Odyssey:
Increased speed to 90 (was 50), also increased acceleration/deceleration/turn accel
Increased number of fighter bays to 2 (was: 1)
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?
- Other REDACTED:
- Smaller fleets will run away from the player instead of always engaging (to remove annoyance of having to fight the smaller fleets)
Could we get this on the suspend/resume repairs tooltip, too?
- "Unmothball" tooltip will show estimated supplies and time to recover combat readiness
Will not focus their fighters on the target? That seems backwards...
- Carriers given an "Eliminate" assignment will not focus their fighters on the target
- Fixed issue in refit screen where mounts on restored hulls would show "empty" hovertext after being fitted
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.
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.
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.It sort of needs that speed to offset low range of energy weapons and it's low durability.
Hell, 90su base is faster than most capitals in .7.2, even after skills.
Actually I seem to recall that he mentioned that he would buff it as it has switched places with the logistics treeAny 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.
Will not focus their fighters on the target? That seems backwards...
Was the permanent war issue fixed?
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.
* ...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?
... 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.What exactly stopped you from including plasma jets in it in 0.8? It even has additional engines already.
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]
- Person bounties:
- ...
Autofit now attempts to recreate weapon groups used by the target variant instead of autogenerating themAt last hurray! :D
Officers: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).
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
Added Colossus Mk.II and Mk.IIII'm not sure my body is ready :O
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+
Person bounties:Sounds like really good and needed changes :)
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
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?
Transverse Jump: fleet stops and charges for 3 seconds before executing the jump, can be attackedIt 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?
Front Shield Generator...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.
Reduces top speed by 25%
Changed to tier 0, lower price, carried by all major factions
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...
Ship AINot so sure, I already had experienced lot of problems with non-assault type carriers rubbing their omni's into enemy's faces. So... yeah.
Will now close in a little more on enemies it's winning the flux war against
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.
Fixed issue w/ ships not closing in effectively on very distant enemies sometimes and wandering insteadThis sounds really good.
MiscellaneousHooray!
Game now comes with 64-bit Java 7 (7u79)
Fixed issue with amount of collision damage applied to stationsI sense that Tartifflete posting that vid with monitor shieldbashing the station has been noticed ;D
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.
charge regen is halved, not cooldown. currently it gets 1 charge every 10 sec.QuoteDamper 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...
- Colossus freighter now properly has the "civgrade" hullmod
Front Shield Generator
Reduces top speed by 25%
Changed to tier 0, lower price, carried by all major factions
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.
NOOOOOOOOOi feel the same! :(
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.
What exactly stopped you from including plasma jets in it in 0.8? It even has additional engines already.
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]
Hey Alex, did you by chance add in the third skill choice for officers by any chance?
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.
Ha! I knew i was right :) But what about the rest of the economy?
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?
I sense that Tartifflete posting that vid with monitor shieldbashing the station has been noticed ;D
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.
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?
Piranha: removed LMG, bombs have an 0.1 second arming time
THUNDERS
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? ^^
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:
...
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.
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?
- Ox-class Tug:
- Improves fleetwide burn by 1, cumulative with other tugs, not limited by its own burn level
- Uses 10 fuel per light-year
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.
Yes, yes! ;Ddetached modules? what?
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?
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.
detached modules? what?On the big REDACTED, some modules stay on and others fly off when destroyed.
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.
- Ox-class Tug:
- Improves fleetwide burn by 1, cumulative with other tugs, not limited by its own burn level
Prolly those destroyed weapon mounts?Yes, yes! ;Ddetached modules? what?
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?
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
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.
Good idea. Renamed to:\o/
Makeshift Shield Generator
Shield Conversion - Front
Shield Conversion - Omni
- Autofit now attempts to recreate weapon groups used by the target variant instead of autogenerating themTHANK GOD
- Fighters now start out in "regroup" rather than "engage" modeYES
- Added Colossus Mk.II and Mk.IIIHot damn. Can't wait to see what those could be!
(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.
- LRPD Laser: reduced flux to 25/sec (was 100)For some reason this speaks volumes to me.
- Odyssey: Increased speed to 90 (was 50), also increased acceleration/deceleration/turn accelHoly... That is a big speed buff.
- Added new carriers (Mora, Drover, Legion) to the "Random Battle" missionThis makes me incredibly happy.
- Fixed bug where venting would trigger the cooldown on Phase Lance and similar weaponsNice. That one was starting to annoy me.
- Fixed issue with REDACTED fleets not spawning at REDACTED REDACTEDThis just makes me laugh all over again. ;D
On the big REDACTED, some modules stay on and others fly off when destroyed.
(http://i.imgur.com/TLcazyW.png)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!!!
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?
MARRY MEH!
(http://i.imgur.com/TLcazyW.png)
WIP, thoughts?
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.
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.Those are the best questions!
... so much confusion :)
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.
Added "Converted Hangar" modspec to level 2 Fighter Doctrine
Less drastically reduced flux cost of PD Laser and both Burst PD Laser versions
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)QuoteLess 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.
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.
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.
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)
- Ion Pulser: ammo regenerates in sets of 3, to match burst size
Advanced Countermeasures:I'm not sure Advanced Countermeasures should even exist to begin with, in light of these changes.
- 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%)
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".
- 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 ;)
New bounties will not spawn near where the player is
Interdiction Pulse ability
Odyssey:
Increased speed to 90 (was 50), also increased acceleration/deceleration/turn accel
Piranha: removed LMG, bombs have an 0.1 second arming time
Thunder:
Range 8000, speed 450, 500 health/75 armor (same as Gladius)
Armed with Light Dual MG, IR Pulse Laser, Swarmers
- 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 ;)
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.
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.
Bounty level goes up with player level even if the player hasn't been doing bounties
Do they have nerfed swarmers like Talons?
QuoteBounty 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 ^^*.
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.
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'm not sure Advanced Countermeasures should even exist to begin with, in light of these changes.i gotta agree with this.
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.
- Colossus freighter now properly has the "civgrade" hullmod
Inb4 patch notes: fixed bug where the Colossus-class heavy freighter did not have the "Civilian-grade hull" hullmod.
QuoteBounty 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.
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.
keep level low and get money by other means - steamroll level scaled spawns like superhuman.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.
vs.
focus on non combat skills and suck really hard.
vs.
get high level but no heavy\powerfull ships and rageout.
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).
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.
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.
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'm not sure Advanced Countermeasures should even exist to begin with, in light of these changes.SpoilerMy 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]
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).
- 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
QuoteDamper 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 ::))(and other responses re: MSG)SpoilerPerhaps 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]
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.
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?
QuoteNew 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.
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.
Do they have nerfed swarmers like Talons?
QuoteBounty 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.
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.
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?
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 ^^*.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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)
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.
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.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.
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.
... Shields toggle fine, but no other right-click does a thing in either tactical or strategic views.
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.
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?".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.
I think we should.
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).
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.
Lux are good, better than I thought, but Sparks still kill most things a bit faster than 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.
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 "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.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.
(big enough that anti-ship weapons are effective against them)
or flat out have the Plasma get a strike tag. I remember having to add that in, in .72(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
Why would Front Shield Generator lower the top speed?
(As in both gameplay reason and lore-wise description)
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?
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)
- 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.
Unstable Injector: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.
Reduced range penalty to 15% (was 25%)
Reduced speed bonus to 25/20/15/15
Can you buy and attach/swap modules in refit screen?Nope. Modules have to be built-in.
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.
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]
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)
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.
Size of new patrols spawned patrols increases more quickly as they're defeatedI 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.
As an aside:Size of new patrols spawned patrols increases more quickly as they're defeatedI 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.
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.
Or is that already the case?
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.
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.
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.
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!
It'd be cool if outposts were an offline-only feature that required an internet connection and a Uplay account
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.
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).
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?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%.
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.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.
Transverse Jump: fleet stops and charges for 3 seconds before executing the jump, can be attacked
Hats for spaceships? Now we're talking!(http://i.imgur.com/Dr75QgQ.jpg)
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
@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.
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.
What you are asking is basically "why should elements in a game be balanced against each other?"
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.
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!
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.
Added "allowForceQuitInIronMode" setting to settings.json; defaults to true
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.
@Gothars did you ever got away by hiding in asteroids or whatever? I never could.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Wing size 4, no fighters destroyed: .8 and .8.1 both deploy two more 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)
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.
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?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.
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!
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.
QuoteBTW, 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.
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.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?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.
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!
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.
they DGAF about supplies, CR or losses
Looking good, thanks Alex!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.
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.
...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.
Looking good, thanks Alex!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.
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.
...
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.
...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.
...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.
IP changes are interesting, will AI counter it by using ASB too?
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.
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?
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.
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.
... AND they move
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
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!
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.
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.
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?
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.)
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
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.
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.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).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.
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.
So why do you have an agar.io-like navigation minigame that you keep elaborating upon update after update?
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
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
~Snip~
*snip*
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.
Minor intel GUI issue (https://gfycat.com/IncomparablePrestigiousChevrotain)
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.
...Sustained Burn, on the other hand, is mandatory, at least if you want to get anywhere in any kind of reasonable time...
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.
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....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.
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...
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.
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.
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
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?
What's wrong with Odyssey? It's one of the better looking ships, with its own style too.
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.
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.
I want an artillery platforms with a range of from 2000Tachyon Lance Paragon.
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.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.
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.
Well good thing it's super fast (for a capital) and has capital ship range (assuming ITU is installed)!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.
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.
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) |
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.
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.
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.
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...
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.
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.
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)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.
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.
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.
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?
Anything resembling an ETA for this?
Fixed crash on star system info screen if planet had 4 or more moons
First impression of the new Thunder: it is waaaaaaaay too fast. It can't actually kill things because its attack runs last milliseconds.
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
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.
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.)
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.
are the new Colossi not on the codex somehow? I just looked and couldn't find them
Huh.
Probably because Alex upload 'free' version for pirates with keyloger and bitcoin miner included by mistake.
Or so I hear.
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.
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.
First impression of the new Thunder: it is waaaaaaaay too fast. It can't actually kill things because its attack runs last milliseconds.
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.
(We get you want to stay low-key about this, but we won't blow the whistle on you!)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.)
PS. AM I HEARING NEW MUSIC?
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.
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...
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...
I've submitted a false positive report to Avast. (I'm gonna switch to somebody else. AVG?)
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
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
[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...
Is Stian still on for Starsector's music and SFX? I haven't heard any news from that guy in years.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Sufficient sensor strength on affected fleet allows it to avoid interdict entirely
This includes using Active Sensor Burst
i hope removal of deep hyperspace and hyperstorms is possible without violating "no RE" rule.no RE?
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.
I just tried out storms just to see what the fuss is, and it is well-deserved.
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!
EDIT: Would it be really necessary for you to not only made the storms interrupt SB
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.
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.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).
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Some things that (I imagine) would be relatively easy to implement with modifications of already existing things:...i hate those phase storms already. ^^
- 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)
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!
Storm ideas
Hotfix #2 is up; notes on what's in it in OP.
Test results here (https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/6f49422f1457c83626ae0451a049163ffcf58c21e318226c43fbf2769bec9c1b/analysis/1496598660/) (spoiler - completely clean, even according to Avast).
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).
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.
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?
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)?
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 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).
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.
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! :)
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.
Re: bounty scaling: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.
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.
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?
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.
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:
...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.
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).
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.
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.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.
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
Alright, one more hotfix is up. Hopefully it's the last one for .1, fingers crossed. Notes in the OP, but basically:Alex finally fixes a thing~
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
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.
Is it possible now to set course to a random (empty) point in system map?
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.
you just stack 3 HEFed Tachyon Lancesisn'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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 Paragon, I managed to kill it, after many attempts, with Claw fighters and triple plasma cannon.Skill-less Odyssey vs sim Paragon? How?
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.
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.
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.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.
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.
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).
Say, Alex, is there any way to set up officers to continue leveling and getting skills past LVL.20?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.
Manually setting max level over 20 just gives me a blank skill selection for LVL.21.
Same. I've set mine to 29 and it works fine. (Although any higher WILL crash the game)Say, Alex, is there any way to set up officers to continue leveling and getting skills past LVL.20?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.
Manually setting max level over 20 just gives me a blank skill selection for LVL.21.
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.
alex when's .9?Between now and the heat death of the next universe
alex when's .9?Between now and the heat death of the next universe
Same. I've set mine to 29 and it works fine. (Although any higher WILL crash the game)
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
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).
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.Say, Alex, is there any way to set up officers to continue leveling and getting skills past LVL.20?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.
Manually setting max level over 20 just gives me a blank skill selection for LVL.21.
Note: What size is your screen?1920x1200 if it matters.
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).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.
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.
@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:
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.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).
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...
The very existence of map corners is problematic. They don't make lore-sense and are literally AI corner cases.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).
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...
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.
If the distance from the boundaries is the same for the AI for attacking and withdrawing
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.
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.
Hyperspace earthquakes too!
I also modded infernum back; it does sounds more unique than generic fuel."generic fuel" in Starsector is still made of anti-matter. :P
Removed "destroyed weapon mounts" hullmod; was more confusing than clarifying the matter
QuoteRemoved "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.
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.
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?
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.