeah, no worries, and I probably shouldn't have said anything anyway :)


I rolled up on a pirate fleet, and the first sign of trouble was Hellbore rounds coming out of nowhere. Didn't lose anything, but I almost died laughing when I saw what they were coming from.

Ahhh yes. So working as intended :)

That's what I figured; you can leave the wretched excess to modders (I found a couple of places to stick them; still working out how dumb that was). I was just eyeing a few edge cases like the Gryphon's medium ballistic turret as a good slot for, say, a medium Annihilator, and perhaps the tip of the left arm as a good spot to stick a ballistic weapon. And of course it would be neat if you could sub a Dual LMG or LAG in for the Kite's right missile slot.

I have to say, I'm liking the idea of putting some composite slots on a Kite (or, rather, I'm liking the idea of a Kite kitted out with 3 dual machine guns or Vulcans just going to town.) I'll probably resist the temptation, though.

It's already such a capable ship for the cost - honestly, I was surprised how much having it as the 2nd starting ship helps, and how survivable it is. Half the time fighting pirates, it somehow manages to get 1-2 kills all by itself.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 02:40:22 PM
Yeah, no worries, and I probably shouldn't have said anything anyway :)
i don't mind :]
Quote
I have to say, I'm liking the idea of putting some composite slots on a Kite (or, rather, I'm liking the idea of a Kite kitted out with 3 dual machine guns or Vulcans just going to town.) I'll probably resist the temptation, though.

It's already such a capable ship for the cost - honestly, I was surprised how much having it as the 2nd starting ship helps, and how survivable it is. Half the time fighting pirates, it somehow manages to get 1-2 kills all by itself.
i had a similar experience with it in v0.7.0. and with SO, a couple Kites are now my go-to pursuit frigates, at least until i can get my hands on some Tempests.

but you could put composite mounts on the Luddic Path versions. with their risky hullmods, it could make them interesting to use as a player.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 26, 2016, 02:42:58 PM
I have to say, I'm liking the idea of putting some composite slots on a Kite (or, rather, I'm liking the idea of a Kite kitted out with 3 dual machine guns or Vulcans just going to town.) I'll probably resist the temptation, though.

It's already such a capable ship for the cost - honestly, I was surprised how much having it as the 2nd starting ship helps, and how survivable it is. Half the time fighting pirates, it somehow manages to get 1-2 kills all by itself.
Kite that is not forced to use missiles for two out of three slots would be nice.  Occasionally, I use Kite (A) with railgun and two annihilators, but that is not very satisfying, and I cannot find anything better for brawling.  Basically, I snipe with the railgun, then unload with annihilators.  Plays very much like a ballistics ship before ammo limits were removed.


@ Dri:  I just downloaded the new release, and I will probably start a new game.  It came at an inconvenient time for me, and it will probably take me a week or so before I grind it to the ground.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 26, 2016, 02:49:54 PM
Just got to say that I like the new look of the launcher! (which is as far as I've gotten so far)
Edit: Are the scarab's front weapon slots supposed to able to rotate like turrets?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on February 26, 2016, 02:56:44 PM
Noticed a music bug.

In the previous version the combat song would sometimes linger after an encounter was over, usually happened in hyperspace I think. Now that doesn't happen anymore, but after the combat part the "engagement" song starts playing (the faction song of the other side) and THAT song is the one that is now lingering after salvaging.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 03:01:23 PM
Noticed a music bug.

In the previous version the combat song would sometimes linger after an encounter was over, usually happened in hyperspace I think. Now that doesn't happen anymore, but after the combat part the "engagement" song starts playing (the faction song of the other side) and THAT song is the one that is now lingering after salvaging.

Thank you, fixed - would happen in hyperspace while near a star system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 26, 2016, 03:09:55 PM
Aww, damn! I'm at work, someone please post screens of the new ships and updated Hyperion!
here you go:
Spoiler

updated LR PD and HIL, new Ion Pulser and Ion Beam
(http://i.imgur.com/OkYE5kc.jpg)

new Wayfarer, Centurion, Scarab, Harbinger and Mudskipper MK.II (featuring only a single large mount!), and updated Hyperion
(http://i.imgur.com/5DjG7b0.jpg)

new ship systems for Centurion and Brawler, Scarab, Harbinger, Afflictor, and Doom
(http://i.imgur.com/0kyDSDL.jpg)

some more weapon slot cover examples
(http://i.imgur.com/nCvSGs7.jpg)

some new starting options
(http://i.imgur.com/xzYEZj2.jpg)
[close]



Awesome, thanks dude! Can't wait ti play!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on February 26, 2016, 03:10:30 PM
By the way, are all these little fixes going to be dealt with in a hotfix or are you just updating the download link each time?  Just curious.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 03:13:00 PM
but you could put composite mounts on the Luddic Path versions. with their risky hullmods, it could make them interesting to use as a player.

"Ill-Advised" might make that too much of a gamble, still, but that does seem to thematically fit the pather variants better. Hmm!

By the way, are all these little fixes going to be dealt with in a hotfix or are you just updating the download link each time?  Just curious.

Hotfix, probably in a day or two unless something major turns up sooner. Would go crazy if I updated the download link every time; involves updating the link in... 20+ places, and uploading the builds to 3 different places.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 26, 2016, 03:29:16 PM
Oh, wow, wow, wow. Sadly, I have to go to sleep now. Can't wait to try this out tomorrow :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 03:34:15 PM
the new starting options are great! two more thoughts:

1) the Centurion option states that it is "slower and hard to kill", compared to the Lasher, but the two ships actually have the same base speed. "hard to kill" could also be somewhat misleading to new players, since frigates in general can feel like they die whenever the player makes the slightest mistake. even if the Centurion is better at this than most other ships of that size, large part of what makes it survivable is its active system, which unexperienced players may not use as much or as well timed as they should.
and since the hybrid mounts seem to be a big part of what differentiates it from other combat frigates, maybe it should say something along the lines of "well-rounded and harder to kill" or "versatile and tough for its size". /nitpick ^^

2) obviously subjective, but i feel the "had business dealings with a prominent pirate captain" choice should carry some kind of penalty, like reducing standing with independents down to suspicious. if the event was known widely enough for it to give you a decent reputation among pirates, other factions would probably hear at least rumors as well. this would also serve to immediately tell new players that keeping high reputation with other factions would be difficult if you're frequently dealing with pirates.
if the penalty seems too harsh, the option could have also add some bonus credits, which would fit the "business dealings" part.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 26, 2016, 04:02:40 PM
The Afflictor might be a BIT OP now...
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/gZ5THio.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 26, 2016, 04:11:19 PM
What Skills do you have there, Kitsune? Missile spec... or was 4-5 Reapers enough to kill it? O_o

I thought Alex added a arming timer for Reapers to prevent phase ships dumping them on a target before it could raise shields.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 04:25:59 PM
@Sy:
Good thoughts, especially the point about losing a bit of independent rep. Probably not something I want to touch now (starting options are a thing that's going to evolve a couple more times at least), but will keep it in mind!

The Afflictor might be a BIT OP now...
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/gZ5THio.png)
[close]

Nice! I'm assuming at least 5 missile spec, and then timing a 4-torpedo barrage with a Quantum Disruptor activation? IIRC you'd need more than 5 torpedoes, though, or missile spec 10.

Seems alright to me, though, since that's a very specialized loadout - guessing you probably even had to link up the Reapers. Main thing I'm surprised by is the lack of damage on the Afflictor - you'd think it'd catch at least some of the Paragon's firepower after unphasing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 26, 2016, 04:41:05 PM
Quick notes:

* This is the first version where I had to disable sound to run the game.  If I run fullscreen and with sound, the game freezes soon after it starts, probably due to lack of memory.  If I turn off sound, I can play the game, but no sound is no fun.  I had this problem before with mods, but this is the first time without mods installed.

* Wolf as a starter ship is gone!  At least I can suicide until I get one!  Respawn ships are Wayfarer, Centurion, Lasher, and... Wolf.

(Loaded my prior saves...)
* LR PD Laser costs too much flux!  I had flux problems using them as a Wolf, more so than Tactical Lasers.  I will stick with other beam PD options.  LR PD Laser should not use more flux than Tactical Laser, given its OP cost and reduced DPS.

* Atropos (with max Missile Specialization) is evil now.  Much faster than Harpoons.  I like them.  They feel almost like Templars' Clarents, except with much less range.

* Reapers bouncing off is usually of no consequence.  If the target does not have enough PD, the Reaper will bounce inside the target and explode anyway.

* Afflictor's Quantum Disruptor is extremely powerful - great for cracking Paragon's shield.  Given how that system works, Afflictor works best as Reaper or Atropos boat.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 04:46:55 PM
* This is the first version where I had to disable sound to run the game.  If I run fullscreen and with sound, the game freezes soon after it starts, probably due to lack of memory.  If I turn off sound, I can play the game, but no sound is no fun.  I had this problem before with mods, but this is the first time without mods installed.

Hm, that's extremely strange, considering this version only added a couple of sounds. I'd be very surprised if it was indeed a memory issue, since even with sound on, vanilla is still well short of using up 1 gig of memory. How long does it take to freeze? What does it end up doing, i.e. does it recover at some point, does it stutter, or does it just hang permanently?

Could you try installing OpenAL from a link here?
https://www.openal.org/downloads/

That might actually resolve the issue.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 04:48:16 PM
if the Afflictor seems too much of a hard counter to ships like the Paragon, you could make the system unusable while phase cloak is on cooldown. that way it would have to make itself vulnerable to enemy fire for at least 2sec before it can pull off its combo of overload + HE burst.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 04:50:13 PM
if the Afflictor seems too much of a hard counter to ships like the Paragon, you could make the system unusable while phase cloak is on cooldown. that way it would have to make itself vulnerable to enemy fire for at least 2sec before it can pull off its combo of overload + HE burst.

That's a possibility, but really, my initial reaction is that this isn't an issue. A hyperspecialized phase ship *should* probably take out a lone capital ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Taverius on February 26, 2016, 04:53:25 PM
* LR PD Laser costs too much flux!  I had flux problems using them as a Wolf, more so than Tactical Lasers.  I will stick with other beam PD options.  LR PD Laser should not use more flux than Tactical Laser, given its OP cost and reduced DPS.
I think that's the idea though - its not frigate PD.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 26, 2016, 04:57:17 PM
Nice! I'm assuming at least 5 missile spec, and then timing a 4-torpedo barrage with a Quantum Disruptor activation? IIRC you'd need more than 5 torpedoes, though, or missile spec 10.

Seems alright to me, though, since that's a very specialized loadout - guessing you probably even had to link up the Reapers. Main thing I'm surprised by is the lack of damage on the Afflictor - you'd think it'd catch at least some of the Paragon's firepower after unphasing.

I got lucky with my shots and the enemy shots. Barely took any damage. Missile spec 5 for +1 missile was all I had for skills
My loadout: 4 reapers on alternating
Mods: Blast doors, hardened systems, Injector
Max caps and vents

if the Afflictor seems too much of a hard counter to ships like the Paragon, you could make the system unusable while phase cloak is on cooldown. that way it would have to make itself vulnerable to enemy fire for at least 2sec before it can pull off its combo of overload + HE burst.
That's a possibility, but really, my initial reaction is that this isn't an issue. A hyperspecialized phase ship *should* probably take out a lone capital ship.
Agreed. This took me a few tries to do and most of the time if I wasn't cloaked after the cooldown, I was dead

Also I found a few bugs: One is that the bounty in Corvus is only for around 12 days. I think this is because we start on Jan 1 206. The other bug is that in missions, the game won't remember you checking the "don't show unusable hullmods" box and it resets every time the hull mod box closes
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 05:38:48 PM
* LR PD Laser costs too much flux!  I had flux problems using them as a Wolf, more so than Tactical Lasers.  I will stick with other beam PD options.  LR PD Laser should not use more flux than Tactical Laser, given its OP cost and reduced DPS.
I think that's the idea though - its not frigate PD.

Yeah, it's meant for either a very dedicated smaller PD ship, or as a bit of long-range PD on a larger ship.

Also I found a few bugs: One is that the bounty in Corvus is only for around 12 days. I think this is because we start on Jan 1 206. The other bug is that in missions, the game won't remember you checking the "don't show unusable hullmods" box and it resets every time the hull mod box closes

Hmm, that's strange - it's supposed to insta-end any bounties that pop up from Jangala until the player spawns, at which point it starts a fresh one. Are you sure it wasn't, say, an extra bounty from Asharu or some such that started out at 12 days?

Mission mod dialog: fixed!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 26, 2016, 05:41:09 PM
* This is the first version where I had to disable sound to run the game.  If I run fullscreen and with sound, the game freezes soon after it starts, probably due to lack of memory.  If I turn off sound, I can play the game, but no sound is no fun.  I had this problem before with mods, but this is the first time without mods installed.

Hm, that's extremely strange, considering this version only added a couple of sounds. I'd be very surprised if it was indeed a memory issue, since even with sound on, vanilla is still well short of using up 1 gig of memory. How long does it take to freeze? What does it end up doing, i.e. does it recover at some point, does it stutter, or does it just hang permanently?

Could you try installing OpenAL from a link here?
https://www.openal.org/downloads/

That might actually resolve the issue.
The first time I ran it, I froze after I tried to exit the codex after browsing a ship.  On subsequent runs, it freezes for a bit when "preloading..." appears.  Usually, this is temporary, but if I click something later to exit a screen, it freezes permanently.

If I need to install something, I think I will try 64-bit java.  I have the RAM, but not the 64-bit java to use it.

* LR PD Laser costs too much flux!  I had flux problems using them as a Wolf, more so than Tactical Lasers.  I will stick with other beam PD options.  LR PD Laser should not use more flux than Tactical Laser, given its OP cost and reduced DPS.
I think that's the idea though - its not frigate PD.
It's not any-ship PD.  I do not even use tactical lasers for PD on some capital ships (like Paragon) due to flux cost, and I do not want to use PD that sucks more flux than tactical lasers.  The ships that have flux for LR PD Laser need that flux for flux hungry assault weapons like blasters, and PD that costs too much flux interferes with effective blaster/PC use.

Also, the ships with the best PD are not beam users, but Vulcan and/or flak users.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 05:45:17 PM
On subsequent runs, it freezes for a bit when "preloading..." appears.  Usually, this is temporary, but if I click something later to exit a screen, it freezes permanently.

If I need to install something, I think I will try 64-bit java.  I have the RAM, but not the 64-bit java to use it.

Removing the "-server" bit from vmparams may be worth a shot in this case, too.

It'd be weird for this to be a memory issue since memory use should be consistent across different systems, and it works fine - not even close to memory limit - over here. So I'd still suggest trying installing OpenAL; that you're experiencing issues with this suggests a problem with sound on your system rather than with the game.

That said, 64-bit java may resolve it anyway, in bandaid fashion.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 26, 2016, 05:57:43 PM
Stealth buff to Hammerhead? Did it always have 5000 hull (same as Enforcer)?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 05:58:15 PM
I think so? Don't recall touching that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on February 26, 2016, 06:01:56 PM
Well done! So many amazing points that we could have a long time playing! Anyway, will 0.7.2a become a long-sustained version? We had just done the translation just for 0.7.1 not long ago.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 26, 2016, 06:08:41 PM
Scarab is hilarious, firing 3-4 annihilator volleys before the first one hits is an amazing feeling. Gets real nasty when you have 10 helmsmanship. Flank anything.

Stealth buff to Hammerhead? Did it always have 5000 hull (same as Enforcer)?
Yea
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 06:13:58 PM
Anyway, will 0.7.2a become a long-sustained version? We had just done the translation just for 0.7.1 not long ago.

That's the plan, yeah! (Also, sent you a PM with a question.)

Scarab is hilarious, firing 3-4 annihilator volleys before the first one hits is an amazing feeling. Gets real nasty when you have 10 helmsmanship. Flank anything.

Worth ... acquiring... from Tri-Tach? :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 26, 2016, 06:22:43 PM
I can endure those stuffy bastards' resentment if it means I get to have bullet time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 26, 2016, 06:25:46 PM
Haven't gotten ahold of a Scarab yet but from the Codex it seemed that its flux stats were pretty abysmal considering how many weapons it can mount...

Glad to hear that its ship system easily makes up for it!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 26, 2016, 06:27:06 PM
You won't really use all of its weapon mounts. Also it has a really efficient shield.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on February 26, 2016, 06:48:33 PM
Anyway, will 0.7.2a become a long-sustained version? We had just done the translation just for 0.7.1 not long ago.

That's the plan, yeah! (Also, sent you a PM with a question.)


And i replied.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on February 26, 2016, 07:01:51 PM
I like the Centurion. It's right up my alley – heavy armor and lots of guns. 8)

Also, turning to put different weapons on target makes me feel like a pro. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 07:10:24 PM
i gotta say, i'm not a fan of the firing arcs of Wayfarer and Centurion. way too spread out for ships that are supposedly designed for combat. having only two small mounts for primary weapons (or a maximum of three, in a tiny arc, at an awkward angle) and being unable to have frontal PD coverage without sacrificing yet another of these two mounts seems really weak, especially for what is classified as a heavy frigate.

i understand that the Wayfarer is only a hybrid combat ship and the Centurion's strength is supposed to be its toughness, but i still feel this is too little. i think at least the two side-turrets should have firing arcs up to the center front (as in, not overlapping with each other). that would still only allow aiming a maximum of three weapons at a time at one enemy, but it wouldn't be at such a limited and awkward angle. alternatively it would allow having full (albeit weak) frontal PD coverage without having to give up a frontal mount.
even with a change like that, they'd still have far less focused firepower than a Lasher or Wolf.

edit:
I like the Centurion. It's right up my alley – heavy armor and lots of guns. 8)

Also, turning to put different weapons on target makes me feel like a pro. :P
looks like we feel rather differently. :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 26, 2016, 07:42:13 PM
i gotta say, i'm not a fan of the firing arcs of Wayfarer and Centurion. way too spread out for ships that are supposedly designed for combat. having only two small mounts for primary weapons (or a maximum of three, in a tiny arc, at an awkward angle) and being unable to have frontal PD coverage without sacrificing yet another of these two mounts seems really weak, especially for what is classified as a heavy frigate.

i understand that the Wayfarer is only a hybrid combat ship and the Centurion's strength is supposed to be its toughness, but i still feel this is too little. i think at least the two side-turrets should have firing arcs up to the center front (as in, not overlapping with each other). that would still only allow aiming a maximum of three weapons at a time at one enemy, but it wouldn't be at such a limited and awkward angle. alternatively it would allow having full (albeit weak) frontal PD coverage without having to give up a frontal mount.
even with a change like that, they'd still have far less focused firepower than a Lasher or Wolf.

edit:
I like the Centurion. It's right up my alley – heavy armor and lots of guns. 8)

Also, turning to put different weapons on target makes me feel like a pro. :P
looks like we feel rather differently. :D
I completely agree here. The Centurion feels like an over-gunned freighter or a PD platform and not as an actual mine line combat frig
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 07:48:23 PM
The Centurion is a ship that explores a turret layout that provides similar coverage all around the ship; the explicit design goal is to not have it be a ship where frontal firepower is greatest, without making it a broadside ship at the same time. It's just a different style; lower single-target firepower but much better defensive capability and it's harder to be flanked.

It does also make a mean escort ship later in the game. The turret layout is a benefit, and it can survive the firepower that's flying around at that point.

Sure, if it could point more turrets towards the front, it'd be a better ship. But it probably wouldn't be a ship that got made at all, given that that role is nicely filled by all the aforementioned frigates.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 26, 2016, 07:51:23 PM
@ Alex:  My monitor is a widescreen, 1920x1080.  Instead of disabling sound, I can reduce resolution (and disable fullscreen), and can run the game (maybe not extended play).  Like no sound, lowering resolution is not fun either (I have grown used to a bigger screen), but probably not as bad as no sound.

I have problems when I run 1920x1080 (or close to it) AND sound.  Did not have problems before 0.7.2 (without mods); do not have problems if I downgrade something (not fun).

What exactly is OpenAL?  The host site gives almost no details on what it is, or what it does if I install it.


i gotta say, i'm not a fan of the firing arcs of Wayfarer and Centurion. way too spread out for ships that are supposedly designed for combat. having only two small mounts for primary weapons (or a maximum of three, in a tiny arc, at an awkward angle) and being unable to have frontal PD coverage without sacrificing yet another of these two mounts seems really weak, especially for what is classified as a heavy frigate.
I noticed that, and it seems that way.  My gut instinct is to put LAG, and one kinetic at the front, and the rest Vulcans.  Centurion and Wayfarer feel like shuttles with lots of mounts for Vulcan PD.  Scarab seems to have a similar layout, but for worse energy weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 26, 2016, 08:01:10 PM
Alex did you release this patch just for little ol me? Time ships and API assistance for hiding TWIGs? You even wrote a 'temporal' shell ship system for me!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 26, 2016, 08:03:59 PM
Centurion isn't the most exciting ship, even though it does fill an unexplored niche and is ridiculously hard to kill for a frigate. I can see the overarching idea behind it, but the end result is that you'll probably outfit it as a long range tac laser/gyro/ipdai ship/burst laser platform almost every time, unless it's at the very start of the game. Need to test more though, it might be a funny unflankable point capping ship with a set of long-range ballistics on it, or as a "tank" with an aggressive officer to generate flanking opportunities.

What's the deal with the missile power creep, by the way? Missiles offer lower TTK and a higher degree of randomness than a few years back, and most patches have continued the trend in some way, although the Locust and Squall are good. (is the squall supposed to have 750 proj HP?)

Missile Specialization is the biggest culprit, but there are a few other changes too. The new Atropos isn't really fun to deal with, and it feels fairly brainless to use. If the enemy fleet has a few, you basically can't overload near those ships ever, or you die, forcing you to play extremely cautiously. This was already the case thanks to Harpoons and missile specialization, but now there's an added dimension to it. They're thankfully quite rare in vanilla, but I find it tedious. I wonder if the idea of a homing torpedo is inherently flawed. Torpedoes are supposed to pack enough punch to threaten bigger ships, so PD resistance and raw damage is their chief asset over MRMs. A fast, homing torpedo turns it into an asymmetrical weapon that favors top-down engagements, instead of being an equalizer, because the toughest ships aren't hard to hit in the first place. To put it bluntly, I feel like the Atropos doesn't really need to exist at all.

Harpoons have become better against frigates over time. Frigates like to use Harpoons as equalizers against bigger ships. Bigger ships can never dodge harpoons reliably anymore due to the veering, but even frigates can struggle due to the fact harpoons will flip around and accelerate back if they miss on the first run. Maybe harpoons should commit more to their heading and instead try to predict based on the target's current vector, so that a frigate that reads the incoming missile's projected hit location can pull off a last-minute dodge, and to make the initial firing position more important.

The best defense against missiles is to crush the enemy ship(s) so hard that you're never vulnerable in the first place. Counting on reacting to the missiles is unreliable (or impossible if given missile spec), unless you're already playing extremely defensively. The harder it is to minimize the impact of being punished by missiles (for either side) the more binary Starsector becomes and the more important it is to only choose asymmetrical engagements that are in your favor. And a lot of the time, you can just fire Harpoons indiscriminately to remove threats anyway, the concept of "punishment" or situational use has become a bit blurred. It's a tricky balance, because you would never use a missile with 3 ammo if you can't reliably gain anything from firing them.

The redesigned Hurricane MIRV is also not very interesting. It tends to mostly ignore PD except for flak, leaving you shielding the submunitions until the ship runs out of ammo, because it's too risky to engage while it's still launching them unless you vastly overpower the enemy. In the end, you just game the ammo out, and if you can't, you'll probably get punished hard for it. Might be a side effect of how liberally the AI uses the weapon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 26, 2016, 08:06:01 PM
The Centurion is a very interesting ship. Powerful enough to make the early game easier, but complicated to fly. The firing arcs and starting weapons make it more of a broadside ship, that wants to switch between being tilted to the left and tilted to the right depending on your target's flux levels and shield status. However, once I got the guns for it, I just decided to alternate the front four slots between Dual Autocannons and Light Assault Guns so that no matter which way it's pointing it has 1 kinetic and 1 HE gun facing the enemy. It's certainly tanky, and I quite like it.

Taking the Bounty Hunter's option to start with an extra ship and an officer bumps your burn speed down to 9, which makes it a bit hard to chase down pirates in Corvus. Slightly annoying.

I right-clicked my officer to remove him from a ship and transfer to another ship, and he disappeared entirely?

With the combination of the free ship + officer, and further nerfed pirates, I believe it is now possible for mortal men to claw their way out of the early game sinkhole of misery. Kudos.

Edit: A Mudskipper with a Large Ballistic Mount? What?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on February 26, 2016, 08:09:24 PM
A very quick thought: how's "Dynamic" sound compared to "Synergy" for energy/missile mounts? Synergy sounds nice but seems a bit out of place (it almost implies you can use two weapons in one to "synergise"), Dynamic sounds more "versatile" while retaining a high tech feel.

My opinion of course.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 26, 2016, 08:09:44 PM
The redesigned Hurricane MIRV is also not very interesting. It tends to mostly ignore PD except for flak, leaving you shielding the submunitions until the ship runs out of ammo, because it's too risky to engage while it's still launching them unless you vastly overpower the enemy. In the end, you just game the ammo out, and if you can't, you'll probably get punished hard for it. Might be a side effect of how liberally the AI uses the weapon.
The MIRV is much like it was before it got unlimited ammo.  If your ship can shield-tank them, it is a good idea to do so until it runs out (most).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 26, 2016, 08:11:24 PM
Yeah, waiting for the enemy to predictably waste their missiles on your shield is really interesting
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 08:15:04 PM
it did occur to me that the Centurion (and to some degree the Wayfarer) would probably feel a lot better later on, in larger battles, where they can fire at several enemies at a time (without needing to focus one down on their own) or provide powerful beam support or PD to allied ships.

but then it is probably a poor fit for a starting option, where it will often be the only ship in the fleet for some time and needs to be able to take out several enemy frigates all by itself. if it's just there for variety's sake, that's fine for experienced players who know to avoid that option unless they want to have a bigger challenge. but it would be somewhat of a newbie trap, since trying to solo pirate fleets in that ship would likely feel rather frustrating, even though a "slower and hard to kill" bounty hunter's combat ship may sound like the perfect choice for someone unexperienced just starting out.

and now that the complaining has been taken care of, i'll go back to giggling with joy over my new Afflictor that i recently "aquired" found on Asharu's black market! ^_^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 26, 2016, 08:22:21 PM
The Doom's interdiction array is oddly satisfying to use. ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 26, 2016, 08:28:08 PM
Hey Alex, here is a screencap of what I was talking about. This is right after doing a new game
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/e3k7aLv.png)
[close]
never mind it popped up after a few days... (Jan 29th) Sorry
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on February 26, 2016, 08:28:22 PM
Missiles are definitely too powerful. A barrage of harpoons will kill anything. The only other missiles worth using are the MIRV, which is basically the large harpoon, and reapers. By the way, the MIRV seems to have been buffed tremendously, the damage is through the roof. I can almost one shot an Enforcer now.

I also got an Afflictor and I don't really know how to use it best. I fitted it with 4 AM blasters, got 19 caps, no vents. I can one shot hammerheads and sunders from behind through the hole in their shields, but then again I could also be playing in an Enforcer and take a few extra seconds to achieve the same result. I've never really used phase ships before and now they seem a lot better but I don't know when to attack or what to attack with them.

I also have two bugs to report:

1) Sometimes friendly AIs will get stuck in a corner of the combat map, no order can debug them. You need to physically move near them and ask for escort.

2) The Onslaught has a new stock loadout that's quite "special" to say the least. It's called "Standard" like the other one, but it's most certainly not standard as it mounts missiles nearly everywhere, which of course isn't even possible. It works though.

Vanilla game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: MesoTroniK on February 26, 2016, 08:31:46 PM
Centurion isn't the most exciting ship, even though it does fill an unexplored niche and is ridiculously hard to kill for a frigate. I can see the overarching idea behind it, but the end result is that you'll probably outfit it as a long range tac laser/gyro/ipdai ship almost every time, unless it's at the very start of the game. Need to test more though, it might be a funny unflankable point capping ship with a set of long-range ballistics on it, or as a "tank" with an aggressive officer to generate flanking opportunities.

What's the deal with the missile power creep, by the way? Missiles offer lower TTK and a higher degree of randomness than a few years back, and most patches have continued the trend in some way, although the Locust and Squall are good. (is the squall supposed to have 750 proj HP?)

Missile Specialization is the biggest culprit, but there are a few other changes too. The new Atropos isn't really fun to deal with, and it feels fairly brainless to use. If the enemy fleet has a few, you basically can't overload near those ships ever, or you die, forcing you to play extremely cautiously. This was already the case thanks to Harpoons and missile specialization, but now there's an added dimension to it. They're thankfully quite rare in vanilla, but I find it tedious. I wonder if the idea of a homing torpedo is inherently flawed.

Harpoons have become better against frigates over time. Frigates like to use Harpoons as equalizers against bigger ships. Bigger ships can never dodge harpoons reliably anymore due to the veering, but even frigates can struggle due to the fact harpoons will flip around and accelerate back if they miss on the first run. Maybe harpoons should commit more to their heading and instead try to predict based on the target's current vector, so that a frigate that reads the incoming missile's projected hit location can pull off a last-minute dodge, and to make the initial firing position more important.

The best defense against missiles is to crush the enemy ship so hard that you're never vulnerable in the first place.

The redesigned Hurricane MIRV is also not very interesting. It tends to mostly ignore PD except for flak, leaving you shielding the submunitions until the ship runs out of ammo, because it's too risky to engage while it's still launching them unless you vastly overpower the enemy. In the end, you just game the ammo out, and if you can't, you'll probably get punished hard for it. Might be a side effect of how liberally the AI uses the weapon.

I would like to expand upon this, I strongly dislike the entire flight profile of most vanilla missiles.

Evasion is essentially ineffective as the missiles have so much acceleration and turn ability that they just loop around and then hit the rear of the ship. Even more bizarre is how often they weave and sidewind around a stationary target effectively missing on purpose then hitting the rear! I would prefer a flight profile that relies on interception rather than massive maneuverability, where the weapon is fast and sets up a pass at the intercept point, if you evade it? Kudos, it is unlikely to be able to make a return pass on all but the largest targets. The weaving behavior would also taper off as it approaches the target at a faster rate than it does now which would fix the missing on purpose issue.

I feel that Salamanders are ok, Locusts are ok, Swarmers are ok, Annihilators are ok, and Squall are ok but every single other missile weapon uses distasteful mechanics. In the previous paragraph I described what I do not like about the agility and AI of standard guided missiles. But what of the others?

Why is the Sabot second stage projectile essentially hit scan?

(http://i.imgur.com/sfBEsor.gif)
 
So that mod missile weapon has a reasonable second stage, the primary missile actually aims the shot at an intercept point so its accurate while retaining a "fair" speed for the submunition. This is similar in a way to what I mentioned before about normal guided missiles, that a system that is smart instead of just boosting all the stats like crazy makes for a far more fair and balanced game.

What of torpedos and rockets? Same issue really, the AI is terrible at aiming them so to fix that they all have insane acceleration and top speed. You cast the finger of death and there is almost no possible way to defend against it via simple movement and PD has almost no response time. If the AI actually aimed rocket weapons properly then they could have reasonable speed and acceleration.

Bassically, I believe in the theory that every play should have a counter play but with how most missiles work right now there are few options to deal with them and they just are not fun. The way the AI works I don't agree with, most all of them are too agile and too fast, and the alpha strike is completely out of control and I am only talking about level 0.

A bit of a rant there, but it is what it is. Most mod missiles that use custom AI work similar to the theory I described that I believe makes for a better game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Surge on February 26, 2016, 08:42:22 PM
The Scarab seems a bit OP for a starter ship, though I suppose no more so than the Wolf already was. It IS starting to warp my perception of time in-game though, which is fun I guess.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 26, 2016, 08:47:39 PM
-missiles power creep stuff
-more missile power creep stuff-
I really don't have much more to add except that I agree with these guys
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on February 26, 2016, 08:48:46 PM
What exactly is OpenAL?  The host site gives almost no details on what it is, or what it does if I install it.
You remind me of someone at my college, a friend of mine - he worries WAY too much about everything that happens or doesn't happen.  A simple Google search will tell you that it's an audio application that's fairly common across pretty much every platform conceivable.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on February 26, 2016, 08:51:44 PM
The Scarab seems a bit OP for a starter ship, though I suppose no more so than the Wolf already was. It IS starting to warp my perception of time in-game though, which is fun I guess.

The more I use it the more I like it. It's kind of okay as a starter ship in that it takes some time to really comprehend what you have unleashed on the sector. It is a very powerful starter ship, though. That's for sure. Taking the hit against tri-tach probably makes up for that to some degree, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on February 26, 2016, 08:53:58 PM
The Conquest's engine flare alignment is messed up.  No screenshot because it should be obvious if you look at it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on February 26, 2016, 09:01:27 PM
The Conquest's engine flare alignment is messed up.  No screenshot because it should be obvious if you look at it.
Same with the Hammerhead, though that ones a bit harder to see.

I'm okay with the turret layout of the Centurion, Scarab, and Wayfarer. They first two have Omni shields and ship systems that either mitigate/ let you more easily avoid incoming damage.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on February 26, 2016, 09:01:51 PM
Wasn't the Doom supposed to have its Medium Missile mounts changed to Synergy? Don't think this has been mentioned yet (or perhaps it has and I'm just blind).

Also, the Mudskipper Mk.II has the same cargo and crew capacity as the normal version. Seems like it should be greatly reduced.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 09:06:56 PM
for some reason my Harpoons seem to frequently ignore my target and go after another enemy instead. just had two of a salvo of three fly after some Broadswords, rather than take out the overloaded Wolf in front of me, which was set as target.

somewhat related, the AI still seems to have some trouble judging how many Harpoons it should fire at a vulnerable enemy, at least when there are allies nearby doing the same (screenshot (http://i.imgur.com/83Hcpjy.png)).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: DanJSC on February 26, 2016, 09:11:39 PM
The officer you start with doesn't count as an officer it seems. Accidentally put myself in his ship and when i put myself back in mine he'd vanished. Reloaded the save from an earlier one, when trying to reassign him he's just nonexistant.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on February 26, 2016, 09:14:43 PM
for some reason my Harpoons seem to frequently ignore my target and go after another enemy instead. just had two of a salvo of three fly after some Broadswords, rather than take out the overloaded Wolf in front of me, which was set as target.

somewhat related, the AI still seems to have some trouble judging how many Harpoons it should fire at a vulnerable enemy, at least when there are allies nearby doing the same (screenshot (http://i.imgur.com/83Hcpjy.png)).

Just had the same thing happen to me.  :-\

Might have something to do with the changes made to the missile ai for phase ships.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 09:20:58 PM
@ Alex:  My monitor is a widescreen, 1920x1080.  Instead of disabling sound, I can reduce resolution (and disable fullscreen), and can run the game (maybe not extended play).  Like no sound, lowering resolution is not fun either (I have grown used to a bigger screen), but probably not as bad as no sound.

I have problems when I run 1920x1080 (or close to it) AND sound.  Did not have problems before 0.7.2 (without mods); do not have problems if I downgrade something (not fun).

That's odd. I'm seeing the same memory usage when running at 1024x768 and 1650x1080, and that's what I'd expect, more or less. Certainly not a major difference. Unless the video card you're using uses RAM instead of dedicated VRAM, but even that doesn't make much sense since that'd be fine to go over what's allocated to Java.

What exactly is OpenAL?  The host site gives almost no details on what it is, or what it does if I install it.

It's the sound library the game uses. Sometimes, on a windows machine, the OpenAL.dll on your system will end up being used instead of the one shipped with the game, for Windows reasons. And if that one happens to be an old/bad version, problems occur. Installing OpenAL from that link should ensure that the OpenAL on your system is a working version.


Alex did you release this patch just for little ol me? Time ships and API assistance for hiding TWIGs? You even wrote a 'temporal' shell ship system for me!

:)


A very quick thought: how's "Dynamic" sound compared to "Synergy" for energy/missile mounts? Synergy sounds nice but seems a bit out of place (it almost implies you can use two weapons in one to "synergise"), Dynamic sounds more "versatile" while retaining a high tech feel.

My opinion of course.

Hmm. Will think about that; initial thought is to leave well enough alone - to my mind it's kind of a sidegrade.


Hey Alex, here is a screencap of what I was talking about. This is right after doing a new game
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/e3k7aLv.png)
[close]

Aha, right, this is not offered by Jangala. If you wait a few seconds in the campaign view you should get a new bounty posted from Jangala.


I right-clicked my officer to remove him from a ship and transfer to another ship, and he disappeared entirely?
The officer you start with doesn't count as an officer it seems. Accidentally put myself in his ship and when i put myself back in mine he'd vanished. Reloaded the save from an earlier one, when trying to reassign him he's just nonexistant.

Bug; reported earlier and fixed for the hotfix that'll be out... probably in a couple of days.

Edit: A Mudskipper with a Large Ballistic Mount? What?

Glorious madness, that's what!


1) Sometimes friendly AIs will get stuck in a corner of the combat map, no order can debug them. You need to physically move near them and ask for escort.

How often/under what conditions are you seeing this? What exactly are they doing? Are enemy ships nearby? Are any "Avoid" orders in play?


2) The Onslaught has a new stock loadout that's quite "special" to say the least. It's called "Standard" like the other one, but it's most certainly not standard as it mounts missiles nearly everywhere, which of course isn't even possible. It works though.

Did you see it in the campaign? If so, where?


Missile stuff:
Spoiler
Centurion isn't the most exciting ship, even though it does fill an unexplored niche and is ridiculously hard to kill for a frigate. I can see the overarching idea behind it, but the end result is that you'll probably outfit it as a long range tac laser/gyro/ipdai ship almost every time, unless it's at the very start of the game. Need to test more though, it might be a funny unflankable point capping ship with a set of long-range ballistics on it, or as a "tank" with an aggressive officer to generate flanking opportunities.

What's the deal with the missile power creep, by the way? Missiles offer lower TTK and a higher degree of randomness than a few years back, and most patches have continued the trend in some way, although the Locust and Squall are good. (is the squall supposed to have 750 proj HP?)

Missile Specialization is the biggest culprit, but there are a few other changes too. The new Atropos isn't really fun to deal with, and it feels fairly brainless to use. If the enemy fleet has a few, you basically can't overload near those ships ever, or you die, forcing you to play extremely cautiously. This was already the case thanks to Harpoons and missile specialization, but now there's an added dimension to it. They're thankfully quite rare in vanilla, but I find it tedious. I wonder if the idea of a homing torpedo is inherently flawed.

Harpoons have become better against frigates over time. Frigates like to use Harpoons as equalizers against bigger ships. Bigger ships can never dodge harpoons reliably anymore due to the veering, but even frigates can struggle due to the fact harpoons will flip around and accelerate back if they miss on the first run. Maybe harpoons should commit more to their heading and instead try to predict based on the target's current vector, so that a frigate that reads the incoming missile's projected hit location can pull off a last-minute dodge, and to make the initial firing position more important.

The best defense against missiles is to crush the enemy ship so hard that you're never vulnerable in the first place.

The redesigned Hurricane MIRV is also not very interesting. It tends to mostly ignore PD except for flak, leaving you shielding the submunitions until the ship runs out of ammo, because it's too risky to engage while it's still launching them unless you vastly overpower the enemy. In the end, you just game the ammo out, and if you can't, you'll probably get punished hard for it. Might be a side effect of how liberally the AI uses the weapon.

I would like to expand upon this, I strongly dislike the entire flight profile of most vanilla missiles.

Evasion is essentially ineffective as the missiles have so much acceleration and turn ability that they just loop around and then hit the rear of the ship. Even more bizarre is how often they weave and sidewind around a stationary target effectively missing on purpose then hitting the rear! I would prefer a flight profile that relies on interception rather than massive maneuverability, where the weapon is fast and sets up a pass at the intercept point, if you evade it? Kudos, it is unlikely to be able to make a return pass on all but the largest targets. The weaving behavior would also taper off as it approaches the target at a faster rate than it does now which would fix the missing on purpose issue.

I feel that Salamanders are ok, Locusts are ok, Swarmers are ok, Annihilators are ok, and Squall are ok but every single other missile weapon uses distasteful mechanics. In the previous paragraph I described what I do not like about the agility and AI of standard guided missiles. But what of the others?

Why is the Sabot second stage projectile essentially hit scan?

(http://i.imgur.com/sfBEsor.gif)
 
So that mod missile weapon has a reasonable second stage, the primary missile actually aims the shot at an intercept point so its accurate while retaining a "fair" speed for the submunition. This is similar in a way to what I mentioned before about normal guided missiles, that a system that is smart instead of just boosting all the stats like crazy makes for a far more fair and balanced game.

What of torpedos and rockets? Same issue really, the AI is terrible at aiming them so to fix that they all have insane acceleration and top speed. You cast the finger of death and there is almost no possible way to defend against it via simple movement and PD has almost no response time. If the AI actually aimed rocket weapons properly then they could have reasonable speed and acceleration.

Bassically, I believe in the theory that every play should have a counter play but with how most missiles work right now there are few options to deal with them and they just are not fun. The way the AI works I don't agree with, most all of them are too agile and too fast, and the alpha strike is completely out of control and I am only talking about level 0.

A bit of a rant there, but it is what it is. Most mod missiles that use custom AI work similar to the theory I described that I believe makes for a better game.
[close]

Nerfing the Hurricane is on my TODO list.

The Atropos is expensive OP-wise, but, yes, I generally agree with the analysis. Had similar thoughts when trying to balance it, a guided torpedo is a weird niche. Ended up giving it a short range to somewhat compensate. The saving grace, as you say (and that I definitely considered) is you don't encounter it much at all as a player. If you did, it would be very problematic. As it is, I'm still not happy with it.

I do also think Missile Spec is the main problem here, and that'll be addressed.



What of torpedos and rockets? Same issue really, the AI is terrible at aiming them so to fix that they all have insane acceleration and top speed. You cast the finger of death and there is almost no possible way to defend against it via simple movement and PD has almost no response time. If the AI actually aimed rocket weapons properly then they could have reasonable speed and acceleration.

I can't really agree with this. Without missile spec, I still find Reapers pretty dodgeable - you just have to maintain awareness of ships that have them.

Before the buff to top speed, the only reliable way to get Reaper hits was to launch them point-blank. Anything shot from afar was either shot down or reliably dodged by ships up to cruiser size. Sure, the odd one got through, but it felt very luck-based - just fire it off and hope the AI messes up, basically.

(is the squall supposed to have 750 proj HP?)

Yes, in theory most of the projectile is just a lump of metal but... it's weird. I kind of want to rework the Squall at some point - I like the overall idea (a long-term stream of kinetic damage allied ships can play around) but not the specific execution.


Bassically, I believe in the theory that every play should have a counter play but with how most missiles work right now there are few options to deal with them and they just are not fun. The way the AI works I don't agree with, most all of them are too agile and too fast, and the alpha strike is completely out of control and I am only talking about level 0.

Minus the ones you've mentioned as being ok, and minus the torpedoes, that leaves what - the Harpoon and the Sabot, right? Assuming missile spec is out of the picture - sabots are slow, and long-range PD can take them out. They can also be moved away from by many ships. Harpoons are very susceptible to flak, and can be dodged by frigates. I'm not saying these are *bad*, but it seems like you should get some value out of 4 ordnance points, right?

I mean, if we were talking about these at Missile Spec 10, I'd pretty much agree with what you're saying, so it seems like a matter of degrees. I definitely haven't, in playtesting, felt like level 0 missiles were unfair, uncounterable, or even a particular pain to deal with. On the other hand, if a missile spec 10 enforcer unloads 10+ Harpoons and just erases one of your ships that had the audacity to get to 80% flux, that's a whole other story. So: will definitely keep an eye on it.


All in all, I feel like the TTK for ships has gone up too much in recent updates. Scaling that down is a big item on the TODO list, and missiles are certainly part of that.


The Conquest's engine flare alignment is messed up.  No screenshot because it should be obvious if you look at it.
Same with the Hammerhead, though that ones a bit harder to see.

I'm okay with the turret layout of the Centurion, Scarab, and Wayfarer. They first two have Omni shields and ship systems that either mitigate/ let you more easily avoid incoming damage.

Uhh, how'd that happen? Thank you, let me fix that up.


Wasn't the Doom supposed to have its Medium Missile mounts changed to Synergy? Don't think this has been mentioned yet (or perhaps it has and I'm just blind).

It wasn't. I do remember seeing some talk about this on the forum, but I'm not sure where people got the idea that that happened.

somewhat related, the AI still seems to have some trouble judging how many Harpoons it should fire at a vulnerable enemy, at least when there are allies nearby doing the same (screenshot (http://i.imgur.com/83Hcpjy.png)).

Thanks - I'll note that down as something to look at. It's supposed to consider that (though not perfectly). Could be just an edge case where it's within expected parameters for it to mess up, could be something I did messed up the code that figures this out.

for some reason my Harpoons seem to frequently ignore my target and go after another enemy instead. just had two of a salvo of three fly after some Broadswords, rather than take out the overloaded Wolf in front of me, which was set as target.

Right - more or less "how it works" now; phase breaks missile lock and phase skimmer/teleporter actually does phase out the ship briefly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on February 26, 2016, 09:28:55 PM
  • Doom:
    • Changed medium missile hardpoints to "synergy"
    • New ship system, "Interdictor Array"

That's where we got the idea from. ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 26, 2016, 09:31:01 PM

The Conquest's engine flare alignment is messed up.  No screenshot because it should be obvious if you look at it.
Same with the Hammerhead, though that ones a bit harder to see.


Uhh, how'd that happen? Thank you, let me fix that up.


*Cough* Maybe I updated the sprites - for the Conquest at least - without fixing the engine glows? Or was that the patch before? Pretty sure I didn't touch the Hammerhead at all however.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 09:32:13 PM
  • Doom:
    • Changed medium missile hardpoints to "synergy"
    • New ship system, "Interdictor Array"

That's where we got the idea from. ;D

... well, I got sat down pretty hard here.

(Played around with that at one point but didn't like it; thought I'd removed that from the patch notes before publishing them. Apparently not.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 09:33:11 PM
*Cough* Maybe I updated the sprites - for the Conquest at least - without fixing the engine glows? Or was that the patch before? Pretty sure I didn't touch the Hammerhead at all however.

Are you really sure? Because it looks super messed up, like, not the kind of messed up that could've gone overlooked for too long. (Fixing now, about to check in.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 09:40:13 PM
i love how the Mudskipper variant that's armed with a Gauss Cannon has to vent after every single shot. xD

shouldn't the MK.II have significantly worse logistics stats, though? seems weird to me that forcing a large mount and military sensor systems on that little thing doesn't come at the cost of cargo and passenger capacity, or maybe increased maintenance requirements.

Right - more or less "how it works" now; phase breaks missile lock and phase skimmer/teleporter actually does phase out the ship briefly.
oooh, i see. i had no idea that this change applies to all phase-related stuff. that's actually pretty cool!

on a completely different note, i've started subconsciously trying to shift+scroll to speed up in things other than Starsector, because that's such a useful feature, and it doesn't work! frustrating. >_<
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 26, 2016, 09:44:17 PM
*Cough* Maybe I updated the sprites - for the Conquest at least - without fixing the engine glows? Or was that the patch before? Pretty sure I didn't touch the Hammerhead at all however.

Are you really sure? Because it looks super messed up, like, not the kind of messed up that could've gone overlooked for too long. (Fixing now, about to check in.)

(... okay, maybe not then. I did not, in fact, check to see how messed up it was. *straightens invisible tie, classily*)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 09:48:23 PM
i love how the Mudskipper variant that's armed with a Gauss Cannon has to vent after every single shot. xD

That one actually required an AI change - a special case of "if you've only got one weapon, and a non-offensive system, then just vent when the weapon is cooling down if it's beneficial".

shouldn't the MK.II have significantly worse logistics stats, though? seems weird to me that forcing a large mount and military sensor systems on that little thing doesn't come at the cost of cargo and passenger capacity, or maybe increased maintenance requirements.

I think they just put the passengers/cargo inside the barrel of the Hellbore. I don't see the problem, it's very roomy in there.

(Ok, honestly, it should probably have really awful cargo/passenger capacity.)

on a completely different note, i've started subconsciously trying to shift+scroll to speed up in things other than Starsector, because that's such a useful feature, and it doesn't work! frustrating. >_<

I've done that before :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cik on February 26, 2016, 09:54:02 PM
fighter changes rabble rabble  >:(

cool patch though. every time i come on to the forum i check the top and i've missed it too many times.

maybe you should make the announcements in big bolder text for my poor mind :^)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on February 26, 2016, 09:57:49 PM
shouldn't the MK.II have significantly worse logistics stats, though? seems weird to me that forcing a large mount and military sensor systems on that little thing doesn't come at the cost of cargo and passenger capacity, or maybe increased maintenance requirements.

I think they just put the passengers/cargo inside the barrel of the Hellbore. I don't see the problem, it's very roomy in there.
Alternatively I'm imagining the pirates literally just bolting the guns on top of the cargo space, ha! Silly pirates.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: StarSchulz on February 26, 2016, 10:05:14 PM
The scarab is so weeeeiiirrrdd!   :o
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 10:06:15 PM
That one actually required an AI change - a special case of "if you've only got one weapon, and a non-offensive system, then just vent when the weapon is cooling down if it's beneficial".
i was actually a bit surprised to see it! "wait, the ai recognises it should just vent when it has only one weapon and no shield? huh, neat."

Alternatively I'm imagining the pirates literally just bolting the guns on top of the cargo space, ha! Silly pirates.
they could be offering special tours that let customers experience the thrill of battle and force of heavy weapons like never before!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on February 26, 2016, 10:23:53 PM
Alternatively I'm imagining the pirates literally just bolting the guns on top of the cargo space, ha! Silly pirates.
they could be offering special tours that let customers experience the thrill of battle and force of heavy weapons like never before!

Seatbelts not included for the most genuine experience.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 11:10:36 PM
question: does Damper Field's effect apply before or after armor damage reduction is calculated? also, i assume it doesn't mitigate emp damage?

Seatbelts not included for the most genuine experience.
seeing as how they're all likely to die regardless, that's probably fine.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 26, 2016, 11:16:30 PM
question: does Damper Field's effect apply before or after armor damage reduction is calculated? also, i assume it doesn't mitigate emp damage?

Before, and it does mitigate EMP damage. It's preeeetty good.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 26, 2016, 11:38:50 PM
Before, and it does mitigate EMP damage. It's preeeetty good.
oh, wow, okay.

edit: Phase Skimmer's description still states that it generates flux when used.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Taverius on February 27, 2016, 05:13:17 AM
Hmm, should the refire for the (single) atropos be 60 like a (single) harpoon? I feel its an oversight and should be closer to a reaper's 12.

P.S. Still no intel map panning, boo hiss etc :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 27, 2016, 05:22:31 AM
I kind of like the missile power creep, at least for those with limited shots - makes missiles useful.  Before initial power creep in 0.65, missiles were either so bad and/or unreliable that I never used them except point-blank Reapers or 0 OP one-shot freebies.  Even so, without missile specialization, limited missiles are not reliable enough to waste OP.  I like the new Atropos - fast and reliable.  I better get something for 2 or 3 OP spent, and Atropos is good for that, although without Missile Specialization, I probably would not spend the OP because Atropos is not damaging enough.  The dual Atropos is actually worth the 6 OP now.  Atropos make Harpoons look bad now.  At least Atropos is usable without Missile Specialization.  Harpoons are too easy to shoot down without Missile Specialization - waste of OP.

Personally, I like to see most missiles upgraded to something close to Templar's Clarents.  Atropos is a good start.

Without Missile Specialization, I stick to unlimited missiles or 0 OP one-shots.  Even with unlimited missiles, I like Missile Specialization to make them faster and more reliable.

Proximity Charges are very, very bad, unless changed in 0.7.2.  Too slow, cost too much OP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 27, 2016, 05:23:18 AM
Hmm, should the refire for the (single) atropos be 60 like a (single) harpoon? I feel its an oversight and should be closer to a reaper's 12.
Atropos feels like super Harpoon.  I like Atropos as super Harpoon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 27, 2016, 05:48:22 AM
Hmm, should the refire for the (single) atropos be 60 like a (single) harpoon? I feel its an oversight and should be closer to a reaper's 12.
agreed! +1 ammo for "single" torpedos should mean getting another shot later on, not being able to just deal double damage without delay. i'm glad the Reaper was finally fixed, although i'd still say 5sec delay is too little, considering the Typhoon has 10sec and Missile Specilization further reduces it to 3.3sec. doubling their ammo is already very powerful for these weapons.

Personally, I like to see most missiles upgraded to something close to Templar's Clarents.  Atropos is a good start.
o_o

i agree missiles without skills feel kinda.. meh. but i also feel they are too powerful with MS 10. 50% increased travel speed and manoeuvrability and firing speed and damage and increased ammo is just too much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: JohnDoe on February 27, 2016, 07:22:19 AM
Facetanking Harpoons with Damper Field is now my favorite activity.

Edit: The Mudskipper Mk.II with Gauss Cannons made me laugh pretty hard when I first saw it. Here's for hoping there will be a Mudskipper Mk.III with a large missile mount (so I can put ROLANDs on it).

(http://i.imgur.com/djOS8nB.jpg)

Alex gonna get a visit from the Secret Service.

lol
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 27, 2016, 07:50:45 AM
It's been two in-game years and I still haven't seen a single Ion Pulser, either in a market or on an enemy ship. I finally resorted to consoling myself one just so I could test the thing. First impression is that the sound is terrible. The Ion Cannon makes a satisfyingly snappy noise, but the Ion Pulser makes a quiet little thwippy sound, like a piece of paper in a bike's wheel, which does not do the weapon's power justice. You need another weapon to deal some hard flux damage first, but once they hit 80% or so they might as well have overloaded because the Ion Pulser will make sure they're not gonna do anything for at least 15 seconds. It's worth the OP, if you've got the flux dissipation and the other weapons to back it up.

The new Doom is insane. It was a decent ship before, but it's an absolute monster now. It's got the peak time to really abuse the new phase mechanics, the new phase mechanics more than make up for the loss of Fast Missile Racks, and the new ship system is amazing in its own right. This thing eats cruisers alive and kills the simulator Paragon in a couple of passes. Don't even ask about what it does to Onslaughts, it's too graphic to describe on a SFW forum.

The new Aurora is disappointing. The only energy weapon you can realistically put in the small synergy hardpoints is the AM blaster, but the new phase ships are much better AM blaster platforms because they'll almost always have the speed and positioning advantage as well as not having to worry about risking an overload from soft flux. So either you're piloting a burst-and-run Aurora which is very inferior to a burst-and-run Doom, or you're trying to use the Aurora as the hybrid energy/missile boat it used to be but now isn't because it doesn't have a large missile slot anymore. You can't run anything similar to 4 Annihilators + Locust because the Annihilator Pod has no burst, the Harpoon Pod doesn't have enough sustain, the Typhoon doesn't fire fast enough, and 4 Swarmer SRM launchers are inferior in every way to 1 Locust SRM launcher. You're stuck with slapping as many Harpoons on the thing as you can, and vanilla Starsector is way too Harpoon-centric as it is. I'm having a hard time justifying a place for the Aurora in my fleet. This change is a net nerf, and the Aurora did not need a nerf. I'd recommend just changing the medium synergy slot back to a large missile slot. That would keep the AM-blaster build for the people who like that sort of thing, while still letting the Aurora be a viable missile platform.

I agree that missiles have power crept a bit too far. The AI is very liberal with the missiles when ships go above 80% flux; I would have had a great screenshot of the AI unloading what must have been 4 dozen Harpoons from 3 Enforcers, a Falcon, and a Vigilance in an attempt to kill my Doom, but this patch is giving me having trouble with screenshots. Starsector+ nerfs Missile Specialization, and that does make the missile situation feel quite a bit better, but it gives out Atropos racks to what seems like every pirate and Hegemony fleet in the game and that doesn't help much. The sheer quantity of guided strike weaponry the AI throws around is staggering. Not that I'm much better really, all of my destroyers and frigates get Harpoons if they can mount missiles.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 27, 2016, 07:54:53 AM
bug: i've been holding a Tri-Tachyon commission for a few months, and they declared war on Sindrian Diktat shortly after, dropping my (previously neutral) standing with them down to hostile. but just now hostilities between the two factions ended, and instead of having my standing with SD increased back up again, my standing with TT went way up (from 73 to 100) and i'm still at -50 with SD.

no clue what caused this, i've been holding only the same TT commission the whole game. also didn't fight any SD fleets (or anything other than pirates and Hegemony) at any point. got some screenshots if you want to take a look, though i didn't spot anything else out of the ordinary.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Aeson on February 27, 2016, 08:37:06 AM
Like several others in this thread, I was rather amused the first time I encountered a Mudskipper II. I haven't yet had the opportunity to see how it is against larger ships, but at least against my starting frigate it's not much of a threat.

Speaking of the Mudskipper II, could we have that thing designated as a 'gunboat' or something similar rather than as a 'frigate?' Seems like a fitting designation for an overgunned, fragile, slow, and ungainly vessel that dies almost as quickly as a real warship closes with it but which nevertheless might be dangerous in swarms.

As far as the Centurion goes, I'm a bit on the fence about it. I like the durability that its system gives you, and I think it'll make a great escort for bigger ships, but the turret configuration and speed makes it a little awkward early on. The starting configuration is okay (LAC+LDAC+LAG or LDAC+LAG+Ion isn't bad for firepower even if the turret arrangement makes the ship awkward to fly, and dropping to LDAC+LAG to simplify flying isn't bad against most pirates, either), but I definitely found myself wanting some extra speed when facing D-variant Wolves or other fast pirates early on; still, managed to take out a Luddic Path Kite and Lasher with just the starter Centurion, so it can't be that bad. Also, Damper Fields are great when I need to drop the flux levels and can't (be bothered to) back away from an opponent.

I also looked at but haven't played on the Trader start with the Tarsus and cargo. That looks like quite the wealthy start, maybe enough so, especially if you found a mission that wanted some of your free stuff, to outfit an escort or two and make an early fleet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on February 27, 2016, 08:38:54 AM
I really like the new sprites for the wayfarer, centurion, and scarab.

The name and sprite of the centurion in particular are really effective at conveying the nature of the ship, plus it's just a cool looking shape. Any analysis of the ship must consider this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on February 27, 2016, 08:39:45 AM

1) Sometimes friendly AIs will get stuck in a corner of the combat map, no order can debug them. You need to physically move near them and ask for escort.

How often/under what conditions are you seeing this? What exactly are they doing? Are enemy ships nearby? Are any "Avoid" orders in play?

2) The Onslaught has a new stock loadout that's quite "special" to say the least. It's called "Standard" like the other one, but it's most certainly not standard as it mounts missiles nearly everywhere, which of course isn't even possible. It works though.

Did you see it in the campaign? If so, where?

1) So far I've only seen it happen with Burn Drive ships. They just keep burn driving over and over into the border of the map. If you bring enemies to them they turn around and attack though, but if you try to tell them to move or escort when nobody is near them they just ignore you. No avoid orders were in play. Just a few escorts. Small ships escort medium ship, which escorts big ship.

2) The AI isn't using it, but it's available in the loadout menu. Elite, Outdated, Standard, and now, another Standard. I've never used mods so it's not a leftover or anything, it says (Stock), I can't delete it. Haven't tried on the XIV Onslaught since I don't have one, but it's there on the normal version. It mounts missile pods on various weapon slots like the medium ballistics and so on.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 27, 2016, 09:00:27 AM
The new Aurora is disappointing. The only energy weapon you can realistically put in the small synergy hardpoints is the AM blaster, but the new phase ships are much better AM blaster platforms because they'll almost always have the speed and positioning advantage as well as not having to worry about risking an overload from soft flux. So either you're piloting a burst-and-run Aurora which is very inferior to a burst-and-run Doom, or you're trying to use the Aurora as the hybrid energy/missile boat it used to be but now isn't because it doesn't have a large missile slot anymore.
For the Aurora, I use one Tactical Laser at the furthest tip to force AI to keep shields up at long range, and three Ion Cannons in the other three small synergy mounts.  Medium synergy gets Heavy Blaster.  Aurora can now out-Eagle the Eagle at triple blaster assault, and gives a reason to use Aurora over a Medusa or two.  Before, Aurora was a weird Medusa and Gryphon combo.

That said, I agree that the loss of heavy missile is a bit of a net nerf.  I would like to see an Aurora with a large synergy mount.  That way, it can use the fun heavy energy weapons, or heavy missile.  If not, then at least a medium universal so it can mount an HVD or Heavy Needler and can actually use beams effectively if it wants.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 27, 2016, 09:04:20 AM

1) Sometimes friendly AIs will get stuck in a corner of the combat map, no order can debug them. You need to physically move near them and ask for escort.

How often/under what conditions are you seeing this? What exactly are they doing? Are enemy ships nearby? Are any "Avoid" orders in play?

2) The Onslaught has a new stock loadout that's quite "special" to say the least. It's called "Standard" like the other one, but it's most certainly not standard as it mounts missiles nearly everywhere, which of course isn't even possible. It works though.

Did you see it in the campaign? If so, where?

1) So far I've only seen it happen with Burn Drive ships. They just keep burn driving over and over into the border of the map. If you bring enemies to them they turn around and attack though, but if you try to tell them to move or escort when nobody is near them they just ignore you. No avoid orders were in play. Just a few escorts. Small ships escort medium ship, which escorts big ship.

2) The AI isn't using it, but it's available in the loadout menu. Elite, Outdated, Standard, and now, another Standard. I've never used mods so it's not a leftover or anything, it says (Stock), I can't delete it. Haven't tried on the XIV Onslaught since I don't have one, but it's there on the normal version. It mounts missile pods on various weapon slots like the medium ballistics and so on.
I can confirm that if you turn devmode on and look at the variants, there is an Onslaught loadout with Salamander MRM pods mounted in the large ballistic and medium missile slots, and Harpoon MRM pods mounted in every single other slot.

Slowly but surely, the Harpoons are taking over Starsector. Eventually there will be no weapon but the Harpoon.

The new Aurora is disappointing. The only energy weapon you can realistically put in the small synergy hardpoints is the AM blaster, but the new phase ships are much better AM blaster platforms because they'll almost always have the speed and positioning advantage as well as not having to worry about risking an overload from soft flux. So either you're piloting a burst-and-run Aurora which is very inferior to a burst-and-run Doom, or you're trying to use the Aurora as the hybrid energy/missile boat it used to be but now isn't because it doesn't have a large missile slot anymore.
For the Aurora, I use one Tactical Laser at the furthest tip to force AI to keep shields up at long range, and three Ion Cannons in the other three small synergy mounts.  Medium synergy gets Heavy Blaster.  Aurora can now out-Eagle the Eagle at triple blaster assault, and gives a reason to use Aurora over a Medusa or two.  Before, Aurora was a weird Medusa and Gryphon combo.

That said, I agree that the loss of heavy missile is a bit of a net nerf.  I would like to see an Aurora with a large synergy mount.  That way, it can use the fun heavy energy weapons, or heavy missile.  If not, then at least a medium universal so it can mount an HVD or Heavy Needler and can actually use beams effectively if it wants.
The reason to use an Aurora instead of a few Medusas was the large missile mount. Being a weird Medusa/Gryphon combo, i.e. a Gryphon that can actually defend itself on the front lines, was the point of the ship. Now it's two Medusas mashed together with no Phase Skimmer, inferior turret arcs, Synergy slots instead of Universal slots, and it costs as many supplies to deploy as three Medusas.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 27, 2016, 09:54:33 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/djOS8nB.jpg)

Alex gonna get a visit from the Secret Service.

Well, at least it's not Bernard Dickerson.


bug: i've been holding a Tri-Tachyon commission for a few months, and they declared war on Sindrian Diktat shortly after, dropping my (previously neutral) standing with them down to hostile. but just now hostilities between the two factions ended, and instead of having my standing with SD increased back up again, my standing with TT went way up (from 73 to 100) and i'm still at -50 with SD.

Ohh, thank you. Fixed - it was (as you noted) bugged and would sometimes restore reputation for the wrong faction. So you got the right amount back, but applied to your TT rep and not SD.

1) So far I've only seen it happen with Burn Drive ships. They just keep burn driving over and over into the border of the map. If you bring enemies to them they turn around and attack though, but if you try to tell them to move or escort when nobody is near them they just ignore you. No avoid orders were in play. Just a few escorts. Small ships escort medium ship, which escorts big ship.

How strange. Haven't seen this myself, and been playtesting with a bunch of Enforcers in the last run. Well, will keep an eye out!


2) The AI isn't using it, but it's available in the loadout menu.

Ah, gotcha. Removed that variant altogether, really no reason for it to still be in the game.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 27, 2016, 10:24:26 AM
does the Entropy Amplifier increase damage to shields and/or from emp weapons?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 27, 2016, 10:35:04 AM
Shields, yes, EMP, no. The latter is an oversight, fixed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 27, 2016, 10:52:38 AM
oh, cool. thanks. :]

should maybe also add to the description that it builds a significant amount of flux when used.

edit: aaand i think the visual indication for it being active could use an improvement. sound helps, and the activation animation on your own ship is very noticeable, but the redish glow on the actual target can be pretty hard to see in the heat of battle, especially when the ship's armor has been smashed up recently (which usually happens). some kind of pulsing animation or a glow that radiates beyond the edges of the target ship's sprite could help.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 27, 2016, 11:03:33 AM
oh, cool. thanks. :]

should maybe also add to the description that it builds a significant amount of flux when used.
And the same to the temporal shell. Overloaded myself the first time I used it
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 27, 2016, 11:18:19 AM
I agree that missiles have power crept a bit too far. The AI is very liberal with the missiles when ships go above 80% flux; I would have had a great screenshot of the AI unloading what must have been 4 dozen Harpoons from 3 Enforcers, a Falcon, and a Vigilance in an attempt to kill my Doom, but this patch is giving me having trouble with screenshots. Starsector+ nerfs Missile Specialization, and that does make the missile situation feel quite a bit better, but it gives out Atropos racks to what seems like every pirate and Hegemony fleet in the game and that doesn't help much. The sheer quantity of guided strike weaponry the AI throws around is staggering. Not that I'm much better really, all of my destroyers and frigates get Harpoons if they can mount missiles.
Found my picture! I was wrong, it was only 3 dozen Harpoons. They still one-shot one of my Wolves.

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/ArlhZoU.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 27, 2016, 11:43:39 AM
I'm not really a fan of frigates but I must say these new ones are great, as others said the turret arcs are a bit weird but I already got used to them. With all these new ships, I want more and more a place where we can just test ships and fool around with all the skills and weapons. Yea, I could just use the Console Commands but that takes a lot of time :/.

Also the phase changes are really interesting, it made playing with/against phase ships more fun than before.

As always keep up with the phenomenal work Alex, the game keeps getting more and more awesome with each update. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 27, 2016, 12:08:04 PM
The reason to use an Aurora instead of a few Medusas was the large missile mount. Being a weird Medusa/Gryphon combo, i.e. a Gryphon that can actually defend itself on the front lines, was the point of the ship. Now it's two Medusas mashed together with no Phase Skimmer, inferior turret arcs, Synergy slots instead of Universal slots, and it costs as many supplies to deploy as three Medusas.
Large missile was the only reason I used Aurora in the past.  If I did not want missiles, then all high-tech cruisers were a bust, with firepower no better than a Medusa, and Eagle would have been my pick for three medium energy weapons, but triple blaster Eagle is unforgiving to use.  Now, Aurora can blast things with three blasters and have better flux stats than Eagle and better firepower than Medusa.  Aurora is good at blaster spam.  Unfortunately, there is not much Aurora can do well now other than blaster spam.  Aurora's role has changed from missile boat to melee specialist... in a game where high speed and long-range are most effective.

There might have been a recent discussion to change Medusa's universal to synergy, which all that would do is reduce variety of endgame configurations (e.g., cannot use beams offensively without kinetics).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 27, 2016, 12:24:24 PM
I'm not really a fan of frigates but I must say these new ones are great, as others said the turret arcs are a bit weird but I already got used to them. With all these new ships, I want more and more a place where we can just test ships and fool around with all the skills and weapons. Yea, I could just use the Console Commands but that takes a lot of time :/.

Also the phase changes are really interesting, it made playing with/against phase ships more fun than before.

As always keep up with the phenomenal work Alex, the game keeps getting more and more awesome with each update. :)

Your best bet is dev mode > edit variants, because you can spawn any fleet you want vs any fleet you want using deploy allies/deploy enemies
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 27, 2016, 12:49:35 PM
I'm just getting into the game, and I noticed something slightly odd:

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/XXdvO1D.jpg)
[close]

The red areas roughly mark the screen space that is "off limits" for your fleet while panning the camera, i.e. you cant move your camera in a way that the fleet is in that area. But what is the point of the area in the upper right corner? It would make sense in the lower left, there it would stop you from covering your fleet with the Tripad widget.


Oh and btw, a "go back" option during character creation would be greatly appreciated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 27, 2016, 12:54:48 PM
I'm just getting into the game, and I noticed something slightly odd:

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/XXdvO1D.jpg)
[close]

The red areas roughly mark the screen space that is "off limits" for your fleet while panning the camera, i.e. you cant move your camera in a way that the fleet is in that area. But what is the point of the area in the upper right corner? It would make sense in the lower left, there it would stop you from covering your fleet with the Tripad widget.

The way that works is it's limited to 800 units of panning in each direction (configurable via settings.json, campaignMaxPan). The distance you can pan towards the bottom left is a bit less because it stops panning once you mouse over the UI elements that are there.

Oh and btw, a "go back" option during character creation would be greatly appreciated.

Noted!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 27, 2016, 01:30:59 PM
Large missile was the only reason I used Aurora in the past.  If I did not want missiles, then all high-tech cruisers were a bust, with firepower no better than a Medusa, and Eagle would have been my pick for three medium energy weapons, but triple blaster Eagle is unforgiving to use.  Now, Aurora can blast things with three blasters and have better flux stats than Eagle and better firepower than Medusa.  Aurora is good at blaster spam.  Unfortunately, there is not much Aurora can do well now other than blaster spam.  Aurora's role has changed from missile boat to melee specialist... in a game where high speed and long-range are most effective.

There might have been a recent discussion to change Medusa's universal to synergy, which all that would do is reduce variety of endgame configurations (e.g., cannot use beams offensively without kinetics).
The Aurora could be used as a melee specialist before the change. 4 Annihilators and 1 Locust SRM backed up by a battery of Pulse Lasers and IR Pulse Lasers, with Expanded Missile Racks to make sure it never runs out of missiles. And I don't think I ever did run out of missiles, even with SSP's increased fleet sizes. It cut through everything smaller than an Onslaught like butter, using Annihilators on destroyers and cruisers, and the Locust on frigates and fighters. Now that build doesn't work; it's dependent on the Locust SRM for anti-fighter/frigate HE. Medium missile weaponry doesn't have the particular mix of burst and sustainability that the Locust does, there isn't even a medium anti-fighter missile in vanilla.

The Aurora was better as a melee ship before the change because its melee build didn't generate tons and tons of soft flux. Missiles don't use flux, and Pulse Lasers are much lighter on flux and much more flux efficient than Heavy Blasters. This means it could dedicate the majority of its flux capacity to soaking up damage with its shield, not to dealing damage with flux-inefficient weaponry, and it needs to soak up damage with its shield because its armor is crap.

What the Aurora is left now with is Heavy Blaster spam; flux-heavy and flux-inefficient which greatly reduces its survivability, and which uses relatively short-ranged weaponry, ensuring it'll be taking fire from anything it engages that's larger than a destroyer. Not a good combination. It can use an Antimatter-blaster burst build, which phase ships are inherently much better at. Or, it can mount a bunch of Harpoons and Atropos torpedoes and be a tankier Gryphon with crippled offensive capability.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 27, 2016, 03:32:10 PM
The problem with missiles is they are limited.  I will run out in a simulator-sized battle, even with Expanded Missile Racks.  I generally avoid missile boats, and build for endurance, which missiles aside from Salamanders or Pilums are poor at.  If you want a missile boat, that is good.  If you want a blaster ship bigger than Medusa, your only viable options (before 0.7.2) were Eagle or Paragon.

Quote
What the Aurora is left now with is Heavy Blaster spam; flux-heavy and flux-inefficient which greatly reduces its survivability, and which uses relatively short-ranged weaponry, ensuring it'll be taking fire from anything it engages that's larger than a destroyer. Not a good combination. It can use an Antimatter-blaster burst build, which phase ships are inherently much better at. Or, it can mount a bunch of Harpoons and Atropos torpedoes and be a tankier Gryphon with crippled offensive capability.
I do not disagree that Aurora was weakened overall, despite getting better with blasters.

This is why I consider Dominator best-in-class for cruisers.  Only Reaper Aurora could compete, but that is gone (not enough shots from Typhoon).  With tons of dual flak, even Onslaught may be better than Paragon for capitals.

Yes, blasters are flux hogs.  Aurora has the stats to do it well, or at least better than Eagle now.  Eagle could do it if built for it, but is unforgiving with mistakes in any case.

P.S. What I mean by melee specialist is the ship is optimized for fighting with short-ranged (energy) weapons.  Melee is not a good thing to do in Starsector, but if that is the best the ship you want can do, and you need to use it (due to lack of better options available), you build for it (e.g., Safety Override, use weapons with range of 500 or less) despite that weakness.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on February 27, 2016, 03:41:27 PM
What if the Aurora's Synergy slots are all changed to Universal?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 27, 2016, 03:45:04 PM
(I think you guys might be selling an all-beam Aurora a bit short. It's not going to kill a Paragon, probably, but anything short of that?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 27, 2016, 04:04:38 PM
(I think you guys might be selling an all-beam Aurora a bit short. It's not going to kill a Paragon, probably, but anything short of that?)
Compared to Eagle, Aurora has three small beams instead of three (superior) medium ballistics.  Eagle with beams + HVDs + Mauler is long-ranged and effective, but slow at killing things, certainly no simulator smasher like Dominator (though with more ships in 0.7.2 simulator, I doubt Dominator can solo the simulator now).  I think all beam Aurora would be even worse at killing things than beam-and-ballistics Eagle.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 27, 2016, 04:08:09 PM
What if the Aurora's Synergy slots are all changed to Universal?
I would mount railguns or needlers in the small mounts, and heavy blasters or phase lances in the medium mounts.  Aurora with universals would work like Medusa, Falcon, or Eagle.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 27, 2016, 04:25:23 PM
P.S. Still no intel map panning, boo hiss etc :P

It can be modded in.


Compared to Eagle, Aurora has three small beams instead of three (superior) medium ballistics.  Eagle with beams + HVDs + Mauler is long-ranged and effective, but slow at killing things, certainly no simulator smasher like Dominator (though with more ships in 0.7.2 simulator, I doubt Dominator can solo the simulator now).  I think all beam Aurora would be even worse at killing things than beam-and-ballistics Eagle.

I suspect the superior flux stats, combined with beam flux efficiency, combined with beams needing critical mass to be effective as the main armament, and further combined with High Energy Focus (which is extremely useful now) may make up for that. It's very different than what the Eagle brings to the table, and quite effective.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 27, 2016, 06:12:08 PM
I'm waiting for the hotfix to start a full new game. The bug reports and other issues seem to have slowed down; patch tomorrow or Mon? :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 27, 2016, 06:52:54 PM
I tried all graviton beam and tactical laser Aurora, with +20% damage from max Ordnance Expert.  It mostly works, but slowly.  It can kill standard destroyers and some other bigger ships.  Enemy Aurora is impossible to kill without High Energy Focus; it dissipates about as fast as beams raise flux.  I did not bother with Paragon, since its defenses are better than the Aurora that could not be killed (quickly enough).  As simulator opponents, none of them have boosted defenses.

I compared beam Aurora with beam-and-ballistics Eagle.  Eagle is the superior ship for long-range support; its ballistics hit for hard flux and has just as much range as beams.  Beam Eagle with ballistics kill faster.  For beam support, I would take beam Eagle over beam Aurora every time, if given a choice.  With more demanding upkeep and deployment costs, not to mention slower kill times, Aurora simply underperforms.

Heavy blaster or pulse laser spam, on the other hand, Aurora does that better than Eagle.


Other comments:
* Noticed Burn Drive disables venting.  That will knock the somewhat overpowered low-tech bruisers down a little.

* The Dampen Field effect looks like it can be modified and applied to some mod ship as form-fitting shields.  Seems like quite a bit of stuff could be done with it.


I will wait until the hotfix comes out before installing stuff and starting a new game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 27, 2016, 09:09:25 PM
Noticed MIRV behavior gets pretty weird against small targets. The Hurricane will sometimes slam into shields before it can split, but usually it splits extremely close. So SplitRange doesn't mean much against small targets, but it seems to scale up a lot vs bigger targets as well. It's very noticeable with mod MIRVs, the Achilles from BRDY is supposed to split at a range where the 3 heatseekers can curve around and hit engines, and it usually splits way too close against frigates. Increasing SplitRange too much makes it buggy against large targets in exchange.

E: also, the random factor MIRVs have can compound this issue, I belive it's what causing the stage 1s to occasionally fail to split

E2: Mirvs go after your current target rather than the target you had when you fired the stage 1, not sure if bug or intended, but it can lead to strange situations : 0

E3: A Hurricane firing on cooldown can kill a full health Balanced Hammerhead on its own in about 20-30 seconds, to go back to the missile criticism. The only real defense against the weapon is to play ultra defensively until all the ammo has been wasted, due to the massive DPS while firing as fast as it allows. Then again it IS ammo limited, can only be mounted by a few ships, and costs 25 OP, but idk, I don't like how low the firing cooldown is, plus the ease of countering it (avoid and bait ammo) contrasted with how *** you are if you don't cheese it out. I actually think it was better as a long-range pressure weapon, because then you were basically forced to kill the mounting ship OR you could generally deal with the missiles in some way due to how they were less dangerous and numerous.

It's also hard-countered by flak and ignores every other form of PD save mass vulcans.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 27, 2016, 10:36:20 PM
There's a bug which I can't reproduce reliably, but I've seen a few times.  When I join a battle in progress, say between the Hegemony and the Pirates, then we win the battle and pursue fleeing ships, it seems that dead Hegemony ships will occasionally deploy from the sides to try to catch fleeing pirates.  I've mostly been using my starter Centurion so I've never been fast enough to actually see a dead ship enter the battle, and I could imagine an ally ship with a tiny sliver of hull left might fatally collide with an asteroid or friendly.  However, if this happened, I assume I'd see a "Whatever Ship has been destroyed" message and I didn't in the cases I'm talking about.  Now if ships that were destroyed in a previous battle will still be in the battlefield during pursuit, maybe that's what I'm seeing?  I've definitely seen a couple of dead allied frigates coming in from the sides when I'm pursuing from below.

Hmm. I'll keep an eye out, but I *strongly* suspect something else is going on here. It's hard to imagine a scenario where a ship could deploy dead. Even if it deployed at 0 hp, it'd still be alive until it got hit once, at which point you'd see a message.


@Megas: interesting, thank you for the feedback!


Noticed MIRV behavior gets pretty weird against small targets. The Hurricane will sometimes slam into shields before it can split, but usually it splits extremely close. So SplitRange doesn't mean much against small targets, but it seems to scale up a lot vs bigger targets as well. It's very noticeable with mod MIRVs, the Achilles from BRDY is supposed to split at a range where the 3 heatseekers can curve around and hit engines, and it usually splits way too close against frigates. Increasing SplitRange too much makes it buggy against large targets in exchange.

That's odd. The range doesn't scale, although it does need to face the target to split, so maybe that's why it seems to be having a harder time vs smaller targets? The range check takes the target radius into account, but as a flat modifier.

E: also, the random factor MIRVs have can compound this issue, I belive it's what causing the stage 1s to occasionally fail to split

Right - but you can set the splitRangeRange to 0 to avoid that, right?

E2: Mirvs go after your current target rather than the target you had when you fired the stage 1, not sure if bug or intended, but it can lead to strange situations : 0

They definitely do not do that. They used to a few versions back, but I remember fixing this. Just tested and it works the way it's intended, as far as I can tell. I.E. target one ship, fire MIRV, switch targets, observe MIRV split and fire submunitions at original target.

Are you sure your MIRV and submunitions are actually using the vanilla missile AI? :) Could be I'm missing something here, though, but can't think what at the moment.

E3: A Hurricane firing on cooldown can kill a full health Balanced Hammerhead on its own in about 20-30 seconds, to go back to the missile criticism. The only real defense against the weapon is to play ultra defensively until all the ammo has been wasted, due to the massive DPS while firing as fast as it allows. Then again it IS ammo limited, can only be mounted by a few ships, and costs 25 OP, but idk, I don't like how low the firing cooldown is, plus the ease of countering it (avoid and bait ammo) contrasted with how *** you are if you don't cheese it out. I actually think it was better as a long-range pressure weapon, because then you were basically forced to kill the mounting ship OR you could generally deal with the missiles in some way due to how they were less dangerous and numerous.

It's also hard-countered by flak and ignores every other form of PD save mass vulcans.

Yeah, like I said, nerfing it is on my TODO list :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 27, 2016, 10:36:52 PM
I'm waiting for the hotfix to start a full new game. The bug reports and other issues seem to have slowed down; patch tomorrow or Mon? :)

Something like that, most likely. We'll see what tomorrow brings!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on February 28, 2016, 01:44:27 AM
Something like that, most likely. We'll see what tomorrow brings!

A new patch maybe?

I am liking the new feel of the launcher, since no one seems to take note of it yet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BHunterSEAL on February 28, 2016, 03:33:56 AM
Definitely been enjoying a nice long stretch of vanilla following the .72 release, the mechanical and balance updates seem to have had a positive impact. A few notes on what I've seen so far:

- Trying a Pirate playthrough, faction relations seem to develop very slowly given the small scale of procurement mission rewards and limited impact of selecting the relation boost. Selecting this new-game option seems to improve starting faction standing from (-65) to (-45), not enough to enable transponder-on docking, so open-market trading doesn't build much goodwill. Since they don't offer bounties, I'm having a hard time increasing relations to the point where I'm able to aid them in battle.
- One possible solution, probably something players can tweak on their own, might be to bump starting Pirate relations even further while making the Independents (or even major factions) inhospitable to start.   
- Really minor nit--this wasn't in the changelog, but was mentioned during discussion of .71--clicking a message popup still takes players to the last-viewed Intel screen rather than details of that item. It feels a bit clunky having to switch to the Log and change filters, then reset them next time you want to check prices or bounties on the map.
- I was going to point out that I haven't run across any of the new ships yet, but it occurred to me that this playthrough has been spent almost wholly in Pirate / Hege space.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BHunterSEAL on February 28, 2016, 03:48:17 AM
There's a bug which I can't reproduce reliably, but I've seen a few times.  When I join a battle in progress, say between the Hegemony and the Pirates, then we win the battle and pursue fleeing ships, it seems that dead Hegemony ships will occasionally deploy from the sides to try to catch fleeing pirates.  I've mostly been using my starter Centurion so I've never been fast enough to actually see a dead ship enter the battle, and I could imagine an ally ship with a tiny sliver of hull left might fatally collide with an asteroid or friendly.  However, if this happened, I assume I'd see a "Whatever Ship has been destroyed" message and I didn't in the cases I'm talking about.  Now if ships that were destroyed in a previous battle will still be in the battlefield during pursuit, maybe that's what I'm seeing?  I've definitely seen a couple of dead allied frigates coming in from the sides when I'm pursuing from below.

Hmm. I'll keep an eye out, but I *strongly* suspect something else is going on here. It's hard to imagine a scenario where a ship could deploy dead. Even if it deployed at 0 hp, it'd still be alive until it got hit once, at which point you'd see a message.


Possibly coincidental, but early in my run a Path fleet got clobbered by Hege forces and ran, so I moved to engage the remaining frigate in a separate battle. The Hege fleet joined but just after the mission started I was notified that the Path ship was disabled. No ships or asteroids around it, no shots fired by anyone--my assumption was low CR+hull damage caused a fatal malfunction. The Path frigate wasn't listed as destroyed in the pre-battle screen but there was zero salvage of any kind. Figured I'd throw that out there since that's something I haven't seen in prior releases.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 28, 2016, 05:23:22 AM
Found another bug: Picking an officer as the starting option will not actually give you the officer. He'll show up as piloting the ship, but once you put another officer there, he'll be gone. He's not in the list, either.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 28, 2016, 05:27:45 AM
re: Aurora, i'd also like to see some kind of buff to it. even if it can be on par or slightly better than an Eagle with specific loadouts, i don't think that's even a fair comparison, seeing as how the Aurora has over 50% higher maintenance and, more importantly, deployment cost. the Doom is the only other cruiser that shares the same cost, none of the others even come close. in fact, Aurora and Doom are much closer in deployment cost to Conquest and Onslaught than they are to Dominator, Eagle, Gryphon, etc.

the Aurora's description also seems to imply that it is straight up the most powerful cruiser, with lines such as "one can only wonder what the domain navy could accomplish with a fleet of these sleek, asymmetric and eminently effective vessels" and "few ships can outperform the Aurora ton for ton. its only weakness is its prohibitive cost".

with that in mind, i don't think a large synergy mount would be unreasonable. alternatively, one of the medium turrets could be upgraded to large, or the medium synergy reverted to large missile (although these later changes would of course limit loudout variety more so than potential firepower).

somewhat related, i also just noticed that the description states "the Aurora's large energy turrets annihilate targets at extreme ranges with impunity, while missile launcher hardpoints deal with what is left". that should probably be changed. the "missile launcher hardpoints" are still kind of accurate, but "large energy turrets" is just incorrect. ^^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 28, 2016, 05:40:02 AM
I think it'd be cool to give it more missile power. Several medium forward missile mounts for example. I've always found it a bit weird to use 4x small mounts.

3x medium energy work rather well, and putting Heavy Blasters here gives the Aurora its typical profile of high-damage, high-cost shots appropriate to its flux pool. I'm not sure the frontal loadout is any better now than it had been previously. They are both kind of weird. How about 1x large, 2x medium forward missile mounts? Is that too much?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Copperwire on February 28, 2016, 05:51:21 AM
Eagle vs Aurora is one comparison; the one that is not being made, and should, is Apogee vs. Aurora.

The math that has to be done is you have to add the cap/flux of the two drones (they shoot forever as far as I can tell so 120 vents and ??? cap) and the OP for 2 Ion Blasters (12 OP) to the Apogee.  Looking at it that way, the DP cost difference between the two is ugly.

Frankly, I think the Apogee needs a slightly higher CR/DP cost (I would lean 27+ because it is worth at least a wolf more then an eagle) .... and the Aurora needs to clearly shine.  How does not matter so much.

For the most part, ships seems to be "balanced" either based on "AI as pilot" or "Player as pilot".  I am not sure where to put the Aurora in this sense.  Maybe the answers are down that road.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 28, 2016, 05:53:33 AM
Medium missile mounts are shiiiiiiiiit. The only good things you can stick in them are Harpoon Pods or Typhoons. I'm getting sick and tired of Harpoons and Typhoons are so rare in vanilla that you're more likely to find them from heading into Hegemony space and blowing up patrols with Vigilances than you are to find them on a market.

More to the point, the Aurora would then lose the ability to mount Swarmers, Annihilators, and Atropos torpedoes. Without a medium missile weapons expansion, replacing 4x small hardpoints with 2x medium hardpoints would severely reduce the number of viable builds.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 28, 2016, 06:00:36 AM
If Aurora could mount a large energy weapon, I would have fun blasting things with plasma cannon or one of the powered-up large beams.  That reminds me...

* High Intensity Laser seems useful.  Still weak against shields but once they are out of the way, armor and hull melt quickly!  You cannot shrug the beam off and laugh at it anymore.  (Well, you can still shield tank HIL, but it is clear that it is a specialized anti-armor weapon.)  Sunder and Paragon can use it effectively.  Apogee and Odyssey will need another ship to take out shields for them - useless for them if soloing fleets.

* Tachyon Lance is more reasonable now.  OP cost is no longer absurd, and the other minor tweaks make it a solid weapon.

I think it'd be cool to give it more missile power. Several medium forward missile mounts for example. I've always found it a bit weird to use 4x small mounts.

3x medium energy work rather well, and putting Heavy Blasters here gives the Aurora its typical profile of high-damage, high-cost shots appropriate to its flux pool. I'm not sure the frontal loadout is any better now than it had been previously. They are both kind of weird. How about 1x large, 2x medium forward missile mounts? Is that too much?
If that means giving up the medium synergy, then Aurora reverts to high-tech Gryphon, and Eagle becomes the next upgrade from Medusa if player wants a big blaster boat.  Admittedly, for small energy (for synergy), the only useful options, if building for blasters, is one tactical laser to fool shield AI and three ion cannons to shut down targets for blaster smackdown.

I like the small synergies.  I can totally ignore missiles and focus on brawling.

If I want small missiles, Atropos spam is fun.

I would like a large mount for Aurora.

Quote
Eagle vs Aurora is one comparison; the one that is not being made, and should, is Apogee vs. Aurora.
When I play Aurora, I envy what Apogee has.  Lower costs, stronger shield, free 360 shield, large energy mount, more cargo capacity.  (Aurora used to have 360 shields for free, now it needs to pay an OP tax to get them back!)  Also, Apogee has High-Resolution Sensors.

Before, Aurora was the better ship only due to Reaper spam, which has now been taken away.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 28, 2016, 06:01:43 AM
I think it'd be cool to give it more missile power. Several medium forward missile mounts for example. I've always found it a bit weird to use 4x small mounts.
personally, i'd prefer a large mount over more medium missile capacity. synergy allows for more flexibility in loudout choice, and being able to mount a Squall, Tachyon Lance or High Intensity Laser should make a beam / long range Aurora really something to be feared, even by large ships or those with strong shields.

large mounts also carry a more distinct big-ship-feeling that can make a cruiser stand out, beyond simply increasing firepower by increasing the number of weapons.

Frankly, I think the Apogee needs a slightly higher CR/DP cost (I would lean 27-28) .... and the Aurora needs to clearly shine.  How does not matter so much.
Apogee also has a much more powerful shield than the Aurora, worthy of a high-tech cruiser. and, lorewise at least, i think the Apogee isn't even supposed to be a pure combat ship, but more of an armed exploration/science vessel.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 28, 2016, 06:25:26 AM
Quote
For the most part, ships seems to be "balanced" either based on "AI as pilot" or "Player as pilot".  I am not sure where to put the Aurora in this sense.  Maybe the answers are down that road.
Aurora in prior versions was mediocre solo "AI as pilot" due to poor shot range.  AI would kite the Aurora and kill it.  Aurora would waste MIRVs and not use Reapers aggressively enough.  I had better results with Dominator or Eagle for "AI as pilot" ships.  Those have better shot range and are less squishy when shields come down.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 28, 2016, 07:26:17 AM
Quote
Medium missile mounts are shiiiiiiiiit. The only good things you can stick in them are Harpoon Pods or Typhoons. I'm getting sick and tired of Harpoons and Typhoons are so rare in vanilla that you're more likely to find them from heading into Hegemony space and blowing up patrols with Vigilances than you are to find them on a market.
Actually, for endurance runs (or for simple Pilum oversaturation), medium mounts are great for being able to mount Pilums.  Almost every medium missile mount (and some large) my fleet has are stuffed with Pilums.  Pilums are the only unlimited missile that offer non-negligible damage.

For alpha strike, yeah, I see what you mean.  I probably would prefer two small missile mounts to one medium if I want to alpha strike or even mere Salamander annoyance.  For Salamanders, two small missiles are easier to use than one medium because single Salamanders are much more common than dual Salamanders, and dual Salamanders are rare.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 28, 2016, 08:59:07 AM
I've tried using Pilums. They're annoying to use since you either need to time overloading the enemy with your Pilums arriving, or build your fleet around Pilum spam and ships that can effectively Pilum spam have their own issues, other than the Onslaught. They're good just because they're unlimited with decent damage, but crippled in other ways.

And I'm sure the Aurora would do really well as a Pilum platform. Great value for 35 deployment points.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 28, 2016, 09:07:12 AM
Medium missiles let you mount Annihilator Pods, which are great.

Re: Aurorachat, one of the strengths of the Aurora over the Eagle is defense. The Aurora can easily back off and reset flux thanks to its strong shield and passively good engine/movement stats, and it has unrivalled PD coverage. Its main weakness over the Eagle is having to use beams if range is desired, but the Aurora is much harder to flank or pin down than the Eagle, which needs to constantly mind its flanks. It actually makes for a better close combat ship than the Eagle.

They definitely do not do that. They used to a few versions back, but I remember fixing this. Just tested and it works the way it's intended, as far as I can tell. I.E. target one ship, fire MIRV, switch targets, observe MIRV split and fire submunitions at original target.

Still happens with the Achilles LRM, which uses vanilla behavior and AI for both missile stages. Could be due to the fact the stage 2 missiles are heatseekers.

What does minTimeToSplit do, by the way?

Also, had no idea about SplitRangeRange existing, but after setting it to 0, the missiles do mostly split at a consistent range where they merely waste submunitions from splitting too close, rather than failing to split at all. But some missiles still split way earlier than the others, at a desired range. Guess I'll bite the bullet and write a custom AI to mirv it manually. Either that or I'll make the missile split away instead of towards the target. Anyway this is bordering on off-topic now so nevermind all this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HELMUT on February 28, 2016, 09:47:05 AM
I played a bit the campaign, and it definitely feel more polished than before. My favourite change was the destination list on jump points, to avoid needless waste of fuel. Also, the intel screen is much cleaner, it wasn't that much of a problem with vanilla, but with mods it could rapidly become a mess. Also tried the new ships and weapons.

The Mudskipper MK.II is in the ultimate cannon fodder. It's cheaper than the gun it uses, and have a tendency for suicide (thanks ill-advised modification!). I'm not sure i would even uses one even for free, but they makes good target practice for early game.

The Wayfarer is a safe Cerberus, Their cargo stats are almost identical, but the Wayfarer is a tiny bit more expensive to deploy. Not the kind of vessel i'd use as a flagship but it can find its purpose as an early game wingman, a Kite with cargo in some way. I outfitted mine with a pair of frontal railguns, two sideways PDs for missile interception, and then a pair of Salamanders or even Swarmers on the rear for further fire-support despite their weird turrets arc.

The Centurion is a bit of an oddities, like a really tough Lasher, or a Monitor with a bite. It got a lot of small turrets, but the arcs prevent the Centurion to come even close to the Lasher in the offensive department. It's similar to the Monitor because it is really hard to kill, even if it relies more on armor than its shield. Like the Wayfarer, it can be a pretty good wingman ship early on, but thanks to its survivability, it can keep its job even during mid-game against destroyers and even some cruisers. My build didn't changed much, a PD/fire-support mix. Two railguns on the front, four PDs on the sides/rear, and a Salamander. Not the most existing ship, but at least i had some backup that stayed alive.

The Scarab was much more interesting. It worked for me like a high-tech Lasher, lot of small mounts that encouraged a very aggressive melee play-style. And because of the temporal shell and its really good shield, even the AI could get out of tricky situations. I used it as flagship for quite a while, and gave it 3 IR pulse on the front, coupled with a pair of Annihilators, and two PD lasers on the rear. The sideways mounts felt very superfluous to me, punishing arcs that can only mount more costly PDs that the Scarab doesn't even need, i left them always empty. Also, strapped SO and unstable injector on top of that, because with that much speed and temporal shell, the enemy can't even land a single hit. Later on, when i passed the Scarab to the AI, i replaced one IR for a ion cannon and removed SO. Not the greatest killer of our time, but it survived a lot of pirates.

The new Afflictor is really evil. It was already quite a beast before, but could only be used as a Striker or an un-catchable distraction. While the distraction Afflictor doesn't works as well, its new Quantum Disruptor can give it a role as an escort craft, as it can terrorize everything that rely on its shield or cloak. Most phase ships can fill that role with their respective "powers", but i found the Afflictor to be the dirtiest. Paragon hiding behind its fortress shield? Disrupted! Doom playing hide and seek in P-space? Disrupted! The biggest winner of the patch in my eyes, a must have in any fleets, either as a flagship or AI support.

The Harbinger is also a newcomer. It's monstrously expensive at 20 supplies per deployment, almost as much a an Eagle! But in some way, no other ships can back-stab someone with that many torpedoes. The triple Typhoon Harbinger is for me THE build, especially with the Entropy Amplifier that can boost the damage by 50%! Other build can works, like the new Ion Pulser, but i found the Harbinger to struggle a bit with the flux. Missiles are more convenient to its strained generator.

Didn't had the chance to play the Doom a lot  in the campaign, so not much to say about it. The Interdictor Array is fun against fighter swarms, watching the enemy fighters crashing helplessly against my ships.

The Aurora is better in my opinion, kinda, at least it feel less of a Gryphon variant and more as a proper High-tech cruiser. As debated above, the Striker Aurora isn't what it used to be, even though the new AM Blaster build offer similar capabilities but at higher risks. On the bright side, it can now Laser boat, Pulse boat, and more if you include mods. The new Aurora isn't strictly better than the old one, but it can try more diverse loadouts, some that works better with the AI. Still, it's the most expensive cruiser to deploy with the Doom, and as Megas noted, not exactly superior to the (much) cheaper Dominator. It might require some more testing, but i'm not opposed to that large hardpoint idea.

For the weapons, the Ion Beam is an interesting one, if very expensive (high OPs and flux/sec for insignificant damage). It works pretty well on a laser-boat Aurora, or even Paragon and Medusa (the only ships that can seriously try to use it). It was very rare in my campaign, so i couldn't use it that much, but it felt situational.

The Ion Pulser wasn't so interesting. Unlike ANGRYABOUTELVES, i found it to be a very good (well...) shield-breaking weapon, thanks to its very high-sustained DPS. Still, the 450 range is crippling, especially for a bigger ship, and the limited ammo means i have to dump OPs in the very situational Expanded magazines. I even tried to uses those in some kind of weird SO loadout, but the limited ammo was still a problem. In the end, if i needed to deal some EMP, a bunch of ion cannons can do the job without being as inconvenient as the Pulser. It probably could find its niche if it was cheaper i think but right now? Not a fan. Also, as said earlier, its sound effect is very underwhelming.

For the Tachyon lance, i expected this change to start the coronation of the Paragon as the absolute king of battleships. Fortunately, the shield bypass effect is very uncommon, even at higher flux, so not as much cheesing as i expected. Still, the cost reduction makes it more interesting to use now.

So yeah, other than the underwhelming Ion Pulser, i'm very happy with this patch.

Also, agreed with Cyc's argument over the whole missile power creep thing. I didn't felt as much the gentle caress of the Harpoons in this campaign because i spent most of my time in a P-space, but i clearly saw the results for my allied ships with shields. That guillotine effect when one overload is really merciless, even when playing carefully. The missile skill is part of the problem obviously, but i guess this will be resolved with the skills rework for the next patch.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 28, 2016, 10:16:54 AM
Re: Aurorachat, one of the strengths of the Aurora over the Eagle is defense. The Aurora can easily back off and reset flux thanks to its strong shield and passively good engine/movement stats, and it has unrivalled PD coverage.
the Aurora has better flux stats, but its shield by itself actually isn't any better than the Eagle's. they share a 0.8 efficiency, and the Aurora's shield actually has double the upkeep cost by default, due to it being an omni shield. the only real advantage is being able to achieve complete 360° coverage with Front Shield Emitter, whereas the Eagle will always have at least a small spot of vulnerability even with Extended Shields. and when shields go down, the Eagle has better armor below.

PD coverage actually isn't really better either. the Eagle has 2-3 small turrets covering all directions, except for two very small spots on the sides that have only 1. the Aurora also has 2-3 for most directions, but only 1 covering a good portion of its back. the only part where the Aurora has better coverage is its front left side, which doesn't seem like a meaninful advantage, especially considering that its primary firepower is from center front to rear right.
i suppose you could count the Aurora's rear medium turret for PD coverage, but that also means it will only have a single medium turret for offensive weaponry facing every side except the center front, much more limited than on the Eagle.

yes, the Aurora is faster (at least without Maneuvering Jets) but i don't think 20 more base speed and the higher flux stats justify 60% higher maintenance and deployment cost.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 28, 2016, 10:32:55 AM
I've tried using Pilums. They're annoying to use since you either need to time overloading the enemy with your Pilums arriving, or build your fleet around Pilum spam and ships that can effectively Pilum spam have their own issues, other than the Onslaught. They're good just because they're unlimited with decent damage, but crippled in other ways.

And I'm sure the Aurora would do really well as a Pilum platform. Great value for 35 deployment points.
Pilums are annoying to use, but they work.  I do not use Dominator or a few other ships for Pilum spam, yet Pilums with max Missile Specialization kill things.  AI still manages to do dumb things and eat a stack a Pilums from time to time.  Dominator would not be able to solo the 0.7.1 simulator without them.

If Aurora had two medium missiles instead of four small missiles, I would use Pilums and let them do their thing.  If I could not be bothered with Pilums, I would downgrade to single Salamander or a one-shot missile, which two small mounts are better at than one medium, admittedly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 28, 2016, 10:48:16 AM
- Trying a Pirate playthrough, faction relations seem to develop very slowly given the small scale of procurement mission rewards and limited impact of selecting the relation boost. Selecting this new-game option seems to improve starting faction standing from (-65) to (-45), not enough to enable transponder-on docking, so open-market trading doesn't build much goodwill. Since they don't offer bounties, I'm having a hard time increasing relations to the point where I'm able to aid them in battle.

You can actually join to help them right off the bat, provided you're already hostile with whoever they're fighting. Basically, you just have to go all-in on being a pirate to be trusted enough to fight alongside.

- Really minor nit--this wasn't in the changelog, but was mentioned during discussion of .71--clicking a message popup still takes players to the last-viewed Intel screen rather than details of that item. It feels a bit clunky having to switch to the Log and change filters, then reset them next time you want to check prices or bounties on the map.

You know, let me just fix that up now. There, done.

- I was going to point out that I haven't run across any of the new ships yet, but it occurred to me that this playthrough has been spent almost wholly in Pirate / Hege space.

All of the new frigates are actually available through the various starting options.


Re: Aurora - appreciate all the feedback/discussion! Will keep that in mind and take a look at it, but not for the hotfix, which means next release, which does mean a while. Still, I don't want to knee-jerk balance things right off the bat.


@HELMUT: Thank you for the detailed feedback, really enjoyed reading it :) Nice to see you've had some success with an AI-controlled Scarab; I'd had trouble with that myself.

(Am I alone in really liking the Ion Pulser sound effect? Feels like the smoothness of it is a nice fit for the rapid fire/spinning barrel nature of it.)



Still happens with the Achilles LRM, which uses vanilla behavior and AI for both missile stages. Could be due to the fact the stage 2 missiles are heatseekers.

Ahh, that was it. Fixed so that any missile AI implementing GuidedMissileAI will now have its target properly set by the MirvAI.

What does minTimeToSplit do, by the way?

Minimum time from firing until split.

Also, had no idea about SplitRangeRange existing, but after setting it to 0,

Ahh, forgot that's not in the default hurrican config. Full list of mirv options:

Spoiler
Code: java
splitRange = (float) spec.getParams().getDouble("splitRange");
splitRangeRange = (float) spec.getParams().optDouble("splitRangeRange", 0);
minTimeToSplit = (float) spec.getParams().getDouble("minTimeToSplit");
arc = (float) spec.getParams().getDouble("arc");
hitpoints = (float) spec.getParams().getDouble("hitpoints");
spreadSpeed = (float) spec.getParams().getDouble("spreadSpeed");
spreadSpeedRange = (float) spec.getParams().optDouble("spreadSpeedRange", 0);
projectileRange = (float) spec.getParams().optDouble("projectileRange", 300);
damage = (float) spec.getParams().getDouble("damage");
impact = (float) spec.getParams().optDouble("impact", 1f);
emp = (float) spec.getParams().optDouble("emp", 0);
numShots = spec.getParams().getInt("numShots");
evenSpread = spec.getParams().optBoolean("evenSpread", false);
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 28, 2016, 11:05:25 AM
If Aurora had two medium missiles instead of four small missiles, I would use Pilums and let them do their thing.  If I could not be bothered with Pilums, I would downgrade to single Salamander or a one-shot missile, which two small mounts are better at than one medium, admittedly.
that would only be possible if the mounts were missile-only though, as multi-type mounts like synergy do not allow downgrading to weapons of a smaller size-class.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 28, 2016, 11:16:20 AM
@ Sy:  Yes, that is true.  Aurora would probably be best served with four small mounts if they remain synergy.

@ Alex: I have not tried any of the new weapons yet.  I am waiting for the hotfix before I start a new game.  Recently, I only playtested some things with my old saves, which will not have new stuff unless I wait a while (but not motivated to do so).

I am not sure which ship to start as.  After poking through some files, I noticed Scarab is a rare ship, almost as rare as Hyperion, and only Tri-Tachyon uses them.  I want to play as the Scarab (or at least get my guaranteed rare ship), but hostile to Tri-Tachyon hurts my plans for getting an early commission from them.  Hostile to Tri-Tachyon would not be bad if I wanted to sign up with anyone else but Tri-Tachyon.  (Low-tech is probably the most powerful epoch overall, so being Hegemony war dog would be a good idea.)  But it seems much of the new content seems high-tech focused, and that means if I want to buy it, I need to be friendly with Tri-Tachyon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 28, 2016, 11:26:54 AM
(Am I alone in really liking the Ion Pulser sound effect? Feels like the smoothness of it is a nice fit for the rapid fire/spinning barrel nature of it.)
i think it's alright, but something with a bit more bang would probably better fit its high burst damage.

on that topic, i was also a little underwhelmed with the Ion Pulser's performance. i have only tried it on my Harbinger for now, though, so maybe it will work better on other ships. for the Harbinger specifically, its burst damage to burst flux build-up ratio seemed too poor to me. i use a loadout with three Phase Lances instead now, which works very well against all the poorly-shielded pirate ships. :]
i do want to try a Medusa with Ion Pulsers, backed up by some ballistic kinetic damage to soften up targets before the burst.

I want to play as the Scarab (or at least get my guaranteed rare ship), but hostile to Tri-Tachyon hurts my plans for getting an early commission from them.  Hostile to Tri-Tachyon would not be bad if I wanted to sign up with anyone else but Tri-Tachyon.  (Low-tech is probably the most powerful epoch overall, so being Hegemony war dog would be a good idea.)  But it seems much of the new content seems high-tech focused, and that means if I want to buy it, I need to be friendly with Tri-Tachyon.
i had the same problem. i really wanted to start with the Scarab, but i had also planned for some time to start a Tri-Tachyon playthrough with this new release, due to all the new high-tech toys.

but generally speaking, i think getting a rare and powerful ship from the start with the drawback of being immediately hostile to one of the major factions is interesting. i'd like to see more options that add some variety and character like that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 28, 2016, 01:22:26 PM
Annihilator Pods are crazy good, especially with Missile Spec. Pilums are good with ECCM. Sabot Pods are good. I don't know what the medium lineup would be lacking, except for an Atropos delivery system and a swarmer equivalent. But I've never felt medium missiles to need swarmers in particular, that's dirty work for smaller ships who can't afford PD.

The Aurora has always made an impression on me as a 'hybrid' boat in the true sense of the word. A decent but not oversized energy loadout and dedicated missile capability. The new synergy mounts are probably balanced as they are. I wouldn't want to give this cruiser a heavy synergy hardpoint, because it has the flux pool to handle Plasma Cannon etc. better than most other ships so the advantage would be disproportionate and enemy shield overloads easy to achieve while you're still trucking along. I still think it'd work fine with either 1x synergy medium, 2x missile medium, or 1x missile large, 2x missile medium.

Next up: Building an all-out pulse laser boat for funsies.

Also, it may seem like a small thing, but the new Intel screen feels very tidy and easy to use. Well done.
Oh! And the jump point tooltips are a big help as well. No more awkward savescumming just to catch bounties before others do.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 28, 2016, 02:40:04 PM
I wouldn't want to give this cruiser a heavy synergy hardpoint, because it has the flux pool to handle Plasma Cannon etc. better than most other ships so the advantage would be disproportionate and enemy shield overloads easy to achieve while you're still trucking along.
The amount of supplies and deployment points the Aurora costs is already disproportionate to its effectiveness, but in rather the opposite direction. It's a cruiser that costs almost as much as an Onslaught to field. It should be disproportionately effective. The Apogee has a Large Energy Mount and a Large Missile Mount and a ship system that gives it 2 free ion cannons and 30% extra range, and it costs fewer supplies to field while supposedly not being a dedicated combat ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 28, 2016, 02:49:18 PM
Either Aurora should be powered up or its costs lowered to match Apogee/Dominator/Eagle.  Currently, I prefer to use Dominator, Eagle, or two Medusa instead of that overpriced boat.  Aurora might have been worth that much before due to torpedoing everything to death with Reapers, but it cannot do that anymore.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Copperwire on February 28, 2016, 03:38:34 PM
Anyone else notice that shuttles etc are now 2 CR rather then 3 CR?  Good move Alex :)

CR/DP costs between classes and ships have and continue to be one one of the things that makes me ???, thought it is better in this version.

For instance, even with many things moving to 2 CR, the list of things that cost 3 DP is clearly not "equal":

Hound
Shepherd
Valkyrie
Buffalo
Taurus

Clearly, some have that value because of combat potential and others for cargo.  One way to improve handling this would be to separate CR from DP - even if they generally had the same values, this would give an axis to deal with exceptions.  

Another way to look at it is to look at something like the list of things that cost 12 DP/CR, net:

6 Kites
4 Shepherds
2 Tempests
1 Medusa
1 Enforcer + 1 Shepherd
2 Wolves + 1 Kite

Without going too crazy, "equal" isn't really applicable.  And that is ok; it is a SP game and things like rarity, price, and utility "handicap" the field a bit.  Still, it is a lens worth looking through, and when you do some things stand out.

For one "3 Medusa (36) vs 1 Aurora (35)" does not feel right at all.  

On the other hand "2 Medusa (24) vs 1 Apogee (25)" feels better - they are not the same but each can fill roles that the other can't in terms of fleet performance... and I think that is about as much as you can ask in terms of getting it right.

Another worth considering/testing for yourself is "1 Condor + 4 CR of fighters vs 4 Shepherds". 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BHunterSEAL on February 28, 2016, 04:40:13 PM

You know, let me just fix that up now. There, done.


Awesome, thanks a ton--the Intel screen has come together really well.


All of the new frigates are actually available through the various starting options.


Just saw that! Love at first sight with the Centurion. I like that it functions as sort of a flag-frigate early-on and stays useful when refitted for dedicated PD-escort duties once you've started fielding larger warships. It takes a little getting used to broadside-focused weapon arcs in a ship that small, but the punch it adds to a frigate squadron is worth it. Definitely not something you want to run around solo with, but the special shield ability is a great counter to the ever-present danger of finding yourself cut-off and surrounded by faster frigates. Probably my favorite example of ship design in Starsector so far.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 28, 2016, 04:54:23 PM
I have to agree that the aurora does NOT feel like it is worth almost an onslaught. Hell many of the changes have made ships not feel worth their cost, like the Centurion being worth as much as a Tempest (6 while the Lasher is 4 and the Wolf is 5) and the Scarab, Shade, and Afflictor being worth almost as much as an Enforcer! (8 versus 9)
Oddly enough, the doom is the only ship that didn't get boosted way above the average deployment cost
Here is a list for those that want to see the comparisons:
Spoiler
Examples:
Supplies per deployment:
Enforcer: 9
Hammerhead: 8
Medusa: 12
Afflictor: 8
Shade: 8
Hyperion: 15
Harbinger: 20!
Falcon: 15
Eagle: 22

The new frigs:
Scarab: 8
Centurion: 6
VS.
Tempest: 6
Wolf 5
Lasher: 4
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on February 28, 2016, 05:41:52 PM
The reason for the phase ship costs being so high is because those things are monstrous now, especially the Afflictor. Centurion and Scarab could maybe do with a one point downgrade though (Centurion doesn't have great offensive potential, and Scarab isn't quite as deadly as the phase frigates).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 28, 2016, 05:53:38 PM
One of the most effective ships in my fleet is an AI controlled Aurora of mine who's officer has Power Grid Modulation and shield tanking hull mods (front shield generator, hardened shields etc) and some heavy blasters. The Aurora has such good flux stats that its damn near invincible and its fast enough to simply bail out and vent quickly (resistant flux conduits for even faster venting) when it does finally get high on flux.

Not saying it couldn't use some tweaks to its cost but its still a powerful ship when built right and a very safe bet to give to an AI officer.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nick XR on February 28, 2016, 11:29:33 PM
Think I found a bug, couldn't turn my transponder back on once I turned if off (although I didn't turn it "off", I "went dark" which turned it off).  When I disabled going dark, I was then unable to enable my transponder.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 28, 2016, 11:33:11 PM
Think I found a bug, couldn't turn my transponder back on once I turned if off (although I didn't turn it "off", I "went dark" which turned it off).  When I disabled going dark, I was then unable to enable my transponder.
Transponder needs to be double tapped to be turned on or off
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nick XR on February 28, 2016, 11:36:40 PM
Think I found a bug, couldn't turn my transponder back on once I turned if off (although I didn't turn it "off", I "went dark" which turned it off).  When I disabled going dark, I was then unable to enable my transponder.
Transponder needs to be double tapped to be turned on or off

Wait, so transponder has to be double tapped to work, but all of the others are single tap?  That's unintuitive as can be and the transponder help makes no mention of that (not that I usually read help...).  No other game with a "skill bar" has done anything like that that I can recall. 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 28, 2016, 11:39:12 PM
There's text at the top of the screen that tells you you need to use it again to confirm activation/deactivation, and the ability button flashes. Reason being that toggling the transponder (especially turning it *on*) can have disastrous consequences.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on February 29, 2016, 03:03:19 AM
just found something strange.. i'm buying marines from the blackmarket on Zorra, with price starting at 747 credits per unit. but with each one i buy, the price per unit decreases. if i buy all 30 available marines, price per unit goes down to 379. i would've expected price to increase, not decrease, as local supply approaches 0.
this seems to apply to some goods, but not to everything. if i buy all the fuel and supplies on offer, ppu for supplies goes up and ppu for fuel goes way down.

screeshots: 1 (http://i.imgur.com/pon7yJp.png) 2 (http://i.imgur.com/g9bXC2M.png) 3 (http://i.imgur.com/xLPvkE3.png)

is this a bug or am i missing something? ^^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Carabus on February 29, 2016, 04:34:44 AM
I had the very same bug in StarSector 0.7a in Tigra City, but forgot to report. When I tried buying the marines one at once, the price was constant, but when I selected more the price per unit was decreasing. I even checked the save now. Buying one costs 881 but buying 10 costs about 6800.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Carabus on February 29, 2016, 04:46:15 AM
One more bug from 0.7a that I had a prepared save with. Sorry for not reporting it earlier but I only came back to StarSector today. The bug is possibly already fixed since then, but won't hurt to report anyway in case it was not.

When finishing procurement mission, you get a credits payment. Now if you, without leaving the station, try to recruit an officer, and offer to hire him, it shows your available sum of credits, but instead of actual one it shows the amount you had before you received the payment.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on February 29, 2016, 05:01:46 AM
@XRyst
The Transponder is much, much more important than the other 3 "skills" since it affects politics with the player vastly more.  I can totally understand why Alex made it require two taps instead of 1, to make sure the player didn't accidentally enable or disable it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Spoorthuzad on February 29, 2016, 06:07:09 AM
Shouldn't the other skills have the same double tap function though?
Going dark is basically turning transponder off and slows you down which could be bad in certain situations.
pinging stops you
and emergency burn takes away CR and therefore supplies.

Then again you might get used to double tapping if all skills are double tapped ,making the whole double tapping idea useless...
hmmm....

edit: I'm saying double tapping way too much...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 29, 2016, 07:12:33 AM
just found something strange.. i'm buying marines from the blackmarket on Zorra, with price starting at 747 credits per unit. but with each one i buy, the price per unit decreases. if i buy all 30 available marines, price per unit goes down to 379. i would've expected price to increase, not decrease, as local supply approaches 0.
I had the very same bug in StarSector 0.7a in Tigra City, but forgot to report. When I tried buying the marines one at once, the price was constant, but when I selected more the price per unit was decreasing. I even checked the save now. Buying one costs 881 but buying 10 costs about 6800.

Thank you - fixed. More of the "black market has things the market has no actual demand for so there are edge cases" stuff. Should be good and fixed now, though.

One more bug from 0.7a that I had a prepared save with. Sorry for not reporting it earlier but I only came back to StarSector today. The bug is possibly already fixed since then, but won't hurt to report anyway in case it was not.

When finishing procurement mission, you get a credits payment. Now if you, without leaving the station, try to recruit an officer, and offer to hire him, it shows your available sum of credits, but instead of actual one it shows the amount you had before you received the payment.

Thank you, noted. Will fix that up at some point, but not for this hotfix - the ratio of "chance to introduce other bug while fixing this" vs "issue severity" isn't looking too good :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on February 29, 2016, 07:32:06 AM
Really weird thing happened to me today. It's probably a bug, but I've yet to reproduce it again so there's that.

Accepting a mission that requires clandestine delivery when you already have the materials needed for delivery AND entered transponder off messes with your transponder status to stations.

I docked transponder off at Barad B and saw a 10-unit drug mission for Barad B, which I immediately took. When I talked to the dude that accepts the delivery, he stated that I must be hidden from authorities and some such, which I already was, since I initially docked transponder off. So I exited the station, immediately re-docked, and made the delivery. When I came to Jangala with transponder on, I was refused to dock because I "didn't have my transponder on and that there's a patrol tracking my movements." But I had my transponder on all the time, and no patrol actually came to me. Reloading the save seemed to have fixed the issue, but I couldn't replicate the conditions actually needed to recreate said incident.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 29, 2016, 08:05:04 AM
Thanks for the report - I'll keep an eye out. Can't reproduce it under similar conditions so far. Sounds like it's a case of the actual transponder state getting out of sync with the UI somehow, but I'm not seeing how that might happen.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 29, 2016, 02:22:20 PM
I still didn't get as far as I'd like, but what I've seen I enjoyed. Many of the changes are not very noticeable (except in direct comparison) but make for an overall much smoother campaign experience. Since this is a polish update, I'd (so far) say "job well done" ;)

A question, does this:
Quote
Added "cargo scan" patrols may perform when the player's transponder is on
Chance to happen if player has been doing smuggling at patrol's source market
also apply to buying/selling ships on the black market? It's a bit strange if the patrol people board my just illegally acquired ship to search it for contraband, they are really missing the forest for the trees there. (Could actually be cool if back market ships/goods stay "hot" for a while.)


Another, really minor thing that nevertheless bothered me for a while now: In the little hover-over ship tooltip (that appears e.g. in the deployment dialog or while selecting a flagship during an encounter dialog) a ship's top speed is not shown. Since that is the primary factor in any pursuit scenario, it would be neat if it would be shown. Crew level on the other hand seems irrelevant.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mandabar on February 29, 2016, 05:27:29 PM
Code
Phase Lance: removed EMP damage component

How COULD YOU Alex? ;(

Just started using these on my wolf/medusa last release (7.1a(or some letter)) and really enjoyed the burst and the emp from them.

Oh well, yay for csv! :P

On another note, Is it possible to load a save on this release guys, or will I need to restart/using the power of mods to transfer the save?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 29, 2016, 06:09:02 PM
I still didn't get as far as I'd like, but what I've seen I enjoyed. Many of the changes are not very noticeable (except in direct comparison) but make for an overall much smoother campaign experience. Since this is a polish update, I'd (so far) say "job well done" ;)

:D

Quote
Added "cargo scan" patrols may perform when the player's transponder is on
Chance to happen if player has been doing smuggling at patrol's source market
also apply to buying/selling ships on the black market? It's a bit strange if the patrol people board my just illegally acquired ship to search it for contraband, they are really missing the forest for the trees there. (Could actually be cool if back market ships/goods stay "hot" for a while.)

It does, yeah. As you say, they are indeed missing the forest for the trees; might make sense to add the same kind of thing for ships - where they don't take them from you, they just very strongly suspect they're "hot" and this results in a reputation drop. I like it! Made a note. (This does bring up the question of black market weapons as well... hmm.

On the other hand, functionally this wouldn't change very much if you already have a bunch of cargo - having a ship that's "hot", in that case, results in an increased chance for a "suspicious cargo" outcome. Which, if the result is the same as a "suspicious ship" outcome (i.e. rep loss), might be getting a bit too fancy without clear gain.

Another, really minor thing that nevertheless bothered me for a while now: In the little hover-over ship tooltip (that appears e.g. in the deployment dialog or while selecting a flagship during an encounter dialog) a ship's top speed is not shown. Since that is the primary factor in any pursuit scenario, it would be neat if it would be shown. Crew level on the other hand seems irrelevant.

Yeah, that could probably use a rework. Honestly, I'm thinking about removing crew levels altogether. They complicate a *lot* of things under the hood, and at this point - with officers in play, and all of the crew impact working through CR - they don't add much anymore.

On another note, Is it possible to load a save on this release guys, or will I need to restart/using the power of mods to transfer the save?

Should be possible.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 29, 2016, 07:01:17 PM
Another, really minor thing that nevertheless bothered me for a while now: In the little hover-over ship tooltip (that appears e.g. in the deployment dialog or while selecting a flagship during an encounter dialog) a ship's top speed is not shown. Since that is the primary factor in any pursuit scenario, it would be neat if it would be shown. Crew level on the other hand seems irrelevant.

Yeah, that could probably use a rework. Honestly, I'm thinking about removing crew levels altogether. They complicate a *lot* of things under the hood, and at this point - with officers in play, and all of the crew impact working through CR - they don't add much anymore.

Then how would max CR levels be controlled on officer-less ships?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 29, 2016, 07:14:45 PM
Then how would max CR levels be controlled on officer-less ships?

Just set to something like 70%, with +30% available from officer. Right now, there's such a gap between ships with an officer and without that the max CR level of an officer-less ship barely matters. Even after the skill revamp, I suspect that'll still be the case.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mazuo on February 29, 2016, 07:15:36 PM
I'd reconsider doing that unless you feel the game really needs the change.  Crew levels are pretty nice flavor if nothing else knowing you brought up people from raw trainees to experts at fighting and maintaining spaceships.

I'm sure more could be done to alter their mechanics to something more satisfying if desired, but I'd like to see them stick around.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deathfly on February 29, 2016, 07:22:45 PM
OK, I think I found another rounding issue. Sometime in a food shortage it said it needs approximately 70 foods to resolve it. But after I sold 70 foods it still said approximately 1 more food is needed. So I thinke it may actually needs 70.31415926575 or soso foods but it got rounded to 70 just like something for the purchase missions.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on February 29, 2016, 07:31:17 PM
Maybe crew could gain some kind of campaign-level benefit?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 29, 2016, 07:42:13 PM
I'd reconsider doing that unless you feel the game really needs the change.  Crew levels are pretty nice flavor if nothing else knowing you brought up people from raw trainees to experts at fighting and maintaining spaceships.

I'm sure more could be done to alter their mechanics to something more satisfying if desired, but I'd like to see them stick around.

They're good flavor, yeah, but not much else. And in terms of the complexity they add, it's not even close in terms of what they bring vs what they "cost".

OK, I think I found another rounding issue. Sometime in a food shortage it said it needs approximately 70 foods to resolve it. But after I sold 70 foods it still said approximately 1 more food is needed. So I thinke it may actually needs 70.31415926575 or soso foods but it got rounded to 70 just like something for the purchase missions.

That's actual rounding - that text says "approximately"; it's not supposed to be an exact number.


Maybe crew could gain some kind of campaign-level benefit?

Hmm. I'm not sure I want to try bolting *more* things onto crew levels, given the behind-the-scenes complexity it already causes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Harmful Mechanic on February 29, 2016, 07:54:12 PM
I'd be a little sad to see crew levels go - I enjoy the benefits of training up and selling off hapless slaves green crew as a reliable side business - it keeps bounty hunting viable when you're badly damaged by a tough opponent.

(Crew salaries would be nice, and certainly you could remove a tier for simplicity.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 29, 2016, 08:05:10 PM
This is getting a bit off topic (entirely my fault), but I'll just add this: it's also something where making the base element simpler would make it easier to have more mechanics interact with it, so it could well end up making crew *more* interesting.

For example, salaries - if you have those, then you'd expect them to go up for higher crew levels, which means you'd be punished for crew automatically leveling up, which is a mess that requires more detailed controls for the player to deal with. But if you have just "crew", then adding salaries is a breeze. Other mechanics could likewise follow.

(... and certainly you could remove a tier for simplicity.)

(I'm afraid removing a tier would do next to nothing to help simplify things on the code side. Also, consider that marines already only have one level and that's not an issue; crew levels are a thing that made sense way back but it just doesn't anymore, to me. The time-cost of maintaining it going forward is a bit much.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on February 29, 2016, 08:55:40 PM
For example, salaries - if you have those, then you'd expect them to go up for higher crew levels, which means you'd be punished for crew automatically leveling up, which is a mess that requires more detailed controls for the player to deal with. But if you have just "crew", then adding salaries is a breeze. Other mechanics could likewise follow.
This is exactly why I've disabled crew salaries in SSP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on February 29, 2016, 08:56:45 PM
The only thing I'd worry about removing crew levels is that the Leadership attribute becomes even emptier, but since that'll be addressed in a skill update anyway I say go for it. Crew levels really don't contribute enough to warrant a headache.

Minor bug: the Pirate skin of the Wolf seems a bit shifted to the right. You can see this by comparing other skins with the Pirate one in the codex.

... Also, the naming and descriptions of special skins aren't very consistent. The Pirate skin for the Kite has a Pirate indicator and description but none of the other Pirate skins do, even ones that are actually different from Defective skins (Buffalo, Mule). The Dominator XIV's description is different from every other XIV ship. Hegemony Auxilliaries don't have descriptions, although I note that the Kite one has a commented-out description.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 29, 2016, 10:07:18 PM
Minor bug: the Pirate skin of the Wolf seems a bit shifted to the right. You can see this by comparing other skins with the Pirate one in the codex.

... Also, the naming and descriptions of special skins aren't very consistent. The Pirate skin for the Kite has a Pirate indicator and description but none of the other Pirate skins do, even ones that are actually different from Defective skins (Buffalo, Mule). The Dominator XIV's description is different from every other XIV ship. Hegemony Auxilliaries don't have descriptions, although I note that the Kite one has a commented-out description.

Oh yes, fixing those up now.

(And man, I did indeed butcher one line of pixels out of the Pirate Wolf! Can't believe no one noticed before - thanks for pointing it out.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on February 29, 2016, 10:19:43 PM
I was looking at the Beyond Compare diff of that skin and wondered what that big rectangular change was.  I thought it was a shading accident or something, not a pixel shift!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabotsas on February 29, 2016, 11:21:24 PM

I'm not a fan of how they feel, torpedo payload entirely aside. Will probably take another look at some later point and decide one way or another.

I really liked the trident after I adjusted some of its stats.
- much slower deceleration
- decrease in turning rate
- increase in maximum speed (~160) [was 100]
- front shield arc reduced to ~50 degree [was 180]
- reduced maintenance costs / or increase wing size to 4 [was 2]

My goal with these changes was to differentiate it a bit more from the
dagger. The trident is more reliable to deliver the payload but
at the same time it is more risky because once committed to the attack the bomber will overshoot the target (slower decel. / turn rate)
and expose its unprotected rear, giving the opponent time to retaliate.

I really think that there is a niche for this (heavy) bomber (or even one more).
I hope it won't get completely scrapped for the next release
even if it is just for the sake of keeping the lovely sprite around :-)
Maybe we will see it in a slightly different role,
I am looking forward to it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabotsas on March 01, 2016, 12:35:36 AM
... making crew *more* interesting.
... Other mechanics could likewise follow.

If that is indeed the goal I am 100% on board.
Just consider that there is more to crew than just the core
game mechanics. It is also about progress / accomplishment / rewards.
Mainly officers fill this role now but there might still be potential to involve
the crew in a meaningful way - in a way so that the player actually cares about them (immersion).

Right now, losing a good ship/hull is much more painful than losing its elite crew,
maybe there is a way to up the stakes in the future.

At the same time you have to balance micro vs. macro management.
Especially when fleets get bigger it is hard to keep track of every individual ship.
Replacing losses can take a long time if you decide to maximize every
replacement (given the weapons / hulls, available) and it becomes rather
tedious instead of fun. (I am aware of the 'variants'-feature and I am using it quite a bit
but especially in the endgame I spend a considerable amount of time refitting my fleet in comparison to fighting actual battles.
With outposts in mind, maybe give the player a way to get easier / faster replacements (at a cost).  

Also, consider that marines already only have one level and that's not an issue

While that is true from a game mechanics standpoint I would like to have some kind of customizability (experience, weapons, gear).
Especially when thinking about outposts / planets I would imagine that we will see (boarding / invasion) troops much more often.

crew levels are a thing that made sense way back but it just doesn't anymore, to me. The time-cost of maintaining it going forward is a bit much.

If you feel that this mechanic is hurting the game more (= costing unnecessary dev-time) than it is worth, scrap it or rework it.

If the development process of Starsector has taught me anything - it would be to have faith in you as a developer.
You haven't let me down once :-) Even some changes that I initially rejected (while reading the patch notes) turned out to be ok or even were an improvement (e.g. ballistics without ammo cap / officer portraits in battle).
I get it, it is really important to look at the game mechanics but don't overlook the immersion factor. If done right both supplement and strengthen each other.
Let the player make meaningful choices while keeping the core mechanics simple.

Keep up the good work, excellent release btw (as always)!


Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on March 01, 2016, 06:51:19 AM
It does, yeah. As you say, they are indeed missing the forest for the trees; might make sense to add the same kind of thing for ships - where they don't take them from you, they just very strongly suspect they're "hot" and this results in a reputation drop. I like it! Made a note. (This does bring up the question of black market weapons as well... hmm.

On the other hand, functionally this wouldn't change very much if you already have a bunch of cargo - having a ship that's "hot", in that case, results in an increased chance for a "suspicious cargo" outcome. Which, if the result is the same as a "suspicious ship" outcome (i.e. rep loss), might be getting a bit too fancy without clear gain.

Maybe the simplest implementation would be if your fleet carries over the suspicion level from the market as a general "hotness" level, which would decay within a week or so (in which registry numbers are filed out, DRM chips are overwritten, manufacturer logos are painted over... ;D). When a patrol catches you during that time you get a rep hit dependent on the leftover "hotness" level. So if you do big time smuggling you might get a double rep hit, once from the market and a second time, heavier, from a patrol, if you don't shake it.

At the moment patrols hunt me down all the time, but they never find anything, which makes them look rather silly and the whole thing less interesting than it could be. (Even if I had something illegal, I'd probably just dumb if before they catch up.)



Honestly, I'm thinking about removing crew levels altogether. They complicate a *lot* of things under the hood, and at this point - with officers in play, and all of the crew impact working through CR - they don't add much anymore.

Agreed, I wouldn't miss the different ranks. I think more colorful crew varieties could help much more to "bring the world to life". I'm thinking rare specialist classes (medical, engineering, accounting) that change corresponding fleet stats. Here different pay grades would be make sense and be player controlled. Or passengers: refugees, diplomats and tourists that earn you money/rep but maybe consume certain goods. Basically, turn the vertical crew levels into a horizontal palette of interesting options.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on March 01, 2016, 08:22:03 AM
I second Gothar's observation. I buy rare weapons and the occasional ship on the black market. I try to mix it up with a reasonable amount of regular trading, but if I buy an expensive ship, the suspicion level will skyrocket and it'll be close to impossible to bring it back down. The result is that patrols pick me up a lot but most of the time aren't even able to give me a penalty.

Over the course of the game, this has led me to several conclusions:

- Even though I trade both ways, suspicion level will steadily increase with no obvious impact to bring it back down. -> This should be more forgiving. As I understand it, once you're done trading and return to the market a second time, you can't decrease your 'old' suspicion level by fair trading. You should be able to. Being scanned and found innocent should also decrease suspicion level, I don't know if it already does this.

- Black market trading and patrols are two very separate things. I assume only a tiny, tiny fraction of players will actually buy illegal goods. It's mostly to get otherwise faction-locked stuff. And patrols can't reprimand you for this. -> Either flag ships and weapons as illegal when you buy them (huge gameplay hassle to have them taken from you again), or make patrols do something a little different if they catch you with hot weapons. Like giving you a market ban for X days, making you pay fines amounting to missed market fees + X% penalty.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on March 01, 2016, 08:42:21 AM
Agreed, I wouldn't miss the different ranks. I think more colorful crew varieties could help much more to "bring the world to life". I'm thinking rare specialist classes (medical, engineering, accounting) that change corresponding fleet stats. Here different pay grades would be make sense and be player controlled. Or passengers: refugees, diplomats and tourists that earn you money/rep but maybe consume certain goods. Basically, turn the vertical crew levels into a horizontal palette of interesting options.

I was just thinking that passenger convoys could carry VIPs that could be "looted" and ransomed... although how that would work with Starsector's combat (no quarter ever) would need further thought.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SierraTangoDelta on March 01, 2016, 10:12:54 AM
There's a feature in Nexerelin where fleets will sometimes drop Prisoners of War that can be traded to factions for a rep boost or sold to them for money, or sold as slaves for even more money.
I do like the idea of 'transport' missions where you have to transport a VIP, or a large number of people, to a specific planet. It adds mission variety and gives a use for some of the underused ships like the big Starliner transports.
Different types of crew members are also a good idea, like Medics decreasing the number of crew that die when a ship blows up, engineers that boost repair speed or reduce supply use, etc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 01, 2016, 10:19:35 AM
Heh, not really a "hot"fix anymore, more of a lukewarmfix by this point. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on March 01, 2016, 10:39:29 AM
I'd reconsider doing that unless you feel the game really needs the change.  Crew levels are pretty nice flavor if nothing else knowing you brought up people from raw trainees to experts at fighting and maintaining spaceships.

I'm sure more could be done to alter their mechanics to something more satisfying if desired, but I'd like to see them stick around.

They're good flavor, yeah, but not much else. And in terms of the complexity they add, it's not even close in terms of what they bring vs what they "cost".
Tossed some thoughts about crew over here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10751.msg183228#msg183228); a way to (I think) remove most of their complexity without losing the flavor.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 01, 2016, 11:15:34 AM
Hotfix is up!

Heh, not really a "hot"fix anymore, more of a lukewarmfix by this point. :P

Aw, come on - it's at least full on "warm", still :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 01, 2016, 11:20:01 AM
I suppose the Wolf was too fragile and the phase skimmer is too hard to use for new players. Thus, it got the AXE as a starter/restart option.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 01, 2016, 11:32:38 AM
@Sabotsas: Thanks for the vote of confidence :)

If that is indeed the goal I am 100% on board.

I don't know if that's the "goal", exactly, but the simplification here would certainly open the door to that kind of thing. As well as - and I think this can get lost in the shuffle sometimes - let me do more other things instead of fixing crew-level-related bugs, or it taking longer to add in something that works with crew, etc.

Just consider that there is more to crew than just the core
game mechanics. It is also about progress / accomplishment / rewards.

Yep, definitely aware of that. It doesn't have to come from crew, though - as more stuff opens up (say, outposts) it an come from that as well.


While that is true from a game mechanics standpoint I would like to have some kind of customizability (experience, weapons, gear).
Especially when thinking about outposts / planets I would imagine that we will see (boarding / invasion) troops much more often.

Honestly, that feels like an awful lot of work for what'd ultimately be treated as an abstacted resource. In a game where actions involving marines were played out as an actual game, sure, that might make sense.


At the moment patrols hunt me down all the time, but they never find anything, which makes them look rather silly and the whole thing less interesting than it could be. (Even if I had something illegal, I'd probably just dumb if before they catch up.)

If you have lots of cargo (even if it's legal), they'll find it "suspicous" and you'll get a rep hit. The chance of it being suspicious goes up with the amount of cargo you have relative to your capacity. So if you just buy a ship off the black market but don't carry around a lot of cargo, yeah, chances are they're not going to nail you for anything.

Agreed, I wouldn't miss the different ranks. I think more colorful crew varieties could help much more to "bring the world to life". I'm thinking rare specialist classes (medical, engineering, accounting) that change corresponding fleet stats. Here different pay grades would be make sense and be player controlled. Or passengers: refugees, diplomats and tourists that earn you money/rep but maybe consume certain goods. Basically, turn the vertical crew levels into a horizontal palette of interesting options.

Yeah, that could be very interesting! So long as it's things that avoid relying on a specific type of crew being on a specific ship - i.e., as you say, fleet effecs, not ship effects. (Man, thought something was wrong with my eyes for a second, with the colors. Well done.)

And, yes, just more people-types in general.


- Even though I trade both ways, suspicion level will steadily increase with no obvious impact to bring it back down. -> This should be more forgiving. As I understand it, once you're done trading and return to the market a second time, you can't decrease your 'old' suspicion level by fair trading. You should be able to.

Normal trade will make it go down, yes. It can just take a lot - if you've offloaded a bunch of drugs or organs, that "punches above its weight" in terms of cost, so you may need to sell several times the cost of normal goods. It also does go with with time.

If your suspicion level went up due to completing an illegal procurement mission, btw, the amount it goes up is based on the reward, so that can be even harder to shake.

Basically, the idea is that if you do serious smuggling, you're not going to be able to cover it up entirely.

- Black market trading and patrols are two very separate things. I assume only a tiny, tiny fraction of players will actually buy illegal goods.

Well, it's more about *selling* illegal goods and fulfilling illegal procurements - both make a lot of money, and I'd expect playes do both frequently.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 01, 2016, 12:49:24 PM
Waited for the hotfix, and I got it.  I will play it soon.  (Maybe not today; I am in the middle of something else.)

As for removing crew levels, I like the idea.  One less stat to grind or cheat for.  Go for it!  No leveled crew means newbies are not punished early in the game by being stuck with green crew (because they cannot afford better) and having ships at malfunction level after one fight.

I used Black Market mostly to buy ships and weapons that are either rare and/or not available for my faction, and marines worth 250 credits in 0.7.1.  During 0.7.0, I bought organs from Black Market for Hegemony missions.  Not sure how missions will turn out in 0.7.2.

I suppose the Wolf was too fragile and the phase skimmer is too hard to use for new players. Thus, it got the AXE as a starter/restart option.
If I cannot select Wolf with starting options but can get it with respawn, I will suicide my character to get it, much like scuttling a Hermes(D) or Kite(D) I just bought and getting a Lasher or Wolf in return.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on March 01, 2016, 02:33:10 PM
The more I think about removing crew levels, the more I like it. The only thing you'll really miss from that is the rare profit made from training and selling crew.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 01, 2016, 02:40:39 PM
The more I think about removing crew levels, the more I like it. The only thing you'll really miss from that is the rare profit made from training and selling crew.
Yet another reason to eliminate crew levels.  I have considered maxing the crew XP skill precisely to enable this sort of revenue source.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 01, 2016, 03:18:15 PM
Just thought of another reason to remove crew levels.  By endgame, I, and I suspect most everyone else who survives that long, have plenty of elite crew to fill all of your ships and then some.  Maybe not so many that you can sell as often as you want, but more than enough than you need.  At endgame, 80% CR is the baseline, not 50% or 60% when you start a new game.

The question for crew levels is do you like to grind crew when you start a new game?  The answer for some may be yes.  For me, the answer is a big "NO!"
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on March 01, 2016, 04:00:36 PM
I never even think of it, really. I just buy cheap crew once in a while and they tend to level up quicker than I space 'em. I don't sell Elites off either, I just stash excess crew for when I get bigger ships. Yeah, the mechanic doesn't really 'grab you'. So how can it be made into something cool? ..because just removing a thing is stripping yet another layer off the cake. I rather like the concept of crew. Of having to hire them, train them, pack them lunch and send them off into combat. D'aw.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on March 01, 2016, 04:14:29 PM
True; removing crew feels a bit like removing the old hangar space stat.  I still miss that.  (Fighters within your hangar space limits don't count towards the current 25 ship fleet size limit?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on March 01, 2016, 05:45:56 PM
I never even think of it, really. I just buy cheap crew once in a while and they tend to level up quicker than I space 'em. I don't sell Elites off either, I just stash excess crew for when I get bigger ships. Yeah, the mechanic doesn't really 'grab you'. So how can it be made into something cool? ..because just removing a thing is stripping yet another layer off the cake. I rather like the concept of crew. Of having to hire them, train them, pack them lunch and send them off into combat. D'aw.



When it comes to game mechanics, simply adding more isn't better.  It's easy to add lots of complexity without adding any actual depth to the game, and that's a problem that developers actively work to avoid.

To continue with the metaphor, a bad mechanic is like a layer of Tabasco sauce on your chocolate cake.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on March 01, 2016, 06:03:58 PM
I'd be okay with losing crew levels if it meant we got stuff like medics and engineers.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on March 01, 2016, 07:29:16 PM
Not really a bug, but opening a comlink with a patrol that just scanned your fleet for contraband just cycles the "allow the scan or run away" options over and over again.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 01, 2016, 07:45:11 PM
Not really a bug, but opening a comlink with a patrol that just scanned your fleet for contraband just cycles the "allow the scan or run away" options over and over again.

Can you get out if that happens, or are you stuck in that forever?

Edit: also, not able to reproduce this so far. Do you remember what the initial scan outcome was first time it happened?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on March 01, 2016, 08:28:38 PM
No, I'm not stuck. The option to leave is still there.

Essentially, immediately after being scanned, pressing 1 would just cycle the Open Comlink, Allow Scan, Continue options without end. Although you could still exit if you wished to. And this is regardless of the scan result.

(Also, how do you put the images in the actual post and not as an attachment?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 01, 2016, 08:51:36 PM
No, I'm not stuck. The option to leave is still there.

Essentially, immediately after being scanned, pressing 1 would just cycle the Open Comlink, Allow Scan, Continue options without end. Although you could still exit if you wished to. And this is regardless of the scan result.

Is this with the -RC2 hotfix, btw? IIRC I fixed something to do with cargo scans that might have been related.


(Also, how do you put the images in the actual post and not as an attachment?)

imgur or some such; there's no built-in forum support for that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on March 01, 2016, 09:05:40 PM
Is it just me or is the Conquest's engines still a bit messed up? Some of the engine ports don't have exhaust.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on March 01, 2016, 09:06:24 PM
Yep. RC2 release right here. So something in the dialogue tree was changed? That's all there is to it in here, actually.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on March 01, 2016, 09:10:13 PM
Super minor but unless I'm mistaken the RC2 installer still wants to install to an RC1 folder by default.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on March 01, 2016, 09:11:10 PM
Is it just me or is the Conquest's engines still a bit messed up? Some of the engine ports don't have exhaust.

Are you playing SS+, that was it for me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 01, 2016, 09:18:30 PM
Super minor but unless I'm mistaken the RC2 installer still wants to install to an RC1 folder by default.

There's no RC anything in the installation folder; not sure what you mean?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on March 01, 2016, 09:32:12 PM
Never mind, it was my mistake as I expected.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on March 01, 2016, 09:45:21 PM
Thing I learned today: Being followed by a patrol that wants to scan you actually prevents you from entering the station of the patrol's faction. That's why I couldn't understand why I couldn't enter a station even with my transponder on. Heh.

It would be nice if this was clarified in the station dialogue. Made me scratch my head for more than a minute there.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 01, 2016, 09:53:25 PM
It would be nice if this was clarified in the station dialogue. Made me scratch my head for more than a minute there.

It specifically says that you can't do anything because a patrol is tracking your movements. Am I missing something here? Is there a case where it doesn't do that?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on March 01, 2016, 10:16:11 PM
Yep, the fault is on my part. I didn't think that "a patrol is tracking your movement" could also apply if your transponder is on.

I got a bit too used to 0.7.1's transponder game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 02, 2016, 05:47:20 AM
Not really a bug, but opening a comlink with a patrol that just scanned your fleet for contraband just cycles the "allow the scan or run away" options over and over again.
I decided to open comm link to a fleet that just scanned mine and found no contraband (because I just bought a Medusa from the Black Market openly, just to see what happens).  They demanded yet another scan.  That is very... forgetful (or corrupt).  After one scan, they should not demand another if you try to talk to them after the first scan.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on March 02, 2016, 05:50:50 AM
The Harbinger's small universal mounts aren't symmetrical. Unless that was intended?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on March 02, 2016, 06:31:48 AM
Wasn't fuel and cargo supposed to be destroyed alongside a destroyed ship? Because I just ended up with 150% fuel after a lost fight, because of that couldn't move fast and was subsequently attacked again.


Also, it would be nice if jump points would be part of the list of gravimetric readings in the gravity well tooltip. Usually when you go into a system you can't be sure if you can jump right out again or have to fly trough half the system first.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on March 02, 2016, 08:33:09 AM
The Harbinger's small universal mounts aren't symmetrical. Unless that was intended?
i noticed that as well. should probably be changed, since they're almost symmetrical, and the ship itself looks perfectly symmetrical.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 02, 2016, 09:09:47 AM
Not really a bug, but opening a comlink with a patrol that just scanned your fleet for contraband just cycles the "allow the scan or run away" options over and over again.
I decided to open comm link to a fleet that just scanned mine and found no contraband (because I just bought a Medusa from the Black Market openly, just to see what happens).  They demanded yet another scan.  That is very... forgetful (or corrupt).  After one scan, they should not demand another if you try to talk to them after the first scan.

Any chance I could get a save from before the first scan happens, in this situation? Surprisingly, I'm unable to reproduce this; doing the exact same thing. Looking at the code, it seems just about impossible, too - if it wanted to talk to you about the scan, it would also be pursuing you. Very strange.

The Harbinger's small universal mounts aren't symmetrical. Unless that was intended?
i noticed that as well. should probably be changed, since they're almost symmetrical, and the ship itself looks perfectly symmetrical.

They are? Ahh, the weapon arc facings, off by 10 degrees - thank you, fixed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on March 02, 2016, 09:46:49 AM
They are? Ahh, the weapon arc facings, off by 10 degrees - thank you, fixed.

Prototype hulls, I tell you.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 02, 2016, 09:55:23 AM
Hey David, what did you mean when you said that you're now working on ever so slightly larger ships? :o
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 02, 2016, 10:02:39 AM
In my case, I bought a Medusa from the Black Market, waited a few days, and a patrol approached, caught my fleet, demanded a scan.  I allowed the scan, they found nothing and said I was clean.  At this point, within the same encounter, I have option to open comm link to chat, fight them, or leave.  I decided to chat just to see the stock answer they give (communique received on protocol, status confirmed, over... or something).  Instead of seeing the boring answer as expected, the patrol redid the scan routine.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 02, 2016, 10:14:57 AM
Aha - I was ending the interaction entirely before interacting with the fleet again and opening the comm link, that was the difference. Reproduced and fixed, thank you!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on March 02, 2016, 11:15:27 AM
Hey David, what did you mean when you said that you're now working on ever so slightly larger ships? :o

Larger than just frigates, which the latest batch of new ships has been.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 02, 2016, 11:30:23 AM
Oh, I thought it was something sneaky like an expansion to the variants system. Gotcha. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on March 02, 2016, 12:02:02 PM
Hey David, what did you mean when you said that you're now working on ever so slightly larger ships? :o

Larger than just frigates, which the latest batch of new ships has been.

Hound the size of a cruiser, with an ACG that shoots fighter-sized shells pls
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Taverius on March 02, 2016, 09:00:03 PM
No, that shoots Hounds.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ArkAngel on March 02, 2016, 09:38:04 PM
Wow, am I extremely late to the update. I've played a bit, and good grief, the scarab easily handles a tempest. I'm almost wondering which would win in a fight, a hyperion, or a scarab.
It's truly a beast, able to fight 4-5 frigates by itself with relative ease.

I also, am in absolute love, with being able to hold orbits, or hide in asteroid belts. I got to recreate Gothar's ForeverHound Moments, albiet unintentionally at first.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on March 03, 2016, 08:31:04 AM
Just noticed this, shouldn't the (A)uxiliary variant hulls say "This ship was on the Hegemony auxiliary list"? I'm not sure they would be selling it if it were still on the auxiliary list.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 03, 2016, 10:39:59 AM
Another hotfix is up (-RC3), this one due to the infinite credits trade bug here:
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10765.0

Hopefully that's the last one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Baqar79 on March 03, 2016, 12:22:35 PM
I Noticed this on RC1, but after RC3 I have the same issue.  Running Windows 10 x64 the game refuses to start (It doesn't even get to the loading progress bar that precedes the title screen).

I got around this in RC1 (and now in RC3) by renaming the old jre folder in Starsector's directory; and copying the x64 jre (From java version 8, update 73) into the game directory and then it starts no problem.

It could be due to the fact that I never uninstalled the 0.7.1a release (I just renamed the folder prior to installing 0.7.2a).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 03, 2016, 12:25:15 PM
IIRC others have run into this issue and it's resolved by running the game in Windows 7 compatibility mode. This seems like a windows 10 problem with running 32-bit applications.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Baqar79 on March 03, 2016, 01:18:28 PM
I just tested this now with the old jre folder.

Windows 8, Windows 7, Windows Vista compatibility mode didn't work.

However Windows XP compatibility mode did work and I discovered this was because XP mode give the program Administrator rights to execute.

Simply running the game with Administrator mode without resorting to compatibility mode seems to work with the old jre folder on my machine.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 03, 2016, 01:19:56 PM
Weird, but good to know. Windows 10 seems rather temperamental at the moment - this, more frequent driver issues, etc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on March 03, 2016, 02:48:46 PM
I found a weird AI thing that could be improved upon. When you're phased and float in front of some Dagger bombers, they'll fire their torpedos.

It makes sense to deny a phased ship a safe return to normal space by shooting regular guns at it, but precious torpedos seem like a waste - you'd have to actively work to make that even a threat to yourself. I could see this tactic as being nasty if the AI can tell you're about to overload, but with low flux and no pressure to decloak, they might as well be firing them off into space.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 03, 2016, 02:51:39 PM
Thanks, noted - at the moment fighters treat all missiles as disposable, sort of a "better fire it now than not get any chance to do so later" attitude. Will probably look at fighter AI more closely at some point and address this sort of thing then.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 03, 2016, 06:49:32 PM
Thanks - I'll keep an eye out for that. Sometimes what happens is they decide they're close enough to start the jump transition, but then the point moves and they have to catch up to actually jump. Doesn't make sense why that'd happen in hyperspace, though, so yeah, will definitely be on the lookout.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 03, 2016, 07:20:48 PM
Sadly, it would appear that officers do not get EXP when you send them to do an auto-battle pursuit. I sent a lvl 1 and lvl 7 officer to pursue a 4 ship pirate fleet and they destroyed them all, I got 7000 EXP but my officers got nothing. =/

My flagship and character did not participate.

EDIT: Also, to be honest, I was really surprised they killed them all. It was three Wolves (D) and 1 other thing and I only sent a Centurion and a Kite (A).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 04, 2016, 08:24:36 AM
Finally played RC3 for some time.  It seems most of my ships refuse to obey Capture orders.  A Centurion with my first Steady officer (originally from starter Kite-A) obeys, but a Lasher with an Aggressive officer and a Hound with no officer refused.  I click Capture on objectives, but I see no arrow from any ship except the Centurion to one of them (out of two or three) if that ship participates.

Have not made it to endgame yet where I fight battles with objectives on a regular basis.  I will investigate more when I can.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on March 04, 2016, 02:40:10 PM
I've seen something similar, but I'm not sure how to reproduce it yet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 04, 2016, 03:48:36 PM
I have no idea either.  Another case:  During a pursuit battle (with me as attacker), I deployed frigates on the left and frigates on the right.  I click capture on the point at the right, and a frigate from the left is assigned to it, even though the frigates on the right are much closer to it!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 04, 2016, 04:04:45 PM
Have any of you noticed your AI ships seemingly dumbfounded by an enemy ship that was just destroyed? Several times I've seen my Kite remain facing the hulk of a destroyed enemy for 3-4 seconds before it finally turns and goes after another target.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 04, 2016, 04:06:42 PM
I do not know.  I soloed most of my fights.  When I deploy more in pursuit, it is to capture points, which they fail to do, unlike previous versions.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 04, 2016, 04:21:49 PM
Sadly, it would appear that officers do not get EXP when you send them to do an auto-battle pursuit. I sent a lvl 1 and lvl 7 officer to pursue a 4 ship pirate fleet and they destroyed them all, I got 7000 EXP but my officers got nothing. =/

Thanks - wrote that down.


Finally played RC3 for some time.  It seems most of my ships refuse to obey Capture orders.  A Centurion with my first Steady officer (originally from starter Kite-A) obeys, but a Lasher with an Aggressive officer and a Hound with no officer refused.  I click Capture on objectives, but I see no arrow from any ship except the Centurion to one of them (out of two or three) if that ship participates.
I've seen something similar, but I'm not sure how to reproduce it yet.

Hmm, yeah - also unable to reproduce so far.


I have no idea either.  Another case:  During a pursuit battle (with me as attacker), I deployed frigates on the left and frigates on the right.  I click capture on the point at the right, and a frigate from the left is assigned to it, even though the frigates on the right are much closer to it!

Hard to say without specifics; there are some legitimate reasons this might happen, such as the frigate on the right having a mobility system/phase cloak.


Have any of you noticed your AI ships seemingly dumbfounded by an enemy ship that was just destroyed? Several times I've seen my Kite remain facing the hulk of a destroyed enemy for 3-4 seconds before it finally turns and goes after another target.

It should generally be a second or two, but yeah, that does happen. Made a note to tweak that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 04, 2016, 04:41:08 PM
I bore witness to a Brawler vs Centurion fight. I don't think it was ever going to end, haha, those are some durable frigates with that new Damper Field!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: cpmartins on March 04, 2016, 08:26:47 PM
Afflictor + 3 AM Blasters Vs Onslaught
The cheese is real.
pls don't change it   ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on March 04, 2016, 09:04:46 PM
Had a strange bug that I haven't seen before, where I exited to menu as a patrol was hailing me (I zoned out momentarily but it could have been that the interaction dialog opened while the game was "fading" after exiting), immediately went on "continue" in the main menu, and the save started with the interaction dialog created by the fleet from the previous session open, which had some broken strings and then created a fatal error and CTD when I tried to click a dialog option.

Looked like this:

Spoiler
23527639 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Loading stage 36
23527640 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Loading stage 37
23527640 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Loading stage 38
23527640 [Thread-4] INFO  sound.oo0O  - Cleaning up music with id [Stellar_Rust.ogg]
23527640 [Thread-4] INFO  sound.oo0O  - Cleaning up music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
23527640 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Loading stage 39 - last
23528641 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.oo0O  - Cleaning up music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
23529052 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.oo0O  - Creating streaming player for music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
23529053 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.H  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
23531540 [Thread-4] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.rules.A  - Problem with command of class com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.rulecmd.EndConversation: null
java.lang.NullPointerException
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.optionSelec ted(FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:623)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.reinitPostC ontinue(FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:161)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.reinit(FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:141)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.rulecmd.EndConversation.execute(EndConversation.java:37)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.rules.A.execute(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.rules.C.runScript(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.rulecmd.FireBest.applyRule(FireBest.java:97)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.rulecmd.FireBest.execute(FireBest.java:47)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.rulecmd.FireBest.fire(FireBest.java:53)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.RuleBasedInteractionDialogPluginImpl.fireBes t(RuleBasedInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:176)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.RuleBasedInteractionDialogPluginImpl.optionS elected(RuleBasedInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:208)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.optionSelec ted(FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:564)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.T$1.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.super.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00o.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.null.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.U.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
23533003 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.oo0O  - Cleaning up music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
23533053 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.oo0O  - Creating streaming player for music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
23533053 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.H  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
23533319 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.optionSelec ted(FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:623)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.optionSelec ted(FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:954)
   at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.optionSelec ted(FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:582)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.T$1.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.super.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00o.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.null.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.U.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Carabus on March 05, 2016, 07:55:18 AM
I found some small bugs in my first game using 0.7.2a RC3. Keep in mind I am using StarSector Plus, in case any of the bugs is related.

1. In a description of procurement mission in mission screen there is a typo:
<name> is is working for the local authorites and the delivery may be made openly.

2. I was selling fuel to Asharu black market. Starting price is 75c. When I sell 1 unit of fuel the price is always 75c, even when I sell one unit 30 times in a row. But when I sell 30 units in one transaction, the price drops, for first one I get 75c, but for 30th one I get only 56c, and the average price for all 30 is 65c.

3. When selling a stack, the average price calculated while dragging the stack differs by one from the average price calculated after placing the stack in black market. There is also small difference in formatting of "x <number>". Look at these screenshots:
http://prntscr.com/abj4yo
http://prntscr.com/abj5gd
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 05, 2016, 01:46:09 PM
Thank you for the bug reports!

1. In a description of procurement mission in mission screen there is a typo:
<name> is is working for the local authorites and the delivery may be made openly.

Fixed.


2. I was selling fuel to Asharu black market. Starting price is 75c. When I sell 1 unit of fuel the price is always 75c, even when I sell one unit 30 times in a row. But when I sell 30 units in one transaction, the price drops, for first one I get 75c, but for 30th one I get only 56c, and the average price for all 30 is 65c.

3. When selling a stack, the average price calculated while dragging the stack differs by one from the average price calculated after placing the stack in black market. There is also small difference in formatting of "x <number>". Look at these screenshots:
http://prntscr.com/abj4yo
http://prntscr.com/abj5gd

Wrote these down.

Had a strange bug that I haven't seen before, where I exited to menu as a patrol was hailing me (I zoned out momentarily but it could have been that the interaction dialog opened while the game was "fading" after exiting), immediately went on "continue" in the main menu, and the save started with the interaction dialog created by the fleet from the previous session open, which had some broken strings and then created a fatal error and CTD when I tried to click a dialog option.

That's exactly what it was, fixed - will now pause the game during this fade-out, and not create any dialogs if something (i.e. a script running while paused) did try to do it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 05, 2016, 08:04:21 PM
Still having problems with disobedient ships.  Last few times, I ordered my fleet (of a Lasher, Wolf, Afflictor, and two Scarabs) to Assault/Defend a point.  All ships except Lasher obeyed.  All had officers (no Timid though).

I wonder if the game counts my flagship as an option to assign.  That is, if my ship would be the best qualified, it wants to assign it, but cannot because I use it, but because it thought my ship was the best, it does not check for other ships to use.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on March 05, 2016, 08:23:56 PM
Now that you mention it, I had something similar where I assigned my whole fleet to assault/defend a certain point, and everyone except one Aurora obeyed. When I replayed the battle after taking too many losses, it was the same. The Aurora was just off doing its own thing with a yellow arrow indicating that it wasn't under orders.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 05, 2016, 09:08:06 PM
Do you guys happen to have a save where this happens?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Carabus on March 05, 2016, 09:10:38 PM
Another small bug I noticed:
In the Intel Screen->Reports tab->Message Categories->Prices
there is no entry for Volturnian Lobster.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 05, 2016, 09:56:38 PM
Another small bug I noticed:
In the Intel Screen->Reports tab->Message Categories->Prices
there is no entry for Volturnian Lobster.

This means you don't have any price information for it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Carabus on March 05, 2016, 10:36:25 PM
Another small bug I noticed:
In the Intel Screen->Reports tab->Message Categories->Prices
there is no entry for Volturnian Lobster.

This means you don't have any price information for it.

But I have: http://prntscr.com/absmkn
Unless you mean there is nothing to show on the map, but in one of the test games I started I remember the map was "empty" for some commodities, and despire that they still had the entry in Prices list.


Anyway another possible oversight I found:
Ragnar is called Red Giant, but its description fits Red Dwarf type star, especially when it mentions that its mass is only a fraction of old sun mass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_classification#Class_M
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 05, 2016, 10:38:49 PM
But I have: http://prntscr.com/absmkn
Unless you mean there is nothing to show on the map, but in one of the test games I started I remember the map was "empty" for some commodities, and despire that they still had the entry in Prices list.

The map only shows information that you get from reports due to prices being noteworthy for some reason; that's what I meant here. The other thing sounds like it could be a bug, I'll keep an eye out.

Anyway another possible oversight I found:
Ragnar is called Red Giant, but its description fits Red Dwarf, especially when it mentions that its mass is only a fraction of old sun mass.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_classification#Class_M

Yeah, it's definitely supposed to be a red dwarf - I've actually got a todo item about that somewhere :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on March 06, 2016, 10:17:30 AM
A few random comments:

Just stumbled upon the new orbital mirror painting, it is beautiful! (Once again I wish I could enlarge it in-game.)

The new phase system is an enormous improvement. Back when the original phase invisibility plans were cancelled I was kind of disappointed, and since then I always regarded the transparency mechanics as a less cool substitute. Not anymore! The ships are a blast to fly, and really interesting to fight against.

I like all the balance changes and new ship systems I've encountered so far. All the time shenanigans are awesome. High Energy Focus is a really good system now (it was slightly annoying before).

For the first time I've actively engaged in campaign level stealth gameplay. I had as much fun as in an interesting fight, it was really intense. That's why I think the game could stand more reasons to enter markets undetected besides smuggling, like spy missions . (I only started being sneaky because I wanted to scout all black markets for phase ships, even those of enemy factions.)


Oh, and thank you for the new intel tab. It's not perfect, but so far from the headache inducing wirrwarr from before.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 06, 2016, 10:22:24 AM
For the first time I've actively engaged in campaign level stealth gameplay. I had as much fun as in an interesting fight, it was really intense. That's why I think the game could stand more reasons to enter markets undetected besides smuggling, like spy missions . (I only started being sneaky because I wanted to scout all black markets for phase ships, even those of enemy factions.)

Very much on the same page here! Spy-type missions are actually on the todo somewhere; I'd love to have more things encouraging stealth gameplay.

Oh, and thank you for the new intel tab. It's not perfect, but so far from the headache inducing wirrwarr from before.

Definitely a work in progress, still. UI is hard :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 06, 2016, 12:11:38 PM
Are ships properly closing into range when an enemy has been overloaded? I've seen my Enforcer XIV with a Steady officer (who had little to no flux himself) seemingly AVOID getting into range of enemies while they are overloaded even to the point where he'll slowdown. Its infuriating to see.

Happens 1 v 1 in simulator vs another Enforcer for certain.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 06, 2016, 12:22:08 PM
Are ships properly closing into range when an enemy has been overloaded? I've seen my Enforcer XIV with a Steady officer (who had little to no flux himself) seemingly AVOID getting into range of enemies while they are overloaded even to the point where he'll slowdown. Its infuriating to see.

Happens 1 v 1 in simulator vs another Enforcer for certain.

Yes, pretty sure that's working correctly. When overload time runs low, they stop considering the enemy as being overloaded (so that an overload finishing doesn't come as a surprise), but with low/no flux that shouldn't really come into play. Might be you're seeing relative motion? An Enforcer can be pretty slow, and an overloaded ship *will* be trying to get away. If the Enforcer is already coasting towards its target, it might look like it's not trying to close in because it's not firing its engines.

Could also happen near the edge of the map; ships will try to avoid that area.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: JohnDoe on March 06, 2016, 12:27:06 PM
That has been my observation in 0.7.2a as well; I have seen many 1v1 situations between ships with no officers where one ship would refuse to close the distance without an ally nearby even if the match-up is in its advantage.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 06, 2016, 12:35:37 PM
Indeed the Enforcer is slow but I noticed that ones its flux drops to zero and it gets the flux boost... it won't use it to close in - as if it still thinks it is speed capped or, like I said, it refuses to close in.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 06, 2016, 12:40:15 PM
If there *are* other allies on the field and not extremely far away, then actually, yes, they will try to avoid fighting and stall until help gets there, provided the ally is not fighting someone else already. But this only happens when smaller ships are facing larger ones, the target isn't overloaded, and the smaller ship isn't already engaged and doing well, according to some set of criteria.

This is the sort of thing where it's really hard to say whether what the AI is doing is correct or a bug, because so much depends on the context. "Not engaging an enemy ship when it theoretically might" could be the intended decision, or not.

If you can point to a simulator 1-1 (with details regarding the loadout, and preferably without officers involved, if it's still reproducible without them) where the behavior happens at least somewhat reliably, that would be a great help. Barring that, video of the incident is also helpful (though, of course a bit much to ask for in most cases). Short of these, I really can't do anything useful with this, unfortunately. It's just not clear-cut enough to point to anything specific or even be sure that it's a bug.

I did just now experiment with overloading enemy ships in the simulator, and the ship behavior seems correct - the non-overloaded ship closes in and attacks. It's not reckless about it, but it's certainly not backing off.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 06, 2016, 01:23:00 PM
I appreciate that something like this is a pain in the ass to test and reproduce what with there being so many variables and corner cases that could arise. If you say everything seems fine then I'll go with that and chalk it up to me missing something or other.

Heres the ship and officer in question that I noticed the behavior with - simulator battle with this ship and the two non(D) Enforcers at the same time. Once it killed the 1 ship it seemed to get spooked by the remaining one and didn't want to close in while the target was overloaded.

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/Pgn5orT.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 06, 2016, 02:10:08 PM
Thanks for understanding :)

Tried the loadout and officer from your screenshot just now - well, the difference being a regular Enforcer, and heavy AC's instead of hvel drivers - vs two non (D) Enforcers in the simulator. Unfortunately (?) it looks fine - took one of them out, then I force-overloaded the other. It fired at the overloaded ship but didn't close in because its own flux was high, letting the overloaded ship drift away. Then it vented and re-engaged, finishing the fight in short order.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CaptainWinky on March 07, 2016, 09:54:44 AM
I really like the changes to smuggling/cargo inspections.  I need to pick fights with some Tri-Tach fleets so that I can see how the new phase mechanics work.

Found a small bug: I spotted a pirate-themed Buffalo(D) for sale yesterday, then I noticed that its stats and price were the same as a non-D Buffalo.  I double-checked in the codex just now.  The description and the weapon mount are different but everything else is the same as a regular Buffalo.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 07, 2016, 10:24:54 AM
Well that doesn't make sense concerning the Buffalo. The pirate (D) is combat converted, has tons more weapon mounts and no shield where as the standard Buffalo is a pure freighter with a shield but only a single weapon mount. The stats should not at all be the same, lol

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on March 07, 2016, 10:35:13 AM
Well that doesn't make sense concerning the Buffalo. The pirate (D) is combat converted, has tons more weapon mounts and no shield where as the standard Buffalo is a pure freighter with a shield but only a single weapon mount. The stats should not at all be the same, lol
He is talking about the pirate skin of the normal Buffalo, that has the shielded cargo and is objectively better than all the other buffalos skins, not the Buffalo mkII
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 07, 2016, 10:44:31 AM
Oh, gotcha. I wouldn't even consider any of the other Buffalo variants when the Buffalo (A) exists! It not only has boosted stats but no longer has the negative "Civilian Grade Hull" mod! I like to snap up at least 2 of them as soon as I can. You can buy them on Hegemony open markets too!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on March 07, 2016, 11:36:56 AM
Buffalo (A) is great, but pirate Buffalo has the largest shielded cargo hold of any ship. i usually try to get one or two of the pirate version for the occasional trade with illegal goods, then a bunch of the militarized version for more capacity.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 07, 2016, 01:20:38 PM
I consider pirate Buffalo the best for being able to mount Vulcan instead of weak and/or expensive beam PD.  At least before Buffalo (A) lost civilian-grade hull.  Now, Buffalo (A) may be good for not bloating profile as much as civilian Buffalo.  (Then again, I rarely care about sensors and profiles after a certain point.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on March 07, 2016, 01:44:57 PM
I consider pirate Buffalo the best for being able to mount Vulcan instead of weak and/or expensive beam PD.  At least before Buffalo (A) lost civilian-grade hull.  Now, Buffalo (A) may be good for not bloating profile as much as civilian Buffalo.  (Then again, I rarely care about sensors and profiles after a certain point.)
Given how limited is the impact of the sensor profile on the detection range, I wouldn't care that much about the civilian grade hull. Unless you are running a full phase ship fleet for role-play (and I bet role-play isn't your style).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 07, 2016, 03:30:32 PM
Occasionally, I may try to minimize profile when I really want to sneak into a hostile market that is likely guarded by patrols.  (Fighting would mean I need to want months, which will not do.)  I have done this in my 0.7.0 Hegemony game (before commissions, when everyone became hostile), when I bought organs in Askonia, and I really needed small profile to avoid Diktat patrols.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on March 07, 2016, 04:26:36 PM
Occasionally, I may try to minimize profile when I really want to sneak into a hostile market that is likely guarded by patrols.  (Fighting would mean I need to want months, which will not do.)  I have done this in my 0.7.0 Hegemony game (before commissions, when everyone became hostile), when I bought organs in Askonia, and I really needed small profile to avoid Diktat patrols.

Well, here are a few "standard" detection range for various profile I tested in the game:
I tried it with several profiles:
0 => 510
1 => 570
2 => 680
4 => 790
8 => 930
16 => 1050
40 => 1210
79 => 1350
150 => 1470 (25 Onslaughts with augmented engines!)
250 => 1570 (25 Atlases with augmented engines)
Also that quote link to an interesting discussion about the way detection works.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on March 07, 2016, 10:21:20 PM
Not sure how I feel about the new phase ships as a symmetrical mechanic.  They seem to fall into the same category as the Hyperion where there's no real counterplay available other than waiting for them to run out of CR and malfunction or hoping the AI makes an unforced error (because there is no way to make impositions against ships with incontestable mobility advantages to that degree).  The Afflictor's systems also seems insane.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding how it works but in a large fight having it zip up and overload something through shields can just mean a ship is instantly dead and there's very little that can be done to prevent it.  This is also assuming  you aren't in a ship with fixed front shields, in which case against a phase ship you might just be straight dead since you can't even make it hard for them to get behind you anymore.

They're a ton of fun to use, probably in part because of how brutally unfair they can be, but oh boy can they be awful to fight against if the AI isn't durdling around trying to EMP swarmer missiles instead of violating engine ports.


Other things on the list:  Hegemony fleets with multiple quad-Harpoon Enforcers flown by missile-specced officers, fond of launching unified alpha strikes of turbocharged missiles to delete the first ship on your side of the field to let their flux get high, even if they happen to be two screens away fighting something else at the time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 07, 2016, 10:57:29 PM
Not sure how I feel about the new phase ships as a symmetrical mechanic.  They seem to fall into the same category as the Hyperion where there's no real counterplay available other than waiting for them to run out of CR and malfunction or hoping the AI makes an unforced error (because there is no way to make impositions against ships with incontestable mobility advantages to that degree).  The Afflictor's systems also seems insane.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding how it works but in a large fight having it zip up and overload something through shields can just mean a ship is instantly dead and there's very little that can be done to prevent it.  This is also assuming  you aren't in a ship with fixed front shields, in which case against a phase ship you might just be straight dead since you can't even make it hard for them to get behind you anymore.

They're a ton of fun to use, probably in part because of how brutally unfair they can be, but oh boy can they be awful to fight against if the AI isn't durdling around trying to EMP swarmer missiles instead of violating engine ports.

The idea here is that they run out of CR much faster due to being in fast-time much of the time; counter-play can actually involve forcing them to spend more time there. You're also much less likely to be in a situation where you're waiting them out - a larger battle will generally take enough time that phase ships are going to be close to "done" by the time you start targeting them.

So, yes, they're dangerous and hard to counter directly - though it's still possible: if you're piloting an Afflictor it's doable, if you're using a Hyperion, it's easy, and even something like the Medusa can do it with some planning. Basically, the goal is for them to be fun to use, and for you to mostly not encounter the "let's wait it out" situation to a degree where it's annoying. Even wearing down a frigate from full peak time to 0% CR isn't *that* bad, and that's the worst case.

Bringing an escort or two along can also be very helpful if you're in a front-shield ship.

Specifically regarding the Afflictor's system: the overload only lasts for half a second, so it's not generally instant death. It can be very dangerous, of course. It's also very short-ranged, so simply packing enough firepower and keeping it pointed at the Afflictor is enough to keep you safe. The design here (per the blog post) is that there's something about the new phase ship systems that feels "unfair" (it's part of their feel), but on closer examination is only marginally so and offers some opportunities for counter-play.


Other things on the list:  Hegemony fleets with multiple quad-Harpoon Enforcers flown by missile-specced officers, fond of launching unified alpha strikes of turbocharged missiles to delete the first ship on your side of the field to let their flux get high, even if they happen to be two screens away fighting something else at the time.

Yeah, this is something I'll be looking at alongside the skill revamp. It's definitely a bit much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 08, 2016, 08:07:49 AM
Encountered something that I cannot tell if it is a bug or stealth change to game mechanics.

I went to Qaras (with transponder off).  I already have extreme suspicion level before visiting this time, but since pirates are Vengeful at me, I do not care.  At the black market, I sold a bunch of stuff (mostly marines and fuel) at the black market to drop stability, wait a day, revisit Qaras to see stability drop to zero, then cleaned out the market of marines, fuel, and supplies.  I profited handsomely.

Then the trouble starts.

I took a -2 penalty to reputation with Independents (due to Killa being in Yma), from 77 to 75.  Okay, fine, cost of doing business.  But that does not stop.  For four more months, reputation steadily drops twenty-five more times, over four (in-game) months, -2 each time.  Eventually, my reputation sank to 25.  I waited a bit more, but had to cut it short.  I do not know if the reputation loss will continue or not.

If I was supposed to lose -52 reputation, shouldn't I lose it all in one big hit, rather than many -2 hits?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on March 08, 2016, 10:09:10 AM
Not sure how I feel about the new phase ships as a symmetrical mechanic.  They seem to fall into the same category as the Hyperion where there's no real counterplay available other than waiting for them to run out of CR and malfunction or hoping the AI makes an unforced error (because there is no way to make impositions against ships with incontestable mobility advantages to that degree).  The Afflictor's systems also seems insane.  Maybe I'm misunderstanding how it works but in a large fight having it zip up and overload something through shields can just mean a ship is instantly dead and there's very little that can be done to prevent it.  This is also assuming  you aren't in a ship with fixed front shields, in which case against a phase ship you might just be straight dead since you can't even make it hard for them to get behind you anymore.

They're a ton of fun to use, probably in part because of how brutally unfair they can be, but oh boy can they be awful to fight against if the AI isn't durdling around trying to EMP swarmer missiles instead of violating engine ports.

The idea here is that they run out of CR much faster due to being in fast-time much of the time; counter-play can actually involve forcing them to spend more time there. You're also much less likely to be in a situation where you're waiting them out - a larger battle will generally take enough time that phase ships are going to be close to "done" by the time you start targeting them.

So, yes, they're dangerous and hard to counter directly - though it's still possible: if you're piloting an Afflictor it's doable, if you're using a Hyperion, it's easy, and even something like the Medusa can do it with some planning. Basically, the goal is for them to be fun to use, and for you to mostly not encounter the "let's wait it out" situation to a degree where it's annoying. Even wearing down a frigate from full peak time to 0% CR isn't *that* bad, and that's the worst case.

Bringing an escort or two along can also be very helpful if you're in a front-shield ship.

Specifically regarding the Afflictor's system: the overload only lasts for half a second, so it's not generally instant death. It can be very dangerous, of course. It's also very short-ranged, so simply packing enough firepower and keeping it pointed at the Afflictor is enough to keep you safe. The design here (per the blog post) is that there's something about the new phase ship systems that feels "unfair" (it's part of their feel), but on closer examination is only marginally so and offers some opportunities for counter-play.

I agree that they're generally not a problem in larger battle because there's enough other stuff going on to keep you occupied in the time it takes them to run out of CR and enough overlapping fields of big guns that they have to play somewhat conservatively, and it's even possible they'll let you kill them just because the AI doesn't seem to account for officer bonuses when evaluating threats and they will decide to unphase near a ship that can instagib them.  The Afflictor's system is probably still too much against any of the high-tech sluggers, though.  A Dominator can probably survive its shields going down for a moment, but something like an Aurora or a Paragon that needs to shield tank and has shields that take 10+ seconds to deploy will just die if it gets them switched off in the middle of a fight, especially if the fight involves enemy officers with Harpoons or torpedoes.

The bigger problem is in small battles against something like a Hegemony patrol.  You can't deploy a similarly sized force because your own frigates will probably just get murdered, while anything big enough not to lose in a straight fight is too slow to pressure them and may still need an escort to avoid getting tailpiped, so now to win the fight you have to heavily overdeploy and then wait for them to time out.

Really, the new phase ships are approaching a power level where it might be advisable to start carrying around dedicated anti-phase platforms (if such a thing truly exists at the moment) just do deal with them, and I recall you said that you didn't want them to turn into an RPS mechanic where they own regular ships but then die to some specialized countership you have to lug around.

Quote
Other things on the list:  Hegemony fleets with multiple quad-Harpoon Enforcers flown by missile-specced officers, fond of launching unified alpha strikes of turbocharged missiles to delete the first ship on your side of the field to let their flux get high, even if they happen to be two screens away fighting something else at the time.

Yeah, this is something I'll be looking at alongside the skill revamp. It's definitely a bit much.

Glad to hear it.  It's almost impossible to not lose a ship to one of those fleets, so you end up just hoping they blow their wad on something you don't care about or something that is more durable than they estimated from its own officer bonuses.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 08, 2016, 10:21:32 AM
Glad to hear it.  It's almost impossible to not lose a ship to one of those fleets, so you end up just hoping they blow their wad on something you don't care about or something that is more durable than they estimated from its own officer bonuses.
This is another reason why I solo fleets.  They cannot murder my ships like this when they are not on the map, and I can better prevent or defend against incoming missile storms.

In 0.65, it was eliminate enemy flagship before it launched missiles, something Hyperion can kill before it became a threat to the rest of my fleet.  Now, player needs to eliminate every ship with an officer.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 08, 2016, 10:43:38 AM
@Megas: this sounds like a bug. I'll take a look.

The Afflictor's system is probably still too much against any of the high-tech sluggers, though.  A Dominator can probably survive its shields going down for a moment, but something like an Aurora or a Paragon that needs to shield tank and has shields that take 10+ seconds to deploy will just die if it gets them switched off in the middle of a fight, especially if the fight involves enemy officers with Harpoons or torpedoes.

Harpoons aside (being a separate problem), this seems like it discourages single-ship deployments. Which is probably a step in the right direction, actually. I'd like the eventual skill revamp and possibly some other mechanics tweaks help take some more steps along that path. And, again, if something like the Paragon lets the Afflictor get within 500 units and it feel safe enough to unphase, that's probably a sign that the Paragon is being surrounded and overwhelmed. If it's not, I mean, half a second of downtime and re-raising in the right direction isn't *that* bad.

If you're trying to duel an enemy Onslaught and it's got an Afflictor buddy to trip you up at all the wrong times, you're going to have a bad day - but that's exactly the point of the Afflictor in that scenario. It's meant to be a powerful support ship (hence the system actually halving its own energy damage for a bit, so it can't combine with its own AM blaster shots quite so devastatingly).

The bigger problem is in small battles against something like a Hegemony patrol.  You can't deploy a similarly sized force because your own frigates will probably just get murdered, while anything big enough not to lose in a straight fight is too slow to pressure them and may still need an escort to avoid getting tailpiped, so now to win the fight you have to heavily overdeploy and then wait for them to time out.

I see what you're saying, but I actually ran into this exact scenario while playtesting. My approach was to, in fact, deploy a comparable force, and then personally focus on keeping the phase ship busy. It was, as I remember, fun and a bit of a nailbiter, but doable. Although, iirc, I was piloting a Shade at the time, which was certainly helpful to being able to be where I needed to be. And multiple enemy phase ships would pose a bigger problem.

It does seem like a frigate kitted for speed might be able to do the job too, but surviving against an Afflictor can be tough - you'd really have to play off your allies to avoid getting chased down, while also not getting them killed.

Hmm. Will think on this some more. It might just be that the Quantum Disruptor could use a bit of a nerf in some way; it's very good in a wide range of situations. It's supposed to be better in a support role, but still useful in a 1-1 - but perhaps it's too useful there atm.

I want to keep an eye on it and see how things play out, without making a knee-jerk change, though.


Really, the new phase ships are approaching a power level where it might be advisable to start carrying around dedicated anti-phase platforms (if such a thing truly exists at the moment) just do deal with them, and I recall you said that you didn't want them to turn into an RPS mechanic where they own regular ships but then die to some specialized countership you have to lug around.

It's all a matter of degrees, right? Don't want the only counters to be hard counters, but if something has a hard counter but can also be countered with skillful play, then that becomes interesting.


I'm certainly not saying it's perfectly balanced at the moment, though, and very much appreciate the feedback!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on March 08, 2016, 10:49:15 AM
Specifically regarding the Afflictor's system: the overload only lasts for half a second, so it's not generally instant death. It can be very dangerous, of course. It's also very short-ranged, so simply packing enough firepower and keeping it pointed at the Afflictor is enough to keep you safe. The design here (per the blog post) is that there's something about the new phase ship systems that feels "unfair" (it's part of their feel), but on closer examination is only marginally so and offers some opportunities for counter-play.
It's only not-unfair with the vanilla loadouts though. When you put torpedoes+AM-blaster in those mounts it really feels like cheating as you can instantly kill or silence any ship instantly without ay possible counter. With SS+ randomized variants, one single Afflictor with an average officer in a frigate fleet killed all my destroyers by himself and then harassed my remaining frigates (leading to a humiliating retreat).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 08, 2016, 10:53:37 AM
Are you sure this isn't the case of underestimating it until it was too late? I'd bet you could probably do a lot better replaying that battle a second time. Worst-case scenario, a mass escort formation would make it very difficult for an Afflictor to pick destroyers apart like that.

(Edit: another consideration here is officers being too good at the moment for what I'd consider ideal...)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on March 08, 2016, 10:57:26 AM
Trouble with Afflictor is that it's not a support ship, though. It's a powerful assault / interceptor boat that just happens to have a powerful support ability on top of that. It's probably got its perks stacked a little too high; the Shade is inferior across the board, and its EMP isn't as strong as the Afflictor's ability either. Could switch these two. Or make Afflictor's ability a more 'traditional' EMP that works on engines and weapons only.

Maybe the shield-disrupting effect could be influenced by the strength of the shield or the flux pool. High-tech ships are just fodder for well-placed Afflictor scrambles now, and they're the ones who are already disproportionately expensive to deploy and low on the armour stat. That should amount to something; their shields should be more resistant to scrambling. (If they aren't already, I haven't compared tbh)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 08, 2016, 11:00:03 AM
Torpedo Afflictor can easily destroy one ship unopposed.  I do not use that because it becomes useless after it kills one or two ship, while another ship can solo fleets... after some work.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on March 08, 2016, 11:05:44 AM
Are you sure this isn't the case of underestimating it until it was too late? I'd bet you could probably do a lot better replaying that battle a second time. Worst-case scenario, a mass escort formation would make it very difficult for an Afflictor to pick destroyers apart like that.
I have to hand it to you, the Afflictor is pretty smart at positioning itself in the back right where no weapon can hit it and no allied ship will fire either by fear of hitting the destroyer. Still, an AI Afflictor took out 3 AI destroyers each escorted by a frigate before destroying mine. I don't see what I could do differently except using a deathball formation: The most boring strategy there is and one I believe you wanted to avoid from becoming the optimal play.

And all that with a single frigate, I dread the day I'll face several.

Torpedo Afflictor can easily destroy one ship unopposed.  I do not use that because it becomes useless after it kills one or two ship, while another ship can solo fleets... after some work.
That's stil a feat I do not like to see coming from an AI ship...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on March 08, 2016, 07:36:39 PM
I just got to be able to play the 0.7.2a update and, for the first time, got to see the Mudskipper Mk.II and it's much-spoken about Ill-Advised Modifications.

Least to say, I dropped on the floor and rolled around laughing my guts out for the next 5 minutes.  It's both hilarious and so over-the-top that it's beautiful, absolutely wonderful. :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 08, 2016, 07:39:46 PM
I tried Mudskipper II too (armed with Mark IX autocannon).  It is like a mini-Brawler (pre Damper Field version).  No PD, but it can kite with 900 range gun.  At least Ill-Advised Modifications does not permanently kill the lone gun on it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on March 08, 2016, 08:25:44 PM
The Paragon has more than enough OP to run Frontal Shield Emitter and Accelerated Shields, which I actually ran before the phase changes just so I could vent often. Doesn't help the AI much, but the player can limit the damage Afflictors do with proper outfitting.

Phase ships are actually quite vulnerable to faster phase ships with higher flux capacity or more efficient cloaks; i.e. player equipped and piloted phase ships. If you phase after they do and stick close enough to shoot them when they unphase, they'll stay phased until they're forced out by hard flux, and then you can AM Blaster them. Which isn't really an argument against phase ships being too powerful, but it is something you can do to kill them.

I do agree that the Afflictor is perhaps too versatile. You can equip it to be very good at anything you might want a frigate to do, from clearing out fighters to dueling other frigates to harassing capital ships. The Shade at least only has two universal slots, not four, which somewhat limits the uses you can put it to.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on March 08, 2016, 08:39:10 PM
From what I've seen, there is absolutely nothing that can stop Afflictor that uses correct attack timing from unloading torpedoes into any (large enough) target ship.
Even simple skill-less Afflictor that just fires it's 4 reapers simultaneously with activating system can take away about 75% of simulator Paragon's health. Retreat is also quite safe because most weapons on enemy ship that face Afflictor are disabled by damage.

With maxed missiles skill this probably means killing two Paragons.
Yes, it will have to retreat immediately after, but so what? Hyperion is unlikely to pull that off within CR time constrains at all, while it doesn't even take long with Afflictor.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 08, 2016, 09:37:29 PM
Give it some time guys, feel it fully out and maybe brainstorm some counters before ya pass absolute judgement.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on March 08, 2016, 11:23:23 PM
I have not played around with afflictors yet (been having a blast in a Scarab - that thing is scarily deadly against front shielded destroyers), but if the problem is alpha strike damage, why not change the front mounts away from universal to hybrid?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on March 08, 2016, 11:55:58 PM
I have not played around with afflictors yet (been having a blast in a Scarab - that thing is scarily deadly against front shielded destroyers), but if the problem is alpha strike damage, why not change the front mounts away from universal to hybrid?

This would be sufficient to solve "one-shot Paragon" extreme case, but ability to land guaranteed hits ignoring all defenses still doesn't feel very balanced. Even Hyperion, which has similar ability to bypass shield by teleportation, is able to do so mostly because of AIs imperfect shield raise timing, not because it is impossible to counter at all.

Plus, mods probably already have some bursty HE ballistic/energy weapons that can work as poor man's reaper to some extent.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 09, 2016, 06:32:29 AM
Give it some time guys, feel it fully out and maybe brainstorm some counters before ya pass absolute judgement.
People have played enough to know what the Afflictor can do.

The only thing stopping torpedo Afflictor from doing too much damage is lack of ammo.  It kills a few ships, then it leaves.  However, I cannot think of anything that can stop it aside from the enemy not deploying a big enough target for it kill.

Fighter heavy fleets are probably not as vulnerable to Afflictors due to few viable targets, but given how weak fighters are, more conventional enemy fleets will tear fighters apart (more easily than non-fighter fleets).

Hyperion, a playership that can stop it, is rare.  Some players may need to resort to save-scumming a deserter fleet to board one late in the game.  I suppose another phase ship could try to stop the Afflictor, probably mirror match.  Thanks to phase cloak's time shift, very few ships can keep up with an Afflictor.  Those that can are rare and fragile enough to die if disrupted then shot for one or two-hit kill.

Afflictor is a "demonic spider".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on March 09, 2016, 02:34:55 PM


Plus, mods probably already have some bursty HE ballistic/energy weapons that can work as poor man's reaper to some extent.

Not sure we should be balancing vanilla game around mod possibilities, but I understand the general thrust of your argument
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on March 10, 2016, 06:47:36 AM
It seems as if there are different principles at work when delivering illegal goods. For example, I get official Hegemony missions to deliver organs (which are supposedly illegal), and I can even deliver them with the transponder on, no problem. But when I deliver drugs for some pirates on a Hegemony world I've got to play all sneaky. Am I missing a distinction or is this a bug?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on March 10, 2016, 06:51:12 AM
It seems as if there are different principles at work when delivering illegal goods. For example, I get official Hegemony missions to deliver organs (which are supposedly illegal), and I can even deliver them with the transponder on, no problem. But when I deliver drugs for some pirates on a Hegemony world I've got to play all sneaky. Am I missing a distinction or is this a bug?
The legit recipients are licensed medical staff who need an extra supply through semi-official channels. The pirate ones are black market dealers.
(been that way since 0.7, if the details haven't changed since then)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 10, 2016, 09:22:17 AM
Right, yeah. The mission description will also specify if clandestine delivery is required; perhaps that bit of text should be highlighted. Made a note.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Achataeon on March 10, 2016, 06:26:27 PM
Changes as of March 03, 2016 (hotfix, -RC3

Something's really bugging for quite a while now. The -RC3 doesn't have a closed parenthesis on it ")"

That and, where can you buy Harvested Organs legally? The only reliable way I can buy that thing is off of Chicozmotoc, and it's illegal there. Kinda hard to do those legal Organ missions without resorting to Black Marketing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 10, 2016, 06:34:43 PM
Something's really bugging for quite a while now. The -RC3 doesn't have a closed parenthesis on it ")"

Thanks, fixed that up :)

That and, where can you buy Harvested Organs legally? The only reliable way I can buy that thing is off of Chicozmotoc, and it's illegal there. Kinda hard to do those legal Organ missions without resorting to Black Marketing.

I don't remember offhand whether any Tri-Tachyon markets (where these are legal) are large enough to have some. It's not supposed to be something you can easily get legally, though - needing to use the black market for these, and drugs, is pretty much the point.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Bastion.Systems on March 11, 2016, 01:33:23 PM
Aww yizz new Starsector version, loads of changes!  :o
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Taverius on March 12, 2016, 03:13:24 AM
Hey Alex, looks like the skeleton crew perk can still put fighters under alpha-level AI control :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Serenitis on March 12, 2016, 01:06:22 PM
Quote
Burn Drive: now disables venting while active
This is an absolute cow to get used to after being able to stop at will. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 12, 2016, 01:08:08 PM
Hey Alex, looks like the skeleton crew perk can still put fighters under alpha-level AI control :)

Thanks - noted! Kinda-sorta-feature for now, but yes, something that needs to be cleaned up eventually.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on March 12, 2016, 03:20:11 PM
Is this as it should be? Seem kinda strange that saving their people from starvation doesn't make Tri-Tachyon hate me at least a little bit less.
(http://i.imgur.com/eO0nE9P.png)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on March 12, 2016, 03:32:45 PM
Is this as it should be? Seem kinda strange that saving their people from starvation doesn't make Tri-Tachyon hate me at least a little bit less.
(http://i.imgur.com/eO0nE9P.png)

Yeah, I just noticed this while trying to recover my rep with the independents :(
Seems once you hit hostile, the only remedy is to kill their enemies?

I really don't like the finality of relationship modifiers atm.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 12, 2016, 03:37:22 PM
And once you reach Vengeful, it is final, and nothing raises reputation anymore.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on March 12, 2016, 05:26:51 PM
- Added Donate Basket of Kittens
- Will add 1 rep even at Vengeful
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 13, 2016, 05:15:10 PM
Is this as it should be? Seem kinda strange that saving their people from starvation doesn't make Tri-Tachyon hate me at least a little bit less.
(http://i.imgur.com/eO0nE9P.png)

Weeell, you've probably been shooting at their military for a while. Selling a bunch of food (at a profit!) to a market with a shortage (which, for all they know, you engineered) doesn't really stack up against that. So realism-wise, I think it's pretty reasonable.

That said, I do want to re-evaluate what the various ways to go up/down in reputation are at some point. Probably at some later point, though, when more things are in place.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on March 15, 2016, 04:23:46 PM
Quote
AI fleet commanders now always take the largest combat ship for their flagship, if one is available

Bug?

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 15, 2016, 04:34:24 PM
Psh, those 3 small ballistic mounts totally make it a combat ship!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on March 15, 2016, 08:38:37 PM
It's a merchant convoy, so I figure the biggest cargo ship being the "flagship" makes sense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 15, 2016, 08:52:48 PM
That bit of patch notes is, apparently, a lie. It's going to pick one of the ships of the biggest size class available, and it's more likely to pick combat ships, but it's not guaranteed. In this case, the only capital being the Atlas, it'll always end up being the flagship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Weltall on March 15, 2016, 08:58:20 PM
 :o That lying piece of patch note! Still seems logical for the Merchant leader to be closer to a civilian and stay safe away from the battle, while his guards protect him and the cargo XD

Weeell, you've probably been shooting at their military for a while. Selling a bunch of food (at a profit!) to a market with a shortage (which, for all they know, you engineered) doesn't really stack up against that. So realism-wise, I think it's pretty reasonable.

So this is something normal now? To not be able to overcome hate easily sounds really nice. Adding a period that no matter what actions you do, will not be accepted by the enemy faction as a friendly gesture~
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ranakastrasz on March 16, 2016, 12:52:57 PM
:o That lying piece of patch note! Still seems logical for the Merchant leader to be closer to a civilian and stay safe away from the battle, while his guards protect him and the cargo XD

Weeell, you've probably been shooting at their military for a while. Selling a bunch of food (at a profit!) to a market with a shortage (which, for all they know, you engineered) doesn't really stack up against that. So realism-wise, I think it's pretty reasonable.

So this is something normal now? To not be able to overcome hate easily sounds really nice. Adding a period that no matter what actions you do, will not be accepted by the enemy faction as a friendly gesture~

Thats the intention of Vengful from what I understand, even if it never really seemed to work right before.
I had a whole suggestion on that subject, but I don't think anyone noticed.
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=9786.msg168860#msg168860

Essentially, that Vengeful, cooperate, and scaling down towards neutral are harder to change, requring larger magnitudes of activities and specific activities to achieve. Vengeful would be irreversable and Cooperative would require you to specifically attack an allied fleet to reverse, with less strict requirements as you move towards neutral.

Hence dedicated effort would be required, and things like black market transactions or similar wouldn't really be enough, even in massive volumes. You would have to be obviously opposed to them to the point where they are unable to trust you to be friendly, ever.


Still needs some kind of Fleet commander interaction system, and you need a way to get out of combat with semi-hostile fleets without Fighting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 16, 2016, 11:06:59 PM
I had a whole suggestion on that subject, but I don't think anyone noticed.
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=9786.msg168860#msg168860

I noticed! Remember reading it at the time. Sorry I didn't respond; it's just... well, it's hard to make time to respond everywhere I'd like to. I do try to read as much as possible, though - especially suggestions; I'd estimate I catch probably 90% of it at least.

Hence dedicated effort would be required, and things like black market transactions or similar wouldn't really be enough, even in massive volumes. You would have to be obviously opposed to them to the point where they are unable to trust you to be friendly, ever.

I think that specifically would be troublesome, because then getting to cooperative would basically be a license to smuggle without consequences. That doesn't seem desirable design-wise.

The system in place already pretty much supports these kinds of mechanics, though.

Still needs some kind of Fleet commander interaction system, and you need a way to get out of combat with semi-hostile fleets without Fighting.

Yeah, I'm more or less holding off on touching it until more/almost all things like this are in place. What's there isn't perfect but works for now. Once it's clear what war etc looks like, it may make sense to revisit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ranakastrasz on March 17, 2016, 08:43:56 AM


I noticed! Remember reading it at the time. Sorry I didn't respond; it's just... well, it's hard to make time to respond everywhere I'd like to. I do try to read as much as possible, though - especially suggestions; I'd estimate I catch probably 90% of it at least.
Ah. Sorry. Just that no replies at all, so I wasn't sure.
Quote
I think that specifically would be troublesome, because then getting to cooperative would basically be a license to smuggle without consequences. That doesn't seem desirable design-wise.
Hmm. Main issue I've had with that is that a lot of weapons or ships are hard to find, so you really need to look into the black market AND the legit market. A database that updated what kind of stuff you can find at each station might help.
Quote
The system in place already pretty much supports these kinds of mechanics, though.
Oh? At higher cooperation levels there are less penalties for smuggling/using the black market?

Quote
Yeah, I'm more or less holding off on touching it until more/almost all things like this are in place. What's there isn't perfect but works for now. Once it's clear what war etc looks like, it may make sense to revisit.
True enough. Its just that if an enemy faction is hostile but not vengful, it isn't exactly hard for that to slip. Generally, running away results in you losing at least one ship in my experience, and the alternative is to kill the enemy fleet if you can. Either way, things get worse.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Trigger on March 17, 2016, 09:10:06 AM
Just a few quick questions/suggestions about relays and comm sniffers.

I'm a few hours into a run and currently in the process of hunting down any remaining relays I havn't put comm sniffers on atm, but I find myself routinely visiting the same relays over and over again just checking if I've remembered to put a comm sniffer on it/had one removed yet. There doesn't really seem to be much of a penalty to just having comm sniffers on as many relays as you can atm, as in the hours I've played so far I've yet to notice anything relating to having one discovered despite having comm sniffers on the vast majority of relays in the game. Is there no penalty to having comm sniffers after they've been set up, or is it simply that rare for one to actually be discovered?

It'd be great to have way to track the relays in the game, what faction they belong to and whether or not you've got a comm sniffer set up on them if there aren't already a way to do that. It seems a bit strange that you've got no way to track whether or not you've got a device designed to intercept and send you information, of all things, on a relay in any other way than physically running up to it and having a look. I guess I could just write it down somewhere or do as I have been and just check every time I run past one, but that seems a bit superfluous when you could easily just clear it up by adding a page relating to comm relays and sniffers somewhere in the Intel tab (or alternatively just add it to the information you get when hovering over stars in the Intel tab along with markets).

Also, while I'm at it, does becoming vengeful with a faction makes you permanently hostile to them? No way to reconcile with them at all?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 17, 2016, 09:36:31 AM
During 0.65 days, comm sniffers could be detected and removed and/or investigated, and a reputation penalty (akin to smuggling or food market manipulation, I presume) if convicted after investigation.  Losing cooperative reputation (possibly) for the miniscule benefit of getting more very cryptic (to the point of uselessness) spam or information overload seemed like a very VERY bad deal.  Investigations have been removed for now.  I still do not bother with sniffers.

Assuming standard game (no Nexerelin), once you are Vengeful with a faction, you are permanently hostile because nothing raises reputation with a Vengeful faction anymore.  You can cheat to reverse this (e.g., load game in devmode, change reputation).

Quote
Hmm. Main issue I've had with that is that a lot of weapons or ships are hard to find, so you really need to look into the black market AND the legit market. A database that updated what kind of stuff you can find at each station might help.
Yes, many high-quality hardware is rare enough that player needs to shop every market.  I go to Black Markets to buy ships, weapons, and marines.  If I join Hegemony, maybe organs too.

I would like to get blueprints and autofactories so I can produce the items I want and not rely on the markets of my potential enemies.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Trigger on March 17, 2016, 01:09:20 PM
Oh, okay thanks. So what does comm sniffers actually give you? I assumed they gave you more information about prices/bounties/events etc, but by the sounds of things it's a lot more limited than that?

I'm still going to opt to use them because more information can't hurt as far as I'm concerned. Maybe Alex could add somewhere to track what comm sniffers you have installed if he ever decides to rework them?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on March 19, 2016, 05:01:20 PM
Any chance of a release to fix the ships not following orders bug (or a workaround we can apply?). I do love my Lashers. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on March 19, 2016, 05:14:53 PM
Comm sniffers get you a few more price updates; a bit of an orphaned mechanic at the moment.

Any chance of a release to fix the ships not following orders bug (or a workaround we can apply?). I do love my Lashers. :P

No hotfix for this, though I do wish I'd caught that earlier, ugh.

For a workaround, you can add the following to all .system files that don't already have something similar:

   "aiHints":{
      "activeSpeedIncrease":0,
      "burstMovementPotential":0,
      "averageSpeedIncrease":0,
   }


And that should do the job.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on March 19, 2016, 05:20:07 PM
Thanks!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Abradolf Lincler on March 19, 2016, 09:21:57 PM
Is the Apogee more common now? because in the last update I had to spawn one in after waiting about 20 years ingame...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 23, 2016, 10:05:18 AM
Bro, you don't want a lame, pansyass Apogee; you want a real mans ship! DOMINATOR!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on March 23, 2016, 10:30:49 AM
Aurora if you wanna be prettyyy~
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on April 08, 2016, 07:40:39 PM
Does Ion Beam GFX resemble that of Graviton Beam too much? I was wondering why a Graviton Beam was disabling all my weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on April 08, 2016, 08:01:18 PM
Does Ion Beam GFX resemble that of Graviton Beam too much? I was wondering why a Graviton Beam was disabling all my weapons.
That it does, along with the HIL...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on April 08, 2016, 11:23:23 PM
yeah, i think beams in general could really use more visual differentiation. with more distinct colors (at least between beams that deal different types of damage), a wider range of widths, and additional/stronger secondary effects, or even secondary colors.

in Diablo 3, i always liked how the wizard's "Ray of Frost" ability has five distinct beam styles for the different upgrade-runes, while keeping the same ice blue color as base:
(http://i.imgur.com/1yOfdEI.jpg)

Starsector beams look rather bland in comparison:
can anyone identify all six weapons used here? :D
(http://i.imgur.com/0X1HJ2s.jpg)
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/UU0e2Ae.jpg)
[close]

even in Starsector, beams already look rather flashy simply by being beams, compared to most projectile based weapons, so i can understand not wanting to go overboard with fancy visual effects. but i still think the different weapons should be more easily identifiable at a glance without having to look at the firing weapon itself, especially given their long range. most beams, at least the ones that fire continously, could probably be quite a bit thinner and still be easily visible, if just adding additional effects would create too much visual fireworks.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Soda Savvy on April 11, 2016, 12:52:14 PM
One could go the full realism route and have all the lasers be invisible, with nothing but giant explosions and geysers of vaporized metal at the impact points depending on beam strength.

And the particle weapons act like trans continental flame throwers.

Maybe, however, add in a 'Pulse laser' variant, like from battletech? Those always had a nice deal of variety.


That does bring up an idea though; A Plasma lance, that acts like a beam, but has a chance to ignore high flux shields, and when it does it flamethrowers the entire inside of the shield bubble. Ship turns into a glowing sphere until the shield overloads, low level energy damage across everything.

But that's heading into the 'too much work' silly area.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 11, 2016, 03:12:07 PM
The only two beams I have difficulty distinguishing, and are important to distinguish, are graviton beam and ion beam.  Ion beam seems slightly whiter and tighter, but not enough to tell it apart from graviton beam quickly.  Graviton beam, player can shrug off if necessary.  Ion beam, can be bad news and some ships should get out of range ASAP.

HIL is bluer enough that I can tell it apart from Graviton/Ion beams.

As for phase/tachyon lances, both are damaging enough that it does not matter what shade of purple they are.  They simply hurt.  It would be nice if we can tell them apart more easily, though it will not help much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Serenitis on April 17, 2016, 01:45:51 PM
This new thing where missiles lose thier tiny minds and go derping off into the black whenever thier target cloaks or skims is really annoying and frustrating.
It makes fighting any phase/skim equipped ship so amazingly tedious by turning the 'battle' into a clock-watching episode where you wait for the target to either run out of CR or retreat.

Change back to previous behaviour please. Please!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 17, 2016, 03:10:42 PM
Yeah, looking at this is on my list somewhere. Doing other things at the moment, but I'll get to it eventually :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Aik on April 18, 2016, 01:04:17 AM
Is it just me, or is this game vastly more difficult than it used to be? Massive fleets that wouldn't be a threat before unless you badly screw up can chase you down easily now. Everyone pretty much has the same burn speed in the map now? It's getting quite frustrating.

Most of the fleets that chase me down and obliterate my poxy fleet of frigates are big enough that they should have better things to do...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on April 18, 2016, 08:45:07 AM
Where are you that these big fleets can actually catch you? If you are flying through an enemy controlled system then yeah, it should be really dangerous. It should be very easy to avoid larger pirate fleets and make sure you don't go into Hyperspace too soon!

I chill in Corvus for the early game killing pirates until I have a few frigates and destroyers. Then, I hunt bounties as my main source of cash; when I approach the planet with the bounty fleet I "Go Dark" and check out what ships they have.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Aik on April 19, 2016, 12:30:00 AM
The thing is that the big fleets are mostly the same speed as my little fleet, so it's possible for them to keep up a chase whereever. To lose them I often have to lure them back to friendly territory and have an allied fleet distract them while I escape. Going dark can help if they start off a fair way behind, but usually they're close enough and fast enough to be able to find me if I go dark, even in good terrain, once the chase has started.

The worst is when a very small/fast fleet catches up and then a slower much larger fleet that's reasonably far away joins in on the the battle against me. It seems terribly unfair.

Pursuit battles aren't that fun. It would be nice if there was something to limit the number of them you have to deal with. I don't mind when I've just lost a battle, but being pushed into them repeatedly (because they're rarely happy with beating you up once...) against fleets you have no hope whatsoever of doing anything against is unfun. I'd rather just have the option to surrender...

Disclaimer that I'm playing a heavily modded game, but I doubt this is a mod-thing.

I might just be bad at this game, but I didn't used to be!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on April 19, 2016, 04:33:04 AM
The annoying thing is that before sensors, fleets would chase other fleets (including the player) for a while, then give up and go do something else if they didn't catch up after a while. Now they hound their victim until they catch it or lose contact, which looks rather ridiculous in most contexts (especially if it's a multi-capital fleet chasing a single frigate).

(I've complained about this before (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10453.0), though from a modding POV)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 19, 2016, 08:58:05 AM
It may indeed be mod-related in the sense that a modded game tends to have more fleets, so it's harder to avoid things. The way it is now does require a different set of skills than before, though.

In 0.7.2a, I did make it so that enemy fleets are less likely to pursue - and will instead harass - if they don't have anything that might be able to catch up to you on the combat map. Perhaps that could use another look, if you're frequently running into pursuit battles where nothing happens. It'd be good to know the fleet makeups involved.


The annoying thing is that before sensors, fleets would chase other fleets (including the player) for a while, then give up and go do something else if they didn't catch up after a while. Now they hound their victim until they catch it or lose contact, which looks rather ridiculous in most contexts (especially if it's a multi-capital fleet chasing a single frigate).

Yeah, the "huge fleet vs lone frigate" could use a look - should probably abort earlier. Maybe, say, a base month-long pursuit duration modified by a factor based on the relative sizes.

In general, though, fleets being persistent about chasing you down is very much intentional and, I think, a good thing for the difficulty long term. If they get bored easily overall, then it's just too easy to defeat-in-detail or just in general avoid any fleets you don't want to encounter. And then you get things like smaller fleets shadowing you until they reach critical mass, which is important to prevent a large player fleet from becoming 100% untouchable. (It still is due to skills + officers, but that's a separate issue.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on April 19, 2016, 09:18:27 AM
It would be nice to have more granular controls, like to set priorities for certain behavior.  For example, if I want a fleet to guard another, I want it to be very unaggressive with chasing enemies and prioritize keeping to its normal movement routine (simply being near the thing it's trying to guard).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 19, 2016, 08:53:21 PM
Quote
And then you get things like smaller fleets shadowing you until they reach critical mass, which is important to prevent a large player fleet from becoming 100% untouchable.
This doesn't actually work out, in practice, because those small, fast-enough-to-catch-you fleets are inevitably weak fleets that pose no threat, even in large numbers, once you reach a certain point in the game.  I'm not sure that this is a good solution to player power in general; if Skills get nerfed to the point where they're largely just cosmetic, rather than making high-end enemies considerably more scary, then we're right back to single-player-vs-all being the motif, rather than fleet combat being efficient.  I don't that's the way to go, tbh; I think SS+ has largely gone the right way, by giving the player genuinely challenging fights to have at high levels- the only major flaw is that they're entirely optional fights, rather than things the player cannot always avoid, so they don't provide any real sense of danger.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 19, 2016, 09:13:33 PM
This doesn't actually work out, in practice, because those small, fast-enough-to-catch-you fleets are inevitably weak fleets that pose no threat, even in large numbers, once you reach a certain point in the game.

Well, I did mention skills being a related-but-separate issue.

I'm not sure that this is a good solution to player power in general; if Skills get nerfed to the point where they're largely just cosmetic, rather than making high-end enemies considerably more scary, then we're right back to single-player-vs-all being the motif, rather than fleet combat being efficient.

This seems backwards to me. The high bonuses from skills, and in particular high offensive bonuses coupled with low defensive bonuses, are largely what enables single-player-vs-all. Clearly we're thinking about this differently; what're your thoughts?


It would be nice to have more granular controls, like to set priorities for certain behavior.  For example, if I want a fleet to guard another, I want it to be very unaggressive with chasing enemies and prioritize keeping to its normal movement routine (simply being near the thing it's trying to guard).

For the time being, I think this (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=10453.0) is a decent workaround. The assignments are enough to basically let a script override ship AI whenever it decides it's necessary to.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on April 19, 2016, 11:05:49 PM
This seems backwards to me. The high bonuses from skills, and in particular high offensive bonuses coupled with low defensive bonuses, are largely what enables single-player-vs-all. Clearly we're thinking about this differently; what're your thoughts?
Sorry to butt in, I've been meaning to make a big suggestion post about skills for a while and this is a good occasion.

My idea for a skill revamp would be that instead of giving direct bonuses, most of them (except leadership type skills) would unlock a dedicated hullmod at level 1, and all subsequent levels would improve the efficiency of that hullmod. Then they could still provide significant bonuses, but since you'd have to spend OP and could not install all of them, that would prevent turning all ships in flawless murder machines.

A few skills could still provide direct bonuses, like reduced deployment costs, better targeting lead, accelerated repairs, (side deployment in attack battles, raised peak efficiency time?) etc so that officers are still useful. Also their ships could maybe be ordered around without spending command points for example.

I still need to mull over some details and I should make a proper suggestion someday.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 20, 2016, 06:50:03 AM
Quote
My idea for a skill revamp would be that instead of giving direct bonuses, most of them (except leadership type skills) would unlock a dedicated hullmod at level 1, and all subsequent levels would improve the efficiency of that hullmod. Then they could still provide significant bonuses, but since you'd have to spend OP and could not install all of them, that would prevent turning all ships in flawless murder machines.
That's an interesting idea, although the devil's certainly in the details.  Personally, I'm not at all sure that coupling Hull Mods and skills was a great idea in the first place, especially when most of them are on Tech / Combat areas we'd get anyhow. 

It made it so that a bunch of the Hull Mods don't even get used, if you didn't want to get XYZ path filled out because Grind, which just removes potential fun from the game.  But since people can still mega-level by abusing trade, I guess that's all right...

Seriously, though, I think that ultimately, Hull Mods should be tied to missions given to you by Factions, where the power toys require pretty amazing heroics, rather than leveling.  But that gets into later polish issues with the development of the game; I think discussion of this probably has to wait until Industry is Alpha and we can have a coherent discussion about the difficulty ramp in general.

Quote
Clearly we're thinking about this differently; what're your thoughts?
Basically, there's a vaaaaaast difference between rolling around with a couple of Frigates and Level-0 pilots and what I was rolling around with the last time I went to level 40+ on regular difficulty- a few Frigates for chasers and a mix of Medusas and Enforcers and Level-20 Captains with hand-picked skill trees (i.e., I just ruthlessly culled them any time they got a bad upgrade choice), backed up by my invinci-Cruiser, an Apogee kitted to shield tank.

The fleet could catch practically anything and fear nothing, and I could just sit back and watch.  Practically no amount of anything less than Cruiser-sized could kill even one member of this fleet, frankly. 

Certainly not anything Pirate(D), which is the only Faction where this dynamic happens all that often.  But I could exploit that behavior and take out 30+ ships in a single fight that would be a reasonable payoff in Supplies / Fuel, if nothing else, by letting them get brave / dumb enough to "catch" me.  Suckas!

Now... would that have worked vs. 200+ ships, because at that level, Pirates only spawn hordes?  No, then I'd have had to individually pilot every one of those ships, most likely, and it'd have been genuinely dicey, because CR decay would've made it hard.  But they don't, nor do they wait until it'd be actually smart to engage. 

Fact is, anything less than an Armada should not tangle with one player Destroyer backed up by another Destroyer and 3+ Frigates.

I think that the Fleet AI should get more exposed in the API; I'd be more than willing to write a smart one that takes player levels / power into account, calls reinforcements, etc.

On the whole subject of Skill power... it's not that Skills are OP / UP.  It's that when you get past Level 20, you're just not seeing dangerous-enough opponents, because Markets are still spawning the same ol' same ol' and the Variants aren't dynamically adjusting to reflect what players+ allied Captains can do.  SS+ largely addressed that, at least for Bounties, but it needs to be addressed in the base game mechanics; having the Markets strictly limit what the AI can field doesn't work well atm (which is exactly the same problem Mount and Blade had, which they resolved in the way I'm describing, by largely de-coupling Lords from the "real" economy).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 20, 2016, 08:58:43 AM
My idea for a skill revamp would be that instead of giving direct bonuses, most of them (except leadership type skills) would unlock a dedicated hullmod at level 1, and all subsequent levels would improve the efficiency of that hullmod. Then they could still provide significant bonuses, but since you'd have to spend OP and could not install all of them, that would prevent turning all ships in flawless murder machines.

That's interesting. As you say, though, that'd mess up officers... hmm.

I'm not sure this does anything qualitatively different than skills providing direct bonuses, though. These hullmods cost OP, alright. But this just means they provide a greater-than-usual amount of benefit per OP - otherwise, they wouldn't be locked behind a skill. And then we're looking at skills providing that "extra" amount of power for free, in terms of OP.

The difference is the balancing factor is being limited by OP in addition skill points, but if anything, that makes it more difficult to balance - now you've got to consider the OP values for the various ships, too. Skills would turn into something that's more beneficial to ships that have above-baseline OP values. Is that an intended effect of that approach? I suspect not, because it doesn't seem like a good thing on the face of it.


Personally, I'm not at all sure that coupling Hull Mods and skills was a great idea in the first place, especially when most of them are on Tech / Combat areas we'd get anyhow. 
...
Seriously, though, I think that ultimately, Hull Mods should be tied to missions given to you by Factions, where the power toys require pretty amazing heroics, rather than leveling.

Been thinking along similar lines myself for a while, actually.

The fleet could catch practically anything and fear nothing, and I could just sit back and watch.  Practically no amount of anything less than Cruiser-sized could kill even one member of this fleet, frankly.

I'm still not understanding - this sounds like exactly an issue with skills being very strong compared to baseline.


I think that the Fleet AI should get more exposed in the API; I'd be more than willing to write a smart one that takes player levels / power into account, calls reinforcements, etc.

If you're talking about the campaign-level fleet AI - that's entirely replaceable now, via CampaignPlugin.pickXXXXXXAIModule().
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on April 20, 2016, 09:39:44 AM
I'm not sure this does anything qualitatively different than skills providing direct bonuses, though. These hullmods cost OP, alright. But this just means they provide a greater-than-usual amount of benefit per OP - otherwise, they wouldn't be locked behind a skill. And then we're looking at skills providing that "extra" amount of power for free, in terms of OP.
The main difference as I see it is that you can't mount all hullmods on a ship, thus they can't get better in every single aspect even at high level. Also hullmods are already pretty powerful by themselves, and skills are VERY powerful alone. The combinaison of both create ships worth multiple times their skill-less hullmod-less self.

By making both these thing a single one, with hullmods a bit stronger than they curently are (although not that much) and adding new ones when apropriate, I think it would avoid a lot of the powercreep issues and make them easier to balance.

Not all skills would be tied to a hullmod though, so the whole distinction between "Leadership" "Technology" and "Combat" would have to be changed in something else. Maybe two trees? The Technology+Industry tree that would unlock the hullmods and manage your outposts, and the Combat+Leadership that would encompass the officers and non-hullmod skills.

Anyway I still need to finish mulling over this and probably make a smal list of examples.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on April 20, 2016, 11:15:25 AM
Skills and hullmods are fine. They both work differently and I enjoy having both in the game. The only thing problematic are Combat skills right now, because they focus too much power on your flagship - and on every ship with an officer. These need to be toned down and changed more towards defensive skills rather than weapon characteristics, speed and maneuverability. If you want to nerf these mechanics, go for the real issue and nerf the Combat tree and officers.

Hullmods are not universally awesome - they cost OP, meaning you make a concession, you pay for it. Skills require combat experience, they're the carrot to go out and fight. Please don't remove either of these. They are both fun mechanics, they have a place in the game and it'd only make it more dull if you couldn't have both. The magnitude of power creep is only really a problem since version 0.7 and we all know why.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 20, 2016, 12:17:56 PM
Quote
I'm still not understanding - this sounds like exactly an issue with skills being very strong compared to baseline.
It's the combination of skills, a few ships / weapons being markedly superior to everything else in their weight class, having enough OPs, etc., etc.

I guess we could say all of this is the fault of skills being OP, but I look at this more as simply not having enough challenges on the high end.  I'm entirely OK with having awesome fleets of cool captains and ultra-tech at the high end- that's fun.  I just want stuff that's flying around that can possibly kill me.  

After a certain point, the only time that happens in Vanilla is if I decided to go Scarab and fight Tri-Tach fleets that contain two Paragons, because they can and will sometimes kill a chunk of my fleet, even if I use Avoid and kill them dead last.  That, and they usually bring Afflictors early.

But usually the Apogee can get in and tank one of them long enough to bring it down, and then we're all over the other one like hyenas.

Nothing else really can do that; Onslaught's not cutting it atm and the Conquest is a joke in AI hands, fighter fleets don't work out against my mix and the only Cruisers I actually have some fear of because they are effective in AI hands, the Apogee and the XIV Eagle, are pretty rare encounters.  

Neither is really well-kitted to take my stuff down.  Nothing else really bothers that bunch, on the high end; at that point in the game, I out-range and out-DPS and out-fly all possible enemies, and that's before Captain skills take them to the next level.  We need some really dangerous threats around to deal with the player at that point that aren't just ignorable or entirely optional.  I'd really rather see that than nerfing everything into a dull mush; once Industry exists and Leadership gets revamped, levels will get spread out more anyhow.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 20, 2016, 01:01:33 PM
Hmm - this started out with you saying that reducing the impact of skills would make everything into one-ship-vs-all, which is what I'm still trying to understand the logic of. I think we're getting fairly off-track regarding that :)

I guess we could say all of this is the fault of skills being OP, but I look at this more as simply not having enough challenges on the high end.  I'm entirely OK with having awesome fleets of cool captains and ultra-tech at the high end- that's fun.

That's all completely relative, though. Whichever way you look at it, bringing skills down will add more challenge on the high end. It's quite out of hand now, and there's a ton of room to reduce the impact of skills while still having it be very significant. More importantly, the way they are know seriously messes with the balance and feel of most ships, which were really tuned for no-skills to start with.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on April 20, 2016, 01:03:38 PM
Oooo, Megas ain't gonna like you nerfing skills to create a more "base-stat" feel to ships!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 20, 2016, 01:24:14 PM
Quote
this started out with you saying that reducing the impact of skills would make everything into one-ship-vs-all
Because if we don't have fairly heroic Skills for AI Captains, then we're back to player skill being the deciding factor, basically.  

AI Captains are more of a liability than not until midgame; after that, the player can afford to take ship losses, if needbe, to get them the XP they need to hit higher levels.

If player skill, rather than stats, is what is most efficient, we're right back to the single-player-vs-all model of gameplay.  

If you want fleet combat to be the normal way play progresses, then Captains make the difference between just soloing with a series of Medusas and rolling around with a mixed bag, tbh.  Until Captains were a thing, I only used AI ships that could tank or be support; Captains made them viable to actually get them fighting.  The problem isn't, "Captains are OP"... again, the problem is largely, "there is nothing challenging a player fleet built by a good player after about Level 30".

So, no, I don't agree about nerfing Skills; instead, make the high end much more challenging. 

Otherwise, we're back to, "do I use the the Tempest or the Medusa to Solo All", because player skill vs. the AI is always going to go in the player's favor, at the high end of play.  I think that the right answer to that is to make the AI fleets come out ahead on raw stats and numbers, so the player is both using their skills and the buffed-up Captains to win, but probably with losses (rather than like it is right now, where an optimaxed fleet can largely win for me without me doing much at all).  So, to win without any losses at all, they'll have to be extremely good at solo play.  That'd strike a good balance with the solo-vs-fleet crowds; solo would work, but be Nintendo Hard and take longer amounts of time IRL, whereas fleet would work more efficiently, time-wise, but wouldn't be quite as efficient, in terms of cost / benefit, game-wise.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 20, 2016, 01:57:21 PM
Or, to use another analogy:

Great gameplay is when you avoid the Mount and Blade error, and players don't just use Huscarls or solo castles or both, because efficiency.

Great gameplay is when the player feels like mixes of AI-piloted things actually add more strength than weakness, but at the high end, losses are a real cost and losing a battle is just an error away.  That's how it feels past early game up until midgame atm, until it becomes too easy as everything (OPs, Skills, good ships and weapons, etc.) add up.

Right now the main problem is that early-game on Normal is tense and brutal, but it gets much easier past level 16-ish (when Combat is maxed and you start getting Captains past Level 10-ish).

The right answer isn't to make the early game even harder by making the climb out even slower, imo... which is exactly what nerfing Skills much, especially Combat, is going to do, along with making Captains in general far less relevant.  Instead, focus on that later period of play.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on April 20, 2016, 02:05:05 PM
I completely disagree; skills shouldn't affect a massive improvement in combat prowess, at least not if the player doesn't dedicate an entire career to it.  The base balance of ships is more interesting overall and leaves open tons of early-game content to fill the void present currently.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 20, 2016, 02:07:00 PM
If player skill, rather than stats, is what is most efficient, we're right back to the single-player-vs-all model of gameplay.  

Aha - I get what you're saying now, but I just think on this point it's ... well, wrong :)

If skill bonuses are focused around offense - as they largely are - then the more you get from them, the more it magnifies the impact of player skill, while simultaneously making the environment much more dangerous to friendly ships.

For a very basic example, a non-skill Tempest kitted with pulse lasers is going to take a good long time to kill a single Venture, just due to the time it takes to punch through armor. Add in Target Analysis, and the time-to-kill is cut drastically, even if the Venture "keeps pace" by getting the same bonus.

The more dangerous ships are, in terms of TTK, the higher the impact of player skill and the more encouraged the player is to solo everything. To me, the logic of this seems pretty cut and dry.

The right answer isn't to make the early game even harder by making the climb out even slower, imo... which is exactly what nerfing Skills much, especially Combat, is going to do, along with making Captains in general far less relevant.

If skills are both weaker and more defense-focused, this will make officers *more* relevant, not less. They'd make ships less likely to be lost, and the overall environment they fight in would be less dangerous.

I also don't think skills are a huge factor in "climbing out" of the early game. Until you get a good number of wins w/o skills, you're not going to get the skills anyway. Once you've gotten them, you have the money for a few extra ships already.


Different, asymmetrical late-game challenges are another matter, though. There, I do agree with you - it'd be very much a good thing to have. But the difficulty of that would be tuned to whatever the impact of skills is, and so it's almost entirely a separate issue.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 20, 2016, 02:23:05 PM
I'm pretty sure TTK isn't the issue here at all.

Power Modulation 10 is, other than Entoptic Rangefinder, the most powerful buff in the game.  It and the flux-to-damage stat is why the Apogee is king of the Cruisers. 

I think that the idea that TTK is what's wrong is largely incorrect; it's not TTK, it's that the Tempest, for example, suddenly becomes able to kite indefinitely without taking damage, with Power Modulation 10, Entoptic Rangefinder, and Helmsmanship 10.  Add in ITU and it's in a range band that nothing deals with well, efficiently killing things one Hard Flux chip at a time.  You could take away all of the TTK skills tomorrow and that Tempest would still be a monster- but a monster that's harder to kill than ever.

The TTK stuff helps a bit, but it just speeds up the outcome.  The only part of the TTK that even matters in that scenario is the 25% Shield damage- the rest of it's just tinsel, frankly, because a Flux-locked AI ship is dead sooner or later.

Those three Skills are where the power is, with optimized fleets, though, and they're all basically defensive in nature, because they alter real-world CEP for counter-attacks or make counters impossible, depending on what the Tempest is killing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on April 20, 2016, 02:29:01 PM
Your argument only applies to the player; the invincibility you describe is something that the AI does not know how to make use of.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 20, 2016, 02:36:07 PM
Nah, the AI deals with kiting pretty well, actually.  Even Vanilla's AI does a great job with a well-configured Tempest.

Now, there are limits, admittedly; the Tempest, in AI hands, will not kill non-D Cruisers+, because of range bands.  But up until that point, yeah.

Past that, Medusa / Apogee hammer-and-anvils can kill just about anything on auto-pilot, configured well.  I just use the Enforcers as fighter sponges and to kill on Paragons; one Enforcer and three Shepherds makes for a well-nigh unkillable unit that soaks an incredible amount of stuff.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 20, 2016, 02:42:09 PM
TBH, I'd call all those skills "offensive", at least in part. They're useful for defense, sure, but it's the kind of defense that lets you continually stay on target while dealing damage. (It's not quite clear how to differentiate between "offensive" and "defensive" skills, anyway, except for how they affect TTK - but perhaps that's not very important, just nomenclature.)

You could take away all of the TTK skills tomorrow and that Tempest would still be a monster- but a monster that's harder to kill than ever.

You're forgetting peak performance here, I think. It's a pretty critical component of all this. If that's not in place, then yeah, you get a Tempest soloing anything, with or without skills, and yes, it's probably in a bit more danger when everyone has skills, but it IS in place, and precisely for this reason. (The alternative to peak performance is making larger ships hard-counter smaller and faster ones; if there's any room for skill to prevail, it will, so gameplay changes are generally ineffective there unless they're drastic - i.e. hard-counter.)

What movement and offense skills let you do is break peak performance limitations, basically - sometimes, too badly. For example, if a Medusa can effectively kite frigates, this is bad. Movement skills are something that badly needs some toning down as well, for this reason.


Then you get into, "what if the player just chain-deploys however many Tempests they need", and this is indeed an issue. It's made better by increasing the overall usefulness of allies, though - e.g. you'll kill things much faster w/ a friendly Tempest to distract/deal extra damage. This may or may not be more efficient than chain-deploying both Tempests; will have to play around with this and see.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 20, 2016, 02:58:36 PM
I think that "defensive" is pretty clear- "stuff that actively prevents permanent damage from occurring" rather than "stuff that causes damage to happen" is a good distinction.  

Of the skills I just mentioned, only one (Entoptic Rangefinder) counts as both; it both boosts range and therefore it also boosts CEP.  Helmsmanship is purely about CEP at kiting ranges; Power Modulation 10 is about causing damage to not matter, long-term; only major burst damage matters.  

None of these skills are totally OP or whatever; it's just that they're especially synergistic for some ships that already have mobility advantages and exacerbate the problems with weapon balance / ship balance in general.  The Wolf also gets much more powerful with those three skills maxed out, but it's not as egregious as the Tempest, for example.

Peak performance on the Tempest is significant until they have Combat Aptitude 10, yes.  But usually I have Hardened Subsystems installed, forgoing missiles to pay for it.  I practically never use Missiles, in general; they simply aren't worth bothering, with AI fleets, vs. getting the OPs put to better uses.  But frankly, at high levels, Peak Performance isn't a thing; I just kill everything before it starts to kick in, 90% of the time.  If AI fleets were double their current size, on the high end, it'd start mattering.

But frankly, the way things work right now, it's:

A.  1-2 Tempests killing all the little stuff on the fringes up to wounded Destroyers.  They don't die, because meanwhile...
B.  Medusa duos are killing all of the big stuff up to Battleships.  They don't die, because meanwhile...
C.  Enforcer / Shepherd squads are running interference, because the Vanilla AI likes to focus on them and waste missiles on them for some reason. But if there are really big ships on the field then...
D.  The Apogee gets called in if I want to just screw up the AI entirely; it can get surrounded by ships and not die, if kitted properly, while dealing minor damage the whole time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Aeson on April 20, 2016, 06:32:35 PM
@xenoargh:
Would you mind defining what you mean by CEP? I don't see anything obvious, and it doesn't sound like you're talking about circular error probability.

Quote
Of the skills I just mentioned, only one (Entoptic Rangefinder) counts as both; it both boosts range and therefore it also boosts CEP.  Helmsmanship is purely about CEP at kiting ranges; Power Modulation 10 is about causing damage to not matter, long-term; only major burst damage matters.
Power Grid Modulation reduces shield flux generation and increases flux dissipation; the level 10 bonus just does more of the same. Reducing shield flux generation and increasing flux dissipation increases the effective flux pool available for firing weapons and allows your ship to remain actively engaged longer without too much risk of overload; increasing the venting rate means that the ship can return to the fight more quickly after backing off to vent. Helmsmanship increases the speed and agility of a ship whose captain has the skill, which makes the ship more able to get around front and, to a lesser extent, omni shields, and also makes it easier to keep enough pressure on an opposing vessel to prevent that ship from venting. Both of these skills can be argued to be at least in part offensive skills; only from a very narrow veiwpoint are these entirely defensive.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 20, 2016, 09:13:09 PM
I am indeed talking about Circular Area Probability.  For various reasons, other than Beams, shots are inherently inaccurate, even if fired by an AI that has calculated where your ship "should" be at the time the shot arrives.  Add in random noise, and the CEP gets larger. 

Small, fast ships have very large CEPs compared to large, slow-moving ships and get missed quite often at long ranges (anything over 700 in Vanilla); hence why the Tempest, and to some extent the Wolf, are outliers statistically, when we talk about ships the AI uses inherently better than others.  It's not just the CEP difference that matters, though; a Tempest can disengage and Vent at will, too, which makes it entirely unlike most of the ships in the game.  The Tempest would best be fixed, balance-wise, as an individual case by cutting its base speed a little bit; it'd need to cost less to deploy, etc., then, of course, because that's such a huge stat and it would be nothing like as dangerous if it wasn't able to out-run practically everything and out-gun almost everything a size class larger, too, if we include the Drone.

The level 10 Power Grid Modulation drains Hard Flux; it turns a nonrenewable resource into a renewable one.  I feel like this is a very poorly understood buff.  I like that buff, but it needs to be understood properly; in a fleet context, it means many thousands of DPS difference between my fleet and yours before my average fleet member is Flux-locked, all else being equal. 

When we're talking AI-on-AI in a fleet battle, Flux-lock is pretty much the end; a ship in that position rarely survives much longer.  It's not like a player-vs-fleet duel, where the enemy gets to Vent while hiding behind their buddies; in most cases, everybody gets pincered at some point... except for ships like the Medusa and Tempest, who are too fast for that to happen, or have abilities that prevent it most of the time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 21, 2016, 10:14:23 AM
Peak performance is important when you want to solo fleets.  In 0.7.1, the only standard cruiser I could solo the simulator with was Dominator, and it had all skills maxed and no PD, and it finished at about critical malfunctions.  Aurora theoretically could do it, but was unable to due to enemy Paragon outranging and outgunning it.  The other cruisers did not bring enough firepower.

The most important skills are Gunnery Implants (entoptic rangefinder perk), Mechanical Engineering (+OP, Augmented Engines), and Computer Systems (+OP, ITU).  Of the Combat skills, Damage Control (hull regeneration), Helmsmanship (speed), and Ordnance Expert (OP discount).  Power Grid Modulation is very useful, but only 5 is required.  10 is very nice for AI though since it patches one of its AI weaknesses.  Missile Specialization is great for powering-up Reapers.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on April 21, 2016, 10:42:16 AM
If it weren't for officers I would be fine with eliminating skills - I find the no skills balance much more satisfying to play.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 21, 2016, 12:38:09 PM
I am the opposite.  I find no-skills boring to play - ships are too slow (makes other games' capital ships fast by comparison), not enough OP to get what I need, and flux-hungry configurations are not viable.  Even with max OP, some ships (like Hammerhead and Gryphon) are starved for OP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 21, 2016, 01:34:09 PM
I find no-Skills SS very boring, personally; if it went that way, I'd have to bump up OPs considerably to even feel like I was vaguely having fun, because there is too little variety in optimal builds at Level 0. 

Playing with minute allocations of OPs got very boring very fast and the gameplay is much more fun at the high end, where death comes quickly. 

I just want Vanilla to get a lot harder on the high end. 

For example, I'd like to see Battleships that cost more Supplies / Fuel than a player can readily afford (i.e., you'd never be able to afford to keep one going on a diet of (D)) be terrifying opponents that can destroy my current setup, rather than the inverse, where I honestly feel like none of the Cruisers other than the Apogee is worth using atm for costs (player Dominator and player Eagle are almost, but not quite- nobody else is), and none of the Battleships are worth using for their DPs, regardless of what they cost in Supplies and Fuel.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 21, 2016, 01:52:40 PM
Using a capital is already painful, unless player gets to fight huge extended battles with them, then they are more efficient than the rest of your fleet.

Battleships are slow - you need a tug with them to maintain burn speed, and they guzzle much more fuel than a cruiser - even more if you bring the aforementioned tug.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 21, 2016, 02:13:06 PM
A lot of this is definitely subjective, but I think part of it is also being used to how it feels now. It was very much balanced for "no skills" initially, though, and most of the AI tuning involves no-skill ships - so "improved AI" is sort of a free benefit of toning skills down, as is better overall ship balance.

Well, will just have to see how it pans out. I should add that a revamp of the skills is going to involve more than just turning the numbers down... but don't want to get into the details just now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on April 26, 2016, 10:47:14 AM
I'll chime in to say that I prefer the more stately pace of combat without skills, and it's obvious that the game was designed around that level of performance from ships.  Weapons are less lethal in general, larger ships struggle to turn fast enough to track smaller opponents with their main batteries because they don't have +50% agility bonuses, and it feels like there's generally more room for decision making in combat because maneuvering is more committal while engagements are likely to last beyond the first salvo.

Another compelling thing about this game was the concept of failure by degrees.  Rather than simply going from alive to dead, ships take progressive damage that leaves them still functional, but changes how they need to be played.  Right now this doesn't come up as often at high-level combat because ships frequently just die in a single alpha.


The incredibly lethality of ships also puts a strain on AI allies, since even a minor mistake means they just get completely gibbed and many skills are powerful enough that was would have been a reasonable decision is actually a terminal error (with the wort offenders being skilled Harpoon spam, but we've talked about that one already).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on May 10, 2016, 01:01:43 PM
The argument over what's defensive and offensive is a cup half full/empty exercise in pointlessness. I might be late bit someone needed to say it.
And I really like the thought of making stuff unlockable through missions. Like, say, extra starting options, for one.
Just that one, really.
Please do that one
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Linnis on May 15, 2016, 09:24:06 AM
Like I said before. I hate skills or perks that makes your guns "shoot harder" or make your ship have "more stuff"

These kind of stuff is almost never liked in the long run.


Skills that effect other stuff like less maintenance is a good one.

Some others skills or perks that could work like:

Choose battlefield shape.
Choose to force out or free escape ships into and from battle.
Gain access to MORE special hull mods, Maybe pick one every time a skill is leveled up.
Stuff like put diff weps on diff mounts.
Put on extra armor on ship directions. (buff armor squares and give special in-game visuals like more shiny)

There could be so much more cool stuff.

Instead of making skills just make you stronger, how much make them give us more and more customization!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 16, 2016, 06:43:26 AM
Instead of making skills just make you stronger, how much make them give us more and more customization!

Skills giving more tactical options (your first two examples) is a good direction to take, but giving too much customization (your last three examples) might lead to a boring "everything is interchangeable" endgame.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 16, 2016, 07:43:34 AM
I like the "shoot harder" skills because I think the level 0 baseline is too slow and weak, and not enough OP to get anything fun.  If the "shoot harder" skills were gone, I would like to see the baseline raised.  I see skills as a patch to a fundamental problem - sluggish and weak ships.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on May 16, 2016, 08:03:27 PM
I like the "shoot harder" skills because I think the level 0 baseline is too slow and weak, and not enough OP to get anything fun.  If the "shoot harder" skills were gone, I would like to see the baseline raised.  I see skills as a patch to a fundamental problem - sluggish and weak ships.

Slow-paced combat where maneuvers are committal and ships deteriorate rather than combust is the intended gameplay, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on May 16, 2016, 08:10:04 PM
Slow-paced combat where maneuvers are committal and ships deteriorate rather than combust is the intended gameplay, though.
You don't understand Megas.  He has a very, very niche style of play, and makes the game bend to him rather than the other way around. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on May 16, 2016, 10:55:47 PM
I know Megas, but I also enjoy tilting at windmills and hold out the distant hope that one day he will come around to the fact that the game isn't primarily played to be a pure arcade shooter.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 17, 2016, 11:51:10 AM
I got Starfarer (during the 0.53 days) because it played like an arcade-like shooter, much like Star Control 2 and Transcendence.  Skills have made it better for shmup-like action.

Having a viable campaign and fast-paced arcade action are not mutually exclusive.  Star Control 2 did it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: facc00 on August 02, 2016, 10:05:16 PM
Hi guys just want to make sure I am running the most current version.  Starsector 0.7.2a Release
Posted February 26, 2016

Any new on the next release?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on August 03, 2016, 12:10:36 AM
nope this is it for now. For news on the upcoming release see the blog post link at the top of any page of the forum. And, it's nice to welcome you
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on August 03, 2016, 05:08:18 AM
the next release is still a couple months away at least, might well be half a year or even more. it's gonna be a big one!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: facc00 on August 03, 2016, 07:25:30 AM
Thats awesome, I bought this some time ago so its all new to me still plenty to do.  Are we going to be able to take abandoned planets and set up trade?  Build starbases?  What about hiring fleets to protect said areas?

Will there be a steam release?  This game is super fun and I think it stands alone in its genre.  It would do well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on August 03, 2016, 08:32:51 AM
Are we going to be able to take abandoned planets and set up trade?  Build starbases?  What about hiring fleets to protect said areas?
there will be outpost construction and related industry of some kind, but we don't have many details on that yet. it has however been more or less confirmed that said industry will be a major focus of the next release (whenever that will be), with a recent blogpost detailing planetary surveys (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2016/06/09/planetary-surveys/).

Quote
Will there be a steam release?  This game is super fun and I think it stands alone in its genre.  It would do well.
i think it's not 100% certain at this point, but yes, the game will most likely find its way onto steam one way or another, once it's done. for now though, Alex (the lead dev) doesn't want to expose the game to the big steam audience just yet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: facc00 on August 03, 2016, 09:28:06 AM
Thanks for the responses!  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on August 05, 2016, 02:50:36 AM
which, thank God Alex isn't one of those sad devs that kills their game in the womb by putting a game on the steam front page in alpha. Really it basically needs to be 1.0 releases and up
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on August 05, 2016, 03:28:32 AM
which, thank God Alex isn't one of those sad devs that kills their game in the womb by putting a game on the steam front page in alpha. Really it basically needs to be 1.0 releases and up
many indie devs/studios simply don't have the money to fully develop a game before getting any noteworthy returns. Starsector is somewhat unique in that it has a very small team, even compared to other indie games, and has (afaik) already sold a decent number of copies despite very little advertising. if steam early access allows some good games to be completed that otherwise wouldn't have been possible, i'm all for it.
but yeah, caution when buying a product that isn't (and possibly never will be) finished is definitely warranted. ^^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on August 05, 2016, 03:34:19 AM
my concern isn't even whether or not an early access game will get completed, it's that even if I love it I won't care when it gets completed because I've already played it in alpha
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Weltall on August 05, 2016, 07:18:35 AM
my concern isn't even whether or not an early access game will get completed, it's that even if I love it I won't care when it gets completed because I've already played it in alpha

I have got into the game from 0.6.5.1a if I remember well and played 0.5.4.1a because I really had to try out Omega's Minimash. Even when I went to the older game, I did not feel like it was really bad, compared to the newer one. Every version feels like a new game, with more things added to it.  I guess I feel that when sandbox games with mod support, have alpha releases and they are done right, they can be enjoyable even when a person replays them when an updated version appears.

If anything, when alpha stage will be over, I feel I will be a bit sad to know that nothing more will be added. No offense to people that wait for the release version >.>
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on August 05, 2016, 07:32:16 AM
Every version feels like a new game, with more things added to it.  I guess I feel that when sandbox games with mod support, have alpha releases and they are done right, they can be enjoyable even when a person replays them when an updated version appears.
yeah, same for me. i wouldn't play something with a linear campaign and/or narrative focus in early access, because it would just spoil the experience of the full game. but something sandbox-y that i'd play repeatedly anyway, and that is enjoyable even when some of the mechanics or content are still missing, works quite well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on August 05, 2016, 08:13:18 AM
Yeah, the changes between versions at this stage are so dramatic that you really feel like you are playing a new game. And it get's better each time! I really like how the combat, which is still the heart of it all, gets some special love with each update, despite it being basically "done" for years now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Weltall on August 05, 2016, 08:26:58 AM
I see it like a food recipe~ The more time passes, the tastier is gets and every time it gets better, you just love the taste all over~ I really feel sad I got on the ship late, because I feel like I have missed a lot of the past, that people seem to talk at times. But definitely better late than never!

My mother though does not appreciate it, when I get furious with the game, yell at my screen and hit my mouse >.> ... I promise I am a calm guy afar from that.  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: facc00 on August 26, 2016, 09:04:23 PM
When is the 0.7.3 with them new sexy carrier revamp?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on August 26, 2016, 09:10:52 PM
I tried asking Alex if all major features for the next patch were set in place, with just polishing left to go, but he didn't respond.

So who really knows but I'd take a guess at 2-3 months more.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.7.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on August 27, 2016, 01:38:21 AM
I tried asking Alex if all major features for the next patch were set in place, with just polishing left to go, but he didn't respond.

I'm pretty sure the answer is "no" at the moment. Personally, I'm just hoping for a 2016 release.


In the meantime I'll close this thread.