Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => Announcements => Topic started by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 01:00:05 PM

Title: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 01:00:05 PM
Blog post/download links here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2017/06/03/starsector-0-8-1a-release/).

Changes as of June 06, 2017 (hotfix #3, RC8)

Tweaked bounty level progression

Bugfixing:



Changes as of June 04, 2017 (hotfix #2, RC7)

Misc

Bugfixing:



Changes as of June 03, 2017

Campaign

Miscellaneous


Changes as of May 30, 2017

Campaign

Combat

Miscellaneous

Modding

Bugfixing



Changes as of May 24, 2017

Campaign

Abilities


Skills


Combat

Ship AI

Sounds


Miscellaneous

Modding


Bugfixing

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 24, 2017, 01:21:50 PM
Quote
Odyssey:
Increased speed to 90 (was 50), also increased acceleration/deceleration/turn accel
Increased number of fighter bays to 2 (was: 1)

Holy buff Batman, a capital ship with almost destroyer level speed. It's actually gonna be good now  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Inventor Raccoon on May 24, 2017, 01:27:24 PM
The Odyssey might be weaker in a fight than the other capitals, but at least none of THEM can say that they can keep pace with a Hammerhead. So long, suckers.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 24, 2017, 01:32:18 PM
  • Other REDACTED:
    • Smaller fleets will run away from the player instead of always engaging (to remove annoyance of having to fight the smaller fleets)
Aww. I like those fights - gives me a reason to keep a few good hunter-killer frigates around; gives me a relatively low risk source of fights to get some XP onto new officers.  ...But I can see the reasoning behind this, too.  Maybe if they were to do that 'maintaining distance' thing, but be slow to run if the player -wants- to hunt them down?

  • "Unmothball" tooltip will show estimated supplies and time to recover combat readiness
Could we get this on the suspend/resume repairs tooltip, too?

  • Carriers given an "Eliminate" assignment will not focus their fighters on the target
Will not focus their fighters on the target?  That seems backwards...
Edit: Ah, tyops.  "Will now focus their fighters" makes much more sense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SierraTangoDelta on May 24, 2017, 01:35:36 PM
Wyvern, there's a command for fighters to attack things now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dwarfslayer on May 24, 2017, 01:38:25 PM

  • Fixed issue in refit screen where mounts on restored hulls would show "empty" hovertext after being fitted


Aha! Does this mean that using variants will stop stripping built-in weapon systems as well?

Looking good for the 0.8.1 !
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SierraTangoDelta on May 24, 2017, 01:45:27 PM
Any plans to make the Combat skill tree more appealing? As it stands, the other three seem to be outshining it pretty hard. Everyone I have spoken to says they don't use any Combat skills.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: cjuicy on May 24, 2017, 01:46:19 PM
Looking forward to this. Odyssey changes look promising....

I hope the Colossus Mk. II and Mk.III aren't just bigger Buffalo Mk.II clones. They have the potential to be the scourge of the sector. Don't waste it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on May 24, 2017, 01:47:33 PM
Was the permanent war issue fixed?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on May 24, 2017, 01:47:47 PM
Love most of the changes, but the Odyssey does not need 90 speed. Especially with High Energy Focus.

Looking forward to this. Odyssey changes look promising....

I hope the Colossus Mk. II and Mk.III aren't just bigger Buffalo Mk.II clones. They have the potential to be the scourge of the sector. Don't waste it.

They keep the theme of Mk. II ships.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: mehgamer on May 24, 2017, 01:49:12 PM
I'm very concerned about a capital that outruns cruisers and has a damage boost system.

Hell, 90su base is faster than most capitals in .7.2, even after skills.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 24, 2017, 01:52:59 PM
Wyvern, there's a command for fighters to attack things now.
And if I could simultaneously assign both "Eliminate" and "Fighter Strike" on a single target, this would not be an issue.  As the game quite sensibly doesn't allow multiple assignments on one target (or one ship set to follow multiple assignments), having a carrier focus its fighters on its designated target for an "Eliminate" command makes sense.

Or, in short: "Fighter Strike" is for Drovers and Astrals and other carriers that prefer to keep their distance*.  "Eliminate" is for Odysseys and Legions and almost anything with a converted hangar - and in that case, I would expect the carrier to bring both its fighters and its own guns to bear on the eliminate target.

_____
* ...Come to think of it, Alex, how is "Fighter Strike" different from "Engage"?  Edit: Oh, re-read the notes; fighter strike lets the carrier do whatever strikes its fancy as long as it stays more or less in fighter range of the target.  Presumably engage makes it want to fight -that- target, though not as overridingly so as an eliminate would.  I think?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 24, 2017, 02:00:39 PM
Caught you red-handed! (http://imgur.com/I3mNRig)

Lay in course changes are good, I'll finally be able to avoid stars without having to hold LMB.
Obsolete (D)-hulls go away, that's better.
Changes to Ox make it interesting ship, though I'd say that until AI learns how to avoid/disable Sustained Burn it's mostly there for the looks. It doesn't look that expensive even.
Officer QoL change, gut, even though it didn't affect me much.
memetic upgraded Colossi are memetic
Wait, wait, hyperspace storms move? What sorcery is this?! I've always thought there either are lone dots, clear "skies" or goddamn apocalypse.
The best thing about person bounties is that scaling with player level and not having to race with time for the bounty.
If we fight Domain Survey Fleet in the tutorial, does it even deserve being redacted?
Speaking of redacted... How's "REDACTED REDACTED" made? You cut a text form paper, then cut a hole in space-time? It doesn't sound healthy for the universe.
Sustained burn changes are a mixed bunch, slowing down already made you thought of curling. On the other hand, AI uses it now too and there's no (neutrino) scanner penalty.
Interdiction Pulse is used for ambushes mostly, right? *pirating intensifies*
I like buffs to Coordinated Manoeuvres, Recovery Operations, Advanced Countermeasures, but nerf to Logistics makes my efficiency-bent soul sad.
Odyssey became a high-speed nightmare, but TT Brawler, I think, doesn't actually benefit from plasma jets (unless you want to make dedicated EMP boat).
Damper Field...
I can't say much about fighters because I use them rarely and don't pay much attention to them even then. It's nice to see more countermeasures and PD buffs, though. Locust should be a nightmare now...
Any plans to make the Combat skill tree more appealing? As it stands, the other three seem to be outshining it pretty hard. Everyone I have spoken to says they don't use any Combat skills.
I think Alex dislikes combat being better than fleet, don't bet on it anytime soon.
I'm very concerned about a capital that outruns cruisers and has a damage boost system.

Hell, 90su base is faster than most capitals in .7.2, even after skills.
It sort of needs that speed to offset low range of energy weapons and it's low durability.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on May 24, 2017, 02:13:56 PM
Wow, that Odyssey. It did feel in a weird spot when I tried it in 0.8. 90 speed is a lot though. Considering the Conquest is already more vulnerable than a decently kitted Odyssey. Advanced Countermeasures 50% Kinetic DR against Armour looks like a game changer. A lot of ships rely on autocannons and Sabots to be dangerous. These two changes may have been a bit overzealous. ;)

Energy PD change looks interesting. Probably a deserved buff. Locust is now the official wounded capital finisher. Aside from being actually useful against fighters now.

Not sure about the fighter ranges & new Thunder.. thought a bit of variety was fine there. But we shall see how it plays. Thumbs up to everything else!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on May 24, 2017, 02:14:18 PM
Any plans to make the Combat skill tree more appealing? As it stands, the other three seem to be outshining it pretty hard. Everyone I have spoken to says they don't use any Combat skills.
I think Alex dislikes combat being better than fleet, don't bet on it anytime soon.
Actually I seem to recall that he mentioned that he would buff it as it has switched places with the logistics tree
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 02:22:15 PM
Will not focus their fighters on the target?  That seems backwards...

Typo, was meant to read "now" instead of "not". They didn't before.


Was the permanent war issue fixed?

Looking into it (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12476.0) at the moment; the notes aren't the full entirety of the changes - there are still a few things I'd like to wrap up/work in.

Re: Odyssey - I might bring it down by 10-20 speed, will see. Going to do a bit more playtesting here :)

Any plans to make the Combat skill tree more appealing? As it stands, the other three seem to be outshining it pretty hard. Everyone I have spoken to says they don't use any Combat skills.

Not at the moment, no. I'd like to see how it shakes out later on; personally I think it's getting overlooked a bit right now because the new stuff is shiny while combat got a nerf. It's still quite good, though - I've played through with a combat character - so I think things may swing back in its direction a bit. Not entirely opposed to buffing it some, though.


* ...Come to think of it, Alex, how is "Fighter Strike" different from "Engage"?  Edit: Oh, re-read the notes; fighter strike lets the carrier do whatever strikes its fancy as long as it stays more or less in fighter range of the target.  Presumably engage makes it want to fight -that- target, though not as overridingly so as an eliminate would.  I think?

Right, exactly.


... but TT Brawler, I think, doesn't actually benefit from plasma jets (unless you want to make dedicated EMP boat).
Damper Field...

It just goes with the high-tech mobility theme in general, and it needs some mobility help with its main guns being energy.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on May 24, 2017, 02:37:55 PM
The Odyssey has been hot garbage for a while, so I look forward to it maybe being good now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 24, 2017, 03:00:14 PM
It just goes with the high-tech mobility theme in general, and it needs some mobility help with its main guns being energy.
What exactly stopped you from including plasma jets in it in 0.8? It even has additional engines already.
After some testing... It'd probably make a fun (but not efficient) frigate, good pursuiter, good EMP dealer, but I wouldn't trust AI with it ever. Unless it gets some flux buffs it'll struggle a lot. Right now I have problems with coming with a workable loadout that isn't EMP bomber, AM blaster bomber or beamspam. Or one that doesn't rely on allies.
Along the way I've discovered that AI repeatedly underestimates ship with AM blasters only by lowering its shields in or barely outside range and NOT rising them when shot comes. It happened only on a lasher, though, so it might have been a specific issue of lasher thinking it's speed will save him, but it doesn't.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BillyRueben on May 24, 2017, 03:07:12 PM
  • Person bounties:
    • ...
Any chance we could get the fleet composition of those bounties mixed up a bit? It can be kind of tiresome to get a good rep with a faction and be stuck fighting the same fleet types over and over for an entire playthrough.[/list]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hussar on May 24, 2017, 03:12:09 PM
Just few thoughts upon reading :)
In general 90% positive about these :)
Spoiler
Quote
Autofit now attempts to recreate weapon groups used by the target variant instead of autogenerating them
At last hurray! :D
Quote
Officers:
If already have a carrier skill: guaranteed a carrier skill pick on every level-up, if any left
Otherwise: guaranteed a non-carrier skill pick on every level-up
This though is a little confusing in sound. Does it mean that the only way to get carrier officers will be on a recruitment? Aka if he has a carrier skill then the old remains, if not - he won't get a carrier skill choice ever? Well, this is a bit clumsy way to solve the problem in my opinion but as long as I won't have to throw officers away in the end it's fine. I think though that we should be able to just bring up officer list and toggle an option on/off for carrier skills to appear for that particular officer during the level-up (so it would be possible to pick just 1 carrier skill if someone do desires, for example for an ship with one hangar bay that't not a carrier but benefits greatly from the added escort/support wing).

Quote
Added Colossus Mk.II and Mk.III
I'm not sure my body is ready :O

Quote
Scavenger fleets that turn pirate now have low reputation impact, i.e. fighting them will not turn you insta-hostile w/ either the independents or the pirates
+
Quote
Person bounties:
Improved bounty description - mentions flagship, fleet size, and noteworthy commander qualities
Bounty fleet commanders may get fleetwide skills (electronic warfare etc)
Technically-expired bounties will not end while player is in the same system as target
"Mission-important" flag on fleet will be cleared if fleet remains after flagship is taken out
Sounds like really good and needed changes :)

Quote
Food shortage events will now increase food prices properly (wasn't working right before)
Ha! I knew i was right :) But what about the rest of the economy?

Quote
Transverse Jump: fleet stops and charges for 3 seconds before executing the jump, can be attacked
It won't make it any less a god-ability - but it's good to see change like this in my opinion. That hovever - if attacked - what happens after battle? Will fleet be able to do a transverse jump upon victory or successful disengage? If victorious, will we be scavenging and then making the jump?

.
Quote
Front Shield Generator
Reduces top speed by 25%
Changed to tier 0, lower price, carried by all major factions
...huh? We talk about installing shield on a unshielded vessel yes? Okay... Taking that most of them had medicore speeds to begin with... Huh. -25% to top speed sounds to be over the top to me. -15% or -10% I think would play out better. It would have an impact but wouldn't make those ships insanely sluggish.

.
Quote
Damper Field: damage reduction down to 50% (from 67%), charge regen rate halved (1 per 20 seconds)
Nice it gets reduced but having to deal with it more often? Uh. Can get annoying...

.
Quote
Ship AI
Will now close in a little more on enemies it's winning the flux war against
Not so sure, I already had experienced lot of problems with non-assault type carriers rubbing their omni's into enemy's faces. So... yeah.

.
Quote
Fixed issue with carriers getting over-aggressive sometimes when given an assignment (such as "assault" or "defend")
And the above mentioned was happening without orders like these. So (double) yeah.

Quote
Fixed issue w/ ships not closing in effectively on very distant enemies sometimes and wandering instead
This sounds really good.

.
Quote
Miscellaneous
Game now comes with 64-bit Java 7 (7u79)
Hooray!

.
Quote
Fixed issue with amount of collision damage applied to stations
I sense that Tartifflete posting that vid with monitor shieldbashing the station has been noticed  ;D
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 24, 2017, 03:18:34 PM
Quote
This though is a little confusing in sound. Does it mean that the only way to get carrier officers will be on a recruitment? Aka if he has a carrier skill then the old remains, if not - he won't get a carrier skill choice ever? Well, this is a bit clumsy way to solve the problem in my opinion but as long as I won't have to throw officers away in the end it's fine. I think though that we should be able to just bring up officer list and toggle an option on/off for carrier skills to appear for that particular officer during the level-up.
No, this means that officers probably start mostly with combat skills and if they have only combat skills, they'll always be able to choose a combat skill, however, sometimes they'll get 1 carrier option.
If officers have at least 1 carrier skill, then you'll get (at least?) 1 carrier skill to pick.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on May 24, 2017, 03:26:38 PM
Hey Alex, did you by chance add in the third skill choice for officers by any chance?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on May 24, 2017, 03:32:20 PM
Quote
Damper Field: damage reduction down to 50% (from 67%), charge regen rate halved (1 per 20 seconds)
Nice it gets reduced but having to deal with it more often? Uh. Can get annoying...
charge regen is halved, not cooldown. currently it gets 1 charge every 10 sec.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: RickyRio on May 24, 2017, 03:34:12 PM
  • Colossus freighter now properly has the "civgrade" hullmod

NOOOOOOOOO

I was enjoying having a hauler without the civilian hullmod sensor strength/profile penalty!

Could we pretty pretty please get some sort of military cargo and tanker ship? I don't mind investing more heavily in them to get the benefit but I feel it is very much an area where the sector military fleets lack.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 24, 2017, 03:38:12 PM
Front Shield Generator
Reduces top speed by 25%
Changed to tier 0, lower price, carried by all major factions

So... you think now'd be a good time to start lobbying for a speed increase for the Hound?  ;D


Oh BTW, do the PD drones on the Prometheus stay? Seem strange to leave one remnant of the old system.



No, this means that officers probably start mostly with combat skills and if they have only combat skills, they'll always be able to choose a combat skill, however, sometimes they'll get 1 carrier option.
If officers have at least 1 carrier skill, then you'll get (at least?) 1 carrier skill to pick.

Yeah. In practice the only effect is that carrier officers have an easy time picking up all the carrier skills.



Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on May 24, 2017, 03:39:43 PM
NOOOOOOOOO

I was enjoying having a hauler without the civilian hullmod sensor strength/profile penalty!

Could we pretty pretty please get some sort of military cargo and tanker ship? I don't mind investing more heavily in them to get the benefit but I feel it is very much an area where the sector military fleets lack.
i feel the same! :(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 03:42:40 PM
What exactly stopped you from including plasma jets in it in 0.8? It even has additional engines already.

It's had those since forever - its original, way-back system was maneuvering jets. I don't think plasma jets existed at the point in the dev cycle that we added the TT Brawler.

Any chance we could get the fleet composition of those bounties mixed up a bit? It can be kind of tiresome to get a good rep with a faction and be stuck fighting the same fleet types over and over for an entire playthrough.[/list]

Oh, right, I remember that thread. Yeah, let me remove the increased probability based on having high relationship with a faction.

Hey Alex, did you by chance add in the third skill choice for officers by any chance?

Negative. By chance :)

(I'd like to keep officers at least somewhat random.)

Could we pretty pretty please get some sort of military cargo and tanker ship? I don't mind investing more heavily in them to get the benefit but I feel it is very much an area where the sector military fleets lack.

Put insulated engines on it, and you're good to go. Sensor strength on it probably won't matter much if you've got enough ships.

Ha! I knew i was right :) But what about the rest of the economy?

Not touching that for .1, that'd be silly :)


It won't make it any less a god-ability - but it's good to see change like this in my opinion. That hovever - if attacked - what happens after battle? Will fleet be able to do a transverse jump upon victory or successful disengage? If victorious, will we be scavenging and then making the jump?

It's interrupted if there were hostilities.

I sense that Tartifflete posting that vid with monitor shieldbashing the station has been noticed  ;D

Indeed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 03:43:47 PM
So... you think now'd be a good time to start lobbying for a speed increase for the Hound?  ;D

It's always a good time to lobby for the Hound.

Oh BTW, do the PD drones on the Prometheus stay? Seem strange to leave one remnant of the old system.

They do but yeah, it's very much a holdover. Let's call it a "charming idiosyncrasy", maybe?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 24, 2017, 03:52:29 PM
The changes to LR PD laser seem promising.  The 100 flux cost was killer, and I used LR PD Laser mostly as a poor-man's Tac Laser.

Odyssey getting 90 speed seems overkill, more than current Heron, although Heron can use HVD and Odyssey cannot.  But since Odyssey will get two fighter bays, it can afford to use fighters as auxiliary kinetic guns and use beams for range.  Tachyon Lance is great, if the attacker has some way to put hard flux on shields.

Pity with changes to Damper Field.  Looks like Centurion and Brawler will be even worse.  (Brawler was not that great to begin with.)

Pity that all high-level bounties will not feature pirates.  It was nice seeing obvious pirate high-level fleets, even if they were a bit too common.

Question:  Is there a size limit for new Remnant fleets as they get bigger, or will it cap like other factions?  In other words, a single fleet will not grow much beyond thirty ships, will it?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 03:58:27 PM
Pity that all high-level bounties will not feature pirates.  It was nice seeing obvious pirate high-level fleets, even if they were a bit too common.

Hmm, you know what, let me add a small-ish chance to get pirate bounties at high level also, just for the sake of variety. Before it was 50%, which was a bit much. Changed it to 25%.

Question:  Is there a size limit for new Remnant fleets as they get bigger, or will it cap like other factions?  In other words, a single fleet will not grow much beyond thirty ships, will it?

It's limited, yeah.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on May 24, 2017, 04:36:40 PM
re Odyssey: i'm glad it got a 2nd flight deck, and i like it getting a speed buff, but like many others i feel 90 is too high. 70 or 75 would be fine, i think.

also, can Venture have a 2nd deck now too? it probably wouldn't even make much of a balance difference, but only a single built-in Mining Pod wing just feels really underwhelming, even for a semi-civilian ship... even Converted Hangar with zero-OP Talons would probably be better than that.

re Damper Field: i think the reduced charge regen is good, and 50% damage reduction is fine on Mora, but together might be too much of a nerf for Brawler and Centurion. how about making the damage reduction scale with ship size like 70/60/50/40?


oh yeah, and...
<.<
>.>
did you perchance look at implementing that holding down right-click to immediately activate shield/cloak thing? ^^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Surge on May 24, 2017, 04:46:59 PM
holy hell that FSG nerf, are shielded Hounds REALLY that strong? I've never really thought of ships with FSG as anything more than makeshift support vessels that, you know, actually work in combat. Considering that of the ships that really needed FSG; Hound, Cerberus, Buffalo MkII, Mudskipper MkII, only the Hound was really capable of running circles around targets. Now these ships are not only in a position where they are spending a good chunk of their limited OP to counter EMP weapons and provide some modest longevity against kite builds, they are also sacrificing the speed they now need more than ever to offset their horribly taxed flux systems.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 24, 2017, 04:57:08 PM
The fastest base speed a cruiser has is 80.  Odyssey could be fine at 80, if 90 is too much.

Hounds with Front Shield Generator are merely viable in combat.  Without a shield it is dead the moment an enemy with missiles or beams or EMP weaponry appear.  Without shields, Hound and Cerberus are just freighters without the civilian hullmods.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on May 24, 2017, 05:01:34 PM
not entirely related to the patch notes, but since there always seem to be people who get confused about Front Shield Generator, Front Shield Emitter and Omni Shield Emitter, i suggest renaming them to something like:


that makes it clear that the generator is only for ships that don't already have a shield, and that the other two aren't meant for ships that don't already have one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 24, 2017, 05:08:53 PM
Front Shield Generator and Front Shield Emitter are too similar and easy to confuse when reading posts discussing them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on May 24, 2017, 05:14:42 PM
Overall looks really nice :)

Quote
Piranha: removed LMG, bombs have an 0.1 second arming time

Makes sense - they had this peculiar behavior where they would often do more damage hanging around a smaller target (frigate/mobile destroyer) with their lmg's than their guns. I'm guessing the improved leading is helping their damage potential? Otherwise our Kopesh overlords won't have much competition for carpet bombing.

Dagger/Trident: The OP reduction is good - I might go farther, but thats probably overbalancing. I've found that for hunting destroyers Daggers are nastily effective (when backed up), though I still might lean Kopesh and just eat being a bit worse against destroyers in exchange for 8 OP and being better against cruisers/caps.

Talons: I'm glad they won't be saturating point defenses with their swarmers so much.

Quote
THUNDERS
Spoiler
Hell yes.

 THUNDER (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2AC41dglnM)
[close]

I'm preemptively clenching for frigate captains everywhere. Assuming they can hit their targets at those speeds and don't get too quickly flux locked on the IR pulse.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 24, 2017, 05:24:20 PM
I started drafting another wall-of-text commentary about skills a day or two ago, but with the changes coming, it may be best for me to wait until the update hits.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 05:34:14 PM
also, can Venture have a 2nd deck now too? it probably wouldn't even make much of a balance difference, but only a single built-in Mining Pod wing just feels really underwhelming, even for a semi-civilian ship... even Converted Hangar with zero-OP Talons would probably be better than that.

Well, the Venture's built-in mining drones aren't supposed to be *good*, so comparing them to other things, they should fall short.


re Damper Field: i think the reduced charge regen is good, and 50% damage reduction is fine on Mora, but together might be too much of a nerf for Brawler and Centurion. how about making the damage reduction scale with ship size like 70/60/50/40?

Maybe - still considering what/whether to do something re: Centurion/Brawler.


oh yeah, and...
<.<
>.>
did you perchance look at implementing that holding down right-click to immediately activate shield/cloak thing? ^^

I think I mentioned this before - not something I'm comfortable touching w/o a bunch of testing to follow. Too easy to introduce a bug there.



Re: FSG - if it takes a barely-combat-viable ship and makes it combat-viable, then that by definition is at least bordering on "too strong", isn't it? The idea is to make it available early, but also make it an option rather than something you always put on Hounds/Cerberi/etc.


not entirely related to the patch notes, but since there always seem to be people who get confused about Front Shield Generator, Front Shield Emitter and Omni Shield Emitter, i suggest renaming them to something like:
...

Good idea. Renamed to:
Makeshift Shield Generator
Shield Conversion - Front
Shield Conversion - Omni


I'm preemptively clenching for frigate captains everywhere. Assuming they can hit their targets at those speeds and don't get too quickly flux locked on the IR pulse.

They can hit things pretty well, yeah. They do give up a lot of firepower and durability compared to other wing options, though - the price they pay for rapid response and force concentration.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on May 24, 2017, 05:38:19 PM
Yes, yes!  ;D
I can't wait for this update to be released!
Anyway, Alex. Can we restore detached/destroyed modules on a ship? e.g. when we restore a ship and it's missing its modules, can we restore the modules as well?
Also, Any ETAs for the update?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 05:51:58 PM
Anyway, Alex. Can we restore detached/destroyed modules on a ship? e.g. when we restore a ship and it's missing its modules, can we restore the modules as well?

Modules come back naturally over the course of repairs.

Also, Any ETAs for the update?

Soon(tm), of course :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zhentar on May 24, 2017, 06:06:06 PM
  • Ox-class Tug:
    • Improves fleetwide burn by 1, cumulative with other tugs, not limited by its own burn level


Awesom-

  • Uses 10 fuel per light-year

Oh :( Guess I won't be using it then...


Could we pretty pretty please get some sort of military cargo and tanker ship? I don't mind investing more heavily in them to get the benefit but I feel it is very much an area where the sector military fleets lack.

Put insulated engines on it, and you're good to go. Sensor strength on it probably won't matter much if you've got enough ships.

I've already got insulated engines on my Colossi to mostly cancel out the augmented drive field... they're still the noisiest ships in my fleet. I was excited to have a non-civilian hull freighter, without that I'll have to go back to buffalos :(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on May 24, 2017, 06:06:50 PM
Yes, yes!  ;D
I can't wait for this update to be released!
Anyway, Alex. Can we restore detached/destroyed modules on a ship? e.g. when we restore a ship and it's missing its modules, can we restore the modules as well?
Also, Any ETAs for the update?
detached modules? what?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: dk1332 on May 24, 2017, 06:07:53 PM
Sweet mother of Odyssey. Can't wait for this.

Now I can stop limiting my speed fleet to 70% non-carriers, 20% auxiliary ships, and 10% carriers due to them starting with "engage" fighters.
The new strike command should be able to give players an edge against the REDACTED Stations.

Wish the ship's restoration doesn't cost that much or rather it costs more depending on each D-mods it has. But meh, a free ship is free.

Btw, I'm not sure if this has been reported already but found this odd...things happening


There's the probability that most of those problems might be caused the buggy console command mod. But maybe they are worth checking out?

Spoiler
then again....the REDACTED might only meant to be fought by the Player so you can disregard this post  ;)
[close]


Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on May 24, 2017, 06:08:06 PM
Could we pretty pretty please get some sort of military cargo and tanker ship? I don't mind investing more heavily in them to get the benefit but I feel it is very much an area where the sector military fleets lack.

brb colossus (A) mod incoming
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on May 24, 2017, 06:08:21 PM
detached modules? what?
On the big REDACTED, some modules stay on and others fly off when destroyed.

  • Ox-class Tug:
    • Improves fleetwide burn by 1, cumulative with other tugs, not limited by its own burn level

Hm, with that in mind, it might make sense to give some AI fleets Tugs as to make escaping them a bit more of a challenge.  Stuff like system patrols or smugglers to make catching them harder.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: dk1332 on May 24, 2017, 06:10:41 PM
Yes, yes!  ;D
I can't wait for this update to be released!
Anyway, Alex. Can we restore detached/destroyed modules on a ship? e.g. when we restore a ship and it's missing its modules, can we restore the modules as well?
Also, Any ETAs for the update?
detached modules? what?
Prolly those destroyed weapon mounts?


Could we pretty pretty please get some sort of military cargo and tanker ship? I don't mind investing more heavily in them to get the benefit but I feel it is very much an area where the sector military fleets lack.

brb colossus (A) mod incoming

SOMEONE MAKE THIS HAPPEN!!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on May 24, 2017, 06:12:49 PM
I think I mentioned this before - not something I'm comfortable touching w/o a bunch of testing to follow. Too easy to introduce a bug there.
yup, you did mention that. but that was before the 0.8a release, so i was wondering whether it would be suitable for 0.8.1.
i'm gonna stop pestering you about it now though, sorry. ^^

Quote
Good idea. Renamed to:
Makeshift Shield Generator
Shield Conversion - Front
Shield Conversion - Omni
\o/
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: AxleMC131 on May 24, 2017, 06:16:21 PM
Might as well throw in my initial thoughts of the changes that stuck out, to me at least. This comes directly from my comments on the Discord.



Spoiler

Quote
- Autofit now attempts to recreate weapon groups used by the target variant instead of autogenerating them
THANK GOD

Quote
- Fighters now start out in "regroup" rather than "engage" mode
YES

Quote
- Added Colossus Mk.II and Mk.III
Hot damn. Can't wait to see what those could be!

Quote
(Thunder changes)
Whoa. The Thunder's been changed up a lot. Way faster, long range, and now armed with LDMG, IR Pulse and swarmers. Darn, I'mma miss the Ion Cannon as much as the Harpoon, but still looking forward to them.

Quote
- LRPD Laser: reduced flux to 25/sec (was 100)
For some reason this speaks volumes to me.

Quote
- Odyssey: Increased speed to 90 (was 50), also increased acceleration/deceleration/turn accel
Holy... That is a big speed buff.

Quote
- Added new carriers (Mora, Drover, Legion) to the "Random Battle" mission
This makes me incredibly happy.

Quote
- Fixed bug where venting would trigger the cooldown on Phase Lance and similar weapons
Nice. That one was starting to annoy me.

Quote
- Fixed issue with REDACTED fleets not spawning at REDACTED REDACTED
This just makes me laugh all over again.  ;D

[close]



As always, awesome work Devs! Can't wait!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on May 24, 2017, 06:36:46 PM
On the big REDACTED, some modules stay on and others fly off when destroyed.

but those will never be repaired, per se, right? So we're just talking about like a mod thing?

Could we pretty pretty please get some sort of military cargo and tanker ship? I don't mind investing more heavily in them to get the benefit but I feel it is very much an area where the sector military fleets lack.

brb colossus (A) mod incoming

SOMEONE MAKE THIS HAPPEN!!!
(http://i.imgur.com/TLcazyW.png)

WIP, thoughts?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 06:38:44 PM
On the big REDACTED, some modules stay on and others fly off when destroyed.

but those will never be repaired, per se, right? So we're just talking about like a mod thing?

Yeah, mod thing. At least if I interpreted the question correctly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: dk1332 on May 24, 2017, 06:42:38 PM

(http://i.imgur.com/TLcazyW.png)

WIP, thoughts?

MARRY MEH!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on May 24, 2017, 07:18:43 PM
Yeah, mod thing. At least if I interpreted the question correctly.
Hm, so that means, for example, if you blow off an Armor piece off of a REDACTED, it won't ever come back no matter how long you wait?  If that's true, feels a bit odd since that flies in the face of everything else we've seen with Starsector.  Heck, that might even change how I fight it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 07:23:49 PM
It'll come back. What I mean by "mod thing" is that it's not something that will affect the player's ships in vanilla, since there are no player-gettable ships with modules.

... so much confusion :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on May 24, 2017, 07:32:05 PM
It'll come back. What I mean by "mod thing" is that it's not something that will affect the player's ships in vanilla, since there are no player-gettable ships with modules.

... so much confusion :)
Those are the best questions!

Player ship or not, taking down a big REDACTED is like eating a sandwich.  Eating it in one big go is hard - taking bits out of it is easier, though costs more time (and supplies).  Hence my interest.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on May 24, 2017, 07:45:17 PM
If we're lobbying for Hound buffs we will all end up regretting, I'll throw in a plug for pirate variants with Arbalests to make the current crop of newbies experience some shadow of the hell that early game used to be.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 24, 2017, 07:57:11 PM
Re: FSG - if it takes a barely-combat-viable ship and makes it combat-viable, then that by definition is at least bordering on "too strong", isn't it? The idea is to make it available early, but also make it an option rather than something you always put on Hounds/Cerberi/etc.
Uh, no.

I would always put it on Hound and Ceberus because without it, they die the moment any serious warship looks at them funny.  Missiles? Dead!  Long-range beams? Dead!  EMP? Dead!  I treat Hound and Cerebus as civilians without the civilian hullmods.  Specifically, I treat them as freighters that can run from just about anything pirates throw at them.

Without shields, I do not even think about using Hound and Cerberus in a fight because they are that fragile.

When I fight against such ships, they are easy to kill and are among the first to die.

That said, bad flux stats combined with inefficient shields and low OP (due to being hybrid ship instead of a true warship) makes it hard to use shields well.

I would like to see a hullmod that strips shields from beefier ships that can take some hits like Enforcer and Onslaught.  I know mods have added that (not sure which one, since I do not play them), but it could help AI ships that overload too easily from bad shields (like Enforcer).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 24, 2017, 08:04:19 PM
Lots of excellent changes in there.

Re: Odyssey

I nearly posted a semi-rant in Megas' feedback thread about how the Odyssey was in a no-man's land for high-tech ships. Every other "large" high-tech ship had either a mobility system or strong shield but the Odyssey did not. It was trying to slug it out with inferior energy weapons and an asymmetrical design.

What I like about the 90 speed, even if it is high, is that the Odyssey becomes closer to what I wanted the Aurora to be before Plasma Jets: something of a high-tech ship-of-the-line. It's following classic battlecruiser doctrine: outgunning what it can't outrun and outrunning what it can't outgun. While its offensive/defensive capabilities remain relatively unchanged (though the addition of another flightdeck is pretty significant), the fact that it's moving at destroyer speed means that it can outflank cruisers and capitals that would win a straight-on fight. Maybe it will it be a tad too strong in this iteration but do remember, it has the second-highest deployment cost in the game: right after the Paragon and tied with an Astral.

Re: Tug changes

I get that it's useful to increase the speed of your fleet, especially if you have a load of slower freighters or capitals but as long as S-Burn remains the preferred method of travel, +1 just isn't that significant. Now that the AI is using S-Burn, maybe I'll have to pay more attention to my fleet's base burn speed because I could get chased down but like I said in the Augmented Drive Field thread, S-Burn has trivialized (or perhaps more appropriately, homogenized) burn levels. With the changes to S-Burn, perhaps its use won't be as ubiquitous as current?

I thought you were looking into making Tugs more of a fuel-saving measure for the rust-bucket fleets, though the +50% fuel perk in Recovery Operations may have been the route you took.

Quote
Added "Converted Hangar" modspec to level 2 Fighter Doctrine

Massive change, IMO. I don't think there is a single modspec that completely changes the way you play as much as this one. It's rarity in the current game means I don't mess with it much but if I ever stumble across it, most of my destroyers and above use it. The flexibility that's offered by adding a fighter wing to even a destroyer is huge and it's not difficult to reach a critical mass of fighters/bombers if you toss in a few dedicated carriers. I'd hate for it to get nerfed but fighters are just so good right now. I'd daresay move it to Level 3 if nothing else changes.

Quote
Less drastically reduced flux cost of PD Laser and both Burst PD Laser versions

I must be dense: I don't understand what this is saying. Did flux costs increase for PD Laser and Burst PD...? The "less" is throwing me off and perhaps it's not supposed to be there at all?

Ton of a great bugfixes. Huge QoL improvements in there. Loving the fighter changes and will have to be on the lookout for Thunders now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lancefighter on May 24, 2017, 08:18:03 PM


Quote
Less drastically reduced flux cost of PD Laser and both Burst PD Laser versions

I must be dense: I don't understand what this is saying. Did flux costs increase for PD Laser and Burst PD...? The "less" is throwing me off and perhaps it's not supposed to be there at all?

Ton of a great bugfixes. Huge QoL improvements in there. Loving the fighter changes and will have to be on the lookout for Thunders now.
LRPD went from 100 to 25, a 75% reduction. I assume what he means is the others 'only' went down by maybe 50% of their cost (say, 50 to 20, or 25 to 15, I cant remember specifically what the others are)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 24, 2017, 08:21:23 PM
@Megas:
I'm not saying those ships are too strong with FSG. I'm saying that if FSG single-handedly takes them out of "garbage tier", then it's too strong.

That said, they're still usable - I've had decent early-game success deploying both Hounds and Cerberi; a heavy mauler is a heavy mauler no matter how crappy the firing platform. With FSG, hopefully there'll be an alternate way of using these in the early game that's not so weapon reliant but isn't straight-up better than the unshielded version.


I thought you were looking into making Tugs more of a fuel-saving measure for the rust-bucket fleets, though the +50% fuel perk in Recovery Operations may have been the route you took.

Yeah, exactly. Tugs may be on the expensive side, but maybe with SB being less of an always-on, they'd have a niche. Too cheap and this stacking would be trouble, though, so have to err on the side of too expensive.

Massive change, IMO. I don't think there is a single modspec that completely changes the way you play as much as this one. It's rarity in the current game means I don't mess with it much but if I ever stumble across it, most of my destroyers and above use it. The flexibility that's offered by adding a fighter wing to even a destroyer is huge and it's not difficult to reach a critical mass of fighters/bombers if you toss in a few dedicated carriers. I'd hate for it to get nerfed but fighters are just so good right now. I'd daresay move it to Level 3 if nothing else changes.

I'm hoping that the overall balanced changes to fighters make this a bit less appealing, i.e. 0-OP Talons being so great combines especially well with Converted Hangar.


LRPD went from 100 to 25, a 75% reduction. I assume what he means is the others 'only' went down by maybe 50% of their cost (say, 50 to 20, or 25 to 15, I cant remember specifically what the others are)

Yeah - that item is meant to be read in the context of the one immediately previous, but I can see how that's confusing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on May 24, 2017, 08:34:01 PM
  • Ion Pulser: ammo regenerates in sets of 3, to match burst size

Has this always been possible? I just got a little idea for ballistic weapons in my personal mod ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on May 24, 2017, 08:36:29 PM
Lots of nice changes in this!

Some comments about specific things:

Advanced Countermeasures:
  • Level 1: increased to -50% kinetic damage vs armor (was: 20%)
  • Level 2: increased to -25% HE damage vs shields (was: 20%)
  • Level 3: damage to fighters/missiles increased by 50% (was: 30%)
I'm not sure Advanced Countermeasures should even exist to begin with, in light of these changes.
Spoiler
My concern here is: You get things like HVD/Gauss Cannon being moderately effective against some ships' armor while doing nearly nothing to other, visually identical ships, without a readily available indicator of why this should be the case. Likewise with sending fighters against a ship and them Doing Something or getting swatted like flies.

The invisibility aspect is true of many other buffs. But at least with something like a ship having the zero flux bonus with its shield up or its missiles flying faster, the player can easily see what's going on even if they don't know why. The damage calculation is completely hidden except for the final output. And unlike, say, Heavy Armor, the bonus from Advanced Countermeasures doesn't even appear on the stats card.
[close]

Quote
Damper Field: damage reduction down to 50% (from 67%), charge regen rate halved (1 per 20 seconds)
If we're going with the nerf as stated (rather than only reducing charge regen, or making the damage reduction scale with hull size, as suggested in that other thread), Brawler and Centurion could stand to receive a compensatory buff perhaps. Centurion in particular doesn't seem to have a combat role at present other than "be annoying to kill".

On FSG: If it's going to inflict such a huge speed penalty I'd say it needs some other buff, like lower upkeep cost (i.e. not ~100 f/s on a Hound). (Or make it cost 0 OP ::))
Spoiler
Perhaps having it vs. not having it was indeed far too dramatic a change for the ships it goes on.

But now I can think of exactly one case where I'd bother using it now: HVD/Mauler sniper Hounds that need to not die to Tactical Laser/Swarmer SRM return fire. For just about any other build, things that don't have a shield and need it to survive... need a 25% speed reduction scarcely any more (Buffalo Mk. II) or arguably even less (Hound, Cerberus). I haven't had a reason to field these ships (with or without shields) in my games as it is, not when I can just get proper warships and cargo haulers in their place.
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on May 24, 2017, 08:45:47 PM
Interdiction Pulse. It's cool to see a more aggressive campaign ability. But I'm confused. Is it for stopping fleets from catching you, or stopping fleets from getting away from you?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on May 24, 2017, 08:46:38 PM
  • Ion Pulser: ammo regenerates in sets of 3, to match burst size

Has this always been possible? I just got a little idea for ballistic weapons in my personal mod ;)

Yes, it's the basis of cool magazine-based modguns that can benefit from expanded mags
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on May 24, 2017, 10:55:03 PM
Quote
New bounties will not spawn near where the player is

It's weird to see world rotate around player that obviously. Plus, it was nice to get extra income for surprise double bounty.

Quote
Interdiction Pulse ability

Maybe it should depend on relative sizes of fleets (both chance to interrupt SB/EB and burn level reduction. With cutoff to 0% if casting fleet is too small)? Having single frigate stop Onslaught armada in it's tracks doesn't feel right.
And would be annoying to no end if spammed by small fleets that like to swarm around player due to being too weak to attack directly.

Quote
Odyssey:
    Increased speed to 90 (was 50), also increased acceleration/deceleration/turn accel

It needed buff, but that much?... DE level speed with ability to almost insta-kill a DE when caught from long range (triple Tachyon Lance under HEF). Even frigates, while they have enough speed to stay safe, are simply not that cautious under AI control, and will likely be easy prey.

Well, at least it will be fun to pilot before it gets it's well deserved nerf.

Quote
Piranha: removed LMG, bombs have an 0.1 second arming time

Just as 0.8 made them finally worth using. I don't think I'll ever prefer a Piranha to Khopesh/Dagger after this change.

Quote
Thunder:
    Range 8000, speed 450, 500 health/75 armor (same as Gladius)
    Armed with Light Dual MG, IR Pulse Laser, Swarmers

Do they have nerfed swarmers like Talons?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 24, 2017, 11:26:40 PM
Is the Odyssey getting slightly more OP on account of a new fighter slot or is the sweet speed boost good enough? I really like the Odyssey being upgraded to the "speed demon" niche capital—for so long it has just...been there with nothing worth mentioning about it really.

Fighter nerfs abound but that was to be expected, though I'm kinda scratching my head on the IR Pulse Laser tweaks—you got the Gladius that can't support the weapon for more than 2-3 shots before it flux chokes and now you have the Lux with a special "slow" version of the weapon. The Thunder has acquired one too but at least it has the flux to make use of it. It all seems a bit odd.

But hey, the +50 range to light mortar is a buff to Warthogs and the Atropos-equipped bombers are a bit cheaper! But man, the Piranhas have been gutted pretty hard—maybe a slight OP reduction is in order or swap the MG for a Vulcan?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: AxleMC131 on May 24, 2017, 11:41:20 PM
  • Ion Pulser: ammo regenerates in sets of 3, to match burst size

Has this always been possible? I just got a little idea for ballistic weapons in my personal mod ;)

If what you mean is "is it possible in the current version", then yes it is. ;) There's another value in the "weapon_data.csv" after "ammo" and "ammo/sec" labelled "reload size", which is the number of charges the weapon reloads in a single instant. It's basically for a clip-based reloading system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: zaimoni on May 25, 2017, 01:03:29 AM
Re Hounds/Cerebuses:
Re: FSG - if it takes a barely-combat-viable ship and makes it combat-viable, then that by definition is at least bordering on "too strong", isn't it?
One of the highest-utility early-game micro-management orders that doesn't belong in SS is "exactly one of you, eliminate that target".  Use specifically for Hound/Cerebus/Mudskipper Mk II, all of which only need one AI Wolf or AI Lasher to erase if they don't have an FSG.  I'm pretty sure this new order would allow far more mopups of 5 ship or less fleets to be total annihilations.

Gut reaction is that FSG upgrades Hound/Cerebus combat readiness from "just retreat them at battle start if you didn't catch it in fleet deployment" to something in the Hermes shuttle or Kite shuttle range -- wouldn't have a guilt trip activating for all-hands on deck emergencies, but don't activate for anything less.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on May 25, 2017, 02:12:11 AM
One of the highest-utility early-game micro-management orders that doesn't belong in SS is "exactly one of you, eliminate that target".  Use specifically for Hound/Cerebus/Mudskipper Mk II, all of which only need one AI Wolf or AI Lasher to erase if they don't have an FSG.
Select the ship or ships you want to kill the target, then right-click on the target. This will give an eliminate order that only the selected ships will follow. This also works for escort orders.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: RawCode on May 25, 2017, 03:37:05 AM
Quote
Bounty level goes up with player level even if the player hasn't been doing bounties

one step closer to obvilion in space and difficulty slider.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 25, 2017, 05:01:15 AM
Do they have nerfed swarmers like Talons?

Yes. Thunders make for a great rapid response squad that you can use when something somewhere needs an immediate intervention. They often do need backup ASAP, though.


Quote
Bounty level goes up with player level even if the player hasn't been doing bounties

one step closer to obvilion in space and difficulty slider.

Hardly, bounties are something you have to actively seek out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: HELMUT on May 25, 2017, 05:34:24 AM
Like other people, i'm also a bit worried with that huge Odyssey buff. I think the second launch bay is a good idea, but the 90 speed change might be too much. While an absurdly fast capital ship will undoubtedly fun to fly, it's also likely to be quite infuriating to fight.

Scenarios similar to the kiting Heron comes to mind, an AI Odyssey would make for a difficult opponent if you don't have an overwhelming amount of firepower and the speed to bring it to the enemy. Even then, you also need to make sure you can get in range while weathering the HEF boosted barrage of fire, not many ships can do that. In the end, a single Odyssey could drag on a battle for a while, devolving the encounter in a CR war.

That's only the theory though. I think testing against an Odyssey would be more important than testing as an Odyssey to avoid making it unfun.

For Damper Field, while it's going to make things easier against the Mora, the two DF frigates are going to suffer quite a bit. I still think that current DF is fine, but only for smaller ships, it's just the Mora that needs... Something. Hopefully, the halved charge rate should be good enough.

About the fighters, while i'm happy with pretty much everything here (Nerfed Talon and Spark, Thunder reworked as a long range interceptor), i'm really surprised by the castration of the Piranha. The Lmg was incredibly useful for shield-breaking and general PD purpose, the bomb arming time will also reduce the efficiency of their point blank bombing runs. It's not like it was a godly bomber to begin with, very situational (only works against slow enemies without flak) and dangerously prone to cause friendly fire, i'm not sure of the why of this nerf. Especially since the very strong Kopesh have been left untouched here.

So... Yeah, if that lmg doesn't come back, perhaps replacing it with something else? How about frag bombs, like in the old days? I remember the battlefield littered by random explosions looking very pretty.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Flying Birdy on May 25, 2017, 06:03:17 AM
Honestly, the AI running around with S-Burn just seems incredibly scary to me. The AI S-Burn buff (no more sensor penalties), combined with the transverse jump and e-burn nerf, will make escaping patrols absolute hell. I mean, how does one even escape from an AI fleet at 18 burn? Is the only option just to S-Burn as well to get away? Is it possible to E-Burn out of sensor range during the AI's S-Burn windup? Is the T-Jump delay short enough to allow for a T-Jump while the AI windsup its S-Burn?

Its going to be really important to see what circumstances the AI will execute an S-Burn. This might be something that is completely broken and destroy play as a pirate.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: YuiTheModder on May 25, 2017, 06:10:42 AM
Hi Alex, I was wondering if there are any user interface changes looking to be added in the new update? I feel like a toggle feature for speeding up time and (in combat) ships facing the mouse would be really ergonomic and fab for taking the strain off some tired fingers ^^*.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 25, 2017, 06:37:27 AM
a heavy mauler is a heavy mauler no matter how crappy the firing platform. With FSG, hopefully there'll be an alternate way of using these in the early game that's not so weapon reliant but isn't straight-up better than the unshielded version.
The problem with Heavy Mauler (and HVD) is it is too rare except maybe by endgame.  Heavy Mauler is rare enough that I usually reload the game if I lose a ship with them.  It is easier for me to replace or recover most ships than Heavy Mauler.

Hound (and other small ships prone to dying) is too fragile to put Heavy Mauler on.  I probably put Arbalest or Heavy Mortar because I would not care if I lose those weapons.  (Similarly, this is why I do not put Railguns and Light Needlers on Lashers.  Lashers die, and they were common enough before 0.8 that replacing them was easier than those weapons.)

As for hullmod taking ships out of garbage tier being too powerful, I do not quite agree with that.  It is about as must-have for unshielded ships as ITU and Resistant Flux Conduits for most ships, Expanded Deck Crew for carriers, Expanded Missile Racks for missileships, and Advanced Optics for some beam ships.  You could say that maxing vents takes a lot of ships out of garbage tier for not having enough dissipation to support weapons and vent fast enough.  For real flux hogs like Mjolnir, player needs extra dissipation from skills to support it and make it worth using.

EDIT:  A ship is garbage tier is bad - so bad that a player would not want to use it in combat ever.  Something that takes a ship out of liability to usefulness can only be a good thing.  It expands useful ship options in combat, not add gamebreakers.  Plus, Hounds are still quite bad even with shields, just not hopeless.  Cerberus with shield was better than Lasher during 0.65, though I do not know of that remains true today.


Lux losing half speed for IR Pulse Laser, why?  They were not very strong offensively, and they are more expensive than Sparks.  With that change, I might ignore Lux and stick with Broadswords.

Re: Piranha.  They would become the low-grade guns of bombers.  (Actually, they already are, but at least they are effective.)  Only good to put on disposable ships if you cannot afford to lose better bomber chips.

I have no problem with Converted Hangar at Fighter Doctrine.  It does complete change ships, and it is very fun, but it is not always must-have for all ships.  It is very good, probably about Flux Distributor level (i.e., very nice to have, but can be sacrificed if ship needs more OP to do its job), but not so vital to be ITU level.  I would probably dump missiles for Converted Hangar, but I would not give up more vital hullmods the ship needs to do its basic job.

If anything, I like to see more hullmods in skills.  For example, Advanced Optics at Gunnery Implants 2 or ITU at Gunnery Implants 3.

Quote
one step closer to obvilion in space and difficulty slider.
I can see that (and I dislike dynamic difficulty that encourages low-level runs or other degenerate stuff), although it could be justified as them getting stronger as time passes like you are.  You do need a source of ships and weapons, and if you cannot buy them, you need to take them from enemies you kill.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 25, 2017, 06:39:51 AM
Honestly, the AI running around with S-Burn just seems incredibly scary to me. The AI S-Burn buff (no more sensor penalties), combined with the transverse jump and e-burn nerf, will make escaping patrols absolute hell. I mean, how does one even escape from an AI fleet at 18 burn? Is the only option just to S-Burn as well to get away? Is it possible to E-Burn out of sensor range during the AI's S-Burn windup? Is the T-Jump delay short enough to allow for a T-Jump while the AI windsup its S-Burn?

Its going to be really important to see what circumstances the AI will execute an S-Burn. This might be something that is completely broken and destroy play as a pirate.

You can stop a fleet that's S-burning towards you dead in its tracks with the Interdiction Pulse, and then just walk away casually. You can also try to E-burn at a right angle to dodge it.



Hi Alex, I was wondering if there are any user interface changes looking to be added in the new update? I feel like a toggle feature for speeding up time and (in combat) ships facing the mouse would be really ergonomic and fab for taking the strain off some tired fingers ^^*.

You can revert the behavior of shift in the settings menu. Then you only have to press it of you don't want your ship to follow the cursor.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 25, 2017, 06:50:09 AM
Like other people, i'm also a bit worried with that huge Odyssey buff. I think the second launch bay is a good idea, but the 90 speed change might be too much. While an absurdly fast capital ship will undoubtedly fun to fly, it's also likely to be quite infuriating to fight.

Scenarios similar to the kiting Heron comes to mind, an AI Odyssey would make for a difficult opponent if you don't have an overwhelming amount of firepower and the speed to bring it to the enemy. Even then, you also need to make sure you can get in range while weathering the HEF boosted barrage of fire, not many ships can do that. In the end, a single Odyssey could drag on a battle for a while, devolving the encounter in a CR war.

That's only the theory though. I think testing against an Odyssey would be more important than testing as an Odyssey to avoid making it unfun.

Fair points. We'll have to see if it can indeed kite well enough to become annoying but even at best, the Odyssey is neither an offensive nor defensive juggernaut. Given equal deployment costs, I don't think even a speedy Odyssey is going to dictate engagements as much as a less costly Onslaught, Legion, or Astral. I do believe that with the change, the Odyssey will leapfrog the Conquest, though.

Quote
About the fighters, while i'm happy with pretty much everything here (Nerfed Talon and Spark, Thunder reworked as a long range interceptor), i'm really surprised by the castration of the Piranha. The Lmg was incredibly useful for shield-breaking and general PD purpose, the bomb arming time will also reduce the efficiency of their point blank bombing runs. It's not like it was a godly bomber to begin with, very situational (only works against slow enemies without flak) and dangerously prone to cause friendly fire, i'm not sure of the why of this nerf. Especially since the very strong Kopesh have been left untouched here.

So... Yeah, if that lmg doesn't come back, perhaps replacing it with something else? How about frag bombs, like in the old days? I remember the battlefield littered by random explosions looking very pretty.

I scratched my head a bit on this one, too. The Piranha is not intra-competitive with any of the other bombers but costs just as much. If it's the "poor man's" bomber, I guess I could understand the nerf but that would necessitate a OP cost of 5 or something. Alternatively, with the nerf, I think it could stand to go up to 4 bombers per wing. If all it's doing is carpet-bombing (with a bomb-delay no less), at least completely saturate the area. The LMG was the lone-saving grace vs. a Khopesh.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on May 25, 2017, 07:03:29 AM
I'm not sure Advanced Countermeasures should even exist to begin with, in light of these changes.
i gotta agree with this.

i think the reduced kinetic damage against armor and reduced HE damage against shields are just bad perks from a design perspective; making kinetic/HE even worse against the things they're already bad at doesn't seem like a great idea, especially since the numbers need to be pretty big to be worth spending a skill point on mitigating damage from what is already only a minor threat (relative to other damage types).

increased damage to missiles and fighters sounds fine to me, but problematic for the reasons Histidine mentioned when the number gets as large as +50% -- which, yes, it probably needs to be for a rank 3 perk.

if just removing the skill is undesirable, here are some other suggestions for what the different ranks could do:

i imagine some of these might not work well in practise, but i think there are enough possibilities to make an "Advanced Countermeasures" skill useful without its current balance and design issues.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 25, 2017, 07:19:52 AM
The only reason for me to think about Advanced Countermeasures is to give beam PD some much needed power, but spending three points for that is too high a cost.  Armor and shields are already quite effective against damage types they are good at, so I see no reason to spend a point on a frivolous benefit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: kobeathris on May 25, 2017, 07:23:28 AM
Any plans to make the Combat skill tree more appealing? As it stands, the other three seem to be outshining it pretty hard. Everyone I have spoken to says they don't use any Combat skills.

Not at the moment, no. I'd like to see how it shakes out later on; personally I think it's getting overlooked a bit right now because the new stuff is shiny while combat got a nerf. It's still quite good, though - I've played through with a combat character - so I think things may swing back in its direction a bit. Not entirely opposed to buffing it some, though.


Just wanted to chime in that in a play through to level 40 with a fairly even split between combat, leadership, and tech, slightly leaning toward combat, I found that I could accomplish quite a lot with 1 Eagle (Flagship), 2 Pirate Eagles (restored and with combat officers), 2 Sunders (No Officers, HIL), a Heron and a Drover (Both with Carrier officers).  My biggest problem was with high tech fleets, as I had to be really careful in dealing with phase ships, since I didn't have a good way to get rid of them quickly, and they can cause havoc. I would reload after failed battles to try again, but I was up to 270 to 300K (Legion flagship for one, Doom for another) bounties and heavily out numbered and still able to win with this setup. It would have been easier with a larger fleet, but not having to worry much about fuel and supplies was the trade off.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on May 25, 2017, 07:25:34 AM
I think Front/Makeshift Shield Generator comes with enough downsides to not need another one. Firstly it costs OP, secondly it opens the ship up to overloading which it can do easily with its low efficiency and the poor flux stats of the ships that can use it. In the AI's hands a Hound overloading with a few hits may well be less effective than one that doesn't and gets a few more shots in. Not to mention it's so narrow the shield may do nothing at all and end up just being wasted OP.

I understand where "it boosts their effectiveness relatively too much" comes from but that seems to be the point of MSG? The hullmod can only be equipped on a very select few ships, all of which happen to be loot pinatas in the hands of AIs and nigh-unusable in the hands of players. If MSG makes trash-tier ships garbage-tier instead it basically makes zero difference since they just end up not being used, so MSG may as well not exist.

Plus I think looking at relative effectiveness boosts is misleading. Taking Unstable Injectors as an example, a 15% range debuff for a Capital is IMO more crippling than the same debuff for a Frigate for various reasons. If MSG boosted trash-tier ships by 100% that doesn't make it too strong to exist because when you take into account the "various reasons": namely the ships that can use it are trash-tier: it's quite balanced. If the issue is that it becomes "mandatory" well... isn't that what's been done with ITU/DTC for most ships?



Also:

  • Colossus freighter now properly has the "civgrade" hullmod

Quote from: Embolism
Inb4 patch notes: fixed bug where the Colossus-class heavy freighter did not have the "Civilian-grade hull" hullmod.

Called it. :D



P.S. TT Brawler getting Plasma Jets is pretty cool, but it really needs those extra flux stats the description promises. If it's not possible to change this via skins then it should get built-in flux hullmods or maybe just be its own hull. That, or Energy weapons need their possible overhaul; especially if TT is going to be re-purposing more midlines (and also for existing midlines like Eagle/Falcon).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on May 25, 2017, 07:42:24 AM
MSG takes garbage-tier ships and makes them barely combat-worthy by giving them something all combat ships need to have. It's an OP tax. It shouldn't have a downside because it's an OP tax, just like DTC and ITU.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on May 25, 2017, 07:49:01 AM
This new acronym is making me hungry.

But yeah it's similar ITU/DTC for shieldless ships, and apparently ITU/DTC is actively encouraged to be mandatory aside from ships that clearly don't benefit from it. That seems quite similar to monosodium glutamate where it's near-mandatory (except not quite because it opens the ship up to flux-locking and overloading which may end up being worse than not having it for AIs) aside from ships that can't use it.

Plus hullmods now have a new balancing factor: rarity. ITU is "mandatory" but isn't available readily. MSG could be similar: if say it's available by about midgame, it may be thought of as something that keeps shieldless ships relevant as weaponry that chews through them becomes increasingly prevalent.



Also re: Venture.

Having built-in mining pods is fine: I get they're not meant to be good (although in that case I don't see much reason for them to be slottable either, they should probably be like Borers). The issue is it locks the Venture out of using Converted Hangars, and it seems weird that ships with no hangars at all can get superior carrier capacity than a ship that already has a half-hangar but cannot improve it in any way. You can't really cite "civilian ship" as a reason as every other civilian ship can get Converted Hangars to be better carriers than the Venture.

If it has to keep mining pods I think having two wings would help even things out, and not make it weirdly less effective than the Shepherd. 8x mining beams on a cruiser vs 6x on a frigate doesn't seem like it would break the bank.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: RawCode on May 25, 2017, 08:05:53 AM

Quote
Bounty level goes up with player level even if the player hasn't been doing bounties

one step closer to obvilion in space and difficulty slider.

Hardly, bounties are something you have to actively seek out.

keep level low and get money by other means - steamroll level scaled spawns like superhuman.
vs.
focus on non combat skills and suck really hard.
vs.
get high level but no heavy\powerfull ships and rageout.

it's probably fun, but in really it is not.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on May 25, 2017, 08:08:49 AM
I'm not sure Advanced Countermeasures should even exist to begin with, in light of these changes.
i gotta agree with this.

i think the reduced kinetic damage against armor and reduced HE damage against shields are just bad perks from a design perspective; making kinetic/HE even worse against the things they're already bad at doesn't seem like a great idea, especially since the numbers need to be pretty big to be worth spending a skill point on mitigating damage from what is already only a minor threat (relative to other damage types).

increased damage to missiles and fighters sounds fine to me, but problematic for the reasons Histidine mentioned when the number gets as large as +50% -- which, yes, it probably needs to be for a rank 3 perk.

if just removing the skill is undesirable, here are some other suggestions for what the different ranks could do:
  • retain higher armor damage reduction on exposed hull
  • convert a portion of all shield damage taken into soft flux rather than hard flux (should be a significant amount, since there's already a perk that completely negates 20% of all shield damage taken)
  • make some projectiles/missiles pass through unphased phase ships (or just reduce all damage taken), as long as cloak is not on cooldown (so it wouldn't make phase ships that recloak asap more annoying to fight)
  • increase range of PD weapons
  • increase accuracy / reduce recoil / improve target-leading of PD weapons
  • reduce flux of PD weapons (maybe by a flat amount, so low-flux PD weapons would become zero-flux)
  • increase firing rate of PD weapons (unlike damage boost, this would be visible to an opponent. but wouldn't really work for beams)
  • reduce speed/maneuverability of missiles locked onto this ship (this might also be problematic to communicate to the attacker though)
  • increased/guaranteed chance for flamed-out missiles to harmlessly bounce off this ship

i imagine some of these might not work well in practise, but i think there are enough possibilities to make an "Advanced Countermeasures" skill useful without its current balance and design issues.

It is useful because the AI doesn't focus damage types the way players do..
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on May 25, 2017, 08:17:56 AM
keep level low and get money by other means - steamroll level scaled spawns like superhuman.
vs.
focus on non combat skills and suck really hard.
vs.
get high level but no heavy\powerfull ships and rageout.
1. Impossible. There is no way to prevent leveling up; you can not spend your skill points, but you'll still level up. Additionally, this already happened if a player built up a large fleet through non-bounty means; no matter how large your fleet, you'd still start off fighting 3 Mudskipper MkIIs and a Kite (D). This change was made so this scenario you're predicting could happen, won't happen.
2. If you're doing a non-combat build, why are you doing bounties? Surveying, scanning, and scavenging exist now. How many points can you put into non-combat skills anyway, is it even possible to do a dedicated non-combat build?
3. If you got high level through non-bounty means, you can keep doing that while you wait for a "heavy" ship to spawn. If you got high level through doing bounties, the bounties would be scaling anyway, and thus you'd run into this problem anyway.

Additionally, the old system of bounty scaling isn't being removed. As you do bounties, they'll scale up like they did previously. All this does is prevent surveying magnates who want to get into bounty hunting from having to start by killing the aforementioned 3 Mudskippers and a Kite (D) fleet 3 times so the bounties start leveling up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 25, 2017, 08:50:55 AM
Just thought of something:  Aurora with Plasma Jets is actually faster than Medusa.  If I try to kite with Medusa (with Needlers and Ion Beam), Aurora will use Plasma Jets to charge and force the fight.  Phase Skimmer lets my Medusa escape, at first.  However, Plasma Jets recharge faster than Phase Skimmer and eventually, Medusa runs out of Phase Skimmer charges and cannot escape, then Aurora lays the smackdown fast and wins.

Thus, it may not be totally uncalled for Odyssey having 90 speed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on May 25, 2017, 09:15:39 AM
It is useful because the AI doesn't focus damage types the way players do..
that doesn't make it "useful", in the sense of being worth a skill point, it just means it has an effect at all... obviously it's balanced/designed with the assumption that inefficient damage types are being fired against the two defenses, yes. that doesn't change the fact that kinetic damage vs armor and HE damage vs shields are already by far the least threatening (excluding frag damage, which is intentionally niche).

if i didn't go off the assumption that the AI uses inefficient damage types, i wouldn't be discussing "balance and design issues" of these perks in the first place, because they would have literally zero effect. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on May 25, 2017, 09:17:20 AM
I feel the Medusa and, to some extent, the Wolf are falling behind. The Medusa isn't really the "deadly black ops destroyer" it's trumped up to be nowadays.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on May 25, 2017, 09:53:35 AM
I really liked the ideas from Sy about Advanced Countermeasures and agree that the current skill doesn't look that fun, so started a new thread with additional ideas/suggestions:  Thread  (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12491.0)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 25, 2017, 10:16:28 AM
I feel the Medusa and, to some extent, the Wolf are falling behind. The Medusa isn't really the "deadly black ops destroyer" it's trumped up to be nowadays.
They are fairly good against most things in their weight class, but they cannot punch above their weight like they used to.  That said, I agree they no longer evoke fear.  If anything, Drover is the new Medusa or destroyer heavyweight.  Just give Drover Broadswords and Warthogs as its "weapons", slap Expended Deck Crew, Extended Shields, and Unstable Injector for hullmods.  Just kite and spam its Reserve Deployment system, and watch Drover's fighters shred frigates or punch above its weight like Medusa and Enforcer used to do.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 25, 2017, 10:17:44 AM
My concern here is: You get things like HVD/Gauss Cannon being moderately effective against some ships' armor while doing nearly nothing to other, visually identical ships, without a readily available indicator of why this should be the case. Likewise with sending fighters against a ship and them Doing Something or getting swatted like flies.

The invisibility aspect is true of many other buffs. But at least with something like a ship having the zero flux bonus with its shield up or its missiles flying faster, the player can easily see what's going on even if they don't know why. The damage calculation is completely hidden except for the final output. And unlike, say, Heavy Armor, the bonus from Advanced Countermeasures doesn't even appear on the stats card.

I think this is more an argument for more transparency of the officers skills in combat, not for excluding stat buffing skills (of which many are "invisible"). If you could open this window
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/8iCddVC.png)
[close]
during battle, that would enable you to make informed decisions on how to handle a threat. Or if that's too much information, it could be compressed in single phrase, e.g. carrier specialist/offense specialist/defense specialist/all-rounder.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: grinningsphinx on May 25, 2017, 10:20:11 AM
Aint no one gonna be using Piranha now.  They are worth precisely zero OP as stands now, on par with the nerfed Talons.  Overall, good patch and thank you, but there are several things ill be changing back right away as i *vastly* disagree with new scores or implementation.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on May 25, 2017, 10:39:05 AM
Aint no one gonna be using Piranha now.  They are worth precisely zero OP as stands now, on par with the nerfed Talons.  Overall, good patch and thank you, but there are several things ill be changing back right away as i *vastly* disagree with new scores or implementation.



I think it really depends on if we can get the bombs to hit target better than they are in this version.

Idea: Instead of the bombs releasing straight forward, release multiple bombs at a time: some go straight forward, but some have a decent sideways component. This makes it harder for the target ship to dodge everything.

It also makes Piranhas uniquely effective in attacking multiple ships at once that are in a "death ball" formation. Even with some spread the target ship will dodge most of them, but there will be so much ordinance that the other ships will ALSO need to dodge or turn their shields.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 25, 2017, 10:43:27 AM
I'm not sure Advanced Countermeasures should even exist to begin with, in light of these changes.
Spoiler
My concern here is: You get things like HVD/Gauss Cannon being moderately effective against some ships' armor while doing nearly nothing to other, visually identical ships, without a readily available indicator of why this should be the case. Likewise with sending fighters against a ship and them Doing Something or getting swatted like flies.

The invisibility aspect is true of many other buffs. But at least with something like a ship having the zero flux bonus with its shield up or its missiles flying faster, the player can easily see what's going on even if they don't know why. The damage calculation is completely hidden except for the final output. And unlike, say, Heavy Armor, the bonus from Advanced Countermeasures doesn't even appear on the stats card.
[close]

There's a bunch of other stuff like this from other skills: -20% damage against armor, +15% damage to shields, etc. But, yeah, ok, this is more extreme. Hmm.


i think the reduced kinetic damage against armor and reduced HE damage against shields are just bad perks from a design perspective; making kinetic/HE even worse against the things they're already bad at doesn't seem like a great idea, especially since the numbers need to be pretty big to be worth spending a skill point on mitigating damage from what is already only a minor threat (relative to other damage types).

Design-wise, the idea is having this skill rewards "playing well" (i.e. taking the right damage on the right defenses) even more. It's a point that it's probably not very compelling unless the numbers get quite high, though.


  • retain higher armor damage reduction on exposed hull
  • convert a portion of all shield damage taken into soft flux rather than hard flux (should be a significant amount, since there's already a perk that completely negates 20% of all shield damage taken)
  • make some projectiles/missiles pass through unphased phase ships (or just reduce all damage taken), as long as cloak is not on cooldown (so it wouldn't make phase ships that recloak asap more annoying to fight)
  • increase range of PD weapons
  • increase accuracy / reduce recoil / improve target-leading of PD weapons
  • reduce flux of PD weapons (maybe by a flat amount, so low-flux PD weapons would become zero-flux)
  • increase firing rate of PD weapons (unlike damage boost, this would be visible to an opponent. but wouldn't really work for beams)
  • reduce speed/maneuverability of missiles locked onto this ship (this might also be problematic to communicate to the attacker though)
  • increased/guaranteed chance for flamed-out missiles to harmlessly bounce off this ship

Some interesting ideas here, nice.


Quote
Damper Field: damage reduction down to 50% (from 67%), charge regen rate halved (1 per 20 seconds)
If we're going with the nerf as stated (rather than only reducing charge regen, or making the damage reduction scale with hull size, as suggested in that other thread), Brawler and Centurion could stand to receive a compensatory buff perhaps. Centurion in particular doesn't seem to have a combat role at present other than "be annoying to kill".

Maybe the Centurion could just do with a cost reduction - "being annoying to kill" seems like a reasonable role for an escort frigate. Hmm.


On FSG: If it's going to inflict such a huge speed penalty I'd say it needs some other buff, like lower upkeep cost (i.e. not ~100 f/s on a Hound). (Or make it cost 0 OP ::))
Spoiler
Perhaps having it vs. not having it was indeed far too dramatic a change for the ships it goes on.

But now I can think of exactly one case where I'd bother using it now: HVD/Mauler sniper Hounds that need to not die to Tactical Laser/Swarmer SRM return fire. For just about any other build, things that don't have a shield and need it to survive... need a 25% speed reduction scarcely any more (Buffalo Mk. II) or arguably even less (Hound, Cerberus). I haven't had a reason to field these ships (with or without shields) in my games as it is, not when I can just get proper warships and cargo haulers in their place.
[close]
(and other responses re: MSG)

1) Good call about the upkeep cost, lowered it to .5 (was .75).

2) Played around with it a bit, and it seems decent. Added a Hound and Cerberus variants using MSG and an Arbalest (thanks, Voyager I) to pirate fleets, and they're quite decent. I think overall it'll increase survivability in the context of a larger garbage-ball while reducing it when facing larger numbers of enemies (where speed becomes important). You're probably not going to want to keep using them past the early-midgame, but imo that's alright.

Plus hullmods now have a new balancing factor: rarity. ITU is "mandatory" but isn't available readily. MSG could be similar: if say it's available by about midgame, it may be thought of as something that keeps shieldless ships relevant as weaponry that chews through them becomes increasingly prevalent.

The goal is to make it available early, since by mid-late game, MSG or not, those ships aren't going to be super useful in combat.


Interdiction Pulse. It's cool to see a more aggressive campaign ability. But I'm confused. Is it for stopping fleets from catching you, or stopping fleets from getting away from you?

Some "stopping fleets from catching you", and some "ambushing fleets heading towards you"; not so much "getting away from you" since it'll have no effect on anything heading away. It'll also make using Sustained Burn around enemy fleets rather more dangerous.



Quote
New bounties will not spawn near where the player is

It's weird to see world rotate around player that obviously. Plus, it was nice to get extra income for surprise double bounty.

It's only obvious if you're reading the patch notes. Perhaps a better way to put it, in the patch notes, would have been "stopped bounty fleets from occasionally spawning in the same system the player is in, which was confusing and felt weird".


Maybe it should depend on relative sizes of fleets (both chance to interrupt SB/EB and burn level reduction. With cutoff to 0% if casting fleet is too small)? Having single frigate stop Onslaught armada in it's tracks doesn't feel right.
And would be annoying to no end if spammed by small fleets that like to swarm around player due to being too weak to attack directly.

Yeah, I'm still looking at the details here. There's definitely potential for annoyance.


Do they have nerfed swarmers like Talons?

Yes.



Quote
Bounty level goes up with player level even if the player hasn't been doing bounties

one step closer to obvilion in space and difficulty slider.

Just to make sure I was clear, already-posted bounties won't scale up with player level. It's only newly-posted bounties that are affected.


That's only the theory though. I think testing against an Odyssey would be more important than testing as an Odyssey to avoid making it unfun.

It's still not super maneuverable, and since it doesn't have a mobility system, I don't think chasing it down would be too much of a problem. Especially given that by the time you're facing one, you've got the resources to invest into any one of a number of faster options - it's not like, say, the Hyperion, where you're just not going to be able to chase it down no matter what. But yeah, it's a good point re: looking at it from the other direction.


Honestly, the AI running around with S-Burn just seems incredibly scary to me. The AI S-Burn buff (no more sensor penalties), combined with the transverse jump and e-burn nerf, will make escaping patrols absolute hell. I mean, how does one even escape from an AI fleet at 18 burn? Is the only option just to S-Burn as well to get away? Is it possible to E-Burn out of sensor range during the AI's S-Burn windup? Is the T-Jump delay short enough to allow for a T-Jump while the AI windsup its S-Burn?

The think to keep in mind is SB fleets have low acceleration and are much easier to dodge by just moving sideways. Also, Inderdiction Pulse more or less hard-counters SB as a pursuit tool.


Hi Alex, I was wondering if there are any user interface changes looking to be added in the new update? I feel like a toggle feature for speeding up time and (in combat) ships facing the mouse would be really ergonomic and fab for taking the strain off some tired fingers ^^*.

No, sorry! For combat, though, there's already a setting to invert shift behavior, so that may be of use to you.



The problem with Heavy Mauler (and HVD) is it is too rare except maybe by endgame.  Heavy Mauler is rare enough that I usually reload the game if I lose a ship with them.  It is easier for me to replace or recover most ships than Heavy Mauler.

HVD, sure, but I've had a lot more luck picking up Heavy Maulers. Maybe a bit more than average on that particular playthrough.


Lux losing half speed for IR Pulse Laser, why?  They were not very strong offensively, and they are more expensive than Sparks.  With that change, I might ignore Lux and stick with Broadswords.

It was entirely too good in terms of damage output. Just spamming Lux wings would maul things, and mauling things isn't a heavy fighter's job.


Just as 0.8 made them finally worth using. I don't think I'll ever prefer a Piranha to Khopesh/Dagger after this change.
Re: Piranha.  They would become the low-grade guns of bombers.  (Actually, they already are, but at least they are effective.)  Only good to put on disposable ships if you cannot afford to lose better bomber chips.

They still have the highest damage potential out of all bombers, so I think they'll still have a niche vs larger targets. If you're mainly fighting destroyers or faster cruisers, then yeah, the other bombers will do better, but that's the point - that it was competitive against smaller targets was the problem.

That said, they could possibly use an OP cost reduction, maybe to 8. I'll take a look.

Idea: Instead of the bombs releasing straight forward, release multiple bombs at a time: some go straight forward, but some have a decent sideways component. This makes it harder for the target ship to dodge everything.

It also makes Piranhas uniquely effective in attacking multiple ships at once that are in a "death ball" formation. Even with some spread the target ship will dodge most of them, but there will be so much ordinance that the other ships will ALSO need to dodge or turn their shields.

I'll take a quick look and see how that goes. IIRC I tried something similar and it didn't pan out but I'm not 100% sure on why or even if I did.


Just wanted to chime in that in a play through to level 40 with a fairly even split between combat, leadership, and tech, slightly leaning toward combat, I found that I could accomplish quite a lot with 1 Eagle (Flagship), 2 Pirate Eagles (restored and with combat officers), 2 Sunders (No Officers, HIL), a Heron and a Drover (Both with Carrier officers).  My biggest problem was with high tech fleets, as I had to be really careful in dealing with phase ships, since I didn't have a good way to get rid of them quickly, and they can cause havoc. I would reload after failed battles to try again, but I was up to 270 to 300K (Legion flagship for one, Doom for another) bounties and heavily out numbered and still able to win with this setup. It would have been easier with a larger fleet, but not having to worry much about fuel and supplies was the trade off.

Thank you! Good to know, yeah.


I really liked the ideas from Sy about Advanced Countermeasures and agree that the current skill doesn't look that fun, so started a new thread with additional ideas/suggestions:  Thread  (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12491.0)

Cool, will check that out :)


Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on May 25, 2017, 12:13:51 PM
I can already see the addition of AI S Burn and the I Pulse being annoying at best and infuriating at the worst. And cheese-able as well.
How far off course does someone need to be before they are unaffected by the pulse? How far out does it reach? Does the AI have some built in reaction time to avoid it?
I can see this ability and S Burn for the AI making pirating unfun and impossible to be profitable due to the nature of everything. How would one take down a trade convoy when it is going at burn 18 and the Pulse has a charge time?

Now that E Burn has half the duration, have the costs been reduced or the acceleration increased? If not then I can see this becoming more and more an AI only ability, even with the no CR loss skill
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 25, 2017, 01:03:33 PM
Quote
Maybe the Centurion could just do with a cost reduction - "being annoying to kill" seems like a reasonable role for an escort frigate. Hmm.
The problem is that both Centurion and Brawler are hard to kill, can stop bigger things and are reasonable escorts (Centurion is better for PD duties, while Brawler will stop bigger ships due to having guns). The main difference is that Brawler has an overwhelming firepower, while Centurion has very little of it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: zaimoni on May 25, 2017, 01:54:33 PM
One of the highest-utility early-game micro-management orders that doesn't belong in SS is "exactly one of you, eliminate that target".  Use specifically for Hound/Cerebus/Mudskipper Mk II, all of which only need one AI Wolf or AI Lasher to erase if they don't have an FSG.
Select the ship or ships you want to kill the target, then right-click on the target. This will give an eliminate order that only the selected ships will follow. This also works for escort orders.
I need right-clicking on the target to be an operation, for that.  It's a no-op on the machine I play SS on.  Shields toggle fine, but no other right-click does a thing in either tactical or strategic views.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on May 25, 2017, 02:06:05 PM
I put an Odyssey's speed to 90 and decided to test a couple of ships against it, and yeah, it's kind of aggravating to have a ship with such a strong omnishield be able to constantly reset, especially thanks to the capital peak performance time. It is however interesting to see the odd one out (HEH) of the vanilla capital ships get some attention. I would like to see a sprite overhaul sometime too : V
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hussar on May 25, 2017, 02:36:02 PM
It won't make it any less a god-ability - but it's good to see change like this in my opinion. That hovever - if attacked - what happens after battle? Will fleet be able to do a transverse jump upon victory or successful disengage? If victorious, will we be scavenging and then making the jump?
It's interrupted if there were hostilities.

The question then is: "Upon successful disengagement from a forced battle, is it possible to load up the transverse jump again BEFORE the invulnerability period comes off?".
I think we should.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 25, 2017, 02:41:26 PM
... Shields toggle fine, but no other right-click does a thing in either tactical or strategic views.

That's... super weird.

The question then is: "Upon successful disengagement from a forced battle, is it possible to load up the transverse jump again BEFORE the invulnerability period comes off?".
I think we should.

Oh, I see - not before invulnerability, since that's super short, but I think the other fleets will be "standing down" for long enough that you should be able to.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 25, 2017, 05:03:07 PM
Oh hey!  Random thought of the moment: if we'll actually be able to mod in multi-part ships in 0.8.1, how will that interact with phasing cloaks?  If I give the main ship a phasing cloak, will it phase out its modules with it?  If I give a module a phasing cloak... does that even work?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 25, 2017, 05:19:16 PM
Just off the top of my head, they'd probably all be able to phase independently of each other.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hussar on May 25, 2017, 05:28:30 PM
The question then is: "Upon successful disengagement from a forced battle, is it possible to load up the transverse jump again BEFORE the invulnerability period comes off?".
I think we should.
Oh, I see - not before invulnerability, since that's super short, but I think the other fleets will be "standing down" for long enough that you should be able to.

Guess we'll have to see. If you agree with me on this, it can always get fixed in next patch if it proves to be a problem. Since not always you get all fleets to stand down, as sometimes few fleets tries to gang up on you but they don't do it together (like they can be literally pixels away from joining, so they don't get affected and force another battle in matter of seconds). Hence why my questions.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 25, 2017, 06:14:28 PM
Quote from: Alex
HVD, sure, but I've had a lot more luck picking up Heavy Maulers. Maybe a bit more than average on that particular playthrough.
For Mauler, I guess it depends on who I am friends with.  If I go without commission, and I do not visit too many Black Markets, then access to Mauler is limited.  Black Market occasionally carries the Mauler, but only like one or two at a time.  I cannot stockpile lots of them like I can with other weapons.  HVD is like Mauler except I see even less at Black Markets (although I can farm those from stronger Remnants if I want).

If I took commission from someone like Hegemony, or fight their fleets constantly, I probably would find many more Maulers to use.

Quote from: Alex
It was entirely too good in terms of damage output. Just spamming Lux wings would maul things, and mauling things isn't a heavy fighter's job.
I could not believe that, so I just tried three wings (and three other wings later), and they seem just slightly behind Sparks at killing things (my test subject was a Falcon).  Broadswords had trouble chewing through armor.  Warthogs were better but they were a bit slower and cost more OP.  Lux or Sparks chewed up Falcon faster.  Okay, I underestimated their offense.  Lux are good, better than I thought, but Sparks still kill most things a bit faster than Lux (at least with three wings of either).  If anything, that just shows how good Sparks are and I should farm Sparks instead of Lux (due to Sparks killing faster and cost less OP) if I had to choose which chips to loot and scum for general purpose assault if I cannot get both.  Lux would be good if I needed something that can survive swarming an Onslaught a bit longer, but if I need sub-capitals dead fast, Sparks would be my go-to between that and Lux.

I expect "fighters" to fight and maul things at least as well as interceptors, just be slower but beefier.  I would not expect "fighters" to be decoys or jokers that are only good for playing distracting jokes on the enemy until the wizards/artillery unload on the target.  I expect fighters to stab the enemy dead, not play linebacker for the wizard until he casts the "I Win" button spell.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 25, 2017, 06:39:24 PM
Lux are good, better than I thought, but Sparks still kill most things a bit faster than Lux

Right - almost as good as the most OP fighter in the game by far, which also lost half its offense :)

I expect "fighters" to fight and maul things at least as well as interceptors, just be slower but beefier.  I would not expect "fighters" to be decoys or jokers that are only good for playing distracting jokes on the enemy until the wizards/artillery unload on the target.  I expect fighters to stab the enemy dead, not play linebacker for the wizard until he casts the "I Win" button spell.

That's fair in general, but wrong for Starsector. In general, I don't think durable fighters that can also deal decent damage work at all, because they're too good in the sense that it's unavoidable damage with no risk to the carrier. Interceptors are fragile but can deal damage; bomber damage can be shot down, while heavy fighters don't have a similar method by which their damage can be mitigated. It pretty much inescapably has to be poor.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on May 25, 2017, 07:16:45 PM
The terminology should be changed. Except for Warthog and classic Lux, none of the "heavy" fighters are actually heavy anything. (Well, okay, only Broadsword and new Lux are actually not-truly-heavy)
They're primarily flare-droppers; "support fighter" would be more accurate.

I think there might be room for a true "heavy fighter" wing, which acts like a frigate substitute that can be replaced in combat. Balancing factors could include being slow, large (big enough that anti-ship weapons are effective against them), having a short leash range, and/or having a long replacement time and large impact on replacement rate.
So we could have a scenario where a few wings of heavy fighters are a potent threat to medium-sized ships, but they won't last forever and once they die the carrier won't be doing anything useful for a while. It'd also take time for the wing to reach its target, and the carrier will have to get close enough that it risks counterattack by enemy frigates/fighters.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: 2_Wycked on May 25, 2017, 07:18:05 PM
I don't see any notes about the factions so is it safe to assume Hegemony is staying as the "starting" faction with TT only opening up to players after a lot AI core trading / bounties? Have you thought about giving us the option to take a commission with any faction during a new game?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 25, 2017, 07:35:01 PM
Like Histidine says, if "heavy fighters" will be distractors and jokers, "support fighter" would be a more apt label, much like Xyphos is when highlighted in the codex.

I can imagine newbie or someone less familiar with the game mechanics thinking "Heavy fighter? Cool!  Let's watch them kill things?  Why are they making a pretty mahou shoujo light show and not killing anything?  This sucks!"  More like wrong expectations from a misleading label.

A true heavy or super fighter as Histidine says could be fun.  Closest the game has now is the Terminator drone.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on May 25, 2017, 07:40:09 PM
The terminology should be changed. Except for Warthog and classic Lux, none of the "heavy" fighters are actually heavy anything. They're primarily flare-droppers; "support fighter" would be more accurate.
The "heavy" role in fighters is currently perfectly defined - pretty much any fighter with flares.  There can be Heavy Interceptors like the Gladius or Heavy Fighters like the Broadsword.  In reall life, heavy fighters were generally larger fighters designed to have longer range and have heavier armament to escort friendly bombers or take down enemy ones.  The "heavy" typically indicates a job to distract enemy point-defense.  The target of said enemy point defense can vary depending on the main role - Fighters focus on enemy ships, Interceptor on enemy fighters, for example.

The fighter archetype you're thinking of is probably a "fighter-bomber", which is essentially a fighter armed with bigger armament capable of engaging targets larger than itself - like ground targets such as tanks or bunkers or naval targets such as ships (though not as dedicated or as big as bombers or torpedo bombers like the Lancaster bomber or the B5N "Kate" torpedo bomber) .  Stuff like the P-47 Thunderbolt with an armament of nearly a dozen rockets would class in that.  The Thunder (before the 0.8.1a patch with a total change in it's armament) could be pretty well classified as a "fighter-bomber" with it's Harpoon and Ion Cannon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: AxleMC131 on May 25, 2017, 08:29:48 PM
The "heavy" role in fighters is currently perfectly defined - pretty much any fighter with flares.  There can be Heavy Interceptors like the Gladius or Heavy Fighters like the Broadsword...

The fighter archetype you're thinking of is probably a "fighter-bomber", which is essentially a fighter armed with bigger armament capable of engaging targets larger than itself ...  The Thunder (before the 0.8.1a patch with a totaly change in it's armament) could be pretty well classified as a "fighter-bomber" with it's Harpoon and Ion Cannon.

This basically matches my understanding, yeah. Conversely, a "Support Fighter" (like what the Longbow used to be classed as or the Xyphos now is) is a fighter designed to hang close to a larger ship and providing supporting fire or additional point defence.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on May 25, 2017, 08:38:44 PM
This basically matches my understanding, yeah. Conversely, a "Support Fighter" (like what the Longbow used to be classed as or the Xyphos now is) is a fighter designed to hang close to a larger ship and providing supporting fire or additional point defence.
Indeed.  Finding an Aurora with triple Phase Lances and SABOTs and as many Vents and Capacitors as I can fit on it with Converted Hangers and a Xyphos to be surprisingly effective.  I nuke the shields and hull while the Xyphos takes care of point-defense and making the enemy ship incapable of fighting back.  The description for the Xyphos is rather fitting right now, same as the rest of the Heavy Fighters.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Mazuo on May 25, 2017, 08:47:36 PM
Love the right-click for destinations in empty space addition.  Was about to suggest it myself until I saw the notes.

In regard to the makeshift generator, has it already been tried with crappy stats for shield damage/flux, upkeep etc. instead of the speed nerf?  Seems like it'd still be nice for unshielded ships on the edge of usefulness but the concern of it easily overloading would balance it somewhat.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on May 25, 2017, 09:56:22 PM
(big enough that anti-ship weapons are effective against them)


This just reminded me (and I should probably post this somewhere else but it's super late and I'm exhausted) I've seen REDACTED ships fire plasma cannons at my spark fighters and miss and end up blasting their own ships. AI should probably give extra weight to "allied ships behind this fighter if I miss" when considering firing heavy weapons like that
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on May 25, 2017, 09:58:34 PM
(big enough that anti-ship weapons are effective against them)


This just reminded me (and I should probably post this somewhere else but it's super late and I'm exhausted) I've seen REDACTED ships fire plasma cannons at my spark fighters and miss and end up blasting their own ships. AI should probably give extra weight to "allied ships behind this fighter if I miss" when considering firing heavy weapons like that
or flat out have the Plasma get a strike tag. I remember having to add that in, in .72
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on May 25, 2017, 10:02:10 PM
The way I see it there's currently five roles for strike craft in SS.



Bombers: self-explanatory. Should generally be more effective against larger ships.


Interceptors: anti-bomber and anti-ordnance, so in theory a defensive fighter type. Currently they're far more offensive than they should be, essentially being light assault fighters. May change next patch.


Assault Fighters: bit harder to define. In theory they should be like bombers in that they're meant to fight ships, maybe with more focus against smaller rather than larger ships. In practice the traditional SS assault fighter - the Warthog - had always been slow and unable to catch nimble vessels, making interceptors better at the role. A better role for these might be that of a corvette, bridging the gap between strike craft and frigates. They'd be well-armed and difficult to destroy but vulnerable to heavier ship weaponry.


Support Fighters: to my mind this means strike craft that can potentially outrange their target ships, so things like Xyphos, Longbow and maybe Khopesh. A better term might be "close support" fighter. I'd classify the Claw as more of an assault fighter, even an interceptor if you disregard the fact it can't shoot down ordnance.


Heavy Fighters: their job is to open the way for bombers by softening up targets, distracting PD and chasing away interceptors. In practice they do the first two okay but aren't that good at dealing with interceptors, and in any case current interceptors seem more interested in assaulting enemy ships rather than neutralising bomber threats. A lot of blurring between this and the assault fighter role, to the point where the assault fighter may not truly exist anymore: which may be what Alex wants, since assault fighters by definition should work well without having to mix in other strike craft types.



I think the Gladius is very much lost in translation. It was originally more of an assault fighter, now it's... kinda-sorta assault with a half-assed attempt at playing heavy, with the end result that it does nothing well. It also became a Thunder-wannabe which IMO doesn't fit its look: whereas the Thunder looks sleek and fast, the Gladius looks almost awkward. IMO it should return to being a slower, heavily armed and heavily armoured assault fighter. Its current non-role is weird.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on May 25, 2017, 10:24:40 PM
@Embolish
Interceptors aren't exactly the most well-armed fighters - usually they've got a large number of lightly armored craft in their wing, but only one or two weapons per fighter at most.  The Talon and Sparks are incredibly OP right now, even Alex admitted that (and nerfed them), so leave that out of your calculations. :) They can be used offensively or defensively, in any anti-fighter capacity, which is fitting.

Assault Fighters here pretty much take up the role of anti-ship fighters that aren't dedicated bombers.  Lots of armor, heavy ordnance (for a fighter), and possibly something else.  Currently the only Assault Fighter we have is the Warthog, so we can't really tell what the "possibly something else is", as the Warthog's is flares -speaking of, if you ask me, the Warthog is a tad bit OP because it takes the dedicated Heavy Fighters flare and simply walks with it while being better in nearly every respect.  Single flares would probably be better, or a different ship system entirely.

Heavy Fighters aren't exactly the best at taking down ships; the Lux, Broadsword, etc. don't have much stopping power (though they do have more firepower per fighter than Interceptors) -
 Warthogs have a definite advantage over them with triple Light Mortars on each craft.  Their main role, far as I can tell, is to take hits and attract attention to make way for the bombers.  Reasonable and venerable role, if not a tad bit dicey for the pilots. ;)

Speaking of the Gladius, I think it's intended role is (as it says on the tin) to be an Interceptor - but not just any, a Heavy Interceptor.  I'm assuming here Alex intended the single-use flares on it to be deployed when engaging a group of other Interceptors so the flares attract their weapon's fire (which are usually PD) while the MGs and IR Pulse Lasers eat into them.  Very, very niche (possibly too niche - only works against other enemy Interceptors), and though I haven't tested it, I don't feel it would be very effective.  It needs a change.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 25, 2017, 10:57:35 PM
Actually, when I open the codex and play around... we don't have anything that's classed as an assault fighter?  Is that a bug?  And the Claw's description says it's a support fighter, but it's listed in the codex as a heavy fighter?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on May 26, 2017, 01:18:21 AM
Why would Front Shield Generator lower the top speed?
(As in both gameplay reason and lore-wise description)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on May 26, 2017, 01:37:29 AM
Why would Front Shield Generator lower the top speed?
(As in both gameplay reason and lore-wise description)

Fluff: Power is reallocated from engines.
Gameplay: To prevent Hounds from kiting with Mauler/HVD.

I'm not saying it's a good decision though. Hounds have horrible flux stats, then you add inefficient shield that costs OP + OP-expensive weapon... Results were mediocre at best even before speed nerf.
Plus frigate swarms are twice obsolete anyway (due to 10 officers limit in combat and SB/EB making their burn advantage unimportant for campaign).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: AxleMC131 on May 26, 2017, 01:46:42 AM
Actually, when I open the codex and play around... we don't have anything that's classed as an assault fighter?  Is that a bug?  And the Claw's description says it's a support fighter, but it's listed in the codex as a heavy fighter?

Yeah, the tags and codex tabs need a definite cleanup.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 26, 2017, 05:22:35 AM
When I tested killing times for various fighters, Gladius were dying left and right.  Sparks and Lux killed the fastest.  Warthogs were slower.  Broadswords were really slow, but they killed the Falcon on their own.  Gladius just drained the replacement rate on my Heron.

Probably re-do the tests and remember peak performance time left on Heron more aside from comparisons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 26, 2017, 12:13:33 PM
Just a small QoL thing I've just though about: maintenance value gets changed when you have Fleet Logistics, while fuel/ly is unchanged when you get Navigation level 2. I'm not sure, but probably that's because technically tooltip value is also jump into hyperspace cost, but I think that it wouldn't be that wrong if -25% fuel reduction applied to jump too (so tooltip can have reduced value) or to have jump cost unchanged while tooltip value is changed (because jump cost is a fraction of fuel cost to get anywhere).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: zeno on May 26, 2017, 01:06:14 PM
Quote
Ox-class Tug:

    Improves fleetwide burn by 1, cumulative with other tugs, not limited by its own burn level
    High sensor profile
    Base burn is 8
    Uses 10 fuel per light-year and 10 supplies per month (but only 5 supplies to deploy)
    Costs 40% CR to deploy (which brings down the cost to regain full CR, especially when recovered)

If I'm understanding this change correctly, it's to provide an option to make capital/cruiser fleets faster, with a hefty fuel cost.  But I think this unfairly punishes destroyer heavy fleets that try to remain fuel efficient.

For example, consider the following fleet composition:
- 1x cruiser flagship of choice
- 4x sunder/hammerhead/drovers w/ officers
- 3-5x beam wolves
- 2-3x buffalos
- 1x Ox
- optional: a few shepherds

A fleet like this can take on any bounty, survey, or salvage well into the late-game, chiefly due to the player-controlled cruiser acting as the heavy-puncher in combat.  In terms of cargo it's not as efficient as the larger freighters, but the trade off is that you can maintain a 9-burn max fleet speed with a single tug to offset the cruiser.

With the new Ox, this is no longer economical as 2x tugs (+20 fuel/ly!) are needed to bring the fleet up to 9-burn, at which point you might as well have a couple of of cruiser-class freighters and tankers.  This can have the lopsided result of large fleets with cruiser/capitals zipping around faster than small/medium fleets, as large fleet has the cargo space to shrug off the added logistical burden of 2-3 tugs.  IMO it basically makes destroyer-heavy expedition fleets obsolete.

One option is to leave the Ox as is, and introduce a destroyer (or maybe even cruiser) tugship that has the new fleet-wide behavior and even higher costs.  Has something like this been considered?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on May 26, 2017, 01:15:59 PM
The Ox buffs its own burn speed, so you'd need only one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: zeno on May 26, 2017, 02:41:16 PM
Even 1 Ox at +10 fuel/ly is still super costly for smaller fleet.  The fleet I posted needs 20-25 fuel/ly total currently, with the new Ox it'd result in almost a 50% increase in fuel consumption.

Ultimately, it's more of a logistical cost than a monetary one.  It disproportionally punishes smaller fleets that can't afford to haul as much fuel around, but big fleets don't have that problem.  Especially since the big fleets will be able to burn at higher speeds, and so will have a much easier time catching hostile detachments to take their fuel/supplies, instead of spending money to buy at markets.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 26, 2017, 02:59:16 PM
Hm.  Could we make the Ox instead of having a huge fuel cost itself, instead increase the fuel usage of every ship it's providing a benefit to?

Say, 15% per burn rating a ship is being boosted by.  So if you've got three tugs in your fleet, and an overall fleet burn rating of 10, then ships with a natural burn rate of 10+ would see no fuel use penalty, those with 9 would have a 15% fuel use penalty, those with 8 (including all three tugs) would see a 30% increase in fuel used, and those with 7 would be penalized by all three tugs for 45% extra fuel usage.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 26, 2017, 03:05:56 PM
I think Alex doesn't want that because he'd rather have burn levels a commitment, so you won't see destroyers on burn 10 fleet, you won't see any cruiser but falcon at burn 9 and so on.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Harmful Mechanic on May 26, 2017, 03:13:23 PM
One for the patch: occasionally I'll run into derelict ships or Domain probes and survey ships in asteroid fields that orbit a point so closely (we're probably talking an orbit value of 20 or less) that they just wibble-wobble around in a circle. This looks, to put it mildly, really silly. Might be good to put a minimum distance or maximum speed or both on that orbit value.

Also, found a procgen system that had three planetary systems clearly of the same template (ice giant with rocky unstable world and rings):
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/zFjqTiA.png)
Not a concern so much as funny, but it did mess with the illusion just a bit.
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 26, 2017, 03:31:11 PM
  • Ox-class Tug:
    • Improves fleetwide burn by 1, cumulative with other tugs, not limited by its own burn level
I think Alex doesn't want that because he'd rather have burn levels a commitment, so you won't see destroyers on burn 10 fleet, you won't see any cruiser but falcon at burn 9 and so on.
So in other words: what you describe as something we won't see... is already (planned to be) in the game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 26, 2017, 04:24:17 PM
Quote
Unstable Injector:
Reduced range penalty to 15% (was 25%)
Reduced speed bonus to 25/20/15/15
This could be more useful for normal ships.  At least carriers will not be able to abuse this as much, since they are unaffected by the range penalty.

I started experimenting with more carriers (other than Drover) with only fighters as weapons.  Due to how powerful carriers are, it turns out carriers can still kite-and-snipe as conventional warships used to do.  Just "snipe" with fighters.  If anything, it is similar to the infinite Salamander and infinite Fast Missile Racks combo during that one patch.

I will probably start another topic about carriers after I draft my post later.  For now, I tried soloing the simulator with an Astral (and Sparx) with a character optimized for carriers instead of a generalist.  I still could not solo it, but there were only nine enemy ships left before CR decayed to zero, and it did better than Paragon.  That same Astral managed to solo the hero battlestation, and it did not need to abuse Gunnery Implants and Electronic Warfare to do it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on May 26, 2017, 04:53:45 PM
Can you buy and attach/swap modules in refit screen?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 26, 2017, 04:58:21 PM
Can you buy and attach/swap modules in refit screen?
Nope.  Modules have to be built-in.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on May 26, 2017, 04:59:56 PM
Will they come back when you restore the ship, though?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Inventor Raccoon on May 26, 2017, 05:05:14 PM
Modules regenerate as the parent ship repairs its hull and CR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on May 26, 2017, 05:12:56 PM
The ones detached in-combat too?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on May 26, 2017, 08:46:04 PM
Can we define alternate module payloads with skins? e.g. a carrier skin for the REDACTED battlestation with 6 hangar modules.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Inventor Raccoon on May 27, 2017, 06:26:41 AM
Can we define alternate module payloads with skins? e.g. a carrier skin for the REDACTED battlestation with 6 hangar modules.
Yeah. All of a station's modules are defined in its .variant file, so you can have multiple layouts for the same station. Just have to make a new .variant, put it in the REDACTED faction file, and hopefully it'll spawn sometimes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: kobeathris on May 27, 2017, 07:45:27 AM
Weird bug to report, and if it is already addressed, sorry for missing it.

When fighting Salvage fleets that go pirate (I THINK that is only when this happens) I frequently (always?) see weapon group #2, which should be autofire, start combat as manual, and I have to toggle it back to autofire.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 27, 2017, 10:42:16 AM
One for the patch: occasionally I'll run into derelict ships or Domain probes and survey ships in asteroid fields that orbit a point so closely (we're probably talking an orbit value of 20 or less) that they just wibble-wobble around in a circle. This looks, to put it mildly, really silly. Might be good to put a minimum distance or maximum speed or both on that orbit value.

THank you, fixed that up.

Also, found a procgen system that had three planetary systems clearly of the same template (ice giant with rocky unstable world and rings):
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/zFjqTiA.png)
Not a concern so much as funny, but it did mess with the illusion just a bit.
[close]

Hah - there's no template, this happening is entirely due to luck!


Weird bug to report, and if it is already addressed, sorry for missing it.

When fighting Salvage fleets that go pirate (I THINK that is only when this happens) I frequently (always?) see weapon group #2, which should be autofire, start combat as manual, and I have to toggle it back to autofire.

If you're playing vanilla - could you send me your save? This sounds really odd. (fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: kobeathris on May 27, 2017, 11:58:46 AM
If you're playing vanilla - could you send me your save? This sounds really odd. (fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com)

When I was getting ready to send you the save, I figured out what the issue is, and it has nothing to do with the salvage fleet. Because the fleet was much larger than mine, I selected everyone and ordered them to a map corner, that turned on autopilot fort he flagship as well. As soon as auto pilot engages and I unpause, it turns off auto fire for group 2. It does this consistently whenever I turn on autopilot for the command ship. Not sure if that is intended behavior or not. If I turn on autofire for group 1 and 2, just a s a test, it turns both back off when I engage autopilot.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 27, 2017, 12:02:16 PM
Ah, ok, that makes sense. Less than ideal, perhaps, but the expected behavior.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Serenitis on May 27, 2017, 12:42:34 PM
Gladius were dying left and right. 
Whenever I've used Gladius and watched them, they've got themselves into a weird kind of standoff with whatever they are attacking and end up orbiting the target, BUT facing in the direction they are moving while firing harmlessly into space as they get picked off.
It's like they are trying to turn to face what they are attacking but can't quite manage it fast enough and so end up as distractions rather than threats.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 27, 2017, 12:58:45 PM
Turns out Gladius performance was not as bleak as I initially reported, but they are still sub-par (for the OP you pay for them) compared to alternatives.  Currently Gladius would be worth about 8 OP, not 12.  By comparison, I would put current Talons at 10 OP; they outperform the majority of fighter wings.  Wasps are pathetically weak.  They need all the skill help they can get to survive.  Otherwise, bigger enemy ships eat Wasps like popcorn before they do much damage.

To my surprise, Warthogs are brutally effective if you can stack lots of them.  With enough Warthogs, they murder big ships quickly.  Only bombers have a chance to kill faster, but Warthogs are more self-sufficient.  If Warthogs were fast enough to chase down frigates, they will be even better than Sparks.

With I tried to solo simulator with Astral with Warthogs, it was like playing with Paragon.  Big ships die, but frigates stalled the Astral due to outrunning Warthogs.  With Sparks, Astral killed as much as its CR held out.  Only nine combat ships were left out of the entire simulator before CR decayed to zero.  Paragon could not do so well, due to frigates kiting then swarming for the kill.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on May 28, 2017, 02:49:48 AM
Maybe if the Gladius didn't dance around so much it would be worth 12 OP. They fly around their target so much they end up only firing half the time, and firing while flying backwards and having their machine gun bullets hover in place and hit nothing, the projectile's forward momentum nearly canceled out by the Gladius's backwards momentum. I notice Talons will get in close to their target and constantly fire their Vulcans; if the Gladius did that, if they would just stay in weapon range and let their flares cover for them while they unload their guns, they might be worth 12 OP. Either that or get another wing member, because they're worth about 4 OP a fighter right now.

Edit: I figured out how to get Gladii to act like Talons, mostly. They're constantly zooming in and out, fouling their shots, for two reasons; their attackrunrange is too high, and they're constantly running high on flux so they back off to dissipate. Talons have their attackrunrange set to 200, 50 range shorter than their vulcans, and have enough flux dissipation to constantly fire without running out of flux. If you set the Gladius's attackrunrange to 250 in wing_data.csv (50 range shorter than their machine guns) and give them the no_weapon_flux hullmod in gladius_fighter.variant, they behave much more aggressively.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 28, 2017, 06:45:03 AM
@ ANGRYABOUTELVES:  I noticed the speed boost from Wing Commander 1 can do this to other fighters.  With that perk, Wasps often fly away too fast from ships and out-of-range for their lasers.  That perk is great for Warthogs and some bombers though, they need the speed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on May 28, 2017, 07:50:19 AM
As an aside:

Size of new patrols spawned patrols increases more quickly as they're defeated
I found this pretty funny, because in Nexerelin I actually had to tone patrol size scaling down, way down compared to vanilla. Once a bunch of patrols die (which can happen very quickly even without player intervention, if a star system is repeatedly targeted for invasions), high-powered markets like Sindria or even Eochu Bres can very quickly inundate the system in oversized detachments, through which an invasion fleet (or the player's, for that matter) has no chance of getting through.

Of course the design goals are different in each case: in vanilla patrols are just there to give the player something to fight, whereas Nexerelin requires something that is actually possible to defeat in the long run.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on May 28, 2017, 08:49:06 AM
Why the change to Front Shield Generators?

That pretty much makes them no-go for any ships with Omni Shields :-\

It would make much more sense to simply give them an efficiency penalty, instead, imho.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 28, 2017, 08:53:20 AM
@ xenoargh:  Front Shield Generator, to be renamed Makeshift Shield Generator, adds a shield to ships without a shield.  You were thinking of Front Shield Emitter, which will be renamed to Shield Conversion - Front or something similar.

That said, the OP cost to Makeshift Shield Generator is enough of a penalty for the ships that need it.  Even (A) ships struggle to afford all among Makeshift Shield Generator, sufficient flux, and weapons to work.  The speed penalty on top of that is unnecessary.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on May 28, 2017, 09:22:51 AM
I'm totally agreed with you.  Most of the ships that can buy Front Shield Generator (Hounds, etc.) don't have good Flux pools or Dissipation stats... so, unless that's fixed, this effectively kills their last use-case...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on May 28, 2017, 10:37:08 AM
As an aside:

Size of new patrols spawned patrols increases more quickly as they're defeated
I found this pretty funny, because in Nexerelin I actually had to tone patrol size scaling down, way down compared to vanilla. Once a bunch of patrols die (which can happen very quickly even without player intervention, if a star system is repeatedly targeted for invasions), high-powered markets like Sindria or even Eochu Bres can very quickly inundate the system in oversized detachments, through which an invasion fleet (or the player's, for that matter) has no chance of getting through.

Of course the design goals are different in each case: in vanilla patrols are just there to give the player something to fight, whereas Nexerelin requires something that is actually possible to defeat in the long run.

maybe patrol size can shrink over time if nobody is dying? (after all, who wants to throw out all these detachments if the enemies aren't even coming?)

Or is that already the case?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 28, 2017, 10:38:13 AM
Of course the design goals are different in each case: in vanilla patrols are just there to give the player something to fight, whereas Nexerelin requires something that is actually possible to defeat in the long run.

Indeed!

Or is that already the case?

Yep.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on May 28, 2017, 05:27:21 PM
I might be repeating the same thing but, how many weeks left before the update releases?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 28, 2017, 05:54:39 PM
Probs within a week.

I want to know if the Outposts patch is gonna take 6 months or longer...seems like a lot of the game's groundwork is already in place so hopefully not.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: dogamusprime on May 28, 2017, 07:55:14 PM
Asking about release times on the dev post gets the thread locked. So either make a new post or please don't ask.

Not trying to be a jerk, but it'll be here when it gets here.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on May 28, 2017, 08:15:15 PM
I wanna ask you something.
why the custom rules for the mods is broken for 0.8 and how did you finally fix it?
Should be something that come out with the hotfixes
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 29, 2017, 07:30:16 AM
I want to know if the Outposts patch is gonna take 6 months or longer...seems like a lot of the game's groundwork is already in place so hopefully not.

The groundwork does seem there but outposts might be an all-or-none kind of deal. If you allow people to establish an outpost but it doesn't have a clear function or any appreciable effect on gameplay, what's the point? I think for all the players hoping for a mini-empire or pseudo-faction of their own, outposts will have to tie-in to most, if not all, of the basic mechanics of the game: combat, surveying, economy, factions, npc interaction, etc. in a way that's rewarding/fun rather than a grind.

I'm very much looking forward to a blog post detailing Alex's vision for outposts. He's been grounded in his approach thus far and I trust he'll have a good perspective on how they should work.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: zaimoni on May 29, 2017, 08:46:56 AM
Right, outposts look fairly "large" (thinking about probable effort if I were to commit to implementing for my own game), not a point release feature.  If there were no huge technical hitches I'd guess they'd be in 0.9 .

Multiple surprises could give us a 0.11 however (game not feature complete after three more major feature sets added).  Best not to second-guess here.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 29, 2017, 10:35:04 AM
We know so little about Alex' plans for outposts that it's hard to guess the time frame of their implementation. Will it just be a binary no outpost/outpost thing or will you be setting down buildings per hand like in an RTS? Will outposts enable you to be a player in the Sector wide trade network? Will they be able to defend themselves, so new combat scenarios are necessary? Will they enable completely new avenues of building and equipping the ships of your fleet?
And the most important question, can all their features be implemented consecutively, or are they so interconnected that it only makes sense to release them in one big update?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 29, 2017, 10:55:34 AM
We know so little about Alex' plans for outposts that it's hard to guess the time frame of their implementation. Will it just be a binary no outpost/outpost thing or will you be setting down buildings per hand like in an RTS? Will outposts enable you to be a player in the Sector wide trade network? Will they be able to defend themselves, so new combat scenarios are necessary? Will they enable completely new avenues of building and equipping the ships of your fleet?
I'm okay with upgradeable outposts and RTS-like management, so long the player doesn't have to do everything manually - for example, I couldn't care less about AI fleets hauling cargo for me, but I'd like to have a reason to use frigates and destroyers later on, by being able to "hop" in them even if it doesn't make any sense in-universe: I'd just like to have "dynamic missions", where those missions are when your trade fleet gets ambushed (and you have to use what you have bought earlier) or the like. I think Total War has something similar.
As for outposts themselves, I'm all for complexity, I won't be satisfied with just "X-producing outpost"! Of course, within reasonable limits.
Also have I told you I'm a RTS buff? ^^
Quote
And the most important question, can all their features be implemented consecutively, or are they so interconnected that it only makes sense to release them in one big update?
Well, we have surveying (and to a lesser degree salvaging) and many people spotted their immediate compensation (for not being able to use that data) potential.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 29, 2017, 11:07:30 AM
I would like outposts to be a place to store ships and weapons, and build more of them.  It would be nice if I can sell commodities, ships, and weapons my base produces to NPCs for a profit (as long as they do not tap into my storage reserved for my war machine).

I would also like to capture enemy markets or burn them to the ground like Remnant battlestations.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on May 29, 2017, 01:18:46 PM
It'd be cool if outposts were an offline-only feature that required an internet connection and a Uplay account
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 29, 2017, 02:45:55 PM
I think outposts are gonna feature a grid of squares or hexes and you'll drop factories/farms/mines icons into these slots. Different worlds will have different open slots or something.

David loves drawing stuff like that so all the better!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 29, 2017, 04:52:15 PM
Oh yeah, look at those sexy tiles from him:
Spoiler
(https://d2ujflorbtfzji.cloudfront.net/package-screenshot/8fc2eb72-c317-4fac-98a7-6409c7946fdf_scaled.jpg)
[close]
That, with exo planet terrains mixed in, would look fantastic in Sector!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 29, 2017, 04:59:44 PM
I think outposts are gonna feature a grid of squares or hexes and you'll drop factories/farms/mines icons into these slots. Different worlds will have different open slots or something.

David loves drawing stuff like that so all the better!

Nothing is impossible but I've yet to see any campaign feature that goes anywhere near that level of detail. I'm still going under the assumption that Combat is King™ and that outposts will be something to build up so that you have to fight/defend them. I don't expect them to be Sim City but I do believe they'll be built up over time and require varying levels of resources to upgrade/equip. As far as "seeing" the outposts, I don't expect there to be a lot of visual consideration outside of an orbital station (if they're not planetside). I think we'll have to use our imaginations for the most part, just as we do whenever we go to ports now. The difference will be that they'll be *our* ports, which is a big deal.

Hopefully we'll be able to manufacture from raw materials, import/export commodities, build ships and stations, generate fuel, etc. Hopefully it takes a lot of work to get a fully-functioning outpost up, or a series of them (because not every planet has every raw material), but the payoff is that we can become self-sufficient and perhaps operate with a surplus. At that point, you're no longer at the mercy of the factions and that's a huge, and likely necessary, step toward having end-game goals.

That's what I'd like to see, anyway. I wouldn't mind seeing little hex grids and stuff, though, but I don't expect outposts to be a tiny Civilization game. :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BillyRueben on May 29, 2017, 06:00:07 PM
It'd be cool if outposts were an offline-only feature that required an internet connection and a Uplay account

Yeah, but it really needs micro-transactions to be a real feature. Otherwise, I just don't think it would be worth it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on May 29, 2017, 09:32:42 PM
It'd be cool if outposts were an offline-only feature that required an internet connection and a Uplay account

Yeah, but it really needs micro-transactions to be a real feature. Otherwise, I just don't think it would be worth it.

And don't forget that the actual buildings for the outposts will be sold in "booster packs" of 3 each, with random buildings! The cards for ultra-rare buildings like autofactories are all sparkly and drop in .01% of packs.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 29, 2017, 10:48:59 PM
I think outposts are gonna feature a grid of squares or hexes and you'll drop factories/farms/mines icons into these slots. Different worlds will have different open slots or something.
On one hand, it's quite common and ok to tile worlds... On the other hand, it wouldn't make sense in Starsector since you're most probably not colonising/exploiting whole planet, but at best every possible profitable resource site. I don't know, it may be just the tiles not meshing with SS (to me). But I have to admit that it'd make colonies more natural (as in colonies with people intending to live there, not resource extraction outposts).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: RawCode on May 30, 2017, 07:33:55 AM
It'd be cool if outposts were an offline-only feature that required an internet connection and a Uplay account

Yeah, but it really needs micro-transactions to be a real feature. Otherwise, I just don't think it would be worth it.

And don't forget that the actual buildings for the outposts will be sold in "booster packs" of 3 each, with random buildings! The cards for ultra-rare buildings like autofactories are all sparkly and drop in .01% of packs.

will game feature summer sales each cycle?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 30, 2017, 11:24:07 AM
will game feature summer sales each cycle?
Every building will have different skins that you can get from a chest, except keys are sold for 2$ each and the chance to get rare skin is lesser than 0,1%.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 30, 2017, 12:27:33 PM
I hope Alex is taking notes, so many fantastic ideas here! Personally I'm really hoping for monthly subscription fees and social media share buttons in the game.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Inventor Raccoon on May 30, 2017, 12:32:47 PM
I hope Alex is taking notes, so many fantastic ideas here! Personally I'm really hoping for monthly subscription fees and social media share buttons in the game.
Don't get your hopes up yet - Alex hasn't confirmed yearly season passes yet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: cjuicy on May 30, 2017, 12:35:40 PM
I hope Alex is taking notes, so many fantastic ideas here! Personally I'm really hoping for monthly subscription fees and social media share buttons in the game.
Don't get your hopes up yet - Alex hasn't confirmed yearly season passes yet.
You are forgetting the randomized loot boxes. Skins, ship hats, and unique weapons for the low low price of grinding and your credit card.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 30, 2017, 12:49:33 PM
Hats for spaceships? Now we're talking!


Random (serious) thought: maybe the stand alone "Missions" should be renamed "Scenarios", so they can't get confused with the in-campaign missions anymore.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 30, 2017, 01:16:42 PM
Transverse Jump: fleet stops and charges for 3 seconds before executing the jump, can be attacked

Why does everything useful have to have some kind of deal-breaker downside? I'm honestly asking, because it seems every single thing that's useful and allows the player to do something they weren't able to do previously just gets nerfed into pointlessness. Transverse Jump was awesome for escaping pursuing fleets, and this change is specifically designed to make that not work anymore.

Same thing with Augmented Engines and Unstable Injector in the last update. Oh, having them allowed the player to kite the AI? Let's make one of them only work on the map, which is pointless when Sustained Burn exists, and give the other a downside so bad that it becomes unusable on almost every ship. Then the AI will be able to kite the player, which is much more fun! Right? Right?

I could go on like this for a very long time. New abilities are fun. Marginal percentage bonuses are not.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 30, 2017, 01:22:25 PM
Spoiler
Hats for spaceships? Now we're talking!
(http://i.imgur.com/Dr75QgQ.jpg)
YEE HAW! And don't forget that SS can show ads in markets for extra immersion!
[close]
The idea to rename missions to scenarios is good for confusion avoidance and integral with other games, where pre-set maps are called scenarios.

@Sordid before transverse jump was a free "get out of jail" card, it allowed you to avoid every fight you don't want to take. It's not that if you're ahead it's working, it always worked.
Augmented engines are in uneasy place now and Unstable Injector's drawbacks are too big too. I think Alex might've made 2 changes to reduce player mobility (more cautious AI, UI nerf) without possibly testing them together (that, or he thought that fighters should now harass/force fight).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: cjuicy on May 30, 2017, 01:23:33 PM
Transverse Jump: fleet stops and charges for 3 seconds before executing the jump, can be attacked

Why does everything useful have to have some kind of deal-breaker downside? I'm honestly asking, because it seems every single thing that's useful and allows the player to do something they weren't able to do previously just gets nerfed into pointlessness. Transverse Jump was awesome for escaping pursuing fleets, and this change is specifically designed to make that not work anymore.

Same thing with Augmented Engines and Unstable Injector in the last update. Oh, having them allowed the player to kite the AI? Let's make one of them only work on the map, which is pointless when Sustained Burn exists, and give the other a downside so bad that it becomes unusable on almost every ship. Then the AI will be able to kite the player, which is much more fun! Right? Right?

I could go on like this for a very long time. New abilities are fun. Marginal percentage bonuses are not.
I agree, to some extent. While many nerfs and debuffs are added to balance the game, in some areas this can kill any and all use of an ability completely. Unstable Injector, Augmented Engines, Omni-shield conversion (and possibly FSG) suffer from this greatly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 30, 2017, 01:25:03 PM
Same thing with Augmented Engines and Unstable Injector in the last update. Oh, having them allowed the player to kite the AI? Let's make one of them only work on the map, which is pointless when Sustained Burn exists, and give the other a downside so bad that it becomes unusable on almost every ship. Then the AI will be able to kite the player, which is much more fun! Right? Right?
Unstable Injector works wonderfully on carriers with all fighters and minimal (or no) weapons.  Some fighters will be weakened next patch, but Warthogs are not one of them as far as I can see.  Warthogs are basically slower (classic) Sparks or Lux in effectiveness.  Boardswords are a bit weak, but at least they put pressure on shields, which helps Warthogs if I cannot stack too many of them.

I used carriers before I discovered their true power just to get at ships that keep kiting away from my ships.  Normal fights are not as fun anymore because the AI kites too much, so I break that by exploiting carriers.

But, yes, loss of shot range from Unstable Injector on most ships hurt too much.  This is why I may consider an all carrier fleet next game, or at least as many carriers as I can hire Timid officers to run away from everyone.  Not sure less speed on Unstable Injector will be enough.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Inventor Raccoon on May 30, 2017, 01:27:30 PM
Transverse Jump was awesome for escaping pursuing fleets, and this change is specifically designed to make that not work anymore.
This update did add Interdiction Pulse, which has a brief chargeup and then halts any pursuing fleet for a good 6-7 seconds, easily enough to turn on Sustained Burn and escape.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 30, 2017, 01:28:28 PM
Transverse Jump: fleet stops and charges for 3 seconds before executing the jump, can be attacked

Why does everything useful have to have some kind of deal-breaker downside? I'm honestly asking, because it seems every single thing that's useful and allows the player to do something they weren't able to do previously just gets nerfed into pointlessness. Transverse Jump was awesome for escaping pursuing fleets, and this change is specifically designed to make that not work anymore.

Same thing with Augmented Engines and Unstable Injector in the last update. Oh, having them allowed the player to kite the AI? Let's make one of them only work on the map, which is pointless when Sustained Burn exists, and give the other a downside so bad that it becomes unusable on almost every ship. Then the AI will be able to kite the player, which is much more fun! Right? Right?

I could go on like this for a very long time. New abilities are fun. Marginal percentage bonuses are not.


What you are asking is basically "why should elements in a game be balanced against each other?"
So a) there’s a challenge for the player involved and b) there’s a reason to use multiple different elements and not just one. Both are essential to keep the game from becoming boring.
In the example at hand, Transverse Jump makes other tactics to escape (hiding in asteroid fields, emergency burn) or not get spotted (running dark, distractions) and the related stats less relevant, if not obsolete.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 30, 2017, 01:29:20 PM
Updated! Last batch of changes; next up: some playtesting to make sure everything is in decent shape.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 30, 2017, 01:39:51 PM
@Sordid before transverse jump was a free "get out of jail" card, it allowed you to avoid every fight you don't want to take. It's not that if you're ahead it's working, it always worked.

That's the point, it allowed you to get away even if you were slower than your pursuer. Now you have to be faster in order to build up enough of a lead to be able to use it, but if you're faster you don't need it in the first place.

Transverse Jump was awesome for escaping pursuing fleets, and this change is specifically designed to make that not work anymore.

This update did add Interdiction Pulse, which has a brief chargeup and then halts any pursuing fleet for a good 6-7 seconds, easily enough to turn on Sustained Burn and escape.

Doesn't that just make Transverse Jump even more pointless?

What you are asking is basically "why should elements in a game be balanced against each other?"

Don't go putting words in my mouth. That's not what I'm asking.

Quote
In the example at hand, Transverse Jump makes other tactics to escape (hiding in asteroid fields, emergency burn) or not get spotted (running dark, distractions) and the related stats less relevant, if not obsolete.

All of those are tedious and annoying, so in my opinion that's a plus.

That's a very common game design element in a lot of games. Put in an annoyance that the player has to deal with, allow them to unlock a skill or item that lets them bypass it. The challenge is in unlocking that, and not having to deal with the annoyance is the reward. Yes, Transverse Jump is better than Going Dark or hiding in asteroids. That's because you have to spend skill points to unlock it and it eats resources with every use, whereas the other things are free. Just like a rocket launcher you find in a secret room in a first-person shooter is better than the pistol you started the game with. Of course it is, that's the whole point of getting new stuff, it's supposed to be better. Insisting that everything should be competitive with everything else saps all sense of achievement from progressing in the game because you never unlock anything better, just sidegrades. And because your starting ability then has to be useful in all situations, those sidegrades will necessarily be situational at best.

I see Starsector falling into the same trap as Skyrim. Remember Skyrim's skill tree, with every weapon and armor skill having that +20%-per-point node at the bottom and nodes with new power attacks and abilities further up the tree? When I first played the game, I only put a single point into that starting node and then went after the other ones, because new abilities make the game more interesting and exciting. But of course I struggled, and on my second playthrough I realized the way to go is to max out that base node first and only use leftover points for the rest. But all that's doing is affecting how much my own number increases in relation to the enemy's number, which makes his/mine health bar go down quicker/slower. Compared to the ability to decapitate or paralyze people, that's a very boring thing to unlock. And that's what SS is becoming, the only useful upgrades are +X% to something.

It also doesn't help that the solo playstyle has been nerfed into the ground by making the player unable to kite the AI, so really the only useful upgrades are +X% to a stat of some AI ship that you don't even directly control.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 30, 2017, 01:43:54 PM
Updated! Last batch of changes; next up: some playtesting to make sure everything is in decent shape.
I bet it's the skins that convinced you to post it. And hats!

IP changes are interesting, will AI counter it by using ASB too?
Ouch... Odyssey lost a fair chunk of its shield. On the other hand, Conquest got an armour boost! I think if Odyssey will be able to use its weaponry efficiently, I won't mind shield change.
Fighter changed look good, reserve deployment seems less susceptible to abuse. Considering you're mostly tweaking values now we can expect the patch soon.

@Sordid instant transverse jump made mobility less important, since even if your pursuer went at 20 burn, one key press would unmake this advantage.
Additionally I like toying with enemy's sensors more fun than just yolo charge and then transverse jump to scout.

@Gothars did you ever got away by hiding in asteroids or whatever? I never could.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: HELMUT on May 30, 2017, 01:45:15 PM
I like what i see here, the Odyssey little nerfs and there should help preventing it from being too much of a pain to fight. I also approve of the Reserve Deployment nerf, i feel like the Drover was just too strong with it.

The Conquest armor buff on the other hand is a bit surprising, but i guess it needs it to stay competitive with its high-tech alternative. Perhaps a brawling Conquest build is even going to be a thing now?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 30, 2017, 01:55:25 PM
That's a very common game design element in a lot of games. Put in an annoyance that the player has to deal with, allow them to unlock a skill or item that lets them bypass it. The challenge is in unlocking that, and not having to deal with the annoyance is the reward. Yes, the Transverse Jump is better than Going Dark or hiding in asteroids. That's because you have to spend skill points to unlock it and it eats resources with every use, whereas the other things are free.
Like Surveying, not having Navigation hurts quite a bit, but I cannot afford to spare three points in that skill if I want to afford all of the combat skills I need to build my optimal killing machine.

Now that Transverse Jump will take ages to activate, I may consider not having Navigation much less painful.  Sure, Transverse Jump made it too easy to escape, but for me, the main benefit of that ability was simply instant teleportation - going where you want to go so quickly.  Basically a huge quality-of-life feature rivaling max Surveying.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 30, 2017, 02:21:34 PM
Added "allowForceQuitInIronMode" setting to settings.json; defaults to true

Thank you!


What you are asking is basically "why should elements in a game be balanced against each other?"

Don't go putting words in my mouth. That's not what I'm asking.

I'm trying to answer your question ("Why does everything useful have to have some kind of deal-breaker downside?") by formulating it in a different way, not putting words in anyone's mouth.

I completely disagree with your description of the sensor and stealth game play as an "annoyance made to be bypassed". You're inferring that from your personal dislike of these mechanics. And even if it were boring, the right solution would be to improve or remove it, not to build in a skip-button.

BTW, rocket launchers have limited and rare ammo, exactly for the reasons I described.


@Gothars did you ever got away by hiding in asteroids or whatever? I never could.

Totally! Just today I was laying low in the ring system near Sindria, becoming almost invisible while waiting for a window of opportunity to enter the black market. More than 20 patrols must have passed me by before I made it to the planet, had to revert course several times and hide again.
Of course, if they are already just behind you it's not gonna help you much.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 30, 2017, 02:22:20 PM
So if I'm reading this right, Reserve Deployment is now a thing you use when some of your fighters have been destroyed, rather than preemptively to put more fighters on the field in the first place?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 30, 2017, 02:28:15 PM
Of course, if they are already just behind you it's not gonna help you much.
That's my point - going dark in pursuits is pointless, it's either for ambushes or "stealth sequences", like yours. I was asking explicitly because you've mentioned it as an alternative to the transverse jump in the context of escaping pursuit, if I'm not mistaken.
@Wyvern yes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Inventor Raccoon on May 30, 2017, 02:31:18 PM
So if I'm reading this right, Reserve Deployment is now a thing you use when some of your fighters have been destroyed, rather than preemptively to put more fighters on the field in the first place?
In 0.8, you can use it for both purposes, and it'll spawn more reserve fighters if any of your normal wing members are destroyed, to fill it up to the new maximum. With 0.8, it's less effective when used to replace existing fighters, and won't fill it back up to full if the wing has no fleet members alive.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 30, 2017, 02:35:23 PM
I completely disagree with your description of the sensor and stealth game play as an "annoyance made to be bypassed". You're inferring that from your personal dislike of these mechanics.

This might carry more weight here than anything I write myself:

I want to mainly talk about the question you posed. "Why are you fighting?" Because it's fun. The battles are the meat of the game, everything else is there just as filler between the fun bits. I'm sure it stings a bit to hear it put so bluntly, but that's how it is. The number of weapons, ships, hull mods, loadouts, fleet combinations, and combat situations the player can encounter in battles makes for an incredibly varied and fun experience. The overworld gameplay can't ever hope to match that, it will always be less complex and less exciting.

No, I hear that. While I think campaign level gameplay can be fun (and already is in some instances), and will get better yet, it's a different kind of fun, and battles are ... I don't know if it's too much to say the "heart" of the game, but design-wise, the idea is that anything you do in the campaign funnels you into combat for one reason or another. So, yeah, same page here.

Quote
And even if it were boring, the right solution would be to improve or remove it, not to build in a skip-button.

That's your own personal opinion. The fact of the matter is that a huge number of acclaimed and successful games have done exactly that. Dark Souls, for instance, forces you to walk everywhere to begin with and doesn't give you the option to quick travel until two thirds through the game. Skyrim lets you pick a skill that makes your lockpicks unbreakable, effectively bypassing the lockpicking minigame. Hell, in the Saints Row series you can get upgrades that make you straight up permanently invincible. I could go on for a very long time like this.

Quote
BTW, rocket launchers have limited and rare ammo, exactly for the reasons I described.

Yes, I did say that unlike Going Dark or hiding in asteroids, Transverse Jump eats resources. Thank you for agreeing with me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 30, 2017, 02:38:32 PM
Ahh, okay, looks like I was misreading it.

So for example:
Wing size 4, no fighters destroyed: .8 and .8.1 both deploy two more fighters.
Wing size 3, no fighters destroyed: .8 deploys two more fighters, .8.1 deploys one more fighter.
Wing size 4, one fighter destroyed: .8 deploys three more fighters, .8.1 sets max wing size to six but only deploys one more fighter.
Wing size 3, one fighter destroyed: .8 deploys three more fighters, .8.1 sets max wing size to four but only deploys one more fighter.
Wing size 4, all fighters destroyed: .8 deploys six fighters, .8.1 sets max wing size to six but only deploys four fighters.
Wing size 3, all fighters destroyed: .8 deploys five fighters, .8.1 sets max wing size to four but only deploys three fighters.

Alex, are those correct examples?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 30, 2017, 02:45:18 PM
To add to Sordid's point, there is an Angband variant called Sil.  It has an id-minigame (style common to old-school roguelikes) I really dislike.  There is an ability called Loremaster that identifies everything and bypasses the whole id-minigame altogether.  I beeline for that ability every game I play.  If not for Loremaster, I would refuse to play Sil because id-minigames featured in some classic roguelikes tend to be frustrating.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on May 30, 2017, 02:56:28 PM
I kinda agree with Sordid here, especially when it comes to campaign movement abilities. It just seems like any time the player gets the upper hand, it gets nerfed into the ground.
-Increased Burn skill? Goes from a big boost to a tiny one to none at all, meanwhile the AI gets and keeps E Burn, basically giving THEM the skill since they DGAF about supplies, CR or losses
-Finally got a way to get through those hyperstorms that pop up and have greater than shown effect ranges that slow you down AND drain you of your supplies? (Seriously, whose bright ****ing idea was THIS?!) LOL, That was a mistake! Now they effect you more AND they move! Oh and they're more common! Have fun kids!
-Finally got an ability that puts you on par with the AI's E Burn spam? Nope, the AI now gets that along with a skill that you KNOW they will just constantly spam while you have to worry about rep hits and actually HITTING your targets! GG wannabe pirates! Suck it up and be model citizens
-You know that emergency escape skill you liked so much? Well we decided to nerf it into the ground and still keep the hidden CR/ supply costs as well! No fun for you!

Alex, with the IP skill now using your sensor strength to control how powerful and how far it reaches, is the rep hit removed? Otherwise I can see this being a big source of annoyance or even bug reports due to higher sensor ranges meaning more chances to hit friendly fleets
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 30, 2017, 03:06:06 PM
I can see it now.  If fleets will get angrier at you (short of open hostilities) for interdicting hostiles, shouldn't the sector at large be angry at each other if they use it to catch everything?

This gets even sillier if player is able to build a polity later.  He gets rep hits from visitors for protecting his territory, but everyone else gets off scott-free.

How about this?  Say I can set up patrols to defend my system (in some future version with outposts implemented).  My patrols start clocking smugglers and other questionable types.  Reputation will go down with everyone because I am the player!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Inventor Raccoon on May 30, 2017, 03:07:34 PM
Wing size 4, no fighters destroyed: .8 and .8.1 both deploy two more fighters.
Wing size 3, no fighters destroyed: .8 deploys two more fighters, .8.1 deploys one more fighter.
Wing size 4, one fighter destroyed: .8 deploys three more fighters, .8.1 sets max wing size to six but only deploys one more fighter.
Wing size 3, one fighter destroyed: .8 deploys three more fighters, .8.1 sets max wing size to four but only deploys one more fighter.
Wing size 4, all fighters destroyed: .8 deploys six fighters, .8.1 sets max wing size to six but only deploys four fighters.
Wing size 3, all fighters destroyed: .8 deploys five fighters, .8.1 sets max wing size to four but only deploys three fighters.
1 and 2 are right, 5 and 6 are right. 3 and 4 aren't. It's (current fighters) + (fighter wing size) = (new wing size, up to the new maximum)

Case 3 has a new maximum of 6 fighters (4+2), currently 3 fighters and a wing size of 4, so it's 3+4 = 6 + 1 fighter that doesn't get launched because it hits the maximum. Wing is fully restored. Case 4 is maximum of 4 (3+1), currently 2 and a wing size of 3, so 2+3=4+1 left over from hitting the maximum. Wing is fully restored.

Case 5 has a maximum of 6, current 0, wing size of 4. 0+4 = 4, doesn't hit the maximum, so 4 fighters are launched. Same deal with 5, only 3 fighters are launched.

I can see it now.  If fleets will get angrier at you (short of open hostilities) for interdicting hostiles, shouldn't the sector at large be angry at each other if they use it to catch everything?

This gets even sillier if player is able to build a polity later.  He gets rep hits from visitors for protecting his territory, but everyone else gets off scott-free.

How about this?  Say I can set up patrols to defend my system (in some future version with outposts implemented).  My patrols start clocking smugglers and other questionable types.  Reputation will go down with everyone because I am the player!
Pretty sure it's a penalty for the faction you're interdicting. Interdicting pirates with Hegemony around won't affect reputation, but if a Hegemony patrol comes to scan you and you successfully interdict them to get away, Hegemony will suffer a rep hit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 30, 2017, 03:22:13 PM
Ah, yup, I think you're right.

Conclusions:
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 30, 2017, 03:26:09 PM
Of course, if they are already just behind you it's not gonna help you much.
That's my point - going dark in pursuits is pointless, it's either for ambushes or "stealth sequences", like yours. I was asking explicitly because you've mentioned it as an alternative to the transverse jump in the context of escaping pursuit, if I'm not mistaken.

With "pursuits", do you mean only "two fleets at max burn chasing each other"? I was also thinking of patrols "looking for your fleet" with search patterns and such.



Quote
BTW, rocket launchers have limited and rare ammo, exactly for the reasons I described.

Yes, I did say that unlike Going Dark or hiding in asteroids, Transverse Jump eats resources. Thank you for agreeing with me.

The point of limited ammo of classic rocket launchers is so you still have to use other weapons. Are you saying the minuscule costs of TJ have the same effect in respect to other movement/sensor abilities? oO



It's an interesting point btw, about "skip mechanic" buttons existing in some games. Seems to me like a crutch - if you have one mechanic in the game that's initially fun, but won't stay interesting for the entire duration of the game, it makes sense to enable skipping it after its potential has been exhausted.  That's not really comparable to a skip function you can have from very early on, though.
 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 30, 2017, 03:59:21 PM
I can see it now.  If fleets will get angrier at you (short of open hostilities) for interdicting hostiles, shouldn't the sector at large be angry at each other if they use it to catch everything?

This gets even sillier if player is able to build a polity later.  He gets rep hits from visitors for protecting his territory, but everyone else gets off scott-free.

How about this?  Say I can set up patrols to defend my system (in some future version with outposts implemented).  My patrols start clocking smugglers and other questionable types.  Reputation will go down with everyone because I am the player!
Pretty sure it's a penalty for the faction you're interdicting. Interdicting pirates with Hegemony around won't affect reputation, but if a Hegemony patrol comes to scan you and you successfully interdict them to get away, Hegemony will suffer a rep hit.
I was thinking more of collateral damage.  You interdict pirates and that merchant convoy or two that happened to be passing nearby.  You hit pirates and the convoy.  BAM! Rep loss!  Replace convoy with patrol, or non-pirate smuggler, or indie bounty hunter chasing your target too.

The point was if collateral damage with interdictor is too easy, only the player gets penalized for doing it.  NPCs can use it freely, much like how Midnight Kitsune points out that NPC fleets spam E-Burn like no tomorrow because they do not care about resource management.

P.S.  Never-mind double agents that freely change from Pirate to Independent and back like Smugglers and Salvagers.  We had some major reputation bugs with such fleets.  Imagine if you start a pulse when they were pirate, but change to indies when the wave hits (if it takes time for the pulse to reach your target).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on May 30, 2017, 04:04:06 PM
Looking good, thanks Alex!
I agree completely with the OP changes to Kopesh and Gladius. The small nerf to Reserve Deployment will help bring the Drover back into destroyer power levels.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 30, 2017, 04:06:13 PM
The point of limited ammo of classic rocket launchers is so you still have to use other weapons. Are you saying the minuscule costs of TJ have the same effect in respect to other movement/sensor abilities? oO

:-\

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm simply pointing out that unlike the other avoidance/escape options it does incur a cost.

I can talk about the actual costs, though. If anything, the way to fix the skill is to make it cost way more to use. Or perhaps give it a dual functionality. One click to initiate a charge-up timer to jump for a small supply cost, second click to bypass that timer and jump immediately for a substantial cost in supplies/fuel and/or damage to ships. That would preserve its usefulness for both convenience and emergencies. It's still a get-out-of-jail card, just no longer a free one.


Quote
It's an interesting point btw, about "skip mechanic" buttons existing in some games. Seems to me like a crutch - if you have one mechanic in the game that's initially fun, but won't stay interesting for the entire duration of the game, it makes sense to enable skipping it after its potential has been exhausted. That's not really comparable to a skip function you can have from very early on, though.  

Just how early a "skip mechanic" should be available is a matter of opinion too, though, and even the same game designer can go back and forth on that. Dark Souls 2 and 3 just let you quick travel right from the start. On the other hand, Dark Souls 1 is unique in the series in that it lets you pick a Master Key during character creation, which lets you unlock some important doors and completely bypass a huge chunk of the game.

Sure, you could argue that Transverse Jump is accessible too early. Maybe. I'm not sure I would agree. Yeah, sure, you could rush it, but then you'd be compromising your fleet by not having other important skills. And is it really such a bad thing to have it accessible early? If you enjoy playing cat and mouse with other fleets on the map, more power to you. Some of us just want to get to the next fight, though.

they DGAF about supplies, CR or losses

That's an extremely important point that IMO deserves stressing. A lot of the design work that's being done seems to treat the overworld map as a multiplayer game, like some hyper-complex version of agar.io where every bubble is being controlled by a live player and everyone has to have equal chances. But that's not the case, there's only one player, and as you said the AI doesn't give a toss about supplies, CR, or losses. This throws the whole thing out of whack.

The job of a multiplayer game is to entertain everybody equally, so there can't be any "I win" buttons. Every skill or ability has to be counter-able in some way, you can't let one person keep winning all the time simply because they have a skill/item/whatever. The average player has to lose 50% of the time.

The job of a singleplayer game is very different, it is to entertain one person. It's very tempting to think that putting the player on equal footing with the AI is the way to do that, that it'll make the game challenging and fair and so on. But that's not how it works. If the player loses his fleet, it's a huge setback. If the AI loses a fleet, it doesn't care, it just spawns a new one. The willingness of the AI to throw its unlimited resources at the player is a massive advantage, so the player has to be 'overpowered' to compensate. Giving the player the same skills and same power level as the AI doesn't create equality, quite the opposite. But this imbalance is also what makes the game fun. Multiplayer games are about fighting more or less equal opponents, each fight tense and close, while singleplayer games are power fantasies based around mowing down hordes of AI mobs. The player should be challenged by the enemies, yes, but ultimately he or she should almost always win.

Attempting to balance a singleplayer game as if it were a multiplayer one is completely misguided. Not only will the AI always have some kind of 'cheat' that will just sour the experience (i.e. unlimited supplies, fleets, etc.), it will never put up as good a fight as a real opponent anyway, so what's the point? If I wanted an equal fight, I'd play a multiplayer game. I play a singleplayer game to curb-stomp hordes of enemies, and SS moves farther and farther away from that in every update.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 30, 2017, 04:09:25 PM
Looking good, thanks Alex!
I agree completely with the OP changes to Kopesh and Gladius. The small nerf to Reserve Deployment will help bring the Drover back into destroyer power levels.
That alone will not do it.  The main use of Reserve Deployment was to stop replacement rate from bleeding low too fast, not additional firepower.  Even Condor is kind of strong, just overshadowed by Drover.

Quote from: Sordid
...and SS moves farther and farther away from that in every update.
I agree at least partially.  I have the most fun after I build my overpowered god units and destroy everything.  This is why endgame is my favorite part of Starsector.  Everything before endgame is just practice or tutorial, and I love it when levels fly by so fast during pre-0.8.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on May 30, 2017, 04:14:27 PM
Looking good, thanks Alex!
I agree completely with the OP changes to Kopesh and Gladius. The small nerf to Reserve Deployment will help bring the Drover back into destroyer power levels.
That alone will not do it.  The main use of Reserve Deployment was to stop replacement rate from bleeding low too fast, not additional firepower.  Even Condor is kind of strong, just overshadowed by Drover.
...

Interesting - while I did use it some to stop replacement rate, I mainly did use it for the firepower increase. 5 Broadswords + 5 Daggers was a heckuvalot more effective than 3/3 and could punch through cruiser defenses with no other support. Not sure if 4/4 will be able to, but we'll see.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 30, 2017, 04:18:35 PM
@ Thaago:  I agree more fighters is better.  However, when up against a stronger force, the main thing to remember is you cannot let replacement rate drop too low at all costs.  I suppose 0.8 Reserve Deployment did it all, give more fighters and kept the rate up.  I guess with the changes, it would make sense to use it when replacement rate starts falling, not as soon as possible.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 30, 2017, 05:14:51 PM
Quote from: Sordid
...and SS moves farther and farther away from that in every update.
I agree at least partially.  I have the most fun after I build my overpowered god units and destroy everything.  This is why endgame is my favorite part of Starsector.  Everything before endgame is just practice or tutorial, and I love it when levels fly by so fast during pre-0.8.

Exactly. That's your reward for all the effort you spent leveling up your character and building your units. Every progression-based singleplayer game has that. In Skyrim you're eventually able to shout the most powerful dragons to death, in Fallout you're eventually able to kill deathclaws with your bare hands, in Mount&Blade you're eventually able to solo armies with your horse and war bow, in Dark Souls you can stack so many buffs that you can one-shot most of the bosses, in Dragon's Dogma you can eventually kill the big bad dragon before he even gets out of the first phase of his epic scripted fight, and I could go on for a very long time like this.

It's okay to have overpowered skills in a singleplayer game because that's the whole point. Looking for ever more powerful builds and facerolling all opposition with them is what we play these games for. That's what gives them depth, that's what makes them fun. If your progression consists of perfectly balanced +X% bonuses with no room for exploitation, congratulations, you've just made the game boring and uninteresting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on May 30, 2017, 05:33:34 PM
...in Dragon's Dogma you can eventually kill the big bad dragon before he even gets out of the first phase of his epic scripted fight...
Yup. And if you REALLY leveled up, you could take down the stronger version of him SOLO. Got to love MA Hunter bolt spam with magic rebalancer! Of course this was with a max level character with literally the best gear from the expansion.  
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 30, 2017, 05:36:43 PM
So Alex, I'm curious where Starsector is setting in terms of challenges in its development you have yet to face! As far as raw difficulty of coding something into being, would you say you've got the worst done and over with? Or is there some major hurdle in the future of Starsector's development that makes you feel tired just thinking about it? This is all kinda nebulous so I don't mind a rather nebulous answer.

Also, other than Outposts, is there something still in store that you're excited to finally start digging into? Some new mechanic or feature? Or is that sorta talk still too REDACTED?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 30, 2017, 05:45:55 PM
...in Dragon's Dogma you can eventually kill the big bad dragon before he even gets out of the first phase of his epic scripted fight...
Yup. And if you REALLY leveled up, you could take down the stronger version of him SOLO. Got to love MA Hunter bolt spam with magic rebalancer! Of course this was with a max level character with literally the best gear from the expansion.  

Who would win? Blast Arrows + Conqueror's Periapts + Fivefold Flurry OR Daimon, the final boss of the extra-hard DLC?

Spoiler
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et_MaBD8Rgw
[close]

And that's just an Assassin. A Ranger could have used Tenfold Flurry and a more powerful bow for more than double the DPS. ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 30, 2017, 05:52:27 PM
IP changes are interesting, will AI counter it by using ASB too?

Sometimes, yeah. It's aware of the potential and will do it in the right circumstances.


The Conquest armor buff on the other hand is a bit surprising, but i guess it needs it to stay competitive with its high-tech alternative.

Yeah, just a little something so it's not left *too* far behind. Being midline, it really ought to have better armor than the Odyssey anyway.


So if I'm reading this right, Reserve Deployment is now a thing you use when some of your fighters have been destroyed, rather than preemptively to put more fighters on the field in the first place?

I think it's still useful in both cases, just less so, in both cases.


Of course, if they are already just behind you it's not gonna help you much.
That's my point - going dark in pursuits is pointless, it's either for ambushes or "stealth sequences", like yours. I was asking explicitly because you've mentioned it as an alternative to the transverse jump in the context of escaping pursuit, if I'm not mistaken.
@Wyvern yes.

I'm hoping there will be some situations where using IP will open up a window where you can E-burn away and then go dark.

But, yes, if they're right next to you, options are... limited.


To add to Sordid's point, there is an Angband variant called Sil.  It has an id-minigame (style common to old-school roguelikes) I really dislike.  There is an ability called Loremaster that identifies everything and bypasses the whole id-minigame altogether.  I beeline for that ability every game I play.  If not for Loremaster, I would refuse to play Sil because id-minigames featured in some classic roguelikes tend to be frustrating.

More an argument for not having minigames, imo. Not a fan of those in general, except for where they are tuned to be easy and just add flavor. (I.E. Skyrim's lockpicking minigame is alright, though it being a full-fledged player skill and how that all works is another topic.)


...  AND they move

(They always moved, i.e. gradually shifted to affect nearby cells. Now they move more slowly.)

Alex, with the IP skill now using your sensor strength to control how powerful and how far it reaches, is the rep hit removed? Otherwise I can see this being a big source of annoyance or even bug reports due to higher sensor ranges meaning more chances to hit friendly fleets

If you use it with transponder off and the other fleets don't know who you are, there's no rep penalty. It's minor and can't make you hostile, in any case.


How about this?  Say I can set up patrols to defend my system (in some future version with outposts implemented).  My patrols start clocking smugglers and other questionable types.  Reputation will go down with everyone because I am the player!

That would probably be bad, so it probably wouldn't work that way. I mean, I feel like I'm stating the obvious here, but I guess it needs saying?


Ah, yup, I think you're right.

Conclusions:
  • Reserve Deployment is worded really awkwardly (though I'm not quite sure how to improve it).
  • Reserve Deployment is vastly more potent than I thought it was - I'd assumed that it simply deployed an extra 1/2 wing size fighters regardless of how many were or weren't destroyed.

Yep.


I have the most fun after I build my overpowered god units and destroy everything.  This is why endgame is my favorite part of Starsector.  Everything before endgame is just practice or tutorial, and I love it when levels fly by so fast during pre-0.8.

I feel like there's a lot of middle ground between "thing X got nerfed" and "there's no way to become overpowered". Frankly, TJ strikes me as a bit of an odd candidate here, and if we really care about how easy it is to achieve OP-ness, the Odyssey buffs would more than make up for it :)



So Alex, I'm curious where Starsector is setting in terms of challenges in its development you have yet to face! As far as raw difficulty of coding something into being, would you say you've got the worst done and over with? Or is there some major hurdle in the future of Starsector's development that makes you feel tired just thinking about it? This is all kinda nebulous so I don't mind a rather nebulous answer.

Also, other than Outposts, is there something still in store that you're excited to finally start digging into? Some new mechanic or feature? Or is that sorta talk still too REDACTED?

Ah, it's hard to say. There's a bunch of stuff I'm excited about more than outposts, though, that's for sure - but I don't want to spoil it, or discuss it before I'm more certain of it becoming a reality.

In terms of difficulty, probably the economy again. Figuring out how to make it performant, does the things it needs to do in terms of moving commodities around/supply/demand/etc, something your outposts can plug into, and something that's capable of dealing with fine-grained inputs like "the player sold X amount of commodity Y here" is a challenge. I'm going to need to take another look at it soon, and will probably have to make some simplifying assumptions - part of the issue is, I think, it's trying to do too much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 30, 2017, 05:57:50 PM
To add to Sordid's point, there is an Angband variant called Sil.  It has an id-minigame (style common to old-school roguelikes) I really dislike.  There is an ability called Loremaster that identifies everything and bypasses the whole id-minigame altogether.  I beeline for that ability every game I play.  If not for Loremaster, I would refuse to play Sil because id-minigames featured in some classic roguelikes tend to be frustrating.

More an argument for not having minigames, imo. Not a fan of those in general, except for where they are tuned to be easy and just add flavor. (I.E. Skyrim's lockpicking minigame is alright, though it being a full-fledged player skill and how that all works is another topic.)

So why do you have an agar.io-like navigation minigame that you keep elaborating upon update after update?

Also, if it was an argument for not having minigames, I'd have given a bunch of examples of games that let you bypass minigames. I gave one such example and other examples of games that let you skip core gameplay mechanics and/or large portions of content. Clearly my point was more general and not limited to only minigames (which, I agree, are rarely a good idea).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on May 30, 2017, 06:03:07 PM
I can talk about the actual costs, though. If anything, the way to fix the skill is to make it cost way more to use. Or perhaps give it a dual functionality. One click to initiate a charge-up timer to jump for a small supply cost, second click to bypass that timer and jump immediately for a substantial cost in supplies/fuel and/or damage to ships. That would preserve its usefulness for both convenience and emergencies. It's still a get-out-of-jail card, just no longer a free one.
I have to say I love this idea and I feel like it would also add options for other skills to use as well
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on May 30, 2017, 06:37:21 PM
Why the odyssey nerfs? 90 speed odyssey was able to kill almost every cruiser sure, but it still lost to other capitals. At best it could beat a conquest or flee from a Paragon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: AxleMC131 on May 30, 2017, 06:45:40 PM
Why the odyssey nerfs? 90 speed odyssey was able to kill almost every cruiser sure, but it still lost to other capitals. At best it could beat a conquest or flee from a Paragon.

Because a 90 top speed capital is horribly overpowered.  :-[ That's faster than most destroyers, and equal to some frigates.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on May 30, 2017, 07:11:05 PM
Why the odyssey nerfs? 90 speed odyssey was able to kill almost every cruiser sure, but it still lost to other capitals. At best it could beat a conquest or flee from a Paragon.

Because a 90 top speed capital is horribly overpowered.  :-[ That's faster than most destroyers, and equal to some frigates.
Sure, but it also lost to almost every capital, and even a few specialized cruiser builds. Also, I was able to kite a 90 speed odyssey with a Falcon, so it's not insurmountably fast. Being able to choose its engagements was a good tradeoff for losing against any decent capital. 90 speed just meant it could catch the ships it could kill and run from about half the ships that could kill it.

Nerfing the speed to 80 is fine, but the decrease shield power makes it even more fragile. I can already hard-counter the odyssey with an astral for only 5 supplies more, with the lowered shield efficiency/speed I'll probably be able to beat it with a bunch of cruisers that were previously borderline.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 30, 2017, 07:18:02 PM
Why the odyssey nerfs? 90 speed odyssey was able to kill almost every cruiser sure, but it still lost to other capitals. At best it could beat a conquest or flee from a Paragon.

Because a 90 top speed capital is horribly overpowered.  :-[ That's faster than most destroyers, and equal to some frigates.
That is Aurora today, faster than any destroyer, thanks to fast charging Plasma Jets.  Only a cruiser, and a pricey one, but it is very strong for a non-carrier, better than Dominator or Eagle if played to its strengths.  At least Aurora is no longer a joke.  Still not as good at soloing fleets as Heron with Unstable Injector, two Warthogs, and one Broadsword, let alone Sparks and Lux.  Heron can solo about a 200 DP fleet of ships (Onslaught and various smaller ships) on its own.  The others cannot do as well due to AI's kite-and-swarm tactics (which fighters are too fast and/or too far engagement range to be stymied by).

Nerfing the speed to 80 is fine, but the decrease shield power makes it even more fragile. I can already hard-counter the odyssey with an astral for only 5 supplies more, with the lowered shield efficiency/speed I'll probably be able to beat it with a bunch of cruisers that were previously borderline.
Yes, I am skeptical with the shield nerf.  Also, it is uncharacteristic of high-tech ships, unless Sunder is counted as high-tech.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 30, 2017, 07:22:15 PM
So why do you have an agar.io-like navigation minigame that you keep elaborating upon update after update?

Because it's not a mini-game, it's part of the actual game. The line between the two is blurry sometimes, but it's not that blurry. If you don't enjoy it, that's certainly your prerogative, but personally I find the navigation-related gameplay, and the various cat-and-mouse things you can do with stealth, to be a lot of fun. It's something I'd like to keep building on and make use of with more and more gameplay/content/design elements. Given that, things that bypass it entirely have to be handled with care, to say the least.


I can talk about the actual costs, though. If anything, the way to fix the skill is to make it cost way more to use. Or perhaps give it a dual functionality. One click to initiate a charge-up timer to jump for a small supply cost, second click to bypass that timer and jump immediately for a substantial cost in supplies/fuel and/or damage to ships. That would preserve its usefulness for both convenience and emergencies. It's still a get-out-of-jail card, just no longer a free one.
I have to say I love this idea and I feel like it would also add options for other skills to use as well

Yeah, I like that idea - could probably work if the cost was high enough that it was comparable to, say, almost losing a battle. Could see something similar for interdiction pulse, too - maybe a skill that unlocks the ability to bypass the chargeup at a high cost. Non-toggle abilities would have to support being usable when already active, though... definitely not a .1 thing. And it might still be something that's worth it at any price if it's at all possible, but still, I like the gist of the idea.


Why the odyssey nerfs? 90 speed odyssey was able to kill almost every cruiser sure, but it still lost to other capitals. At best it could beat a conquest or flee from a Paragon.

The extra 10 speed doesn't really make a difference when the player is piloting it, so it's probably better for it to be on the low end of the effective spectrum. For shields, let's put it this way - it was beating an Onslaught in an AI vs AI fight prior to that adjustment.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 30, 2017, 08:14:01 PM
So why do you have an agar.io-like navigation minigame that you keep elaborating upon update after update?

Because it's not a mini-game, it's the actual game. The line between the two is blurry sometimes, but it's not that blurry. If you don't enjoy it, that's certainly your prerogative, but personally I find the navigation-related gameplay, and the various cat-and-mouse things you can do with stealth, to be a lot of fun. It's something I'd like to keep building on and make use of with more and more gameplay/content/design elements. Given that, things that bypass it entirely have to be handled with care, to say the least.

Yeah, you've padded out the minigame to the point where it takes up more time than the actual core gameplay. I don't think that's such a good thing. Not only did you agree with me the last time we talked that the battles are the heart of the game, the overworld map doesn't actually even have any real gameplay. Yeah, you click and hold a mouse button to make your fleet move. That's it, that's the only gameplay there is, and the fleet movement feels horribly laggy and unresponsive due to the inertia (which the mandatory Sustained Burn makes even worse) and skill-induced forced stops. The rest of it is just clicking buttons and menus. That's okay for a turn-based strategy game where you administer a ton of units and settlements, or perhaps for an MMORPG where the lag doesn't allow for actual action gameplay. Neither of which is the case with SS. SS navigation feels like playing a game of Starcraft where you only control one unit and have a 3-second ping to the server. There's no complexity to hold your interest, and the delay makes what action you can get feel deeply unsatisfying. And I'm not sure adding more complexity is going to make it any better. It's just going to put more menus to click through on the way to the fun bit.

I made this exact point last time, and you agreed with it and said that your goal was to make that journey to the fun bit as smooth and painless as possible. And then you went and made it even worse. It pains me to see this great game get buried under all this needless tedium. I can't keep recommending SS to people anymore. I was really looking forward to talking to my friends about how awesome the new update was, but I just couldn't... because it isn't... You made the battles worse by further diminishing the role of the player's ship and you made the map worse by making it even more unresponsive and tedious than it already was. I guess when I get a craving for Starsector I'll have to go back to .7 and imagine what could have been.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on May 30, 2017, 08:46:19 PM
All games in StarSector's "genre" have a campaign and a combat layer. Personally I can enjoy both and would love to see even more added to the campaign layer.

And I think the campaign layer has more nuance than you give it credit. It obviously isn't just "click to move" otherwise you wouldn't be complaining about how you can't do exactly that because of all these new buttons Alex is adding.

Once actual strategic stuff gets added (outposts, a working economy) these tactical campaign options would become even more important. Remember that StarSector is still being built upon and a lot of current functions (see: Surveying) will make more sense as the game gets closer to completion.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on May 30, 2017, 08:48:04 PM
The extra 10 speed doesn't really make a difference when the player is piloting it, so it's probably better for it to be on the low end of the effective spectrum. For shields, let's put it this way - it was beating an Onslaught in an AI vs AI fight prior to that adjustment.
Was this the simulator Onslaught? I don't think it has any forward facing kinetics, the only good option for shield penetration is the TPCs. An Onslaught with a couple Mark IXs, or any other anti-shield weaponry for that matter, does much better.
EDIT: Just did a quick test on a new game, spawning in a standard onsluaght, removing the thumpers, and upgrading two flak cannons to mark IXs. It destroys a 90 speed, 2 fighterbay, +10 OP odyssey with minimal armour damage.
EDIT 2: For some reason the AI Onslaught refuses to use Burn Drive vs. Odyssey. If I take manual control and burn drive whenever the Odyssey tries to retreat and vent the fight goes much faster/better.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 31, 2017, 12:27:41 AM
Yeah, you click and hold a mouse button to make your fleet move. That's it, that's the only gameplay there is, and the fleet movement feels horribly laggy and unresponsive due to the inertia (which the mandatory Sustained Burn makes even worse) and skill-induced forced stops. The rest of it is just clicking buttons and menus.
It depends on your likes. For you, (apparently) all terrain and sensor play is there only to hinder player, whereas for me, it is a source of fun as well, with finding optimal paths through dangerous terrain, luring AI, going dark to avoid detection being entertaining activities. Maybe not as a good, big fight, but better than many. As for inertia, it's not really bad when you're flying normally (in my experience fleets can turn around in 2 seconds, top) while having it increased while using sustained burn is supposed not to give you the ability to force fights with anybody you want, no matter their fleet, as well as being realistic (the faster you go, the more time it takes to change your velocity).
About skills: ASB has a good reason to do so now (it counters IP), but I have to say that I'm not sure if Sustained Burn's isn't a bit too long, while that of planetary scan is most of the time pointless since if you're scanning, it means there's nothing nearby anyway (because how many fleets are there in outer sector? I've been able to survey multiple systems and not encounter any).
And then there are buttons and menus that for some people (like me) are fun. But I think it's not the point, the point is the disparity between managing-focused campaign gameplay and arcade-ish combat... Alex, just make some arcade mode for all min-maxers with all balance nerfs disabled just to allow them to snowball all they want. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 31, 2017, 05:41:08 AM
Sure, you could argue that Transverse Jump is accessible too early. Maybe. I'm not sure I would agree. Yeah, sure, you could rush it, but then you'd be compromising your fleet by not having other important skills. And is it really such a bad thing to have it accessible early? If you enjoy playing cat and mouse with other fleets on the map, more power to you. Some of us just want to get to the next fight, though.
In my case, I cannot rely on 0.8 Transverse Jump for that because 42 points is not enough to get all the fighting skills I want plus Navigation (or Surveying).

It depends on your likes. For you, (apparently) all terrain and sensor play is there only to hinder player, whereas for me, it is a source of fun as well, with finding optimal paths through dangerous terrain, luring AI, going dark to avoid detection being entertaining activities.
Hyperspace storms can die for all I care when they slow your fleet to a crawl (without Sustained Burn) and ruin your fleet with bottomless supply drain like they did during 0.7x.  They are a scrappy game mechanic.  I like it that Sustained Burn makes them mostly irrelevant.

P.S.
It destroys a 90 speed, 2 fighterbay, +10 OP odyssey with minimal armour damage.
Does Odyssey have more +5 or +10 OP for the second fighter bay, or does it need to make do with current 0.8 OP?  Patch notes does not mention additional OP for Odyssey.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 31, 2017, 07:41:08 AM
~Snip~

As always, you're entitled to your opinion and you make valid points. That said, I'm of the opposite persuasion. The core gameplay has not suffered, IMO, and being god-like gets boring. In previous patches, once you get your fleet and/or flagship to a certain level, the game has no challenge anymore unless you handicap yourself. Moreover, the campaign additions give the player reason to fight, which is sometimes just as important as the fighting itself. Traveling to a bounty or other target builds the suspense: if I could just instant travel there the only thing it does is make my time from Level 0 - 40 that much quicker. Not to mention that there are now fleets, derelicts, and other systems that beg for me to check them out along the way. The campaign additions since .8 have added a sense of surprise/discovery to the game that SS has been teasing through lore since the beginning. I'll agree these additions have made constant fighting less achievable but just like in music, you need lows to bring out the highs. If you find campaign travel tedious, I get it (I do too at times), but in light of what it has the potential to do, i.e. gives us exploration, surveying, salvage, etc., I'm more than happy to travel around considering the payoffs in doing the other activities.

I've found combat to be as satisfying as ever because I know I can lose. In the large fleet actions of high-end bounties or faction fleets, even if I'm in a battleship with max skills, there's a difference between knowing you're the strongest guy on the block and knowing you're invincible. By virtue of skills and human intelligence, I know I'm going to have an advantage in the vast majority of encounters but in previous patches, player skill was buried under overpowered skill perks that homogenized every battle. It didn't matter if I was good or terrible, when my flagship has 50+% more OP, Vents, Damage, Armor, Speed and everything else relative to what's against me, I can mash my face into the keyboard and win. I don't find that fun, or at least, not fun for very long. In the current meta game, many of my flagships are pound-for-pound better than what I'm up against (I like SO Hammerhead right now), but without really good positioning or help from my fleet, there's no way I can take on capitals or large carriers. It is because of that limitation I'm finding more enjoyment in having to be very particular with the battles I pick and knowing I can lose if I get in over my head is where the thrill is. As you say, there is no actual parity in the game: the campaign factions will always just spawn another fleet, but I want the illusion of parity. It's far more meaningful to me to  win a fight where I thought it was fair or I was the underdog than to go in as the favorite. After all, why are bosses in other games always so much bigger than the player?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 31, 2017, 08:25:42 AM
Minor intel GUI issue (https://gfycat.com/IncomparablePrestigiousChevrotain)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on May 31, 2017, 08:53:36 AM
*snip*

You're right that the various campaign additions enrich the game in a way. They give context to the fighting and sometimes create truly memorable moments. For instance, one time I got a bit too greedy with bounties and ended up short on fuel for the return trip. Fortunately for me a sensor burst revealed a derelict, which happened to be a tanker with 200 fuel in it, just what I needed. That was pretty awesome.

The thing is, derelicts and surveying aren't mandatory. You can just ignore them if you want (which for me is most of the time). Sustained Burn, on the other hand, is mandatory, at least if you want to get anywhere in any kind of reasonable time. And yes, it makes travel quicker, which is good, but it also makes controlling your fleet a lot less responsive and enjoyable (which I suspect is the reason behind its tweaks in .1). That's why I'm complaining about Sustained Burn but not derelicts, because derelicts don't affect me if I don't choose to interact with them. If I decide that grinding the derelict menu is worth my time, that's on me. The trouble with Sustained Burn is that I can't very well decide not to use it, because the map's been designed with it in mind. That'd be like abstaining from fast travel in Oblivion or Skyrim. Yes, you can technically do it, but nobody ever does except as part of an immersion/challenge run (where the challenge is mostly to the player's patience).

Now on to the main point that I found interesting in your post, which is the question of becoming god-like and keeping the game challenging. Firstly I'd like to point out your statement about previous versions posing no challenge to high-level players/fleets doesn't take into account [redacted] [redacted], which don't exist in those versions. That's just a minor point, though. More importantly, I'm not quite sure what the intention is behind SS's leveling system. See, you're right that in general reaching god-like levels of power makes games boring. That's when you retire that character and start over with a different build. And to me it seems that that's the intention behind SS's system given its restrictive level cap and lack of a respec option. You seem to want the game to be playable and challenging indefinitely, and I can see why, it takes a long time to level up your character and assemble a top-tier fleet. I see a contradiction in the design here.

I'd quite like to hear Alex' take on what the intention here is. Is the game supposed to be played repeatedly with different skills, factions, and fleet compositions? In that case giving the players the ability to become god-like with certain broken builds might not be such a bad idea. It's immensely satisfying to reach that point, and once the boredom sets in the player can simply start over with a different build. Finding ever more powerful builds becomes a motivation for replaying the game over and over. If, on the other hand, the idea is to make one character and keep playing them indefinitely, then IMO a respec option would not go amiss. Part of the reason why I stopped playing .8 is that I built my character wrong, and with no respec option correcting those errors would require throwing away all the time, effort, and progress I've invested.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 31, 2017, 08:54:54 AM
Was this the simulator Onslaught? I don't think it has any forward facing kinetics, the only good option for shield penetration is the TPCs. An Onslaught with a couple Mark IXs, or any other anti-shield weaponry for that matter, does much better.
EDIT: Just did a quick test on a new game, spawning in a standard onsluaght, removing the thumpers, and upgrading two flak cannons to mark IXs. It destroys a 90 speed, 2 fighterbay, +10 OP odyssey with minimal armour damage.
EDIT 2: For some reason the AI Onslaught refuses to use Burn Drive vs. Odyssey. If I take manual control and burn drive whenever the Odyssey tries to retreat and vent the fight goes much faster/better.

Fair enough, but still feels the simulator Onslaught should do better against it. In any case, it's still remarkably good. It didn't get any extra OP, btw.

Minor intel GUI issue (https://gfycat.com/IncomparablePrestigiousChevrotain)

I'm sorry if I'm being dense: what's the actual issue?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 31, 2017, 09:12:11 AM
I'm sorry if I'm being dense: what's the actual issue?
For whatever the reason, if you click on "inhabited" filter with "not fully surveyed" on, it'll disable the latter. It wouldn't be very jarring, except you can turn the latter on again. "Stars" and survey filters are incompatible and disable each other when the other is selected, but it doesn't work with "inhabited" filter.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on May 31, 2017, 09:12:43 AM
...Sustained Burn, on the other hand, is mandatory, at least if you want to get anywhere in any kind of reasonable time...

strongly disagree here. I have never used sustained burn in any of my playthroughs after the first. And even that I only used it for the tutorial. It all depends on what you consider reasonable, which I suspect is very different between us.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 31, 2017, 09:29:36 AM
For whatever the reason, if you click on "inhabited" filter with "not fully surveyed" on, it'll disable the latter. It wouldn't be very jarring, except you can turn the latter on again. "Stars" and survey filters are incompatible and disable each other when the other is selected, but it doesn't work with "inhabited" filter.

Ahh, thank you - fixed that up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on May 31, 2017, 09:30:07 AM
...Sustained Burn, on the other hand, is mandatory, at least if you want to get anywhere in any kind of reasonable time...

strongly disagree here. I have never used sustained burn in any of my playthroughs after the first. And even that I only used it for the tutorial. It all depends on what you consider reasonable, which I suspect is very different between us.
Without sustained burn you're spending anywhere from 2 to 3 times as many supplies when traveling, not taking into account any hyperspace storms or fights you get into with pirates that can catch you because you're not at burn 20. I'd say it's pretty mandatory for increasing your profit margins.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on May 31, 2017, 09:44:33 AM
it's mandatory for *increasing your profit margins*. Meaning, it's only mandatory assuming increasing your profit margins is mandatory. Again strongly disagree here.

I did a playthrough under 3x supply and fuel consumption and 2x ship cost once just so I could find out how hard the game can be before I stopped turning a profit. Vanilla gets me far more money than I know what to do with by comparison
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 31, 2017, 10:03:25 AM
Fair enough, but still feels the simulator Onslaught should do better against it. In any case, it's still remarkably good. It didn't get any extra OP, btw.
Ouch!  There goes the missiles.  Oh, wait!  I got rid of them already to make everything else fit!  Okay, let's see how well new Talons work...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Paul_Kauphart on May 31, 2017, 10:11:54 AM
Hi,

I want to add to the discution on Transverse Jump.

I agree the 0.8 version is way too powerfull, and I agree it should be nerfed, however, I think just adding a strong timer is not the way to go, because it just makes it into a replacement jump point with no decision making behind it (close to a jump point, use it, otherwise use TJ). Furthermore, lorewise it basically makes jump points irrelevant and there's no way to explain why no one else is using it while everybody should be using it.

Instead I'd like it to be a choice between ressources and time, meaning if I have time, going to a jump point should always be cheaper.
For me something that make sense should be that jumping outside of a jump point (or strong enough gravity well when jumping in) costs a lot more energy, so instead of spending 1 ly worth of fuel to jump in and free jump out, it could be something like 10 to 15 ly worth to jump in hyperspace and maybe 5 ly worth to jump out.

Then I have to think about the money cost of using it, and if I TJ away from that REDACTED fleet, will I still have the fuel to carry on my exploration, or make even make it back to an inhabited system.

Finaly, I think having an activation time is fine, if it stays short (probably no more than a second).

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 31, 2017, 10:18:11 AM
Meaning, it's only mandatory assuming increasing your profit margins is mandatory.
You need enough profit to upgrade and at least keep up with enemies as they upgrade.  It hurts having to put a fleet in storage when they upgrade faster than you can.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Paul_Kauphart on May 31, 2017, 10:23:27 AM
PS : I forgot the TJ CR cost, I think its fine as it is, but it wouldn't hurt if it got increased a little, it shouldn't be the main cost though, we already have a lot of stuff that costs CR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 31, 2017, 10:47:53 AM
See, you're right that in general reaching god-like levels of power makes games boring. That's when you retire that character and start over with a different build. And to me it seems that that's the intention behind SS's system given its restrictive level cap and lack of a respec option. You seem to want the game to be playable and challenging indefinitely, and I can see why, it takes a long time to level up your character and assemble a top-tier fleet. I see a contradiction in the design here.

I'd quite like to hear Alex' take on what the intention here is. Is the game supposed to be played repeatedly with different skills, factions, and fleet compositions? In that case giving the players the ability to become god-like with certain broken builds might not be such a bad idea. It's immensely satisfying to reach that point, and once the boredom sets in the player can simply start over with a different build. Finding ever more powerful builds becomes a motivation for replaying the game over and over. If, on the other hand, the idea is to make one character and keep playing them indefinitely, then IMO a respec option would not go amiss. Part of the reason why I stopped playing .8 is that I built my character wrong, and with no respec option correcting those errors would require throwing away all the time, effort, and progress I've invested.

IIRC, Alex has been a proponent of starting over. This is the reason there is no respec and I think I even remember him saying that after killing the Redacted Redacted, the game is "over" and it's time to start a new character. For me, it's a lot like Diablo II in that you can play the same class of character with totally different skills and totally different drops and have a totally different experience. So far, I've done probably 5-6 playthroughs to Level 40 and have tried various extremes of playing: fleet-based, solo-based, Industry-based, Explorer-based, Low-Tech, High-tech, etc. I set out from the beginning to stay true to that kind of experience but the randomness of the campaign forces a bit of fluidity.

The thing is, I don't think I have more than 10 hours invested in any one character. Compared to that same Diablo II (or III for that matter) where you can easily have a hundred hours in one character due to grinding. Re-rolling isn't that big of a deal in SS, to me anyway, most of the fun comes from the variety of RNG elements and experiences along the way (also true of Diablo!) The other side of it is that each playstyle has its own strengths and challenges. I've had fun with each style, though I'm naturally inclined to go one way or another. I just hit Level 40 in a "max the Combat Tree" playthrough and despite everything I've said here and elsewhere, I do feel it's lacking somewhat compared to the other playstyles. My flagship is strong but not proportional to the investment.

But my Level 40 character with a top-tier ship might have a chance going around single-handedly wiping out Red Warning REDACTED systems if we had the 0.7 skill system. Perhaps it would be fun the first time around due to novelty but there would be that point of no return where you know, as a player, that no challenge is left. As it stands for 0.8, I've only had one playthrough where I felt that nothing could challenge me and that was a with a high-tech fleet with 10 Level 20 Officers and 15 million credits banked. I had just wiped two Battlestations back-to-back (in adjacent systems no less) and so I retired that character. Everything else? There's still challenges out there and to me, that's good design. Eventually every game runs out of things to do but the longer that takes, the better.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ali on May 31, 2017, 11:02:36 AM
Sigh - i wanna like the odyssey but just find it too ordpoint / flux starved...

i think in a recent build i tried with it, there was no spare op for 1 fighter bay yet alone 2  :(

Also bit frustrating the medium missile mounts aren't synergy... that woulda made a more appropriate change and small mounts left as energy imo?

Every battle i tried with odyssey as my flag just resulted in getting overloaded :( also shudn't the odyssey have suimilar or more op than a conquest?  Conquest seems to be much easier to use as a flag vessel than odyssey  :-\

Just noticed shield mod speed nerf now too.. sigh, "balance ruining fun at every turn"  :(

Still Starsector remains my top game!  ;D  Hope to see more ships & modspec items & the skill tree gaps filled in, in the future!!

Am glad starsector remains mod friendly so even clueless types like myself can mod ship stats to suit self like swapping systems and built in modspec around etc...

Hope to see 8.1 asap so the other top mods can be released soon after!  ;D

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 31, 2017, 01:28:49 PM
@ FooF:  That is why my first (and only) character is unskilled, so I do not need to re-roll characters.  I have a master character to branch from and experiment with skills and various other resources without the need to restart.

* * *

I just tried a carrier fleet with carrier and mobility skills, and except for killing the battlestation, it is much more powerful than a conventional fleet.  By that, I can bring a smaller fleet of carriers than a bigger fleet of mixed ships and kill as fast or faster than my generalist fleet for less supplies and fuel consumed.  The only thing that limits the fleet is the fighters of other carriers escort other ships instead of attacking other ships.  Unless I bump my carrier into an enemy or the enemy drives too close to my deathball fleet, the fleet is not as destructive as it could be.  (This really hurts for battlestation fights where carriers will not send fighters along with yours to murder sections from a safe distance.)

Most of the fighters of my carrier fleet were Warthogs.  Flagship used Sparks (I did not have enough Warthogs for all of my ships).  A few ships used Thunders and Claws.

Just before that, I tried various conventional warships with combat skills, but despite surviving a bit longer and killing a few more ships, they all succumb to the AI's kite-and-swarm tactics.  Carriers counter the AI's favorite (and irritating) playstyle effectively because carriers can keep running away and fighters are faster than most if not all ships and kill them.

Once 0.8.1 comes, I will be tempted to play a carrier-focused fleet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: MCWarhammer on May 31, 2017, 02:21:12 PM
I did a playthrough under 3x supply and fuel consumption and 2x ship cost once just so I could find out how hard the game can be before I stopped turning a profit. Vanilla gets me far more money than I know what to do with by comparison

How did you do this, by the way? I'd like to try it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on May 31, 2017, 02:48:55 PM
It's a little involved. I first doubled f/s consumption (ship_data.csv) and 1.5x'ed the price (commodities.csv). I doubled fuel capacity while I was at it because the idea was to increase upkeep cost, not range. The issue with that was it made salvage more profitable than I'd have liked (if loot table worked the way I thought it did). So I then went off and changed the loot tables to weigh scrap metal more heavily and fuel/supplies less (somewhere in Campaign/procgen, off the top of my head) and lowered min salvage value to like 1/10 of the original value (config/settings). Needless to say, there was a lot of playtesting involved.

Just the first 2 changes would give you a general idea as to what it's like though. If you want you can also just increase consumption (supplies/mo, supplies/de, fuel/ly, and fuel capacity) in ship_data.csv and be done with it. That's the far simpler method with some small issues I'm not gonna outline here. If I have to remake my personal mod come 8.1 that's probably the way I'd do it.
 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on May 31, 2017, 04:35:53 PM
I leave supply/fuel costs constant and just dramatically increased ship prices. When stacked with the omnifactory tariff they can get very expensive.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 31, 2017, 07:56:54 PM

Why the odyssey nerfs? 90 speed odyssey was able to kill almost every cruiser sure, but it still lost to other capitals. At best it could beat a conquest or flee from a Paragon.

The extra 10 speed doesn't really make a difference when the player is piloting it, so it's probably better for it to be on the low end of the effective spectrum. For shields, let's put it this way - it was beating an Onslaught in an AI vs AI fight prior to that adjustment.

Out of curiosity, given the Odyssey has a higher combat deployment cost than a Onslaught, would you not want the Odyssey to beat the Onslaught, or at least have 50/50 odds?  It feels like if you consider the campaign stats, they are perhaps worth 5 supplies/month (Buffalo + Dram), with the downside you have an extra 5 supply cost per combat since you don't deploy Buffalos or Drams normally. 

So I tried modifying the some of the ship definition files in 0.8, and in the sim matched an Odyssey with the originally proposed buffs (90 speed, increased maneuverability some - matched the Aurora in this case, added a 2nd fighter bay), then outfit it similar to the default simulator loadout (2 Autopulse lasers, 1 Guardian PD, 3 Pilum, 7 Burst PD Lasers, 5 IR Lasers), but dropped capacitors/vents to put in a 2nd Longbow.

While the autopilot with a 100% CR Odyssey (realized the CR was 100% on the Odyssey after I ran the tests) defeated an Onslaught_Standard 3 out of 3, it fell to the Onslaught_Elite 2 out of 3.  Given the Onslaught_standard is sub-optimal against a high tech opponent (no frontal kinetic), this doesn't seem that far off, assuming one was aiming for 50/50 victory rate.  I admit it is a small sample size though.  Dropping the shield to 1.0 seems like it causes a large shift in those odds.  Not saying the 80 speed, 1.0 shielded Odyssey is wrong, but just curious about where you want the Odyssey to slot in given its costs.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 31, 2017, 09:34:25 PM
An 80 speed capital is pretty insane/awesome—not getting any more OP on account of the 2 fighter bays kinda blows, though! It's ship system pairs really well with them Autopulse Lasers, gotta say!

The Odyssey really needs David to give it a loving makeover, btw.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 01:46:36 AM
What's wrong with Odyssey? It's one of the better looking ships, with its own style too.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 01, 2017, 03:45:56 AM
Out of curiosity, given the Odyssey has a higher combat deployment cost than a Onslaught, would you not want the Odyssey to beat the Onslaught, or at least have 50/50 odds?

The Odyssey is a battlecruiser, the Onslaught a battleship. The hallmark of a battlecruiser is speed and flexibility, with the ability to hunt down smaller ships and outmaneuver bigger ones. The specialty of a battleship is facing opponents head-on with unmatched defense and firepower.
It's totally OK if, in a fleet battle with room for tactics, maneuvers, multi vector attacks and distractions, a battlecruiser manages to outmaneuver and kill a battleship. That's what it is supposed to do.
But in an 1-on-1, when attacking the enemy directly from the front, the battleship ought to win every time.  That's what it is supposed to do.

What's wrong with Odyssey? It's one of the better looking ships, with its own style too.

Agreed, I like it fine.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 05:36:21 AM
It would be nice if Odyssey got at least +5 OP for Wasps.  I already need to leave missiles empty (even if I want them) unless I take Loadout Design 3.

Quote
What's wrong with Odyssey? It's one of the better looking ships, with its own style too.
Same as Aurora pre-0.8.  Too slow and no shot range to speak of.  Every other capital outguns and/or outranges it.  Even cruisers with ballistics can kite-and-snipe it to death, just like they did to Paragon during 0.7x.  Fighters could make up for poor range, but one wing of fighters is not enough.  And against things Odyssey can kill, it cannot catch.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on June 01, 2017, 05:38:14 AM
The Odyssey is a battlecruiser, the Onslaught a battleship. The hallmark of a battlecruiser is speed and flexibility, with the ability to hunt down smaller ships and outmaneuver bigger ones. The specialty of a battleship is facing opponents head-on with unmatched defense and firepower.
It's totally OK if, in a fleet battle with room for tactics, maneuvers, multi vector attacks and distractions, a battlecruiser manages to outmaneuver and kill a battleship. That's what it is supposed to do.
But in an 1-on-1, when attacking the enemy directly from the front, the battleship ought to win every time.  That's what it is supposed to do.

Thanks for the clarification.  That raises a question in my mind, where does the Legion fall on that spectrum of battlecruiser to battleship?  Or is it orthogonal due to being twice as much carrier as the Odyssey?

Given its specs, the Legion looks a lot like a low tech version of the Odyssey.  It has an ability capable of getting it into combat with cruisers  (as a number of my destroyed Eagle will attest to), a similar number of guns, and multiple wings of fighters.  However, in AI battles, there are variants, such as the fire support, which beat the various Onslaught variants as well as a default style Odyssey, buffed or not.  Mostly because the Onslaught is unwilling to burn drive on the Legion after the first time it drives in to make contact, similar to how it doesn't seem to burn drive on the Odyssey - which I think is why it doesn't win in the AI battles.  It plays to the Odyssesy's shield strengths where as the Onslaught's armor is much better if it just keeps pressuring the Odyssey after that first exchange.

A human piloted Onslaught doesn't seem to have any problems with an Odyssey or Legion, as it just burn dives in and drops them in under 30 seconds.  Any Onslaught variant seems to work.  The current AI seems really hesitant to burn drive in with an Onslaught, other than for the very first contact.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 05:47:44 AM
Odyssey is closer to being a battlecruiser (which it was for a long time), while Legion is battlecarrier. The balance relies on that the Odyssey is faster and has weapon-boosting system, while Legion is better at providing support fire and has more fighters.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 05:56:43 AM
Legion has campaign stats closer to a battleship, and despite having fewer guns, it can focus-fire nearly all of them ahead for maximum firepower, much like Blackrock's (classic) Karkinos.  A well configured Legion can go toe-to-toe with a battleship and win.  Legion is much like the Battlestar Galactica, a battleship and carrier rolled into one.  Legion cannot divide its personal firepower against multiple targets like Onslaught, Paragon, and Conquest can, but it has fighters to do that job.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 06:49:59 AM
Alex: just wanted you to know that Apogee's flares being decent spammable PD and decent spammable distraction for enemy PD is brilliant! I haven't used it much, but it's very funny to me that they can actually be used offensively as well.
From tests conducted on Dominator the funniest thing is that flaks didn't quite knew what to do with flares, while vulcannons shot at them without even hitting them. It really made my day.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: XMod on June 01, 2017, 06:57:23 AM
I want an artillery platforms with a range of from 2000
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 07:02:37 AM
I want an artillery platforms with a range of from 2000
Tachyon Lance Paragon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 07:05:06 AM
Use carriers.  Fighters are effectively homing weapons, and have much more range (3000+) than beam Paragon or Gauss Cannons.  Carriers can solo things other ships cannot.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on June 01, 2017, 07:29:39 AM
Out of curiosity, given the Odyssey has a higher combat deployment cost than a Onslaught, would you not want the Odyssey to beat the Onslaught, or at least have 50/50 odds?

The Odyssey is a battlecruiser, the Onslaught a battleship. The hallmark of a battlecruiser is speed and flexibility, with the ability to hunt down smaller ships and outmaneuver bigger ones. The specialty of a battleship is facing opponents head-on with unmatched defense and firepower.
It's totally OK if, in a fleet battle with room for tactics, maneuvers, multi vector attacks and distractions, a battlecruiser manages to outmaneuver and kill a battleship. That's what it is supposed to do.
But in an 1-on-1, when attacking the enemy directly from the front, the battleship ought to win every time.  That's what it is supposed to do.

As for the deployment cost of the Odyssey (vìs-a-vìs the Onslaught), it's following the high-tech philosophy of "it likely won't take as much hull damage and it can engage/disengage way better than slow bruisers." With 80 speed, two flight decks, a really deep flux pool and good shield, I think it falls in line with that design pretty well.

Since SS is World War II in space, an interesting designation regarding battlecruisers were that they were armed like a battleship but not armored like one. Battleships were routinely armored so that they could withstand a barrage from their own guns. As guns increased in caliber, the armored belt around the battleships grew heavier and the ships became slower. Most navies by WWII had gone to an "all-or-none" armored system (to go along with the "all big gun" approach to dreadnoughts): having some armor that couldn't withstand the highest caliber weapons was actually less efficient than not having any armor at all, since a direct hit would destroy the ship either way. So, many naval vessels had minimal armor to increase speed. Battlecruisers were a part of this design: as well armed as a battleship but considerably faster because they weren't encumbered by thick armor. The problem, of course, is that if a real battleship showed up, the battlecruiser had no defense. Obviously, SS isn't a 1:1 to representation but the Conquest and Odyssey are both fast and hit relatively hard but they can't take the same pounding as an Onslaught or Paragon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on June 01, 2017, 07:31:54 AM
Just to add one last data point, I continued playing around in the simulator some more, and find for 1 on 1 battles, the Onslaught does much better with the Eliminate order rather than the default autopilot and no specific orders.  The extra aggressiveness seems to make it rely on its armor more and keep pressure on the opponent's shields, which plays to its strengths better.  It handily deals with the Legion and seems to handle the buffed Odyssey much better as well.  Again small sample size though.

Anyways, thanks for the clarifications.  They were very informative.  And thanks again to Alex for such a fun game to play around with.  I appreciate how easy he made it to mess around with a good portion of the code base.  Its kinda fun tweaking stuff to see its effects in game.  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 07:42:59 AM
As for the deployment cost of the Odyssey (vìs-a-vìs the Onslaught), it's following the high-tech philosophy of "it likely won't take as much hull damage and it can engage/disengage way better than slow bruisers." With 80 speed, two flight decks, a really deep flux pool and good shield, I think it falls in line with that design pretty well.
Not sure about that.  Flux pool is good, but not as good as Conquest.  As for shield, if Odyssey kept 0.8 shield, I would agree, although it still was not very durable to begin with, especially if you need that flux to attack things.  At 1.0, it would be no more durable than Aurora.

Two fighters bays but no additional OP to support that?  Unless Talons are still overpowered for their cost (despite getting weakened), that would be hard to afford two good fighters without sacrificing something.  I already eschew medium missiles to get what I need to make Odyssey somewhat decent.


P.S.  I agree with Hiruma Kai's earlier points.  I expect what I pay for, and if Odyssey costs more to use than Onslaught, Conquest, or Legion, I expect Odyssey to be on par if not outperform less expensive capitals somewhat in overall combat performance.

That said, with skills, Astral is the most powerful ship in the game of 0.8, and it is cheaper than Paragon.  (Yes, I know skills, some overpowered fighters, and Unstable Injector will be weakened.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 08:29:26 AM
I think that maintenance reduction would be better for Odyssey than another combat buff.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 08:42:01 AM
Maybe.  About the only campaign goodies Odyssey has are slightly bigger capacities and higher burn speed made irrelevant by Sustained Burn.  As for campaign buff, it would need to be cheaper to use as you say (like lowering DP cost from 45 to 35 would be a start).  Making it a true hybrid like Apogee could work, but somebody else commented something to the effect he would not use it for combat if that happened.  I would not blame him for not deploying a capital that gets outranged and outgunned by every other capital, including weaker ones like Conquest.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 08:47:06 AM
I don't know who, but I'd join him. I like efficiency and in my fleet there's place only for dedicated ships. Dedicated freighters and dedicated combat ships (and tankers and rigs). I don't see a point in taking a ship with me if 2 dedicated ships will beat him in efficiency while being less than 2 times more expensive than it. I'd rather have a dedicated "cheap capital" than a hybrid mess. Multirole ships are for early game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 09:11:22 AM
I would rather the Odyssey be slightly overtuned than have another Aurora, a ship that's both obsoleted by carriers in battlefield role and defeated by carriers in a 1v1. Simulator Aurora gets beaten by a completely unskilled Heron on autopilot with 2 Gladius, 1 Claw, and a Heavy Mauler, and the same Heron kills frigates and destroyers just as well as the Aurora if not better. I'd expect a fast (battle)cruiser to be able to close in with its speed and destroy carriers of its size class or smaller, but I doubt the new Odyssey will be able to do so if it has terrible shield efficiencies and isn't faster than a Heron.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 01, 2017, 09:16:21 AM
Well now, I wouldn't say a 1.0 shield is "terrible". Sure it ain't no 0.6 like an Omen or Paragon but...meh.

The only terrible shields are the ones above 1.2 like the Sunder's and Conquest's.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 09:18:56 AM
For a high tech ships that have low armor and hull integrity for their size and have to depend heavily on their shield for taking damage, 1.0 base shield efficiency is terrible, 0.8 is mediocre, and 0.6 is good. The Odyssey now has 200 lower armor and 2000 lower hull integrity than the Conquest, so its shield better be able to take hits. With a total shield HP equal to the Aurora's (12000÷0.8 = 15000÷1.0) and only slightly better than the Conquest's (20000÷1.4=14285) it's not going to be able to take fire.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 09:21:29 AM
No other high-tech ship has shields above 0.8.  Odyssey having 1.0 would be a first.

P.S.  Carriers are overpowered.  Heron is a better combat ship than every other cruiser.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 01, 2017, 09:44:18 AM
Well good thing it's super fast (for a capital) and has capital ship range (assuming ITU is installed)!

I really don't think taking 20% more shield damage is going to upset things all that much, but as I said before, not receiving more OP for it's two new flight decks is some bullcrap.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 09:52:42 AM
Well good thing it's super fast (for a capital) and has capital ship range (assuming ITU is installed)!
Fast, yes, but fast enough to flank Onslaught?  I am not sure of that.  Capital ship range?  Only if it uses beams (and then it needs fighters to put hard flux on shields).  Otherwise, +60% of 700 is still 1142, less than cruisers' range with Mauler/HVD plus ITU.  Odyssey does not really have capital ship range now, and it still will not, at least with 700 range energy weapons; beams will probably be viable if it can afford two wings of Broadswords.

Agreed that no additional OP for second fighter wing hurts.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 09:54:00 AM
Well good thing it's super fast (for a capital) and has capital ship range (assuming ITU is installed)!

I really don't think taking 20% more shield damage is going to upset things all that much, but as I said before, not receiving more OP for it's two new flight decks is some bullcrap.
It's weapon range is crippled by being energy, so it has to be super fast. It's like having Unstable Injector built-in, except previously it only had the range penalty and not the speed. And it's taking 25% additional shield damage, not 20%. 0.2 is one quarter of 0.8. Given that its shield is a very important and significant portion of its survivability, this is a big deal.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 09:58:24 AM
@ ANGRYABOUTELVES:  Agreed.  Odyssey has somewhat better defenses than Conquest due to its shield, but significantly worse firepower.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on June 01, 2017, 10:37:31 AM
Even the 90 speed odyssey didn't beat the Onslaught by flanking, it beat it by winning a flux war against entirely HE/Frag weaponry. I think it is quite reasonable for an Onslaught with no anti-shield options at all to lose to even the weakest high-tech ship just as it would be reasonable for a 100% kinetic Paragon to lose to an Onslaught.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 10:52:38 AM
Perhaps we should have a look at other high-tech ships' shields... In the table "new" Odyssey with its 1,0 shields is basically a bigger Aurora in that regard, while old Odyssey was losing (albeit slightly) to an Apogee, which admittedly has a damn strong shield. Both of those, though, are nothing in comparison to Paragon's shields... I'll have to see if speed and second fighter wing make up for worse shields.(http://i.imgur.com/dXwIua8.png)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on June 01, 2017, 10:56:47 AM
shoot I'm late to this argument but re: the onslaught costing less CAR to deploy, it's an outdated ship from a bygone era of naval doctrine, the Odyssey isn't. Presumably the onslaughts age and ubiquity in the primary military has cause some shortcuts to be developed
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 11:01:56 AM
The Astral has 12000 flux capacity and a 0.6 efficiency shield, for a total of 20000 shield HP. Both the Oldyssey and the Newdyssey have worse shields than the Astral.
The Onslaught has 17000 flux capacity and a 1.0 efficiency shield. The Newdyssey's shields are inferior to the Onslaught's.
The only capital ships with worse shields than the Newdyssey are the Legion, the Conquest, and the civilians.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 11:08:52 AM
Oh wow - I didn't think about them. In Onslaught's case it's not that big deal since it isn't exactly supposed to tank much with its shields, but Astral has flux-free weapons (fighters), so it can tank until the flux cap. New Odyssey really looks bleak in that comparison.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on June 01, 2017, 11:21:18 AM
I'm in agreement that changing the efficiency of the Odyssey without a big increase in Capacity looks like a raw deal, for a ship that's already pretty weak.

I think Odyssey really should keep efficient shields, or have a System that replaces HEF and gives Energy Weapons significantly more range for a little while (3-5 seconds; long enough to trash lighter Frigates).

It would make up for the shields being gimped somewhat, since it could open the engagement by putting flux on the opponent (unless it's an Onslaught Burn Driving in).  I think the Odyssey's main issues have always been that its effective firepower is terrible compared to almost anything else in its size class, and unlike the Conquest., it can't have a "strong side" to (kind of) make it work (in human hands, with luck and alpha).  I like that it's more of a carrier now; that is sensible.  But it needs more oomph, or it's just something we can ignore until we've killed the escorts, unlike the Paragon, where we pretty much need to stay awaaaaaaaay unless we're really, really really ready (which is a good dynamic- I like that it's that deadly now, lol).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on June 01, 2017, 11:30:50 AM
I think the Odyssey just needs the 0.8 efficiency shields back. With 80 speed and .8 shields it can destroy most cruisers but fails against capitals, which is a pretty reasonable niche. The Paragon can be the high-tech capital killer while Odyssey can be the cruiser killer.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 12:07:38 PM
I tried flanking Onslaught with a Heron.  At 130 with zero-flux speed bonus, it has trouble flanking Onslaught.  It could do it, but not without taking some serious damage.  With bonuses from Helmsmanship (for 138 speed), Heron could flank Onslaught a bit more easily.  Later, I tried to flank a Dominator with the same Heron but could not do it.

Odyssey with 80 speed would have enough speed to withdraw from things that threaten it, and maybe murder some of the slower cruisers and destroyers.  I doubt it will be able to run rings around capitals unless it gets Plasma Jets like Aurora.  Now, Aurora is a speed demon with Plasma Jets.  It will run down and catch destroyers, even Medusa.  It can come close to Heron at killing a fleet, but Heron is still better.

Odyssey should keep its 0.8 shield.  80 speed should prevent some cruisers from kite-and-sniping Odyssey to death.  Two fighters should make beams a viable option for Odyssey too, although no more OP for fighters when it already has a slight OP shortage makes it less than exciting.

If High Energy Focus would be replaced, Reserve Deployment would be fun to spam fighters when needed or maybe to keep up with Legion.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on June 01, 2017, 12:31:48 PM
I still think the Odyssey is a battlecruiser that happens to have flight decks rather than a carrier that happens to have big guns, if you get my distinction. Reserve Deployment would be kind of nice but I still think the Odyssey is meant to shoot at things rather than let fighters deal with them.

Perhaps it should inherit the Apogee's old ship system (with the drones?) and gain 30% range instead of High Energy Focus. If it didn't have a range disadvantage against ballistic cruisers/capitals, its speed and shield may not be as much of an issue because it doesn't have to close as much distance. The other two high-tech capitals have built-in range boosts...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 12:37:34 PM
1800 range beams on a mobile platform is entering "Paragon with plasma jets" territory... As in, overpowered.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 01, 2017, 12:46:19 PM
I still think the Odyssey is a battlecruiser that happens to have flight decks rather than a carrier that happens to have big guns, if you get my distinction. Reserve Deployment would be kind of nice but I still think the Odyssey is meant to shoot at things rather than let fighters deal with them.

Yeah, its strength is definitely in it's guns. It has cruiser level fire power and destroyer level fighter power. If fighters were its specialty it wouldn't even need that high speed.

That said, it could be interesting to see a faction variant of the Odyssey that is focused more on fighters, maybe with three flight decks and a fitting system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 12:51:11 PM
How would Odyssey with beams, ITU, and Advanced Optics be overpowered?  It would need fighters (or other ships) to hit for hard flux for beams to be a threat against the things that can threaten Odyssey.  It cannot be done very effectively with only one wing of fighters.

Quote
I still think the Odyssey is a battlecruiser that happens to have flight decks rather than a carrier that happens to have big guns, if you get my distinction. Reserve Deployment would be kind of nice but I still think the Odyssey is meant to shoot at things rather than let fighters deal with them.
Does not matter what Odyssey was meant to be.  If Odyssey was meant for direct combat, it pales compared to Paragon.  It needs to make up for that somehow, and fighters are the key.  Although Odyssey does not need so many fighters to become another Astral.  If Odyssey does not have enough fighter power, and it cannot get enough speed to do much, then it really needs Advanced Targeting Core to compete, but that should not be necessary if Odyssey is fast enough and has enough fighters to support it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 01:02:49 PM
But it will have 2 wings. 2k range beams with fighters adding hard flux damage and it itself being highly mobile would equal Odyssey having huge area of "denial" by firepower. With its many mounts it wouldn't have to have interceptors to defend itself against other fighters and with triple tachyon beams and HEF it'd have 11250 burst damage... It can pierce through many shields with no to little support and everything that can withstand this, the Odyssey will be able to kite.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 01:09:42 PM
But it will have 2 wings. 2k range beams with fighters adding hard flux damage and it itself being highly mobile would equal Odyssey having huge area of "denial" by firepower. With its many mounts it wouldn't have to have interceptors to defend itself against other fighters and with triple tachyon beams and HEF it'd have 11250 burst damage... It can pierce through many shields with no to little support and everything that can withstand this, the Odyssey will be able to kite.
Almost like it's a real battlecruiser, able to kill what it can't outrun and outrun what it can't kill.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 01:15:33 PM
We will see.  Even four wings from Legion can falter unless player put some points into carrier skills.  Odyssey will be no better than Condor in terms of fighter support.  Two wings should make fighters usable for Odyssey.

If Odyssey can kill about as much as Paragon, that is a good thing.  Odyssey is not the cheapest capital to use.

80 speed is only fast for big ships.  Without mobility system, it is not that fast when compared to everything.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 01, 2017, 01:37:14 PM
Almost like it's a real battlecruiser, able to kill what it can't outrun and outrun what it can't kill.
But that's on top of having 2000 units wide bubble that nothing smaller than cruiser can enter...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 01:50:28 PM
But that's on top of having 2000 units wide bubble that nothing smaller than cruiser can enter...
You're exaggerating. Firstly, it's 1800 units, not 2000. Secondly, it's not a bubble, the Odyssey cannot converge three large energies in a 360° radius. The Odyssey can converge three large energies at a single awkward angle that requires seriously good piloting to reliably take advantage of. More likely the Odyssey will be able to hit destroyers and frigates with one or two large energies, and that's much more survivable.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2017, 02:09:55 PM
More likely the Odyssey will be able to hit destroyers and frigates with one or two large energies, and that's much more survivable.
Do not count on that.  Medusa is faster and it cannot catch some frigates.  Frigates will be able to kite, swarm, and kill no problem.  It is the cruisers and slow destroyers (like Enforcer and some carriers) that may have trouble, and that is fine since Odyssey is weak against other capitals.

HIL is stopped by most shields, and it is a bad flux trade for the attacker.  Tachyon Lance is good, but needs hard flux to bypass shields.  Any other large energy, Odyssey gets outranged by many ballistic users and Paragon.

Remember, Onslaught and Legion have Burn Drive for more speed.  Conquest has Maneuvering Jets for more speed.  Paragon has Advanced Targeting Core to compensate for poor mobility and fixes energy weapons' range weakness.  Astral is the master of fighters thanks to six bays and Fighter Recall, and fighters have even more range than Paragon.  Odyssey has... nothing to compensate for slow speed and shot range, except one fighter bay, which is not much better than a Converted Hangar Onslaught and Paragon can get (and those two ships have some OP to spare).  The 80 speed and two fighter bays should not make Odyssey overpowered, but to at least compete with the other capitals.  That is kind of why the shield change to 1.0 is baffling.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 01, 2017, 02:43:06 PM
I currently playtest the Odyssey in this configuration:
3x Autopulse Laser
12x Tac Laser
2x Sabot Rack

ITU
IPDAI
Advanced Gyros
Expanded Mags
2x Xyphos Wing

So on the one hand I have a beam kraken with the Tac Lasers and the Xyphos' four Ion beams, which quickly deals with many frigates, fighters and damaged ships. And with the Sabots and Autopulsers I have plenty of burst hard flux firepower to kill of anything bigger. It's pretty hard to find anything that can stand up to that combo.

I tried it as a carrier, but two decks just don't have the oomph to do anything at their own in the kinds of fights the Ody gets involved in. Longbows on permanent "regroup" are useful too, but I found the static gun platform called Xyphos to provide the most value. I'd like more fighters of that kind.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 07:29:40 PM
Why are all the default Aurora variants terrible? There's one with nothing but burst PD and some Salamanders, there's one with nothing but Ion weaponry, I don't think there's a single one that's actually good. And by good I mean has two Sabot SRM Pods and Expanded Missile Racks.

Oh, and the Strike Aurora variant has a PD laser in the rear medium synergy, which isn't possible as synergy slots can't mount weapons smaller than their slot size.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 01, 2017, 07:54:26 PM
An Aurora without at least one Heavy Blaster is no Aurora at all!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 08:04:10 PM
Auroras without Heavy Blasters are the best Auroras. It should only run any HBs if it's also running Safety Overrides, and I don't like Safety Overrides. The Aurora still functions best as a front-line missile boat. That's my major issue with the default Aurora variants, there are no missile boat Auroras. I get that some captains are crazy and like to overload themselves with the Heavy Blaster, but surely at least some of them realize that they'll overload more of the enemy by dropping eight Sabots and Plasma Jetting forwards to protect the first stage of the Sabot shells from PD with their shields.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on June 01, 2017, 08:14:03 PM
I prefer -one- heavy blaster on an Aurora, in the forward hardpoint.  Front turrets go to pulse lasers.  No SO, no UI, no missiles, just death and destruction for whatever gets in front of you.  You can't just put it on autofire, but having those 500 damage shots is great for armor-breaking.  Missiles are just... Yeah, okay, you can horribly massacre three ships.  Six if you have extended racks.  I'd rather have a build with a bit more staying power.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 08:22:16 PM
When those six ships you horribly massacre are all of their cruisers, the Aurora doesn't need staying power. It can comfortably kill destroyers with 2 Pulse 3 IR Pulse. Sabots in the mediums and HE missiles, preferably Annihilators, in the smalls allow it to punch within, even slightly above, its weight class for 6 (six) ships. I can't remember the last time a bounty had six Falcons, let alone six actual cruisers.

The sim Aurora can't kill the Heron mostly because its loadout is terrible. Front Shield is necessary for the Aurora in 0.8, just so it doesn't get crippled by fighters shooting out its engines.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: orost on June 01, 2017, 08:43:29 PM
Aurora wants to be an aggressive hunter-killer ship and absolutely excels in this role but all the variants are strange declawed support boats.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on June 01, 2017, 08:44:48 PM
More likely the Odyssey will be able to hit destroyers and frigates with one or two large energies, and that's much more survivable.
Do not count on that.  Medusa is faster and it cannot catch some frigates.  Frigates will be able to kite, swarm, and kill no problem.  It is the cruisers and slow destroyers (like Enforcer and some carriers) that may have trouble, and that is fine since Odyssey is weak against other capitals.

HIL is stopped by most shields, and it is a bad flux trade for the attacker.  Tachyon Lance is good, but needs hard flux to bypass shields.  Any other large energy, Odyssey gets outranged by many ballistic users and Paragon.

Remember, Onslaught and Legion have Burn Drive for more speed.  Conquest has Maneuvering Jets for more speed.  Paragon has Advanced Targeting Core to compensate for poor mobility and fixes energy weapons' range weakness.  Astral is the master of fighters thanks to six bays and Fighter Recall, and fighters have even more range than Paragon.  Odyssey has... nothing to compensate for slow speed and shot range, except one fighter bay, which is not much better than a Converted Hangar Onslaught and Paragon can get (and those two ships have some OP to spare).  The 80 speed and two fighter bays should not make Odyssey overpowered, but to at least compete with the other capitals.  That is kind of why the shield change to 1.0 is baffling.
This is approximately what I found when I tested a 90 speed Odyssey. Capitals killed it, it killed Cruisers, did decently against destroyers, and was killed by frigates. (Odyssey lost to 40 DP Onslaught [A variant that swaps two flak cannons for kinetics], won vs. 100DP of cruisers, won vs. 50DP of Destroyers, lost vs. 50DP of frigates)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 01, 2017, 08:53:33 PM
Aurora wants to be an aggressive hunter-killer ship and absolutely excels in this role but all the variants are strange declawed support boats.
Some of the variants do have claws, though. The """""""Balanced""""""" variant has 2 Heavy Blasters, an Ion Pulser, and two Antimatter Blasters. It's got so much claw that it cuts itself whenever it tries to fire.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on June 01, 2017, 09:27:44 PM
Out of curiosity, with the 80 speed and 1.0 shield reduction for the Odyssey, what is its distinguishing characteristic versus the Conquest now?  Basically just 2 fighter wings?  It used to be the Odyssey was a better tank, but had less offense because of its energy weapon load out and slower average speed.

There's about a 800 effective hit points difference between a Conquest's base shield and an Odyssey's base shield with the 1.0 multiplier, and the Odyssey really doesn't have the spare OP to put more points into flux capacitors to take advantage of the shield ratio.   The Conquest's time averaged speed is 70 (manuevring jets adds +50 about half the time) versus the Odyssey's 80.   The Conquest's effective 315 OP + 40 dedicated Large Ballistics OP lets it grab just as many useful hull mods the Odyssey if it fills both sides equally with weapons, more if it doesn't.  

An Odyssey can get 3 large energy weapons in arc along a thin line, while a Conquest can get 2 Large and 2 medium ballistics in arc comfortably.
 The high energy focus can briefly make that seem like 4.5 large energy weapons, but I'd argue 2 Large and 2 medium ballistics are just as good when high energy focus is up, and better when its down.  Two large missile launchers seem to help as much as two fighters wings in the short term, at least in a 1 on 1 duel against larger ships.  Certainly I think Squall MLRS can be compared to Longbows against other cruisers or capitals.

The Odyssey's fighters wings seem to do a better job of chasing down lone frigates than the missiles.

Also while playing around, I've discovered non-officer setups of the Conquest which look to beat the standard and elite Onslaughts 100% of the time when both are AI piloted (in addition it seems to defeat every Odyssey setup run by the AI I've tried).  For example, 2x Gauss Cannons, 2x Hellbore, 2x Hypervelocity, 2x Heavy Mauler, 2x Squall, 2x Sabot SRM pod, x8 Tactical lasers, Dedicated Targeting Core, Stabilized Shields, Hardened Shields, rest in vents then capacitors, 315 OP used.  By not including short range PD, the AI is smart enough not to close with the Onslaughts, and it has enough shield to survive the burn drive and maneuvering jet out of the way.  Throwing it against carriers also works surprisingly well despite its lack of actual "PD".  The tac lasers actually kill fighters rather than trying to kill the ammunition they drop.  Up against 2 sim Herons, it seems to win.  2 sim Moras on the other hand is very close.  Once its armor is bumped to 1200, and talons are nerfed, it should win regularly against that match up I think.

I've come to a much better appreciation of the Conquest through all this testing.  I'll need to aim for it more often in play throughs.  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embercloud on June 02, 2017, 01:31:49 AM
I take it the interdiction pulse nullifies transverse jumps chargeup?
Meaning you need to start transversing jumping once again if you, for example, manage to successfully withdraw from the fight?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Death_Silence_66 on June 02, 2017, 03:07:23 AM
Anything resembling an ETA for this?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 02, 2017, 05:40:04 AM
Re: Aurora
If I can spare the weapons, I like two Heavy Blasters and one Ion Beam.  If not, three Pulse Lasers, two Ion Cannons, maybe Salamanders.  It has enough mounts to fire four Salamanders, which is roughly the minimum to make them reliable.

P.S.
Back to Odyssey...
Quote
and the Odyssey really doesn't have the spare OP to put more points into flux capacitors to take advantage of the shield ratio.
That is true, and will be more so if Odyssey does not get more OP to support second wing of fighters.

With more speed, a configuration I may want to try again is three Guardian PD in the heavy mounts and IR Pulse Lasers in all of the small mounts.  This configuration is ineffective in 0.8 because the range was even less, and against the things it could kill, they simply stayed away from Odyssey easily, and against capitals, some of them kite-and-sniped Odyssey while the rest simply outgunned it.  The Guardian PDs are better PD than many PD lasers, and the IR Pulse Lasers do respectable damage when about six or seven pound on the enemy.  But with short range, Odyssey almost needs to bump into enemies to kill them.  Maybe 80 speed will help in that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 02, 2017, 09:04:42 AM
I take it the interdiction pulse nullifies transverse jumps chargeup?
Meaning you need to start transversing jumping once again if you, for example, manage to successfully withdraw from the fight?

Right, yes. So does just being in a fight. But given that whoever you fought should be "standing down", you should have ample time to withdraw.

Anything resembling an ETA for this?

Well, I'm pretty deep into testing, if that's any help :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Snrasha on June 03, 2017, 06:00:53 AM
Quote
Fixed crash on star system info screen if planet had 4 or more moons

Thank for have fixed this bug.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 10:01:55 AM
It's out!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: c0nr4d1c4l on June 03, 2017, 10:06:13 AM
YEEEEEEEEESSSSSS!!  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on June 03, 2017, 10:21:46 AM
< internet is down
< sees Alex releases new update
< does a sadface
<decides to give downloading it over the phone a shot, worried about how I'd go about doing that
< link just works

Alex really is stalking me to keep track of which IP's are me
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: JohnDoe on June 03, 2017, 10:24:07 AM
 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 03, 2017, 11:12:15 AM
First impression of the new Thunder: it is waaaaaaaay too fast. It can't actually kill things because its attack runs last milliseconds.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 03, 2017, 11:28:53 AM
So whats coming next? A 0.8.2 that'll "flesh" things out even further? Or maybe things are a in a good spot now and it's time for Outposts? :O
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 03, 2017, 11:32:43 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/SDVYKtW.jpg)And you said Odyssey won't receive any OPs! While we're at that, Heron also got some, previously maxed with +10% skill now show 3 unspent OPs.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on June 03, 2017, 11:34:15 AM
Has anyone else here Avast? I've tried downloading 0.81 a couple of times already and every single time when it's about to finish downloading Avast says ''threat detected'' and I can't do *** about it. One time it actually downloaded, Avast deleted the file immediately as I opened it. I remember 0.8 also having some problems with Avast but this is far more annoying.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 11:41:18 AM
First impression of the new Thunder: it is waaaaaaaay too fast. It can't actually kill things because its attack runs last milliseconds.

It'd probably do more damage if it was slower, but speed does have other advantages, especially couple with its range.

So whats coming next? A 0.8.2 that'll "flesh" things out even further? Or maybe things are a in a good spot now and it's time for Outposts? :O

Aside from hotfixes, I it's on to new features!

And you said Odyssey won't receive any OPs! While we're at that, Heron also got some, previously maxed with +10% skill now show 3 unspent OPs.

Probably due to OP cost reductions of a few fighter wings. Some variants might be over OP as well, as a few fighter now cost more.

Has anyone else here Avast? I've tried downloading 0.81 a couple of times already and every single time when it's about to finish downloading Avast says ''threat detected'' and I can't do *** about it. One time it actually downloaded, Avast deleted the file immediately as I opened it. I remember 0.8 also having some problems with Avast but this is far more annoying.

Hmm - can you disable Avast entirely for the duration of the download and installation? (Also, if you can report it to them as a false positive, that'd be a great help.)




Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on June 03, 2017, 11:42:22 AM
are the new Colossi not on the codex somehow? I just looked and couldn't find them
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on June 03, 2017, 11:44:22 AM
Quote
Hmm - can you disable Avast entirely for the duration of the download and installation? (Also, if you can report it to them as a false positive, that'd be a great help.)

I can't even report it as a false positive, which I did with 0.8... Guess only thing I can do is to disable it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on June 03, 2017, 11:45:47 AM
Has anyone else here Avast? I've tried downloading 0.81 a couple of times already and every single time when it's about to finish downloading Avast says ''threat detected'' and I can't do *** about it. One time it actually downloaded, Avast deleted the file immediately as I opened it. I remember 0.8 also having some problems with Avast but this is far more annoying.
Huh.
Probably because Alex upload 'free' version for pirates with keyloger and bitcoin miner included by mistake.
Or so I hear.
Disclaimer.
Spoiler
ITS A JOKE.
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 11:50:57 AM
are the new Colossi not on the codex somehow? I just looked and couldn't find them

Oh, hmm - hulls with dmods don't show in the Codex. Probably not "correct" behavior here, but as the Codex is iffy at the moment, it's just one more thing to look at for it, eventually.

Huh.
Probably because Alex upload 'free' version for pirates with keyloger and bitcoin miner included by mistake.
Or so I hear.

(I get that it's a joke, but people sometimes take things seriously that they shouldn't, so I'd rather not even joke about that.)

I can't even report it as a false positive, which I did with 0.8... Guess only thing I can do is to disable it.

Anti-viruses, just ugh. In my experience, MSE is just about good enough these days, and not intrusive. But really, nothing gets you all that much protection anyway, it's mostly a false sense of security.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Todriam on June 03, 2017, 11:52:10 AM
Has anyone else here Avast? I've tried downloading 0.81 a couple of times already and every single time when it's about to finish downloading Avast says ''threat detected'' and I can't do *** about it. One time it actually downloaded, Avast deleted the file immediately as I opened it. I remember 0.8 also having some problems with Avast but this is far more annoying.

I was in middle of installing and AVG decided it was a threat.  Couldn't get around it, so I ended up just disabling AVG for the 30 seconds it took to install.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 03, 2017, 11:54:08 AM
First impression of the new Thunder: it is waaaaaaaay too fast. It can't actually kill things because its attack runs last milliseconds.

It's actually great if you want to have a rapid response force, for example to help allies in trouble or intercept an enemy frigate on way to a nav buoy. Often you have to back them up after they delayed the enemy, though.
A while I had a kinda command ship (Drover) with Nav Relay, ECM package and as only direct intervention method two of the new Thunder wings. Worked pretty well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 03, 2017, 11:56:48 AM
Probably due to OP cost reductions of a few fighter wings. Some variants might be over OP as well, as a few fighter now cost more.
Oh, yeah, right, I forgot about that.

Huh.
Probably because Alex upload 'free' version for pirates with keyloger and bitcoin miner included by mistake.
Or so I hear.

(I get that it's a joke, but people sometimes take things seriously that they shouldn't, so I'd rather not even joke about that.)
(We get you want to stay low-key about this, but we won't blow the whistle on you!)

From some early tests Odyssey with twin plasma cannons and two longbow wings seems capable of killing everything non-capital in one 4-sabot salvo and then 1 double plasma cannon salvo, with HEF. If it worked on Dominator, it has to work on everything, right?
And... I finally can say that... David, I know you like this rounded gun mounts on Colossus, but really I'm pretty sure pather or pirate captains wouldn't pay attention to such aesthetic!

PS. AM I HEARING NEW MUSIC?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Bastion.Systems on June 03, 2017, 12:19:00 PM
PRAISE LUDD IT IS HERE.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 12:20:02 PM
PS. AM I HEARING NEW MUSIC?

Yep, there's a new campaign track!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 03, 2017, 01:37:39 PM
Colossi are... Just as competent as I've expected. By that I mean similar to most of combat freighters. As in, bad. But hey, nobody expected it to be better! Oh, by the way... side mounts of theirs are in different positions on both sprites. And Hammerhead's left medium ballistic mount is a bit off to the left.
I suspect that "new" Brawlers will be bad... TT Brawler is still good only for pursuit and AM bombing, while normal I won't use any more, solely because I want to remember him positively.
And the new engines on Ox look as if they were bolted on.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: zaimoni on June 03, 2017, 02:00:52 PM
Has anyone else here Avast?
Just ditch Avast; if you're on Win10 you have Windows Defender available, if you can't afford anything else lightweight.  Avast was good back ~2000, but the quality control has gone down in the past decade or so.

I do have an axe to grind: Avast is 100% incompatible with the cross-domain login system backing an online game I help maintain.  It can't handle the way the login system juggles cookies and PHP session data.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hussar on June 03, 2017, 02:10:51 PM
Oh man. Time to start over... again XD
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 03, 2017, 03:13:39 PM
Anyone got some (preferably) in-combat pics of the Mk II and Mk III Colossus? Since they aren't in the codex it might be awhile before I see'em...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hussar on June 03, 2017, 03:19:29 PM
Anyone got some (preferably) in-combat pics of the Mk II and Mk III Colossus? Since they aren't in the codex it might be awhile before I see'em...

go into: \Fractal Softworks\Starsector\starsector-core\graphics\ships\colossus
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TheJoeEffect on June 03, 2017, 03:20:39 PM
I've submitted a false positive report to Avast. (I'm gonna switch to somebody else. AVG?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 03:36:49 PM
Anyone got some (preferably) in-combat pics of the Mk II and Mk III Colossus? Since they aren't in the codex it might be awhile before I see'em...

Or you could run in dev mode and go into "edit variants" off the main screen.

I've submitted a false positive report to Avast. (I'm gonna switch to somebody else. AVG?)

Thanks!

Microsoft Security Essentials/Windows Defender? (I've had AVG delete a windows system file make the system unbootable once. Sure, it was >10 years ago, but that sort of thing leaves a bad taste in your mouth.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: isaacssv552 on June 03, 2017, 03:52:06 PM
Why does the new version require me to retake the tutorial? I find it odd since everything else seems to have worked fine so far.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on June 03, 2017, 04:14:39 PM
Why does the new version require me to retake the tutorial? I find it odd since everything else seems to have worked fine so far.
Because they way the system remembered if you did it or not changed to a registry entry, which means that once you beat it, it should remember that you did without needing to hold onto saves

Alex, I sent avast an email to their whitelisting service so hopefully your installer will get flagged as safe soon. I also included links to your fractal email and the website as well
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 04:26:52 PM
Why does the new version require me to retake the tutorial? I find it odd since everything else seems to have worked fine so far.
Because they way the system remembered if you did it or not changed to a registry entry, which means that once you beat it, it should remember that you did without needing to hold onto saves

Right, yes, so after this time it should persist across re-installs. It should also still allow you to skip it if there are any existing saves, though.

Alex, I sent avast an email to their whitelisting service so hopefully your installer will get flagged as safe soon. I also included links to your fractal email and the website as well

Thank you!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on June 03, 2017, 04:53:23 PM
Thanks Alex!

[Edit] Btw, on a Windows 10 system "Windows Defender SmartScreen" gave me a little bit of backtalk on installing. It still let me after I poked it for more details, but claimed you were an unknown publisher. I'll see if I can give feedback somewhere...

[Double Edit] Also, the new music... Stian, you've really outdone yourself. Its really good.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 03, 2017, 05:15:46 PM
Is Stian still on for Starsector's music and SFX? I haven't heard any news from that guy in years.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Baqar79 on June 03, 2017, 06:09:52 PM
Blast!, I'm in the middle of an epic exploration outting within Elite Dangerous, and now a brand new Starsector update is released.

I'm planning on starting again with 0.8.1a, but I'm torn about making it home in ED first before I dive in (probably around ~2-3 days if I go fast, or a week if I take my time a little). Hmmm, time management for my favourite games...is that even possible :D

Alright, as soon as I find a nice system, I'll park up, and have a looksie into 0.8.1a for a *few hours.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on June 03, 2017, 06:23:33 PM
Quick feedback (chasing down bounties in Galatia): Having tiny pirate frigate fleets spamming interdiction pulse on me every time I try to sustain burn is... annoying. Considering these ships will constantly hound the player through an entire starsystem, what recourse do I have other than to try to catch them with emergency burn? Its taking me more supplies to catch them than to fight, and its forcing me to do boring mop up fights constantly. I'll see how this goes in later in.

On the plus side, I'm mostly digging the fighter balance. Talons are useful, but not overpowered, Thunders are nice though I haven't fought against them, and an enemy Mora with Gladius + Talons was very difficult on my frigates (but that let my slow D Hammerhead shine).  Kopeshes are still very nice at 12 OP. My one gripe is that I haven't found a use for Piranhas - very small sample size of fights so far, but I would rate it as a 5 OP bomber rather than 10.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 06:51:57 PM
Hotfix is up for this issue:
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12547.0

[Edit] Btw, on a Windows 10 system "Windows Defender SmartScreen" gave me a little bit of backtalk on installing. It still let me after I poked it for more details, but claimed you were an unknown publisher. I'll see if I can give feedback somewhere...

I think it's part of Microsoft's general policy to drive people to use their godawful store. In this case, by vaguely scaring them about unknown publishers.

Is Stian still on for Starsector's music and SFX? I haven't heard any news from that guy in years.

Yeah, very much so.

Quick feedback (chasing down bounties in Galatia): Having tiny pirate frigate fleets spamming interdiction pulse on me every time I try to sustain burn is... annoying. Considering these ships will constantly hound the player through an entire starsystem, what recourse do I have other than to try to catch them with emergency burn? Its taking me more supplies to catch them than to fight, and its forcing me to do boring mop up fights constantly. I'll see how this goes in later in.

Huh - I can see how that'd be, but I've literally never had that happen to me in playtesting. I wonder what's different, or if it's just situational enough that I never ran into it. Possibly turning off your transponder could help here. Could also get some room by launching your own IP, if they're insistent...

My one gripe is that I haven't found a use for Piranhas - very small sample size of fights so far, but I would rate it as a 5 OP bomber rather than 10.

Depending on how far along you are, that could actually be ok - the Piranha's niche is really "anti big, slow stuff" so it's not going to be useful early. Ultimately - if stations are a more common fixture in combat - I could see them being more dedicated station and capship crackers than anything else.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 03, 2017, 07:07:05 PM
Relatively quick feedback from me (which I should post in a new topic):

* LR PD Laser is useful!  With much lower flux cost, mounting it instead of PD Laser feels like an upgrade, despite lower damage.

* Odyssey:  Good news, it can kite-and-snipe with Tachyon Lance and two Broadswords.  Bad news, one, worse shield efficiency makes brawling with classic configurations harder because hard flux builds up faster.  Kinetics will crush it fast.  Two, no more OP to support the second wing of fighters makes Loadout Design 3 mandatory.  Talons are okay for other carriers, but Odyssey probably wants Broadswords or other 8+ OP fighter to use.  It is nice cruising at higher speed, but with new shield weakness, I feel like configuring Odyssey as a beam sniper instead of a Plasma Cannon or IR Pulse Laser brawler.

* Fighters:
Talon:  Still useful, but not overpowered.  Does Swarmers recharge one missile every ten seconds?  If so, I think that is moot.  This is a case I want Talons to die as soon as they fire Swarmers.  Fortunately for me, they tend to die, and because Talons can still stream almost non-stop, they still fire missiles more frequently than the weapon stats.  Overall, I think new Talons may be worth 5 OP.

Gladius:  They seem to stay are target more, and they kill a bit faster than Broadswords if the wing survives.  They seem okay, if slightly weak, at 10 OP.

Thunder:  These are weak!  They are simply faster and slightly cheaper Gladius with much slower replacement rate.  They drop like flies, only now they cannot freeze the enemy.  Compared to old Thunders, they take much longer to kill ships, much like new Talons.  With old Thunders, they were outdone by overpowered Talons.  Now, they are outdone by Talons - and almost everything else - because Thunders are weak.  I miss the old Thunders, and I want them back; maybe replace the Harpoon with a second Swarmers.

Sparks/Lux:  Still good, but inferior to Warthogs at killing things.

Warthogs:  Still brutalizes whatever they swarm.  The most powerful fighter that is not a bomber.

Swarmers used by fighters should just simply shoot two missiles every ten seconds.  Talons just die and get replaced constantly.  Thunders need the extra firepower.

OP costs of Wasps and Talons should be swapped.  Talons are still one of the more useful wings, though not as powerful as Broadswords, and powerful enough to kill things if they die and get replaced quickly enough.  Wasps are too fragile.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 07:49:00 PM
Thanks for the feedback!

As far as the Thunder - yeah, it's definitely going to be weak if measured against other fighters straight up. You're probably not going to see much benefit from using it without also using the new "fighter strike" command. Hmm - it might make sense to replace the IR Pulse with an Ion Cannon, so they're more "on-demand utility".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on June 03, 2017, 07:55:51 PM
Will you update new versions(not bug fixes) in a short time?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 03, 2017, 08:31:50 PM
No, this is it for a while, no 0.8.2a planned or anything like that.

(Unless there's another hotfix needed, as you say.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: AxleMC131 on June 03, 2017, 08:38:50 PM
While I haven't had much time to see how things play out, I've got one or two immediate feedback points I'd like to make.

First off, AUTOFIT IS SAVED!  ;D The fact that it no longer tries to mess with your weapon groups is a true Godsend - thank you Devs.

Next, I can actually see myself considering the LRPD laser now. Feels much more viable as an alternative to the Burst PD and regular PD Laser

And finally, while I like the new Thunder, its turn rate seems extremely poor in comparison to its speed. I tested some of them against one of Tartiflette's giant punching bag Practice Targets, and they seem to handle so badly that they miss half of their shots on each strafing run... Against a giant stationary target. I think they need a buff to turn rate to compensate for the increase in speed. Not sure if their current handling is a deliberate design choice, but as it is they seem to have a lot of potential that I just can't seem to unlock.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on June 03, 2017, 10:00:40 PM
as trivial as complaints get, but the 2 colossi variants have their sprites offset 1 pixel up, visible when you scroll through its sprites folder
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Serenitis on June 03, 2017, 11:39:57 PM
Quick feedback (chasing down bounties in Galatia): Having tiny pirate frigate fleets spamming interdiction pulse on me every time I try to sustain burn is... annoying. Considering these ships will constantly hound the player through an entire starsystem, what recourse do I have other than to try to catch them with emergency burn? Its taking me more supplies to catch them than to fight, and its forcing me to do boring mop up fights constantly. I'll see how this goes in later in.
This.
Constantly getting shadowed by 1-2 ship fleets that bounce in and out of sensor range to 'maintain contact', and repeatedly spam IP making travel a tedious grind. This occurs more frequently in systems, but also happens in hyperspace and can get you utterly ruined if you get tagged by an IP and clip a storm.

Also not impressed with how storms completely override s-burn now. Given that they are all but invisible until they are active, and have a fuzzy boundary that may/may not align thier effects with the flashing area, and thier seemingly much higher occurance rate they now render almost all of 'deep' hyperspace a no-go area which puts a LOT of territory out of bounds.
I liked that you could eventually ignore all this drek because storms are just filler and exist solely to make the player suffer for some reason while acting as a roadblock to actually interesting content.

I get that you want to make travel 'interesting', but punishing the player by forcing tedious busy work on them, or for not having 100% perfect vision is really not a good way to do it.
The most interesting kind of travel is the kind that gets you to somewhere else with the minimum of hassle, and maybe the odd point of interest here and there. There really doesn't need to be massive fleet eating hazards liberally sprinkled over the entire area you can traverse, hostile fleets fill that role perfectly well.
This is why fast travel options exist in all kinds of games.

Not really got any other feedback as these two points have rendered the game dull enough that for the first update ever I actually don't want to play it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 04, 2017, 01:49:44 AM
Having you fleet IP'd by a single ship is pretty darn annoying!
You should make it so that the ability-interrupting effect stop working on larger fleets at certain threshold (fleet size against yours, sensor strength, range, etc.) Faster ships can just EB their way out of an IP-activating fleet.

EDIT: Would it be really necessary for you to not only made the storms interrupt SB, but made it more frequent? This is way above scrappy mechanic, and actually the one thing (out of many) that breaks this game for me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 04, 2017, 02:01:51 AM
Having you fleet IP'd by a single ship is pretty darn annoying!
You should make it so that the ability-interrupting effect stop working on larger fleets at certain threshold (fleet size against yours, sensor strength, range, etc.) Faster ships can just EB their way out of an IP-activating fleet.


That's how it already works:

Quote
Sufficient sensor strength on affected fleet allows it to avoid interdict entirely
This includes using Active Sensor Burst
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Krelian on June 04, 2017, 02:34:38 AM
Thank you Alex, you made my weekend :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: RawCode on June 04, 2017, 05:27:29 AM
well, new hyperstorm vs sustained burn interaction made traveling "unfun", well, to be exact "*** boring and slow ever with shift pressed constantly".

hyperstorm thing is fun, but, due to lack of viable methods to counter, avoid or pathfind around storms, they just slow player down for no good reason turning every travel into:

1) Hold shift and watch how your fleet crawl around on burn 2
2) Try to avoid storms and crawl around on about same speed but with your own (player) time and effort wasted
3) Lay course and AFK, you are extremely unlikely to be intercepted in fridge area anyway

storm and hyperspace should be navigation hazard, not damn bush walls around everything
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Igncom1 on June 04, 2017, 05:30:27 AM
It would be fun if clear hyperspace corridors were something that the player could survey and such.

Make em appear on the map afterwards, give em a name and let the AI fleets navigate through them afterwards and such.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ali on June 04, 2017, 05:55:50 AM
Anyone else having download issues?  Mine keeps failing at 194 / 196mb..  :'(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 04, 2017, 06:41:22 AM
You ought to tone down the frequency of the hyperstorms. Or make it not interrupt SB.
...unless you prefer losing players, of course.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: RawCode on June 04, 2017, 07:01:22 AM
i hope removal of deep hyperspace and hyperstorms is possible without violating "no RE" rule.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 04, 2017, 07:06:21 AM
i hope removal of deep hyperspace and hyperstorms is possible without violating "no RE" rule.
no RE?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 04, 2017, 07:26:13 AM
With the Odyssey changes, it seems like its role is a bit confused.  Is it meant for assault or support now?  If it supposed to be primarily a brawler with minor fighter support, then it either needs its 0.8 shield back or its flux raised.  Its newfound speed does not amount to much when it is still forced to approach enemies to attack and take hits on the shield along the way in.  If it is meant to hang back and provide support with beams and fighters, I think changing system from High Engine Focus to Reserve Deployment would help more because two wings of fighters will be chewed up in heavy fighting and drained to 30-40% even with fighter bonuses (from Expanded Deck Crew and skills), and Reserve Deployment will help slow down the rate drain.  Either way, +5 OP to help support deck #2 would be nice.  (A fighter bay is a weapon slot, is it not?)  With its current OP, I need to sacrifice either vents or missiles, and since missiles tend to be unreliable, I leave missile mount empty every time so that my Odyssey can vent fast enough.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on June 04, 2017, 07:27:12 AM
Remove slowdown effect from hyper storms. It'll still cost you a bit if you bulldoze through one, but not excessive amounts, and the primary direct source of the annoyance is removed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 04, 2017, 07:30:52 AM
At this rate, we'll be going to see 0.8.2 very soon. or at least 0.8.1b.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 04, 2017, 07:37:10 AM
One more quick comment:  Thumper is actually useful now!  With 700 range, it can be mounted along with Arbalest and/or Heavy Mortar and help kill things, and Thumper will wreck things stripped of armor fast.  On Enforcer, I now consider mounting all three among Arbalest, Heavy Mortar, and Thumper instead of two Arbalests and one Heavy Mortar.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on June 04, 2017, 08:31:46 AM
Remove slowdown effect from hyper storms. It'll still cost you a bit if you bulldoze through one, but not excessive amounts, and the primary direct source of the annoyance is removed.

How about the other way around? Losing CR is punishing the poor players and barely bothering the well-equipped ones. Slowdown without CR penalty would still be relevant to travel, as hyperspace storms were meant to be.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 04, 2017, 08:52:37 AM
I just tried out storms just to see what the fuss is, and it is well-deserved.  Without Navigation, fleet is slowed to a crawl.  E-Burn should ignore it, but doing so drops your speed drop to zero for a second before fleet starts moving, and by then, it seems E-Burn was more of a waste.  With Navigation 3, the storms do not slow enough to make E-Burn worth using at all.  Fleet burn drops to 9, activate E-Burn, speed drops low for a second, then I move at 11.  Using E-Burn while S-Burn is on while caught in a storm seems like a very raw deal.

Storms are very bad now.  Looks like I may reload games much more frequently as during the 0.7x days if storms turn out to be a real problem as I replay the game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on June 04, 2017, 09:32:01 AM
And the worst of it is, the people saying "Oh, you can just skill point your way out of storms mattering" back in .8 were either lying or just shooting themselves in the foot without realizing it; sure, with navigation 3 you could mostly negate the speed penalties... but even with safety procedures 2, simply clipping a storm cost a huge chunk of supplies - I tested the 'just fly in a straight line' technique, and it was simply too expensive to be practical unless you're spending half your cargo space on supplies and have credits coming out your ears to pay for it all.

Plus, that's five to ten skill points (depending on how you count aptitude costs) that you could've spent elsewhere, all going into "Hyperspace storms are less of a problem" - that kind of investment really should have an effect!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 04, 2017, 09:44:45 AM
I just tried out storms just to see what the fuss is, and it is well-deserved.

Is it? I don't really get the fuss about storms. Yeah, they are dangerous. That's why you don't fly into them. That requires planning ahead an toggling sustained burn occasionally.

When they were relatively harmless people complained that travel is boring because there are no challenges. Now there are challenges (apparently avoidance isn't too easy), but that's bad, too?


And the worst of it is, the people saying "Oh, you can just skill point your way out of storms mattering" back in .8 were either lying or just shooting themselves in the foot without realizing it; sure, with navigation 3 you could mostly negate the speed penalties... but even with safety procedures 2, simply clipping a storm cost a huge chunk of supplies - I tested the 'just fly in a straight line' technique, and it was simply too expensive to be practical unless you're spending half your cargo space on supplies and have credits coming out your ears to pay for it all.

Plus, that's five to ten skill points (depending on how you count aptitude costs) that you could've spent elsewhere, all going into "Hyperspace storms are less of a problem" - that kind of investment really should have an effect!

Uh, no?  In .8 Nav 3 made you pass single storm cells within a second or so, costing hardly any supplies. You only had to dodge big clusters.



Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 10:09:01 AM
EDIT: Would it be really necessary for you to not only made the storms interrupt SB

(... storms don't interrupt SB.)


In any case: looks like I'll be hotfixing another (more minor) crash bug, so I'll take a look at a couple of things here. In particular, "maintaining contact" fleets using IP is not intentional and never happened to me in testing, and that's easy enough to fix.

Re: storms, I think I'll turn them back down a bit in frequency. Thinking about them some more, I think they'd work better if they were a much more rare and much bigger threat, rather than "constant, low-grade threat that can become an annoyance due to being constant" as they are now. So, for example, if now and again you were to find yourself in the path of a storm 10 cells wide, or some such, that's got potential to be an interesting event. The same sort of idea as behind turning down the probability of derelict defenders down to 50% but increasing their strength.

But that's much more than I'd want to even attempt for a hotfix, so I'll just turn the storm frequency back down a bit for the time being, while leaving the other changes in place.

I will say that I also don't get much of the fuss about storms - easy enough to avoid, for me, and they were never any real trouble, plus it's fun navigating clear channels in hyperspace for once - but turning down the storm frequency will leave that in place, so it's not something I feel strongly about one way or another.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on June 04, 2017, 10:10:48 AM
Uh, no?  In .8 Nav 3 made you pass single storm cells within a second or so, costing hardly any supplies.
Uh, yes.  Really, I tried this.  With the fleet I was using, that "hardly any" ran to about thirty supplies (with a fleet that could happily run for months on a mere 200 or so), and clipping multiple storms over the course of a trip (which inevitably happened if you did what people were suggesting and just went afk while your fleet flew in straight lines) meant -enormous- losses of supplies compared to actually controlling your fleet.
You only had to dodge big clusters.
But then, it sounds like we're talking about different things - having to "dodge big clusters" still means you're interacting with the game, which was kindof the point of the storms in the first place.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on June 04, 2017, 10:15:48 AM
almost sounds like alex wants us to keep an eye on the fleet during long travels instead of rolling on autopilot.... working as intended?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 04, 2017, 10:18:02 AM
And the worst of it is, the people saying "Oh, you can just skill point your way out of storms mattering" back in .8 were either lying or just shooting themselves in the foot without realizing it; sure, with navigation 3 you could mostly negate the speed penalties... but even with safety procedures 2, simply clipping a storm cost a huge chunk of supplies - I tested the 'just fly in a straight line' technique, and it was simply too expensive to be practical unless you're spending half your cargo space on supplies and have credits coming out your ears to pay for it all.

Plus, that's five to ten skill points (depending on how you count aptitude costs) that you could've spent elsewhere, all going into "Hyperspace storms are less of a problem" - that kind of investment really should have an effect!
Skill point out of way of storms is a heavy cost.  I cannot afford to spend points in Navigation if I want a chance to get all 42 points into most of the things I want to make my fleet a combat machine.  42 points does not seem like enough, I am always juggling what one or two skills I want to sacrifice, nevermind QoL skills of any sort (aside from Fleet Logistics).

Quote
Is it? I don't really get the fuss about storms. Yeah, they are dangerous. That's why you don't fly into them. That requires planning ahead an toggling sustained burn occasionally.
Sure, if they can be easily avoided.  I only flew through them to see what they did.  I have not played 0.8.1 enough to see how common they are.  It seems many of the complaints boil down to how common they are and how devastating they are if you get caught in one.  And remember, detection is still imperfect, and some people have difficult spotting them before they flare.

Quote
When they were relatively harmless people complained that travel is boring because there are no challenges. Now there are challenges (apparently avoidance isn't too easy), but that's bad, too?
I missed or ignored those complaints about boring travel, probably because I did not agree with them.  I disliked storms in 0.7x, and rejoiced when they were mostly irrelevant in 0.8.  Now, after seeing how storms may be back with a vengeance in 0.8.1, if I encounter wall-to-wall storms frequently, I will probably reload games about as much as in 0.7x.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 04, 2017, 10:26:52 AM
Uh, yes.  Really, I tried this.  With the fleet I was using, that "hardly any" ran to about thirty supplies (with a fleet that could happily run for months on a mere 200 or so), and clipping multiple storms over the course of a trip (which inevitably happened if you did what people were suggesting and just went afk while your fleet flew in straight lines) meant -enormous- losses of supplies compared to actually controlling your fleet.

Sorry for coming of a bit stroppy there.

I just tried it, my medium sized fleet (1 cruiser, 4 destroyer, 3 frigs) spend seven supplies to restore the CR they lost (1%) by passing through a storm cell. That's less than 1% of their cargo capacity.


But then, it sounds like we're talking about different things - having to "dodge big clusters" still means you're interacting with the game, which was kindof the point of the storms in the first place.

The big clusters are relatively rare, 97% of the time you don't have to (had to) do anything. And even if you ignored them, they hurt, but you could take the loss with some over-preparation.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: RecklessPrudence on June 04, 2017, 10:27:22 AM
Getting a false positive with Avast on the install file, both downloading it and running it. Claims it's an infection of FileRepMalware type. I've submitted a report to Avast about it, but thought I'd better let you guys know, too.

EDIT: Hm. Restored it and added it to exclusions, and then it claimed it blocked a threat just before the attack, of type IDP.Generic.23bb8a4a68f4.3.2

Maybe I've got a bad add-on on my browser or something, caused me to download something along with the installer?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Igncom1 on June 04, 2017, 10:29:34 AM
I kinda liked how they became truly threatening again, making deep hyperspace a true dangerous wasteland that I would need to carefully navigate for face the dire consequences!  But oh well!  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 10:31:16 AM
Getting a false positive with Avast on the install file, both downloading it and running it. Claims it's an infection of FileRepMalware type. I've submitted a report to Avast about it, but thought I'd better let you guys know, too.

Yep, happened to quite a few people already. Thank you for submitting the false positive report!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 04, 2017, 10:36:05 AM
To be fair, i kinda like hyperstorms that are "OhCrapigottadodgethisormyfleetsgonnagetrekt" an not "Ph god not this again. pleas end already
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 04, 2017, 10:38:45 AM
Alex, if you know/suspect what causes Avast to freak out, maybe you could trim installer to 128MB or less and send it to VirusTotal site (https://www.virustotal.com) so it would check if any other antiviruses have problems with it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 10:58:50 AM
Alex, if you know/suspect what causes Avast to freak out, maybe you could trim installer to 128MB or less and send it to VirusTotal site (https://www.virustotal.com) so it would check if any other antiviruses have problems with it.

Given that it's a common occurrence with every release, it's hard to summon up the enthusiasm or alarm level to do that, but, alright, in the name of being totally paranoid: stripped out the jre's from the installer, which made it weigh in at around 120mb. Test results here (https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/6f49422f1457c83626ae0451a049163ffcf58c21e318226c43fbf2769bec9c1b/analysis/1496598660/) (spoiler - completely clean, even according to Avast).

Since we're being paranoid, also submitted each JRE (32 and 64 bit), they also come back as completely clean.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 04, 2017, 11:42:38 AM
Thinking about them some more, I think they'd work better if they were a much more rare and much bigger threat, rather than "constant, low-grade threat that can become an annoyance due to being constant" as they are now. So, for example, if now and again you were to find yourself in the path of a storm 10 cells wide, or some such, that's got potential to be an interesting event. The same sort of idea as behind turning down the probability of derelict defenders down to 50% but increasing their strength.

On the one hand super storms sounds fun, but on the other hand... I kinda like that you're actually dodging and weaving constantly during travel now. Rare, big events would bare the danger that you sit there passively staring at your screen for 90% of the time.

I think ultimately it's the right direction to go in, but only if there are more types of events in hyperspace in general, so the total event frequency doesn't fall all that much.


Some things that (I imagine) would be relatively easy to implement with modifications of already existing things:
- temporary jump points that are invisible on the starscape and lead to treasure rich systems you can't re-enter
- yellow storms that form elongated chains that damage you but don't require fuel to fly through
- white storms that briefly generate jump points in their heart that lead to random systems far away on the map
- green storms that generate exotic debris fields you can scavenge but skyrocket the chance of having an accident
- pink crazy storms that spawn your own fleet to battle against, but after the battle only crew is lost, no ships and CR (because it was an induced hallucination)

Of course, in the long term I'd hope to see more elaborate things (maelstroms, drafts, wave fronts, space Kraken, migrating von Neumann locusts swarms, special hyperspace resources...), but maybe thongs like these could be a relatively good intermediate solution?


Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on June 04, 2017, 11:50:16 AM
Some things that (I imagine) would be relatively easy to implement with modifications of already existing things:
- temporary jump points that are invisible on the starscape and lead to treasure rich systems you can't re-enter
- yellow storms that form elongated chains that damage you but don't require fuel to fly through
- white storms that briefly generate jump points in their heart that lead to random systems far away on the map
- green storms that generate exotic debris fields you can scavenge but skyrocket the chance of having an accident
- pink crazy storms that spawn your own fleet to battle against, but after the battle only crew is lost, no ships and CR (because it was an induced hallucination)
...i hate those phase storms already. ^^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 04, 2017, 12:07:53 PM
The weaving through storms worked back when it was just the Core Worlds and there was clear "routes" through the storms that you could take. But now, there is simply too much space to cover and no clear route through it all—planning a route all the way out to fringe systems would be ridiculous!

Maybe you could bring back those hyperspace "waves" but instead of speeding you up, they'd dissipate or "calm" large swathes of hyperstorm, making for a temporarily safe corridor of travel!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 04, 2017, 12:16:11 PM
Just had a fleet engage SB to follow me, and then, after I engaged SB, it engaged EB. Which slowed it down and made escape easy.

The weaving through storms worked back when it was just the Core Worlds and there was clear "routes" through the storms that you could take. But now, there is simply too much space to cover and no clear route through it all—planning a route all the way out to fringe systems would be ridiculous!

Are you maybe mixing up storms and "deep" hyperspace? There were never clear routes through storms.

Planning ahead just means looking for the occasional shallow hyperspace path that runs parallel to your route and keeping the zoom far out to spot potential storms early and give them a wide berth.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HELMUT on June 04, 2017, 12:18:10 PM
Storm ideas

You know, i think you should develop this idea a bit more on the suggestion forum, because i think it could resolve the issue of boring "alt-tabbed" hyperspace travel. I remember that Xeno proposed random encounters at some point (and i wasn't really hot about it), however some exotic events randomly happening when caught in a storm could spice up hyperspace a bit.

I like the teleporting one in particular, it got a very 40K warpstorm feels to it.

Oh by the way, thank you Alex for the quick update!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 12:42:37 PM
Hotfix #2 is up; notes on what's in it in OP.


Re: Storm ideas - I think it bears some thought in general. If there's a lot of stuff going on, it seems like it ought to be something with potential upsides as well as downsides, or it's back to "non-stop annoyance". Plus some downtime/easy travel isn't exactly bad - it can be good for pacing and making things that do happen feel more important. Calm before the storm and all that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 04, 2017, 12:50:54 PM
I mean deep hyperspace then, ways through it that you'd never risk hitting a storm. It was feasible to weave around it back when it was just the Core Worlds, but now there is simply so much deep hyperspace everywhere that planning out a route with a low risk of storms when traveling to distant systems is...painful to say the least. Not to mention it would take you much longer to get somewhere if you're dodging all over the place and that just eats up more supplies and fuel for every trip!

If plowing through storms with SB active is a no-go now, then something must be done or long distance travel is gonna be a super obnoxious (as others have already said).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hussar on June 04, 2017, 01:12:46 PM
Hotfix #2 is up; notes on what's in it in OP.

Woo, I was just in time. :D

No more loosing modules through shields wohoo :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 04, 2017, 01:23:26 PM
Test results here (https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/6f49422f1457c83626ae0451a049163ffcf58c21e318226c43fbf2769bec9c1b/analysis/1496598660/) (spoiler - completely clean, even according to Avast).
Spoiler
(https://imgflip.com/s/meme/Black-Girl-Wat.jpg)
[close]
I don't get it.

About hyperspace... Well, right now storms aren't exactly an interactive mechanic. I'd like some variety to them (like Gothars suggested) or interactivity (like IP creating a storm-clearing blastwave). Right now storms just force you to sometimes disengage SB and wait for clear passage or EB through them (which makes you loose supplies to loose supplies).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 01:28:30 PM
Right now storms just force you to sometimes disengage SB and wait for clear passage or EB through them (which makes you loose supplies to loose supplies).

Hmm - not really my experience with it. It's more, "you have to look ahead (including using right-click and radar) to adjust your route in a timely manner". You may have to turn off SB *sometimes* but (again, in my experience) that's been rare.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HepC on June 04, 2017, 01:33:18 PM
Bounty fleets right now scale way too fast, my first bounty (with two frigates) was an eagle and half a dozen destroyers.  They didn't get much better after that relatively speaking either.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 01:35:59 PM
Bounty fleets right now scale way too fast, my first bounty (with two frigates) was an eagle and half a dozen destroyers.  They didn't get much better after that relatively speaking either.

There's one bounty that's going to be higher level than the rest - looks like that's probably what you ran into. The description talks about the flagship and fleet size, and has a rough indicator of the bounty target's level.

(What level were you at that point, btw?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HepC on June 04, 2017, 01:38:13 PM
5ish if that. These "tougher" bounties seem to be the standard rather than the exception as I've only encountered two that weren't ridiculous. 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 04, 2017, 01:42:28 PM
You can compare the price money and gun for the fleets at the lower end.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 01:52:48 PM
Only one at a time is higher level. Look for the lower-money ones and early on ones that say "unremarkable officer" with a frigate-sized flagship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HepC on June 04, 2017, 01:55:38 PM
No I get that there's some indication of bounty quality but when I went to face a bounty with an eagle for 80k I thought it would be a fleet of just an eagle, not the entire 14th battlegroup.  And now I've "lost" my game because I salvaged an onslaught that I can't even field yet but now every bounty is multiple capships/cruisers.  I mean like the direction of tougher bounties but it's a bit much too soon.  I might just be bad at the game.

The first bounty I did kill was an unremarkable officer in a destroyer and the usual starting bounty fleet.  I'm definitely getting more than one "high level" bounty at a time.   
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 01:59:06 PM
Ah, I see - yeah, if you do a couple and then get your fleet reset, then there'll only one one lower-level one to help you work your way up. (There's also a fleet size indicator, "in command of a <size>" fleet - small, medium-sized, etc.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on June 04, 2017, 02:02:04 PM
Sounds like a general increase in the number of bounties would help here, so we have more bounties of each tier to strive for at any given time
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 04, 2017, 02:54:08 PM
Got the hotfix to try out (mostly) restored Thunders.  They are much better, and one of the better wings to use.  They kill things faster than Broadswords and Claws, and maybe Gladii at times, but Thunders are a bit more fragile and need skill support more.  Thunders do not die as quickly as they did, and the current recharging Swarmers make sense on them.

Got a chance to try out Piranha, and they feel like a castrated Khopesh instead of the clumsy but powerful fighter/bomber it used to be.  They are underpowered at 10 OP.  To be honest, I do not want to use them unless I need junk to mount on a disposable carrier.

I agree bounties scale too fast.  The problem is if the player does the tutorial, he will be level 6 or 7 minimum after leaving Galatia, and maybe more (like 10+) if he gets in a few more fights before leaving core.  My first bounty fight was a big fleet of pirate destroyers and frigates, and I needed my entire fleet to kill it, and I had to replay it a few times due to excessive casualties in the first few attempts.
Title: Does it really make sense to delay transverse jumping back from hyperspace?
Post by: behrooz on June 04, 2017, 04:48:10 PM
The activation time for transverse jump has really cut down on the amount that I use it, especially dropping out of hyperspace.

It makes sense that TVJ shouldn't be a get-out-of-smuggling-free card in-system, but does it really need the activation time jumping back down out of hyperspace, where you can only use it within a small radius of a nascent gravity well and evading by dropping back through a nearby jump point is often easier than getting to the nascent gravity well to begin with?

The charge time coming out of hyperspace feels more like a useless delay without any corresponding gameplay benefit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lord0Trade on June 04, 2017, 05:24:58 PM
Love that 64 bit Java is now included, Thanks a lot! Keep up the good work.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on June 04, 2017, 08:45:29 PM
Alex, have you thought of adding in a  settings file option to allow messing with the storms? Or are they at least moddable so that others can tune them down (or up for the REALLY crazy folk)?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on June 04, 2017, 08:52:17 PM
Re-did the tutorial after 8.1. We get the Interdiction Pulse when we get Sustained Burn but the dialogue and the tutorial make no mention of it directly. Probably low-priority but forcing the player to use it or getting it used on them might be helpful for understanding how it works. It took me getting to Corvus and seeing Hegemony patrols use it on pirates to really see it in action.

I'm enjoying the additional bounty variety and the descriptions that accompany them. I have also run into Hounds with Makeshift shields and Arbalests and it made me smile. They are more annoying than ever but that's a good thing (Hounds need all the love they can get).

Haven't tried Thunders yet but I am doing a carrier-focus for this run. Talons are sufficiently toned-down I think but Piranhas are non-competitive when Khopesh and Warthogs exist. Honestly, they could be 0 OP and not hurt anything. They'd be competing with Talons for the "free" designation but more than that, they're taking a fighter slot so it's more of an opportunity cost thing. Once the biggest ships hit the field, sure, they're worth more than 0 but there are so few targets that warrant that 10 OP cost, especially since they lost their secondary MGs.
Title: Re: Does it really make sense to delay transverse jumping back from hyperspace?
Post by: Alex on June 04, 2017, 10:45:48 PM
It makes sense that TVJ shouldn't be a get-out-of-smuggling-free card in-system, but does it really need the activation time jumping back down out of hyperspace, where you can only use it within a small radius of a nascent gravity well and evading by dropping back through a nearby jump point is often easier than getting to the nascent gravity well to begin with?

Hmm, that's a good point. Wasn't thinking about that, but yeah.

Alex, have you thought of adding in a  settings file option to allow messing with the storms? Or are they at least moddable so that others can tune them down (or up for the REALLY crazy folk)?

It's moddable, yeah.

Re-did the tutorial after 8.1. We get the Interdiction Pulse when we get Sustained Burn but the dialogue and the tutorial make no mention of it directly. Probably low-priority but forcing the player to use it or getting it used on them might be helpful for understanding how it works. It took me getting to Corvus and seeing Hegemony patrols use it on pirates to really see it in action.

IIRC the tutorial does mention it briefly, but yeah, a stage explaining/demonstrating its use would be nice to have.

I have also run into Hounds with Makeshift shields and Arbalests and it made me smile. They are more annoying than ever but that's a good thing (Hounds need all the love they can get).

Are they even annoying? To me it's just a fun variation, slow enough that chasing them down isn't an issue, but different enough for different tactical considerations to come up.


Warthogs probably need an eventual nerf, really. I want to wait and see about Piranhas, since all the feedback so far is - I think - skewed by being more early-game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 04, 2017, 11:02:49 PM
If Warthogs gotta be nerfed, I'd rather you bump their OP cost up to 13 or 14 rather than gut their stats/weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on June 04, 2017, 11:05:01 PM
Been too long since I last played. Never even made it past the tutorial before. Oy. Been fun tooling around, though. It's right in that sweet spot of hard, but doable. Makes it nice and interesting.

It's great cruising out of the tutorial with a fleet of rustbuckets. I decided to co all in salvage on this first runthrough and I love that feeling of poking around in space for fun things to find. I also love that I have three officers and I only had to hire one with money.

It's so great coming back to this game and seeing how much it's grown. It's getting so good! And it already was so good!  :)

Now to sleep and dream of all the stuff I'm going to buy with my sweet derelict scan bounties.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on June 05, 2017, 02:39:32 AM
If Warthogs gotta be nerfed, I'd rather you bump their OP cost up to 13 or 14 rather than gut their stats/weapons.
agreed. overall i feel we have too many fighters balanced around 8-12 OP, i'd prefer to have more balance adjustments done in a way that creates options below or above that. and high OP cost would fit the heavy Warthog style, imo.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 05, 2017, 06:09:06 AM
Shielded Hounds and Cerberus are nice.  As much as I dislike the speed reduction on Makeshift Shield Generator, it makes shielded Hounds and Cerberus easier to fight.  Fighting shielded Hound at full speed would probably be like fighting a Remnant frigate.

Did another early playthrough, this time skipping tutorial.  Storms seem infrequent enough that they can be dodged without much difficulty (still prefer 0.8 storms where they can be mostly ignored).  Bounties scale too fast.  I had to put my fleet in storage because the bounties are too big to handle, and took exploration missions with Wolf and Dram to raise enough money to buy more ships and weapons.  Character level below a certain threshold, say... 20, probably should not affect bounty level.

I think I have seen enough.  Will probably cheat up an endgame fleet because I do not want to spend days or weeks grinding up another game.

Warthogs are too strong when compared to other fighters, but it would be nice if they simply cost more if they otherwise stay the same.  Warthogs already flux cap with mortars quickly, so lowering guns may not be enough.  Probably need to lower wing size to two, and maybe tone down the flares to a single.  Their biggest weakness is speed.  Even with Wing Commander 1, many frigates can outrun them, which means Astral cannot rely on them to kill a bunch of frigates in the simulator when trying to kill the simulator.  If Warthogs get weakened, I would like to see them go faster to compensate.  It is annoying that they are so slow, but the power they wield makes them worth using.

Piranhas need their LMG (or Swarmers, if going old school) back.  If not, their OP cost needs to go down - way down, like 5 OP.

After playing fighters more, Xyphos is not very useful.  The main reason to use fighters today is for fighters to run down and kill ships, but Xyphos cannot do that.  Small carriers need interceptors and the like to hunt enemies.  Most, if not all, effective carriers built for brawling and can theoretically use Xyphos as auxiliary ion beams, outrange them.  Legion with 900 range ballistics plus ITU or Odyssey with Tachyon Lances plus ITU and Advanced Optics want to snipe from maximum range, and Xyphos does not have as much range.  Xyphos is more useful for a brawling Odyssey with Autopulse or Plasma Cannons, but new 1.0 shields made those classic configurations less attractive.  Destroyers or Aurora with Converted Hangar can probably make good use of Xyphos, but it costs so much OP and with slower rate recovery (from Converted Hangar and no Expended Deck Crew), rate will probably fall in big fights and Xyphos will probably get killed off soon.

P.S.  When I installed 0.8.1 for the first time, I failed to set combat speed to 2f and... UGH!  1f is so agonizingly slow!  I quickly set it to 2f and the game felt much better.  Still wish game could handle faster speeds while maintaining fidelity.  2.5f would be ideal.  Wish there was a way to set game speed without digging into settings.json.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 05, 2017, 09:27:27 AM
It's so great coming back to this game and seeing how much it's grown. It's getting so good! And it already was so good!  :)

:D Glad you're having fun coming back to it.



Re: Warthogs:
I was thinking - tentatively - of bumping up the OP cost and reducing the range to 2000 or so. But playtesting etc.

Re: bounty scaling:
I'll have to take a look at it at some point, then. When I was testing that out, I didn't have any trouble, but I went straight from tutorial garbage ball to 2x railgun 2x heavy mortar Hammerhead (with combat skills) + carriers and that's probably one of the stronger starts at the moment.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on June 05, 2017, 09:50:31 AM
Re: Warthogs:
I was thinking - tentatively - of bumping up the OP cost and reducing the range to 2000 or so. But playtesting etc.

Re: bounty scaling:
I'll have to take a look at it at some point, then. When I was testing that out, I didn't have any trouble, but I went straight from tutorial garbage ball to 2x railgun 2x heavy mortar Hammerhead (with combat skills) + carriers and that's probably one of the stronger starts at the moment.

Yeah, I'm in the camp of nerfing the Warthog through unconventional means, if it's necessary.

And yeah, "annoying" wasn't the right word to use...more like "a new kind of distraction." They aren't difficult to kill but you can't just use Beam Wolfs on them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 05, 2017, 10:19:15 AM
Re: bounty scaling:
I'll have to take a look at it at some point, then. When I was testing that out, I didn't have any trouble, but I went straight from tutorial garbage ball to 2x railgun 2x heavy mortar Hammerhead (with combat skills) + carriers and that's probably one of the stronger starts at the moment.
My first 0.8.1 start, with a tutorial start, was this too, and my first bounty was large (full of destroyers and frigates) and required the entire fleet, and I had to retry a few times.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on June 05, 2017, 11:16:43 AM
I'm really enjoying the bounty difficulty myself - the fights are hard, which is good. If I'm spending the time to hunt down a bounty, I want the fight to be exciting and need my whole fleet, not to be an autopilot fight.


Spoiler
My most recent was a 120k enemy pirate fleet with multiple cruisers, a legion, and the usual crap frigate spam vs my 3 hammerheads, condor, drover, 2 wolves, shepard, and afflictor. I piloted the afflictor (with hardened subsystems but no combat skills) until it ran out of AM blaster ammo (and was starting to lose CR), then retreated it and piloted one of the Hammerheads. I ended up losing the Hammerhead I was piloting to the Legion (5x torpedo barrage to the face after broadswords softened me up... the AI pilots were much smarter than me!) and the Shepard to frigate spam, but recovered both with only 1 D mod each (lucky as I have no industry skills). Thanks goodness for 'avoid' and 'eliminate'!
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 05, 2017, 11:34:14 AM
At what level do bounty fleets cap out at these days?

I've been fighting bounties that reward around ~330k credits, have level 20 officers and can have 1-3 capital ships. That about the max end of things?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 05, 2017, 11:52:45 AM
I've been fighting bounties that reward around ~330k credits, have level 20 officers and can have 1-3 capital ships. That about the max end of things?

That sounds like the top end of it, yeah. Out of 5 bounties posted, one should also be higher level - so even when you max out the bounty level, one bounty out there will be above that, potentially by quite a bit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 05, 2017, 12:29:05 PM
I do not mind hard bounties, but all of them scale up too fast.  In my first 0.8.1 game, when I saw some pirate destroyer as the flagship reported by intel.  I thought maybe no bigger than my fleet, but it was.  After that meat-grinder, future bounties I read in Intel appeared no easier.

Next 0.8.1, game, I skipped tutorial and started with Wolf and Kite (A).  Salvaged two Hounds and a Lasher.  First two bounties were low level, and I could take them without much trouble.  Back to core, I get two carriers, and bounties spike to about 100K, give or take a few K.  The nearest one was Mora.  Others were cruisers that my small ships had no chance of killing.  I went to the Mora, and found Mora, Falcon, several destroyers, another carrier, and frigates.  Bigger and stronger than my fleet.  No chance of winning.  All of the bounties were like this.  Had no choice but to store my fleet and do exploration missions with Wolf and Dram.

Chasing bounties burns a lot of fuel.  My fleet cannot afford to come home empty handed.  My early-game fleet must win or it goes into financial ruin.  My first 0.8.0 game come close to this by midgame, when I did not make enough money to upgrade my fleet.  Now, I need to grind exploration missions because bounties level-grind faster than I can.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: orost on June 05, 2017, 01:48:54 PM
When bounties are easy enough that you can chain them without doing anything else, people will complain that exploration is unnecessary and useless.

When bounties are hard enough that you have to do other things in between them for money to keep up, people will complain that they have to grind exploration.

There is no winning as a game developer  :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 05, 2017, 02:13:48 PM
Hmm. Well, there's always going to be a level 0 bounty (posted within a few days or so) to fall back on.

I think also investing in combat skills makes a huge difference here - just did a 130k bounty (Falcon, Eagle, Hammerhead, 7-8 assorted frigates) with a fleet consisting of a Sunder (D), two Drovers, and the two starting frigates - and having vs not having combat skills takes the battle from "tough, but winnable" to "pretty easy".

I'll also note that this 130k bounty was the "high-reward, high-level outlier" and not the average bounty level I'd got to from doing bounties, and afterwards I had about 200k saved up, meaning, what, 2 cruiser-sized carriers? Which would take the fleet to a whole new level of power entirely.

That said, though, will definitely keep an eye on it.

Another random observation - part of what makes carriers so powerful seems to be that they are more available than other combat ships, probably because pirate fleets have non-D versions of carriers and so they're easier to acquire on the black market. A pair of good combat destroyers with the right weapons would do pretty well too, I think, but it's just much harder to get than a pair of Drovers or a Heron or a Mora. Heck, I wanted a destroyer to pilot but had to settle for a 2-dmod Sunder from a previous bounty (faulty grid, comp. armor). Which did well enough, honestly, but much too fragile for using en masse.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 05, 2017, 03:17:40 PM
In my first game, I had just the starter fleet from Galatica, plus a few more frigates I scooped up along the way.  Was lucky that I got Heavy Blaster and two Railguns in the tutorial.

In my second game, I just had Wolf, Kite, Hound, Hound (LP), and Lasher.  When I upgraded, I added Drover and Condor with good fighter wings, but they were just outnumbered and outclassed when bounties spiked.  That fleet will not take on Mora, Falcon, several destroyers (including another carrier) and several frigates.  It was only about 100k, and the other bounties appeared no easier than that (flagships were cruisers on the other bounties).

Sometimes, getting ships is not a problem, but getting weapons are.  In my second game, I found a Sunder, but had to scuttle it because I did not have medium weapons for it, and I could not afford to support it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: intrinsic_parity on June 05, 2017, 03:27:49 PM
Yes I have noticed bounty fleets go very quickly up to cruiser size which tend to outclass early game fleets. They also usually have a full compliment of destroyers+frigates.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 05, 2017, 04:14:12 PM
A cruiser alone would be doable, but a cruiser plus escorts, where the escorts alone are a bigger fleet than yours is a bit ridiculous.  And this is only the second or third bounty fight.  It is like ramming an SNK boss fight down your throat on stage 2 or 3.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 05, 2017, 04:50:27 PM
If it's the 2nd or 3rd bounty fight and you've got a cruiser with that many escorts, you must've picked the high-money, high-level bounty. It takes 2 completed bounties to get from level 1 to level 2 (which will still be pretty weak).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 05, 2017, 04:56:26 PM
Maybe, but all of the other bounties I saw were 100k+ and had cruisers for flagships, mostly Falcons.  I just took the one with the Mora because it was close and could be an easier fight if the escorts were minor.  Did not expect two cruisers and escorts more numerous than my fleet.

Also, in my first game, all of bounties were 80k+.  My first bounty fight was the one with the easy flagship (Buffalo 2), but I was surprised to see almost twice as many ships as my starter fleet with two bonus frigates.  It was a meatgrinder.

@ Alex:  Didn't you say character level affects bounty level?  If so, that can skew things.  If I do tutorial, my character is at least level 6 or 7, and one more big fight will cause levels to rise even more.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 05, 2017, 04:57:41 PM
Maybe the amount of escorts could be reduced a bit? or the bounties more abundant?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: orost on June 05, 2017, 05:15:58 PM
I'm going to say something that I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned yet. Maybe that means it's a stupid idea, but it makes sense in my head.

Why do we need the bounties to scale at all?

Put in a lot of them, enough to cover the entire range of difficulties, and let the player choose what they want to fight. There sure is enough space for that now in the Sector. It solves all the problems with scaling, and also makes the world feel more populated and authentic. Instead of contorting the world to fit the player's ability as closely as possible, let the player explore the world and find things to do that match their current ambitions.

It wouldn't even take huge changes to the intel interface, it's already good at filtering lots of data. Just some tweaks to more easily identify bounties in the strength range you're interested in.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vigal on June 05, 2017, 05:41:33 PM
I like this update quite a lot but I must say I despise these new hyperspace storms since they have KILLED exploration for me.

- distanced displayed on scan/survey missions is no longer useful because I have to travel so much further to get round storms
- Sustained burn in hyperspace is mostly useless since I lack the manoeuvrability to dodge storms with it on
- I have no way of knowing when a huge wall of storms is in front of me so I can't chart a course round them until I am right next to them

These factors coupled with the drop in scan/survey rewards and lower AI core drops have made exploration tedious and unprofitable rather
than the fun experience it was in 0.8a.

Adding a hullmod or perk to the navigation skill that gave 90% resistance to the effects of hyperspace storms would be great.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 05, 2017, 07:29:04 PM
Re: Storms
Some of the storms are partially obscured by darker cloud overlays.  Storms are not always easy to see coming even if you know what to look for.

Quote
Adding a hullmod or perk to the navigation skill that gave 90% resistance to the effects of hyperspace storms would be great.
Hopefully a hullmod (I doubt it works that way though).  I ignore every skill whose purpose in life is merely campaign QoL because I need every point to turn my fleet into a combat machine.  The exceptions are Fleet Logistics and Loadout Design because of very powerful all-purpose boosts at 3 for everyone.  I want Navigation so bad, but 42 points is not enough to afford that after I am done getting most of the skills I want more.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on June 05, 2017, 08:55:04 PM
Fighter balance so far:

Warthogs are incredibly strong mostly due imo to their armor. Anti-Fighter weapons just don't damage them very much, and the flares are quite effective at making them not get hit.

Tridents are worth every penny of their 25 OP cost when on a Drover. As the game considers bombers with launched ordinance as 'dead' wrt Reserve Deployment, a well timed system use can spawn 3 additional (2 from system 1 from rebuild) bombers soon after the initial 2 fire, for a total of 10 atropos. Better yet, the returning bombers are alive and so will be rearmed and launched before the reinforcements get back. When it hits its rythm its an incredible stream of torpedoes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on June 05, 2017, 08:56:04 PM
...Maybe we should just remove the flares from warthogs?  They're assault fighters, not heavy fighters...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 05, 2017, 10:08:26 PM
Eh, playing on the very latest hotfix, I've noticed that sometimes I'll go through a large bank of deep hyperspace and there'll be almost no storms whatsoever (which is very nice!). Other times I'll come onto a big wall of deep hyperspace that'll be just FILTHY with storms—odd! Seems like a "feast or famine" sort of deal...

Anyways, juking and dodging storms isn't so bad when just going out to bounty fleet range, but I really wouldn't want to take the same effort to go out to distant fringe systems. I'm all for further toning down the frequency of storms or adding some new mechanic that makes dealing with them easier and/or more interesting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Elthari on June 06, 2017, 04:19:18 AM
After the last hotfix my carriers behave very weirdly.
I have a fleet of 5 Drovers + 1 Astral flagship.

Drovers do not respond to move commands sometimes, they just form a small ball of ships at the warp-in spot and just deny any movement commands. I can see arrows on the tactical screen, but they just turn around, sometimes bumping into each other.
When asked to escort someone they will lend fighters to the cause, but they still won't ever move, so once my Astral surpasses the fighter tether range it's defenceless.
Full Assault? Ha, they still stay at one spot, but they will eradicate anything that dares to fly in 3000 unit zone around them.

So now my main tactics is to stay in one place, form a Mighty Chaotic Ball of fighters-bombers-carriers that I cannot move and wait for enemy to fly blindly into this "trap". Quite annoying.

I can provide a save file if needed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: StahnAileron on June 06, 2017, 04:44:43 AM
Anyways, juking and dodging storms isn't so bad when just going out to bounty fleet range, but I really wouldn't want to take the same effort to go out to distant fringe systems. I'm all for further toning down the frequency of storms or adding some new mechanic that makes dealing with them easier and/or more interesting.
After reading this, I got ideas for some things:


BTW, dunno how viable this is, but would it be possible to rig fights that take place in hyperspace nebula to have a chance to have static/EMP discharges in the nebula during the fight? (Guaranteed if you fight IN a storm?) Now that I thought about it, I kinda feel like the battlescape needs more than just movement obstacles to spice things up. Hazards would be nice for the campaign. (Also, do gravity-wells ever show up in campaign battles? It's been a LONG time since I touched the scenario battles, but I recall at least one of them having a fight with a planet in the background that you could use for gravity assists.) I think it'd make choosing WHERE to fight more important strategically. (Perhaps especially when player-outposts become a thing and we need to defend them or something.)

Just throwing stuff out there... Not bothering with numbers unless/until interests is shown.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 06, 2017, 06:02:16 AM
...Maybe we should just remove the flares from warthogs?  They're assault fighters, not heavy fighters...
Maybe (if nothing else changes), or just have the single flare Gladius use.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on June 06, 2017, 07:12:22 AM
harvest the power of storms to INCREASE burn speed in a storm and for a little time afterwards once you exit the storm. So flying through a storm might be a viable strategy to escape or catch another fleet.
gotta say, that sounds like a fun idea to me in general, although i'm not so sure it would be useful as a hullmod (since then it would only matter if the slowest ships of your fleet have the hullmod).

if storms apply their 'damage' more rapidly to compensate for much reduced time spent in them, players will still generally want to avoid them due to their high costs, but may choose to exploit them for speed in an event where that boost is more important than high CR or connected supply costs. it is already possible to exploit their slowing effect as well, to a degree, but the opportunities for it are rare, and attempting to cut off or damage a hostile fleet through use of a storm is much more of a gamble than boosting your own fleet by punching right through one.

it might also serve to make getting caught in a storm feel less annoying/punishing, even if it would still (overall) be just as costly as it is now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on June 06, 2017, 07:36:10 AM
As a counter data point for bounty difficulty, I'll state I'm not having any problem with them.  I will pick the ones I think I can do with the fleet I have, so I don't always go after the highest bounty.  I haven't needed to wait around for bounties to expire and refresh - always had something I could take.
 I was, however, putting together what I consider close to an optimal fleet.  Which includes doing loops through populated space black markets to buy what I need (i.e. Drovers, Herons) when I have the cash.

In iron man, at level 40, I've got a Legion, an Eagle, 4 Herons, a Drover, a Medusa, and Wolf (plus assorted logistics ships).  This seems to be able to handle any current bounty, which vary from about 180k up to 300k a the moment.  I've got a damaged Onslaught, Eagle, Drover, Hammerhead, and Medusa sitting in storage.  Skills are Tech, Leadership and Combat focused.  No Industry.  1 Combat ship officer, 5 carrier officers with full fighter skills.  This was from a tutorial start.

I have been using heavy fighter compositions, with me in a direct combat ship on the way up.  Wolf->Hammerhead (D)->Medusa->Eagle->Legion.  Assorted Drovers, Herons, etc for the other fleet ships.  Fighter heavy still seems optimal to me, although I think it is weaker than before.  The leadership skill changes do matter and I think were in the right direction.  Fighter composition for the fleet is Broadswords, Longbows and Daggers, while the Legion carries Broadswords and Warthogs.

Admittedly, I restarted 3 times early on in 0.8.1, but not due to bounty fleets, but rather random fights (come out into hyperspace right next to a large enemy fleet, seeing whether I could take that Pirate Armada in combat with another fleet, etc).  Poor strategic decisions on my part.  And its faster (and more fun for me) to restart fresh than try to recover from 2,000 credits a wayfarer and a kite.  Its also possibly a habit from Rogue-like games.  I will admit, with the bounties where they are, if I lost my fleet and had no backup ships, I'd probably just restart.  Trying to take cruiser class ships in frigates is a bit much.  And without industry skills, it'd probably take longer to put the fleet back together when compared to starting over and just working up the bounty fleets again.

I've lost a ship here and there (i.e. Condor (D), Kite, Drovers, an Eagle), but have made enough to restore or buy new.

There was a period where I was trying to get an Odyssey to salvage for testing and was going after those Tri-tachyon preferentially.  Didn't succeed in getting one yet, but I wonder if that biased the difficulty on the way to where I am.  I think the "Balanced" Odyssey under AI control even with an officer is the easiest capital to kill in actual fleet engagements.  Either I would solo it in an Eagle or order a fighter strike and watch it pop.  Its kinda funny when some default Eagle loadouts last longer against bombers, because they have a better shield tank buffer than the default Odyssey loadout.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 06, 2017, 09:07:47 AM
I started another game, this time in dev mode so I can change money and reputation at will (so I can buy ships, weapons, and hullmods).  While character is still level 1, I noticed bounties are mostly sticking around 50k.  When I played my first game and left Galatia at level 6 or 7, all bounties were hovering around 80k+, before I fought my first one.  How much does character level factor into bounty level?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 06, 2017, 09:11:58 AM
After the last hotfix my carriers behave very weirdly.
I have a fleet of 5 Drovers + 1 Astral flagship.

Drovers do not respond to move commands sometimes, they just form a small ball of ships at the warp-in spot and just deny any movement commands. I can see arrows on the tactical screen, but they just turn around, sometimes bumping into each other.
When asked to escort someone they will lend fighters to the cause, but they still won't ever move, so once my Astral surpasses the fighter tether range it's defenceless.
Full Assault? Ha, they still stay at one spot, but they will eradicate anything that dares to fly in 3000 unit zone around them.

So now my main tactics is to stay in one place, form a Mighty Chaotic Ball of fighters-bombers-carriers that I cannot move and wait for enemy to fly blindly into this "trap". Quite annoying.

I can provide a save file if needed.

If you could send me a save - especially in the near future - that would be great.


I started another game, this time in dev mode so I can change money and reputation at will (so I can buy ships, weapons, and hullmods).  While character is still level 1, I noticed bounties are mostly sticking around 50k.  When I played my first game and left Galatia at level 6 or 7, all bounties were hovering around 80k+, before I fought my first one.  How much does character level factor into bounty level?

Player level / 5, rounded down = minimum average bounty level.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 06, 2017, 09:19:42 AM
Player level / 5, rounded down = minimum average bounty level.
That probably explains why bounties scale too fast.  If I do the tutorial, my character could be about level 10 before I fight my first bounty.  Single-digit levels fly-by very fast after significant fighting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: zaimoni on June 06, 2017, 09:30:16 AM
And if you do both pirate-hunting bounties in full (Galatia and Corvus), it is impractical but technically possible to clear CLvl 20 before doing anything else.  [Won't happen without killing sensors w/dev mode, so requires cheating to realize.]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 06, 2017, 10:01:16 AM
It wouldn't make it go up faster, though, that's just a lower limit. That is, the bounty level still goes up normally from 0 behind the scenes.

Still, probably no reason for level <=10 to affect it, made a tweak.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 06, 2017, 11:19:18 AM
Alright, one more hotfix is up. Hopefully it's the last one for .1, fingers crossed. Notes in the OP, but basically:


Changes as of June 06, 2017

Tweaked bounty level progression

Bugfixing:

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Linnis on June 06, 2017, 11:39:24 AM
Alright, one more hotfix is up. Hopefully it's the last one for .1, fingers crossed. Notes in the OP, but basically:


Changes as of June 06, 2017

Tweaked bounty level progression

Bugfixing:
  • Fixed issue with accepting Persean League commission stopping the posting of new bounties
  • Fixed issue with allies retreating at the start of a battle



YAY!!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 06, 2017, 01:59:03 PM
Alright, one more hotfix is up. Hopefully it's the last one for .1, fingers crossed. Notes in the OP, but basically:


Changes as of June 06, 2017

Tweaked bounty level progression

Bugfixing:
  • Fixed issue with accepting Persean League commission stopping the posting of new bounties
  • Fixed issue with allies retreating at the start of a battle


Alex finally fixes a thing~
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 06, 2017, 02:44:48 PM
And if you do both pirate-hunting bounties in full (Galatia and Corvus), it is impractical but technically possible to clear CLvl 20 before doing anything else.  [Won't happen without killing sensors w/dev mode, so requires cheating to realize.]
That pirate fleet next to the pirate miner station that we need to sneak by during the tutorial?  It is marked for death once the post-gate bounty goes online.  Maybe other pirate fleets I find along the way too.  As for Corvus, there is almost always something lurking around the pirate planet that used to be Barad before 0.8.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Creepin on June 06, 2017, 02:54:03 PM
Is it possible now to set course to a random (empty) point in system map?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 06, 2017, 02:56:56 PM
Is it possible now to set course to a random (empty) point in system map?

Right-click on empty space; right-click on empty space again to cancel.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Creepin on June 06, 2017, 02:58:07 PM
Thank you for the lightning-fast reply! :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 07, 2017, 11:39:36 AM
More rambling feedback not worth its own post...

Played around with Conquest.  With more durability, it feels more like a fast battleship than a battlecruiser, especially if it uses Hardened Shields.  It can easily go toe-to-toe with the SIM Onslaught and win (thanks to Onslaught's bad anti-shield configuration).  SIM Conquest is also not too hard to kill.  Paragon is hard unless I give my Conquest Gauss Cannons and pilot it myself.  (AI has some trouble piloting Gauss Conquest well enough.)

Odyssey is weak now.  1.0 shields made it more fragile, and if I use two decent 8 OP fighters on it, Odyssey is OP starved.  Now, if I want to brawl with Odyssey armed with short-ranged weapons, it almost needs two Claw wings to maybe shut down the enemy then smash it fast while enemy is paralyzed.  Otherwise, Odyssey will go down.  Unlike Conquest, Odyssey cannot go toe-to-toe with any other capital.  Odyssey cannot afford to fight fair against enemy capital; it must outrange or paralyze the enemy somehow.

I like the new Fighter Strike command.  Even so, it seems the AI can sometimes hold back some fighters instead of sending all to kill the target.  Main problem with ordering fighter strikes to pick off everyone is it eats a lot of CP, which means I either need to invest in Command & Control and/or install Operations Center hullmod.

I am not sure if having a carrier-based fleet is such a great idea if my ships will just hold on to fighters or have them always escort some ship when I want all fighters to swarm enemies and pick them off one-by-one.  Not sure ordering strikes constantly may work well without me wasting more resources (skill points or hullmod) for the job.  Also, sometimes, it seems carriers can be suicidally stupid (by driving up to enemy ships) if I give them short-range PD weapons (to defend against missiles), and the only way to stop the aberrant behavior is to remove all weapons so they act like proper cowards.  I suppose I could use Timid officers, but then I cannot use that officer in other combat ships, and I must use that officer for that carrier.

I wish there was a long-range medium beam that does better armor and hull damage.  Currently, if I want 1000+ range beam to put in medium mount (to compliment Conquest's Gauss Cannons), Tactical Laser works at least as well as Graviton Beam, and costs less OP.  Conquest with Gauss does not need Graviton for anti-shield, and Ion Beam is unwanted due to flux cost and low damage.  Lately, I wish the classic Phase Beam was back and upgraded to 1000 range.

All the small beam PD (aside from Mining Laser) is useful.  PD Laser for cheap and/or emergency short-range defense.  LR PD for generalist use.  Tactical Laser for long-range assault, and burst PD when you need better PD and can afford the OP cost.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 07, 2017, 01:18:40 PM
Odyssey is weak now.  1.0 shields made it more fragile, and if I use two decent 8 OP fighters on it, Odyssey is OP starved.  Now, if I want to brawl with Odyssey armed with short-ranged weapons, it almost needs two Claw wings to maybe shut down the enemy then smash it fast while enemy is paralyzed.  Otherwise, Odyssey will go down.  Unlike Conquest, Odyssey cannot go toe-to-toe with any other capital.  Odyssey cannot afford to fight fair against enemy capital; it must outrange or paralyze the enemy somehow.

Is it though? It's fast enough to not be killed by Onslaught. And then you just stack 3 HEFed Tachyon Lances until they overwhelm Onslaught's flux rate (+ Tac lasers in small slots, +2 Longbows). Works unskilled vs sim Onslaught. Easy win, and doesn't even take that long.

Sim Conquest's Squalls are annoying, but you can just wait till they run out. Then it's dead.

So the only ship new Odyssey can't solo is Paragon. But who cares? Paragon can't catch anything. In fleet setting Paragon is easy to avoid until it's alone vs your fleet.

Odyssey is strong. It just isn't a Brawler. Soft flux isn't a problem, as long as you produce enough of it, and when you include HEF bonus, Odyssey does exactly that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 07, 2017, 01:25:50 PM
The Sim Onslaught doesn't use burn drive to close the distance and has no kinetic weaponry. I really don't think it should be used as a balance measuring stick.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on June 07, 2017, 03:15:18 PM
you just stack 3 HEFed Tachyon Lances
isn't this exactly what Megas already said? he didn't say that there are zero viable Odyssey builds, but that it basically needs to cheese with out-ranging and out-running enemies, because it can't win against anything (of comparable size) that actually gets a chance to fight back properly.

which might be fine from an "is this ship worth its cost when used correctly" perspective, but runs into the very problems that the removal of Augmented Engines and the significant range penalty of Unstable Injector, as well as nerfs to range and speed skills across the board, were meant to alleviate. personally, while i like Odyssey being fast relative to other capitals, i'm not a fan of giving it near destroyer-level speed at the expense of further reducing its already underwhelming pre-0.8.1 staying power.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 07, 2017, 03:34:42 PM
I tried overpowering Onslaught's shields with three Tachyon Lances.  Even with help from High-Energy Focus, that did not work.  At best, they barely overpowered the shield for scratch damage.  (Also, the range advantage is small.  If I stray into Onslaught TPC range, shield takes hits, and Odyssey must vent, wasting time.)  What works better is wait until Onslaught drops shield, then fire Tachyon Lances off to the side and clip the Onslaught before it raises shields fully.  That works until Onslaught is almost dead, it will keep shields up always, and overpowering shields without hard flux takes too long.

Tachyon Lances (and Mjolnir) are rare enough that I generally only have enough to fully outfit one capital with them by endgame.  (If I am not commissioned with Tri-Tachyon, I can only get them by looting enemy Paragons.)  Often times, I must use High Intensity Laser as a substitute.

If I try to fight another capital head-on with shorter-ranged weaponry (i.e., everything aside from 1000 range beams), even against a Conquest, Odyssey gets pounded into the ground, unless Claw (or Thunder) wings paralyze the enemy first.

Except for Odyssey, all capitals can go toe-to-toe against each other and have a chance to win.  Some, like Legion and Conquest, have a harder time against Paragon, but it is doable.  Odyssey needs to rely on cheese for a slim chance to win.

I do not want Odyssey to be pigeonholed into Tachyon Lance sniper boat because it lacks the defenses to slug it out like every other capital, even against less powerful ones like Conquest or Legion.

Odyssey is "not a brawler".  That is a problem.  High-Energy Focus is a brawler ship system.  If it cannot brawl, what can it do?  Legion and Astral are better carriers than Odyssey.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 07, 2017, 07:11:30 PM
Finally tried out the new Locust, and it is much better.  It has become a good missile launcher.  It may be anti-fighter, but I use this as a general-purpose launcher against anything.  Even with frag damage, a swarm or two will likely kill a frigate or maybe a destroyer outright, and will do a ton of damage to anything else with armor blown off.  The best part of Locust is it is reliable.  Against a target with flux nearly capped and some armor blown off (or not in case of small targets), Locust shoots so many missiles that stopping them all is unlikely.  Also, the Locusts has plenty of shots; none of this three or five strikes and you're out nonsense.  I get to shoot Locust at least fifteen times.  If I bother to mount missiles on Conquest, a pair of Locusts is what I want.  More fun than quad Pilums (too easy to stop).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 07, 2017, 07:24:09 PM
I thought the Locust was pretty okay even back when it first came out—it'd shred most anything that didn't have it's shields ready to block with the missiles being fast, accurate and reliable. With the OP Missile Spec 10, a single salvo from it could pop frigates with ease. Funnily enough though, I never once used it for actually killing fighters back then.

If you say it has gotten even better now... :o
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 07, 2017, 07:54:13 PM
I thought Locust was rubbish when it first came out, not much better than Swarmers and little more than like a watered down Hurricane MIRV.  It is much better now.  I might have exaggerated how well new Locust does to small ships, probably due to not remembering everything right.

With Expanded Missile Racks, Locust is like Heavy Needler back in the ammo days.  Gryphon with Locusts and Expanded Missile Racks can probably fire Locusts for the whole fight.  Currently, I am experimenting with a Gryphon armed with two Light Needlers, a Heavy Mauler, two Vulcan for rear PD, and Locust.  I am holding the fire button down shooting off Locusts like no tomorrow.  Gryphon is more likely to die trying to brawl before running out of missiles the first time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 07, 2017, 08:27:00 PM
Well, I'm sure all my views on large missile weapons were skewed by Missile Spec 10. I almost never pilots ships what come with a large missile slot. =/
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 07, 2017, 09:08:47 PM
I do not want Odyssey to be pigeonholed into Tachyon Lance sniper boat because it lacks the defenses to slug it out like every other capital, even against less powerful ones like Conquest or Legion.

But it's the only reasonable conclusion after looking at Odyssey's new stats. It is TL sniper boat. Has range,speed and system that enable kite-sniping, but not much else.

I tried overpowering Onslaught's shields with three Tachyon Lances.  Even with help from High-Energy Focus, that did not work.  At best, they barely overpowered the shield for scratch damage.  (Also, the range advantage is small.  If I stray into Onslaught TPC range, shield takes hits, and Odyssey must vent, wasting time.)  What works better is wait until Onslaught drops shield, then fire Tachyon Lances off to the side and clip the Onslaught before it raises shields fully.  That works until Onslaught is almost dead, it will keep shields up always, and overpowering shields without hard flux takes too long.

Killed sim Onslaught with skill-less Odyssey (Tach Lances, Tac Lasers, Longbows) in 100 sec 1st attempt (I forgot to use Longbows) and 70 sec second.
As long as you sync HEF and Tachyon Lance fire, Onslaught gets easily overwhelmed.
A few vents if Onslaught fires some TPC aren't a problem either. HEF regenerates somewhat slower than Tach Lance recharge anyway.

I don't see much of a counter to Gauss Cannon using Capitals for Odyssey. But other than that, it easily stomps both Onslaught and Conquest (after baiting squalls). Other weapons don't matter much even if kinetic - only TPC and Gauss have enough range (vs TL + optics). HVD could also save Paragon from tactics described in EDIT2.

EDIT: just noticed that sim Onslaught has only DTC instead of ITU. Still, range safety margin seems sufficient even for ITU.

EDIT2: it is possible to solo sim Paragon with skill-less Odyssey. Takes pretty much whole 600 sec CR and does not have much margin for error. Basic idea is to stack hard flux with Longbows (short engage-regroup cycle to ensure they stay mostly within my shield) and then burst with HEF TLs as soon as Paragon drops shield (target it's side, this will give you few seconds before shield opened centrally extends enough to cover vulnerable point) . Admittedly, if Paragon simply didn't drop shield at low flux, this wouldn't work (within 600 sec timeframe).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 08, 2017, 05:20:29 AM
But it's the only reasonable conclusion after looking at Odyssey's new stats. It is TL sniper boat. Has range,speed and system that enable kite-sniping, but not much else.
And that hurts.  Odyssey used to have some durability to slug it out, and it lost what little durability it had.  Even with more speed, Odyssey is not very fast.  Even Conquest is not much slower if it spams Maneuverability Jets, and it is now almost a battleship thanks to additional durability.

Against Onslaught, if I use fighters, then sure, Tachyon Lance works.  But, if the fighters get picked off fast, and that can happen, then Tachyon Lance alone will not work.  I like to have some PD, especially with weak shields, so Tactical Lasers are not an option.

As for Paragon, I managed to kill it, after many attempts, with Claw fighters and triple plasma cannon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 08, 2017, 06:59:42 AM
And that hurts.  Odyssey used to have some durability to slug it out, and it lost what little durability it had.  Even with more speed, Odyssey is not very fast.  Even Conquest is not much slower if it spams Maneuverability Jets, and it is now almost a battleship thanks to additional durability.
Just adding armor to Conquest doesn't help it too much. All it's weapons (per side) are still compactly located near surface, and as such are easily disabled by incoming fire.
In comparison Onslaught can be reduced almost smoldering wreck and still keep half or more of it's weapons operational, unless EMP arcs are involved.

Against Onslaught, if I use fighters, then sure, Tachyon Lance works.  But, if the fighters get picked off fast, and that can happen, then Tachyon Lance alone will not work.  I like to have some PD, especially with weak shields, so Tactical Lasers are not an option.
TL + Tacs are enough even if I leave fighter slots empty. Just takes longer and leaves much less error margin.
As for PD... It's good on flak-wielding low-techs, especially Onslaught. On other ships you can't get PD that is good enough, and whatever amount of missiles it can stop, could also be stopped by shield + vent for free.

As for Paragon, I managed to kill it, after many attempts, with Claw fighters and triple plasma cannon.
Skill-less Odyssey vs sim Paragon? How?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 08, 2017, 07:17:18 AM
Conquest has two sides.  As I favor symmetrical configurations, if one side gets disabled, I use jets, turn, and use the other side.  Armor was not the only thing that got buffed, but also hull.  If Conquest gets Hardened Shields (or ton of capacitors), its durability gets close to battleship levels.  I had AI Conquest (with Mark IX, Heavy Maulers, Ion Beams, and Burst PD) go head-to-head with SIM Onslaught and it won.

As for Odyssey stopping missiles with shields, I do not want to do that with Odyssey's new weak shield if possible, especially if I want to fire flux hogs like plasma cannons.  Beam PD will not stop everything, but it will stop some.  Also, LR PD is now a useful generalist weapon, it is cheaper and faster than Tactical Laser, IPDAI (which I may not find without commission), and Advanced Gyros combo.  It does not have as much range or power, but with Odyssey's low OP budget, I need something cheap and effective, which probably means either PD or LR PD.

Skill-less Odyssey vs sim Paragon? How?
Like I said, many attempts.  Claws paralyze Paragon.  Odyssey smashes Paragon as fast as possible with plasma cannons while Paragon is helpless long enough.  It is much harder than it sounds, harder than with any other capital.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 08, 2017, 07:58:22 AM
Conquest has two sides.  As I favor symmetrical configurations, if one side gets disabled, I use jets, turn, and use the other side.  Armor was not the only thing that got buffed, but also hull.  If Conquest gets Hardened Shields (or ton of capacitors), its durability gets close to battleship levels.  I had AI Conquest (with Mark IX, Heavy Maulers, Ion Beams, and Burst PD) go head-to-head with SIM Onslaught and it won.

That maneuver takes a lot of time when you are just a target to be shot. If enemy has decent dps they will disable second side right as you are turning. It can be occasionally useful, but that's about it.
I find asymmetric Gauss on one side more versatile. Any enemy ship can be Gauss-sniped, but there is no reason to have that on both sides.

As for Odyssey stopping missiles with shields, I do not want to do that with Odyssey's new weak shield if possible, especially if I want to fire flux hogs like plasma cannons.  Beam PD will not stop everything, but it will stop some.  Also, LR PD is now a useful generalist weapon, it is cheaper and faster than Tactical Laser, IPDAI (which I may not find without commission), and Advanced Gyros combo.  It does not have as much range or power, but with Odyssey's low OP budget, I need something cheap and effective, which probably means either PD or LR PD.

Problem is, unless you start stacking Guardians, beam PD doesn't even make a dent against some missiles.
Squalls are the worst offenders. They can be baited, dodged, shield-tanked or shot down manually by TL/HIL, but PD fire against them is waste of flux, as near 100% of them get through anyway.
Annihilators and MIRVs are similar in terms of overwhelming beam PD, though not quite 100% get through.

And these are the most annoying. If you can handle them (through whatever non-PD means) the rest should not be a problem.
At least as long as no Templar Clarents are involved. Against them burst PD is the correct choice.

Like I said, many attempts.  Claws paralyze Paragon.  Odyssey smashes Paragon as fast as possible with plasma cannons while Paragon is helpless long enough.  It is much harder than it sounds, harder than with any other capital.

I tried, but don't understand what would force Paragon to drop shield in this scenario. Claws get shot down easily and Odyssey has very short survival time within hard-flux weapon range.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 08, 2017, 09:37:31 AM
Not a fan of Gauss Cannon unless I absolutely need the range to kill a Paragon.  It is slow and a flux hog.  Still, Gauss on one side is flexible if encountering Paragon is likely, I give you that.

I do not need beam PD to work against every missile.  Yes, Squalls, that is a lost cause for an Odyssey unless it uses Guardian PD (and for other ships unless they stack three or more dual flak).  Many other missiles, can be shot down.  Maybe not huge clouds like Onslaught's Annihilators, but some here and there, like those fired by smaller ships, sure.

Burst PD is ideal, but they are somewhat rare, and in case of Odyssey, is too OP starved to afford many of them.  PD and LR PD are almost as common as dirt, and LR PD is a usable alternative to Tactical Laser.

Quote
I tried, but don't understand what would force Paragon to drop shield in this scenario. Claws get shot down easily and Odyssey has very short survival time within hard-flux weapon range.
Sometimes, they just drop it.  This is how Paragon playership can solo much in the simulator (other capitals and cruisers drop shields when they think it is safe, then fire Tachyon Lances to the side and clip them before shields go back up), and how Warthogs can sometimes brutalize ships they swarm faster than they should because the AI sometimes drops shields when they should not.  In case of triple plasma cannon vs. Paragon.  It would put quite a bit of hard flux on the shield if Paragon does not use Fortress Shield.  AI in Starsector does not always play perfectly.

And I emphasize many attempts.  Triple plasma cannon against Paragon and winning is possible but impractical.

And the problem I have with Odyssey is it cannot fight like any other capital against another and win.  Odyssey cannot outfight other capitals.  Even Conquest can get into slugging matches and win now.  Odyssey does not excel in fighter spam - Legion and Astral do that much better, and Legion can get into a slugging match and win.  Astral... it has six wings of fighters to do all of its dirty work.  Odyssey needs to rely on cheese and/or luck to win against other capitals.

P.S.
Quote
That maneuver takes a lot of time when you are just a target to be shot. If enemy has decent dps they will disable second side right as you are turning. It can be occasionally useful, but that's about it.
Not always.  They often get disabled while my ship vents or before shields go up or I miscalculated and did not move the shield enough to block that Hellbore shot or something.  Whatever the reason, shield gets raised, Conquest has flux to spare, spins, and side two is ready to fire.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 08, 2017, 11:12:57 AM
Another weapon comment:  Played with Hammer Barrage some more, and it feels underwhelming for the OP I pay.  I did a quick peek at the codex, and the total damage it can do is 30,000, only 50% more than medium Annihilators or Reapers.  And since the launcher sprays Hammers, hitting with all of them is not very easy, especially with the ships that have large missiles mounts in the first place.  The only things going for Barrage is the DPS and availability in Open Market.  The DPS in mitigated by clip getting emptied about as quickly as a small missile rack.  Either Barrage needs more ammo or its OP cost lowered a bit, like 18.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 08, 2017, 12:44:54 PM
Quote
3) The Hammer Barrage only has 20 ammo? The Cyclone also has 20 ammo! HB only gets 5 volleys @ 6000 dmg potential VS. Cyclone's 10 volleys @ 8000 damage potential. Yes the Cyclone is 6 OP more expensive but I think the HB could at least come with 2 or so more volleys (so 28 ammo or something).

I said that a few weeks ago about the Hammer Barrage. Is it doomed to remain near trash-tier for a long time, like the old Thumper?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 08, 2017, 12:57:39 PM
Locust is only 18 OP, but has homing and 12000 total DPS.  Sure, it is frag damage, but it is good to launch at anything with flux nearly max and armor stripped.  If ship has weak armor to begin with, even better - just shoot.  Only problem with Locust is rarity.

Sure, Hammer Barrage can be substandard due to being Open Market, but it should be cheap to mount (or made better), which Barrage is not at 20 OP.  Open Market weapons tend to be relatively cheap on OP cost.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on June 08, 2017, 01:44:29 PM
So Nav Relay kind of feels like cheating.

Boosts speed across the board all the time? Flock of hermes never felt so good.  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on June 08, 2017, 01:58:55 PM
Nav Relay and ECM / ECCM ratings are both really cool, under-rated systems that reward "garbage ball" fleets, yup.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: StahnAileron on June 09, 2017, 09:12:43 PM
Say, Alex, is there any way to set up officers to continue leveling and getting skills past LVL.20?

Manually setting max level over 20 just gives me a blank skill selection for LVL.21. A workaround I tried by giving officers 2 points per level sorta works. It was fine until I hit late-game where NPC fleets could get LVL.20 officers. The problem here is that certain initial officer skill rolls will result in maxing out 10 skills at level 19, leaving the game to apparently  stall/freeze with the lack of skill selection for LVL.20. (I'm assuming this is the case as the game played fine until the late game when LVL 20 officer in NPC fleets are more common. Reloading the same save would work; it rarely ever froze at the same point, so I imagine it was just RNG with officer generation.) I haven't tested increasing the officer skill-count limit to like 11. (I can't see that working well either since the UI seems to be designed for 10 skills max.)

I know you have your own design intentions for the game, but seeing as skills aren't quite set in stone yet (infrastructure skills have yet to be implemented), I imagine there's gonna be some growth in the skill/leveling system later to account for that.

Also, any consideration for officers to gain fleet-wide and/or Industry skills as well? Fleet-wide skills would be cumulative, the trade-off being the bonuses are individually lower. I mention this since right now, we only have combat officer builds (mostly Direct Combat vs Carrier). I would like to think fleet-support builds would be a viable path in the future when Infrastructure is a thing. (Personally, I would LOVE to off-load some industry skills, like surveying, to an officer if I could considering the player limit of LVL 40.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 09, 2017, 09:23:43 PM
Say, Alex, is there any way to set up officers to continue leveling and getting skills past LVL.20?

Manually setting max level over 20 just gives me a blank skill selection for LVL.21.
That sounds like a bug. You're changing officerMaxLevel in data/config/settings.json, right? I've set that to 26 and it's working just as you'd expect it to.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on June 09, 2017, 10:46:44 PM
Say, Alex, is there any way to set up officers to continue leveling and getting skills past LVL.20?

Manually setting max level over 20 just gives me a blank skill selection for LVL.21.
That sounds like a bug. You're changing officerMaxLevel in data/config/settings.json, right? I've set that to 26 and it's working just as you'd expect it to.
Same. I've set mine to 29 and it works fine. (Although any higher WILL crash the game)
Note: What size is your screen?

Edit: Alex, will there be anymore hotfixes do you think? What about a .8.5 version?
Edit 2: Hey Alex, it looks like avast has whitelisted the SS install as I was able to download and run it without adding it to my exclusions or turning off avast
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on June 09, 2017, 11:15:30 PM
alex when's .9?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 09, 2017, 11:26:31 PM
alex when's .9?
I'm not Alex, but I can tell you right now that he doesn't know. 0.8.1 just released, there's no way to tell when 0.9 will be out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on June 09, 2017, 11:26:47 PM
alex when's .9?
Between now and the heat death of the next universe
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on June 10, 2017, 12:34:55 AM
alex when's .9?
Between now and the heat death of the next universe

oh cool so it's coming out far, far sooner than anybody expects?  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 10, 2017, 06:18:37 AM
From my experience destroyers and frigates are near suicidal, engaging cruisers and capital ships without proper support and alone. Is there a reason why they do that? And it's repeated many times, destroyer engaging capital ship alone and dying in an instant (I don't use frigates anymore because of that issue, they die even faster).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 10, 2017, 08:51:42 AM
Same. I've set mine to 29 and it works fine. (Although any higher WILL crash the game)

I'm pretty sure that above 29 should no longer hang the game, but there's no point anyway, since officers are limited to 10 skills total and you get that maxed at 29.

Edit: Alex, will there be anymore hotfixes do you think? What about a .8.5 version?

Not planning on either. If a major crash bug comes up, I'd have to do a hotfix, but it'd have to be pretty major at this point.

Edit 2: Hey Alex, it looks like avast has whitelisted the SS install as I was able to download and run it without adding it to my exclusions or turning off avast

Awesome! Thanks again to everyone that reported it to them.


From my experience destroyers and frigates are near suicidal, engaging cruisers and capital ships without proper support and alone. Is there a reason why they do that? And it's repeated many times, destroyer engaging capital ship alone and dying in an instant (I don't use frigates anymore because of that issue, they die even faster).

Hmm - I can't say I've seen what you're talking about. I mean, for capital ships, yes, frigates and to some extent destroyers will get wrecked, but that's why "avoid" is there. For vs smaller ships, though, including cruisers, I really haven't seen a problem - frigates feel super survivable to me whenever I use them (which is all the time).

Probably depends on the type of frigates/loadout/opponents/etc, though. I think what I'm trying to say is less "that doesn't happen" and more "you can probably make it not happen", if that makes sense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 10, 2017, 08:54:57 AM
Alex, what will be the major feature in 0.9?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: StahnAileron on June 10, 2017, 09:14:29 AM
Say, Alex, is there any way to set up officers to continue leveling and getting skills past LVL.20?

Manually setting max level over 20 just gives me a blank skill selection for LVL.21.
That sounds like a bug. You're changing officerMaxLevel in data/config/settings.json, right? I've set that to 26 and it's working just as you'd expect it to.
Yep, in that file. Odd... Maybe I just need to start a new game and do it from scratch. My attempts were on a savegame with which I already had max-level officers. Maybe the bleed-over exp glitched the skill selection somehow *shrug*. The officers I tried to level up had been sitting at 20 for quite some time, so they probably had plenty of excess exp.

Note: What size is your screen?
1920x1200 if it matters.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 10, 2017, 11:24:40 AM
Hmm - I can't say I've seen what you're talking about. I mean, for capital ships, yes, frigates and to some extent destroyers will get wrecked, but that's why "avoid" is there. For vs smaller ships, though, including cruisers, I really haven't seen a problem - frigates feel super survivable to me whenever I use them (which is all the time).

Probably depends on the type of frigates/loadout/opponents/etc, though. I think what I'm trying to say is less "that doesn't happen" and more "you can probably make it not happen", if that makes sense.
It depends on the fact that every ship is happy with engaging just about anything solo. If I could make all my frigates cowards relying on allies to divert enemy attention they'd stop dying and I'd be so happy.
On the realistic note, avoid command applies to every ship, but I want my cruisers to engage the ship.
If that helps you, irritatingly most of my destroyers dies either at the beginning from going after some frigate and dying because suddenly enemies are behind it as well OR when they decide that facehugging a capital is something that will work. The worst is that in the second case, all they'd have to do is to just wait for a big scary ship that's just behind them.
I guess I'll have to spend some battles on the map and learn when AI goes bananas.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: behrooz on June 10, 2017, 05:28:38 PM
In battles against nastier opponents, I've had excellent results in 0.8.1 using a combination of ordering all of the less-survivable ships to escort something tougher and judicious application of engage/eliminate/avoid orders against specific enemies to provide an overall guide and take advantage of local mismatches.

Ideally, the escort pairings make sense, like two Lashers escorting a Hammerhead, or a SO Medusa with a Tempest escort.

This can even be chained, four Lashers escorting two Hammerheads that are in turn escorting a Dominator or something.

At that point, even an unlucky frigate is unlikely to get far enough ahead to become an easy victim, and your fleet can mostly be relied on to take care of itself.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Althaea on June 13, 2017, 05:51:49 AM
@Alex - the salvage gantry description reads:

"Increases the resources gained from salvaging derelicts, floating hulks, and other such by 10/20/30/40 percent, depending on hull size, up to a fleetwide maximum equal to the salvage difficulty rating."

Since the displayed salvage difficulty rating post-combat or with debris fields and generic derelicts is 0%, does that mean the Salvage Gantry hullmod does not grant a bonus under those circumstances?

If so, are any changes/features planned regarding this system? Since currently, the hull-mod would only be useful outside of the core systems when dealing with Redacted and abandoned stations.

In any case, I'm guessing the +10% bonus from Salvage 3 always applies?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 13, 2017, 08:45:39 AM
@alguLoD: Correct & correct! Not planning to change this at the moment, as it's intentional. I don't want players to feel like they're obligated to lug around a Salvage Rig just to get the most out of common occurrences like debris fields and derelict ships. Preparing for a proper salvage expedition, on the other hand, is another matter.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 13, 2017, 10:48:36 AM
The game should probably make that more obvious. The salvage rig description even gives outright misinformation about it: "salvage rig ... assists in ... scavenging useful material from wreckage and debris fields". And the gantry hulmod description also doesn't state the real use case, it only becomes obvious after you experienced for yourself that nothing inside the core worlds ever has a difficulty rating over 0% (and then put the pieces together).


BTW, I'd love an answer to the question I posted here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12612.0):    
Is there any reason why deployment points are not re-distributed as the power balance shifts during battle? I continue to get in awkward situations because I can't reinforce my worn fleet during battle, and the only way around seems to be to increase battle size (which is bad for performance).

Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 13, 2017, 10:55:25 AM
@alguLoD: Correct & correct! Not planning to change this at the moment, as it's intentional. I don't want players to feel like they're obligated to lug around a Salvage Rig just to get the most out of common occurrences like debris fields and derelict ships. Preparing for a proper salvage expedition, on the other hand, is another matter.
So you mean I've been dragging those 2 rigs my whole game and it was placebo the whole time? D:
I find it funny now that there even was a debate, rigs vs shepherds, as it was meaningless mostly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 13, 2017, 11:21:48 AM
Yes.  Salvage Rigs are completely useless if you have no points in Salvaging.  As Gothars says, this is not obvious (unless you read everything carefully, maybe), and I lugged salvage ships for naught at first.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 13, 2017, 11:49:20 AM
The game should probably make that more obvious. The salvage rig description even gives outright misinformation about it: "salvage rig ... assists in ... scavenging useful material from wreckage and debris fields". And the gantry hulmod description also doesn't state the real use case, it only becomes obvious after you experienced for yourself that nothing inside the core worlds ever has a difficulty rating over 0% (and then put the pieces together).

Hmm, yeah, I'll have to take a look at that. I think that was written before the mechanics got completely settled.

BTW, I'd love an answer to the question I posted here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12612.0):    
Is there any reason why deployment points are not re-distributed as the power balance shifts during battle? I continue to get in awkward situations because I can't reinforce my worn fleet during battle, and the only way around seems to be to increase battle size (which is bad for performance).

Ah, missed that entirely somehow - posted a reply there.


So you mean I've been dragging those 2 rigs my whole game and it was placebo the whole time? D:
I find it funny now that there even was a debate, rigs vs shepherds, as it was meaningless mostly.

The placebo effect is not to be underrated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Berty on June 14, 2017, 04:18:23 AM
So, just to confirm; if one does have the Salvage skill and is getting +10% salvage from a battle, would the salvage rig increase the loot gained or would it just be the +10% from the skill?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on June 14, 2017, 04:22:29 AM
So, just to confirm; if one does have the Salvage skill and is getting +10% salvage from a battle, would the salvage rig increase the loot gained or would it just be the +10% from the skill?
It would just be the 10% from the skill. The 10% global salvage found bonus does not increase the salvage rating of anything, and the salvage rig only gives a bonus up to the salvage rating of the thing you're salvaging.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 14, 2017, 08:29:35 AM
Right. And to be explicit about it, the Salvage Rig has no impact on post-combat salvage in any case.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on June 14, 2017, 05:37:00 PM
Anyway what is the point of yellow beacons now?
I was visiting one recently and find some Remnants that run from me (with 11 burn) and some dormant ones that I could not even engage as my rust bucket fleet have max burn 10.
I can harass them but could not engage them at all even when they got into 0 CR.
Whats going on?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on June 14, 2017, 08:28:45 PM
Quick note on Warthogs: I've lowered their armor to 100. They are still overpowered for 12 OP and will ruin everything, but interceptors are marginally effective and a cruiser has a chance to beat a destroyer outfitted with them, if it has dedicated anti-fighter, non PD (flares) weapons. An Eagle with a full beam loadout for example can take them down if it focuses its entire attention. Unlike now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on June 14, 2017, 10:36:04 PM
instead of reducing Warthog durability, you could make them larger, so they become easier to hit with weapons that aren't beams or dedicated PD. their current sprite is pretty small compared to Gladius, Xyphos or Trident, and they also don't rely on a shield bubble that would have a much wider collision radius than the hull itself. i think that would also fit better with the theme of slow speed and heavy armor.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 14, 2017, 11:02:35 PM
Just put them up to 16-18 or w/e OP—it's okay to have a powerful assault fighter wing. Let's not nerf their stats as that would make them more boring.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: adimetro00 on June 14, 2017, 11:11:40 PM
Hey, alex! What are you focusing on in the next patch? There's talk about outposts and establishing markets either on a planet or creating a station market. Are you going to work on that in the 0.9 update?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on June 15, 2017, 12:42:33 AM
0.9 is the MMORPG MOBA update
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 15, 2017, 02:02:06 AM
I think we will have to wait for the respective blog posts to learn about the content of the next update :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 15, 2017, 10:14:17 AM
Yeah, not going to let the cat out of the bag too early :)

Re: Warthogs, definitely keeping various feedback in mind here.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on June 15, 2017, 12:05:29 PM
They are tricky - I tried also lowering their offense to 2 mortars, but then they were too anemic. I kind of like them offensively powerful but defensively weaker - still murderous against a distracted target but less able to just crush everything by themselves.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 15, 2017, 04:25:53 PM
I honestly like Sy's idea of making them somewhat bigger, thus easier to hit. They do seem rather small for such a heavy, durable craft.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: MesoTroniK on June 16, 2017, 12:42:33 AM
I honestly like Sy's idea of making them somewhat bigger, thus easier to hit. They do seem rather small for such a heavy, durable craft.

If I was nerfing the Warthog this is what I would do.

- Make Decoy Flare launcher the single shot version instead of the current triple shot salvo.
- Make its sprite and hitbox significantly larger and easier to hit, somewhere around the size of the Gladius and Xyphos.
- Lower armor to 175.
- Raise its OP cost significantly so they serve as a high end investment of the ship's total loadout.

That combo of changes should be plenty to bring it in line, and also look cooler and more proportional to the power the wing wields.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on June 16, 2017, 07:23:32 AM
I honestly like Sy's idea of making them somewhat bigger, thus easier to hit. They do seem rather small for such a heavy, durable craft.

If I was nerfing the Warthog this is what I would do.

- Make Decoy Flare launcher the single shot version instead of the current triple shot salvo.
- Make its sprite and hitbox significantly larger and easier to hit, somewhere around the size of the Gladius and Xyphos.
- Lower armor to 175.
- Raise its OP cost significantly so they serve as a high end investment of the ship's total loadout.

That combo of changes should be plenty to bring it in line, and also look cooler and more proportional to the power the wing wields.


They'd be nerfed to oblivion with that. Pick two, at most.

I like the idea of a larger hitbox. If they are hit by heavier caliber weaponry, that would definitely reduce their overall longevity.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 16, 2017, 08:52:12 AM
I would pick single flare and either larger sprite or 15-18 OP cost.  Leave the armor alone if its speed will not be raised to match other fighters.  The only reason Warthogs' slow speed is tolerable is they kill stuff, except the silly frigates that outrun them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 16, 2017, 10:11:59 AM
except the silly frigates that outrun them.

Smart frigates. AI shouldn't behave stupidly just because it would be convenient for player in some situations.

In fact, not smart enough - DEs could outrun too, if they intentionally held fire for zero-flux boost. Or kill Warthogs while kiting them, instead of charging right into cloud of fighters and exposing their unshielded rear.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 16, 2017, 10:44:50 AM
Smart frigates. AI shouldn't behave stupidly just because it would be convenient for player in some situations.
That is the thing about AI.  Some players want the best AI, get it, then complain the game is too hard, or at least not fun.

I am contemplating building an endurance fleet.  That is, a fleet of flagships designed to hide in the corner and stall until every last enemy ship runs out of the CR because they are too cowardly, similar to what happened against enemy Timid officers during earlier 0.7x days.

Enemy want to run away from my big ship and not die unless it thinks it can swarm my ship?  I will exploit that.  Move just enough for some ships to approach, back into corner and they run away like little cowards, then wait, and repeat until their CR hits zero first and they cannot do that anymore.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 16, 2017, 11:15:20 AM
Smart frigates. AI shouldn't behave stupidly just because it would be convenient for player in some situations.
That is the thing about AI.  Some players want the best AI, get it, then complain the game is too hard, or at least not fun.

I am contemplating building an endurance fleet.  That is, a fleet of flagships designed to hide in the corner and stall until every last enemy ship runs out of the CR because they are too cowardly, similar to what happened against enemy Timid officers during earlier 0.7x days.

Enemy want to run away from my big ship and not die unless it thinks it can swarm my ship?  I will exploit that.  Move just enough for some ships to approach, back into corner and they run away like little cowards, then wait, and repeat until their CR hits zero first and they cannot do that anymore.

The very existence of map corners is problematic. They don't make lore-sense and are literally AI corner cases.

But AI could counter that by waiting for you just outside of CR decay radius, thus making stalemate yours to resolve.
Or if they have enough mass to make you tick, put exactly enough ships at max CR decay range to either successfully bait you or win by CR.
There is usually counter-cheese available, as long as one wants to look for it...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 16, 2017, 12:03:34 PM
The very existence of map corners is problematic. They don't make lore-sense and are literally AI corner cases.

But AI could counter that by waiting for you just outside of CR decay radius, thus making stalemate yours to resolve.
Or if they have enough mass to make you tick, put exactly enough ships at max CR decay range to either successfully bait you or win by CR.
There is usually counter-cheese available, as long as one wants to look for it...
They wait outside the radius, until you move just enough for them to decide they can swarm you safely, then you immediately backpedal.  They will get close and fire a few shots, but if your ship is something like a Paragon, they have little chance of breaching your defenses on time, and then they retreat when they see you withdraw back into your corner.  I repeat this as long as my ship has peak performance.  As long as I have more time then them, I win.  It is a slow win, but it is very efficient in terms of resources spent (if you need to deploy all to stand a chance otherwise).

Also, the player can limit the number of ships by lowering battle map size to the minimum of 150.  Unless the enemy sends two cruisers or a capital against your capital, your peak performance cannot tick down because the enemy does not send enough small ships to make your ship tick down.

Actually, if the player lowers battle map size for any reason, he may be forced to solo fleets since 60 DP is only enough for a Paragon and one other 10 DP ship, and that 10 DP wingman will probably die.

If my peak performance expires, I simply full retreat and start over for round two (or three or more) until the enemy is defeated.  The enemy will lose CR for more ships than my one.

Normally, I like to play with max battle size, but if there is superior fleet I cannot beat fairly, and the enemy AI annoys me too much because they do not stand and fight, I throw their cheese right back at the AI, and I can outcheese the AI.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 16, 2017, 12:28:16 PM
The very existence of map corners is problematic. They don't make lore-sense and are literally AI corner cases.

But AI could counter that by waiting for you just outside of CR decay radius, thus making stalemate yours to resolve.
Or if they have enough mass to make you tick, put exactly enough ships at max CR decay range to either successfully bait you or win by CR.
There is usually counter-cheese available, as long as one wants to look for it...
They wait outside the radius, until you move just enough for them to decide they can swarm you safely, then you immediately backpedal.  They will get close and fire a few shots, but if your ship is something like a Paragon, they have little chance of breaching your defenses on time, and then they retreat when they see you withdraw back into your corner.  I repeat this as long as my ship has peak performance.  As long as I have more time then them, I win.  It is a slow win, but it is very efficient in terms of resources spent (if you need to deploy all to stand a chance otherwise).

Also, the player can limit the number of ships by lowering battle map size to the minimum of 150.  Unless the enemy sends two cruisers or a capital against your capital, your peak performance cannot tick down because the enemy does not send enough small ships to make your ship tick down.

Actually, if the player lowers battle map size for any reason, he may be forced to solo fleets since 60 DP is only enough for a Paragon and one other 10 DP ship, and that 10 DP wingman will probably die.

If my peak performance expires, I simply full retreat and start over for round two (or three or more) until the enemy is defeated.  The enemy will lose CR for more ships than my one.

Normally, I like to play with max battle size, but if there is superior fleet I cannot beat fairly, and the enemy AI annoys me too much because they do not stand and fight, I throw their cheese right back at the AI, and I can outcheese the AI.

Well AI could wait until you are far enough from corner, until committing to attack. If you have only one Paragon or are similarly outmatched in speed, it is free to choose when to attack and whether to attack all.

As for chain deployment + multi-round combat - yes, these tactics can be unbeatable (or at least unmatched in efficiency) in current iteration. With either corner Capitals or just ton of Afflictors/Hyperions.

Battle-size is kind of different thing, defeating AI by picking options which make it uncompetitive is about the same as selecting easy difficulty...

The thing is - a player-piloted Paragon with character skills can only be defeated under rather specific sets of circumstances (like big swarm of Tempests far from corner/ synced attack by multiple Capitals/ Several Astrals worth of bombers), not by throwing random ships at it in not-overwhelming amounts. If situation doesn't look close to winnable for AI, it makes sense to retreat/not initiate fight.
But that requires pretty much different campaign structure - so that driving enemy away would already be rewarded in some cases.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 16, 2017, 01:04:58 PM
Sure, but the AI will wait an indefinite amount of time for your Paragon or other big ship to poke its head out.  If it will not retreat and leave me alone, then that means forcing a peak performance timer battle if I cannot outfight the incoming swarm.

If the distance from the boundaries is the same for the AI for attacking and withdrawing, it does not matter where it is.  Just find that invisible barrier and freely straddle it at will to toggle AI behavior.

Big swarm of small ships kills Paragon, with or without skills (and this was partially true even before 0.8 ).  I tried soloing 0.8 simulator with max skilled Paragon.  It is impossible.  Once only the frigates are left, they flee and wait until they can swarm en masse, and it is over for the Paragon.  Unlike campaign, retreat and redeploy is not an option in the simulator.  Large enemy ships on the other hand, are too slow and can be kited, outranged, and picked off with quad Tachyon Lances.

Battle map size may be selecting difficulty, but it can be changed mid-game, and I am not above exploiting game-given features to stack the fight in my favor, although I dislike lowering battle map size (less than maximum of 500) and out-stalling the AI unless the AI annoys me so much that I do not care how the AI loses and I win.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 16, 2017, 01:06:52 PM
If the distance from the boundaries is the same for the AI for attacking and withdrawing

(It's not.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 16, 2017, 01:08:12 PM
@ Alex:  Yes, I seem to have noticed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: kerghnox on June 16, 2017, 03:33:38 PM
Any chance of making hyperstorms moddable? I know most people like them the way they are, but there's some of us who would like to modify how harsh they are.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on June 16, 2017, 04:31:34 PM
to be harsher, yes? Hey Alex the consensus seems to be the storms need to be harsher, could you add hyperspace hurricanes and hyperspace tsunami to the next update?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: RedTheHunter on June 16, 2017, 05:13:23 PM
Hyperspace earthquakes too!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cik on June 16, 2017, 05:16:54 PM
also make crossing the event horizon instantly lethal and/or there's another starmap inside the event horizon and/or you can go into red space where you meet a bunch of peaceful probes that are also simultaneously murderous.

thanks.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on June 16, 2017, 07:46:59 PM
also make crossing the event horizon instantly lethal and/or there's another starmap inside the event horizon and/or you can go into red space where you meet a bunch of peaceful probes that are also simultaneously murderous.

thanks.

to be fair nobody crosses the event horizon, or even enters a star, they just go around the star in 3d space, which on the 2d display looks like ur in (over) them
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 16, 2017, 08:56:44 PM
Any chance of making hyperstorms moddable? I know most people like them the way they are, but there's some of us who would like to modify how harsh they are.

A quick note: they're 100% moddable. Just requires more than editing a text file.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Captain Draco on June 17, 2017, 02:45:24 AM
Hyperspace earthquakes too!

Demons and space monsters attacks please; I also modded infernum back; it does sounds more unique than generic fuel.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on June 17, 2017, 01:58:36 PM
I also modded infernum back; it does sounds more unique than generic fuel.
"generic fuel" in Starsector is still made of anti-matter. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on June 17, 2017, 03:33:41 PM
Hell, I'm still onboard for some proper aliens (not just AI War stuff) and/or some hyperspace horrors with bio weapons or somthing!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hazard on June 17, 2017, 06:23:29 PM
A tiny thing that popped to my mind: will the heavy and light autocannons get new sprites at some point? There's nothing wrong with them per se, but if you compare them to the machine gun family, it's a little bit funny when you notice that the barrels are either very similar in size (light versions), or larger on the machine gun (heavy versions). ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sophismata on June 20, 2017, 04:35:53 AM
Quote
Removed "destroyed weapon mounts" hullmod; was more confusing than clarifying the matter

Does this mean that it is, or is not clear when a d-mod has removed or downsized weapon mounts?

I don't know all the base mounts off by heart, but I have found some ships to be missing the normal hard points (eg, I think one of the wolf variants is missing the medium energy).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: mendonca on June 20, 2017, 07:14:24 AM
Quote
Removed "destroyed weapon mounts" hullmod; was more confusing than clarifying the matter

Does this mean that it is, or is not clear when a d-mod has removed or downsized weapon mounts?

I don't know all the base mounts off by heart, but I have found some ships to be missing the normal hard points (eg, I think one of the wolf variants is missing the medium energy).

I think the gist of it is; it is not as immediately clear (you have to examine each hull for mounts rather than quick inspection of D-Mods) BUT this removes a lot of confusion with the procedural [D] ships being fundamentally different than the non-procedural old-[D] ships.

Non-procedural inferior ships, with non-cleanable downsides, now get independent signifiers e.g. [P] for [P]irate.

Slight lack in immediate clarity, at a cost to much greater overall clarity and less chance of confusion as the game mechanics play out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabaton on June 21, 2017, 04:43:04 PM
Are planetside operations planned? Ruined/worlds and decivilized planets seem like that, the lore also points to it. Might give marines something to do.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sophismata on June 22, 2017, 01:48:40 AM
I think the gist of it is; it is not as immediately clear (you have to examine each hull for mounts rather than quick inspection of D-Mods) BUT this removes a lot of confusion with the procedural [D] ships being fundamentally different than the non-procedural old-[D] ships.

Non-procedural inferior ships, with non-cleanable downsides, now get independent signifiers e.g. [P] for [P]irate.

Slight lack in immediate clarity, at a cost to much greater overall clarity and less chance of confusion as the game mechanics play out.

Ahhh, right; I think I get you. Now, as long as it's a [D] ship it's possible to restore it back to full operations. [P] and other variants are essentially different hulls and cannot always be brought up to the standard variant spec.

Thanks!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zhentar on June 22, 2017, 08:24:02 AM
There's still a [D] Sunder that that has 3 medium energy instead of 2 medium & 1 large. But I think that's the only remaining exception.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 22, 2017, 09:16:39 AM
There's still a [D] Sunder that that has 3 medium energy instead of 2 medium & 1 large. But I think that's the only remaining exception.
Restoring the Sunder gives its large mount back.

Hammerhead (D) with 85 OP does not upgrade normal Hammerhead with 95 OP, but remains itself with 85 OP and without the (D) mods.  This was reported a while back (and probably fixed for later).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gotcha! on August 12, 2017, 03:37:20 AM
I haven't played this game since I made mods for it (aka ages). Installed it again yesterday and I'm very happy to see so much was added to the game.
My head almost exploded when I saw the star map.
Bonus kudos for The Incinerator (as I believe it was called).

Nice going, Alex (and team). Can't wait for 1.0. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Iq2Gamer on November 11, 2017, 11:24:45 AM
Is there a way to drop a commission from a faction or are they permanent?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 11, 2017, 11:48:32 AM
Currently no way to do it aside from becoming hostile with the faction. The mechanic itself is a bit of a placeholder.

Also: hi, and welcome to the forum!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on November 11, 2017, 04:32:57 PM
Currently no way to do it aside from becoming hostile with the faction. The mechanic itself is a bit of a placeholder.
Really, or is dropping to Suspicious (two steps above Hostile) enough to annul commission?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 11, 2017, 04:57:43 PM
I don't actually recall exactly - suspicious might be enough. Hostile is certainly enough :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: JH1 on November 28, 2017, 02:24:54 PM
Are there any plans to be able to change name and avatar during the game? This would be a welcome addition for people like me who spend way too much time on character creation.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sy on November 29, 2017, 06:49:46 AM
Are there any plans to be able to change name and avatar during the game? This would be a welcome addition for people like me who spend way too much time on character creation.
you can easily change name and portrait by editing your latest savefile directly. just open \Starsector\saves\save_namegoeshere_1234567890\descriptor.xml in notepad++ or something similar, and change the portraitName and characterName entries to whatever you like. you can find the vanilla portrait names in \Starsector\starsector-core\graphics\portraits.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 29, 2017, 08:44:34 AM
As for being able to edit it in-game: maybe at some point? Mainly a question of getting around to it, as it's rather low-priority among the other things that need doing. I'll say that for outposts and factions, you'll be able to rename/change the flag at any time, precisely to avoid having to spend too much time making those decisions.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on November 29, 2017, 11:44:48 AM
I'll close here, so nobody gets his hope up for new patchnotes for nothing :)