Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => Announcements => Topic started by: Alex on June 01, 2018, 05:52:13 PM



Title: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 01, 2018, 05:52:13 PM
Blog post/download links here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2018/11/16/starsector-0-9a-release/).

Changes as of November 20, 2018 (RC10)

Campaign:
  • Hegemony Inspection industry disruption in case of hidden REDACTED reduced to maximum of 2 months

Modding:
  • Fixed crash caused by producing 0-cost weapons or other items
  • When merging json files: if a mod provides an empty json array, the merged json will be set to an empty array instead of appending the empty array to it (which is a no-op)
    • For example, "engineSlots":[] in a missile's .proj file will clear the engine slots instead of doing nothing

Bugfixing:
  • Fixed issue where commodities available in-faction would sometimes not be listed as coming from in-faction
  • Fixed issue where ships found in a debris field were usually turned into Nebula-class liners
  • Fixed bug where expeditions repelled by ground defenses would stick around in system indefinitely
  • Inspection: fixed "Defenders will comply" intel description when Hegemony is already hostile
  • Autofit no longer considers weapon priority set in the doctrine (it was not supposed to)
  • Fixed damage calculation bug involving Strike Commander (caused fighters to deal a lot more damage than intended)
  • Fixed bug that fairly frequently caused missiles and other projectiles to hit twice in the same frame
  • Fixed lack of fuel and supplies at Ancyra during tutorial



Changes as of November 16, 2018

Campaign
  • Starting ships for the "faster start" options now have some fairly benign d-mods
    • Goal is to introduce player to the idea that d-mods are "ok"
    • And to make adding damaged ships to their fleet feel better
    • Starting Apogee does not have a d-mod
  • Changed effect of Alpha Cores on industries that aren't production-focused
    • Spaceport/Megaport: +20% accessibility
    • Ground Defenses/Heavy Batteries: ground defense strength x1.5
    • REDACTED structure: relevant bonus
    • REDACTED facility: relevant bonus
    • Commerce: +1 stability
    • Patrol HQ/Military Base: x1.25 fleet size
    • Orbital Station: a high-level AI core "officer" is in command of the station in combat
  • Added very rare salvage "special" to find a blueprint to ship wrecks
  • Faction-specific ships now available on the open market, with a reduced quality
    • 2 to 3 more d-mods than average for that colony
  • Pirate, Luddic Path, and REDACTED fleets are more likely to get increasingly aggressive than to retreat
    • That is, when a regular fleet would retreat, they may ramp up the attack instead
  • System bounties:
    • Some of the faction's patrols pull back to defend the main colony for the duration
    • Gives bounty hunters more room to operate
  • Person bounty:
    • Removed level-based scaling
    • Added slight time-based scaling
  • Allied fleets will no longer deploy very low CR ships in pursuit scenarios
  • Commodity pricing and related:
    • Deficit/excess is indicated by red/green commodity icons in the colony info screen
    • Results in significantly higher/lower prices for number of units based on amount of deficit/excess
    • Deficit/excess amount shown in the commodity tooltip's "list of best places to buy/sell"
    • Ctrl-clicking will buy up all excess (to capacity) and sell to fill deficit
  • Improved discoverability of habitable/low hazard worlds
  • Increased average size of pirate and Pather ships; still use smaller ships overall
  • Added "transponder off" warning and option to turn it on while jumping into a populated system
    • Only warns if patrols in-system care about transponder status
    • Warns if turning the transponder on would make any factions immediately hostile
  • Toned down the effect of hyperstorm strikes on fleet movement
  • Adjusted bounty fleet size progression to be more consistent
  • Adjusted fleet spawning to tend towards larger ship sizes for larger fleets, even for a doctrine that prefers smaller ships in general
  • New (extra difficult) starting option: "A spacer. A broken-down shuttle. A lifelong debt."
    • Enable using "enableSpacerStart" in data/config/settings.json
  • Turned "altMouseMoveToMassTransfer" control off by default (transfers large quantities of cargo quickly)
  • Adjusted how stockpiling at player-owned colonies works
    • A quantity of resources produced locally is added to the Local Resources submarket
      • More if it's not being exported due to, say, low accessibility
    • Taking these results in an at-cost charge in that month's income/expense report
    • Can be taken "for free", but their base value is deducted from player's monthly income
    • Added a setting to let a colony use these to counter shortages
      • Costs considerably less than taking the resources directly
    • Resources can be brought to the colony and put in Local Resources manually
      • Using or taking these does not result in any cost
    • Local Resources submarket tooltip lists stockpile growth rate and limits
  • Added Waystation industry back in
    • Increases accessibility by 10%
    • Low cost and upkeep
    • Makes the colony stockpile fuel, supplies, and crew into Local Resources, even if it's not a producer of any of these
    • Alpha Core bonus: hugely increased stockpiling rate and limit for fuel/supplies/crew
  • Added Transplutonics to more salvage drops
  • Improved salvage variety from planetary ruins
  • Significantly increased the upkeep cost of Refining, Heavy Industry, Light Industry, and Fuel Production
    • Goal is to encourage building these on low-hazard worlds
  • Made various "colony threat" intel items have a more prominent sound effect
  • Special items such as blueprints will not be lost if cargo ships are lost while retreating
  • Pirate bases will not launch random not-anti-player raids for the first year or so
  • Procurement Contract mission: added button to show best prices and places to buy the commodity
  • Greatly reduced the prices of high-cost ship weapons
    • Example: Tachyon Lance, 25000 -> 8000
  • Reduced build cost of orbital stations of all tiers
  • Reduced base price of Marines to 200 credits (was: 500)
  • Debt (i.e. expenses not covered by credit balance) from last month carries over into next month

Combat
  • Changed minimum battleSize to 200 and default to 300 (was: 150 and 250)
  • Enemy will prefer to deploy larger ships when attacking a station
  • Orbital Stations
    • Targeting Supercomputer (built-in on all modules) now greatly reduces recoil
    • Reduced flux stats
  • Player can now always deploy at least one ship into combat, regardless of its deployment point value
    • Mostly comes into play when deploying alongside an allied station which can eat up most of the deployment points
  • Background planet, when a battle has an orbital station:
    • Moved down if the player is defending
    • Moved up if the player is attacking
    • Goal is to keep it from interfering with the combat too much, visually, and have it look like it's "in front" or "behind" the station, as appropriate


Fighters
  • When ordered to regroup, fighters will always be able to keep up with the carrier, regardless of their top speed otherwise
    • Bombers returning to re-arm also receive this bonus

Weapons
  • Hammer torpedo: made engine glow bigger and slightly redder to distinguish better from Salamander


Ships
  • Paragon:
    • Increased deployment and monthly maintenance cost to 60 (was: 50)
    • Reduced crew required to 400 (was: 450)
  • Onslaught:
    • Increased crew required to 750 (was: 500)
    • Increased maximum crew to 1500 (was 1250)
  • Buffalo: reduced max burn to 8 (was 9) to bring in line with standard civilian burn levels at that size


Hullmods
  • Automated Repair Unit:
    • Removed bonus to CR recovery and repair rate
    • Reduced OP cost
  • Militarized Subsystems:
    • Reduces both CR to deploy and supply cost by 30% instead of just reducing supply cost
  • Efficiency Overhaul:
    • Instead of reducing CR cost to deploy, increases CR recovery and repair rate by 50%
  • Degraded Engines: reduced penalty to 15% (was: 20%)


Ship AI
  • Ships ordered to "Eliminate" or "Full Assault" will be more aggressive when facing an orbital station
  • Improved use of Maneuvering Jets/Plasma Jets to back off while at high flux
  • Ensured that retreat orders are obeyed promptly
  • "Escort" order will now take precedence over "Avoid"
  • More liberal missile use when they're at full ammo and the ship is having difficulties
  • Further reduced tendency to fire off missiles vs unshielded ships
  • Fixed autofiring inaccuracy with dumbfire rockets/torpedoes when paired with missile speed bonuses
    • Also affects autofiring weapons on player's ship

Modding
  • Fixed issue where all weapons could get disabled by critical malfunctions if ship had decorative weapons
  • Fixed issue with DUAL weapon barrel mode that caused it to fire 12-23-34 instead of 12-34-12
  • Added to SoundPlayerAPI:
  • void pauseCustomMusic();
    • void resumeCustomMusic();
    • void playCustomMusic(int fadeOutIfAny, int fadeIn, String musicSetId)
    • void playCustomMusic(int fadeOutIfAny, int fadeIn, String musicSetId, boolean looping)
  • Added to ArmorGridAPI:
    • Vector2f getLocation(int cellX, int cellY);
  • Added to CombatEngineAPI:
    • int getWinningSideId();
    • boolean isCombatOver();
  • Added to DamagingProjectileAPI:
    • float getMoveSpeed();
  • Added to ShipAPI:
    • void syncWithArmorGridState();
    • void syncWeaponDecalsWithArmorDamage();
  • Added to ShipSystemAPI:
    • void setCooldownRemaining(float remaining);
    • void setCooldown(float cooldown);
  • Added to WeaponAPI:
    • void setCurrHealth(float currHealth);
  • Added to WeaponSpecAPI:
    • Color getGlowColor();
    • boolean isInterruptibleBurst();
  • Moved MuzzleFlashSpec class to API
  • Added MuzzleFlashSpec getMuzzleFlashSpec() to WeaponAPI
    • Returns null for non-projectile weapons
    • Make sure to call WeaponAPI.ensureClonedSpec() before making any changes to muzzle spec
    • Otherwise changes will affect all weapons of this type until game restart
  • Added to CharacterCreationData:
    • void addScriptBeforeTimePass(Script script);
    • List<Script> getScriptsBeforeTimePass();
  • Added sim_opponents_dev.csv file that's loaded when the game is in dev mode and "playtestingMode" is set to false
  • Added "noImpactSounds" setting to weapon specs; defaults to false
  • Added ALWAYS_PANIC ship hint; makes ship always fire missile weapons as if panicking
  • Used by Pather version of Colossus


Bugfixing:
  • Fixed brief invulnerability window caused by phase ships uncloaking inside/too near an enemy ship
  • Fixed issue with allied forces not deploying ships in some circumstances
  • Small asteroids from a ring system no longer prevent unphasing
  • Fixed bug where a re-built orbital station was no longer effective



Changes as of October 20, 2018

Campaign
  • Added portside bar to colonies
    • And a number of possible bar events of varying importance
  • Added REDACTED mission (starts in bar)
  • Added raids, bombardments, and planetary defenses
    • Can raid a colony for valuables, commodities, blueprints, and other items
    • Can raid to disrupt operations of a specific industry
    • Marines, specialized ships, and skills determine raid strength and outcome
    • Raids with transponder off do not cause instant hostility
    • Can bombard colonies using fuel; not very efficient
      • Tactical bombardment to disrupt military operations
      • Saturation bombardment: an atrocity; causes multiple factions to go hostile
        • Colonies of size 4 and below are destroyed outright
        • Larger colonies lose a lot of stability and are likely to decivilize after some time
    • Colonies can build up various layers of defenses
    • Nearby fleets prevent raids and bombardments
    • Orbital stations prevent bombardments but not raids
    • Ground defenses make raids more difficult and bombardments more expensive
  • Can run salvaging operations on colonies with ruins
    • Must be surveyed first (for the ruins to be identified)
    • Outcome depends on scale of ruins on the planet
  • Colonies that have low stability for too long have a chance to become decivilized
  • Can view colony info and interact with core UI when docked with a hostile colony that does not give docking clearance
  • Added monthly salary for marines
  • Added REDACTED (to do with population growth)
  • Officer level-up dialog keeps going while there are skill choices to make, unless "not now" is selected
    • Added shortcut key for "level up" button in dialog
  • Orbiting fleets will no longer use Active Sensor Burst
    • Goal is to reduce randomness involved in successfully sneaking into a colony
  • Added periodic warning message when fleet is over capacity in cargo/fuel/crew
  • Added a recoverable Dram tanker to the ships around Tetra
  • Changed "Hand Weapons" commodity to "Heavy Armaments"; now covers things like heavy weapons, tanks, mechs, hovercraft, etc
  • Added pirate bases and raids
  • Added Luddic Path cells
  • Added Hegemony inspection
  • Added punitive expeditions
  • Added Synchrotron Core; can be installed in Fuel Production industry to drastically increase output
  • Added blueprint and special item drops to various salvage
  • Implemented Tech-Mining industry
    • Chance to find blueprints, modspecs and other rare items, based on the size of ruins being mined
    • Generates some basic commodities (fuel, supplies, metals, machinery); delivered to gathering point
    • Output goes down over time
  • Updated various tooltips (added "design type" information - low tech, midline, etc where appropriate; made other improvements)
    • Cargo/commodities
    • Ship weapons
    • Ships
    • Hull mods
    • Various blueprints
  • A colony sold a Synchrotron Core or a Nanoforge will use them if able to
  • Tooltip for fleet points bar in ship deployment dialog now includes battle size and how many points the enemy has
  • Jump-point dialog now includes a warning if there are nearby fleets on the other side
    • Includes warning and plays a sound if the nearby fleets are hostile
  • New game start:
    • Added easier options that start you off with multi-ship fleets - a "salvage expedition" and a "mercenary force"
    • Added 3-year-long monthly stipend from the Galatian Academy from the tutorial mission
      • Also given when tutorial is skipped
  • Sustained Burn:
    • Now gives +100% burn instead of +10
      • Means that bonuses to ship burn level (i.e. Augmented Drive Field) are doubled
      • While fleetwide bonuses (tugs, Nav Buoy, etc) are not
    • Slightly increased arc in which it has the highest acceleration penalty
    • Reduced charge up/down time to half a second (was: 2.5 seconds up, 1 second down)
    • Goals are to )1 make burn level of ships mean more and 2) encourage turning SB off sometimes
  • Emergency Burn:
    • Reduced supply cost by half (was: 50% of total deployment cost of fleet, now 25%)
    • Burn bonus increased to +8 (was: +5)
  • Navigation: level 3 now gives +1 to maximum burn and an additional +1 when Sustained Burn is on
  • Known hullmods no longer drop or show up for sale
  • Buying up hullmods will NOT increase the odds of remaining ones showing up
  • Fleet Logistics: maintenance reduction reduced to 25% (was: 30%)
  • Derelict ships in campaign will now show ship type in the tooltip, i.e. "Derelict Ship (Dram-class Light Tanker)"
  • Salvaging mechanics:
    • "Salvage rating" no longer a player-facing stat; still affects crew/machinery needed
      • Removed "blow it up" option as it's no longer relevant
    • Salvaging skill provides up to a 50% bonus to finding resources and rare items
    • Recovery of resources is affected by:
      • Having enough crew (multiplier, 0 to 1)
      • Having enough heavy machinery (+0 to +100%)
      • Salvaging skill (up to +50%)
      • Salvage Rigs / other ships with salvaging capacity; diminishing returns for more ships
        • Ships must be at at least 10% combat readiness for bonus to apply
    • A fraction of the total bonus also applies to post-combat salvage
    • Recovery of rare items is only affected by the Salvaging skill
      • Not affected by not having enough crew, machinery, or any other modifiers
    • Goals are:
      • Clean up the flow by removing the "blow up then scavenge" option
      • Allow player to specialize in getting a lot more value out of it
      • Ensure that salvaging something will not feel like a wasted opportunity due to missing out on likely-otherwise-inaccessible items such as blueprints
      • Give Salvaging skill long-term value - it grants access to 50% more stuff that would otherwise be hard or impossible to get
      • Make salvaging without the skill but with Salvage Rigs a viable option, both in terms of rare items and resources gained
  • When exploring a ship wreck, added notification when there's cargo on board
  • When the player's net monthly income is negative and they run out of credits:
    • Credits set to 0
    • Custom production of ships and weapons is halted
    • When this goes on for two months or more, some crew may leave next time the player's fleet comes into port
    • Can be countered by shutting down industries on owned colonies - reduces expenses and gives back most of the credits used to establish the industry
  • Monthly salary for unassigned colony administrators reduced to 10% of base
  • Reduced strength of scavenger fleets
  • Some of the pirate fleets that show up in pirate activity/bounty systems will congregate near jump-points and pirate colonies, making them easier to find
  • Transponder-off trade:
    • No longer has any impact on reputation or, for black market trade, suspicion level
    • (Previously: had a smaller-than-normal effect; goal is a more clear distinction)
  • Increased maximum player level to 50 for the moment; pending another look at skills
  • Added lists of best places to buy/sell to commodity tooltip
  • Added common "delivery" mission
    • Encountered in dockside bars
    • Take and deliver X amount of commodity to another colony
    • Medium reward; usually takes player to semi-dangerous systems (i.e. pirate activity etc)
    • Volume of commodities and reward depends on player's fleet
    • Different version when offered at player-owned colony
  • Planet tooltip: now shows survey level for uninhabited and faction name for inhabited
  • During salvage, when finding information about the location of another entity of interest nearby:
    • Will no longer point to small derelict ships, only cruisers and larger
    • This also means that more of these will point to other, larger structures
      • (Since no longer diluting the pool of potential targets with larger number of chaff)
  • Course widget: made data font bigger
  • Added new carrier-specific d-mods:
    • Malfunctioning Comms - reduces fighter engagement range
    • Defective Manufactory - reduces fighter speed and increases fighter damage taken
      • Affected fighters have a "damaged" visual overlay
  • Changed cargo tabs to "All" "Resources" "Ship weapons" and "Other" (i.e combined "Commodities" and "Crew")
  • Increased number of crew recovered from "cryopods with crew" exploration special
  • Changed hazard rating to be based around 100% base instead of 0% base, since that's how it's used
  • Reduced production of commodities by Heavy Industry; high production levels now require special items or a very large colony
  • Added notification message when industry construction completes; can click to open colony screen
  • Added notification for when colony size increases; can click to open colony screen
  • Changed intel UI tags to be OR instead of AND
  • Removed Surveying skill; can now survey planets with any hazard rating
    • Increased cost by a flat +10 supplies
    • Significantly reduced the value of survey data (30k for Class V; was: 100k)
  • Revamped and simplified economy:
    • Colonies have a single accessibility value which determines how much they can import and export
      • Accessibility also affects colony growth
    • Combined demand for a commodity generates a total "market value"
    • Export income is determined by a colony's "market share", which is based on production and accessibility
  • When interacting with fleet that has a low reputation impact and fighting which won't cause instant hostilities: added text to that effect
  • Ships recovered after combat will retain known hullmods
  • Weapons and fighters on your ships have a 100% chance to be recovered if the ship is recoverable
  • Recovery Operations:
    • Removed bonus to own fighter/weapon recovery
    • Increased recovery bonus for enemy ships/weapons/fighters to 25% (was: 15%)
  • Can "abandon" a size-3 colony; requires paying for (significant) evacuation expenses
  • Can "stabilize" a colony that's suffering from Recent Unrest
    • Maximum equal to Recent Unrest minus one
      • Can not be used to increase stability of a colony not suffering from unrest
    • Cost based on amount stabilized and colony size
    • Expensive - generally not worth it purely to improve colony income through higher stability
      • Primarily a means to stave off the decivilization of a bombarded/raided colony

Terrain
  • Hyperspace storms:
    • Fixed tooltip
    • Removed sensor profile penalty and speed penalty
    • Changed CR drain effect to powerful "storm strikes" hitting random ships
      • A strike reduces CR and deals armor/hull damage, but can't destroy a ship
      • Larger fleets attract more powerful strikes
    • Some strikes will not deal any damage - at most 1 every 5 seconds (on average) will
    • Each strike gives the fleet a speed boost in a direction determined by the fleet's position relative to the storm cell and its speed
    • Speed beyond burn level 20 does not cost extra fuel
    • While speed-boosted, the fleet may briefly lose steering control
      • Emergency Burn allows control while boosted
    • Strikes are synced up with the "cloud lightning" visual/audio effects
    • Entering an active hyper cell will cause a flurry of storm strikes - i.e, the timing is predictable
    • Overall:
      • Potential for more severe damage to individual ships
      • Much less expensive in total, and lower per-day costs since not all ships are affected
      • Situationally useful for faster travel
  • Deep hyperspace:
    • Now slows down larger fleets more than small ones
  • Nebula:
    • Now slows down larger fleets more than small ones
    • Removed in-combat effect on ship speed
  • Asteroid belts/fields:
    • Do not slow down fleets directly
    • Chance of "asteroid impacts" on the drive field, briefly knocking the fleet off course
      • Heavier impacts on larger fleets
      • Navigation skill helps mitigate impacts
  • Magnetic field:
    • Now reduces the range at which a fleet within can be detected by 75%
    • When in magnetic storm, range is reduced by 100%, and the sensors of the fleet have their range reduced by 90%
    • Goal: useful for sneaking around and hiding in
  • In general: terrain that slows down fleets is where smaller fleets can run to get away from larger fleets

Ships
  • Tempest:
    • Increased maintenance/deployment cost to 8
    • Replaced Active Flare Launcher with High Energy Focus
    • Terminator Drone:
      • Changed wing size to 2
      • Reduced replacement time to 10 seconds
      • Reduced top speed; engines can no longer flame out
      • Changed type to "support" with 0 roam range
      • Added "Terminator Core" hullmod
        • Increases damage to missiles and fighters 2x
        • Gives perfect target leading
        • Increases beam range
        • PD weapons ignore flares
      • Now armed with a PD Laser and IR Pulse Laser
      • Overall:
        • Excellent anti-fighter and point-defense
        • Limited usefulness as anti-ship support due to no roam and low weapon range
  • Colossus, all 3 versions: significantly cheaper to buy
  • Colossus Mk2, Mk3:
    • Added Civilian-grade Hull (not a nerf)
  • Prometheus:
    • Reduced fuel capacity to 2500
    • Changed ship system to Flare Launcher
  • Apogee:
    • Reduced fuel/ly to 2
    • Increased fuel capacity to 200 and cargo capacity to 400
    • Changed arc of large front hardpoint to 10 degrees (was: 5)
    • Changed coverage of medium turrets to not cover front and overlap in the back
    • Reduced deployment and supplies/month costs to 18 (was: 25)
  • Mule: increased OP to 80, changed medium turret type to composite, increased max speed to 60
  • Enforcer: fixed weapon locations that were not positioned quite right on the sprite
  • Hound, Cerberus: increased OP by 5
  • Adjusted OP for most civilian ships, generally slight to moderate increases
  • Odyssey:
    • Removed front overlap of 3 large turrets
    • Improved arcs of two rear-facing small turrets
    • Changed right-side large turret type to "synergy"
    • Added built-in High Resolution Sensors
    • Added built-in ECCM Package
    • Reduced fuel/light-year to 8 (was: 10)
    • Increased OP by 10
    • Reduced top speed to 70 (was 80)
    • Ship system changed to "Plasma Burn"
      • Very brief, very fast burn; moves about one ship length forward
      • Can still steer and use shields, but can't move backwards
      • Stores up to two charges
  • Aurora: reduced flux capacity by 1000 and flux dissipation by 50
  • Ox-class Tug: reduced fuel cost/light year to 5 (was: 10)
  • Tri-Tachyon Brawler:
    • Added built-in Insulated Engine Assembly
    • Increased OP to 60 (was: 50)
    • Changed standard variant to be long-range support
  • Added Falcon (P) - pirate "hot rod" version with extensive modifications
  • Added Shrike-class Light Destroyer
    • High-tech; used in navies of many factions
    • Plasma Burn ship system
    • Medium missile slot and good energy-based firepower
    • Fast and very fragile
  • Added XIV Battlegroup ship not available to the Hegemony


Weapons
  • Ion Cannon, Ion Pulser: EMP arcs now deal 100% of base non-EMP damage instead of 25%
  • Devastator Cannon: reduced number of particles from explosions
  • Weapons that use ammo now retain their ammo count across multiple engagements
    • In other words, re-deploying a ship will not cause its weapons to be reloaded
  • Autopulse Laser: increased charges to 30 (was: 20)
  • Plasma Cannon:
    • Damage reduced to 500 and and flux/shot reduced to 550
    • Fires 3-shot bursts every 2 seconds
    • Increased turn rate substantially
    • Will no longer autofire against fighters
  • Light Needler:
    • Range reduced to 700
    • Burst size increased to 15 (was 10), reduced per-shot recoil
    • Rate of fire within burst doubled
    • Increased refire delay to keep same DPS as before
    • Flux per shot increased to 50 (was: 40)
  • Heavy Needler:
    • Burst size increased to 30, reduced per-shot recoil
    • Rate of fire within burst doubled
    • Increased refire delay, overall DPS increased from 214 to 250
    • Flux per shot increased to 50 (was: 40)
  • Light AC, Light Dual AC: significantly increased turn rate
  • Arbalest AC: reduced flux cost per shot to 120 (was: 170)
  • Hurricane MIRV:
    • Made missile and warheads more visible
    • Number of warheads is 9
    • Warheads are now two-stage (aim then unguided burn), but much more accurate
    • Increased refire delay to 15 (was: 5)
    • Submunition accuracy significantly impacted by ECCM/Missile Specialization
  • Heavy Mauler: increased refire delay to 1.5 seconds (was: 1)
  • Light Mortar: increased range to 600 (was: 500) and improved accuracy somewhat
  • Pilum LRM: reduced OP cost to 7 (was: 10)
  • Sabot (all):
    • Improved acceleration and turn rate
    • Increased submunition spread to 20 degrees (was: 15)
    • Improved aim/target leading of first stage
  • Sabot Pod: reduced burst size to 2
  • MIRV missiles can now split early when at close range and in-flight for over a second

Fighters
  • Fighters from the same carrier will now coordinate their attacks if launched together and given the proper distance to do so
  • Ordering fighters to engage builds flux up to slightly above 5%
  • Fighter replacement rate now goes down as long as the majority of wings have a missing fighter
    • Note that this is coupled with fixing a bug that caused a lowered rate to apply twice
    • Thus: not a nerf overall
  • Claw: replaced Ion Cannon with Ion Cannon (High Delay) that has a significantly lower rate of fire
  • Khopesh: reduced number of rockets per pod to 5 (was: 7)
  • Mining Pod: substantially increased durability
  • Talon: increased OP cost to 2 (was: 0)
  • Warthog:
    • Wing size reduced to 2 (was: 3)
    • Removed one of the three light mortars
    • Reduced flux stats to roughly halve the remaining firepower after a brief initial burst

Hullmods
  • Converted Hangar:
    • Removed fighter replacement rate penalty
    • Can now re-launch returned fighters quickly, i.e. useful for bombers
    • Fighters have reduced stats and d-mod overlay as if the ship had a Defective Manufactory d-mod
      • (-33% speed, +50% damage taken)
    • OP cost for bombers increased by 100%; by 50% for all other fighters
  • Converted Cargo Bay (Colossus Mk.3 built-in):
    • Same changes, except for OP cost
  • Advanced Turret Gyros: +75% weapon turn speed (was: 50%)
  • Integrated Point Defense AI:
    • Makes small non-missile weapons PD (as before)
    • Grants 50% damage bonus to missiles
    • All PD weapons have the best possible target leading
    • PD weapons ignore decoy flares
  • Shield Conversion - Omni:
    • Reduced shield arc penalty to 33% (was: 50%)
    • Reduced OP cost to match Hardened Shields
  • Unstable Injector: now also increases fighter replacement time by 25%
  • Certain hullmods can now only be installed at a colony with a spaceport or an orbital station
    • These are all tagged with "Logistics" and affect a ship's campaign stats
    • Limited to 2 per ship, not including any built-in logistics mods (such as Surveying Equipment on the Apogee)
    • Goal is to make these a long-term commitment, especially prior to an expedition to the fringes
  • High Resolution Sensors:
    • Can now be learned and installed on other ships. Bonus for capital ships increased.
    • Can be bought from certain factions
    • Also unlocked at Sensors level 3
  • Solar Shielding: reduced cost, beam damage effect changed to reduce energy damage by 20% instead
  • Surveying Equipment: reduced OP cost
  • Augmented Drive Field: +2 burn, no penalties, tier 1, high OP cost
  • Added hullmods:
    • Additional Berthing:
      • Extra crew capacity (flat value, but at least 30% of base)
      • Civilian ships only: +50% supply use for maintenance
    • Auxiliary Fuel Tanks:
      • Extra fuel capacity (flat value, but at least 30% of base)
      • Civilian ships only: +50% supply use for maintenance
    • Expanded Cargo Holds:
      • Extra cargo capacity (flat value, but at least 30% of base)
      • Civilian ships only: +50% supply use for maintenance
    • Militarized Subsystems:
      • Removes Civilian-grade Hull's penalties
      • Adds +1 burn
      • Increased crew requirements
      • -50% supplies to deploy
      • Can only install on ships with Civilian-grade Hull
    • Efficiency Overhaul: reduced maintenance, crew reqs, and fuel use, reduced CR/deploy


Combat
  • Adding new assignments is free while the command frequency is open
  • Waypoints for new assignments will always be created at least 3000 units (3 map grid squares) from the map border
  • Ordering fighters to "engage" will set a ships minimum flux level to slightly over 5%
  • Reserve Deployment:
    • Does not add extra craft for bombers
    • Adds up to 1 (wing size 3 or less) or 2 (wing size > 3) for other fighter types
  • Fortress Shield: increased charge up/down time to 1.5 seconds (was: 1)
  • Damper Field:
    • Now reduces damage by 67% for frigates and destroyers; 50% for cruisers and capitals
    • Damper-field-using frigates should only rarely show up in smaller faction fleets
  • Quantum Disruptor: removed energy damage penalty
  • Fixed a number of admiral AI issues that made it use its ships in a highly suboptimal manner
    • Spends a bit of time capturing objectives, then orders a consistent full assault


Ship AI
  • Fixed bug that occasionally caused the Piranha to drop bombs right on top of friendly ships, including the carrier that it came from
  • Fixed bug that caused the Flash bomber to fire phase charges in an unsafe manner
    • (This was a different bug than the above)
  • Improved escort behavior - fixed a few positional bugs that caused escorting ships to get in the wrong position for what they wanted to do
  • Fixed some issues with carriers not sending out fighters to attack
  • Cleaned up a few cases of the AI backing off unnecessarily
  • Ships that find themselves chasing smaller enemies far away from the action will try to rejoin their allies
    • Still possible for them to be separated, but requires the enemy to screen them off
  • Fixed some cases of burn drive being used to move away from the desired direction (when retreating, escorting, moving to an assigned objective, etc)
  • Fixed issue that caused Khopesh to mostly not fire its rockets at frigates
  • Fixed bug that caused the AI to only rarely fire Sabots and other kinetic missile weapons vs frigates
    • (Were treated as "strike" weapons for that particular case)
  • Improved range-management for "cautious" AI personality - should now keep in range more reliably if outranging the enemy's non-missile weapons


Miscellaneous
  • Revamped UI for adding hullmods to ships
    • Sorting and tag-based filtering
    • Can add/remove multiple hullmods without closing dialog
    • Can adjust vents/capacitors and see ship stats while in dialog
  • Refit screen stats tooltip now shows ship system
  • Changed "primary role" strings for weapons to more accurately reflect their actual combat roles, e.g. instead of "Assault" or "Close Support", it's "Anti Armor" or "Anti Shield" or "Point Defense (Area)" etc
  • Added sensor strength and sensor profile to ship stats tooltip/info panel
  • A crash during saving should no longer corrupt the savefile
  • Launcher will now limit maximum resolution displayed to half of native for 4k monitors; goal is to point to "intended" use of half-native-resolution in fullscreen mode in that case
    • "4kThreshold" in data/config/settings.json if use of higher resolution is desired
  • Increased number of simultaneous sound sources to 128 (was: 64)
  • New icon for Expanded Magazines hullmod

Sound
  • New sound for Hypervelocity Driver
  • New character screen sounds
  • Overall combat sound cleanup
  • Added split sounds for Sabot and Hurricane MIRV

Modding
  • Fixed issue that could cause ships to be deployed far off the map
  • Added listeners for player hostile actions against colonies - raids and bombardments; see: ListenerUtil
  • Phased phase ships with negative flux upkeep cost will now get pushed away from other ships when their flux is low
  • Removed CargoItemType.MOD_SPEC; use CargoItemType.SPECIAL instead
  • Added new columns to weapon_data.csv; if present these override tooltip fields
    • primaryRoleStr
    • speedStr
    • trackingStr
    • turnRateStr
    • accuracyStr
    • noDPSInTooltip: to not show DPS row in weapon tooltip
  • Also added to weapon_data.csv columns to define two custom sections (with highlights) in tooltip info:
    • customPrimary
    • customPrimaryHL
    • customAncillary
    • customAncillaryHL
  • Added "designTypeColors" section to settings.json, provides colors for manufacturer/design type information displayed in various tooltips and blueprint management screens
  • Added to MissileAPI:
    • boolean isMirv();
    • float getMirvWarheadDamage();
    • float getMirvWarheadEMPDamage();
    • int getMirvNumWarheads();
    • DamageType getMirvWarheadDamageType();
    • JSONObject getBehaviorSpecParams();
  • Added PaginatedOptions command to rules; allows easily/automatically creating multiple pages of options in interaction dialogs
  • Disabled interaction dialog options with empty text are now invisible (potentially useful as spacers)
  • Hullmods tagged with "req_spaceport" can now only be added or removed at a colony with a spaceport or an orbital station
    • Can have arbitrary requirements for colony defined per hullmod in the effect plugin
  • Projectile weapons only: LINKED or DUAL barrelMode weapons will now multiply the weapon_data.csv flux cost by the number of barrels that fire simultaneously
    • Multi-barrel beam weapons still use the spreadsheet value as-is
  • Added SectorAPI.void removeTransientScriptsOfClass(Class c)
  • Added to HullModEffect:
    • applyEffectsToFighterSpawnedByShip(ShipAPI fighter, ShipAPI ship, String id)
    • Used to modify fighters spawned by parent ship
  • Added "attackPositionOffset" to wing_data.csv; used to control position within attack group of multiple fighter wings (i.e. fighters first,  bombers behind, etc)
  • Added "canSplitEarly" parameter to MIRV behavior, if set to true missile can split if close to target and elapsed time is over a second
  • Added "splitSound" parameter to MIRV behavior
  • Added: SettingsAPI.doesVariantExist(String variantId)
  • Added to ShipAPI:
    • boolean isJitterShields();
    • void setJitterShields(boolean jitterShields);
      • Controls whether shields are affected by the jitter visual effect
    • boolean isInvalidTransferCommandTarget();
    • void setInvalidTransferCommandTarget(boolean invalidTransferCommandTarget);
    • void clearDamageDecals();
  • Added DamagingExplosionSpec class to API (rather, moved it out from core)
  • Added to CombatEngineAPI:
    • DamagingProjectileAPI spawnDamagingExplosion(DamagingExplosionSpec spec, ShipAPI source, Vector2f location);
    • DamagingProjectileAPI spawnDamagingExplosion(DamagingExplosionSpec spec, ShipAPI source, Vector2f location, boolean canDamageSource);
  • Added to WeaponAPI:
    • void setPDAlso(boolean pd); // makes weapon fire at missiles if there are no other targets
    • That is, imitates having the PD_ALSO tag
  • Added to CharacterDataAPI:
    • void setPortraitName(String portraitName);
    • void setName(String name, Gender gender);
    • Setting the name and portrait in CharacterCreationData during new game creation now updates the name/portrait in the new game creation dialog
  • Added to FighterWingAPI:
    • boolean isReturning(ShipAPI fighter);
    • void orderReturn(ShipAPI fighter);
    • void stopReturning(ShipAPI fighter);
  • Added to CampaignUIAPI:
    • boolean showPlayerFactionConfigDialog();
  • Added to EngineSlotAPI:
    • float getWidth();
  • GenericPluginManagerAPI: now supports transient plugins
  • Added HyperspaceTerrainPlugin.getActiveCells()
  • Added CampaignInputListener interface:
    • int getListenerInputPriority();
    • void processCampaignInputPreCore(List<InputEventAPI> events);
    • void processCampaignInputPreFleetControl(List<InputEventAPI> events);
    • void processCampaignInputPostCore(List<InputEventAPI> events);
    • Register using Global.getSector().getListenerManager().addListener(); usually want transient
  • Added to EveryFrameCombatPlugin:
    • void processInputPreCoreControls(float amount, List<InputEventAPI> events)
    • Called after processing input by active dialogs and tutorial overlay and before everything else
  • Added "npc_only" skill tag that makes skills not show up on the character screen
  • Fixed InteractionDialogAPI.setTextWidth()
    • Requires hideVisualPanel() to be called first
  • Added to CustomCampaignEntityAPI:
    • void setActiveLayers(CampaignEngineLayers ... layers);
    • EnumSet<CampaignEngineLayers> getActiveLayers();

Bugfixing
  • New colonies will properly spawn with orbital junk and radio chatter
  • Fixed bug that caused tooltips for overlapping weapons in the refit screen to not be cleaned up
  • Fixed issue that prevented the "Claim Victory" option from showing up when the enemy has fighters



    Changes as of June 01, 2018

    Campaign
    • Colony building:
      • Player can establish a colony on a planet they've surveyed
      • Requires crew, machinery, and supplies
      • Can change the planet's name, either when colony is established or at any point later on
      • Can build "Industries" and "Structures" (same thing, mechanically) at a colony
      • Some example ones:
        • Mining
        • Farming
        • Spaceport
        • Heavy Industry
        • Orbital stations (of several varieties)
        • Military Base
        • Tech-Mining
        • ... and a number of other ones
      • Some industries can be upgraded, i.e. "Patrol HQ" -> "Military Base", or "Heavy Industry" -> "Orbital Works"
      • Most industries are known from the start, but a few more exotic ones can be learned
      • Can set a "stockpiling level" for a colony to have it build up extra resources the player can take
        • Stockpiling costs credits, but somewhat less than the base cost of the commodities
        • Stockpiles will be used to counter temporary shortages
      • Player colonies have a "local resources" submarket where they can take from, or add to, stockpiles. There's a "storage" submarket for resources that must remain untouched.
      • Player colonies do *not* have an Open Market unless there's a "Commerce" industry
      • Colonies start at size 3; population growth depends on many factors and can be directly invested into
      • Can assign AI cores to manage industries for various, significant benefits
      • A Military Base produces patrols which will defend the colony
      • Can hire Administrators (up to a limit) to manage your colonies
      • Can learn skills that improve the colonies under your control
        • Maximum number under personal control is soft-limited - reduced stability for going beyond
      • Can assign Alpha Cores to manage your colonies, for a massive benefit
      • Establishing the first colony also creates a new player faction
        • Can set the faction name and select a flag
        • Can adjust both at any point in the future
    • Blueprints for ship hulls, weapons, and fighter LPCs:
      • Required by Heavy Industry to build ships
        • Ship production "quality" is based on many factors and affects the number of d-mods a produced hull will have
        • Can be improved by certain items found during exploration
      • Some basic blueprints always known from the start, rest have to be acquired
      • Blueprints can be prioritized to get the desired fleet composition and weapon/fighter use
      • Affect fleet production by player colonies
      • Player can custom-order known ships and weapons
        • Will be built based on the monthly production capacity of their heavy industry
        • And delivered to a designated gathering point, along with some crew, fuel, and supplies
    • New economy system to support colony mechanics
      • Player buying/selling has direct impact on market's available commodity numbers
      • Player colonies can become suppliers for other factions and generate export income for the player
        • Relative "accessibility" of colonies determines who the best supplier is
        • Player has several tools to manage this, from establishing waystations to piracy
    • Officers found in sleeper pods can now be up to level 15 instead of 5
    • Administrators can now be found in sleeper pods; likeliest place to find high-skilled ones
      • Can now go over the maximum number of officers and administrators
        • Can't use the ones over maximum
        • Can't hire to go over maximum
        • Mainly useful to be able to find officers/admins in sleeper pods, while already at maximum
    • Factions
      • Factions have access to ships/weapons/fighters based on their blueprints
      • AI ship loadouts are dynamically generated, based on what's available
      • Factions have been adjusted so that their available blueprints and doctrine make each more distinct
        • Examples:
        • The Hegemony favors larger ships and high-quality officers
        • The Luddic Church, while also mostly drawing from low-tech designs:
          • Favors larger numbers of ships with lower-quality officers
          • Makes extensive use of Converted Hangars
          • Has access to a faction-specific "Perdition"-class torpedo bomber
    • Faction doctrine: settings that affect faction fleet composition and ship behavior
      • Each setting can go from 1 to 5
      • Warships - proportion of regular combat ships found in fleets, on average
      • Carriers - proportion of carriers
      • Phase Ships - proportion of phase ships
      • Warships, Carriers, and Phase Ships must add up to 7 points
      • Officer Quality, Ship Quality, and More Ships - must also add up to 7 points
      • Ship Size - independent setting, determines average size of ships preferred
      • Aggression - determines personality of officers; does not affect the player's own fleet
        • Also applies to combat personality/behavior of ships without officers, both for the player and for other factions
        • This aspect *does* affect the player's own fleet
      • Each faction now has an appropriate doctrine setting
    • Monthly income and expenses:
      • Outposts/colonies
        • Base income from a population
        • Upkeep for each industry; based on hazard rating of planet
          • A lower-hazard planet can support more industries on the "base income"; exact numbers still TBD
          • Can go above that for a negative income
        • Exports: income for becoming the best provider of a commodity to another faction's colony
          • Incurs "overhead" when there are many exports from the same colony
          • *Always* better to have more exports, but the added benefit drops off quickly
      • Storage - 1% of base value of stored ships/cargo
      • Crew, officer, and administrator salaries
      • Presented in a detailed monthly report
    • New tab: "Command", shortcut "D". Allows player to:
      • Manage colonies
      • Can also see which markets you have storage at and what's stored where
      • View latest income report
      • Manage the doctrine and blueprint priorities
      • Make custom production orders
    • Cargo screen
      • Can quick-transfer (or sell) a lot of cargo by holding down Alt then mousing over the stacks
        • Can be turned off via settings.json
      • Improved quantity selection slider for picking up part of a stack
      • Supplies/fuel/crew/marines/heavy machinery now shown first in sorted cargo; other commodities also shown before weapons/fighter chips/etc
    • Revamped intel screen
      • Tag-based filtering system
      • Always shows map
      • UI is updated based on the current state of missions and such
      • Can accept and abandon certain missions directly from the intel screen
      • Can flag pieces of intel as "important"
      • Intel is now "live" and does not require a new message for the information displayed to change
    • Person bounties:
      • Will now pay out and increase reputation when hostile or worse with offering faction
      • Information given re: where to find target now includes constellation and some planet/star system type hints, but no actual star system unless it's a lone star
      • Reward no longer based on market stability
    • System bounties:
      • Will now pay out and increase reputation when hostile or worse with offering faction
      • Most likely in systems containing markets hostile to each other
    • Faction commissions:
      • Have to talk to a high-ranking faction official to get one
      • Pays a level-based monthly stipend in addition to a small bounty for enemy ships
      • Partially restores standing with other factions as hostility status changes
      • Can be resigned; smaller reputation penalty if in person
        • Restores standing with factions that became hostile as a result of holding the commission
    • Faction hostilities: fixed various issues re: hostilities properly ending and total number/frequency
      • Last for at least 6 months, and rarely more than a full cycle
      • Hostilities between Hegemony-TriTachyon and other starting hostilities between major factions (i.e. not pirates/pathers) are no longer permanent
    • Smugglers now have a low reputation impact if attacked, i.e. won't turn entire faction instantly hostile
    • Chance to have advance intel about departures of trade fleets/smugglers, including timeframe and cargo
    • Changed options for colony interaction
      • Can open all core UI tabs with corresponding shortcut instead of just a subset
      • Added "visit dockside bar" option; details are WIP
      • Added "Consider your military options" option; sub-menu allows player to attack orbital station
        • Will also contain a few TBD mechanics re: planet-based military actions
    • Dropping cargo pods may now distract pirate fleets; duration of distraction (if any) depends on quantity of goods ejected
    • Autoresolve (AI vs AI, and auto-resolved pursuit battles):
      • Takes d-mods/production quality into account
      • Works with stations and modular ships
    • Made various improvements to "where is this entity" mission/bounty/etc description text
    • Toned down bounty level-scaling
    • Added "Compromised Storage" dmod, reduces cargo/crew/fuel capacity of ship by 30%
    • Added to Mudskipper Mk.2
    • Added Gremlin-class lowtech phase frigate, with pirate and Luddic Path versions
    • Buy and sell cost of ships now includes the base supply cost of their current combat readiness (i.e., no/minimal credit loss for recovering CR on a ship and then selling it)
      • Similar CR-based modifier added to supplies etc recovered when scuttling a ship
    • Added two new torpedo bomber wings: Perdition and Cobra
    • Fleet AI:
      • Much less easily sidetracked by chases; patrols in particular will largely focus on defending their objectives
      • When orbiting a planet, will spread out to try to avoid overlap with other orbiting fleets
    • Reduced number of campaign ship contrails; improves performance a lot and should generally not be noticeable
    • Sensors: combined detection range in hyperspace now limited to 2000 units (was 5000)
    • Added "generate name" option to colony renaming dialog
    • Installed fighters now shown in the fleet screen
    • Trade fleet routes will stop by a waystation if appropriate
    • Fighting independent scavenger fleets will now only slightly reduce standing with the independents
    • Temporary/event-based market conditions no longer have "event" label, grouped to the left of other conditions instead
      • Condition icon size scales down if there are too many to fit in the available width
    • Lava planets will no longer show up as part of the combat background (too bright)
    • Jump-point tooltip no longer shows planet types in unexplored star systems
    • Number of d-mods is now shown for each fleet member in the campaign fleet tooltip
    • D-mods are now also highlighted in the ship tooltip's list of hullmods
    • Made "fleet despawning" animation smoother
    • Number of supplies UI indicator will now include the picked-up supply stack, if any
    • When a course is laid in and you approach a jump-point, selecting "leave" will also disable autopilot

    Miscellaneous
    • Updated to use newer version of xstream (1.4.10)
    • Cleaned up controls screen - updated text and removed commands that are no longer in the game
    • Made some improvements to game-saving code that should speed it up on non-SSD drives
    • Made in-combat "exit game" button red to avoid potential confusion with "claim victory"
    • Vertical scrollbar active area now wider, indicator expands when mouse is in active area
    • Improved algorithm for automatically generating weapon groups
    • Improved game startup speed when sound is enabled by up to around 40% total, depending on the system specs

    Orbital Stations
    • Can be built at a colony to provide defenses and support nearby friendly fleets in combat
    • Existing colonies have these as appropriate
    • Three tiers: Orbital Station, Battlestation, and Star Fortress
    • Three tech levels/styles: low tech, midline, and high tech
      • Roughly similar combat power of each style, but different tactical approaches
    • Dynamically fitted with weapons based on faction weapon availability
    • Higher-tier stations are bolstered with drones and minefields

    Combat
    • Improved proximity fuse range detection vs longer/thinner ships
    • Phase ships:
      • Doom: new ship system, "Mine Strike", spawns high-damage, high-delay proximity fuse mines
        • Huge buff overall
      • Harbinger: system changed to Quantum Disruptor
      • Afflictor: system changed to Entropy Amplifier
    • Various performance improvements, should be around 20-30% faster
    • Toggling autofire on on an already-selected weapon group will make that group autofire
      • Can override and get manual control by selecting the group again
    • Fixed bug that caused the fighter rate replacement multiplier to apply twice
    • New graphics for Annihilator Pod medium weapon
    • Greatly improved missile tracking
      • And fixed issues with ECCM sometimes making it worse; it should now be a significant improvement
    • Hurricane MIRV:
      • Made missile and warheads more visible
      • Reduced number of warheads to 7
      • Warheads are now two-stage (aim then unguided burn), but much more accurate
    • Integrated Targeting Unit: increased OP cost for frigates to 4
    • Centurion: middle two turrets can now face front; arcs expanded
    • Low CR no longer reduces missile weapon ammo
    • Renamed "Guardian PD System" to "Paladin PD System" (reasons REDACTED)
    • Colossus Mk.3: removed fighter bay and Ill-Advised Modifications
      • Added "Converted Cargo Bay" that adds 2 converted fighter bays

    Ship AI
    • Fixed issue that was causing small weapon groups made up of hardpoints to not be set to autofire
    • Will no longer fire low-ammo missiles vs overloaded fighters
    • Fixed issue with too many carriers auto-escorting nearby combat ships
    • Reduced tendency of carriers to assign their fighter wings to escort nearby ships instead of attacking
    • Carriers assigned a "search & destroy" order will no longer use nearby ships to hide behind
    • Improved logic for multiple ships not using too many total missiles vs a single target
    • Fixed issue that was causing carriers to order fighters to "engage" too far from target, causing unnecessary loss of the 0-flux boost
    • Fixed issue that was causing carriers with some support fighters to not order the other fighters to engage
    • Fixed bug that caused a retreating ship with front shields to keep them on when it was not necessary
    • More likely to set smaller groups to autofire when flux is low, including hardpoint groups
    • Improved autofire flux management
      • Will autofire most kinds of weapon groups, depending on flux level and dissipation
      • Able to keep on pressure with low-flux weapons when on high flux
    • Improved flux management for high-flux weapons such as Heavy Blasters
    • Fixed bug that was causing fighters to only rarely fire missiles/torpedoes at low-hitpoint targets
    • Improved omni shield use vs phase ships
    • Fixed bug that was causing the AI to improperly evaluate where it has the most remaining armor
    • Ships gradually get more aggressive when their peak time and CR tick down

    Modding
    • Fixed crash from left-clicking station in hyperspace
    • Error message due to incorrectly configured music set is now comprehensible
    • Ships with modules:
      • Modules are no longer configured using weapon groups
      • Added "modules" section to .variant files instead
      • Modules will be ordered in listed order provided "modules" is an array of objects
    • Station/ship-with-module weapons no longer rendered in separate pass above everything
      • Use module order to control rendering order instead
    • Variants, hulls, skins, skills, weapons, projectiles: will be merged with core files when loaded
      • Meaning, a mod can now provide a partial file with just the changes rather than a complete file
    • Renamed FleetDespawnListener to FleetEventListener
    • Added reportBattleOccurred() method to FleetEventListener
    • Fixed bug to do with beamFireOnlyOnFullCharge and venting while firing at max charge
    • Proximity fuse projectiles with a trigger range of 0 will now only explode at end of range
    • MutableStat values no longer capped to be >= 0
    • Added better error message when game crashes due to an invalid ship system id being specified
    • Added MissileAPI.interruptContrail() - needs to be called twice, once at old and once at new location
    • Added MarketAPI.get/setEconGroup()
      • Markets within the same econ group only trade with each other and are not visible when viewing nearby markets etc from a market in a different group. Default group is null (the value, not the string).
    • Added ShipAIPlugin.getConfig() method that returns a ShipAIConfig (or null if a custom ship AI doesn't support the core config parameters)
    • Added "tags" and "rarity" columns to ship_data.csv
      • Skins do NOT inherit tags from the parent ship, but can have their own tags specified via a "tags" json array
      • Default d-hulls also do not inherit any tags from the base hull
    • Added "tech/manufacturer" column to ship and weapon data
      • Defaults to "Common" if unspecified
      • "manufacturer" key to override in ship skin file
    • SectorEntityTokens and MarketAPIs stored in a MemoryAPI will be replaced by their ids in save files, and restored on load
      • For this and other reasons, code must gracefully handle a case where an entity is put into memory but then is no longer there or *is* there but is no longer in any LocationAPI
    • Removed dHullOverlaySmall/Large from hull_styles.json; replaced with single dHullOverlay, which should be large-ish and will tile to cover bigger hulls (instead of being upscaled)
    • hull_styles.json: now 3 d-mod overlays per style; light/medium/heavy, in only one size
      • d-mod overlays tile for larger ships
    • Moved get/setModuleVariant() methods from FleetMemberAPI to ShipVariantAPI
    • Weapon group generation:
      • Added "GROUP_LINKED" and "GROUP_ALTERNATION" AI hints to weapon_data; will attempt to place weapons with those in separate groups and set them to linked or alternating
      • Added groupTag column to weapon_data; when set, will heavily favor placing weapons with same groupTag into the same group, without other weapons in it
      • Will not auto-generate weapon groups for AI fleets until combat starts, for performance reasons
    • Fixed word-wrapping issue when a single word is too long for a line
    • Added limited support for drones with SHIP collision class; will no longer crash into mothership
    • Added "canUseWhileRightClickSystemOn" to ship system definitions
    • Missiles now support the "jitter" effect, above the missile sprite only
    • Changes to fleet despawn logic: listeners will now be notified before the fleet member list is cleared
      • Allows seeing fleet state at time of despawn if it wasn't snapshotted
      • Fleet members removed afterwards
    • Added CollisionGridAPI that gives access to internal bin-lattice used to speed up collision checks/AI
      • void addObject(Object object, Vector2f loc, float objWidth, float objHeight);
      • void removeObject(Object object, Vector2f loc, float objWidth, float objHeight);
      • Iterator<Object> getCheckIterator(Vector2f loc, float checkWidth, float checkHeight);
    • Added to CombatEngineAPI:
      • CollisionGridAPI getAllObjectGrid();
      • CollisionGridAPI getShipGrid();
      • CollisionGridAPI getMissileGrid();
      • CollisionGridAPI getAsteroidGrid();
    • Added to SettingsAPI:
      • String readTextFileFromCommon(String filename)
      • void writeTextFileToCommon(String filename, String data)
      • Load/save text data from the <installdir>/saves/common/ folder
        • Limited to 1MB per file, 50MB total files per session
    • Hull mods tagged with "no_drop_salvage" will not drop from campaign salvage operations
      • Different from "no_drop", which will only make them not drop from defeated ships in combat
    • Added alternate system for listening to campaign events, see: ListenerManagerAPI
      • Allows registering to listen for only one type of event
      • Not everything converted to use it, but will only use this system going forward
    • Added event-listening interfaces:
      • ShowLootListener
      • SurveyPlanetListener
      • EconomyTickListener
      • DiscoverEntityListener
    • Added IntelManagerAPI to manage player-visible pieces of information
      • See: Global.getSector().getIntelManager()
      • Replaces EventManager etc
      • CommMessageAPI, SectorAPI.reportEventStage, etc deprecated/removed
      • Game no longer loads/uses reports.csv
      • Missions are re-implemented as "IntelInfoPlugin" rather than a events
      • A few events that were essentially scripts (such as OfficerManagerEvent) remain for legacy reasons
      • MissionBoard and related APIs removed
      • All of these are now handled through IntelManager
      • Removed concept of "comm channels"; channels.json no longer loaded
    • Added CombatEntityAPI.getAI() method to get at proximity fuse AI from projectiles
    • Added ProximityFuseAIAPI, with an updateDamage() method, so changing damage via script can work on flak and similar
    • Added SettingsAPI.getMergedJSONForMod(String path, String masterMod)

    Bugfixing:
    • Fixed issue with market/planet name mismatch for some procgen planets
    • Fixed issues w/ small dormant remnant fleets not engaging and sometimes dropping loot if harassed
    • Ship AI: fixed issue where 4+ carriers could get stuck in an escorting-each-other loop
    • Fixed bug that caused Fleet Logistics 1 to make destroyed ships only have a 50% chance of recovery rather than 100% as intended. Disabled ships still got the 100% chance.
    • Fixed issue with Plasma Cannon not being properly affected by Safety Overrides
    • Save bar no longer get stuck if saving the game throws an error for any reason
    • Fixed issue with scavenger fleets stuck in "returning to <market>" state
    • Fixed issue that was sometimes preventing carriers from properly obeying "Full Retreat" order
    • Fixed rendering issue with black holes on radar
    • Fixed issue with Strike Commander causing projectile weapons from fighters to hit multiple times
    • Fixed crash when a mission variant had a fighter wing from a mod installed and the mod was then disabled
    • Fixed visual issue with jump-point in Westernesse star system
    • Fixed issue with debris fields not despawning properly and causing savegame bloat (thanks, Tartiflette!)
    • Fixed issue where could select civilian/unarmed ships for pursuit autoresolve
    • Fixed issue where fighter chips would disappear from inventory when opening refit screen for a ship with that fighter built in
    • Fixed issue with fighters returning to a retreated carrier getting stuck off-map without retreating
    • Fixed station rendering issue in campaign where module placement wasn't quite right
    • Fixed bug that caused phasing mid-burst to improperly shorten some weapon cooldowns
    • The resolutionOverride config file setting now works with fullscreen mode
    • Fixed issue that cause a black hole to appear in the middle of the sector map in some games
    • Fixed bug that caused the player to have to wait for their allies to finish the battle after full-retreating from it
    • Fixed issue that caused REDACTED fleets to respawn extremely quickly in some situations

    [/list]


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 01, 2018, 05:53:18 PM
    (I'm sure there's a bunch of smaller stuff that's missing from the notes, but these should hit all the high points to date. Er, unless I forgot about something.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MShadowy on June 01, 2018, 06:40:40 PM
    Oh, yes. Good. I'll give these a closer look in a bit; heading out right now.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: arcibalde on June 01, 2018, 06:57:33 PM
    You was busy did't ya. So extensive patch notes and just a couple of TBD.. So 0.9 season of bug-hunting is near. I can feel it in the air. And, I'm confident enough to speak in name of most members, WE are ready.  8)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 01, 2018, 06:59:32 PM
    You was busy did't ya. So extensive patch notes and just a couple of TBD.. So 0.9 season of bug-hunting is near. I can feel it in the air. And, I'm confident enough to speak in name of most members, WE are ready.  8)

    Oh, it'll still be a bit! But it's mostly down to content stuff. Mostly.

    (Stuff that isn't done wouldn't generally be in the patch notes in the first place, the couple of TBDs in there are just for things where I thought it made sense to do that.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volken on June 01, 2018, 07:06:36 PM
    HNNG, Only Alex can make text so sexy


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Aratoop on June 01, 2018, 07:21:44 PM
    Yaaay! I've been following this game for like 8 years now and have always dreamt of having colonies and stuff! So excited!!!!   :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Wyvern on June 01, 2018, 07:52:31 PM
    So much awesome stuff, but oddly the one that really jumped out at me: "Centurion: middle two turrets can now face front; arcs expanded".  Yay!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: arcibalde on June 01, 2018, 08:01:25 PM
    Oh, it'll still be a bit! But it's mostly down to content stuff. Mostly.

    (Stuff that isn't done wouldn't generally be in the patch notes in the first place, the couple of TBDs in there are just for things where I thought it made sense to do that.)

    Ooooo nononono not buying that. A-a. HET :P You are right, you wouldn't put stuff that isn't done in patch notes but my gut feeling is telling me month or two. Probably closer too two. You'll see ;D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 01, 2018, 08:02:58 PM
    Thank you guys :)

    So much awesome stuff, but oddly the one that really jumped out at me: "Centurion: middle two turrets can now face front; arcs expanded".  Yay!

    Hah, was wondering if someone would pick that out!


    Ooooo nononono not buying that. A-a. HET :P You are right, you wouldn't put stuff that isn't done in patch notes but my gut feeling is telling me month or two. Probably closer too two. You'll see ;D

    We'll see :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on June 01, 2018, 08:12:59 PM
    Oh, it'll still be a bit! But it's mostly down to content stuff. Mostly.

    (Stuff that isn't done wouldn't generally be in the patch notes in the first place, the couple of TBDs in there are just for things where I thought it made sense to do that.)

    Ooooo nononono not buying that. A-a. HET :P You are right, you wouldn't put stuff that isn't done in patch notes but my gut feeling is telling me month or two. Probably closer too two. You'll see ;D

    The first 0.7a patch notes were released seven months before 0.7a released.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Chroma on June 01, 2018, 08:14:29 PM
    Forget the Centurion, what's this about? 0.0

    Quote
    Renamed "Guardian PD System" to "Paladin PD System" (reasons REDACTED)

    Either way, my own excitement is minimal as I know this patch will likely take upwards of a year or more. Even so, I really appreciate all of the hard work in this game!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: arcibalde on June 01, 2018, 08:33:00 PM
    The first 0.7a patch notes were released seven months before 0.7a released.

    Gut feeling is gut feeling there is no reasoning with it  :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on June 01, 2018, 08:44:50 PM
    Mmmm, interesting notes.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Inventor Raccoon on June 01, 2018, 08:56:48 PM
    I'm pumped for this update. Looks fantastic.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Eji1700 on June 01, 2018, 09:04:39 PM
    I might have missed some of this, but:

    How will factions interact with colonies? I see we can build defensive fleets, but will hostile factions actually attack/invade the colony itself, and does this mean that such mechanics are coming to vanilla?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Azmond on June 01, 2018, 09:17:47 PM
    HAHAHHA, THIS IS GOING TO BE THE BEST GRADUATION AND END OF MY SCHOOL YEAR!!! HAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!


    After college I am HAPPILY going to be working on metelson's again for this update- and another TC mod of sorts -and I am so uristing, elf-bashing, cat-murderingly happy!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 01, 2018, 10:07:30 PM
    How will factions interact with colonies? I see we can build defensive fleets, but will hostile factions actually attack/invade the colony itself, and does this mean that such mechanics are coming to vanilla?

    This kind of thing has to happen for defensive fleets to make sense, right? I'm not quite sure how much of it will make it into 0.9a; certainly enough for there to be a point to building a military base, orbital stations, and other defenses. But beyond that, into something like full-fledged invasion-type mechanics? Will have to see how the timing pans out.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: basildazz on June 01, 2018, 10:42:11 PM
    I thought we may all be living in space by the time we got this far (or at least orbiting a blackhole), though honestly I hadn't expected quite so much (content) a decade ago when I stumped up my credits. Let's give it a whirl...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: nathanebht on June 01, 2018, 11:09:46 PM
    Cautious excitement!?!  :D Been checking the website for updates every other day recently.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 01, 2018, 11:12:04 PM
    I thought we may all be living in space by the time we got this far (or at least orbiting a blackhole), though honestly I hadn't expected quite so much (content) a decade ago when I stumped up my credits. Let's give it a whirl...

    It's the in-dev patch notes, not quite an actual release yet! I wonder how I can make this more clear; seems like there's a bit of confusion about it every time.


    Cautious excitement!?!  :D Been checking the website for updates every other day recently.

    :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: basildazz on June 01, 2018, 11:22:38 PM
    "It's the in-dev patch notes, not quite an actual release yet! I wonder how I can make this more clear; seems like there's a bit of confusion about it every time."

    Bastard


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: nathanebht on June 01, 2018, 11:28:20 PM
    Yumm, those release notes have a lot of tasty items listed.

    Not sure why I enjoy 2D top down, space games so much but I definitely do.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: jn_xyp on June 01, 2018, 11:35:53 PM
    Look what I found! Another amazing game by Alex :D :D :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cycerin on June 01, 2018, 11:39:07 PM
    Nice stuff. Honestly I didn't expect to see a low-tech phase frigate, so that's cool. It's weird because no matter how much stuff there is to dig into in these patch notes, I'm always excited to look for unannounced new ships and weapons the most.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on June 01, 2018, 11:40:37 PM
    This is fairly inane (but I'd just like to know), for this little section.  The wording is a bit weird.

    • Can now go over the maximum number of officers and administrators
      • Can't use the ones over maximum
    Does that mean you're not allowed to use the specific officer that you found that put you over the limit?  Or does it just limit you to picking using only X number at the same time (meaning you can swap out an officer or administrator that you just found despite being over the limit).  Not being able to use that Level 15 Officer I just plucked out of a sleeper pod because it put me over the limit feels odd.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Nanao-kun on June 01, 2018, 11:47:20 PM
    I love Starsector. And I love all this new content. Can't wait.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 01, 2018, 11:52:13 PM
    Nice stuff. Honestly I didn't expect to see a low-tech phase frigate, so that's cool. It's weird because no matter how much stuff there is to dig into in these patch notes, I'm always excited to look for unannounced new ships and weapons the most.

    I'm a fan of those too, it's really nice to just go back to the basics sometimes and put a new ship into the game.

    Does that mean you're not allowed to use the specific officer that you found that put you over the limit?

    Yeah, that's exactly how it works. If you have say 7 officers and your limit is 5, you can use the first 5. You can however dismiss ones you're not interested in until the ones you want to use are all under the limit.

    It gets surprisingly annoying (especially on the UI side) and bug-prone to try to limit you to "X at a time". Didn't seem worth the time and trouble given that it's a fairly fringe use-case with already a clear way to do what you need to in both cases (i.e. dismiss officers/admins).

    I love Starsector. And I love all this new content. Can't wait.

    Thank you! And thank you to everyone else for their positive comments :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Midnight Kitsune on June 01, 2018, 11:55:04 PM
    My F5 button thanks you for these notes


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Wyvern on June 02, 2018, 12:15:47 AM
    Does that mean you're not allowed to use the specific officer that you found that put you over the limit?

    Yeah, that's exactly how it works. If you have say 7 officers and your limit is 5, you can use the first 5. You can however dismiss ones you're not interested in until the ones you want to use are all under the limit.

    It gets surprisingly annoying (especially on the UI side) and bug-prone to try to limit you to "X at a time". Didn't seem worth the time and trouble given that it's a fairly fringe use-case with already a clear way to do what you need to in both cases (i.e. dismiss officers/admins).
    Oh, nice!  My initial assumption was an X-at-a-time limit, and that's actually kinda exploitable.  (Though, at the same time, would be nice to not need to fire-and-retrain officers if I swap an officered ship between carrier and non-carrier hulls...)  This, by contrast... well, if there's any way to really exploit it, I'm not seeing it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Midnight Kitsune on June 02, 2018, 01:04:35 AM
    Can I put an officer into storage to bypass the limit or is the only way to do so is to fire them?
    With the storage fee, what about abandoned markets and owned markets? Do I have to pay the fee then?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 02, 2018, 01:07:20 AM
    Oh, nice!  My initial assumption was an X-at-a-time limit, and that's actually kinda exploitable.  (Though, at the same time, would be nice to not need to fire-and-retrain officers if I swap an officered ship between carrier and non-carrier hulls...)  This, by contrast... well, if there's any way to really exploit it, I'm not seeing it.

    (Yeah, how to make it not exploitable while also not making it cumbersome was unclear.)


    Can I put an officer into storage to bypass the limit or is the only way to do so is to fire them?
    With the storage fee, what about abandoned markets and owned markets? Do I have to pay the fee then?

    No storage for officers, no. Not necessarily opposed to the idea but it'd require an entirely custom UI.

    As far as the fee: nope, no fee for abandoned or owned markets.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: PCCL on June 02, 2018, 01:23:39 AM
    Quote
    Lava planets will no longer show up as part of the combat background (too bright)

    By this do you mean volcanic planets?

    Is this really necessary? They're not brighter than stars, are they? Stars do show up in combat backgrounds, don't they?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on June 02, 2018, 01:26:04 AM
    Re: Officers
    Having more officers than you can use in reserve would have been handy when I wanted to try a dedicated Vigilance Pilum spam fleet piloted by several Timid officers.  Never did that because I did not want to permanently fire my other officers.

    Nice news on Centurion.  Hopefully, it will no longer be a poor-man's Monitor knockoff.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on June 02, 2018, 01:38:30 AM
    Yeah, that's exactly how it works. If you have say 7 officers and your limit is 5, you can use the first 5. You can however dismiss ones you're not interested in until the ones you want to use are all under the limit.

    It gets surprisingly annoying (especially on the UI side) and bug-prone to try to limit you to "X at a time". Didn't seem worth the time and trouble given that it's a fairly fringe use-case with already a clear way to do what you need to in both cases (i.e. dismiss officers/admins).
    Hm, are there any plans whatsoever where Officers and / or Administrators can die?  For example, if an Officer's ship gets destroyed or a riot breaks out at a Colony.  If there are such plans, it would be much more important to have at least a small number of experienced Officers / Administrators to cover such losses.  Or even just being able to store them somewhere at a known location (like dropping them off at said dockside bar in your Colony to pick them up later if needed) would be of immense use.  You could go more in-depth, let letting officers request to be dropped off somewhere so they can start their own side adventure and letting the player go on a mini-adventure to find them later on, leveled up compared to before would be interesting, but being able to have more than the strict limit in any form is almost necessary, I think.

    If there are no plans - well, the system works I suppose.

    Oh, nice!  My initial assumption was an X-at-a-time limit, and that's actually kinda exploitable.  (Though, at the same time, would be nice to not need to fire-and-retrain officers if I swap an officered ship between carrier and non-carrier hulls...)  This, by contrast... well, if there's any way to really exploit it, I'm not seeing it.
    HOI4 handles that by giving commanding officers "Reassignment Duration", a mechanic where reassigning an officer to a different army is not instant and takes time.  Buffs from both officers (the officer getting removed from the position and the officer taking his place) do not apply until the replacement officer reaches their post.  Some traits can modify this - for example, Erwin Rommel has the "War Hero" and "Media Personality" traits, which modify the Reassignment Duration by 50% and 100% respectively (meaning a Reassignment which takes 10 days would take 25 days instead).  I think that crushes just about every form of exploitation.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Goumindong on June 02, 2018, 01:58:52 AM
    Re: Officers
    Having more officers than you can use in reserve would have been handy when I wanted to try a dedicated Vigilance Pilum spam fleet piloted by several Timid officers.  Never did that because I did not want to permanently fire my other officers.

    Nice news on Centurion.  Hopefully, it will no longer be a poor-man's Monitor knockoff.

    You could always try no officers and then using the avoid command on as many ships as possible


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on June 02, 2018, 02:16:41 AM
    You could always try no officers and then using the avoid command on as many ships as possible
    Burns too much CP (and too much micromanagement), and I probably want skill power (for more speed and better missiles) on those ships, especially during the 0.7.x era.

    Back during 0.7.x, I used Avoid primarily to mark ships and see them beyond fog-of-war.  I did not have enough points for every enemy, and they were on priority targets.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 02, 2018, 03:10:10 AM
    Is this really necessary? They're not brighter than stars, are they? Stars do show up in combat backgrounds, don't they?

    Stars don't show up in combat in the campaign, no, for the same reasons. IIRC there's a mission where there's a star in the background, but it's read (and therefore dimmer) and small.


    Hm, are there any plans whatsoever where Officers and / or Administrators can die?

    Wasn't really planning on doing that, no. It's one of those things that's always possible if it becomes a solution to a mechanical problem, but as you talk about, given the current state of affairs, it would cause problems instead.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on June 02, 2018, 03:29:27 AM
    All this looks amazing. I am incredibly hyped for colonies!

    I note a couple of things that have to do with saving - the new version of xstream and the sectorEntityToken replacement - does this mean that the dreaded save bug is no more? That would be great news!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 02, 2018, 03:40:37 AM
    I note a couple of things that have to do with saving - the new version of xstream and the sectorEntityToken replacement - does this mean that the dreaded save bug is no more? That would be great news!

    Hopefully - it's not something that I'd been able to reproduce, so I can't say for sure, but the change is meant to try to address this.

    On a related note, I'm not seeing this in the patch notes, though I swear I thought I'd put it in - but a crash during the save process, for any reason, should no longer result in a corrupted savefile. It might technically be possible if it's at the worst possible moment? But that should be exceedingly unlikely and of course you'd still have the auto-backups.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on June 02, 2018, 03:57:01 AM
    I'm not seeing any changes on the skill tree besides the addition of colony skills.
    Was the combat/technology tree changed at all? What about the level cap and how points are earned/spent?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 02, 2018, 04:02:39 AM
    I'm not seeing any changes on the skill tree besides the addition of colony skills.
    Was the combat/technology tree changed at all? What about the level cap and how points are earned/spent?

    No significant changes at this point, yeah. I'd like to do it - and have some fairly specific ways I'd like to go about it - but I'm not sure I'll be able to squeeze it into 0.9a.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on June 02, 2018, 04:10:27 AM
    I note a couple of things that have to do with saving - the new version of xstream and the sectorEntityToken replacement - does this mean that the dreaded save bug is no more? That would be great news!

    Hopefully - it's not something that I'd been able to reproduce, so I can't say for sure, but the change is meant to try to address this.

    On a related note, I'm not seeing this in the patch notes, though I swear I thought I'd put it in - but a crash during the save process, for any reason, should no longer result in a corrupted savefile. It might technically be possible if it's at the worst possible moment? But that should be exceedingly unlikely and of course you'd still have the auto-backups.

    Here's hoping! Interesting that you can't reproduce, for me it always happens while backing up the previous save file rather than saving a new one (and people get around the bug by using 'save copy' rather than save). Curious, because I'd think that would just be a call to the filesystem for a name change?


    Also, I reread and the bit about variants being auto-generated at battle start popped out. Does this mean that the variety of enemy ship compositions is about to go way up, or will it usually generate the same thing for the same faction?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 02, 2018, 04:27:56 AM
    Here's hoping! Interesting that you can't reproduce, for me it always happens while backing up the previous save file rather than saving a new one (and people get around the bug by using 'save copy' rather than save). Curious, because I'd think that would just be a call to the filesystem for a name change?

    Hmm, maybe we're talking about different things then. I'm not sure I'm familiar with the one you're talking about.

    Also, I reread and the bit about variants being auto-generated at battle start popped out. Does this mean that the variety of enemy ship compositions is about to go way up, or will it usually generate the same thing for the same faction?

    It should go up; the autofitter will generate different loadouts given the same ship quality and blueprint availability. E.G. the Hegemony has access to the Gauss Cannon, but that doesn't nearly mean that every large ballistic slot is going to get that. It ought to be enough that it's a signature weapon, but still probably considerably less than half in terms of slots.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Eji1700 on June 02, 2018, 05:09:44 AM
    How will factions interact with colonies? I see we can build defensive fleets, but will hostile factions actually attack/invade the colony itself, and does this mean that such mechanics are coming to vanilla?

    This kind of thing has to happen for defensive fleets to make sense, right? I'm not quite sure how much of it will make it into 0.9a; certainly enough for there to be a point to building a military base, orbital stations, and other defenses. But beyond that, into something like full-fledged invasion-type mechanics? Will have to see how the timing pans out.

    Oh of course but i know dev time is a real thing.  The blog posts had mostly been about econ and stations so I wasn't sure how much, if any, of the faction murdering aspect was going to make it into the game.  I'm glad to hear we'll see at least the start of it and maybe more.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Originem on June 02, 2018, 06:22:49 AM
    Wow, impressive...Seems a big work for my translate group though.
    Still want a beam spawner and a custom missile contrail spawner.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on June 02, 2018, 12:05:00 PM
    I'm not seeing any changes on the skill tree besides the addition of colony skills.
    Was the combat/technology tree changed at all? What about the level cap and how points are earned/spent?

    No significant changes at this point, yeah. I'd like to do it - and have some fairly specific ways I'd like to go about it - but I'm not sure I'll be able to squeeze it into 0.9a.

    How about for the exploration/salvaging part of things? Were things tuned or are those skills still required to properly explore?
    I don't mind this too much to be honest but the level cap makes things too restrictive without modding that out.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on June 02, 2018, 03:39:35 PM
    Nice to see some progress.
    I never really noticed it when I was playing, mostly because there wasn't a point in noticing it, but how probable is it to have multiple viable colonies on one star system? It'd be nice to have that, it makes a given star system have more personality simply because it's not just a star system with X colony. Related to that, do military buildings have any range? Do they protect just the colony they're located at, whole system or even some hyperspace around it? Or at least nearby colonies.
    It's quite foolish to suppose Centurion's buff would go unnoticed, despite it being low in the hierarchy it's still a recognisable frigate and some people still like it and still wait for it to stop being so bad. It's kinda funny how ship designs go back and forth between epochs (or however they were called, I forgot by now), with Centurion being kind of baby Enforcer, with the latter's style not being developed until Legion and Onslaught, though the Onslaught's is mixed with Dominator's, which is more like an upgunned Hammerhead, which itself is a bigger Brawler... At least in weapon layout. Well, I also see that Colossus mk 3 received a small buff too. You haven't mentioned it anywhere, but more Suspiciously Redacted Content is coming too?
    I wonder if waystations need to be defended or if they're left alone for mutual benefit. And I wonder my suggestion for pirate frankenstations is going anywhere.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Jonlissla on June 02, 2018, 03:44:44 PM
    The hype is real.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shoat on June 02, 2018, 05:50:01 PM
    One step closer to the original "mount&blade in space" that this game was introduced to me as (by the late TB), really nice!

    That being said, I honestly think "AI ship loadouts are dynamically generated, based on what's available" is probably the best feature among this (it makes the AI play just like I have to - scrambling to find enough weapons to equip my fleet and using lots of wonky interesting setups), which says a lot considering how awesome it is that factions finally get fleshed out with more in-depth game mechanics and that we get to make our own factions on top of that.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 02, 2018, 05:54:47 PM
    Wow, impressive...Seems a big work for my translate group though.
    Still want a beam spawner and a custom missile contrail spawner.

    Yeah, translation is a huge effort in any case, and moreso for this release, I'd imagine.

    How about for the exploration/salvaging part of things? Were things tuned or are those skills still required to properly explore?
    I don't mind this too much to be honest but the level cap makes things too restrictive without modding that out.

    There's a few things there I still want to look at. In particular, how much salvage you get when without the skill. As far as surveying, it might be in an ok place, now that it has a permanent benefit in making more worlds available. But, given that I'd like to have a more thorough look at skills anyway, I don't want to spend too much time fine-tuning them at this point.


    Related to that, do military buildings have any range? Do they protect just the colony they're located at, whole system or even some hyperspace around it? Or at least nearby colonies.

    Depends on where the patrols go; currently it's anything friendly in-system, with varying probabilities, and a chance of an occasional in-hyper patrol near the system.

    You haven't mentioned it anywhere, but more Suspiciously Redacted Content is coming too?

    Wouldn't be redacted if I kept talking about it, would it? :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 02, 2018, 05:56:00 PM
    That being said, I honestly think "AI ship loadouts are dynamically generated, based on what's available" is probably the best feature among this (it makes the AI play just like I have to - scrambling to find enough weapons to equip my fleet and using lots of wonky interesting setups), which says a lot considering how awesome it is that factions finally get fleshed out with more in-depth game mechanics and that we get to make our own factions on top of that.

    Yeah, I'm really hopeful that the set of changes here will give the factions more distinct personalities. E.G. a Luddic Church Dominator and a Hegemony one would be two quite different beasts.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on June 02, 2018, 06:58:27 PM
    I think this was stated before, but do weapons and ships have faction tags now? So for example, a modded faction would prefer only to refit their ships with their own faction tagged weapons and so on.
    Moreover, was the Codex changed at all changed on the UI overalls? That would be a good place to utilize faction tags.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 02, 2018, 07:06:56 PM
    I think this was stated before, but do weapons and ships have faction tags now? So for example, a modded faction would prefer only to refit their ships with their own faction tagged weapons and so on.

    Not tags specifically but there's a column for this and the way the autofitting system is set up handles this. So, yeah, a faction with faction-specific weapons could be easily set up to only use those. That was one of the explicit design goals of the system.

    Moreover, was the Codex changed at all changed on the UI overalls? That would be a good place to utilize faction tags.

    While I'd like to get to it eventually, it's very much a nice-to-have, so: not at this point.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Kyuss11 on June 02, 2018, 07:07:04 PM
    Will there be use for the Marines?
    Will the colonies have needs and requirements to function and keep happy?
    Marines could be used for uprising or disorder from smuggled drugs and or guns on the streets.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shoat on June 02, 2018, 07:23:01 PM
    I think this was stated before, but do weapons and ships have faction tags now? So for example, a modded faction would prefer only to refit their ships with their own faction tagged weapons and so on.
    Moreover, was the Codex changed at all changed on the UI overalls? That would be a good place to utilize faction tags.

    Considering that they'll assemble their loadouts from what they have available ("AI ship loadouts are dynamically generated, based on what's available"), and that the equipment they have available is different for each faction ("Factions have been adjusted so that their available blueprints and doctrine make each more distinct"), there should be no need for specific faction tags on equipment - in fact I think this has a lot more potential for feeling more immersive and more natural (pirates upgrading from scrapped parts to better ones if they acquire industry, or a tri-tach settlement that is doing poorly financially suddenly having to use lower-tech stuff because it's cheaper) than a fixed list of tagged equipment for each faction.


    If this works the way it sounds like it works*, then all faction fleets will use almost exclusively "their" equipment at the start of a campaign (because that's the blueprints they have from the start) and will, depending on how the campaign evolves, occasionally use other equipment a bit more as time goes on.
    *this is assuming that "what's available" for a faction to make loadouts from will either grow over time as they acquire blueprints somehow, or will occasionally include salvaged enemy equipment and/or equipment that someone sold to their open market.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Soren on June 02, 2018, 10:06:37 PM
    So tasty.

    Will we be able to add in custom, upgradable industries? (Maybe a silly question; I'm sure we can.) I have a few things in mind for that...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on June 02, 2018, 10:39:48 PM
    Looks great and there are a ton of features “under the hood” that are going to make the play experience totally different than current.

    Looks like the mid-game (colony/faction management) is setting up nicely for some great end-game content. In the current in-dev state, how much more time does it take you to reach a point where you say “I’ve reached the end of the content and need to start a new character” relative to 0.8? Do colonies add a lot of carrot-on-a-stick to continue the same play through?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 03, 2018, 05:00:13 AM
    Will there be use for the Marines?

    Probably. They'd be involved in some of the features that I'm not 100% sure will make it into 0.9 but it seems... let's say, fairly likely.

    Will the colonies have needs and requirements to function and keep happy?

    Yep! Basically, you need to fill various demand to keep up stability and keep your industries producing. This could take the form of building another colony to produce stuff that fills demand (i.e. a farming world or whatever) or bringing stockpiles of these commodities yourself, that that's more of a stopgap.


    Will we be able to add in custom, upgradable industries? (Maybe a silly question; I'm sure we can.) I have a few things in mind for that...

    Absolutely. Industries can also be learned via blueprint, though in vanilla the vast majority of them are known by default. In addition, you can install various items into an industry; AI cores are "standard" and can be installed into any industry, but some industries (such as Heavy Industry) can have other items that boost their effectiveness. What those are is entirely moddable as well.


    Looks like the mid-game (colony/faction management) is setting up nicely for some great end-game content. In the current in-dev state, how much more time does it take you to reach a point where you say “I’ve reached the end of the content and need to start a new character” relative to 0.8? Do colonies add a lot of carrot-on-a-stick to continue the same play through?

    You know, I honestly can't answer that at this point. While things are coming together, it's not yet at a point where this level of playtesting is possible.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on June 03, 2018, 09:31:24 AM
    Quote
    Renamed "Guardian PD System" to "Paladin PD System" (reasons REDACTED)

    My best guess is that this will be excessively used by Luddic Church fleets or only available from Luddic markets.
    There might also be some spec change on it so it can be worth it's cost as a "large" pd, since it's now quite crappy.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on June 03, 2018, 12:13:47 PM
    My best guess is that this will be excessively used by Luddic Church fleets or only available from Luddic markets.
    There might also be some spec change on it so it can be worth it's cost as a "large" pd, since it's now quite crappy.
    I'm pretty sure there will be other thing called Guardian now, which caused the PD system name change. Remember Alex's tweets?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on June 03, 2018, 05:03:14 PM
    My best guess is that this will be excessively used by Luddic Church fleets or only available from Luddic markets.
    There might also be some spec change on it so it can be worth it's cost as a "large" pd, since it's now quite crappy.
    I'm pretty sure there will be other thing called Guardian now, which caused the PD system name change. Remember Alex's tweets?
    Hm, sorry, I can't really recall anything related.
    About when was that tweet?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on June 03, 2018, 06:41:45 PM
    Your formatting is messed up, yo.
    Check out this thread: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=13249.0


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: c0nr4d1c4l on June 03, 2018, 07:49:46 PM
    Oh mah gawd....COLONIES!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: mendonca on June 03, 2018, 08:36:25 PM
    Great, thanks Alex!

    I'll need a few goes at that to take it all in.

    Poor Mudskipper MkII.

    Insult to injury.

     :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on June 04, 2018, 05:01:55 AM
    Your formatting is messed up, yo.
    Check out this thread: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=13249.0
    I'm not seeing anything specifically "new" tbh.
    I mean, I do see a "Paladin PD" up there, but I'm not seeing any "Guardian" candidate.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on June 04, 2018, 04:01:53 PM
    Poor Mudskipper MkII.

    Insult to injury.

     :D

    Oh man, I didn't catch that! That's hilarious!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: goduranus on June 04, 2018, 05:45:36 PM
    Nooooooooooooooooooooo, my favorite ship the Afflictor was nerfed :'( :'( :'(


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dri on June 04, 2018, 06:51:00 PM
    Hey Alex, how complete would you say the roster of vanilla ships and weapons is at this point? Are we looking at 90% of ships are in the game and then 85% of weapons—I ask because not very many new ships/weapons were added over what is nearly a year of development time. Now obviously you've got some stations going in and surely a couple REDACTED ships/weapons, but do you feel most niches have been filled, then?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 04, 2018, 07:06:23 PM
    Poor Mudskipper MkII.

    Insult to injury.

     :D

    Hah, yes, that's exactly right.


    Hey Alex, how complete would you say the roster of vanilla ships and weapons is at this point? Are we looking at 90% of ships are in the game and then 85% of weapons—I ask because not very many new ships/weapons were added over what is nearly a year of development time. Now obviously you've got some stations going in and surely a couple REDACTED ships/weapons, but do you feel most niches have been filled, then?

    I think what's in covers the bases pretty nicely. There are certainly some more niches that could be filled, but that would always be the case, for increasingly narrow niches. If 1.0 shipped with the current set of ships and weapons, I would be 100% ok with it. Of course, there's still the possibility for adding more, but it's on the "whether me or David feel like adding something in particular" basis, rather any kind of specific plan to do so. The Devastator is a pretty good example - it didn't really need to be in, specifically, but it does have a role and, well, I just thought it'd be fun and wanted to do it.

    Or, something like the Gremlin - the introduction of doctrine controls and a "phase" component to it made having a low-grade phase ship desirable, and there we go.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on June 04, 2018, 07:13:02 PM
    Nooooooooooooooooooooo, my favorite ship the Afflictor was nerfed
    Maybe quad Reaper loadout did, but AM blaster loadout, if anything, probably got better.  More damage to AM blaster shots?  That is good.  Using a faster ship to unload two or three AM blaster shots with more damage per run, instead of Harbinger's triple Mining Blaster, is better - and cheaper.  Not only that, after Afflictor unloads AM blasters, it can back off (for AM blasters to cool down) and let its buddies wail on the enemy while Amplifier lasts.

    If anything, the change from disruptor to amplifier is either upgrade or sidegrade for Afflictor (playership that abuses invulnerability frames during decloak), while Harbinger getting disruptor will probably be a big upgrade.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Eji1700 on June 04, 2018, 07:30:09 PM
    Any notable differences between Hegemony and Diktat now?  You user Pathers as an example, but they were already fairly distinct, while I feel Hege/SD fleets are almost colorswaps sometimes.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 04, 2018, 07:43:50 PM
    Any notable differences between Hegemony and Diktat now?  You user Pathers as an example, but they were already fairly distinct, while I feel Hege/SD fleets are almost colorswaps sometimes.

    Did I mistype? If I did, I meant to say Luddic Church, not path.

    As far as the Hegemony and the Diktat, there are some differences, but they're supposed to be fairly similar, what with the Diktat being directly derived from a Hegemony task force going rogue.

    The main difference now is that the Hegemony has higher-quality officers, while the Diktat has more and higher quality ships (putting that fuel money to use). In practice, Hegemony ships still have good quality because of their manufacturing. The Diktat also doesn't use carriers much, while the Hegemony uses them a bit, which also means that it may end up with a Legion in one of its fleets, where the Diktat wouldn't. There are also significant differences in what hulls and weapons are available, especially on the capital side of the spectrum.

    Just for fun, a comparison of a couple of randomly generated patrols:

    https://imgur.com/a/SVfXmyo

    Note that the Hegemony one has a high quality due to nanoforges, so actually has less d-mods despite having lower doctrine quality. The Diktat may get a nanoforge on Sindria as well; haven't gotten all that sorted yet.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on June 04, 2018, 08:06:51 PM
    Nooooooooooooooooooooo, my favorite ship the Afflictor was nerfed
    Maybe quad Reaper loadout did, but AM blaster loadout, if anything, probably got better.  More damage to AM blaster shots?  That is good.  Using a faster ship to unload two or three AM blaster shots with more damage per run, instead of Harbinger's triple Mining Blaster, is better - and cheaper.  Not only that, after Afflictor unloads AM blasters, it can back off (for AM blasters to cool down) and let its buddies wail on the enemy while Amplifier lasts.

    If anything, the change from disruptor to amplifier is either upgrade or sidegrade for Afflictor (playership that abuses invulnerability frames during decloak), while Harbinger getting disruptor will probably be a big upgrade.

    It's not a fatal nerf for Afflictor Reaper usage either. Afflictor can bypass omni-shields with Reapers vs Cruiser or Capital sized targets without QD, though it's obviously harder to pull off (shoot corner of enemy ship ahead of shield rotation). But in exchange you get a chance to inflict 150% damage.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on June 04, 2018, 08:19:41 PM
    I think what's in covers the bases pretty nicely. There are certainly some more niches that could be filled, but that would always be the case, for increasingly narrow niches. If 1.0 shipped with the current set of ships and weapons, I would be 100% ok with it. Of course, there's still the possibility for adding more, but it's on the "whether me or David feel like adding something in particular" basis, rather any kind of specific plan to do so. The Devastator is a pretty good example - it didn't really need to be in, specifically, but it does have a role and, well, I just thought it'd be fun and wanted to do it.

    Or, something like the Gremlin - the introduction of doctrine controls and a "phase" component to it made having a low-grade phase ship desirable, and there we go.

    For the most part, I agree, though I'd argue there's a pretty big need for an additional Small Energy weapon that deals hard flux. (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12540.0) Right now, IR Pulse is the only "real" one.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on June 04, 2018, 09:04:32 PM
    On topic of those sliders (because that's what they really are), what do they scale from? Individual shipyards/planets, faction size, wealth?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 04, 2018, 09:58:14 PM
    It's a per-faction "doctrine", so it's simply set for each faction. For things like ship quality and fleet size, the doctrine is not the only thing that affects them. For example, for ship quality, some of the things that factor in are stability, industry types, special items, whether it's a cross-faction import, and possibly a thing or two I'm forgetting. The result is that it's possible to have relative clunkers with ship quality 5 and near-top-of-the-line ships with quality 1.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on June 04, 2018, 11:00:58 PM
    So if we want high quality, we could start with 5, then gradually lower that as other factors in our colonies improve? Cause that sounds awesome.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 04, 2018, 11:17:26 PM
    Yep!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: diegoweiller on June 05, 2018, 07:45:31 AM
     :o

    seems great :v


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: LeoMaximus on June 05, 2018, 09:23:27 AM
    Let us leave our legacy in the stars. Now we shall be founders of new space nations, let us engage in the struggle of the space opera. Fighting over systems and stars in the vastness of space, filled with the symphony of war with dazzling weapons lighting up the cosmos. The scarred hulls of ships drift endlessly as a reminder of time.   


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shoat on June 05, 2018, 11:30:02 AM
    I've been wondering: Now that we'll be able to found and govern our own faction, will there also at some point be a possibility to join another faction as a ruler of one station/planet/system?

    From what I gather these features in 0.9a will just model each faction as one single entity. But I'd hope that at some point each faction has an internal power structure of NPC governors (or admirals, or pirate lords, etc.) each controlling some piece of the whole faction, which would include the possibility of joining an established faction and working one's way up and also when one creates their own custom player faction, recruiting and managing NPCs to rule part of one's own empire.



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: DatonKallandor on June 05, 2018, 01:54:23 PM
    • Dropping cargo pods may now distract pirate fleets; duration of distraction (if any) depends on quantity of goods ejected

    That's a good first step to making pirates act like pirates not psychotic serial killers. Although I think this would also be a really good fit for a dialogue option after a successful pirate intercept.

    The reverse should also be true though - player pirates should be able to demand cargo from their targets instead of going for straight murder (because a "pirate" that just kills everyone with no demands, or even if their demands are fulfilled is a stupid and unprofitable pirate who won't live long).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 05, 2018, 04:51:01 PM
    I've been wondering: Now that we'll be able to found and govern our own faction, will there also at some point be a possibility to join another faction as a ruler of one station/planet/system?

    It's possible; we've talked about it internally. Might be a good fit for a reward from having a commission and high reputation, or some such. But I wouldn't say that it's anything "planned" - more something that might happen if it happens to fit in well with some other things around it.

    That's a good first step to making pirates act like pirates not psychotic serial killers. Although I think this would also be a really good fit for a dialogue option after a successful pirate intercept.

    The reverse should also be true though - player pirates should be able to demand cargo from their targets instead of going for straight murder (because a "pirate" that just kills everyone with no demands, or even if their demands are fulfilled is a stupid and unprofitable pirate who won't live long).

    I hear what you're saying, for sure. The counter-point is that the game's focus is combat, and campaign-level activities should (generally! not always) funnel the player towards that. A high degree of unprofitable and bad-for-self-preservation behavior is essentially a design requirement.

    That's not to say that the specific options you're talking about wouldn't be good. They might be! I'm just saying that stuff like that - that lets you avoid combat - should be evaluated in terms of gameplay and not assumed to be good because it makes the behaviors more believable or realistic. Some of that is good, both because it opens up player options and makes things feel more believable. Too much of it would be bad.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on June 05, 2018, 05:15:44 PM
    Have you thought about how to explain this to new players outside of the tip screen in the menu? Since there is no menu option like in dialogues it will require players to be quite experimental, which isn't something good IMO since those that need this the most might not know about it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 05, 2018, 05:18:01 PM
    It's a minor option and more "neat thing for someone to discover" than primary game mechanic. Probably shouldn't have even put it in the patch notes :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: PapaPetro on June 05, 2018, 06:20:16 PM
    Bigtime hyped dude.

    Been sooooo looking forward to this.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Chronosfear on June 05, 2018, 06:45:32 PM
    I´m hyped! again! ( as with every major patch note and/or dev blog )
    Can't wait to build my own destiny and help to build a better hegemony  ::)

    But you need to/consider another option:
    Since you let us go over the officers cap ( while we still cant use them until we send them into the void ( ... the science is leaking out )

    Give us the ability to store officers ( eg. when we have our own outpost )
    could be done ( spontaneous idea )
    -a building ( cryochamber or something ) also possible with some upgrades to increase capacity ( and a monthly fee depending on the level of the building )
    -just send them to have some free time ( but also at a cost .. you have to pay for their free time ) and therefore also available without another building but again only with our own outpost.

    so this is not a no-brainer and the slots are reserved for the best of the best.



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dark.Revenant on June 05, 2018, 07:11:23 PM
    It's a minor option and more "neat thing for someone to discover" than primary game mechanic. Probably shouldn't have even put it in the patch notes :)

    The way I see it, it's not so much a primary game mechanic but a mechanic I like to call "I'm screwed and I need something to bail me out quickly".  Basically, an option to prevent Game Over, even if it's costly.  Like a Megalixir in Final Fantasy or $0.50 at an arcade.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: PCCL on June 05, 2018, 10:00:59 PM
    I hear what you're saying, for sure. The counter-point is that the game's focus is combat, and campaign-level activities should (generally! not always) funnel the player towards that. A high degree of unprofitable and bad-for-self-preservation behavior is essentially a design requirement.


    Don't mean to tell you how to design your game, but thought I'd voice my opinion on this.

    I respectfully disagree that combat should be the focus (or, at least, the overwhelming focus the way that quote presents it as) of the game. To me, the game is at its best when it immerses you in the world as a small business owner with a home port, small fleet, jobs to take and mouths to feed. The "fun" of the game, in my opinion, comes more from "how can I stay afloat with what I got" than "woohoo let's blow up another pirate fleet". The front page of fractal softworks seems to reflect that at least to some extent:

    Quote
    Starsector is an in-development open-world single-player space-combat, roleplaying, exploration, and economic game. You take the role of a space captain seeking fortune and glory however your choose.



    I would also argue that, even if the game is meant to funnel the player into combat, it does not follow that "a high degree of unprofitable and bad-for-self-preservation behavior is essentially a design requirement".

    Combat, in my opinion, is at its most exciting when the outcome is in doubt. Frequently, I see my fleet of something like 2 destroyers and 2 frigates being attacked by 3 (D) frigates. Without the ability to auto-resolve, this does begin to grate. Even if the game is meant to funnel players into combat, I argue there should be a distinction between "fun, exciting combat" and mop-up chore. There are two arguments against this that I can think of, I will try to represent them the best I can and address them below:

    The first argument is that the CR consumption more or less deals with that. I argue it does not. I regularly play on 2x - 3x supply cost and, in mid/late game (3-4 cruisers and assorted support vessels) supplies cease to become an issue.


    The second argument is that it's difficult to distinguish between fun, exciting battles and chore ones. This is a little more nuanced and I'll wall-of-text my response below:

    I understand this point, I am a fairly adept player at this game (it's been what, 6 years since I bought it now?) and a painfully easy fight to me may not be so for other players. This, I suppose, stems from the fact that the game doesn't really have a difficulty setting (other than the easy mode, which I don't think is discussed very much and I can't comment on because I don't use).

    I propose maybe a more involved difficulty setting can help with this whereby in higher difficulties, enemy fleets take you more seriously and won't engage unless they have at least even strength (or in really high settings, when they outnumber you significantly).

    In the alternative, I propose an internal "player threat" tracker - a variable that more or less represents how skilled of a commander the player is reputed to be. AI fleets would (subject to some variability) only engage when their fleet strength is roughly equal or greater than the variable times the player's fleet strength, where fleet strength is estimated from ship size, quality, weapon quality, damage, and officers. So for example, the variable may start out at 0.8 (player has a reputation as a noob) and pirates may try to take on a player fleet of 2DD 2FF with 2DD 1FF with 1 d-mod. When the player beats that, the game will calculate the damage he took and readjust based on it. If the player lost 1FF, for example, the variable will remain the same; if he lost 1FF and had heavy damage to 1DD, the variable may decrease to 0.75; if he wiped the floor with the fleet and barely took damage, the variable may increase to say 1 and the next time enemies may be more cautious in engaging them.

    Bigger fights would be weighed more than smaller fights, to prevent players from losing threat by feeding small fleets and then go marauding with a large one.

    Hopefully that wouldn't be too difficult to implement. I feel it would add a good deal of dynamic difficulty to the game and keep funneling the player to battle without making enemies too easy and suicidal.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 05, 2018, 10:29:25 PM
    Since you let us go over the officers cap ( while we still cant use them until we send them into the void ( ... the science is leaking out )

    Give us the ability to store officers ( eg. when we have our own outpost )
    could be done ( spontaneous idea )
    -a building ( cryochamber or something ) also possible with some upgrades to increase capacity ( and a monthly fee depending on the level of the building )
    -just send them to have some free time ( but also at a cost .. you have to pay for their free time ) and therefore also available without another building but again only with our own outpost.

    so this is not a no-brainer and the slots are reserved for the best of the best.

    Hmm, this seems like a nice-to-have, really. Not particularly opposed to it! But definitely don't see making time for something like this for 0.9. Likely to be the sort of thing that'd only make it in if it helped solve another issue.



    To me, the game is at its best when it immerses you in the world as a small business owner with a home port, small fleet, jobs to take and mouths to feed. The "fun" of the game, in my opinion, comes more from "how can I stay afloat with what I got" than "woohoo let's blow up another pirate fleet".

    I think we're roughly on the same page here; these are all things that give context to the combat, give it stakes, and make it more fun. And that's how I try to look at them in terms of design, generally - how they contribute to the context of combat. The contribution doesn't have to be direct, but it needs to be there or a feature is at best ancillary to the core of the game.

    That's all I really mean by "combat focused" and "funneling". It definitely doesn't mean "fight everything in sight all the time". Basically, my general approach is that stuff in the campaign should make the combat more fun, either directly or indirectly. Which is a pretty general statement, but it helps when thinking through campaign features and deciding which way to go about things. It doesn't mean that *nothing* non-combat-related makes it through, either. It's just a high-level approach to overall design.


    Frequently, I see my fleet of something like 2 destroyers and 2 frigates being attacked by 3 (D) frigates.

    Huh, really? That shouldn't happen; could be a bug that I've since fixed. Just gave it a quick test and a pair of (D) frigates runs away from my fleet of 1 frigate and 1 destroyer. Possibly mod-related?

    In any case, totally agree that that's not a good thing and forcing the player to have trivial fights like that is not a good idea.



    ...
    Hopefully that wouldn't be too difficult to implement. I feel it would add a good deal of dynamic difficulty to the game and keep funneling the player to battle without making enemies too easy and suicidal.

    Hmm - this sort of thing sounds appealing at first, but I think would lead to weirdness and frustration from the player's point of view. There are many times where you'd like to fight a fleet, such as a bounty, and if the punishment for doing well was that these started running away from you... It's also tough to accurately estimate, since it could vary wildly with the player fleet's makeup, size, and currently chosen flagship. It's just too complicated to reduce to a single number effectively, and the benefit of being successful at it still seems questionable.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on June 05, 2018, 11:27:30 PM
    Pirates demanding money seems like a decent stick to beat people away from the core worlds at low levels. It would also make the core worlds a lot safer for new players.

    Offhand, I feel like player piracy would be self correcting to a degree, since you would lose rep with most factions and not get much money to boot. I don't think it should affect your pirate rep, either, so you'll lose more rep smuggling or whatever if you want access to the pirate military markets.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: lapersonaoval on June 06, 2018, 01:57:00 AM
    lots of new stuff, so i am so excited that cannot wait anymore !!!!!! it's amazing that you're making may dreams come true improving this game to "maraviglia", and so sorry for don´t be able to explain myself correctly in english, i intend but needing help to learn, my apologize and congratulations again


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Techhead on June 06, 2018, 03:37:42 AM
    That's a good first step to making pirates act like pirates not psychotic serial killers. Although I think this would also be a really good fit for a dialogue option after a successful pirate intercept.

    The reverse should also be true though - player pirates should be able to demand cargo from their targets instead of going for straight murder (because a "pirate" that just kills everyone with no demands, or even if their demands are fulfilled is a stupid and unprofitable pirate who won't live long).

    I hear what you're saying, for sure. The counter-point is that the game's focus is combat, and campaign-level activities should (generally! not always) funnel the player towards that. A high degree of unprofitable and bad-for-self-preservation behavior is essentially a design requirement.

    That's not to say that the specific options you're talking about wouldn't be good. They might be! I'm just saying that stuff like that - that lets you avoid combat - should be evaluated in terms of gameplay and not assumed to be good because it makes the behaviors more believable or realistic. Some of that is good, both because it opens up player options and makes things feel more believable. Too much of it would be bad.

    As a counter-counterpoint, the core gameplay loop is combat, but not every combat fits into that scenario. Getting curb-stomped by a band of out-of-your-league pirates isn't exactly fun, so offering a "let's skip to the part where you take all my stuff" option lets players move on with their game without dealing with a fleetwipe.

    (And likewise with "chore" combats that PCCL mentioned like raiding civilian trade fleets.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 06, 2018, 04:13:34 AM
    Sure! I specifically made sure to not say this is a bad idea :) Just speaking to the general point that 'more "reasonable" behavior' doesn't necessarily mean 'good'. I'm not saying *all* of it is bad. I'm just saying it's not a universal, unquestioned good, which I think may have been the thrust of the post I was responding to, and it imo was worth discussing in case it was.


    lots of new stuff, so i am so excited that cannot wait anymore !!!!!! it's amazing that you're making may dreams come true improving this game to "maraviglia", and so sorry for don´t be able to explain myself correctly in english, i intend but needing help to learn, my apologize and congratulations again

    Haha, thank you!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: DatonKallandor on June 06, 2018, 06:06:08 AM
    Note that player-pirates would still need to fight for their reputation. Nobody is going to drop cargo or transfer credits to some random guy they've never heard of. Build a reputation as a fearsome pirate who kills those to refuse to give in to their demands should be just as important as not killing the ones that do.

    As for the reverse case, I'm not sure giving players to the option to opt-out of combat with pirates at a (scaling probably?) credits cost is a bad idea. The core of the game is still combat - and avoiding it by paying pirates avoids both the fun and the profit of combat. I doubt people would just stop fighing pirates categorically given those costs.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: PCCL on June 06, 2018, 06:57:56 AM
    Note that player-pirates would still need to fight for their reputation. Nobody is going to drop cargo or transfer credits to some random guy they've never heard of. Build a reputation as a fearsome pirate who kills those to refuse to give in to their demands should be just as important as not killing the ones that do.

    I don't know that "nobody" is going to drop cargo to some random guy if said random guy is pointing an onslaught at them...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on June 06, 2018, 12:46:44 PM
    My grim reaper murder-fleet does not care much what enemy is in the way.  If it can kill it and profit somehow (profit may be optional if my Ming-wannabe is swimming in resources), my fleet is happy.  My fleet is less of a pirate and more of an omnicidal maniac who kills for amusement, although it will not say no to free money and xp.  ("Later! I like to play with things awhile, before annihilation.  Hahaha...")  I may try a destroy-all-factions playthrough, maybe if/when Starsector gets game-ender win conditions.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: DatonKallandor on June 06, 2018, 02:08:21 PM
    I don't know that "nobody" is going to drop cargo to some random guy if said random guy is pointing an onslaught at them...

    Sure the first time it happens they might even drop cargo (balance of forces should absolutely be a factor in addition to reputation when it comes to "will they pay"). The moment that pirate doesn't let the cargo-droppers live though he'll get a reputation and the only thing he can expect from that point on is fights to the death instead of free money, no matter how big his ship is.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on June 06, 2018, 02:11:40 PM
    My grim reaper murder-fleet does not care much what enemy is in the way.  If it can kill it and profit somehow (profit may be optional if my Ming-wannabe is swimming in resources), my fleet is happy.  My fleet is less of a pirate and more of an omnicidal maniac who kills for amusement, although it will not say no to free money and xp.  ("Later! I like to play with things awhile, before annihilation.  Hahaha...")  I may try a destroy-all-factions playthrough, maybe if/when Starsector gets game-ender win conditions.

    Your Admiral would make a good antagonist in a super hero movie. The name Megas fits right in too.

    ...

    You're actually a super villain aren't you?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on June 06, 2018, 02:40:50 PM
    @ Thaago:  When I think of Megas, I tend to think of MegasXLR, the mecha with a muscle car for its head, piloted by a heroic but sloppy fat hero.

    I am tempted to name my super-villain wannabe character Dio.  Strange highways indeed.  That is, if I do not use Hegemony's space marine, in which case, his name is Doom.

    I am not a super-villain in real-life.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TheDTYP on June 06, 2018, 05:01:01 PM
    Are there plans to add more core worlds to this update? I could stand to have a few more, lore and gameplay-wise. There's some interesting combinations we haven't seen yet (iirc) like a system inhabited by both the Church and Tri-tachyon or the Persean League and the Hegemony. I feel like more warzones like Valhalla (?) would be an interesting place to hang out in.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Techhead on June 06, 2018, 06:50:14 PM
    Quote
    • Faction hostilities: fixed various issues re: hostilities properly ending and total number/frequency
      • Last for at least 6 months, and rarely more than a full cycle
      • Hostilities between Hegemony-TriTachyon and other starting hostilities between major factions (i.e. not pirates/pathers) are no longer permanent

    I have a few questions about these changes. Once hostilities end, is TT any more likely to go back to war with the Hegies compared to war with one of the other factions? Is there anything influencing weighting on who fights who or does it remain entirely random?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 06, 2018, 07:30:59 PM
    Are there plans to add more core worlds to this update? I could stand to have a few more, lore and gameplay-wise. There's some interesting combinations we haven't seen yet (iirc) like a system inhabited by both the Church and Tri-tachyon or the Persean League and the Hegemony. I feel like more warzones like Valhalla (?) would be an interesting place to hang out in.

    Ah - there might be a few less, actually; there's been a bit of rearranging on that front. It's something like 50-ish colonies total, and I feel that's approaching being too much; beyond a certain point, things can start to blur, and these do still have a cost in terms of performance. I do hear you re: warzones etc, though, but ideally that would happen more dynamically.

    I have a few questions about these changes. Once hostilities end, is TT any more likely to go back to war with the Hegies compared to war with one of the other factions? Is there anything influencing weighting on who fights who or does it remain entirely random?

    They're not more likely, no. It's about as simple as I could make it at this point; just needed to re-do it using the intel system, and it was a good opportunity to fix the issues and simplify at the same time. Will see where it needs to go later!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Maxzhao on June 06, 2018, 10:11:50 PM
    So so excited for the update! The new player controlled station idea is awesome! Will there be some optimization done for this new release? The game's been quite laggy when travelling (not in combat or in stations) for me. I don't have a gaming rig but I would think a 2D game should run smoothly on a Macbook air? I do understand the current focus is on new content, just hoping there will be a optimisation pass sometime in the near future?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: shoi on June 07, 2018, 04:50:20 AM
    Quote
    Ships gradually get more aggressive when their peak time and CR tick down

    THANK YOUUUU


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 07, 2018, 05:44:54 AM
    Will there be some optimization done for this new release? The game's been quite laggy when travelling (not in combat or in stations) for me. I don't have a gaming rig but I would think a 2D game should run smoothly on a Macbook air? I do understand the current focus is on new content, just hoping there will be a optimisation pass sometime in the near future?

    Yes, there's been quite a lot of that, both for combat and for the campaign; hopefully it will help in your case! Hyperspace can still sometimes get a bit intensive, though, depending on the number of fleets nearby and how far you zoom out. But it's definitely a lot better than it used to be, I'd say something like 30% or so faster overall.

    (As a point of possible interest: just because a game is 2D that does not mean it's not resource-intensive. That's a common misconception, but it is indeed just that. Much of the performance required by Starsector is not graphics-related, anyway, but even the graphics part won't necessarily be faster or slower, it just depends on what the game actually does.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sarissofoi on June 07, 2018, 07:41:41 AM
    Are there plans to add more core worlds to this update? I could stand to have a few more, lore and gameplay-wise. There's some interesting combinations we haven't seen yet (iirc) like a system inhabited by both the Church and Tri-tachyon or the Persean League and the Hegemony. I feel like more warzones like Valhalla (?) would be an interesting place to hang out in.

    Ah - there might be a few less, actually; there's been a bit of rearranging on that front. It's something like 50-ish colonies total, and I feel that's approaching being too much; beyond a certain point, things can start to blur, and these do still have a cost in terms of performance. I do hear you re: warzones etc, though, but ideally that would happen more dynamically.


    Quote
    there might be a few less, actually
    Nooooooo!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on June 07, 2018, 09:17:50 AM
    Well, you can't tell me all those worlds are actually memorable. You know what's in Corvus, Askonia, Magec, Aztlan, Valhalla-Ragnar, Eos Exodus, uhhh... Westernesse, Thule, Hybrasil... But the fact is that the more planets in the core there are, the more distinct they have to be or they risk being places that exist and maybe you even know it, but aren't ever relevant to you. At some point it's not more features, but more bloat. If Alex makes the core more interesting by having less boring stuff in it, good. I personally would ask only for uninhabited systems in the core have loot, danger or be possibly colonisable, even if that'd mean *** off other factions (perhaps that's why they're empty in the first space, because neither side wants to spark a total war).
    By the way, Alex, have you thought about arms dealer mechanic to allow a player with some real estate to access military markets of other factions (those that agree to trade ships and weapons for something)?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sarissofoi on June 07, 2018, 09:28:14 AM
    To be honest I would love to see some semi military ships avialable on civilian market.
    Sector is dangerous and merchanters need some escorts, explorers need some long range artmed ships etc.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Maxzhao on June 07, 2018, 10:20:43 AM
    Yes, there's been quite a lot of that, both for combat and for the campaign; hopefully it will help in your case! Hyperspace can still sometimes get a bit intensive, though, depending on the number of fleets nearby and how far you zoom out. But it's definitely a lot better than it used to be, I'd say something like 30% or so faster overall.
    That's awesome! And yeah your explanation makes sense, I guess there is a lot happening in the game than just the graphics!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ishman on June 07, 2018, 10:50:03 AM
    -snip-

    Yes, there's been quite a lot of that, both for combat and for the campaign; hopefully it will help in your case! Hyperspace can still sometimes get a bit intensive, though, depending on the number of fleets nearby and how far you zoom out. But it's definitely a lot better than it used to be, I'd say something like 30% or so faster overall.

    (As a point of possible interest: just because a game is 2D that does not mean it's not resource-intensive. That's a common misconception, but it is indeed just that. Much of the performance required by Starsector is not graphics-related, anyway, but even the graphics part won't necessarily be faster or slower, it just depends on what the game actually does.)

    As an easy example of what Alex is talking about - dwarf fortress is incredibly well optimized (for a single threaded application) but it will crush absolutely every single cpu in existence very quickly due to the sheer number of things it must keep track of and calculate. Physics calculations and the cost of large numbers of AI entities can balloon out of control very rapidly, and while there are lots of tricks one can do to improve performance in situations like those, most/all come at the cost of simulation fidelity.

    It's also frequently a problem that parallelization is difficult or near impossible for some of these tasks as they must be done in order, so they can't be offloaded to other threads or even GPUcompute - and the game can't proceed to the next tick where it starts all over again until it gets those necessary updates, even if it could wait for some unimportant ones to be calculated. That results in the stuttering you get as the game has to continually wait for these big chunks of data to (whether large numbers of AI entities doing pathfinding or keeping track of enormous numbers of items that are being traded depending on the game) be processed, even if it finished all the graphics calls ages ago in computational time.

    Also doesn't help that thinbooks like the Macbook Air have quite weak CPUs in order to limit the thermal load on their passive cooling.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sooner535 on June 07, 2018, 03:34:15 PM
    ^ could not be happier with people who have understanding of gaming like you mate lol, I have a bud that when he sees games like project zomboid, starsector, and dwarf fortress (all for example) he sees them as crap because of graphics, if a game isn’t AAA quality he will not play them, which too many people think that way.
    Funny thing is I specifically built my pc for games like that, high cpu load and low-medium gpu load. Sad that so many people will only look at graphics and will never play some of the greatest games available (for the record I think starsector and pz have great graphics, and I love the lack of them in DF, more imagination). Anyways to get off that tangent, thank you Alex for this load of work! Can’t wait to get my hands on this update


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Jonlissla on June 07, 2018, 04:11:37 PM
    I think what's in covers the bases pretty nicely. There are certainly some more niches that could be filled, but that would always be the case, for increasingly narrow niches. If 1.0 shipped with the current set of ships and weapons, I would be 100% ok with it. Of course, there's still the possibility for adding more, but it's on the "whether me or David feel like adding something in particular" basis, rather any kind of specific plan to do so.

    Then I would kindly suggest another midtech capital ship.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Morbo513 on June 07, 2018, 07:21:14 PM
    I've heard SS described as "Mount & Blade in space". I'd never played it til earlier this year, there's quite a few features that would be great in SS. In particular I'd like to see named NPC captains who you have individual relationships with, and the ability to conquer markets as in Nexerelin (or better). Judging by some of the changes here, and what I've read in the past, it sounds like that may be the intent.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: c0nr4d1c4l on June 08, 2018, 05:43:09 AM
    I think what's in covers the bases pretty nicely. There are certainly some more niches that could be filled, but that would always be the case, for increasingly narrow niches. If 1.0 shipped with the current set of ships and weapons, I would be 100% ok with it. Of course, there's still the possibility for adding more, but it's on the "whether me or David feel like adding something in particular" basis, rather any kind of specific plan to do so.

    Then I would kindly suggest another midtech capital ship.

    +1


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: steelwing on June 08, 2018, 12:43:24 PM
    My reaction may most closely be represented by the following helpful graphic:
    (http://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/hype-intensifies-gif-14.gif)
    Loving the news about colonies especially.  With a dynamic economy and more fluid faction relationships, this game will approach the same scale as, say, the X-Universe.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: PCCL on June 09, 2018, 06:42:00 PM

    Frequently, I see my fleet of something like 2 destroyers and 2 frigates being attacked by 3 (D) frigates.

    Huh, really? That shouldn't happen; could be a bug that I've since fixed. Just gave it a quick test and a pair of (D) frigates runs away from my fleet of 1 frigate and 1 destroyer. Possibly mod-related?

    In any case, totally agree that that's not a good thing and forcing the player to have trivial fights like that is not a good idea.


    I'll admit my memory might exaggerate and I haven't played in a while, but I just picked up my old save and had this happen:

    (https://i.imgur.com/vMfMefo.png)

    This is for a delivery quest, so it's entirely possible the problem is exclusive to that, but cmon, that's not a remotely fair fight, is it?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 09, 2018, 06:59:45 PM
    Yeah, it's definitely related to it being a delivery mission. The pirate fleet that spawns there will always want to fight (and there's also a non-combat resolution available).


    I've heard SS described as "Mount & Blade in space". I'd never played it til earlier this year, there's quite a few features that would be great in SS. In particular I'd like to see named NPC captains who you have individual relationships with, and the ability to conquer markets as in Nexerelin (or better). Judging by some of the changes here, and what I've read in the past, it sounds like that may be the intent.

    I'm not sure about relationships w/ specific NPCs in particular; will have to see how things go. Can definitely see the argument for it and it's a very good thing in M&B, though.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on June 09, 2018, 07:03:49 PM
    Pirates may do dumb things during freight missions, at least the one designated hunter fleet that sometimes spawn after accepting such a mission.

    In a pre-0.8 game, I had a couple pirate fighter wings (whose fleet got mauled by other fleets) tried to stick up my warfleet with at least two capitals, demanding I hand over the cargo.  The dumb crooks (on camera) were blown away.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shoat on June 09, 2018, 07:11:06 PM
    I'm not sure about relationships w/ specific NPCs in particular; will have to see how things go. Can definitely see the argument for it and it's a very good thing in M&B, though.

    It was always nice in M&B how, even if you were a neutral non-associated guy, some people from a faction might ignore you while others would chase you to the ends of the earth to murder you and yet others might save you from certain doom even though it is not part of their duty, simply because of some earlier interactions you had with them that might have left an impression.

    I think it could be possible to get close-ish to that point here, though the larger scale makes it difficult to achieve the same feel. It would have probably worked out well back in the day when we were all crammed together into the cozy corvus system - come to think of it it might be cool to have an extra setting at campaign generation for an even smaller sector size with even fewer systems (and I can imagine some players' computers might be grateful for that, too).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sooner535 on June 10, 2018, 05:04:02 AM
    Out of curiosity is there any slight idea of an eta? I’m thinking of playing a campaign before hand and I don’t wanna be in the middle of a game just to need to update lol


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: PCCL on June 10, 2018, 05:38:55 AM
    I doubt it'll be out until November at the earliest


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on June 10, 2018, 08:12:39 AM
    As I'm having discussion in this suggestion thread (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=13458.0)
    I now need to know what do you mean by "quality"
    Changes as of June 01, 2018

    • Ship production "quality" is based on many factors and affects the number of d-mods a produced hull will have

    Will the d-mods be random just as post-battle recovery?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Carabus on June 10, 2018, 11:08:34 AM
    Does autofitting system for AI fleets support re-autofitting later in fleet lifetime?
    For example AI fleet wins a battle, loses some ships, aquires new weapons from both lost ships and destroyed enemies.
    Can/will it re-autofit its existing ships using new weapons?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sarissofoi on June 10, 2018, 05:17:17 PM
    I doubt it'll be out until November at the earliest

    Next update in 15 days!
    15 days!!!!!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 10, 2018, 05:18:39 PM
    It was always nice in M&B how, even if you were a neutral non-associated guy, some people from a faction might ignore you while others would chase you to the ends of the earth to murder you and yet others might save you from certain doom even though it is not part of their duty, simply because of some earlier interactions you had with them that might have left an impression.

    I think it could be possible to get close-ish to that point here, though the larger scale makes it difficult to achieve the same feel. It would have probably worked out well back in the day when we were all crammed together into the cozy corvus system - come to think of it it might be cool to have an extra setting at campaign generation for an even smaller sector size with even fewer systems (and I can imagine some players' computers might be grateful for that, too).

    Right, yeah. It's just not something I really want to tack on without a reason. In M&B the lords were pretty central to a lot of things, so it made sense to keep track of reputation etc.

    Out of curiosity is there any slight idea of an eta? I’m thinking of playing a campaign before hand and I don’t wanna be in the middle of a game just to need to update lol

    You're good; the next thing I'm going to be putting out is a blog post :)

    Does autofitting system for AI fleets support re-autofitting later in fleet lifetime?
    For example AI fleet wins a battle, loses some ships, aquires new weapons from both lost ships and destroyed enemies.
    Can/will it re-autofit its existing ships using new weapons?

    It won't do that, no. That would be pretty involved. Also, I I suspect the actual player-facing outcome might often be "why is this thing broken there are weird weapons on this <faction> fleet" :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 10, 2018, 10:31:07 PM
    I now need to know what do you mean by "quality"
    Changes as of June 01, 2018

    • Ship production "quality" is based on many factors and affects the number of d-mods a produced hull will have

    Will the d-mods be random just as post-battle recovery?

    Oh, hey, somehow missed this. I think it came up in more detail earlier in the thread, but basically it's a per-colony value that determines the number of d-mods ships get. 0% (and below) is most likely to generate 5 dmods. 100% is most likely to generate 0. There's some variance but it's limited, i.e. you won't end up with 3+ d-mods at 100% quality.

    Things affecting it include doctrine, items, stability, and possibly a couple of other things.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shoat on June 10, 2018, 11:36:57 PM
    Right, yeah. It's just not something I really want to tack on without a reason. In M&B the lords were pretty central to a lot of things, so it made sense to keep track of reputation etc.

    Of course. I don't want anything just tacked on, either.
    I'll be happy if something like the M&B lords and individual relationships makes it into this game at some point, but if it doesn't because it works poorly in combination with other game mechanics or makes little sense in the context of the game's worldbuilding or just because other better features had priority or what-have-you, I'm not gonna be mad.

    This was the first game I ever paid for before it was released and the only one that I still support and believe in. I fully trust you to make the right decisions.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 10, 2018, 11:52:04 PM
    Thank you for your understanding and support, I really do appreciate it :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sooner535 on June 11, 2018, 12:19:06 AM
    It was always nice in M&B how, even if you were a neutral non-associated guy, some people from a faction might ignore you while others would chase you to the ends of the earth to murder you and yet others might save you from certain doom even though it is not part of their duty, simply because of some earlier interactions you had with them that might have left an impression.

    I think it could be possible to get close-ish to that point here, though the larger scale makes it difficult to achieve the same feel. It would have probably worked out well back in the day when we were all crammed together into the cozy corvus system - come to think of it it might be cool to have an extra setting at campaign generation for an even smaller sector size with even fewer systems (and I can imagine some players' computers might be grateful for that, too).

    Right, yeah. It's just not something I really want to tack on without a reason. In M&B the lords were pretty central to a lot of things, so it made sense to keep track of reputation etc.

    Out of curiosity is there any slight idea of an eta? I’m thinking of playing a campaign before hand and I don’t wanna be in the middle of a game just to need to update lol

    You're good; the next thing I'm going to be putting out is a blog post :)

    Does autofitting system for AI fleets support re-autofitting later in fleet lifetime?
    For example AI fleet wins a battle, loses some ships, aquires new weapons from both lost ships and destroyed enemies.
    Can/will it re-autofit its existing ships using new weapons?

    It won't do that, no. That would be pretty involved. Also, I I suspect the actual player-facing outcome might often be "why is this thing broken there are weird weapons on this <faction> fleet" :)

    Alright, thanks Alex.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: ompalainen on June 11, 2018, 09:08:59 AM
    So nice to see an update. Keep up the good work Alex. Cant wait until 0.9 comes out, guess ill have to send the wife and kids on some trip. :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Histidine on June 11, 2018, 01:03:47 PM
    I've wanted fleet officers to be "recycled" and appear again with reputation persistence, not for any behavioral effects (although those would be nice too) but simply because it'd be neat for the player to open the comm link and go "oh we've met before". Kind of a "make the Sector feel more alive/real" thing.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Morbo513 on June 11, 2018, 02:03:43 PM
    I've wanted fleet officers to be "recycled" and appear again with reputation persistence, not for any behavioral effects (although those would be nice too) but simply because it'd be neat for the player to open the comm link and go "oh we've met before". Kind of a "make the Sector feel more alive/real" thing.
    Yeah - The whole thing that gave me the impression that it'd be an eventual feature is that when say a fleet caught you with the transponder off, you'd lose reputation with its captain as well as their associated faction. I'm not sure if that's even still a thing in 0.8 though, but yes - at the bare minimum functionality it'd simply be an immersion thing. The next step up is if their disposition towards you, independent of that of their faction, changed gameplay in some way. If negative; Extorting you if you're significantly weaker, following you into hyperspace or the far reaches of their sector to try to kill you away from prying eyes, or if positive, jumping in a battle to help you against a faction theirs is neutral towards, escorting you through their sector if your fleet is weak, there are a lot of possibilities there. Then there's stuff like influencing the politics of a faction or alliance, playing them off against each other or going out of your way to help ensure the stability of a faction. All that said, the question is if such systems were created, would they be fully fledged, and would it be worth any effort if not? I think there'd be a lot of room for this sort of stuff within Starsector's gameplay, but I understand if it doesn't fit within the constraints of time/resources/development. We've already got honestly one of the best games I've played


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on June 11, 2018, 02:19:42 PM
    I've wanted fleet officers to be "recycled" and appear again with reputation persistence, not for any behavioral effects (although those would be nice too) but simply because it'd be neat for the player to open the comm link and go "oh we've met before". Kind of a "make the Sector feel more alive/real" thing.

    To help display that, previously met fleet's could show their commander's name. "XYZ's Hegemony Patrol"


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Arkar1234 on June 11, 2018, 03:05:28 PM
    If I remember correctly, there was this bug where friendly fighters can be hit by friendly fire if their engines get flamed out.

    Has that been addressed? Or did I do a dumb here an missed it in the previous patchnotes.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on June 11, 2018, 03:41:34 PM
    I believe that's a feature, not a bug.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Arkar1234 on June 11, 2018, 06:18:37 PM
    I believe that's a feature, not a bug.

    Getting r/Planetside flashbacks


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Inventor Raccoon on June 11, 2018, 08:54:26 PM
    Fighters temporarily get the same collision as normal ships when flamed out, which allows them to get hit by friendly fire and crash into ships.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Eternity on June 11, 2018, 09:04:10 PM
    Can't wait this update ! hoping it for soon :-)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: dftst0 on June 13, 2018, 08:02:45 AM
    Don't know the proper term for it, but searches have returned nothing so far.
    Could there be an option to disable the 'helpful' hint popups ("Your fleet has entered hyperspace!", "All of your ships are below 20% combat readiness", etc.) completely for old/seasoned players?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on June 13, 2018, 09:09:46 AM
    Hi, welcome to the forum:)

    There's a checkbox to disable the hints completely whenever you start a new campaign.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: dftst0 on June 13, 2018, 09:47:45 AM
    Oh. I must be dumb. And blind.

    So much for a well thought-out first post.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ratheden on June 14, 2018, 01:25:25 PM
    I come in for my semi-monthly check on the game, and WOW, I am so looking forward to playing with the new update when it comes.

    Just from the patch notes, looks awesome Alex.




    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Vulpes on June 15, 2018, 11:20:46 AM
    How will faction hostilities be decided?  Are there factors for tension like land, trade wars, attempts to destabilize colonies- or  is it just random?  It'd be interesting if all the other factions can (attempt to) band up to beat down anyone that gets too dominant.

    It'd also be interesting if the player (or AI) could ultimately subjugate all other factions as a kind of late game challenge, or take missions to help re-establish a faction suppressed by someone else.  Maybe by the power of love friendship threats-of-violence the player could even unite the sector and usher in a new dawn of prosperity!

    I guess in a nutshell I'd like the system to allow for a little intrigue, some power plays: tangible player driven changes beyond just being good at killing things.


    On an entirely unrelated note, have you been working on starsector full time or are there other projects to keep the bread flowing?  Such a long time working on one game; must feel odd to know you're reaching the finish line.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 15, 2018, 09:08:53 PM
    I come in for my semi-monthly check on the game, and WOW, I am so looking forward to playing with the new update when it comes.

    Just from the patch notes, looks awesome Alex.

    Thank you! :)

    How will faction hostilities be decided?  Are there factors for tension like land, trade wars, attempts to destabilize colonies- or  is it just random?  It'd be interesting if all the other factions can (attempt to) band up to beat down anyone that gets too dominant.

    It'd also be interesting if the player (or AI) could ultimately subjugate all other factions as a kind of late game challenge, or take missions to help re-establish a faction suppressed by someone else.  Maybe by the power of love friendship threats-of-violence the player could even unite the sector and usher in a new dawn of prosperity!

    I guess in a nutshell I'd like the system to allow for a little intrigue, some power plays: tangible player driven changes beyond just being good at killing things.

    It's random, and factions taking over other faction colonies isn't a thing at this point, so it's not something I want to flesh out. We'll see where it goes; in general I'd expect diplomacy (if any) to be fairly rudimentary.

    On an entirely unrelated note, have you been working on starsector full time or are there other projects to keep the bread flowing?  Such a long time working on one game; must feel odd to know you're reaching the finish line.

    Full-time, yeah. I don't know that it's *that* close to the finish line; we've still got 1.0, whatever bugfixing etc after that, and (hopefully) an expansion. So (provided the preorder income allows it) it ought to be Starsector work for the foreseeable future for me, so it doesn't really feel weird in that way. I do know what you're getting at, though!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Clockwork Owl on June 19, 2018, 06:00:31 PM
    Quote
    (Bounties)Will now pay out and increase reputation when hostile or worse with offering faction

    I can see some case of this being an improvement, but just out of curiosity(and some lurkers' request): what is the reasoning behind this change?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 19, 2018, 06:17:27 PM
    Mainly just removing what felt like an unnecessary complication to convey to the player. It could really go either way whether bounties raising rep from below a certain point is good or bad, and given that, the simpler option seems the way to go. And since I was re-implementing all of these as "intel"...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on June 19, 2018, 11:46:19 PM
    Mainly just removing what felt like an unnecessary complication to convey to the player. It could really go either way whether bounties raising rep from below a certain point is good or bad, and given that, the simpler option seems the way to go. And since I was re-implementing all of these as "intel"...
    At least I will not need to grind Remnants for cores to turn in and raise reputation above Vengeful.  (The cash bonus is nice, but the rep raise is what I am interested in most.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 20, 2018, 01:25:33 AM
    Yeah. Part of my thinking was that the extra bit of player freedom this grants is nice - one can RP this in their head however they want.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: eidolad on June 24, 2018, 02:37:29 PM
    after a few days of playing the game for the first time, I wander over to see what .9a patch will be about...

    I read just 1/3 of the patch notes and was overwhelmed by a Keanu Reeves in the Matrix level of "titanic whoa-ness".  I will need another hour or so to consider the implications of the rest of the incoming transformations on what I thought the game was.  Like, read a sentence, and ponder, sort of thing.

    I vote that the .9a be given a dev branch name of "fabulously_juicy_steak_on_a_plate"




    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: kiss on June 24, 2018, 02:43:28 PM
    Thx for such a good game!

    Can you please remove this such annoing white flashing via full screen in battles when i destroy a ship? I have to turn my head away or close my eyes with hands to not see this !!!

    Thx


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on June 24, 2018, 02:57:32 PM
    Can you please remove this such annoing white flashing via full screen in battles when i destroy a ship? I have to turn my head away or close my eyes with hands to not see this !!!
    You can.  Go to the settings.json file in starsector-core /  data / config and set "enableShipExplosionWhiteout" to "false".


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sarissofoi on June 24, 2018, 03:01:27 PM
    Can you please remove this such annoing white flashing via full screen in battles when i destroy a ship? I have to turn my head away or close my eyes with hands to not see this !!!
    You can.  Go to the settings.json file in starsector-core /  data / config and set "enableShipExplosionWhiteout" to "false".
    Thanks mate.
    I normally have no problems with it but went to play on my old PC and it was like woah. Bright nuke bombs that burn my eye-sockets.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: kiss on June 24, 2018, 03:17:35 PM
    Can you please remove this such annoing white flashing via full screen in battles when i destroy a ship? I have to turn my head away or close my eyes with hands to not see this !!!
    You can.  Go to the settings.json file in starsector-core /  data / config and set "enableShipExplosionWhiteout" to "false".

    Thx bro, i did this! But have players to edit game files for such things?
    I think "such effects" should be off by default or have a switch in game setting!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: PCCL on June 24, 2018, 05:02:52 PM
    because a lot of people like it


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 24, 2018, 05:09:23 PM
    Generally the stuff in settings.json but not in-game settings is there because it would have to be done to a different level of quality for me to feel comfortable having it be an actual in-game setting.

    In the case of ship explosions, for example, they "work" for frigates, but when you scale them up for larger ships, they could stand to have more detail if viewed stand-alone. With the whiteout over them, this never comes up - but removing whiteout would make this an issue.

    If tweaked from a config file, though, I think there's an implicit understanding that things may or may not be optimal as a result of the changes.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dark.Revenant on June 25, 2018, 02:13:34 AM
    GraphicsLib does add extra effects to ship explosions as a replacement for white-out.  I can confirm on Alex's behalf that it is not easy to tune ship explosion effects.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on June 25, 2018, 05:27:51 AM
    (Any sort of visual effect just takes ages to nail down, it seems like. On the bright side, when I'm working on something like that, hours disappear within minutes.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: lapersonaoval on June 30, 2018, 01:54:21 AM
    me levanto cada mañana para ver si ha salido ya la nueva versión ...when i wake up in the morning, first i take a warm, relaxing great shower imaging a new release is waiting for me in my den but .... it's ok, alex, i'll be waiting 'cause you (and your mates) have THE GAME in your hands .... so amazing, so great, plenty of wonders to discover ... ACOJONANTE !!!!!! how can i tell you the marvellous time that i`m spending playing, remodding your mods, ... everything ???? it's a pleasure

    thanx a lot, alex and fractal team and modders, i got no words to describe how much i'm enjoying this maraviglia !!!!!!!!!
    pd: my apologizes, english is not my lenguage and i intend to be understanding for all of you, i know i have to improve ...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Noomsy on July 15, 2018, 09:44:43 PM
    So ready to play with more features....

    Would it help if I buy the game again?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on July 16, 2018, 12:28:54 PM
    Considering doing that myself when the Steam version hits to be honest.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Kyuss11 on July 16, 2018, 02:49:52 PM
    I feel like I ripped Alex off with the low price I paid for this game back in the day. Once this game is fully released, I would buy this game for 30 bucks easy and donate to some of the modders.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on July 16, 2018, 07:33:31 PM
    I appreciate the sentiment :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SeinTa on July 16, 2018, 08:17:56 PM
    Just a quick question, would there be a possibility to recover ships directly in a mothballed state? (i hope I didn't miss a button that does it already)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: facc00 on July 24, 2018, 07:20:08 AM
    Sweet!!!!!!!  All my bases are belong to me. ;p


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Venatos on July 24, 2018, 08:56:47 PM
    hmmm, my left little toe is kinda tingly...
    that must mean that 0.9 is less then a month away!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on July 24, 2018, 09:23:20 PM
    If I were to lay money on it, I would say four months to release.

    I think what you are feeling is updated patch notes or a new blog post.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Venatos on July 25, 2018, 08:04:27 AM
    well, i wouldnt bet money on it, its a toe afterall...
    but he is right about half the time, so there is that. ;p


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: yesofcourse on July 26, 2018, 05:52:08 AM
    First of all, best game ever ! Thank you so much for all of it.
    Silly first question : where do i download 0.9a ?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: arcibalde on July 26, 2018, 06:31:51 AM
    In the future  ;D We only have patch notes for now, still no 0.9 release.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shoat on July 27, 2018, 06:49:08 PM
    First of all, best game ever ! Thank you so much for all of it.
    Silly first question : where do i download 0.9a ?

    At some point, many moons from now, the title of this thread will be changed form "Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes" to "Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes" and then there'll also be a link to the download-location here as well (at the top of the first post by alex).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embercloud on July 29, 2018, 09:14:48 AM
    Man, I’m so hyped for this. Starsector is easily my favorite game


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: FabianClasen on July 29, 2018, 02:35:59 PM
    Wow with these Patch notes, the 0.9x version number really seems appropriate.
    Really looking forward to this.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Merxe on July 29, 2018, 07:48:05 PM
    I want to play Starsector now but the patch notes are released so now I have to wait.
    Now I have to find another single player game for the time being.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Lucax on August 01, 2018, 12:54:44 PM
    Hi Alex, these patch notes look promising ! I'm a bit late on the hype train, but still very excited.

    Do you have any plans to let factions colonize and generally do the same colony related things the player can do ? Similarly, will we be able to colonize a planet on a faction's behalf ?

    Also I didn't expect the low tech phase frigate, it's a welcome surprise. I love ships that can dodge fire, but there are few in the game and I still wish frigates were more useful in the late game / in large battles.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on August 01, 2018, 07:08:50 PM
    Do you have any plans to let factions colonize and generally do the same colony related things the player can do ? Similarly, will we be able to colonize a planet on a faction's behalf ?

    Hi - that's come up a couple of times; while it sounds potentially interesting, it's not a direction I really want to go in. That is, I don't see Starsector as a full-on 4x game, but rather one with player-facing 4x elements and possibly some minor nods to that by the factions, but nothing full-blown.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: HaymakerW on August 02, 2018, 09:23:31 PM
    Do you have any plans to let factions colonize and generally do the same colony related things the player can do ? Similarly, will we be able to colonize a planet on a faction's behalf ?

    Hi - that's come up a couple of times; while it sounds potentially interesting, it's not a direction I really want to go in. That is, I don't see Starsector as a full-on 4x game, but rather one with player-facing 4x elements and possibly some minor nods to that by the factions, but nothing full-blown.

    Heh, guess that's where modders come in. It'll be something modders can pull off, right?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Kyuss11 on August 02, 2018, 10:24:44 PM
    Nexerelin mod does that now http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=9175.0


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: ValkyriaL on August 05, 2018, 08:04:36 PM
    0.9 eh? It's closing in on that magic number.. brings a tear to my eye.  :'(


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Eashua on August 06, 2018, 08:49:12 PM
    So excited that I finally made an account just to say that I am excited... So Excited!



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on August 10, 2018, 10:29:14 PM
    Alex, maybe you can tell how many time we need to wait? Two months with no big news, it is strange.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on August 10, 2018, 10:33:42 PM
    I'll (hopefully) write a blog post in the near-ish future; just a stretch of time working on stuff that I don't want to write about because spoilers, but currently working on something I probably could write about once I wrap it up. Sorry about that!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: arwan on August 15, 2018, 12:44:41 PM
    not going to lie i have been checking the site every day to every few days to see if there is a new blog post LOL. or if 0.9 has released. i stopped playing a little bit ago so not to burn out.. ever since i bought the game years ago now.. i have been waiting for the update that would contain outposts and colonizing.. and with how the game progresses every patch. i feel like its in a really good place for it to happen.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Darrow on August 15, 2018, 02:56:35 PM
    I've been here a long time, 7+ Years infact and i don't post much but I'm itching for a new release.
    I check back every couple of days to see any announcement for a new update.

    It's at the point where its too close to a new release to get heavily involved in a new campaign, but also seems too far away to not scratch the itch.

    Just curious what the delay in release is?
    Usually quite consistent Alex with a year-to-year major update.



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Grievous69 on August 15, 2018, 04:16:51 PM
    I don't want to sound like some kinda weirdo, but you could always play the missions.  I mean, if you're into that kind of thing.

    How dare you defile this holy place you sick freak... Get out of here or I'm calling the mods.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on August 15, 2018, 07:05:20 PM
    Just curious what the delay in release is?
    Usually quite consistent Alex with a year-to-year major update.

    It just boils down to there being more stuff in it, and all of the stuff needing the rest of the stuff to make sense gameplay-wise. Sort of like puzzle pieces that need to fit together and form at least a partial picture. Sorry about the delay, I wish I could make it sooner :)

    Ehh, if it hadnta been for Alex taking his sweet time, I woulda never played (going down the list in alphabetical not chronological order) Caves of Qud, Celeste, Conquest of Elysium, Cuphead, Dead Cells, EDF 4.1, Enter The Gungeon, Fictorum, Hollow Knight, Immortal Redneck (heh they made a game about me), JYDGE, Monolith, Mothergunship, STALKER, Subnautica, The Forest, The Witness, or Wizard of Legend.

    You're ... welcome?


    Title: Re: Umm yeah a little late for that
    Post by: BHunterSEAL on August 15, 2018, 09:17:26 PM
     
    It's at the point where its too close to a new release to get heavily involved in a new campaign, but also seems too far away to not scratch the itch.

    I don't want to sound like some kinda weirdo, but you could always play the missions.  I mean, if you're into that kind of thing.

    It wasn't so long ago that all you could play was missions.

    Fake edit: I can actually remember remember playing those missions from my dorm room. I'm now a fairly experienced professional and in a few weeks will be teaching college students. I'm also a lot fatter :(

    Real edit: I appear to have forgotten how to properly quote people in my old age.
    Part #2: I've tried several permutations of Insert Quote now and am truly embarrassed for myself.
    Part #3: fixed, wow.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: PCCL on August 16, 2018, 02:25:38 AM
    Oh man, I remember playing these missions in computer class in high school.

    I am now a law student and might be a lawyer by the time 1.0 comes out...

    This might be the game I have followed for the longest time...

    I regret nothing


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: NITROtbomb on August 19, 2018, 11:54:44 AM
    same here aha I remember being in my first year of Highschool and am now a professional performer traveling the world on Cruise ships, Lol 


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bribe Guntails on August 25, 2018, 07:52:31 AM
    What will happen to 'Trading' as it exists in 0.8.1? Will there be a purpose for those Organics, Transplutonics, and Harvested Organs for sale on the markets since such activities are now in the strategic domain of colonies?

    Could the player still have a direct hand in the economy; commanding a trade fleet on a faction's behalf and be the target of concerted pirate attacks?


    Title: Re: Umm yeah a little late for that
    Post by: Deshara on August 25, 2018, 08:28:07 AM
    Ehh, if it hadnta been for Alex taking his sweet time, I woulda never played (going down the list in alphabetical not chronological order) Caves of Qud, Celeste, Conquest of Elysium, Cuphead, Dead Cells, EDF 4.1, Enter The Gungeon, Fictorum, Hollow Knight, Immortal Redneck (heh they made a game about me), JYDGE, Monolith, Mothergunship, STALKER, Subnautica, The Forest, The Witness, or Wizard of Legend.

    You're ... welcome?

    the real question is... what's gonna happen to Network once you release 0.9..? Do they drop dead, or do all games vanish everywhere? Do we... need to be stockpiling ???


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: lapersonaoval on August 29, 2018, 05:57:52 PM
    alex, please,
    tell me cuando cuando cuando ???
    i'm going mad waiting for the new release !!! time goes so slowly without 0.9a ...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Grievous69 on August 29, 2018, 06:03:51 PM
    Can't speak for him but I'd say soon-ish like in a month or two. In case you aren't following him on twitter we had the last blog post two weeks ago about a major feature so now he's polishing UI and gameplay mechanics. After that it's just playtesting for a bit then we get 0.9. I understand it's hard to wait but the new version is very much worth it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: JJATH on August 30, 2018, 11:15:57 PM
    October would be the best choice if the update is almost complete. If not the end of the year if it is that far away. September would be asking too much if it's nowhere near done.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 02, 2018, 12:06:06 AM
    So how does the Micro Burn system work?  Can the ship (Odyssey) move anywhere like jets, or does it move the Odyssey forward only like Burn Drive?

    With the new burn, it looks like Odyssey can jump on a smaller ship and kill it before its friends can surround and cut-off the Odyssey's escape.  Not very useful for backpedaling (if Micro Burn can only move forward) while sniping capitals with lances, though.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 02, 2018, 05:28:42 AM
    tell me cuando cuando cuando ???

    Soon(tm) :)


    So how does the Micro Burn system work?  Can the ship (Odyssey) move anywhere like jets, or does it move the Odyssey forward only like Burn Drive?

    It's forward acceleration only, though the ship can still turn, so it's sort of like a very brief burn drive that still lets you maneuver a bit. There are also other changes to go with it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on September 02, 2018, 09:43:48 AM
    I get that it works differently but there seems to be more one-off mobility systems by the patch (though I guess Plasma Jets is also used on the TT Brawler). Couldn't Odyssey be worked around to use Plasma Jets instead?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on September 02, 2018, 09:53:14 AM
    I get that it works differently but there seems to be more one-off mobility systems by the patch (though I guess Plasma Jets is also used on the TT Brawler). Couldn't Odyssey be worked around to use Plasma Jets instead?

    Plasma Jets on a capital ship is hideously overpowered.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cycerin on September 02, 2018, 09:55:35 AM
    As long as it can't be used to reverse, it's fine. The movement is a bit too sudden for the ship's mass IMO, but it's a good take on burst jets-type systems. Although honestly I'd rather see it on a smaller ship than the Odyssey, like, if you were to make a destroyer-sized ship with the odyssey's mid-high tech level and slap it on that, that would be rad.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 02, 2018, 01:06:45 PM
    Currently, Odyssey has problems because it cannot duel any other capital in a fair fight (even other battlecruisers like Conquest, though that is almost a battleship now), and it has trouble killing smaller ships with short-ranged weapons without getting surrounded by other ships, thanks to AI's tendency to encircle and trap ships.  It cannot use fighters as well as Legion due to having less bays and it needs those fighters for support instead of seek-and-destroy.

    With Micro Burn, Odyssey might be able to quickly catch isolated and backpedaling small ships and blast them before its friends can entrap the Odyssey.  Also, Micro Burn might let Odyssey fly past Onslaught (before killing it from behind) without getting clobbered too badly.

    Currently, the only way Odyssey can compete somewhat with other capitals is to constantly backpedal and snipe with triple lances with support from Longbows or Longbow and Dagger.

    Plasma Jets would probably be excessive on Odyssey, allowing it to be relatively untouchable while it snipes with lances.  It is already kind of untouchable, but it is flimsy enough that it has no choice but to do this or die against things that other capitals can withstand.

    All Odyssey might need now is a bit more OP.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 02, 2018, 04:22:30 PM
    I get that it works differently but there seems to be more one-off mobility systems by the patch (though I guess Plasma Jets is also used on the TT Brawler). Couldn't Odyssey be worked around to use Plasma Jets instead?

    I'm not sure why more ship systems would be a bad thing, hmm. One could probably make a "more things to learn" argument but they're more on the content side of things than being new mechanics.

    Plus, I think more systems that make it easier to close in but don't nearly make it as much easier to get out are good for combat gameplay in general.


    Although honestly I'd rather see it on a smaller ship than the Odyssey, like, if you were to make a destroyer-sized ship with the odyssey's mid-high tech level and slap it on that, that would be rad.

    Funny, I was just thinking about that yesterday, what a high-tech destroyer using that as a system would look like. Great minds? :)

    (I also tried it out on the Tempest, just to see how it feels, and it was very underwhelming. Unsurprisingly, perhaps, it really drops off in usefulness on fast ships.)

    Renamed the system to "Plasma Burn", btw.


    Currently, the only way Odyssey can compete somewhat with other capitals is to constantly backpedal and snipe with triple lances with support from Longbows or Longbow and Dagger.

    One of the other changes was removing the 3-large-turret overlap; hopefully it'll be more battlecruiser-y now, or at least it'll have to sink-or-swim based on its merits as that.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dri on September 02, 2018, 05:06:57 PM
    Oh wow, so now it can't bring more than 1 large turret to bare on a target that isn't huge? You giveth and you taketh...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 02, 2018, 05:12:32 PM
    No no, the two turrets on the left side have their original arcs. The turret on the right now has a smaller arc so the triple-overlap in front is gone.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Grievous69 on September 02, 2018, 05:13:40 PM
    I know it's a dead meme at this point but, excuse me what the ***? The overlap is what made it special, now it's basically an oversized Aurora. I'm not saying it won't be fun to pilot but why bother getting a capital which costs so much when its firepower is even worse than before. And before it was still poo poo for a capital. Everyone agrees the ship is really OP starved and now most people will leave that right turret empty because it has no use. Broadside ships don't work in Starsector. Look how the Conquest is usually built. All assault on one side and pd and anti frigate on the other. Please don't make my favourite ship in the game an unviable abomination.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 02, 2018, 05:15:52 PM
    It seems Odyssey will be reduced to brawler as before, but with weakened 0.8.2 era defenses (and no extra OP to use the second bay it desperately needs), it probably would get crushed like a grape.

    I can see removing the turret overlap to kill lance sniper, but with no other changes beside Plasma Burn over HEF, it is probably dead on arrival against capitals not named Onslaught or itself.  I guess Odyssey will be reduced to hunter-killer against small ships, which Legion does well enough with fighters alone.

    @ Grievous69:  Actually, AI can use Conquest decently.  Because AI Onslaught is built suboptimally, AI Conquest is a match for it.  As for the Odyssey stuff, I feel your pain.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 02, 2018, 05:18:51 PM
    Broadside ships don't work in Starsector. Look how the Conquest is usually built. All assault on one side and pd and anti frigate on the other.

    You literally just described how they work :) I mean, they're not an ideal fit for every ship and so on, so no major argument, but they *do* work. And the turret overlap was more of an implementation hiccup; I don't remember at this point if it was intentional or not, but it was certainly not meant as a primary feature of the hull. If it was meant to focus frontal firepower, it wouldn't be laid out the way it is.

    Like I said, there are other changes as well, so I'm not sure anything much re: balance makes much sense to talk about without accounting for those.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Grievous69 on September 02, 2018, 05:22:40 PM
    Oh my bad then, I didn't realise there'll be even more changes.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 02, 2018, 05:27:23 PM
    You literally just described how they work :) I mean, they're not an ideal fit for every ship and so on, so no major argument, but they *do* work. And the turret overlap was more of an implementation hiccup; I don't remember at this point if it was intentional or not, but it was certainly not meant as a primary feature of the hull. If it was meant to focus frontal firepower, it wouldn't be laid out the way it is.
    Do you know what is funny?  Even the AI knew how to use triple lance sniper against a lone AI ship.  It would kite and perfectly line up with all three turrets and blast the enemy will all three lances perfectly.  It would even adjust its course to maintain the three turret overlap.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on September 02, 2018, 05:29:53 PM
    leave that right turret empty because it has no use.

    I'm not really disagreeing with you, but did you know the Guardian (Paladin in 0.9) PD can fire over other ships? I don't usually use Odysseys, but that seems like it could be worth the OP.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Grievous69 on September 02, 2018, 05:45:15 PM
    Wow I can't believe I don't remember that change. Guess we'll just wait and see what works best.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cycerin on September 02, 2018, 07:24:59 PM
    Like I said, there are other changes as well, so I'm not sure anything much re: balance makes much sense to talk about without accounting for those.

    You telling us there will be another changelog to feast upon soon?

    PS: another destroyer would srsly be rad, I think combat destroyers is one of the main content holes in vanilla. You've got a good point of origin with that idea. :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on September 02, 2018, 10:06:29 PM
    Like I said, there are other changes as well, so I'm not sure anything much re: balance makes much sense to talk about without accounting for those.
    Considering the removal of arc overlap, I assume that Odyssey is becoming more of a carrier now. I don't really like this direction, but I don't know if it's really going that way either.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on September 02, 2018, 10:30:17 PM
    It had still just two wings in the gif. Maybe it's just the flux stats that have been boosted.


    I don't know if this was mentioned already, but the IPD-AI could use some love, it's fairly useless, since none of the small weapons are useful as PD. Maybe it could increase their precision and turn rate?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 02, 2018, 11:18:14 PM
    You telling us there will be another changelog to feast upon soon?

    It's possible :)

    Considering the removal of arc overlap, I assume that Odyssey is becoming more of a carrier now.

    It is not!

    I don't know if this was mentioned already, but the IPD-AI could use some love, it's fairly useless, since none of the small weapons are useful as PD. Maybe it could increase their precision and turn rate?

    Yeah, it's been revamped :) Also renamed to "Fire Control AI"...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on September 03, 2018, 01:30:16 PM
    I'll be honest, I think the Plasma Burn looks silly. I mean I'm not expecting realism here and it looks fun to use but it looks really odd to see a ship at that size accelerate that quickly and then lose all of the momentum like it hit something.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on September 03, 2018, 03:38:37 PM
    So now we have Burn Drive, Maneuvering Jets, Plasma Jets, and Plasma Burn?  It feels almost unnecessary.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 03, 2018, 04:27:25 PM
    I'll be honest, I think the Plasma Burn looks silly. I mean I'm not expecting realism here and it looks fun to use but it looks really odd to see a ship at that size accelerate that quickly and then lose all of the momentum like it hit something.

    Fair enough. Maybe the one gif isn't conveying it fully. I tend to be pretty bothered by things that feel like they "break" the physics of the game, and this doesn't feel like it to me - it feels great to use. I also did tone the acceleration/deceleration curves down a bit, though.

    (Btw: for me it recalls an "Enterprise coming out of warp" feeling, and I'm pretty sure I've seen similar looking stuff in other sci-fi, though I can't right now recall where.)

    So now we have Burn Drive, Maneuvering Jets, Plasma Jets, and Plasma Burn?  It feels almost unnecessary.

    Also phase skimmer/teleporter, and to some extent phase cloak and temporal shell. There's a lot of mobility systems in the game, because mobility is important, fun, and there are so many ways to go about it.

    Buuut, I'm not really sure what you mean, so maybe I'm missing an angle on this.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 03, 2018, 05:21:24 PM
    Plasma Burn does not seem like a total copy.  At least the shield stays up.  Based on the animated image, I have no problem with it so far.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dri on September 03, 2018, 05:22:41 PM
    We need more built-in and unique weapons like the Onslaught's Thermal Pulse Cannons. Those are tremendously fun and make the hull quite a bit more standout.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on September 03, 2018, 05:31:52 PM
    Plasma Burn does not seem like a total copy.  At least the shield stays up.  Based on the animated image, I have no problem with it so far.
    Mmm, didn't notice that.  Suppose so.

    We need more built-in and unique weapons like the Onslaught's Thermal Pulse Cannons. Those are tremendously fun and make the hull quite a bit more standout.
    Agree, unique and built-in weapons can make the world feel a bit more lived-in, not everything is modular.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on September 03, 2018, 07:12:40 PM
    Plasma Burn does not seem like a total copy.  At least the shield stays up.  Based on the animated image, I have no problem with it so far.
    It makes Odyssey look like an oversized Aurora, though I suspect it might not outclass Aurora at rapid insertion. Especially since forward boost for a broadside ships isn't very convenient...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 03, 2018, 08:40:32 PM
    It makes Odyssey look like an oversized Aurora, though I suspect it might not outclass Aurora at rapid insertion. Especially since forward boost for a broadside ships isn't very convenient...
    Odyssey has been Aurora's big brother for most if not all of Starsector's past history.  Both used to have High Energy Focus, soon both will have mobility systems.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on September 03, 2018, 10:22:34 PM
    Since you seem to work on a lot of smaller not-high-priority stuff, Alex, let me just mention the enlarged pictures (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=9346.0) idea again :)


    Btw., I think the plasma burn looks nice. I think a concern people have is that too many similar ship systems might be introduced. A distinct system for each ship is good, but similar systems make matters confusing. For example, it would be bad to have fast missile racks, quick reloading missile racks and a missile rack enhancer.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 03, 2018, 10:27:03 PM
    Since you seem to work on a lot of smaller not-high-priority stuff, Alex, let me just mention the enlarged pictures (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=9346.0) idea again :)

    Ahh, sorry! The newer illustrations are at the size they're displayed at (in significant part for loading/vram reasons), and we'll probably convert the existing ones at some point, too.

    Btw., I think the plasma burn looks nice. I think a concern people have is that too many similar ship systems might be introduced. A distinct system for each ship is good, but similar systems make matters confusing. For example, it would be bad to have fast missile racks, quick reloading missile racks and a missile rack enhancer.

    Ah, yeah, that makes sense.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on September 04, 2018, 01:23:41 AM
    I think the Odyssey having a mobility system is just par for the course in regards to the High Tech doctrine. It does look interesting, to say the least. I remember pooh-poohing the Aurora ship system change prior to 0.8 because I wanted a high tech ship-of-the-line but Plasma Jets made the Aurora go from mediocre to near-broken. I'm also interested in what other changes it got. If it is indeed a Battlecruiser, part of me hopes that it gets something akin to what the Conquest got with its Heavy Weapons hull mod (not identical but something that makes it unique).

    I'm also secretly hoping for another High Tech destroyer, maybe another small Energy weapon that deals hard flux, and a [REDACTED] Capital ship of some sort...if we're posting wish lists. :)

    (P.S. Did the Terminator Drone get changed, altered, or is that a new option? Looks like two drones with a PD Laser and IR Pulse.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 04, 2018, 01:42:34 AM
    I'm also secretly hoping for another High Tech destroyer, maybe another small Energy weapon that deals hard flux, and a [REDACTED] Capital ship of some sort...if we're posting wish lists. :)

    Hmmm! (One, possibly two out of three. Which ones? I'll never tell!)

    (P.S. Did the Terminator Drone get changed, altered, or is that a new option? Looks like two drones with a PD Laser and IR Pulse.)

    Yeah, it got changed. 2 in a wing, no shields, a bit more sturdy, PD + IR Pulse, and the "Terminator Core" built-in hullmod that gives a lot of bonuses that generally make it make it live up to its name against fighters. With PD taken care of, the Tempest itself now has High Energy Focus.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 04, 2018, 01:43:25 AM
    Hopefully a damage boost to the large mounts, or range increase to small mounts so that they can compliment the heavy mounts.  Without three mount overlap and nothing else, Odyssey's firepower will be lacking.  If no OP boost, maybe OP discount hullmod like Conquest has too.

    Odyssey with mobility system is probably good.  Despite 80 base speed alone, Odyssey is not fast (and small) enough for hit-and-run with short-ranged weapons.  All it can do with 80 speed is constantly backpedal and snipe at enemies with three Tachyon Lances (and four Tactical Lasers).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on September 04, 2018, 02:09:53 AM
    I'm also secretly hoping for another High Tech destroyer, maybe another small Energy weapon that deals hard flux, and a [REDACTED] Capital ship of some sort...if we're posting wish lists. :)

    Hmmm! (One, possibly two out of three. Which ones? I'll never tell!)

    (P.S. Did the Terminator Drone get changed, altered, or is that a new option? Looks like two drones with a PD Laser and IR Pulse.)


    Yeah, it got changed. 2 in a wing, no shields, a bit more sturdy, PD + IR Pulse, and the "Terminator Core" built-in hullmod that gives a lot of bonuses that generally make it make it live up to its name against fighters. With PD taken care of, the Tempest itself now has High Energy Focus.

    Very interesting on both replies! If I were a betting man, I'd wager which "one" it is, but I have a pretty good guess what #2 is, too...

    Anti-fighter and HEF, eh? Again, the Tempest has been consistently one of the best generalist frigates out there for awhile and I don't see that changing anytime soon. SO Blaster with HEF...that's just evil.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on September 04, 2018, 02:29:03 AM
    Hmmm! (One, possibly two out of three. Which ones? I'll never tell!)

    Except, IIRC, you already confirmed one of those three, and mentioned you were thinking of doing another. ;)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on September 04, 2018, 03:21:26 AM
    I'd like to add that I do not agree with the complaint about the game having too many systems. As long as they are interesting to play with, unique enough and complement the ship well I don't see a problem.

    Unrelated but I'd love to see one day a gamemode or a mod in which a ship could equip and use multiple systems.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on September 04, 2018, 08:31:11 AM
    I think a concern people have is that too many similar ship systems might be introduced. A distinct system for each ship is good, but similar systems make matters confusing. For example, it would be bad to have fast missile racks, quick reloading missile racks and a missile rack enhancer.

    Essentially this. Plasma Jets and Plasma Burn are both high tech engine-based mobility systems that apparently use plasma. And while Plasma Burn excels in its own way, in general it feels like a discount version of Plasma Jets. This is fine across tech levels (e.g. Active Flares vs Normal Flares, or even Plasma Jets vs Maneuvering Jets) but in the same tech level feels odd. It gives the feeling (as others have alluded to) that Odyssey wants to have Plasma Jets, but can't because Plasma Jets is too powerful; so it gets a nerfed version of it instead. Overall it feels gamey.

    My preference would be to nerf th Odyssey's baseline mobility and give it Plasma Jets instead. Of course this is all thematic so take of it as you will.

    RE: the dropping out of Warp feel. I don't really get that from the gif... to get that feel IMO Plasma Burn needs to have a much longer distance travelled. In fact that might be an idea to make it less of a discount Plasma Jets, maybe nerf it to 1 charge at a time only.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 04, 2018, 12:20:58 PM
    I would not want Odyssey to lose base speed unless it got strong enough to slug it out with any other capital in a slugging match.  Odyssey is the only capital warship that cannot do that.  (Even Conquest and maybe Legion can stomp Odyssey into the ground without much of a sweat, let alone a enemy battleship.)  Some might think its high speed (for its size) can let it act as hunter-killer and bully smaller ships, but that is not really possible with short-ranged weapons due to how the AI fights.  You chase down one, and several more surround and attack Odyssey, and 80-something speed is still slower than smaller ships' speed, meaning Odyssey cannot escape quickly enough if things go south fast.

    Maybe Plasma Burn will let Odyssey catch and kill small things before its friends have the time to surround and attack Odyssey.

    Plasma Jets could be nice, but it would probably make it too untouchable, which is bad if lance sniping remains viable or if Odyssey gets stronger and tougher.  Say... if Odyssey has a permanent +50% damage or so hullmod, then lance sniping will probably remain viable, and Odyssey dancing in-and-out easily while picking off ships one at a time would be cheesy, as in encouraged too much.

    Currently, lance sniping while constantly kiting or backpedaling is the way to go with Odyssey.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Deshara on September 04, 2018, 04:00:40 PM
    I think a concern people have is that too many similar ship systems might be introduced. A distinct system for each ship is good, but similar systems make matters confusing. For example, it would be bad to have fast missile racks, quick reloading missile racks and a missile rack enhancer.

    Essentially this. Plasma Jets and Plasma Burn are both high tech engine-based mobility systems that apparently use plasma. And while Plasma Burn excels in its own way, in general it feels like a discount version of Plasma Jets. This is fine across tech levels (e.g. Active Flares vs Normal Flares, or even Plasma Jets vs Maneuvering Jets) but in the same tech level feels odd. It gives the feeling (as others have alluded to) that Odyssey wants to have Plasma Jets, but can't because Plasma Jets is too powerful; so it gets a nerfed version of it instead. Overall it feels gamey.

    My preference would be to nerf th Odyssey's baseline mobility and give it Plasma Jets instead. Of course this is all thematic so take of it as you will.

    RE: the dropping out of Warp feel. I don't really get that from the gif... to get that feel IMO Plasma Burn needs to have a much longer distance travelled. In fact that might be an idea to make it less of a discount Plasma Jets, maybe nerf it to 1 charge at a time only.

    too many narrow mechanical distinctions to fit into a player's head. They feel expected to memorize them all but because they have no external visual distinction (like guns do) it's impossible to judge other than rote memorization of ships they'll mostly not have used much if ever, which is a bad combo.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 04, 2018, 04:19:30 PM
    Essentially this. Plasma Jets and Plasma Burn are both high tech engine-based mobility systems that apparently use plasma. And while Plasma Burn excels in its own way, in general it feels like a discount version of Plasma Jets. This is fine across tech levels (e.g. Active Flares vs Normal Flares, or even Plasma Jets vs Maneuvering Jets) but in the same tech level feels odd. It gives the feeling (as others have alluded to) that Odyssey wants to have Plasma Jets, but can't because Plasma Jets is too powerful; so it gets a nerfed version of it instead. Overall it feels gamey.

    Thank you for elaborating! I can see where you're coming from. To me, this is more about having some consistency/continuity - a "look, both high-tech engine boosting systems use plasma! it makes sense!" kind of thing. But, yeah, I can also see your point.

    In fact that might be an idea to make it less of a discount Plasma Jets, maybe nerf it to 1 charge at a time only.

    Hmm, plasma jets don't have charges, so that'd make it more similar.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bribe Guntails on September 04, 2018, 09:25:23 PM
    My take on the Plasma Burn ability is that it lacks enough visual distinction and function.
    Considering that the ship will rapidly and improbably accelerate and decelerate (unlike Burn Drive), it will look very videogamey when only the main engines are part of the visual design.
    Some Drive Field effects or other space-bending visuals would complete the ability. A recolored Damper Field effect could do the job.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on September 05, 2018, 01:34:18 AM
    I disagree. The uniquely colored trails, the very evident speed boost and the fact that is restricted to high tech ships is enough to differentiate it. At most I'd wager that a more unique thrust sound could be helpful.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Spess Mahren on September 05, 2018, 02:39:23 AM
    So with the upcoming randomly generated pirate bases will the static pirate holdings be removed? I'm hoping the pather's also get randomly generated bases because I rarely see them since I believe they only have two static holdings at the moment.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 05, 2018, 12:12:12 PM
    Speaking of Luddic Path, their two planets look ripe for sat bombing and wipe that faction off the map.  They are the weakest link.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Linnis on September 05, 2018, 08:07:48 PM
    Speaking on thematic matters. Yes the odessy has obsurdly small engines compared to other ships. Maybe change the engine effect compeltly and give the discription of spechially advanced engines or something.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on September 06, 2018, 08:34:29 AM
    While we're on the subject of polishing...

    Prometheus still uses a drone system instead of drone wings like every other ship that previously used drones.

    Also given Expanded Magazines has nothing to do with Ballistics anymore maybe it should have a different icon and be called Expanded Capacitors or something instead. Or maybe it should stop existing since it just doesn't affect that many weapons and feels more like an OP tax than anything.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: mkire on September 06, 2018, 09:46:43 AM
    While we're on the subject of polishing...

    Prometheus still uses a drone system instead of drone wings like every other ship that previously used drones.

    Also given Expanded Magazines has nothing to do with Ballistics anymore maybe it should have a different icon and be called Expanded Capacitors or something instead. Or maybe it should stop existing since it just doesn't affect that many weapons and feels more like an OP tax than anything.
    i still find it useful for the weapons that do use it (the burst pd lasers are a prime example),


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 06, 2018, 11:12:43 AM
    Expanded Magazines feels like a relic from a bygone era and would not mind seeing it removed.  It feels required on Onslaught (for TPCs) and the few other ships that use Autopulse Laser.  Occasionally handy for AM Blaster if twenty shots is not enough, although I prefer if ammo for that weapon was done away with.  Twenty shots is sometimes enough before CR decays, and AM Blaster is very expensive already by itself.

    Autopulse Laser looks cheap at 20 OP, until you plug Expanded Magazines in to make it more functional, then its actual OP cost can vary, maybe closer to the (overpriced) plasma cannon.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on September 06, 2018, 02:30:41 PM
    I kinda like it, because it can create synergy effects, like combining Autopulse and Burst PD. Same is true for Advanced Optics. It's fun to consider synergies during refit, I'd rather have more than less.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: xenoargh on September 06, 2018, 04:26:59 PM
    I just made it affect refire rates (raises alpha DPS, but costs more Flux).  Seemed like the simplest way to make it relevant.  As it is, it'd probably be best if it went down in costs, given the marginal use-cases.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Retry on September 06, 2018, 05:18:06 PM
    Expanded Magazines feels like a relic from a bygone era and would not mind seeing it removed.  It feels required on Onslaught (for TPCs) and the few other ships that use Autopulse Laser.  Occasionally handy for AM Blaster if twenty shots is not enough, although I prefer if ammo for that weapon was done away with.  Twenty shots is sometimes enough before CR decays, and AM Blaster is very expensive already by itself.

    Autopulse Laser looks cheap at 20 OP, until you plug Expanded Magazines in to make it more functional, then its actual OP cost can vary, maybe closer to the (overpriced) plasma cannon.


    If it increased burst size from burst-firing weapons (Thumper, Light/Heavy Needlers), that could give an extra purpose for Expanded Mags (if the reload rate was increased to compensate, so the DPS remains the same but burst damage becomes better).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 06, 2018, 05:20:20 PM
    I had no problem with Expanded Magazine gaining new life if it provided another benefit.  Increased burst size, faster clip recharge, whatever.

    Although in case of increased burst size and reload times, I probably would prefer the more continuous option.  Too long reload time has a downside too despite Starsector favoring burst weapons to the point that AM Blaster is more effective despite having worse stats than IR Pulse Laser on paper.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on September 06, 2018, 06:42:49 PM
    Yeah, longer burst would hurt Needlers in any situations where enemy can make said burst a wasted one. Kinetics work best when your fire flows as constant stream mixed with HE, otherwise enemy can armor tank your kinetic burst then shield tank your HE separately. Longer burst would also improve efficiency of avoidance/blocking with phase skimmer/ fortress shield/ damper field/ etc by enemy.

    Needlers are vulnerable to armor tanking as is (even if AI doesn't fully exploit that fact), I wouldn't pay OP tax to make situation worse.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 06, 2018, 06:51:19 PM
    Not just that, but also flux load.  Part of the reason why a Needler and Phase Lance combo can be dangerous is the attacker can max flux very fast and can then be cherry tapped on shields for an easy overload.  Also part of the reason why plasma cannon is generally impractical to use.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on September 06, 2018, 11:39:13 PM
    Burst kinetics have to be backed up by something that forces the AI to put up shields, but that doesn't necessarily have to be HE; EMP weapons work just as well. A Falcon or Eagle with Heavy Needlers and an Ion Beam can make decent use of the burst, as can a Medusa with Light Needlers and Ion Cannons.

    I think Expanded Magazines is fine. It encourages mounting more than one magazine-style weapon to get the most out of the bonus, which can lead to more interesting builds. A Sunder with 1 Autopulse and 2 Ion Pulsers, a Paragon with 4 Antimatter Blasters and 2 Autopulse on the front, that sort of thing.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Histidine on September 07, 2018, 12:13:29 PM
    Didn't see it in the changelog, so quick question: are there API methods to bring up the "name your faction" dialog screen, and to check if the player has already gone through it at least once?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: borisdm on September 07, 2018, 01:29:33 PM
    Hello How do i get my hands on 0.9a??


    Thanx


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Deshara on September 07, 2018, 04:14:39 PM
    wait until it comes out like the rest of us


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 07, 2018, 04:50:51 PM
    Didn't see it in the changelog, so quick question: are there API methods to bring up the "name your faction" dialog screen, and to check if the player has already gone through it at least once?

    No and yes (via Misc.isPlayerFactionSetUp()) - is the former an issue for Nex? The faction config dialog comes up when 1) you colonize your first planet, and 2) when you click on the faction name in the trade/colony info screen.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Histidine on September 07, 2018, 04:56:53 PM
    Didn't see it in the changelog, so quick question: are there API methods to bring up the "name your faction" dialog screen, and to check if the player has already gone through it at least once?

    No and yes (via Misc.isPlayerFactionSetUp()) - is the former an issue for Nex? The faction config dialog comes up when 1) you colonize your first planet, and 2) when you click on the faction name in the trade/colony info screen.
    Hmm, it's a bit awkward if the player were to get their first market by conquering an existing one, and then see it using the default faction name (especially if it's still "Your"). It's not so bad if they can fix the problem from a market screen, although that doesn't sound like the most visible feature.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 07, 2018, 05:19:54 PM
    Let me make a note. It *is* possible to set it to something else in code, btw - i.e. all the faction setup the dialog does can be done with mod-accessible calls, afaik.

    (As far as its visibility, it tells you how to get to it the first time it shows up, so hopefully that'll help. Plus the name glows on mouseover, and there's a similar set of interactions for naming/renaming a colony, which might help with that as well.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ulzgoroth on September 07, 2018, 07:10:25 PM
    So in the newest blog update, it looks like you decided that the player shouldn't be encouraged to hold off on salvaging a find for lack of ships or resources, but should be for lack of skill investment?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 07, 2018, 07:31:22 PM
    Hmm - I did touch on this in the blog post, but maybe not in enough detail.

    Maxing out the salvaging skill doesn't take long - you can do it by level 4, and fairly quickly even if you don't decide to do it right away (which also implies you're probably not going salvaging right away) - so it's an acceptable thing to wait for. It's also a one-time wait, if it's a wait at all, since you're likely to get to this point during your first salvaging expedition.

    Or, you can decide not to get it at all and put your points elsewhere, in which case you don't need to wait for it.

    Welcome to the forum, by the way!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ulzgoroth on September 07, 2018, 08:31:57 PM
    It was clearly touched on, but for what it's worth I thought the value judgement there was implicit more than explicit.


    Not sure why I didn't register here ages ago, considering I got into the game back in 2012.  The colony building coming up in 0.9 is the feature I've always been most excited about all along.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: greyxenon on September 10, 2018, 10:05:42 PM
    So... when's this coming out?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Midnight Kitsune on September 11, 2018, 12:37:44 AM
    So... when's this coming out?
    Soon™


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Eashua on September 13, 2018, 09:43:06 PM
    Almost frothing at the mouth haha.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Spess Mahren on September 17, 2018, 04:01:59 AM
    Will 0.9a get rid of the last vestiges of D mod ships that can't be fully restored? I keep noticing a type of D mod sunder that has the large mount downgraded to a medium and having to check the stats of all my d mod ships to make sure they are fully restore-able before I salvage them is annoying.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 17, 2018, 04:13:13 AM
    Will 0.9a get rid of the last vestiges of D mod ships that can't be fully restored? I keep noticing a type of D mod sunder that has the large mount downgraded to a medium and having to check the stats of all my d mod ships to make sure they are fully restore-able before I salvage them is annoying.

    Unless I'm missing/forgetting something, it ought to clean all that up, yes.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Snoowarc on September 17, 2018, 06:56:48 PM
    am legit dying here

    I need to have my fix! and get my conquest flagship again :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on September 19, 2018, 02:30:28 PM
    I have an almost unfounded hope and desire that the Conquest's front large launchers get switched with the side medium launchers just for the sake of super-cool-looking Squall deployment. At the very least i hope Squalls track just a bit better (and not narrowly missing mostly everything) in 0.9a given:

    Quote
    Greatly improved missile tracking


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 19, 2018, 07:00:00 PM
    I like where the front launchers are for easy Locust spam.  Dual Locusts is murder against a wide variety of targets.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Arkiuz on September 21, 2018, 04:22:56 PM
    Missiles are my bread and butter and the only thing stopping me from being known as a Missile Platform rather than a ship is the limitations on hardpoints.

    Any chance we'll see some form of customization that'll let me become a missile man?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cik on September 22, 2018, 06:10:16 AM
    bring back original griffon

    also we are going to need at least an additional missile destroyer (buffalo doesn't count as it sucks.. or at least make it better) converted merchantmen are all well and good but to truly embrace the MMM destiny we will need some heavier ordnance.

    maybe make LRMs good or something (though what that would take is hard to say, they are easy to break ATM because the sensor layer is too basic to permit true long range fire without it being either useless or way too strong)

    but yes, more missiles please.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 22, 2018, 02:24:02 PM
    Quote
    bring back original griffon
    While fun, that wrecked Gryphon after one fight.  Pure D&D-style nova class in Starsector if there was one.

    Honestly, I like to see Gryphon get better defenses; it is too flimsy to be practical.  Better hull and flux stats, and make Expanded Missile Racks hullmod builtin (or add more OP).  Failing that, bring back classic Aurora with large missile mount.  Aurora used to be high-tech Gryphon with better stats but no missile forge system (but it did not need it).  Classic Aurora with missiles was almost on par with Dominator.

    Quote
    also we are going to need at least an additional missile destroyer (buffalo doesn't count as it sucks.. or at least make it better)
    Shrike might pass as one if those two medium mounts are synergies.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on September 22, 2018, 02:51:52 PM
    also we are going to need at least an additional missile destroyer (buffalo doesn't count as it sucks.. or at least make it better) converted merchantmen are all well and good but to truly embrace the MMM destiny we will need some heavier ordnance.

    Buffalo is decent in terms of deployment cost to killing power ratio. The only problem - it's not sufficiently willing to commit to all-out-sabot spam strategy, which is the only thing it's good for.
    Still, skill-less auto-piloted Paragon loses to less than it's worth of deployment points in sabot+swarmer+converted hangar talon Buffalos. And same equation seems to hold true for most other cruisers/capitals. I suppose some dedicated counter builds are possible, but against conventional builds Buffalos win decisively.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on September 22, 2018, 04:06:34 PM
    I think thats more because sabots (and maybe talons) are a bit too strong and less because buffalos are any good.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on September 22, 2018, 04:11:31 PM
    Missiles are my bread and butter and the only thing stopping me from being known as a Missile Platform rather than a ship is the limitations on hardpoints.

    Any chance we'll see some form of customization that'll let me become a missile man?

    Sorry, I'm afraid not :) Missiles don't generally build up flux - and often have highly limited ammo - so they are near impossible to balance if they could be mass-installed on a ship. That goes double if they could be installed on *any* ship, not one specifically meant for it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shrugger on September 22, 2018, 05:02:02 PM
    I guess you could make do with taking a missile-focused ship and not installing any non-missile weapons, spending your OP on the best missiles and hull mods instead?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on September 22, 2018, 05:49:45 PM
    I think thats more because sabots (and maybe talons) are a bit too strong and less because buffalos are any good.

    Yeah, but what platform can pack as much per DP? It's 1 med missile + 3 small missile + 2 Tac lasers + Talon wing (slow replenish) per 4 DP, and 2 Vulcans to not get swatted by missiles right away. No armor or shields, but you can do without them if you suppress enemy with sabots.
    Sabots are strong, but also very limited. For normal ships going Sabot heavy means crippling long term play. But Buffalos have no long term play to speak of, so for them it's not an important drawback.

    Anyway, player can't use such attrition tactics in campaign. Plus they are definitely not fuel-cheap, only supply-cheap. But in a narrow sense, Buffalos are worth their DP cost alright, if correctly built.
    Pirates running around with Buffalo stampedes could be fun though :) .


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on September 22, 2018, 08:11:38 PM
    If you put any other missile in those slots, then the ships is terrible. This implies that 12 OP of missiles/4 dp is not good, it's just that stacking sabots is OP. I think the ship need a lot of help to be useful, especially in the campaign.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on September 22, 2018, 09:30:09 PM
    If you put any other missile in those slots, then the ships is terrible. This implies that 12 OP of missiles/4 dp is not good, it's just that stacking sabots is OP. I think the ship need a lot of help to be useful, especially in the campaign.

    Any reasonable variant has to be able to handle both shield and armor, and shield is the more important part. Buffalo has no other options than medium Sabots for shields, so it's an obvious pick.

    Small Sabot - 3000 (x3, 4 OP, 750 per OP)
    Medium Sabot - 12000 (x12, 10 OP, 1200 per OP)

    Clearly, taking small Sabots + whatever in medium slot is non-viable.
    And even if Sabots were to be nerfed, there is just no alternative option. There is no small energy kinetics and Longbows/Broadswords are both too OP-expensive and unsustainable with low replenishment rate. And just plain not enough on their own.





    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on September 22, 2018, 10:07:57 PM
    This is the same state the Odyssey was in, with only one viable load out, that depends on a particularly strong weapon, and is of questionable value anyway. I think the complaints about the odyssey were valid and Alex also must have since he is changing it.

    Anyway, player can't use such attrition tactics in campaign. Plus they are definitely not fuel-cheap, only supply-cheap. But in a narrow sense, Buffalos are worth their DP cost alright, if correctly built.
    So what you're saying is that the Buffalo needs buffs to be useful to the player in the campaign. If it's worth its dp cost but only to the AI (or in non-campaign scenarios) with a very specific load out , what's the point? The AI doesn't care about supplies, and doesn't use the right load out or deploy them in large numbers, unless it just exists to be slaughtered and the player should never use it, which is not fun/good balance IMO.



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on September 22, 2018, 10:41:08 PM
    Quote
    unless it just exists to be slaughtered and the player should never use it, which is not fun/good balance IMO.
    Only if both sides need to be balanced.  If you need wimps that level 1 characters can fight and win, then such obviously inferior options serve their purpose.  Pirates are the rats, goblins, and kobolds in space that players get to kill before they become strong enough to safely take on dragons and kings.

    Buffalo 2 has struck me as an obviously inferior ship for pirates to use, much like Thumper for weapons.  (Pre-0.8 Thumper was so bad that empty mount was a better option.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cik on September 23, 2018, 02:46:39 AM
    ultimately it could be made useful for players as long as it was made suitably cheap to deploy and recover.

    for AI, anything can be good as long as it has sufficient mass.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Voyager I on September 23, 2018, 03:55:50 AM
    Quote
    unless it just exists to be slaughtered and the player should never use it, which is not fun/good balance IMO.
    Only if both sides need to be balanced.  If you need wimps that level 1 characters can fight and win, then such obviously inferior options serve their purpose.  Pirates are the rats, goblins, and kobolds in space that players get to kill before they become strong enough to safely take on dragons and kings.

    Buffalo 2 has struck me as an obviously inferior ship for pirates to use, much like Thumper for weapons.  (Pre-0.8 Thumper was so bad that empty mount was a better option.)

    Yeah basically the whole purpose of Pirate ships is to be garbage fodder for new characters to farm.  I don't think there's a single P ship you would ever want in your fleet unless you were leaning really hard into a clunker run, but their existence serves a necessary role for the game.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ali on September 23, 2018, 01:40:03 PM
    Will all the currently empty skill slots on character screen get filled? i think there's 2 missing from leadership, 4 from tech and 5 from industry...

    Any plans to add more hull mods please!!??  ( With positive effects only!! )

    Would love to see a hull modd that can be installed to remove fighter bays in place for boost such as more flux capacity or across the board stat boost.. ( i know that's a bit contradictory to above comment ;p )

    Also some more non-combat hullmods? So can further boost salvage, cargo vessel's etc...

    Can't wait for release!!!!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Arkiuz on September 23, 2018, 07:44:45 PM
    Missiles are my bread and butter and the only thing stopping me from being known as a Missile Platform rather than a ship is the limitations on hardpoints.

    Any chance we'll see some form of customization that'll let me become a missile man?

    Sorry, I'm afraid not :) Missiles don't generally build up flux - and often have highly limited ammo - so they are near impossible to balance if they could be mass-installed on a ship. That goes double if they could be installed on *any* ship, not one specifically meant for it.

    Heck your balance!  Gimme explosions!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Linnis on September 23, 2018, 08:55:21 PM
    Well there could be a hull mod with something like increase missile capacity by 500% but each missile weapon require 3× the op cost.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ranakastrasz on September 23, 2018, 09:39:04 PM
    Missiles are my bread and butter and the only thing stopping me from being known as a Missile Platform rather than a ship is the limitations on hardpoints.

    Any chance we'll see some form of customization that'll let me become a missile man?

    Sorry, I'm afraid not :) Missiles don't generally build up flux - and often have highly limited ammo - so they are near impossible to balance if they could be mass-installed on a ship. That goes double if they could be installed on *any* ship, not one specifically meant for it.

    Heck your balance!  Gimme explosions!

    This Complete overhaul certainly makes missiles quite common. It pretty much goes with the idea that missiles and fighters are infinite resources like all other weapons, alters PD to match, and it didn't fundamentally break anything.
    https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=13183.0

    That said, As the game is vanilla wise, Missiles are powerful but run out fast, so really aren't like normal weapons at all.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Arkiuz on September 24, 2018, 04:59:11 AM
    I know, I just appreciate the art and programming that goes into these little things.  When you catch a fast moving guy through a shower of flak with a torpedo?  Beautiful.  Poetry in motion.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: UUolf on October 06, 2018, 04:30:34 PM
    I am beyond hyped for the release of this patch - it will extend gameplay massively.
    Does anyone know a release date or a general time it will be put through?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Arkiuz on October 06, 2018, 04:32:42 PM
    I am beyond hyped for the release of this patch - it will extend gameplay massively.
    Does anyone know a release date or a general time it will be put through?
    There's never a set time.  When it happens, it happens.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: UUolf on October 06, 2018, 04:51:09 PM
    (https://i.imgur.com/Ucj922u.gif)

    Fair enough.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dri on October 06, 2018, 05:48:05 PM
    I am wondering why we haven't gotten a Patch Notes update, though. Been like 5 months since the last update...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TheDTYP on October 06, 2018, 07:03:40 PM
    I'm under the impression its coming within a few weeks, but if anyone wants to tell me otherwise so I don't get my hopes up, I welcome that, too.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cik on October 06, 2018, 07:16:01 PM
    TONIGHT'S THE NIGHT


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Harabeck on October 07, 2018, 03:06:36 AM
    TONIGHT'S THE NIGHT

    Says who? You can't just say stuff like that and get my hopes up.  :'(


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: YesHello on October 07, 2018, 04:06:01 AM
    TONIGHT'S THE NIGHT

    Says who? You can't just say stuff like that and get my hopes up.  :'(
    Indeed.  Truly dreadful behavior, since I have been waiting for this update since I bought the game 5-6 years ago.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 10, 2018, 01:28:13 PM
    I just read the post with Converted Hangar changes, with the penalties being changed to double fighter OP cost.  That looks fun, although that probably makes Loadout Design 3 even more desirable than it already is.  (I already consider Converted Hangar too costly without +10% OP.)  Currently, I only use it to put Talons or Claws on my ships, due to the refit penalties and inability to put Expanded Deck Crew.  With the change, other fighters, including bombers, may be handy.  Well, maybe depending how inconvenient lack of Helmsmanship 3 is.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on October 10, 2018, 01:32:12 PM
    Did anything about Talons change? They were pretty much no-brainer for converted hangar and seem to have become even more so.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 10, 2018, 02:01:27 PM
    Talons for Converted Hangar are no-brainer for me mostly because of refit time.  Other fighters aside from Claws take too long to replace with the refit penalties and lack of Deck Crew hullmod, and bombers do not rapid-refit.  With the changes in 0.9, I might rip-out more weapons to use the other fighters (provided I get used to no Helmsmanship 3).

    For some ships, I use Talons mostly as a lure to flush out frigates that would otherwise mob my ship if I stick my ship too far away from the wall far enough to find them.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on October 10, 2018, 02:55:40 PM
    TONIGHT'S THE NIGHT

    Says who? You can't just say stuff like that and get my hopes up.  :'(
    Indeed.  Truly dreadful behavior, since I have been waiting for this update since I bought the game 5-6 years ago.


    I'll close this thread for now, so no one gets his hope uf for nothing:)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 20, 2018, 08:46:21 PM
    Updated the notes! Still a few modding-related things to do, and still doing some testing, but this is the vast bulk of the stuff.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Soren on October 20, 2018, 09:06:42 PM
    That's the birthday present I wanted.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 20, 2018, 09:13:50 PM
    Hah - happy birthday :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Drone_Fragger on October 20, 2018, 09:26:35 PM
    s o o n (tm)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: RickyRio on October 20, 2018, 09:40:10 PM
    • Militarized Subsystems:
      • Removes Civilian-grade Hull's penalties
      • Adds +1 burn
      • Increased crew requirements
      • -50% supplies to deploy
      • Can only install on ships with Civilian-grade Hull

    awesome that this was added, I've wanted a way to have military sensor profile haulers/tankers since I started playing starsector!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on October 20, 2018, 09:47:46 PM
    Well, there goes the Warthog.  I watched it swirl around the toilet for a little while before getting sucked in.  From 9 Light Mortars on 3 craft to 4 Light Mortars on 2 craft, with further nerfs in effectiveness beyond the first few shots.  Meh.

    Of course, the rest of it is quite nice. :) Especially looking forward to the Apogee changes.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embercloud on October 20, 2018, 09:53:07 PM
    Can’t wait.
    I have a problem with known hullmods not spawning as a item, however. I mean, they could always be used for a extra source if income.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: HELMUT on October 20, 2018, 10:07:04 PM
    So many things, so many new cool things. Okay, just this question for this evening :

    Quote
    Doom: new ship system, "Mine Strike", spawns high-damage, high-delay proximity fuse mines
    Huge buff overall
    Harbinger: system changed to Quantum Disruptor
    Afflictor: system changed to Entropy Amplifier

    What will happen to the Doom's old Interdictor Array? With the new Mine Strike system, and the two other phase ships system swap, i kinda expected the Shade to inherit it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 20, 2018, 10:16:05 PM
    awesome that this was added, I've wanted a way to have military sensor profile haulers/tankers since I started playing starsector!

    Well, you could have Insulated Engines do the job already, but that wouldn't cover sensor strength.

    Well, there goes the Warthog.  I watched it swirl around the toilet for a little while before getting sucked in.  From 9 Light Mortars on 3 craft to 4 Light Mortars on 2 craft, with further nerfs in effectiveness beyond the first few shots.  Meh.

    Let's just say that it was *that* overpowered to begin with. There are still aspects where it's not much worse than before - for example, the Decoy Flares are qualitative, and having two vs three fighters launching then isn't a huge deal - but yeah, it's offensive potential needed to go down. Basically, it can do HE damage, and due to being a fighter, it can avoid the shields on many ships. This makes it very universal, so balance-wise, it's better for it to be slightly under-powered (since we see just less use of Warthogs) vs slightly overpowered (because then we see less use of *everything else*).

    That said, I'll keep an eye on it. Might end up adjusting its role entirely.

    Of course, the rest of it is quite nice. :) Especially looking forward to the Apogee changes.

    (The "salvage expedition" starts you off with one! Of course, its weapon loadout is lacking, to put it mildly.)


    I have a problem with known hullmods not spawning as a item, however. I mean, they could always be used for a extra source if income.

    Yeah; imo not worth it for the disappointment factor and just having to check to see if you know it or now. Plus they're not *that* expensive. Blueprints, on the other hand, are, and there known ones can drop.

    What will happen to the Doom's old Interdictor Array? With the new Mine Strike system, and the two other phase ships system swap, i kinda expected the Shade to inherit it.

    It's not used by anything in the game at the moment. I think putting it on a ship that there could be many of could get too annoying to deal with; plus I'm quite partial to the Shade having the EMP emitter. It can really put it to good use.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on October 20, 2018, 10:19:07 PM
    Quote
    •Talon: increased OP cost to 2 (was: 0)

    Amazing. Poor old mining pods have a purpose again.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on October 20, 2018, 10:45:42 PM
      Projectile weapons only: LINKED or DUAL barrelMode weapons will now multiply the weapon_data.csv flux cost by the number of barrels that fire simultaneously
      Multi-barrel beam weapons still use the spreadsheet value as-is

    DUAL, that is a new fire mode. Care to share what it does Alex? :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 20, 2018, 10:47:09 PM
    DUAL, that is a new fire mode. Care to share what it does Alex? :)

    Faaairly sure that's been in for a while, just undocumented - it makes barrels fire two at a time, iirc in order.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on October 20, 2018, 10:57:11 PM
    You... Heh, I would have killed to have known about this since 2012.


    (https://i.imgur.com/jGWXT7s.gif)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: ArkAngel on October 20, 2018, 11:15:25 PM
    Man. I haven't been able to find an apogee in my current games yet, be it for sale or recoverable salvage. The new changes make me so excited for, plus the salvage fleet start.

    Also: 'added XIV Battlegroup ship not available to the Hegemony'
    Whats this? New secret ship we don't know about?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bribe Guntails on October 20, 2018, 11:18:12 PM
    Quote
    Terrain
    Hyperspace storms:
    • Each strike gives the fleet a speed boost in a direction determined by the fleet's position relative to the storm cell and its speed
    • While speed-boosted, the fleet may briefly lose steering control
    I read Hyperstorm speed boost, but I see Hyperstorm Billiards!

    Quote
    • Colonies that have low stability for too long have a chance to become decivilized
    Heck, it's about time something is done about colonies sitting pretty at <2 stability

    Quote
    • New game start: etc
    Easy multi-fleet starts look nice, though that THREE-CYCLE-LONG stipend seems generous.

    Quote
    • In general: terrain that slows down fleets is where smaller fleets can run to get away from larger fleets
    I'mma miss the drive-field-to-energy ratio but this makes sense.

    Quote
    • Militarized Subsystems
    • Efficiency Overhaul
    Optimize my fleeet HNNNG

    So much more exciting stuff coming and I can't wait to absorb it all like a sponge!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 20, 2018, 11:29:45 PM
    Btw, just realized: forgot to mention in the initial posting that the Light Needler's range is reduced to 700.

    You... Heh, I would have killed to have known about this since 2012.


    (https://i.imgur.com/jGWXT7s.gif)

    Haha, sorry :) Nice!


    Also: 'added XIV Battlegroup ship not available to the Hegemony'
    Whats this? New secret ship we don't know about?

    :-X



    I read Hyperstorm speed boost, but I see Hyperstorm Billiards!

    ... you're not necessarily wrong. I'll have to keep an eye on how it feels, it may be a bit extreme.

    Easy multi-fleet starts look nice, though that THREE-CYCLE-LONG stipend seems generous.

    Timed to peter out a bit after some colonies get off the ground. Might still adjust it, though - initially started out at 2 cycles, then buffed it to 3, but then re-did the economy which made early colonies more profitable. So might make sense to go back to 2 at this point.

    Edit: it's also worth noting that with crew and officer salaries, a medium-sized fleet will just about eat up the stipend. So it's really meant to be an early-game booster that you gradually outgrow and replace with colony income.

    I'mma miss the drive-field-to-energy ratio but this makes sense.

    F

    So much more exciting stuff coming and I can't wait to absorb it all like a sponge!

    :D Can't wait to get it out, honestly.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 20, 2018, 11:34:18 PM
    Lots of stuff.  Random comments.

    Sat bombing destroys small colonies?  One of the endgame victory goals I want to do is destroy all (major) factions.  Faction elimination, here I come!  Mwahaha!

    Light Needlers losing range?  Ick!  Seems like Railgun will be the go-to gun for small ballistics.  The only reason to use Light Needler today is +100 range over Railgun, but if the range will be no better than Railgun, and light needler still costs 9 OP to mount, I think I will use Railgun if I have them.  It looks like Light Needler will simply be the inferior 700 range substitute to use if player runs out of Railguns.

    Looks like Mauler will take another hit.

    Nice that Mule will get composite mount.  The only Mule that interested me in 0.8 was Mule (P) for the universal mount (so I can put Heavy Mauler or HVD on it).

    As for Odyssey, it looks like it will become the one standard ship that can use unguided large missiles (i.e., Hammers and Reapers) effectively.  More OP (and free hullmods I probably would not install) is nice.  Not sure how well it will do until I try it.

    Aurora losing flux stats?  Ouch!  Looks like it will be pushed toward Safety Override brawler if it wants to attack with inefficient energy weapons.

    I wonder if the hot-rod Falcon (P) is related to Marauder Falcon from Endless Sky?

    P.S.  Can survey any planet unskilled?  Nice.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on October 20, 2018, 11:40:06 PM
    Light Needlers losing range?  Ick!  Seems like Railgun will be the go-to gun for small ballistics.  The only reason to use Light Needler today is +100 range over Railgun, but if the range will be no better than Railgun, and light needler still costs 9 OP to mount, I think I will use Railgun if I have them.  It looks like Light Needler will simply be the inferior 700 range substitute to use if player runs out of Railguns.

    Burst Damage.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 20, 2018, 11:41:09 PM
    I wonder if the hot-rod Falcon (P) is related to Marauder Falcon from Endless Sky?

    (David came up with it, but with that caveat, I'm pretty sure it's not.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Drone_Fragger on October 20, 2018, 11:46:28 PM
    Hmm, the mauler changes, Is the DPS of the mauler staying the same (ie, it's damage per shot increasing) or is it a 33% nerf to fire-rate as well as DPS?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Techhead on October 20, 2018, 11:47:14 PM
    What will happen to the Doom's old Interdictor Array? With the new Mine Strike system, and the two other phase ships system swap, i kinda expected the Shade to inherit it.

    It's not used by anything in the game at the moment. I think putting it on a ship that there could be many of could get too annoying to deal with; plus I'm quite partial to the Shade having the EMP emitter. It can really put it to good use.
    I know the idea got bad reception last time I proposed it, but I still think it's a really good thematic fit for the Medusa, and with adjustments to the system and ship to fit each other I think it'd be fun both to pilot in mid-game or add as support to a late-game fleet. Especially that the current Medusa will kinda be competing with the new Shrike in a similar "speedy high-tech destroyer" role, a "lock-down-and-kill destroyer" sounds like a cool place to put it in.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on October 20, 2018, 11:47:36 PM
    Hmm, the mauler changes, Is the DPS of the mauler staying the same (ie, it's damage per shot increasing) or is it a 33% nerf to fire-rate as well as DPS?

    Considering the Heavy Mauler is a bit too good...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 20, 2018, 11:50:26 PM
    Burst Damage.
    For what?  Overloading shields and nothing else?  Needle spray are not exactly ideal for attacking non-shield defenses.

    For the ships likely to use needlers (i.e., not high-tech), burst from needlers seems at least as much a liability as an asset.

    Quote
    Especially that the current Medusa will kinda be competing with the new Shrike in a similar "speedy high-tech destroyer" role, a "lock-down-and-kill destroyer" sounds like a cool place to put it in.
    I want Skimmer Medusa to stay.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on October 20, 2018, 11:56:36 PM
    Megas, it is going to fire *fifteen* shot burst. It will be the Doom Slayer of shields.

    This makes it distinct from other small and med KE weapons, in that it is specialized and very good at what they do.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 21, 2018, 12:16:16 AM
    Megas, it is going to fire *fifteen* shot burst. It will be the Doom Slayer of shields.
    I think you exaggerate.  Against a small target, probably.  But against a big target, probably not unless player has lots (whose flux use might overload your ship at a bad time).  Also, most ships that use ballistics are not the sort to hit-and-run well (or as well as high-tech).  Needlers are already bursty now, and they are not that overwhelming.

    800 range is worth 9 OP, but at 700 range, I have my doubts.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 01:10:47 AM
    Hmm, the mauler changes, Is the DPS of the mauler staying the same (ie, it's damage per shot increasing) or is it a 33% nerf to fire-rate as well as DPS?

    Its damage/shot is unchanged, so, yeah, 33% DPS nerf. Probably still mildly overpowered :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Harabeck on October 21, 2018, 01:13:10 AM
    Of course, the rest of it is quite nice. :) Especially looking forward to the Apogee changes.

    (The "salvage expedition" starts you off with one! Of course, its weapon loadout is lacking, to put it mildly.)


    Start with Apogee?! Confirmed best patch.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Eji1700 on October 21, 2018, 01:38:19 AM
    There were so many other little things I was going to mention, much like my support/cargo ships topic, that could use a pass to make them deeper and more interesting systems, and I think you hit all of them.  Amazing stuff.  Can't wait to give it a try.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Retry on October 21, 2018, 02:18:32 AM
    Oh, this patch is looking juicy.  Really juicy!

    I have some quick questions on the reworked Point-Defense hullmod:
    Quote
    Integrated Point Defense AI:
    Makes small non-missile weapons PD (as before)
    Grants 50% damage bonus to missiles
    All PD weapons have the best possible target leading
    PD weapons ignore decoy flares

    Let's say I have three weapons: A Storm Needler, a tactical laser and a PD laser.

    Do only my PD weapons gain a 50% damage bonus to missiles?  Or can some of my other weapons, if they somehow manage to hit a missile by some big fluke, also gain that damage bonus?  (For example: Does my Storm Needler benefit from the damage bonus so I can turn it into an improvised sabot killer?)

    By "all PD weapons" for the 3rd and 4th changes, are we including the PD weapons that were converted to PD as a result of change #1?  (For example: Will my Tactical Laser also ignore decoy flares, just like my PD laser?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 02:41:01 AM
    There were so many other little things I was going to mention, much like my support/cargo ships topic, that could use a pass to make them deeper and more interesting systems, and I think you hit all of them.  Amazing stuff.  Can't wait to give it a try.

    Thank you :)

    Do only my PD weapons gain a 50% damage bonus to missiles?  Or can some of my other weapons, if they somehow manage to hit a missile by some big fluke, also gain that damage bonus?  (For example: Does my Storm Needler benefit from the damage bonus so I can turn it into an improvised sabot killer?)

    By "all PD weapons" for the 3rd and 4th changes, are we including the PD weapons that were converted to PD as a result of change #1?  (For example: Will my Tactical Laser also ignore decoy flares, just like my PD laser?

    All weapons get the vs-missile bonus, so it'll include the storm needler. All PD weapons get the "ignores decoy flares" bonus, which does indeed include weapons granted PD status by the hullmod.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Spess Mahren on October 21, 2018, 02:51:21 AM
    When a colony goes decivilized does the colony outright cease to exist and become essentially a uninhabited world with that modifier?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on October 21, 2018, 03:01:46 AM
    High Energy Focus for Tempest seems to give it disproportionately superior firepower compared to all other frigates. Doesn't feel quite right for it to boast more firepower than the Hyperion, which is looking increasingly gimmicky in comparison.

    I'm not sure about using flux-locking as a balancing mechanism for fighters. It feels inconsistent because 1. not all fighters can be flux-locked and 2. shielded fighters don't generate flux with weapons. It feels like fighters not generating weapon flux should be baseline behaviour.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on October 21, 2018, 03:07:35 AM
    Let's just say that it was *that* overpowered to begin with. There are still aspects where it's not much worse than before - for example, the Decoy Flares are qualitative, and having two vs three fighters launching then isn't a huge deal - but yeah, it's offensive potential needed to go down. Basically, it can do HE damage, and due to being a fighter, it can avoid the shields on many ships. This makes it very universal, so balance-wise, it's better for it to be slightly under-powered (since we see just less use of Warthogs) vs slightly overpowered (because then we see less use of *everything else*).

    That said, I'll keep an eye on it. Might end up adjusting its role entirely.

    Suppose it was.  But I don't think it deserved such a huge nerf - either removing one of the fighters from the wing or removing one of the Light Mortars might be better, both result in an equal reduction in firepower.  But both is too much IMO.

    (The "salvage expedition" starts you off with one! Of course, its weapon loadout is lacking, to put it mildly.)
    Looking forward to that! :) Exploration has been the best part of this game to me since that update came out - I get to see the whacky, interesting, and sublimely beautiful systems the generator pushes out.  And regardless of what weapons it starts with, so long it keeps it's Large Energy Mount, I can feel fairly safe in it with a few escorts.  Black Markets always have interesting things to sell that might work well in that slot...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 03:22:22 AM
    Suppose it was.  But I don't think it deserved such a huge nerf - either removing one of the fighters from the wing or removing one of the Light Mortars might be better, both result in an equal reduction in firepower.  But both is too much IMO.

    I mean, it's entirely possible I over-nerfed it. It was an incremental process, though - first I removed a fighter, *then* one of the guns, and *then* reduced the sustained firepower through flux - since at each step it still felt too strong.

    Looking forward to that! :) Exploration has been the best part of this game to me since that update came out - I get to see the whacky, interesting, and sublimely beautiful systems the generator pushes out.  And regardless of what weapons it starts with, so long it keeps it's Large Energy Mount, I can feel fairly safe in it with a few escorts.  Black Markets always have interesting things to sell that might work well in that slot...

    Thank you! I don't generally see a lot of feedback on the procgen, so this was really cool to read.

    (I had a good bit of fun with the Apogee on a test playthrough - picking up new weapons to equip it with was a gradual process, since it's got such relatively diverse slots with lots of opportunities for upgrades. Still not entirely sold on the medium turrets - if they don't face front, then you're probably not going to put anything other than PD or smalls in them, but, well, that's not the worst thing. Let's see how it shakes out.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on October 21, 2018, 04:01:16 AM
    High Energy Focus for Tempest seems to give it disproportionately superior firepower compared to all other frigates. Doesn't feel quite right for it to boast more firepower than the Hyperion, which is looking increasingly gimmicky in comparison.

    Hyperion (when correctly piloted by player) bypasses any shields, Tempest doesn't. Can't beat that efficiency wise (unless enemy is unshielded Hound or something alike, then it's easy pickings anyway).
    Though I guess it does make Tempest better vs frigates, since aligning jump shot vs fast targets is quite hard.

    Plus, Afflictor is the true king of frigate firepower (and will stay there even after losing QD, I think). But Hyperion is way safer to use, so it has it's merits.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 04:05:04 AM
    When a colony goes decivilized does the colony outright cease to exist and become essentially a uninhabited world with that modifier?

    Yep. You can loot the ruins, too.

    High Energy Focus for Tempest seems to give it disproportionately superior firepower compared to all other frigates. Doesn't feel quite right for it to boast more firepower than the Hyperion, which is looking increasingly gimmicky in comparison.

    I mean, the Hyperion is all about the teleporter, really. Tempest feels like it ought to have the firepower to live up to its name, you know?

    I'm not sure about using flux-locking as a balancing mechanism for fighters. It feels inconsistent because 1. not all fighters can be flux-locked and 2. shielded fighters don't generate flux with weapons. It feels like fighters not generating weapon flux should be baseline behaviour.

    It's a behind the scenes mechanic, so I feel fine with it. If fighter flux stats were player-facing, then I'd share your sentiment.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Snrasha on October 21, 2018, 04:50:52 AM
    Quote
    Removed in-combat effect on ship speed
    I loved this gameplay ;'(


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: craftomega on October 21, 2018, 05:11:47 AM
    I don't even know how many years I have been coming on and off. But I am looking forward to the next update "Soon".


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 05:31:10 AM
    Quote
    Removed in-combat effect on ship speed
    I loved this gameplay ;'(

    Ah, sorry! Didn't feel right leaving it in with the campaign-level nebula change. If you really want it back, though, you can mod it in via a simple settings.json change.

    I don't even know how many years I have been coming on and off. But I am looking forward to the next update "Soon".

    :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on October 21, 2018, 06:55:15 AM
    The Tempest has a bit too much. The Wolf is also technically an "attack" Frigate with a mobility system and a forward profile, and yes it's meant to be the Shrike to the Tempest's Medusa but now the Tempest can achieve almost 4x its firepower while having superior defences and base speed.

    For that much firepower it should be specialised like the Sunder is, as it is the Tempest is pretty much jack of all, master of all. The Hyperion sacrifices a boatload of staying power, the Scarab can't mount mediums, the Tempest... can supercharge its firepower and have turbocharged PD and has superior flux stats and is tied for the highest top speed.

    If it's meant to be this superadvanced and rare prototype then sure, except that's what the Hyperion and Scarab are; the Tempest is more like a general-purpose Wolf step-up.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on October 21, 2018, 07:41:51 AM
    Player piloted Hyperion can solo a Paragon (sim, both skill-less), Tempest even after all it's buffs won't come anywhere close.

    If anyone threatens Hyperion's niche that would be Afflictor. But otherwise Hyperion is fine, it's just not AI-pilotable.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: HELMUT on October 21, 2018, 08:30:51 AM
    The Tempest has a bit too much.

    On the other hand, the Tempest now cost as much as a Hammerhead to deploy. Moreover, while its overall firepower increased, it probably won't be as flexible as before. Ion Pulser Terminator drone was pretty crazy, even more so when there was several of them freely roaming the battlefield. It's still going to be one of the strongest frigate, probably the strongest to use for the AI, but not as obscene as now.

    Do only my PD weapons gain a 50% damage bonus to missiles?  Or can some of my other weapons, if they somehow manage to hit a missile by some big fluke, also gain that damage bonus?  (For example: Does my Storm Needler benefit from the damage bonus so I can turn it into an improvised sabot killer?)

    By "all PD weapons" for the 3rd and 4th changes, are we including the PD weapons that were converted to PD as a result of change #1?  (For example: Will my Tactical Laser also ignore decoy flares, just like my PD laser?

    All weapons get the vs-missile bonus, so it'll include the storm needler. All PD weapons get the "ignores decoy flares" bonus, which does indeed include weapons granted PD status by the hullmod.

    IPDAI Tac laser with the buffed Advanced Turret Gyros Is going to be reaaaaally strong now. Also, with the IPDAI Damage buff against missiles, i can already see myself doing big side swipes with a tachyon lance to delete an entire wave of missiles.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on October 21, 2018, 10:32:05 AM
    Quote
    • Prometheus: Reduced fuel capacity to 2500
    • High Resolution Sensors: Can now be learned and installed on other ships.
    I don't really get the reason behind these changes. Prometheus was good as it was, with same fuel cap/maintenance ratio as all other tankers. HRS was a pretty great reason to find and get Apogee or Omen.
    Quote
    Plasma Cannon: Damage reduced to 500 and and flux/shot reduced to 550
    When we said that heavy blaster is practically a medium-sized heavy weapon, we didn't mean that plasma cannon should be just a better heavy blaster... It is better, but also boring now, you can't one-salvo frigates anymore.
    Quote
    Solar Shielding: reduced cost, beam damage effect changed to reduce energy damage by 20% instead
    I'm going to fight REDACTED (or Sindrian Diktat): the hullmod. Cool. I think I might mount it from time to time now.
    Quote
    Militarized Subsystems:
    • Removes Civilian-grade Hull's penalties
    • Adds +1 burn
    • Increased crew requirements
    • -50% supplies to deploy
    • Can only install on ships with Civilian-grade Hull
    I'm not sure about this one. It feels like it makes the civilian ship penalty too insignificant, though maybe it requires a lot of OP. I'll have to see, but I don't think I'll like it, though it doesn't mean I won't use it.

    Assorted:
    Defective Manufactory seems to be a bit too harsh, doesn't low speed also affect survivability for fighters, since more ordnance can hit them? Kopesh is nerfed a bit, maybe Piranha (especially with fighters coordinating strikes) will become competitive to it. Light mortars getting 100 bonus range means mostly that recovered ships can be effective for cheaper. Is there any advantageous for big fleets terrain remaining? It seems like it's all better for small fleets.
    Quote
    Adding new assignments is free while the command frequency is open
    Wait, then what did it even do before?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embercloud on October 21, 2018, 11:46:05 AM
    High Energy Focus for Tempest seems to give it disproportionately superior firepower compared to all other frigates. Doesn't feel quite right for it to boast more firepower than the Hyperion, which is looking increasingly gimmicky in comparison.

    I'm not sure about using flux-locking as a balancing mechanism for fighters. It feels inconsistent because 1. not all fighters can be flux-locked and 2. shielded fighters don't generate flux with weapons. It feels like fighters not generating weapon flux should be baseline behaviour.

    High energy focus + phase lance = disco king


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on October 21, 2018, 12:45:39 PM
    Player piloted Hyperion can solo a Paragon (sim, both skill-less), Tempest even after all it's buffs won't come anywhere close.

    If anyone threatens Hyperion's niche that would be Afflictor. But otherwise Hyperion is fine, it's just not AI-pilotable.

    That's what I mean though: ships like Hyperion and Scarab need player hands to be most effective. Now you'd be much more worried about AI Tempests whereas AI Hyperions/Scarabs are more "Oooh for me? You should've have".

    The "feel" is all wrong. Not necessarily balance, just... the Tempest's current armament feels like it belongs on a slow heavy frigate, not a speedy attack frigate. If you described a heavy weapons platform protected against smaller threats by state-of-the-art PD drones I would've imaged a lumbering beast, not one of the fastest ships in the Sector.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 21, 2018, 12:48:23 PM
    Yeah, I probably would skimp on Apogee's medium energy mounts if they cannot aim forward, although I probably skimp on them today already if I relied on plasma cannon.  Between Active Flares and tough 360 shield, it does not need weapons for anti-missile.

    Does anyone think Ammo Feeder is overpowered on Lasher?  No?  Then High Energy Focus should not be overpowered on Tempest, especially since 1) it got more expensive to use (as much as killer phase frigate that can abuse decloak invulnerability frames like in a fighting game) and 2) it is stuck with inferior and inefficient energy weaponry.  Up until now, Tempest best strength is confusing the AI with its drone, otherwise, it is a variant Wolf that has omni shield but cannot skim.  If the drones cannot roam anymore, then Tempest might not be able to confuse the AI as well.

    Plasma cannon, looks like it would be a more efficient, rapid-fire heavy blaster, sort of like a rapid-fire rocket launcher in a FPS.  Probably still no match for Mjolnir, but perhaps Plasma Cannon will be practical to use, unlike today.

    Autopulse getting 30 charges by default will be like with free Expanded Magazines today.  Then again, the only ship that will be able to abuse multiple lasers is Paragon, since Odyssey will only focus-fire two instead of three, and Apogee cannot concentrate as many guns forward.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on October 21, 2018, 12:59:00 PM
    The Lasher also sports small weapons only, has inferior flux stats, is slower and isn't defended by super PD drones. I emphasised "and, and, and" for a reason: it's the whole package of firepower, defence and speed with no real weaknesses that I take issue.

    I'm well aware the Hyperion (and Scarab) remain superior in player hands, but the vast majority of the time you'd be fighting against these things (i.e. AI control), and with this change I think the feel and threat of fighting fleet Tempests and fighting the rare prototype frigate is all wrong.

    Again if you described a frigate with heavy weaponry and defended against smaller threats by super PD drones I would've imagined something like the Brawler (which by the way should totally have AAF back: I have no issues with that because the Brawler has clear tradoffs, whereas the new Tempest does not).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 21, 2018, 01:48:23 PM
    Lasher has three small ballistics (rear two will probably be LMGs or Vulcans for PD) compared to two medium energy (about four small energy).  Plus Lasher has one more missile mount.  Given how inferior energy is compared to ballistics, I probably would call it even.  (Pre-0.8 Tempest could barely support two heavy blasters, it probably cannot now.  More likely now is either two pulse lasers or combo of pulse laser/heavy blaster and tac laser/graviton beam)  Lasher is slower, I give you that.  Defended by super PD drones?  Probably a nerf compared to drone attacking a ship to distract it, and loss of active flares.

    On the other hand, you can have almost two Lashers for the price of one 0.9 Tempest.  (It is a reason why current Harbinger is terrible, you can get better results with two Afflictors or two Sunders.)

    Tempest's main weakness will probably be the same as today:  horrible shot range (combined with energy's horrible efficiency), and unlike today, drone may not be able to distract the AI so well (because drone cannot roam).  Without an escape button system, all Tempest has to avoid getting blasted by a bigger ship, is omni shield and good old twitch skills, which not everyone will be good at.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on October 21, 2018, 02:03:30 PM
    I can't tell how excited I am to play this. If I knew the day it'd come out I'd have literally changed my work schedule. Keep up the good work Alex!
    Couple comments:

    Added Hegemony inspection

    Huh, is that similar to the old inspections?

    Goals are: (...)
    Make salvaging without the skill but with Salvage Rigs a viable option, both in terms of rare items and resources gained

    Wait, how does the rare items factor into Salvage Rigs? If I'm reading correctly, aren't the rare items drop rate only modified by the skill?

    Known hullmods no longer drop or show up for sale
    Buying up hullmods will NOT increase the odds of remaining ones showing up

    So if the game rolls for a known hullmod to drop, it won't roll to drop another item in its place? Sounds odd to me. It'd make, for example, looting research stations yield less as the game goes on. When I read the first change I expected the drop to re-roll into a weapon or anything else of similar rarity.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bishi on October 21, 2018, 02:57:40 PM
    So excited! Released in time for xmas? :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 05:43:26 PM
    The Wolf is also technically an "attack" Frigate with a mobility system and a forward profile, and yes it's meant to be the Shrike to the Tempest's Medusa but now the Tempest can achieve almost 4x its firepower while having superior defences and base speed.

    Wolf: 1x medium, 3x small, 2x small missile
    Tempest: 2x medium (*1.5 from HEF if we're generous and assume 100% uptime), 1x small missile

    So, 3 medium vs 1x medium, 3x small, and 1x small missile. Weighing 2 small slots as 1 medium, that's... actually even. Of course, the Tempest's "third" slot is flux free (but it's really not going to be 100% uptime, either), it's got drones (which are not at all reliable at actually shooting ships), and it doesn't have a mobility system - though it does have speed. The Wolf has a bit more OP, while the Tempest is a lot more expensive to field and maintain. As far as defenses, the Wolf is probably harder to pin down overall, while the Tempest - if it gets into a bad spot - is most likely just a goner.

    It's definitely a better fighting ship than a Wolf, but I don't think it's half as clear-cut if you factor in cost, and its not by an insane amount in any case. The Tempest probably wins out as a later-game support ship (which is the point of the drones), but then it's probably not utilizing its HEF nearly as much.

    All that said, I'll keep an eye on it; it did undergo substantial changes and it's likely *something* is out of whack.


    IPDAI Tac laser with the buffed Advanced Turret Gyros Is going to be reaaaaally strong now. Also, with the IPDAI Damage buff against missiles, i can already see myself doing big side swipes with a tachyon lance to delete an entire wave of missiles.

    Hmm, yeah, that'll be interesting to see - always fun to see "skill" maneuvers like that. (Also, another thing the Wolf can do, and the Tempest can't - so it's interesting that a Wolf specialized in PD could possibly outdo it at that...)


    Quote
    • Prometheus: Reduced fuel capacity to 2500
    • High Resolution Sensors: Can now be learned and installed on other ships.
    I don't really get the reason behind these changes. Prometheus was good as it was, with same fuel cap/maintenance ratio as all other tankers. HRS was a pretty great reason to find and get Apogee or Omen.

    Unless I'm missing something, the Prometheus had a much better ratio - as it should - and it still has a better ratio after the change.

    HRS is a "Logistics" hullmod, meaning it's limited to 2 per hull, not counting built-in. That last part means the Omen and Apogee are still special in that - in addition to getting HRS for free - they can also mount a full two Logistics mods.


    Quote
    Plasma Cannon: Damage reduced to 500 and and flux/shot reduced to 550
    When we said that heavy blaster is practically a medium-sized heavy weapon, we didn't mean that plasma cannon should be just a better heavy blaster... It is better, but also boring now, you can't one-salvo frigates anymore.

    I experimented with it a lot and this is pretty much the only place where it felt good but didn't either 1) completely outdo the other energy options or 2) turn out to be generally unusable by AI ships.

    As it stands, we've got: Autopulse for general efficiency, HIL for anti-armor and pressure, Tachyon Lance for shield piercing/sniping, and the Plasma Cannon as a high-dps all-rounder that's not too good at any one thing. If you've got multiple large energy slots, there are reasons to go for just about any combination, since each one brings something different to the table.


    Quote
    Solar Shielding: reduced cost, beam damage effect changed to reduce energy damage by 20% instead
    I'm going to fight REDACTED (or Sindrian Diktat): the hullmod. Cool. I think I might mount it from time to time now.

    You all are missing the main reason to put Solar Shielding on, just saying.

    Quote
    Militarized Subsystems:
    ...
    I'm not sure about this one. It feels like it makes the civilian ship penalty too insignificant, though maybe it requires a lot of OP. I'll have to see, but I don't think I'll like it, though it doesn't mean I won't use it.

    It's a "Logistics" mod, so there's an opportunity cost beyond OP. It also increases crew requirements - which in 0.9a means a higher monthly salary - and that's a significant balancing factor. It's basically a way to double its effective maintenance cost without making it cost more supplies, which would make it bad from a logstics point of view.

    Defective Manufactory seems to be a bit too harsh, doesn't low speed also affect survivability for fighters, since more ordnance can hit them?

    I mean, yes. Need a two-pronged approach here to make sure that both slow and fast fighters are affected. If it's one or the other than either fast fighters are too good, or slow fighters basically don't care once they get into range of the enemy.

    I think I talked about this on Twitter, but in general, as far as Converted Hangar goes, the point is to make it a lot more of a committment and also something that changes the ship more. It's still pretty good with interceptors - I mean, it's not very expensive, and the higher damage taken etc is offset by not having a replacement rate penalty. With bombers is where it gets more interesting, since the OP cost is *huge*, but so is the gameplay effect of having basically unlimited missile support on just about any ship.

    Is there any advantageous for big fleets terrain remaining? It seems like it's all better for small fleets.

    Per the patch notes: "In general: terrain that slows down fleets is where smaller fleets can run to get away from larger fleets"

    Quote
    Adding new assignments is free while the command frequency is open
    Wait, then what did it even do before?

    You could manually reassign ships between existing assignments for free, but not create new assignments.


    I can't tell how excited I am to play this. If I knew the day it'd come out I'd have literally changed my work schedule. Keep up the good work Alex!

    :D

    Added Hegemony inspection

    Huh, is that similar to the old inspections?

    Not at all, but keeping this intentionally vague.

    Wait, how does the rare items factor into Salvage Rigs? If I'm reading correctly, aren't the rare items drop rate only modified by the skill?

    They don't, you're reading it right. Possibly awkward phrasing on my part; the point is just that you shouldn't feel forced to bring rigs (as you would if they got you more rare items) and that you can also still get good returns with rigs and without the skill (which is less rare items than with skill, but also no skill point investment).

    So if the game rolls for a known hullmod to drop, it won't roll to drop another item in its place? Sounds odd to me. It'd make, for example, looting research stations yield less as the game goes on. When I read the first change I expected the drop to re-roll into a weapon or anything else of similar rarity.

    Yep - but then research stations get blueprints, so it's just a drop in the bucket.


    So excited! Released in time for xmas? :D

    :-X


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on October 21, 2018, 07:04:17 PM
    Thank you! I don't generally see a lot of feedback on the procgen, so this was really cool to read.

    Ah, speaking of the generation, I've found more Jungle worlds orbiting Gas Giants of all things than having a separate orbit to themselves, sometimes way too close in or too far out.  Feels really weird about half the habitable worlds I've found are this specific type of Jungle world orbiting a gas giant.

    And then there's the beautiful things like a Desert world orbiting twin suns, or a Water world with an asteroid belt orbiting a yellow star.  If I could rename a planet I would.

    (I had a good bit of fun with the Apogee on a test playthrough - picking up new weapons to equip it with was a gradual process, since it's got such relatively diverse slots with lots of opportunities for upgrades. Still not entirely sold on the medium turrets - if they don't face front, then you're probably not going to put anything other than PD or smalls in them, but, well, that's not the worst thing. Let's see how it shakes out.)
    Ah, the rear mediums now can't fire forward?  Not too much of a reduction in firepower I suppose (only so much a pair of Graviton Beams could do), and I'll almost certainly replace those with PD mounts.  Might be worth looking into what you could do with a pair of Synergy mounts though - missiles might be useful.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 07:13:04 PM
    Ah, speaking of the generation, I've found more Jungle worlds orbiting Gas Giants of all things than having a separate orbit to themselves, sometimes way too close in or too far out.  Feels really weird about half the habitable worlds I've found are this specific type of Jungle world orbiting a gas giant.

    And then there's the beautiful things like a Desert world orbiting twin suns, or a Water world with an asteroid belt orbiting a yellow star.  If I could rename a planet I would.

    If you happen to see that again, could you grab a screenshot? Especially the "way too close or too far out" bit, that'd be interesting to see/possibly tweak. As far as being it jungle worlds in that position, that's more than likely just luck.


    And then there's the beautiful things like a Desert world orbiting twin suns, or a Water world with an asteroid belt orbiting a yellow star.  If I could rename a planet I would.

    You'll be able to once you colonize it!

    If you're really serious about it, you could colonize, rename,t then abandon :D Just a minor matter of the expense.


    Ah, the rear mediums now can't fire forward?  Not too much of a reduction in firepower I suppose (only so much a pair of Graviton Beams could do), and I'll almost certainly replace those with PD mounts.  Might be worth looking into what you could do with a pair of Synergy mounts though - missiles might be useful.

    Did think about that! But then it's 2x medium and 1x large missile mounts, that seems... strong. And also identity-defining for the Apogee, turning it into a missile boat, which doesn't seem quite right.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 07:28:32 PM
    Another note: Terminator Core damage to fighters/missiles is 2x, not 4x. Forgot to update the patch notes after making that change some time back.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Inventor Raccoon on October 21, 2018, 07:36:47 PM
    Heh, 4x did seem a tad absurd, watching the two drones absolutely tear Broadswords into pieces within a few shots.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bribe Guntails on October 21, 2018, 08:38:23 PM
    Quote
    Solar Shielding: reduced cost, beam damage effect changed to reduce energy damage by 20% instead
    I'm going to fight REDACTED (or Sindrian Diktat): the hullmod. Cool. I think I might mount it from time to time now.
    You all are missing the main reason to put Solar Shielding on, just saying.

    (http://biomediaproject.com/bmp/files/LEGO/gms/online/Mindstorms/Stormrunner/Stormrunner/images/splash_logo.jpg)

    Added Hegemony inspection
    Huh, is that similar to the old inspections?
    Not at all, but keeping this intentionally vague.

    Oh, I think I know EXACTLY what this is going to be all about.  ;D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on October 21, 2018, 08:59:01 PM
    Well, well, well. Exciting news all around.

    A change that will drastically alter gameplay that I haven't seen much discussed is the Sustained Burn change. Holy Guacamole, Batman! Simple but elegant solution the homogenization of fleet burn speeds. Bravo. That also made Augmented Drive Field have a role again and it looks like Emergency Burn has its situational usage back rather being out-shined by SB the vast majority of the time.

    I'm also liking the "Logistics" hullmod cap. Gives more meaningful choice to a variety of ship options.

    "Added REDACTED (to do with population growth)" - You added a culling mechanism, didn't you? Get over size X and "something" brings it back into line. Plague, evil AI, civil unrest, some wandering fleet that is drawn to high populations like moth to flame...? I like it!

    "Derelict ships in campaign will now show ship type in the tooltip." Thank you! Huge QoL improvement. I used to pause the game and zoom in to see the hull type.

    "Transponder off trade no longer has any impact on reputation or suspicion level. Goal is a more clear distinction." I'm not sure what the clarity piece is about. I get that going in with transponder off had an ambiguous effect on reputation/suspicion and this removes it but I don't know what other distinctions there are. Basically, don't believe you can get away with smuggling or trading with an enemy?

    "Removed Surveying Skill." Did Remote Survey get the axe, too?

    "Ion Cannon/Ion Pulser: EMP Arcs..." So the arcing effect will be 4x more effective than previous? Is that to add more randomness to EMP or just make these EMP weapons more effective?

    "Autopulse Laser: Increased charges to 30" - Adding Expanded Magazines will up this to 45 now. That's a heck of an opening volley/alpha strike.

    I also like the IPDAI change. I really think we need to have a hullmod that does something similar except that the buffs are exclusively anti-fighter.

    Solar Shielding reducing energy damage by 20% is significant. What was your "You all are missing the main reason of using this?" comment from earlier? I don't regularly take sun-dips or lure fleets into solar flares. I supposed if it's cheap enough, and all my ships were equipped with it, I could use that strategy but I see the damage reduction as the primary boon.

    ********

    This is impressive stuff. Basically a new game again, much like 0.8's additions. I can't wait to try it out and see this XIV Battlegroup ship that's floating around out there. I'm sure there are other changes that are still undocumented or you're reserving for REDACTED reasons. Good job!



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 09:24:16 PM
    Oh, I think I know EXACTLY what this is going to be all about.  ;D

    I wouldn't put it past you.


    A change that will drastically alter gameplay that I haven't seen much discussed is the Sustained Burn change. Holy Guacamole, Batman! Simple but elegant solution the homogenization of fleet burn speeds. Bravo. That also made Augmented Drive Field have a role again and it looks like Emergency Burn has its situational usage back rather being out-shined by SB the vast majority of the time.

    I'm also liking the "Logistics" hullmod cap. Gives more meaningful choice to a variety of ship options.

    Thank you! Hopefully it'll all work out as intended.

    "Added REDACTED (to do with population growth)" - You added a culling mechanism, didn't you? Get over size X and "something" brings it back into line. Plague, evil AI, civil unrest, some wandering fleet that is drawn to high populations like moth to flame...? I like it!

    Negative. Let me just say that this is something you find.

    "Transponder off trade no longer has any impact on reputation or suspicion level. Goal is a more clear distinction." I'm not sure what the clarity piece is about. I get that going in with transponder off had an ambiguous effect on reputation/suspicion and this removes it but I don't know what other distinctions there are. Basically, don't believe you can get away with smuggling or trading with an enemy?

    Right, the clarity is "transponder is off, therefore I don't need to worry about reputation hits" vs "I need to worry some hard-to-quantify amount less".

    "Removed Surveying Skill." Did Remote Survey get the axe, too?

    Ohh, good catch. Hmm, let me just stick it under level 1 Salvaging for the moment.

    "Ion Cannon/Ion Pulser: EMP Arcs..." So the arcing effect will be 4x more effective than previous? Is that to add more randomness to EMP or just make these EMP weapons more effective?

    Mostly to avoid having to explain that it's a quarter damage in the weapon tooltip. It's not a major change in terms of effectiveness since we're talking about non-EMP damage only. The Ion Cannon's is pathetic to begin with, and the Ion Pulser 1) could do with a slight buff and 2) this damage is less effective because it arcs all over the place so isn't focused on damaged armor etc. It's something less than a 10% dps increase even if we consider it at full value.

    Solar Shielding reducing energy damage by 20% is significant. What was your "You all are missing the main reason of using this?" comment from earlier? I don't regularly take sun-dips or lure fleets into solar flares. I supposed if it's cheap enough, and all my ships were equipped with it, I could use that strategy but I see the damage reduction as the primary boon.

    A more careful reading of the tooltips - and the change log - may be in order :)


    This is impressive stuff. Basically a new game again, much like 0.8's additions. I can't wait to try it out and see this XIV Battlegroup ship that's floating around out there. I'm sure there are other changes that are still undocumented or you're reserving for REDACTED reasons. Good job!

    Thank you!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bastion.Systems on October 21, 2018, 09:26:55 PM
    We truly live in a blessed timeline.

    Btw. really happy with all the burn changes.

    Think about it: small elite wolfpack of super fast, tricked out high-tech frigates just causing chaos while near untouchable (until the supplies run out).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on October 21, 2018, 09:31:20 PM
    Ah, I see about Solar Shielding. Forgot that it nearly negates warp storm penalties (tells you how much I use it). Welcome to Pinball Wizard.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 21, 2018, 10:27:16 PM
    Mostly to avoid having to explain that it's a quarter damage in the weapon tooltip. It's not a major change in terms of effectiveness since we're talking about non-EMP damage only. The Ion Cannon's is pathetic to begin with, and the Ion Pulser 1) could do with a slight buff and 2) this damage is less effective because it arcs all over the place so isn't focused on damaged armor etc. It's something less than a 10% dps increase even if we consider it at full value.
    Does this apply to Ion Beam and Tachyon Lance too?  If so, that makes relying on free damage from their shield piercing to finish off enemies even better.  I have scored numerous kills from the shield pierce and arcing damage Paragon can inflict.

    "Autopulse Laser: Increased charges to 30" - Adding Expanded Magazines will up this to 45 now. That's a heck of an opening volley/alpha strike.
    For Sunder and Paragon, yes.  Odyssey and Apogee lost firepower due to turret arc changes, and this just makes up for what they lost.  (Well, Odyssey could use homing missile in the heavy synergy to sort-of focus three heavies.  Locusts there could be useful, that is practically an old-fashioned needler, in terms of ammo count, that hits for HE overwhelming frag damage instead of kinetic.)


    Like Foof, I do not care about Solar Shielding's campaign benefit.  There are much better campaign hullmods I like to use (like Automated Repair Unit) but do not due to limited OP totals.  Less energy damage taken would be the only reason I would want to install solar shielding.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 21, 2018, 10:29:44 PM
    Does this apply to Ion Beam and Tachyon Lance too?

    It doesn't, no.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on October 22, 2018, 12:51:15 AM
    I am quite happy with the large energy weapon changes (I mean I'm fricken ecstatic about all of it, but this is sticking in my mind as a little detail atm). The Plasma Cannon having acceptable anti-shield stats due to the better flux, but keeping a quite high anti-armor penetration due to shot size is going to make it a good generalist weapon, while the alpha strike of an expanded magazine autopulse is very nice. I'm not sure a Sunder has the flux capacity to even fire 45 rounds of autopulse in a row, but I'm sure going to try.

    Fighter time ticking down whenever a fighter is in need of rebuild, rather than half of wing: I like this because it gives a bit more incentive for the few ship wings, which is good as they were a little weak.

    Low performance but full replacement rate fighters on the hangar bay: I can't wait to try it out, but it does create a somewhat weird set of circumstances. A destroyer like an Enforcer can be completely full of D mods, but its one interceptor/bomber wing has the normal replacement rate. A condor or other carrier can get degraded decks AND malfunctioning comms on top of the degraded fighter performance. The condor can still take advantage of the multiple wings working together in the sweet new timing system, but I feel like in a D fleet if I want optimal fighter performance I'm best off skipping D carriers entirely.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 22, 2018, 01:18:19 AM
    Low performance but full replacement rate fighters on the hangar bay: I can't wait to try it out, but it does create a somewhat weird set of circumstances. A destroyer like an Enforcer can be completely full of D mods, but its one interceptor/bomber wing has the normal replacement rate. A condor or other carrier can get degraded decks AND malfunctioning comms on top of the degraded fighter performance. The condor can still take advantage of the multiple wings working together in the sweet new timing system, but I feel like in a D fleet if I want optimal fighter performance I'm best off skipping D carriers entirely.

    Hmm - I mean, that Enforcer is going to be sorely lacking in other areas, right? Its fighters will be slightly better - rather, the fighters won't, but its fighter-related stats will be - but it'd still be extremely limited in other areas, both due to d-mods and CH costs.

    I doubt that's going to be a solid basis for a fighter-based fleet; you'd probably be better off finding Condors w/o multiple fighter-related d-mods, or even with, just due to having more fighter wings for less deployment cost. It may be worthwhile to stick CH on a few ships in any case, but it doesn't seem like it'd be a clear-cut "avoid d-mod carriers" situation. It'd probably be more of a "just stick fighters on whatever hulls you've got" situation, which seems thematically appropriate.

    It's also worth noting that fighter replacement rate is less of a god stat now that it only applies once instead of twice (which was a bug that made it go down to 9% of the rate at 30%).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 22, 2018, 02:05:55 AM
    Assuming civilians like Buffalos have the OP to afford the fighter wing, would it be better to use them instead of Enforcers if we rely mostly on Converted Hangar to do damage?  Civilians with Converted Hangar are not optimal, but they turn from useless in a fight to something mildly dangerous.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 22, 2018, 02:21:53 AM
    It's a possible option, yeah. Depending on the fighter chosen, you could even fit in "Militarized Subsystems" to make the civ ship cheaper to deploy and less of a drag on your fleet stats-wise.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on October 22, 2018, 04:01:15 AM
    I could think of all sorts of nasty Buffalo Mk.II builds with Militarized Subsystems and Converted Fighter Bays.  Mmm.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Voyager I on October 22, 2018, 04:34:09 AM
    I could think of all sorts of nasty Buffalo Mk.II builds with Militarized Subsystems and Converted Fighter Bays.  Mmm.

    I think they call that ship the Condor.

    It's pretty good!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: arwan on October 22, 2018, 06:50:14 AM
    one of the things i didnt even know i needed until i saw it in the notes.

    Changed "primary role" strings for weapons to more accurately reflect their actual combat roles, e.g. instead of "Assault" or "Close Support", it's "Anti Armor" or "Anti Shield" or "Point Defense (Area)" etc

    after i read the change i thought, you know that does make a lot of sense.

    still cant wait till the next version releases. i want to get my grubby little hands all over it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on October 22, 2018, 08:15:19 AM

    Especially looking forward to the Apogee changes.

    (The "salvage expedition" starts you off with one! Of course, its weapon loadout is lacking, to put it mildly.)

    \o/

    Thank you! Really looking forward to that, (gritty) Enterprise roleplaying enabled!

    I'm actually tempted to ask for a "hard" difficulty now, that keeps you in "single ship state" for a looong time:)



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on October 22, 2018, 11:04:33 AM
    I'm excited for that start too. Echoing what was already said in this thread, exploring is also one of my favorite parts of the game and I hope to find all sort of new things with it.  ;D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on October 22, 2018, 03:14:22 PM
    I'm excited for that start too. Echoing what was already said in this thread, exploring is also one of my favorite parts of the game and I hope to find all sort of new things with it.  ;D
    Ditto here! I don't do it very much anymore in .8 but when the release dropped it was a wonderful experience. I'm looking forward to having so many new exploration things to do/find!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embercloud on October 22, 2018, 03:27:54 PM
    Can we get a list of ships you start with if you pick the advanced starts (salvage expridition and merc force)
    Any plans to add additional start scenarions in the future? Maybe faction oriented?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: lapersonaoval on October 22, 2018, 04:21:33 PM
    are system requeriments modified by new release ? (i hope you all understand what i wanna mean, i'm still learning english and not sure if i write correctly)
    thanks


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dri on October 22, 2018, 04:55:00 PM
    Every time Alex makes performance improvements he seems to eat them up by then turning around and upping the quality of the simulation—which ain't really a bad thing. So, requirements probably haven't changed by any appreciable amount.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 22, 2018, 05:03:33 PM
    Thank you! Really looking forward to that, (gritty) Enterprise roleplaying enabled!

    It's not a single ship, right, but you could of course scuttle everything else :)

    I'm actually tempted to ask for a "hard" difficulty now, that keeps you in "single ship state" for a looong time:)

    A spacer. A Mercury-class shuttle. A crushing debt.


    I'm excited for that start too. Echoing what was already said in this thread, exploring is also one of my favorite parts of the game and I hope to find all sort of new things with it.  ;D
    Ditto here! I don't do it very much anymore in .8 but when the release dropped it was a wonderful experience. I'm looking forward to having so many new exploration things to do/find!

    Thank you :)


    Can we get a list of ships you start with if you pick the advanced starts (salvage expridition and merc force)

    Apogee/Condor/Wayfarer/Shepherd/Dram
    Hammerhead/Drover/Centurion/Lasher/Dram

    The idea is in both cases to have a fairly balanced force that's a bit of a better showcase for what the game is about, and is also configured to handle things that might be annoying if the player hasn't figured out how to deal with them.

    Any plans to add additional start scenarions in the future? Maybe faction oriented?

    Hmm, not particularly. I'll probably adjust the current set, too - this is all pretty fluid and I just want to see how it works out. As far as faction-oriented, I really think that's better off staying in-game rather than in the new game dialog. I'm also not sure just how much I want to expand "player relationship with faction" mechanics; I think macro-level Sector event type stuff may be a more interesting direction to go in general. Still, will see.


    are system requeriments modified by new release ? (i hope you all understand what i wanna mean, i'm still learning english and not sure if i write correctly)
    thanks

    (Yep, no problems understanding!)

    The requirements should be about the same. I think overall performance should be better - but, yes, as Dri said, certain fights are also more demanding (for example, Orbital Stations and lots of fighters). One thing that should be considerably better is memory use, though. The new economy is *much* lighter in many ways.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embercloud on October 22, 2018, 06:01:20 PM
    are system requeriments modified by new release ? (i hope you all understand what i wanna mean, i'm still learning english and not sure if i write correctly)
    thanks

    The game doesn’t really require a high end computer, in any case, and if your computer is struggling during large battles, a workaround could be to lower the possible deployment points. This would force less ships participating in the battle.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ali on October 22, 2018, 06:12:30 PM
    Lots of great stuff in the notes!!!  ;D

    Only thing is my beloved aurora's nerfed!!!  :'(

    Also logistics flag will ruin my power-gaming!!!  :'(  Is there a way to turn this off in setting.json???

    Hope to see more hull-mods in the future.. There is a good number of ships / weapons now although some official dreadnaughts / more capitals would be nice!!  ;)

    Not sure how many spaces for future skills will be left now / how many skills per tree will be in game after patch?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on October 22, 2018, 06:48:32 PM
    Weapons
    • Weapons that use ammo now retain their ammo count across multiple engagements
      • In other words, re-deploying a ship will not cause its weapons to be reloaded

    Does Gryphon's missile autoforge recharge?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 22, 2018, 07:25:54 PM
    Only thing is my beloved aurora's nerfed!!!  :'(

    Had to be done! It's a fairly minor nerf all things considered; it's a fun ship and I'd like to keep it that way.

    Also logistics flag will ruin my power-gaming!!!  :'(  Is there a way to turn this off in setting.json???

    "maxLogisticsHullmods":2,

    Not sure how many spaces for future skills will be left now / how many skills per tree will be in game after patch?

    Not entirely sure at this point. I do think I'll cut down the total number of skills, but that's not set in stone.


    Does Gryphon's missile autoforge recharge?

    Yep, it does. Hmm. But then you're only really getting half the missiles with each re-deploy, for the same cost, so it's probably alright.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ali on October 22, 2018, 08:29:26 PM
    "maxLogisticsHullmods":2,"

    Thanks so much for this!! and for your efforts that allow Starsector to be so modible and allow users to taylor their playthrough's to their individual tastes!!!  ;D

    Ah, personally i hope you can maintain a wide selection of skills etc to give players plenty of choice!!! I was sadened at how much WoW cut content to keep a finite amount of skills to learn :(

    More options = more fun in my book, ( although i guess you need to keep to maybe 10? active skills but no reason not to allow plenty of passive's and unlocks elsewhere in the skill tree!!??... )

    Am sure you'll make a good decision regardless as Starsector is truly a marvel to play!!  :)

    Looking forward to easier to find pirate battles in this update!! large pirate fleets have been unusually elusive in my recent playthrough's  :-\


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on October 23, 2018, 07:09:46 PM
    Thank you! Really looking forward to that, (gritty) Enterprise roleplaying enabled!

    It's not a single ship, right, but you could of course scuttle everything else :)


    Scuttle it? What do you take me for?

    I will of course lose those other ships in the dramatic opening scene fight, against the terrible pirate armada which is thereby established as my mortal enemy (and totally not just the first big pirate fleet I see). You see, the pirate admiral is actually my uncle, who, as I discovered earlier, murdered my father, an techno-archaelogist, to get to the rare treasurers he uncovered.
    After this failed attempt at revenge I will have no choice but to flee to the furthest reaches of the Sector, only to discover a new purpose for my existence, out among the stars. While I turn towards exploration and archaelogy, just like my father once did, my uncle's treachey and my need for revenge never quite leave the back of my mind...




    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TheDTYP on October 23, 2018, 07:54:13 PM
    Thank you! Really looking forward to that, (gritty) Enterprise roleplaying enabled!

    It's not a single ship, right, but you could of course scuttle everything else :)


    Scuttle it? What do you take me for?

    I will of course lose those other ships in the dramatic opening scene fight, against the terrible pirate armada which is thereby established as my mortal enemy (and totally not just the first big pirate fleet I see). You see, the pirate admiral is actually my uncle, who, as I discovered earlier, murdered my father, an techno-archaelogist, to get to the rare treasurers he uncovered.
    After this failed attempt at revenge I will have no choice but to flee to the furthest reaches of the Sector, only to discover a new purpose for my existence, out among the stars. While I turn towards exploration and archaelogy, just like my father once did, my uncle's treachey and my need for revenge never quite leave the back of my mind...



    So when Alex starts putting story elements into the game, I vote this should be a plotline. All I'm saying.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Carabus on October 23, 2018, 07:55:58 PM
    Known hullmods no longer drop

    I have a problem with known hullmods not spawning as a item, however. I mean, they could always be used for a extra source if income.

    Yeah; imo not worth it for the disappointment factor and just having to check to see if you know it or now. Plus they're not *that* expensive. Blueprints, on the other hand, are, and there known ones can drop.


    This creates a strange situation where player is incentivized to delay learning of any new hullmods he finds, but doesn't immediately need to use. Instead storing them in cargo or storage until they are really needed to be learned. This way allowing them to spawn in loot again, to be sold for profit.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 23, 2018, 09:34:20 PM
    This creates a strange situation where player is incentivized to delay learning of any new hullmods he finds, but doesn't immediately need to use. Instead storing them in cargo or storage until they are really needed to be learned. This way allowing them to spawn in loot again, to be sold for profit.
    Automatically convert known hullmods found as loot into credits.

    That said, I do not know if storage of any kind will be 100% safe, given raids and all, not to mention storage fees if it is not your colony.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 24, 2018, 01:30:12 AM
    More options = more fun in my book, ( although i guess you need to keep to maybe 10? active skills but no reason not to allow plenty of passive's and unlocks elsewhere in the skill tree!!??... )

    I think that's true as long as the options generally provide interesting choices, and it feels like with the current numbers, the options actually outnumber the choices quite a bit, if that makes sense.

    Am sure you'll make a good decision regardless as Starsector is truly a marvel to play!!  :)

    Thank you for the vote of confidence :)


    I will of course lose those other ships in the dramatic opening scene fight, against the terrible pirate armada which is thereby established as my mortal enemy (and totally not just the first big pirate fleet I see). You see, the pirate admiral is actually my uncle, who, as I discovered earlier, murdered my father, an techno-archaelogist, to get to the rare treasurers he uncovered.
    After this failed attempt at revenge I will have no choice but to flee to the furthest reaches of the Sector, only to discover a new purpose for my existence, out among the stars. While I turn towards exploration and archaelogy, just like my father once did, my uncle's treachey and my need for revenge never quite leave the back of my mind...

    Scuttle it? What do you take me for?

    A red-handed ... techno-archaeologist, apparently.


    This creates a strange situation where player is incentivized to delay learning of any new hullmods he finds, but doesn't immediately need to use. Instead storing them in cargo or storage until they are really needed to be learned. This way allowing them to spawn in loot again, to be sold for profit.

    That's a fair point. There are also cases where knowing a hullmod will mean a hullmod you don't know will drop, though; that's just not how stores work.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bribe Guntails on October 24, 2018, 01:41:50 AM
    This creates a strange situation where player is incentivized to delay learning of any new hullmods he finds, but doesn't immediately need to use. Instead storing them in cargo or storage until they are really needed to be learned. This way allowing them to spawn in loot again, to be sold for profit.

    That's a fair point. There are also cases where knowing a hullmod will mean a hullmod you don't know will drop, though; that's just not how stores work.
    Alternatively hull mods could be worth 0 credits to sell, or you automatically learn them when they're first transferred into your fleet inventory (with feedback before the screen closes).
    I like the latter idea, just need a check to prevent learning already-learned mods.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on October 24, 2018, 09:11:32 AM
    I'd prefer if they got re-rolled into non-hullmod items of similar rarity but this is a really minor point.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on October 24, 2018, 02:57:41 PM
    •Implemented Tech-Mining Industry
    ?Chance to find blueprints, modspecs and other rare items, based on the size of ruins being mined
    ?Generates some basic commodities (fuel, supplies, metals, machinery); delivered to gathering point
    ?Output goes down over time

    This reminds me alot of another book from H. Beam Piper (Space Vikings), The Cosmic Computer. It describes an entire planet where the industry is based on tech mining, as it was once a miliatry staging point in an interstellar war. The protagonists are looking for the crown jewel of the technological remains, said super computer. I dind't get very far yet though, the blatant 50s misogyny is a real turn-off.



    •Can "stabilize" a colony that's suffering from Recent Unrest?Maximum equal to Recent Unrest minus one

    ?Expensive - generally not worth it purely to improve colony income through higher stability
    ?Primarily a means to stave off the decivilization of a bombarded/raided colony

    Doesn't that mean you can never decivilize a rich factions colony? Like, you completly control the system, raid/bomb the enemy colony to reduce stability, they just pay a heap of credits and like by an invisible hand, all your destructive effort is undone? Same for the reverse, just channeling credits seems like a boring way to safe your colony.
    Maybe something like a expensive "disaster relief fleet" that has to be send from another planet would provide more chances of interaction.


    •Added hullmods:

    Looking forward to playing around with those civillian hullmods:)










    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Carabus on October 24, 2018, 03:07:20 PM
    Alternatively hull mods could be worth 0 credits to sell, or you automatically learn them when they're first transferred into your fleet inventory (with feedback before the screen closes).
    I like the latter idea, just need a check to prevent learning already-learned mods.

    I like this idea too. Could be combined with them "disappearing" from markets once you learn them. And make markets only ever have 1 hullmod per stack so you can't buy more. This way there is no way of double-acquiring one hullmod (as they won't appear in loot either), and also it won't look like a trade good to be sold, as you will never have it in your inventory. And without separate "learn" step there will be one click less. :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on October 24, 2018, 04:05:14 PM
    If learned hull mods do not spawn, there is no point in having them be worth money. They only time you would sell them is if they were so bad you would never use them, or if you were abusing the method mentioned above (leaving them in storage 'unlearned' to farm more). Neither of these seem like desirable game mechanics. Maybe a third case where you are very desperate for money, but they aren't worth much, so that hardly seems realistic.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 24, 2018, 04:36:57 PM
    This is a case where gameplay considerations trump logic or verisimilitude.  If anything, I would not like it because I get a bit less loot and feel ripped off, but since exact loot varies, player has no way of knowing if the hullmod would drop in the first place (if he did not have the hullmod).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embercloud on October 24, 2018, 05:00:12 PM
    To be frank, why wouldn’t you endeavour to sell already known hullmods? They may be redundant to you but there is always someone where that is not the case. It’s a really good way to make money


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 24, 2018, 05:10:23 PM
    This reminds me alot of another book from H. Beam Piper (Space Vikings), The Cosmic Computer. It describes an entire planet where the industry is based on tech mining, as it was once a miliatry staging point in an interstellar war. The protagonists are looking for the crown jewel of the technological remains, said super computer. I dind't get very far yet though, the blatant 50s misogyny is a real turn-off.

    Yeah, that may or may not be a direct inspiration for tech-mining. Aaand, yeah, I kind of had to approach the books as a "historical artifact" to get past that stuff - like, they're very interesting, but it's also hard to unreservedly recommend them.

    Doesn't that mean you can never decivilize a rich factions colony? Like, you completly control the system, raid/bomb the enemy colony to reduce stability, they just pay a heap of credits and like by an invisible hand, all your destructive effort is undone? Same for the reverse, just channeling credits seems like a boring way to safe your colony.
    Maybe something like a expensive "disaster relief fleet" that has to be send from another planet would provide more chances of interaction.

    Well, the AI doesn't do that :) Right now, it's just a mechanic for the player to be able to do something to save one of their colonies. If the AI did do this, then it'd probably be possible to balance out with costs and alternate demands on credits. For example, does it do that, or does it launch a military operation to defend another system? As long as it's plausible, I think it'd be alright. A relief fleet is a nice idea, though; could definitely go in that direction if it were to get more fleshed out.

    (It also wouldn't undo all of the destruction - you may stabilize the colony and prevent decivilization, but all of its industries are still knocked out for the better part of a year, and it may have gone down in size as well.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on October 24, 2018, 05:49:31 PM
    To be frank, why wouldn’t you endeavour to sell already known hullmods? They may be redundant to you but there is always someone where that is not the case. It’s a really good way to make money
    My understanding of the patch notes is that learned hull mods no longer drop as loot, so you can't sell them because you will never get them. Obviously you would sell duplicate hull mods if you had them. Someone pointed out that this might result in behavior where you don't learn hull mods so that you can continue getting them as loot to sell, which seems like counterintuitive gameplay.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on October 24, 2018, 06:23:32 PM
    My understanding of the patch notes is that learned hull mods no longer drop as loot, so you can't sell them because you will never get them. Obviously you would sell duplicate hull mods if you had them. Someone pointed out that this might result in behavior where you don't learn hull mods so that you can continue getting them as loot to sell, which seems like counterintuitive gameplay.

    Especially considering that hullmods are only rivaled by AI cores in cost/weight ratio.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Deshara on October 24, 2018, 09:48:27 PM
    Like Foof, I do not care about Solar Shielding's campaign benefit.  There are much better campaign hullmods I like to use (like Automated Repair Unit) but do not due to limited OP totals.  Less energy damage taken would be the only reason I would want to install solar shielding.

    that reminds me, hey Alex since you're implementing campaign-level costs to campaign-level logistics hullmods, and since I never use them bc my fleet is always so OP-starved for effectiveness in combat, how would you feel about a hullmod that translates the OP cost of all logistical campaign-level hullmods into increased operations costs & free up OP for combat, as a reward for late-game fleets that have a hefty income in need of a profit sink that feeds back into combat?

    are system requeriments modified by new release ? (i hope you all understand what i wanna mean, i'm still learning english and not sure if i write correctly)
    thanks

    The game doesn’t really require a high end computer, in any case, and if your computer is struggling during large battles, a workaround could be to lower the possible deployment points. This would force less ships participating in the battle.

    the reason I fell so deeply into this game is bc I was stuck playing on a potato (and a mac, at that lmfao)

    Thank you! Really looking forward to that, (gritty) Enterprise roleplaying enabled!

    It's not a single ship, right, but you could of course scuttle everything else :)


    Scuttle it? What do you take me for?

    I will of course lose those other ships in the dramatic opening scene fight, against the terrible pirate armada which is thereby established as my mortal enemy (and totally not just the first big pirate fleet I see). You see, the pirate admiral is actually my uncle, who, as I discovered earlier, murdered my father, an techno-archaelogist, to get to the rare treasurers he uncovered.
    After this failed attempt at revenge I will have no choice but to flee to the furthest reaches of the Sector, only to discover a new purpose for my existence, out among the stars. While I turn towards exploration and archaelogy, just like my father once did, my uncle's treachey and my need for revenge never quite leave the back of my mind...

    you know it doesn't sound like it'd be that much work for someone to mod (or dev ;) ) in a starting screen dialogue that lets you select ships in your starting lineup to "sell", the game starts in a retreat battle with an overwhelming force that'll salvage after the battle and then disband and all the ships you sold have malfunctioning burn drives & can't flee the battlefield but you start with their market value in cash.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Goumindong on October 25, 2018, 06:01:23 AM
    My understanding of the patch notes is that learned hull mods no longer drop as loot, so you can't sell them because you will never get them. Obviously you would sell duplicate hull mods if you had them. Someone pointed out that this might result in behavior where you don't learn hull mods so that you can continue getting them as loot to sell, which seems like counterintuitive gameplay.

    Especially considering that hullmods are only rivaled by AI cores in cost/weight ratio.

    True, but diagetically selling hullmods doesn’t work.

    Hull mods take up space because everything takes up space but otherwise they would be zero.  They’re not things you install but rather learn. The problem is that hull mods could not be treated as a commodity and would be difficult to implement into the game terms of acquiring... as everything else goes into inventory and is a commodity.

    So if you use a hull mod think of, instead of this being a value to you, that you have lost the ability to sell exclusivity rights.  It was exclusivity rights that were being bought when you sold a hull mod, rather than the thing itself. The main colonies make money by selling their knowledge... but only if things they don’t feel they need exclusive use of. Others won’t buy wheat you have learned because you cannot sell them what they want, which is the right to use it exclusively.  Not the right for you to dilute their use by selling it to someone else


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 25, 2018, 07:55:29 PM
    For the releases 0.7a and 0.8a, it appears their release were about one month after their last pre-release patch notes.  If this October patch notes is the last before release, and the upcoming release follows history, we could see a release around mid-to-late November.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on October 25, 2018, 10:52:43 PM
    For the releases 0.7a and 0.8a, it appears their release were about one month after their last pre-release patch notes.  If this October patch notes is the last before release, and the upcoming release follows history, we could see a release around mid-to-late November.
    So now the question is, will 0.9a be our thanksgiving or Xmas gift :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on October 26, 2018, 03:06:27 AM
    Many thanks Alex for the new notes!

    Apogee Fan wall of text to follow.....

    As someone that fell in love with the Apogee during my iron-mode play-through, the Apogee is already an excellent cruiser:
    -1st Rate shields (0.60 base)
    -Large Energy & Large Missile hardpoints
    -Reasonably good base speed (60)
    -Decent amount of cargo space
    -Built in High resolution sensors and surveying equipment (Excellent for reducing surveying costs in the current version).

    With the right officer perks and hardened shields you can get the shields flux down to 0.32/Damage, making them extremely tough.  I use Locust SRM'S and a converted hanger with a Xyphos wing for additional PD support (not to mention the built in Active Flare launcher) to make it an excellent anti-fighter platform/tank, and use an Autopulse & 2xMedium Gravitons and a Tactical laser for primary damage (it's forward damage is it's weak point, and I'm short on OP after all the hullmods I have installed).  This current configuration works best against swarms of fighters, but holds up well against any other high damage sources; there were very few cases that I was concerned even on iron-mode due to the overall durability of the Apogee.

    The Autopulse laser & Converted hanger changes will free up another 14 OP (50% OP cost on Xyphos (15 OP) & no need for Expanded magazines (7 OP) ); so while I would say overall that the Converted Hanger changes will be a nerf in this case, I'll still have spare OP in exchange (Xyphos are tough and stick close to my Apogee so don't often die, so the replacement rate was never an issue for me).

    Looking at the changes:
    "Reduced fuel/ly to 2"
    -This is a rather nice buff, makes sense for a long range exploration ship to get better fuel/ly, and it becomes an even nicer choice for exploration/surveying/salvaging.

    "Increased fuel capacity to 200 and cargo capacity to 400"
    -Small, but nice little buffs, I guess it is being moved further into an explorer/salvaging role, which suites my current play-style :)

    "Changed arc of large front hardpoint to 10 degrees (was: 5)"
    -Don't think I really noticed this...or perhaps I did at first but learned to work with it as I familiarized myself with the Apogee.

    "Reduced deployment and supplies/month costs to 18 (was: 25)"
    -It may be because I love level 3 energy weapons (and exploration), but I've tried the Aurora, Dominator, Doom (well it is getting buffed now..), Eagle & Falcon and the Apogee is my favourite of the lot.  If the other cruisers got OP reductions as well I would feel better about this change, but otherwise it seems a bit too much for the only cruiser with a Level 3 Energy weapon and 0.6 flux/damage shields (If you have to nerf anything, please leave the shields at 0.6; the best feature of the Apogee IMO is it's ability to take huge amounts of shield damage).

    However:
    "Changed coverage of medium turrets to not cover front and overlap in the back"

    This is a bit of a downgrade, but the Apogee is pretty weak in terms of forward firepower.  I admit I only use the two Medium's for Graviton beams, but I'm running short on OP (Lots of hull-mods, and no vents or capacitors).  Not having that additional extra power (albeit weak) of those mediums is going to be missed (even if they were useless against small targets since the beams can't converge).  I'm wondering what your intention was with this change (eg stop the Apogee out damaging other cruisers in exchange for better cost effectiveness as an explorer/salvager ship)?

    If the reason for the change is to reduce it's forward firepower, then perhaps those medium energy turrets could be removed and replaced with non-removable 360 degree Point Defence system (eg something like the monitor's Flak), it's already a tough ship, but I feel that this would be much more useful then having two rear-only firing medium energy weapons.

    Another separate thought is that the forward-most (left side) small energy turret only covers the back & side, while the other small energy turret (rear, right side) overlaps a little on the front.  With the changes to the medium energy turrets, only a single small energy turret will now be able to cover part of the front (rear, right side one).  If you could rotate the arc of the forward-most small energy turret 45 degrees or so clockwise so that it covers part of the same arc in the forward position as the other small energy turret then at least they could both provide focused fire on front located threats with PD weapons or be equipped with tactical lasers to provide a bit more extra DPS to make the loss of the two front facing mediums a little easier to digest.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 26, 2018, 03:35:18 AM
    Thank you for the writeup, it's always fun to read something in-depth!

    The Autopulse laser & Converted hanger changes will free up another 14 OP (50% OP cost on Xyphos (15 OP) & no need for Expanded magazines (7 OP) ); so while I would say overall that the Converted Hanger changes will be a nerf in this case, I'll still have spare OP in exchange (Xyphos are tough and stick close to my Apogee so don't often die, so the replacement rate was never an issue for me).

    Hmm - unless I'm missing something it's actually a wash, since the Xyphos will cost 50% *more* than its base cost, while bombers in CH would cost double.

    Not having that additional extra power (albeit weak) of those mediums is going to be missed (even if they were useless against small targets since the beams can't converge).  I'm wondering what your intention was with this change (eg stop the Apogee out damaging other cruisers in exchange for better cost effectiveness as an explorer/salvager ship)?

    (Mostly because it's just awkward - both for arc and placement reasons - and the beams overlap the hull in ways that I generally try to avoid when working out ship layouts. It also seems like a reasonable thing to pair with the deployment cost reduction, which in turn makes it a more viable exploration ship - especially considering it's now available with one of the starting options.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on October 26, 2018, 04:38:38 AM
    Hmm - unless I'm missing something it's actually a wash, since the Xyphos will cost 50% *more* than its base cost, while bombers in CH would cost double.

    Ahhh...so it is, I read the notes incorrectly as a discount, whoops!. 

    Hmmm, this seems rather harsh cost in some cases for the converted hanger.  If you don't care about replacement rate in the case of me using Xyphos for mobile point defense, it is all pretty much bad news (more expensive ships that are slower and easier to kill).  Currently bigger ships with converted hangers provide better replacement rates, but cost more OP to install.  Could the converted hanger cost be flat across all ship types, ie make it 10 OP cost regardless of whether it is on a Destroyer/Cruiser/Capital ship, or provide some other benefit for the increase in OP cost as before?

    (Mostly because it's just awkward - both for arc and placement reasons - and the beams overlap the hull in ways that I generally try to avoid when working out ship layouts. It also seems like a reasonable thing to pair with the deployment cost reduction, which in turn makes it a more viable exploration ship - especially considering it's now available with one of the starting options.)

    Fair enough, I can easily accept the cost reduction as part of that deal, but I guess then the medium mounts don't really seem to have a clear role/purpose, hence the thought of removing them all together and replacing them with a fixed built in system with better coverage, but perhaps that will be the same problem with the overlap that you don't like.  I'm guessing that the small energy turret mount on the front left having it's turret arc rotated so that it covers part of the front is a no go, maybe for the same reasons?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on October 26, 2018, 04:44:31 AM
    I like the idea of replacing the mediums with some built in pd. Maybe like the monitor with built in flak, but that might too good so maybe some nerfed flak or built in burst pd?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 26, 2018, 05:08:10 AM
    Hmmm, this seems rather harsh cost in some cases for the converted hanger.  If you don't care about replacement rate in the case of me using Xyphos for mobile point defense, it is all pretty much bad news (more expensive ships that are slower and easier to kill).  Currently bigger ships with converted hangers provide better replacement rates, but cost more OP to install.  Could the converted hanger cost be flat across all ship types, ie make it 10 OP cost regardless of whether it is on a Destroyer/Cruiser/Capital ship, or provide some other benefit for the increase in OP cost as before?

    It's definitely just more expensive for that specific case, but, well, making it more expensive is kind of the point. On the flip side of not caring about the replacement rate, you also don't care about the speed penalty, and the damage taken penalty doesn't seem huge in that case either - and if it is an issue, then the replacement rate is better, and that factors in too.

    As far as larger ships, I *think* a higher cost for hullmod is probably warranted because fighters can add a lot of flexibility and act as a force multiplier for the ship; e.g. a wing of say Longbows is worth more on a ship with the firepower to back them up, etc. It kind of has to be a case of picking an optimal set of fighters for a ship to maximize the effectiveness, rather than slapping on any fighter being baseline-beneficial.


    (It's hangar! Sorry; pet peeve.)


    I'm guessing that the small energy turret mount on the front left having it's turret arc rotated so that it covers part of the front is a no go, maybe for the same reasons?

    Yep, it's just not positioned well for that.


    I like the idea of replacing the mediums with some built in pd. Maybe like the monitor with built in flak, but that might too good so maybe some nerfed flak or built in burst pd?

    Generally speaking I want to be restrained with built-in weapons and such to keep them special. I also don't really like making "regular" weapons built-in; the Monitor is a bit of a special case, not something I want to add more of, if that makes sense. That said, yeah, the mediums are of limited utility - but even if they end up being used for small PD, that's not too bad.         


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on October 26, 2018, 05:15:02 AM
    For me, the Apogee has first and foremost been a support ship.  Always have a couple other ships, even if only frigates, along with it, as it was never designed to deal with other enemies completely on it's own.  200 extra Kinetic beam DPS from Gravitons was never a considerable amount of damage due to beams not causing hard flux (and was only really effective against cruisers or larger due to the arcs being directly forward, meaning there's a wide gap).  So that nerf doesn't affect me in the long run, but I'm glad for the other buffs especially.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on October 26, 2018, 06:35:48 AM
    Apogee could stand on it's own with Autopulse or Plasma (losing 2 Gravitons in forward arc would probably make this unfeasible).
    But then there is a problem of being slow and short ranged (hard flux range) at the same time. You can win against faster+longer ranged opponent because AI is fairly bad at range management, but it's still better to not put yourself in such disadvantaged position by piloting one of better ships.

    Hmm, considering that Needlers are obsoleted in next update (at 700 range they are inferior to Railguns for most practical purposes), Apogee might be actually decent in next update.
    Needlers were Apogee's main weakness, HVD on something like Hammerhead has just low enough damage/fire rate to be vent-tankable till enemy CR runs out.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on October 26, 2018, 06:37:54 AM
    It's definitely just more expensive for that specific case, but, well, making it more expensive is kind of the point. On the flip side of not caring about the replacement rate, you also don't care about the speed penalty, and the damage taken penalty doesn't seem huge in that case either - and if it is an issue, then the replacement rate is better, and that factors in too.

    As far as larger ships, I *think* a higher cost for hullmod is probably warranted because fighters can add a lot of flexibility and act as a force multiplier for the ship; e.g. a wing of say Longbows is worth more on a ship with the firepower to back them up, etc. It kind of has to be a case of picking an optimal set of fighters for a ship to maximize the effectiveness, rather than slapping on any fighter being baseline-beneficial.


    (It's hangar! Sorry; pet peeve.)

    I'm not really sure; if the speed is decreased and the damage taken is increased, then I would think it would be less able to take evasive action to reduce the incoming damage, making it still more fragile.  Though it is more the cost increase that seems excessive, currently I need 30 OP for the converted hangar and Xyphos wing, this gives me:

    2 x Burst PD lasers (14 OP worth)
    2 x Ion Beams (24 OP worth)

    Alright, so looking at that a 50% increase isn't that bad and will bring it in line with the cost of the weapons they use (it feels expensive, but even these numbers are telling me that it isn't true).  Well looks like I've taken the wind out of that argument, but there is still the remaining OP cost of the hangar itself (That hangar/hanger will take some getting used to, so I may accidentally swap in the 'e' at anytime, so I apologize in advance :) ).

    In most cases I've noticed with hull-mods there is a pretty good explanation or buff for the increase in OP cost that comes with different sizes of ships. eg
    -Blast Doors (more crew, bigger ship)
    -Reinforced Bulkheads (bigger ship, more volume to cover)
    -Integrated Target Unit (better range)
    -Unstable Injector (bigger engines for a heavier ship)
    -Hardened Shields (bigger shield emitter, more volume to encapsulate)

    If the hangar's is identical whether it is on a Destroyer/Cruiser/Capital Ship, what is causing the additional OP cost?

    All right I guess this is where game balance comes in (rather than rationalizing the changes with what you expect in reality or the rules of a made up one), and if I'm a bit more honest there are some hull-mods that do this (eg Expanded Missile Racks depends on ship size rather than how many missiles you are using).

    Maybe you could apply a bonus depending on the size of the ship the hangar is installed on:
    Destroyer: -33% speed, +50% damage taken
    Cruiser: -22% speed, +33.3% damage taken
    Capital: -11% speed, +16.6% damage taken

    In any case I like the changes for the Apogee for the most part, I'll miss the damage a bit and I'm just a little lost as what to do with those medium energy mounts now (kind of almost wish they would just disappear all together so I don't have to think about it), but those amazing shields are still there so it's all good.

    My Favourite Apogee configuration in 0.8.1a:
    (https://i.imgur.com/xYpMqeC.png)

    (BTW, do you generally round down or up in the case of fighter OP costs?, (15*1.5 = 22.5) 22 OP would still allow me to use this same configuration here by removing the Expanded Magazines, although I'll likely change this with the new weapon arcs...hmmm...however as a thought, expanded magazines would increase the Autopulse Laser to 45 projectiles now wouldn't it?)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Algro on October 26, 2018, 06:54:24 AM
    It's kinda sad to see the Apogee losing its two medium weapon slot frontal firepower because of the ship layout.

    Apogee is my favorite ship and has always been since the 0.6 era, the extended 20% increased firing range was what made it unique out of the bunch. Although this was changed it still had its shields and my favorite heavy + medium long-range laser combo for map control.

    My usage of this ship is to equip only a Locust, a Plasma Cannon, and two medium graviton beams. Using hull mods this ship can have massive flux dissipation rates, amazing shields, extreme range and complete usage of its only large energy mount. In this setup, everything counts, the two beams lock the enemy in place 1000+ range away and most importantly doesn't let the opponent recover flux. (I use no small slots because I expect some sort of escort)

    But with this change, by losing two medium weapons, it almost loses all of its ability to keep its pressure on 1v1 engagements, and thus truly turning the Apogee into a support ship with only two large slots. This could be the intention, but it still nonetheless takes a massive chunk of its fighting potential away from it.

    Being a rare ship with military capabilities and advanced scientific technologies, it already lost its high tech long-range edge when its system was changed, now the change threatens its usage as a capable military vessel. I really hope to see the two medium slots viable in combat and not turned into PD slots, even at the expense of higher deployment costs.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 26, 2018, 12:18:12 PM
    @ TaLaR:  Only light needlers are losing range.  It seems heavy needlers still keep 800 range.  That said, I agree with you that light needlers will probably be obsolete if railguns are an option.  Not only that, but refire delay will be even longer, so unless it outright overloads shields (for significant duration) like AM Blaster, so-called "burst damage" will be a wash.  OP totals for most ships are low, and I do not want to spend 2 more OP on a fancier railgun than a basic railgun.

    Thought about heavy mauler a bit, and with its DPS cut, it seems it will go from all-purpose weapon to pure sniper weapon when range is paramount (like Gauss Cannon).  It may seem too much of a nerf if all else stays the same.  With less DPS, it would be nice if either accuracy is improved (heavy mauler's accuracy degrades enough with sustained fire) or its OP cost lowered a bit (to 10 or 11).

    Also, Heavy Mauler will no longer be a pure upgrade over Heavy Mortar, but a sidegrade instead.  That is, trading DPS for range.  We have two medium HE weapons for mid-range combat or longer.  Heavy Mortar, which is slow and has 700 range, and Heavy Mauler, which will become a HE HVD with less accuracy.  I don't know about you (no one in particular), but Heavy Mortar is a bit of a pain to use, with slow shot speed and only 700 range, and mauler will fire slower, so two slow-firing weapons.  Currently, Heavy Mauler is the one HE to rule them all and clear upgrade over Heavy Mortar, but that will no longer be the case.  This means we will no longer have a fast, high-powered anti-armor medium weapon to use.  Basically, a new gap in medium anti-armor weaponry.  I almost want the classic Assault Chaingun back, but with better accuracy and 800 range.  In other words, I would not mind a clear medium-range upgrade over Heavy Mortar that costs 10+ OP, whatever it is.  Could be super LAG/chaingun or single-barreled Mjolnir with 800 range, anything aside from slow mortars or weak mauler.

    Re: Apogee
    While its lore has always been explorer ship, it was basically a warship of the line until 0.8, not unlike Venture.  Apogee is simply evolving toward its purpose.  However, I would not mind if the two small hardpoints were upgraded somehow.  They are kind of useless, poking with beams is not much help, and anything else is no good when enemies play keep away.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Schwartz on October 26, 2018, 02:09:51 PM
    Yeah, Apogee will be more awkward to play with different medium arcs. I'm not sure what its role will be... it had good shield efficiency and was a bit lumbering, lending itself well to the sniper role. Now it's supposed to go into the thick of it, but it's not that agile for a front-facing gun boat.

    Needlers did not need changing imo.
    Mauler nerf is a bit much, half that would have been fine.

    That's about it, everything else is AOK and I look forward to the changes.

    Has that crackling sound issue when combat starts and everybody fires their afterburners ever been fixed? Because I bet that's because of many overlapping sound sources. Increasing the # of voices, we might get more crackling in places.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 26, 2018, 02:22:31 PM
    Yeah, Apogee will be more awkward to play with different medium arcs. I'm not sure what its role will be...
    Non-combatant (after early game) that can use a few guns effectively if desperate, like Wayfarer, 0.8 Mule, and Venture.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on October 26, 2018, 02:46:35 PM
    I kind of wonder what arcs do Apogee's med energy mount get then?
    I read they "not cover front", do they shoot at least parallel?
    If they do it's still good to mount things like ion beams to add extra pressure as long range beam support, otherwise they'll both go burst PD(small) for me.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 26, 2018, 02:53:35 PM
    Either burst PD or left empty.  Apogee is a bit OP-starved if it wants to use plasma cannon and some missiles.  There is always Converted Hangar if it needs more weapons and you somehow have OP to burn.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on October 26, 2018, 03:59:16 PM
    I kind of wonder what arcs do Apogee's med energy mount get then?
    I read they "not cover front", do they shoot at least parallel?
    If they do it's still good to mount things like ion beams to add extra pressure as long range beam support, otherwise they'll both go burst PD(small) for me.
    Currently, those arcs do shoot parallel.  The distance is pretty wide though.  With this update they'll not be able to do that.  They'll probably get used for point defense now, or just get rid of them for more spare OP (in my case, probably Converted Hangars).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on October 26, 2018, 04:09:07 PM
    Either burst PD or left empty.  Apogee is a bit OP-starved if it wants to use plasma cannon and some missiles.  There is always Converted Hangar if it needs more weapons and you somehow have OP to burn.
    The converted hanger is now super OP consuming so it's out of the list. Just putting a longbow LPC is a total cost of 39 OP, which I don't think it really worth the price. Even just putting some fighters for PD, why not just get Apogee itself filled with burst PD? Maybe wasps fits, idk...

    I've never considered using plasma cannon for Apogee, though. Considering it's cruiser hull, I prefer tachyon lance/tactical laser and squall build. As squall constantly build hard flux, tachyon lance starts to arc and rip the armor/hull. It doesn't have speed like sunder to gun and run thus range is quite essential.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on October 26, 2018, 04:13:19 PM
    @Megas
    Yeah, it seems Heavy Needler does not get range nerf.

    And you are correct that we won't have a decent HE weapon to pair it with. Heavy Mortar is too short ranged (700, but efficient range is even less due to shot speed) and Mauler is really low dps.
    At this rate, Heavy Blaster will probably be the best medium 'HE'.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 26, 2018, 04:45:04 PM
    At this rate, Heavy Blaster will probably be the best medium 'HE'.
    Not for ballistic mounts, which cannot use it.

    Heavy Mortar's 700 range and slow shot speed makes it an awkward pair for Heavy AC/Needler.  Currently, Heavy Mauler is good enough to pair with AC/Needler (when HVD DPS is not enough), but not with the altered one in 0.9.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on October 26, 2018, 05:06:56 PM
    I definitely agree that the forward small energies on apogee could use some change, they are pretty useless


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 26, 2018, 05:29:07 PM
    Before 0.8, small energies were useful for AM Blasters or ion cannons for close range builds with autopulse up front and heavy blasters on the rear medium mounts, when AI did not cower and stall.  Even tac laser poke was handy before 0.8 because AI always kept shield up if in range.

    Today, I am better off leaving them (and other mounts) blank so I have enough OP to tank up on flux stats and use plasma cannon effectively, maybe add Locusts as a finisher.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 26, 2018, 06:09:45 PM
    (That hangar/hanger will take some getting used to, so I may accidentally swap in the 'e' at anytime, so I apologize in advance :) ).

    It's the effort that counts :)

    In most cases I've noticed with hull-mods there is a pretty good explanation or buff for the increase in OP cost that comes with different sizes of ships. eg
    -Blast Doors (more crew, bigger ship)
    -Reinforced Bulkheads (bigger ship, more volume to cover)
    -Integrated Target Unit (better range)
    -Unstable Injector (bigger engines for a heavier ship)
    -Hardened Shields (bigger shield emitter, more volume to encapsulate)

    If the hangar's is identical whether it is on a Destroyer/Cruiser/Capital Ship, what is causing the additional OP cost?

    All right I guess this is where game balance comes in (rather than rationalizing the changes with what you expect in reality or the rules of a made up one), and if I'm a bit more honest there are some hull-mods that do this (eg Expanded Missile Racks depends on ship size rather than how many missiles you are using).

    Right, it's gameplay/balance driven. But it's fun (and usually easy!) to come up with some in-fiction reasons, too. So, let's see: it's a conversion of the ship's main hangar, right, or at least a portion of it. Presumably, for a larger ship, messing with its hangar disrupts the ship's operations more because, well, there's more to disrupt. It may have a larger hangar, meaning a smaller portion of it is converted, but that's not necessarily linear with the amount of disruption caused. More stuff has to be put on hold while those Talons are whizzing out of the hangar, or being repaired, you know? Can't just carry on regular operations with live ordnance being loaded in 10 feet away. Therefore: a higher OP cost.

    My Favourite Apogee configuration in 0.8.1a:
    (https://i.imgur.com/xYpMqeC.png)

    Cool! I'm a fan of the Locust myself, it's really versatile.

    (BTW, do you generally round down or up in the case of fighter OP costs?, (15*1.5 = 22.5) 22 OP would still allow me to use this same configuration here by removing the Expanded Magazines, although I'll likely change this with the new weapon arcs...hmmm...however as a thought, expanded magazines would increase the Autopulse Laser to 45 projectiles now wouldn't it?)

    It's rounded, so it'd be 23 OP.


    Being a rare ship with military capabilities and advanced scientific technologies, it already lost its high tech long-range edge when its system was changed, now the change threatens its usage as a capable military vessel. I really hope to see the two medium slots viable in combat and not turned into PD slots, even at the expense of higher deployment costs.

    Re: Apogee
    While its lore has always been explorer ship, it was basically a warship of the line until 0.8, not unlike Venture.  Apogee is simply evolving toward its purpose.  However, I would not mind if the two small hardpoints were upgraded somehow.  They are kind of useless, poking with beams is not much help, and anything else is no good when enemies play keep away.

    Yep, very much this. Keep in mind it's also way, way cheaper to deploy now.


    Has that crackling sound issue when combat starts and everybody fires their afterburners ever been fixed? Because I bet that's because of many overlapping sound sources. Increasing the # of voices, we might get more crackling in places.

    I haven't actually experienced this myself, so it's not a universal thing, though I do know what you're talking about. In general, things should be better in this department becaus of some changes to the combat sounds which separate them out into different frequency ranges more.


    Re: Heavy Mauler - hmm, I think you all might be 1) underestimating how great it was to begin with, and 2) overestimating the importance of raw DPS for an HE weapon. I guess we'll see how it plays out, though!

    I will say that in general I'm ok with the "medium HE" niche being somewhat underwhelming because that's a gap that can be more easily filled in with missiles of various flavors.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on October 26, 2018, 08:26:59 PM
    re: Apogee

    For being a potential starter ship, it has to be toned down. I think for an exploration vessel, medium hardpoint arcs notwithstanding, it's still pretty well-armed. That it's able to do its intended role now is just par for the course.

    re: Heavy Mauler

    It really was The King and nothing else came close. That it's nerfed doesn't make it bad, it just puts it on par with everything else. It's closer to the HVD now, which is still a good weapon. It still crushes armor and at range. Misses will hurt a lot, though.

    Now the real question that needs to be answered is where is the Light Mauler? A higher damage-per-shot, low-RoF, long-range Small HE would be welcome. :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 26, 2018, 08:51:10 PM
    Now the real question that needs to be answered is where is the Light Mauler? A higher damage-per-shot, low-RoF, long-range Small HE would be welcome. :)
    Same place as the swift, moderate-to-high RoF, easy-to-use 800 range medium HE weapon with 200 or so DPS to compliment Heavy AC/Needler.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on October 26, 2018, 09:39:35 PM
    Same place as all the flux efficient energy weapons  :o


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Deshara on October 26, 2018, 09:54:00 PM
    In most cases I've noticed with hull-mods there is a pretty good explanation or buff for the increase in OP cost that comes with different sizes of ships. eg
    -Blast Doors (more crew, bigger ship)
    -Reinforced Bulkheads (bigger ship, more volume to cover)
    -Integrated Target Unit (better range)
    -Unstable Injector (bigger engines for a heavier ship)
    -Hardened Shields (bigger shield emitter, more volume to encapsulate)

    If the hangar's is identical whether it is on a Destroyer/Cruiser/Capital Ship, what is causing the additional OP cost?

    All right I guess this is where game balance comes in (rather than rationalizing the changes with what you expect in reality or the rules of a made up one), and if I'm a bit more honest there are some hull-mods that do this (eg Expanded Missile Racks depends on ship size rather than how many missiles you are using).

    Right, it's gameplay/balance driven. But it's fun (and usually easy!) to come up with some in-fiction reasons, too. So, let's see: it's a conversion of the ship's main hangar, right, or at least a portion of it. Presumably, for a larger ship, messing with its hangar disrupts the ship's operations more because, well, there's more to disrupt. It may have a larger hangar, meaning a smaller portion of it is converted, but that's not necessarily linear with the amount of disruption caused. More stuff has to be put on hold while those Talons are whizzing out of the hangar, or being repaired, you know? Can't just carry on regular operations with live ordnance being loaded in 10 feet away. Therefore: a higher OP cost.

    bigger ships have bigger hangers, but need more of their hanger for critical operations.
    Semi trucks might have more tires than a pickup truck, but that's because it needs more tires and using those increased amount of tires as storage space (to smuggle) comes at an increased risk of mechanical failure and therefor increased operational costs which is then offset by an increased focus on repairing tire & axel wear by the maintenance crews who are already going to be seeing this truck anyway (and therefor doesn't increase the operation cost) but does accrue a opportunity cost in that there are fewer work-hours for them to work on other areas of the truck, such as streamlining it for performance and efficiency over long-hauls, or increasing the turning rate of its guns or equipping it with shielding for flying thru the outter sphere of the sun


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: zeno on October 27, 2018, 01:52:58 AM
    imo Apogee losing frontal coverage on the medium mounts make them pretty much useless.  I wouldn't even put PD in them, because the return for OP cost is just too low (not to mention Flare + Locust is more than enough PD for any reasonable fight).  Instead, I'd just leave them empty and use the OP savings for Hardened Shield to make Apogee's already efficient shields near impenetrable.  Perhaps consider making the two mediums asymmetric and leave frontal coverage on one of them so putting in a support weapon like ionbeam or graviton is still an option?

    RE: salvage expedition starting scenario
    This is a change that I never knew I wanted, and I couldn't articulate why at first.  After thinking about it for a bit, I realized what this effectively does is shine a spotlight on a ship that's very interesting on paper, but in reality is seldom used, because by the time the player can find/field an Apogee, he's no longer in a phase of the game where using it as a flagship is powerful.  But by having access to it from the get-go, the player now have good reasons to use it and really learn to love it.  This is the same reason why folks disproportionally like the Hammerhead, even though objectively it's merely a decent destroyer.  But because it's available right from the tutorial, it just tears through everything as a flagship.

    If possible, I think this is something that's at least worth a little bit of further expansion to give the same treatment to a few other rarely used ships.  A couple of candidates I can think of would be Scarab and Shade.  Back story can be something like a Pirate Raider start, where you just stole a rare ship from TT, who's now hostile to you from day 1.  The twist is that you start in orbit around Culann Starforge, and the first order of business is to take your stolen ship and get out of Hybrasil, alive =D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 27, 2018, 02:17:03 AM
    There used to be a "privateer" Scarab start at v0.7.2, with hostile Tri-Tachyon.  Repairing reputation took a long time, up to about midgame and higher levels (about high 20's or low 30's).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Linnis on October 28, 2018, 01:28:22 AM
    If Apogee could have the two frontal small mounts placed closer to the large that would be so awesome.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Algro on October 29, 2018, 06:13:01 AM
    This just came to mind, but wouldn't it be a 'thing' to face long-range enemies with the back of the Apogee (which the two mediums now converge) and then turn back to the front after the large energy finishes recharging or comes into range?
    Sounds stupid but actually makes the mediums worthwhile after the change...

    Talking more seriously though, I would be sad if this change makes the Apogee a non-late-game ship. This change generally makes it more available and cheap, but I've always associated it being a state of the art technological gem -- rare, expensive and extremely potent. Therefore, I would strongly go against it being a beginner ship, punishing the Apogee for being the only explorer in the game and instead make another ship to fill the 'early scout' role.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on October 29, 2018, 06:30:42 AM
    Apogee after the changes seems logistically effective (compared to combo of combat ship + cargo hauler + fuel tanker), but that's about it.
    It's still badly threatened by single Hammerhead less than half it's supply cost (which is faster and has more effective range).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on October 29, 2018, 03:33:25 PM
    re Apogee:

    i actually really like the turret arc change, because it feels like a ship that should be good at going on long solo voyages without much in the way of escorts or additional logistics ships. and the new stat changes further reinforce that (even if the vanilla Apogee start does give you escorts too).
    but one of the biggest issues with large ships going solo is that they are very vulnerable to being surrounded by a bunch of smaller ships, even if those are individually quite weak. Apogee now having medium turrets that cover its rear and flanks, combined with the efficient 360° shield it already had, should help mitigate that vulnerability. and against larger threats, it still has decent frontal firepower.

    range could still be an issue though. even as a cruiser with DTC/ITU, its medium energy turrets will only have ~800 range with anything that isn't purely a support weapon, and can easily be outranged by most destroyers with ballistics, even Derelicts.. i have a couple ideas that could help with this, but all of them would probably be significant buffs, which i don't think it needs, especially with the improved logistics stats and lowered costs. :/
    the large missile mount can help with this as well, but it will generally only be either good at pressuring shields, or at breaking through armor, and still relying on non-missile weapons to fulfill the other role.

    overall though, with the more interesting terrain effects, and surveying becoming much more meaningful, i'm really looking forward to doing a solo Apogee exploration run! :]


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 29, 2018, 07:17:48 PM
    The easiest way to solve the range weakness for Apogee is turn the large energy to hybrid so it can use Mjolnir instead of crappy energy and maybe give it a flight deck whether naturally or Converted Hangar or the like.

    With its overhead costs decreasing and its capacities raised, it is moving away from a tanky warship to a high-tech hybrid.  With less cost, it cannot stay on par with Dominator/Eagle/Aurora.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: ArkAngel on October 29, 2018, 10:52:37 PM
    Considering the Apogee’s original design was as a exploration ship, I think making it less combat oriented and more pointed towards survivability/exploration was a good moce. I’ll still miss it as my favorite combat flagship though.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on October 30, 2018, 05:26:45 AM
    Giving the notes another glance, I see that the Luddic Path are getting "cells".  Does that mean there's going to be more blasted Pather bases throughout the sector?  Does that also mean reputation is different between the cells?  And if they are, how will that be represented on the UI?  Or am I completely wrong?  Same idea with Pirates getting more bases - just more bases or is it something more?

    Also, in regards to sector generation, this type of stuff feels a bit odd at times.
    (https://i.imgur.com/LtSYEmW.jpg)
    While exquisitely beautiful, that ring system is just far too large and too close to the parent star. :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on October 30, 2018, 06:11:15 AM
    I think that relates to the new pirate base and pirate raid mechanics. Pirate bases can spawn randomly and send raids to nearby outposts but they can also be destroyed (June blog post), so I imagine pathers will do the same. I think pirate rep is now hard locked at hostile, so pathers might be the same in that regard as well.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on October 30, 2018, 08:25:25 AM
    The Path doesn't see eye-to-eye with the Church, but I feel if you do a Church playthrough you should be able to at least be Neutral with the Path.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Linnis on October 30, 2018, 09:54:50 PM
    The Path doesn't see eye-to-eye with the Church, but I feel if you do a Church playthrough you should be able to at least be Neutral with the Path.

    The path could be friendly if you have church friendly and TT and HEG unfriendly?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: intrinsic_parity on October 31, 2018, 12:04:30 AM
    It would be cool if there was some special event that could alter your relationship with pirates/path. I like the idea of fixed relationships, but maybe with the addition of more narrative based content, there could be some special event that causes your relationship to change to neutral. Maybe bombarding a core hegemony world, or assassinating a hegemony admiral gains you respect within the pirate community. I'm remembering the escape velocity Nova stories fondly while thinking of this.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on October 31, 2018, 05:14:59 AM
    Is it just the Pirates and Pathers establishing new bases to go raiding?  Seems like there should be more than that to it.

    Hm, I'm a bit concerned over the -33% Speed that Converted Hangars and Defective Manufactory give to their fighters.  Some of the slower fighters already struggle to keep up with faster carriers like the Heron and Drover, let alone faster combat ships that you might install Converted Hangars on.  All the non-REDACTED vanilla bombers plus the Warthog, for example, would be completely unable to keep up with a Drover that has the 0-flux boost going if it had the Defective Manufactory d-mod.  If any ships have speed modifiers, then the gap becomes bigger and some more fighters might lag behind.  Having the Wing Commander skill solves most of these issues, but I feel like this is an important enough thing to point out.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on October 31, 2018, 11:45:56 AM
    I missed -33% speed, and that hurts.  It would be silly for fighters to be much slower than its mothership.  Carrier might end up being the fighters' fighter.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on October 31, 2018, 09:43:23 PM
    I don't want to go into the details of Pather "cells" too much; let's just say that it's a colony condition with various mechanical tie-ins to things.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 01, 2018, 12:22:34 AM
    I missed -33% speed, and that hurts.  It would be silly for fighters to be much slower than its mothership.  Carrier might end up being the fighters' fighter.
    Might be a good excuse to add in RECALL for fighters like the old drone systems have.  Carry the fighters into battle rather than let them fly on their own.  Also means you can add wings to fighters while being in combat without having them getting blow up all the time.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on November 01, 2018, 03:11:10 AM
    Might be a good excuse to add in RECALL for fighters like the old drone systems have.  Carry the fighters into battle rather than let them fly on their own.  Also means you can add wings to fighters while being in combat without having them getting blow up all the time.

    Yeah, it's badly needed anyway. For example to restore fighters while being threatened by some beam-boat which is not dangerous to the carrier itself, but can easily pick fighter as they respawn. Or to prevent fighters from suiciding into Flash mines.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Blaine on November 01, 2018, 04:30:30 AM
    I'm more-or-less 90% sure (there's 10% uncertainty there) from my reading that altering Converted Hangars in that way is a reaction to min-maxing strategies that add Converted Hangars to (nearly) every ship in the fleet.

    While I still have a lot to learn about the game in its most recent iteration, I'm approaching the endgame in my current run, and I feel I know enough now to guarantee that I'd never put the altered version of that mod on a ship for any reason. I can think of a whole lot more use for 25-30+ total OP on a cruiser than installing a single hangar bay that produces one wing of slow fighters or bombers that die twice as quickly.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 01, 2018, 04:51:22 AM
    I'm more-or-less 90% sure (there's 10% uncertainty there) from my reading that altering Converted Hangars in that way is a reaction to min-maxing strategies that add Converted Hangars to (nearly) every ship in the fleet.

    While I still have a lot to learn about the game in its most recent iteration, I'm approaching the endgame in my current run, and I feel I know enough now to guarantee that I'd never put the altered version of that mod on a ship for any reason. I can think of a whole lot more use for 25-30+ total OP on a cruiser than installing a single hangar bay that produces one wing of slow fighters or bombers that die twice as quickly.
    I agree with that, putting a wing of Xyphos on pretty much any Cruiser or even a Destroyer could be worked in very nicely as escorts, but with the massively increased OP costs it's pretty much worthless, not only because they're slower, but because they die twice as quick AND cost an absolutely mind-boggling amount of OP.  The only upside is that Converted Hangars can now relaunch and remake fighters with no penalties, but those pale in comparison to the amount of OP you have to spend.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on November 01, 2018, 05:36:15 AM
    New converted hangars seem to be purpose-built for Talons - they are cheap, so even 50% extra it's just 3 OP. Fast enough to remain useful with 33% speed penalty.
    Will respawn at full rate, and I don't care much about their survival after launching swarmers.

    Might be also good for some bombers, IF you can keep attrition down. Longbows are fairly easy to keep safe, for example.

    But anything slow or stuff that needs to tank damage as normal part of lifecycle is out. For example, Warthogs fail in both ways.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 01, 2018, 03:28:38 PM
    0.8 Converted Hangar is already purpose-built for Talons, and maybe Claws too, because replacement rate for anything else is too slow, thanks to rate penalties and no Expanded Deck Crew.  Not to mention it is hard to afford it without Loadout Design 3.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: fall19 on November 01, 2018, 04:15:08 PM
    so is the update coming before Christmas ?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Grievous69 on November 01, 2018, 04:42:48 PM
    Which one?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 01, 2018, 09:16:57 PM
    so is the update coming before Christmas ?

    Hi, and welcome to the forum!

    :-X


    I'm more-or-less 90% sure (there's 10% uncertainty there) from my reading that altering Converted Hangars in that way is a reaction to min-maxing strategies that add Converted Hangars to (nearly) every ship in the fleet.

    While I still have a lot to learn about the game in its most recent iteration, I'm approaching the endgame in my current run, and I feel I know enough now to guarantee that I'd never put the altered version of that mod on a ship for any reason. I can think of a whole lot more use for 25-30+ total OP on a cruiser than installing a single hangar bay that produces one wing of slow fighters or bombers that die twice as quickly.

    Been playing around with this loadout in my current playtesting run:

    (https://i.imgur.com/TYmKJCl.png)

    I think this sort of general build has potential - bombers especially really give a combat ship a capability it otherwise wouldn't. Even if you just think of them in terms of being unlimited missiles - with extended range, to boot - the OP costs start to get fairly close what getting said missiles plus expanded racks, never mind that it doesn't need slots, and that it can be combined with other stuff the ship has to offer which normal carriers don't. And for bombers the penalties barely matter (hence the higher OP cost).

    So for the Enforcer, it's able to provide consistent longer-range support, while being very much a brick, *and* having good punch with its torpedoes. Is it better than a Drover? Definitely not as far as just fighters go, but it's also cheaper, can hold up much better to being outnumbered, and has a decent shot at turning the tide with a few well-placed torpedoes. Haven't had *too* much playtime with it yet, though, just got that setup going today.

    That said, yeah, it's definitely meant to be more a niche thing - something that changes how a ship plays entirely rather than enhancing its normal playstyle, if that makes sense. Sort of like SO in that sense. And it may indeed need a touch more balancing, we'll have to see!

    (Edit: I should add, this is an early game build - my first ship past the initial "mercenary" start - so the choices are largely driven by what's available vs what would be exactly ideal.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 02, 2018, 12:12:57 AM
    Seems fair, I suppose - it sounded a lot worse than it actually is.  What about the inherent problems that the -33% Speed Penalty that Converted Hangars and Damaged Manufactory give?  Mostly bombers being unable to keep up.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 02, 2018, 04:18:58 AM
    That's a good point - let me make it so that fighters can always at least somewhat keep up when ordered to regroup.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on November 02, 2018, 04:54:46 AM
    Heh, so a rubber band catch-up mechanic (like many racing games) when a regroup is ordered.

    Seems fine mostly on paper, but also seems like it could sort of be lightly exploited say if the carrier itself is under attack. Ordering a regroup instead of an engage order on one of the specific ships attacking the carrier, would result in them getting back faster. Huge problem? Eh not really, but is something to keep in mind.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on November 02, 2018, 05:00:59 AM
    Yeah, this sounds gamey. Could we just order fighters to stay docked instead? It would be useful in some other contexts too.
    Then again, we already get reduced reinforcement rate loss from just setting fighters on regroup (before they actually reach regroup position)... So it may be a lost cause by this point.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 02, 2018, 05:29:16 AM
    I mean, fighters already get a speed boost when moving into position relative to their wing leader, and I don't remember anyone worrying too much about that :) So just think of this as improving the consistency of fighter mechanics across the board.


    Could we just order fighters to stay docked instead?

    Hmm. It's more controls, it reduces the ability of pressure on the carrier to deal with its fighters, and it reduces the ability of the player to at-a-glance evaluate the state of a carrier's fighters, both friendly and enemy.

    For this particular case, I think it also probably wouldn't work very well because it would still require fighters to catch up with a moving carrier, or for the carrier to stop/slow down - which is actually a tough problem to solve for the AI, because of so many conflicting considerations, and a pain for the player.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on November 02, 2018, 05:30:33 AM
    How much of a speed boost are you talking about here Alex? For catching up with the carrier when set to regroup.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 02, 2018, 05:35:01 AM
    Up to the carrier's speed plus 20, right now. Which, generally speaking, means a slight boost to the slower bombers/Warthog when they're used with CH or Defective Manufactory, and that's mostly it. They don't zoom around or anything.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Chronosfear on November 02, 2018, 06:09:57 PM
    so is the update coming before Christmas ?

    Hi, and welcome to the forum!

    :-X


    I'm more-or-less 90% sure (there's 10% uncertainty there) from my reading that altering Converted Hangars in that way is a reaction to min-maxing strategies that add Converted Hangars to (nearly) every ship in the fleet.

    While I still have a lot to learn about the game in its most recent iteration, I'm approaching the endgame in my current run, and I feel I know enough now to guarantee that I'd never put the altered version of that mod on a ship for any reason. I can think of a whole lot more use for 25-30+ total OP on a cruiser than installing a single hangar bay that produces one wing of slow fighters or bombers that die twice as quickly.

    Been playing around with this loadout in my current playtesting run:

    (https://i.imgur.com/TYmKJCl.png)

    I think this sort of general build has potential - bombers especially really give a combat ship a capability it otherwise wouldn't. Even if you just think of them in terms of being unlimited missiles - with extended range, to boot - the OP costs start to get fairly close what getting said missiles plus expanded racks, never mind that it doesn't need slots, and that it can be combined with other stuff the ship has to offer which normal carriers don't. And for bombers the penalties barely matter (hence the higher OP cost).

    So for the Enforcer, it's able to provide consistent longer-range support, while being very much a brick, *and* having good punch with its torpedoes. Is it better than a Drover? Definitely not as far as just fighters go, but it's also cheaper, can hold up much better to being outnumbered, and has a decent shot at turning the tide with a few well-placed torpedoes. Haven't had *too* much playtime with it yet, though, just got that setup going today.

    That said, yeah, it's definitely meant to be more a niche thing - something that changes how a ship plays entirely rather than enhancing its normal playstyle, if that makes sense. Sort of like SO in that sense. And it may indeed need a touch more balancing, we'll have to see!

    (Edit: I should add, this is an early game build - my first ship past the initial "mercenary" start - so the choices are largely driven by what's available vs what would be exactly ideal.)


    STAP teasing use... it hurts that we are not allowed to play  ;D

    I also think the Warthog nerv is to much while Talons for 2OP seems fair.
    It was OP but I am not sure if its still worth using. But well we just need to test it... sooooo let us test it?  ::)
    The rest seems solid pretty solid to me.

    Honestly I'am very hyped to play the next version ... again ...
    Great work. Keep on it!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 02, 2018, 06:46:47 PM
    Sorry not sorry :)

    (An update on that Enforcer: took on a tough bounty and managed to win after quite a few tries. Then tried it with a more conventional loadout for the Enforcer, still under AI control - Mauler, Hypervelocity Driver, and so on. Didn't feel different in terms of difficulty, so the CH build doesn't seem like it's *too* far off. I'm putting points into combat skills, though, which 1) indirectly buffs any support builds and 2) means that what the flagship does matters a lot more than what the other ships do.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 02, 2018, 06:49:10 PM
    Up to the carrier's speed plus 20, right now. Which, generally speaking, means a slight boost to the slower bombers/Warthog when they're used with CH or Defective Manufactory, and that's mostly it. They don't zoom around or anything.
    Sounds about right.  I'm a tiny bit concerned that bombers are going to be able to skedaddle a bit too quick after they've dropped their payload, but I could only be sure if I had it in front of me.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Vayra on November 03, 2018, 01:07:02 AM
    Up to the carrier's speed plus 20, right now. Which, generally speaking, means a slight boost to the slower bombers/Warthog when they're used with CH or Defective Manufactory, and that's mostly it. They don't zoom around or anything.
    Sounds about right.  I'm a tiny bit concerned that bombers are going to be able to skedaddle a bit too quick after they've dropped their payload, but I could only be sure if I had it in front of me.

    It sounds like it should be fine on any of the carriers in the base game -- bombers without a debuff already have quite a bit higher than 100 speed (Heron's 80 speed + 20) so it sounds like this will mostly be useful for countering the debuffs from CH or D-mods, or adding a tiny boost to especially slow bombers on especially fast carriers (SO + unstable injector drover?  :P) at best. Mods that add stuff like fast destroyer or frigate carriers will definitely need to rebalance, though!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 03, 2018, 02:14:04 AM
    It sounds like it should be fine on any of the carriers in the base game -- bombers without a debuff already have quite a bit higher than 100 speed (Heron's 80 speed + 20) so it sounds like this will mostly be useful for countering the debuffs from CH or D-mods, or adding a tiny boost to especially slow bombers on especially fast carriers (SO + unstable injector drover?  :P) at best. Mods that add stuff like fast destroyer or frigate carriers will definitely need to rebalance, though!
    I'm assuming here that Alex meant the carrier's Top Speed + the 0-flux boost, which is also what I was intending.  The Heron is very nippy at 130 speed with that boost - more if you include hull mods.  The Warthog only has a top speed of 130, and nearly all the bombers have less than 200 speed, the required speed to keep up with a 130 mothership that has either of the aforementioned d-mods.

    Though, come to think of it, the Warthog currently as it stands with these changes would be crawling along at 86 speed with the -33% speed bebuff when Engaged.  That's brutal, it's a suicide mission for those guys.  Better be packing Recovery Shuttles.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 03, 2018, 02:35:47 AM
    I think that Recall might become poor-man's recall device.  For a ship that is faster than its bombers, it might sense for ship to Recall after bombers drop their bombs so they return faster, then toggle back to Engage after they return to rearm.

    Perhaps bombers returning to rearm should automatically speed up to Recall speed (if that is faster) so that player does not need to fiddle with the Engage/Recall toggle to squeeze out maximum performance.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 03, 2018, 02:53:57 AM
    Good point, did that. This is not going to affect much - just some of the bombers, and then only with the CH/etc speed debuff, not much else - but might as well.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 05, 2018, 06:25:44 PM
    Has there been any changes to music in the new version? As in combat music and things like that.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bishi on November 07, 2018, 01:53:45 PM
    Damn you for posting interesting updates. I was ok for most of a year not checking on Starsector now its back to every day to see if the new version has been released!  ::)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embercloud on November 07, 2018, 11:03:03 PM
    Damn you for posting interesting updates. I was ok for most of a year not checking on Starsector now its back to every day to see if the new version has been released!  ::)
    Same here, sometimes several times a day.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: AgroFrizzy on November 11, 2018, 04:25:57 PM
    Damn you for posting interesting updates. I was ok for most of a year not checking on Starsector now its back to every day to see if the new version has been released!  ::)
    Same here, sometimes several times a day.

    This. I've been checking twitter for updates too. It's madness.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Merxe on November 11, 2018, 07:19:31 PM
    I just finished Witcher 3 and thought "let's go see if that Starsector patch has been released".
    Damn :(

    Well, more waiting I guess.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Grievous69 on November 11, 2018, 07:22:20 PM
    Ffs every time someone posts something here I get a mini heart attack, guys please stop I can't take it anymore.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 11, 2018, 07:35:52 PM
    Locking the topic for the time being :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 06:00:34 PM
    It's out!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on November 16, 2018, 06:02:00 PM
     ;D

    I have a date in thirty minutes and this is gonna be real hard to explain...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Inventor Raccoon on November 16, 2018, 06:02:07 PM
    Well, see you next week, everyone. I have an update to play.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 16, 2018, 06:02:40 PM
    I would appear as if we scarified our goats correctly, we got the update! :)

    I think I can die in peace now.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 16, 2018, 06:03:19 PM
    Thank you once again Alex, I'll see you guys on the other side.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volken on November 16, 2018, 06:03:44 PM
    (https://i.imgur.com/0arnsky.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Destructively Phased on November 16, 2018, 06:03:53 PM
    ... Well, there goes any chance I had of completing any coursework this weekend.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: ciago92 on November 16, 2018, 06:06:46 PM
    Hotlink in the news bar doesn't work

    e: Nor does the link in the first post. Did we hug it to death or is stuff behind the scenes changing still?

    e2: the buy tab on the main site works


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 16, 2018, 06:08:47 PM
    So much for the rest of today.

    Almost one month after the last patch notes.  History repeats.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 06:10:28 PM
    I have a date in thirty minutes and this is gonna be real hard to explain...

    I am so, so sorry :)


    Hotlink in the news bar doesn't work

    Ahh, thank you! I used the permalink from the WP editor there but as I started the post yesterday, and the link contains the date, it was wrong. Fixed it up.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 06:12:14 PM
    Btw, modding-wise: just deleted the old javadoc and currently uploading the new.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 16, 2018, 06:17:25 PM
    ;D

    I have a date in thirty minutes and this is gonna be real hard to explain...
    The game can wait.  A good person, not so much.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sarissofoi on November 16, 2018, 06:21:32 PM
    Bug report.
    I get stuck in tutorial because prospector neutral fleet steal my pirates that I suppose to defeat. The first combat in tutorial ever.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 06:22:22 PM
    Argh. Thanks for letting me know, will fix that up. Hopefully a rather unlikely occurrence.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SeinTa on November 16, 2018, 06:23:15 PM
    Best news today!

    Thank you!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: arwan on November 16, 2018, 06:25:09 PM
    i have been checking daily to see if 0.9 had released.. loaded up the site saw that it was "out" and instantly heard trumpets playing..

    https://youtu.be/sKfGFz84eFI?t=15 (https://youtu.be/sKfGFz84eFI?t=15)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on November 16, 2018, 06:27:53 PM
    ;D

    I have a date in thirty minutes and this is gonna be real hard to explain...
    The game can wait.  A good person, not so much.
    ^

    To be clear, the explaining that has to happen is: what exactly is the reason am I so excited tonight ;)

    Have fun everybody, maybe I'll be back in time for a first hotfix ;D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 16, 2018, 06:36:12 PM
    Possible bug:

    I have a feeling that "dismiss help popups" is not working.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Eji1700 on November 16, 2018, 06:38:00 PM
    And here I am, stuck at work.  Looks great. Can't wait to tear into it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 06:40:13 PM
    Possible bug:

    I have a feeling that "dismiss help popups" is not working.

    Hmm - seems to be working over here, that's odd. Maybe - the "don't show" checkbox only applies to that particular type of popup, i.e. if you "dismiss and don't show" a cargo one, it'll still show the "your CR is low" etc ones. You can turn them off entirely during new game creation, though.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 16, 2018, 06:42:52 PM
    1. In codex(frigates) i can see little station modules.

    2. My friend have this error:
    Code:
    24104 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/thoughtworks/xstream/io/HierarchicalStreamDriver
    java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/thoughtworks/xstream/io/HierarchicalStreamDriver
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.updateContinueButtonState(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.o?O000(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.<init>(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.new.<init>(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.createUI(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.prepare(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
    Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: com.thoughtworks.xstream.io.HierarchicalStreamDriver
        at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        ... 11 more
    124242 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
    124242 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 06:48:54 PM
    1. In codex(frigates) i can see little station modules.

    Hmm - could you post a screenshot? I'm not seeing it myself.

    2. My friend have this error:
    Code:
    24104 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/thoughtworks/xstream/io/HierarchicalStreamDriver
    java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/thoughtworks/xstream/io/HierarchicalStreamDriver
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.updateContinueButtonState(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.o?O000(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.<init>(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.new.<init>(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.createUI(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.prepare(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
    Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: com.thoughtworks.xstream.io.HierarchicalStreamDriver
        at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        ... 11 more
    124242 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
    124242 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]

    I believe a clean reinstall (that is, delete the older manually, then install) of the game should fix it; this has to do with an old jar file somehow sticking around. Or possibly a mod being turned on.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bastion.Systems on November 16, 2018, 06:52:36 PM
    Had a weird thing where I could not equip missiles (the dropdown list was empty), after reloading from save it works again.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 16, 2018, 06:52:48 PM
    This:
     
    (https://i.imgur.com/qwaz0q6.png)
    Or it something another?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 06:57:48 PM
    Ahh, ok, thank you - wasn't thinking of these as "modules" since they're not directly attached to the station. Gotcha, made a note.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: quangvnm on November 16, 2018, 07:01:46 PM
    Hello Alex,

    I play on Linux, and my game crashed just after choosing the skills, at step generating constellation and sth ... :


    Quote
    39033 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
    java.lang.NullPointerException
       at com.fs.starfarer.loading.specs.HullVariantSpec.getModuleSlots(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus.getModuleSlotsFor(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus.<init>(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMember.init(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMember.<init>(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMember.<init>(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.createFleetMember(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.econ.impl.OrbitalStation.matchStationAndComm anderToCurrentIndustry(OrbitalStation.java:404)
       at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.econ.impl.OrbitalStation.spawnStation(OrbitalStation.java:354)
       at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.econ.impl.OrbitalStation.advance(OrbitalStation.java:193)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Market.advance(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Economy.advance(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager.super(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.dialogDismissed(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Oo0O.dismiss(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.float.dismiss(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.J.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newnew.buttonPressed(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.I.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.I.processInput(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.V.o00000(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
       at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 07:03:26 PM
    Yep, just responded to your PM! And, Linux, alright.

    Has anyone had it work fine for them on Linux? I mean, I tested it on there just the other day... hmm.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 16, 2018, 07:06:04 PM
    Hotkeys broken:
    (https://i.imgur.com/626z6j8.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 07:06:34 PM
    That's actually correct :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Originem on November 16, 2018, 07:14:38 PM
    designTypeColor is kept in settings.json...hmmm
    that's mean, design type id equals design type name? That's a disaster for translation, It may cause a lot of problems


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Botaragno on November 16, 2018, 07:19:28 PM
    :gachiGASM:


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 07:21:14 PM
    designTypeColor is kept in settings.json...hmmm
    that's mean, design type id equals design type name? That's a disaster for translation, It may cause a lot of problems

    Hmm - wouldn't the translation change it in the settings, as well, and so work fine? Perhaps I'm missing something.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 16, 2018, 07:22:05 PM
    Have not yet started yet, just browsed game files and stuff in the refit screen.

    Things I noticed on the skills screen:
    * Helmsmanship 3 is at 1% flux.  Would that cause problems with ships with bad shields?  (It was raised to 5% before for some reason.)

    * Inconsistent bonus stacking.
    For example, Planetary Operations has +25% at level 1, and +25% at level 2.  Meanwhile, Salvaging has +15% at level 1, +30% at 2, and +50% at 3.  If Planetary Operations stack to 50%, does that mean Salvaging stack to 95% at level 3?  If Planetary Operations stack, but Salvaging does not, that is confusing UI.

    One more thing:  Gremlin looks like a smiley face in the codex.

    P.S.  I will try to play at normal speed, but if things feel too slow, I will raise speed to 2f.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on November 16, 2018, 07:25:32 PM
    Not sure if this is intentional or not, but the Apogee no longer has any frontal PD coverage, unless you use hardpoints for PD.

    The Harbinger's description still includes a paragraph about the Entropy Amplifier, even though it doesn't have it anymore.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Originem on November 16, 2018, 07:29:04 PM
    designTypeColor is kept in settings.json...hmmm
    that's mean, design type id equals design type name? That's a disaster for translation, It may cause a lot of problems

    Hmm - wouldn't the translation change it in the settings, as well, and so work fine? Perhaps I'm missing something.

    uhhh, I mean...
    Code:
    "designTypeColors":{
    "Common":[190,200,200,255],
    #"Common":[170,222,255,255],
    #"Low Tech":[245,150,30,255],
    #"Midline":[200,200,200,255],
    #"High Tech":[135,206,255],
    "Low Tech":[245,80,67,255],
    "Midline":[221,201,104,255],
    "High Tech":[160,213,225,255],
    "Remnant":[70,255,235,255],
    "Explorarium":[155,155,155,255],
    "Pirate":[200,0,0,255],
    "Tri-Tachyon":[135,206,255],
    "Hegemony":[245,150,30,255],
    "XIV Battlegroup":[245,150,30,255],
    "Luddic Path":[150,200,0,255],
    "Luddic Church":[75,200,0,255],
    },
    The "Midline" is both id and name right? If I translate it to "XXX(chinese words)", it may cause some unpredictable problems. For example, in ship_data.csv, I change "Midline" to "XXX", there may be wrong because of the font loading size, breaking the translated words and make it unrecognized.(though it's not common)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dexy on November 16, 2018, 07:36:09 PM
    Download speed is awfully slow for me at 20 kb/s (both main and mirror). I'm guessing the server is struggling due to so many people trying to download the new release.

    Is there a faster mirror? I need the windows version.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on November 16, 2018, 07:46:25 PM
    I feel like we need a Lasher (P) now that the Lasher (D) no longer exists as a base skin.
    Also since (D) skins are no longer a thing the Codex probably doesn't need to hide D-mod skins anymore. Now Pirate variants are visible but Luddic Path ones aren't.

    The Shrike might be a good candidate for a 2nd ship with a (H) skin, assuming the Hegemony uses it.
    Would love to have another (TT) variant, though admittedly no good candidates come to mind. Some Midlines may be good for TT skins but not really for a Ballistic-to-Energy conversion (It barely works for the Brawler, which I think could do with Flux Coil Adjunct and Flux Distributor built-in; or there could be a TT hullmod that boosts flux stats).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: NaavT on November 16, 2018, 07:49:33 PM


    2. My friend have this error:
    Code:
    24104 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/thoughtworks/xstream/io/HierarchicalStreamDriver
    java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/thoughtworks/xstream/io/HierarchicalStreamDriver
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.updateContinueButtonState(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.o?O000(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.Object.<init>(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.new.<init>(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.createUI(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.prepare(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
        at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
    Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: com.thoughtworks.xstream.io.HierarchicalStreamDriver
        at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
        at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
        at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at sun.misc.Launcher$AppClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
        ... 11 more
    124242 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
    124242 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]

    I believe a clean reinstall (that is, delete the older manually, then install) of the game should fix it; this has to do with an old jar file somehow sticking around. Or possibly a mod being turned on.

    Alas, it did not help.
    This error still appears.
    Maybe the problem is that I have x32 system?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 07:50:07 PM
    there may be wrong because of the font loading size, breaking the translated words and make it unrecognized.

    I'm not sure I understand this part - it seems like doing what you're describing would work.


    Download speed is awfully slow for me at 20 kb/s (both main and mirror). I'm guessing the server is struggling due to so many people trying to download the new release.

    Is there a faster mirror? I need the windows version.

    I think this may just depend on where you are, unfortunately. The main download is blazing fast for me, so I don't think it's struggling (it's hosted on Amazon...)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 07:51:30 PM
    Alas, it did not help.
    This error still appears.
    Maybe the problem is that I have x32 system?

    Hmm - that seems unlikely, though I guess it's possible. Are you 100% sure you cleaned out the old install? If you have an old vmparams file, that could likely cause this problem. Maybe trying to install in a different folder entirely is worth a shot?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: uzsibox on November 16, 2018, 07:52:07 PM
    Where do you buy ships in the new relase?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 07:55:15 PM
    Where do you buy ships in the new relase?

    Hmm - same as you did in the previous one. Go to a colony, press "F" (or 3 for Trade, then switch to the fleet tab), then it'll show you your fleet, and there's two tabs up top, "Sell" and "Buy". Can also pick the submarket there.

    You have to have your transponder on, though, or have to sneak in successfully (i.e. no patrols are looking for you). The cargo trade screen shows you a message in this case, but the ship one doesn't, so that could be confusing. Let me make a note.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on November 16, 2018, 07:57:50 PM
    Side note: I was looking forward to playing CK2 with Holy Fury this weekend. Now I'm torn.

    Why must you do this to me, Alex?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 08:05:41 PM
    * Inconsistent bonus stacking.
    For example, Planetary Operations has +25% at level 1, and +25% at level 2.  Meanwhile, Salvaging has +15% at level 1, +30% at 2, and +50% at 3.  If Planetary Operations stack to 50%, does that mean Salvaging stack to 95% at level 3?  If Planetary Operations stack, but Salvaging does not, that is confusing UI.

    Ahh, good call, made a note. Missed this somehow. PO is indeed 25+25 while Salvaging is a total of 50%.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Originem on November 16, 2018, 08:17:08 PM
    I'm not sure I understand this part - it seems like doing what you're describing would work.
    Sorry for could not decribe it correctly...We do best not to translate anything in settings.json, so could you give them a structure like
    "Midline":{
      "name":"Midline",
      "color":[221,201,104,255],
    }


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: NaavT on November 16, 2018, 08:33:55 PM

    Hmm - that seems unlikely, though I guess it's possible. Are you 100% sure you cleaned out the old install? If you have an old vmparams file, that could likely cause this problem. Maybe trying to install in a different folder entirely is worth a shot?

    Old versions are removed, saves are placed in archives.
    I even installed on another HDD. Still, this error appears. More options? Excluding OS reinstallation


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 08:43:21 PM
    A CLASSPATH variable in your environment is about the only thing that comes to mind at this point, hmm. If you have that, removing it should make it work. That is, it still seems like the game is running with the wrong version of xstream (the save/load library) somehow, not the one it actually comes with.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 08:52:20 PM
    Sorry for could not decribe it correctly...We do best not to translate anything in settings.json, so could you give them a structure like
    "Midline":{
      "name":"Midline",
      "color":[221,201,104,255],
    }

    Right, I see what you mean. That'd mean extracting it to another file, though; for this particular case, is there a reason not to translate it in settings.json? I do understand that this is messy/inelegant, though; was just doing it quickly.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: BillyRueben on November 16, 2018, 09:08:09 PM
    Can we no longer set a course from the Intel screen?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Originem on November 16, 2018, 09:09:01 PM
    Right, I see what you mean. That'd mean extracting it to another file, though; for this particular case, is there a reason not to translate it in settings.json? I do understand that this is messy/inelegant, though; was just doing it quickly.
    Well, just to sure there won't be any unpredictable things...Let "id" become "name" is a very bad idea anyway, and chinese characters should not be the key in most cases.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:09:39 PM
    You can right-click to set course. Just be careful not to drag when you do since, right-click-drag pans the map.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:10:56 PM
    Well, just to sure there won't be any unpredictable things...Let "id" become "name" is a very bad idea anyway, and chinese characters should not be the key in most cases.

    I agree with you. I also think it should work with chinese characters in the key - but maybe I'll be able to get around to changing for the 0.9.1 release, we'll see. Depends on how crazy things get!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Schwartz on November 16, 2018, 09:13:17 PM
    No crashes here.

    Some quick impressions after finishing the tutorial.

    The new portraits are great. Love the old chinese guy, the lady in the shawl and the black helmeted dude in particular.
    The new weapon stats tooltip is a big improvement.
    I like the bar events much better than the mission listing.
    The pirate falcon paintjob is wicked.

    After looking through the weapons:
    Light Needler is now a trap choice. It has same range as Railgun, does less damage, less single-shot damage and costs 2 more. One perfect acc. slug vs 15 medium acc. shots. What was the reasoning here?
    With Heavy Needler being the expensive anti-shield option for medium slots now (and many small projectiles being bad at everything else), Light Needler could at least retain more DPS with appropriate flux costs.
    Heavy Mauler will probably still be okay because there's no other sniping platform in the medium slot.
    Plasma Cannon looks like a serious customer. All ships that can mount these just got an upgrade.

    Will return after I'm a captain of industry. ;D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 16, 2018, 09:19:47 PM
    Wow! We can do colony on sun!
    (https://i.imgur.com/Srr6qDh.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:22:35 PM
    Light Needler is now a trap choice. It has same range as Railgun, does less damage, less single-shot damage and costs 2 more. One perfect acc. slug vs 15 medium acc. shots. What was the reasoning here?

    (Thank you for all the positive comments!)

    The LN could possibly use a lower cost, but: burst damage has value. Not all ships can stay within range and deliver sustained firepower over time with a railgun; there's more safety in darting in and out. Plus, tactically, a burst of kinetic damage can simply be more useful than sustained kinetic damage, especially as it gives the enemy less of a chance to adjust.

    Phase ships also benefit more from weapons that can reload while phased, though that's not a major consideration here.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on November 16, 2018, 09:23:53 PM
    Light Needler is now a trap choice. It has same range as Railgun, does less damage, less single-shot damage and costs 2 more. One perfect acc. slug vs 15 medium acc. shots. What was the reasoning here?
    With Heavy Needler being the expensive anti-shield option for medium slots now (and many small projectiles being bad at everything else), Light Needler could at least retain more DPS with appropriate flux costs.
    Heavy Mauler will probably still be okay because there's no other sniping platform in the medium slot.
    Plasma Cannon looks like a serious customer. All ships that can mount these just got an upgrade.

    Will return after I'm a captain of industry. ;D

    Light Needler also has less flux efficiency than Railgun, another strike against it.
    My issue with the new Plasma Cannon is that it's just a more rapid-firing Heavy Blaster. I feel it should have more shot damage and nerf the fire rate: or better yet, remove the forced 3-shot.

    RE: darting in and out with Light Needler: the problem is unless the target is being threatened by something else (in which case you probably don't need to dart in-and-out for safety) then your target can simply vent away your burst, and you're not in range to take full advantage of it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:25:45 PM
    Wow! We can do colony on sun!
    (https://i.imgur.com/Srr6qDh.png)

    That's... awesome! Made a note; looks like it affects binaries/trinaries.

    (Sorely tempted to make an "it'll be fine, we'll just go colonize it at night" joke.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:27:13 PM
    My issue with the new Plasma Cannon is that it's just a more rapid-firing Heavy Blaster. I feel it should have more shot damage and nerf the fire rate: or better yet, remove the forced 3-shot.

    If it does more per-shot damage, it steps on HIL's toes. Was aiming to have reasonable differentiation for the various large energy weapons; Plasma Cannon is the "general purpose, not great at any one aspect" option.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: NaavT on November 16, 2018, 09:27:51 PM
    A CLASSPATH variable in your environment is about the only thing that comes to mind at this point, hmm. If you have that, removing it should make it work. That is, it still seems like the game is running with the wrong version of xstream (the save/load library) somehow, not the one it actually comes with.

    Hmm .. Where can I find it?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on November 16, 2018, 09:29:21 PM
    I'd be fine with HIL going back to Energy damage personally. The old HIL's problem was it did 250 DPS, now it does 500 I think it's fine with Energy damage. Still burns through armour, better at pressuring shields.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:29:39 PM
    (Pasting; sorry re: formatting etc.)

    ON WINDOWS
    Right-click on My Computer and select Properties.
    Go to the Advanced system settings tab.
    Click the Environment Variables button. The Environment Variables dialog opens.
    Select the environment variable you want to delete and click Delete.
    Repeat step 4 as many times as necessary.
    Click OK.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:30:41 PM
    I'd be fine with HIL going back to Energy damage personally. The old HIL's problem was it did 250 DPS, now it does 500 I think it's fine with Energy damage. Still burns through armour, better at pressuring shields.

    At 500 dps, it's too good at pressuring shields imo. With that range it's just god-tier.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Schwartz on November 16, 2018, 09:32:47 PM
    A powerful and more flux-efficient large slot energy weapon that deals hard flux is a big deal. We didn't have one before, Autopulse being more situational. And the old PC being unwieldy at best with its massive burst & flux cost. It's actually more powerful because it's weaker, if that makes sense. In that it can be used now.

    Right about the Needler re. burst damage and phase. I hadn't accounted for these. It's still a little odd for the price, and especially when compared to the Heavy variant.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:34:32 PM
    Yeah, not saying it's perfectly tuned, just that it's got a niche.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 16, 2018, 09:36:25 PM
    Did a first hour and a half tutorial/jangala arrival (https://tinyurl.com/y8smxeg3). Didn't get to run into the nitty gritty but haven't had any issues. Only exited now to update to the hotfix.  A bit unrelated but even if my CPU has a lot idle left, streaming/recording SS gives me roughly a 50% FPS cut. :P Not sure what to do about that. (Win7x64, i7 2700k@4ghz)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:37:58 PM
    Oh, right - hotfix is up, everybody!

    A bit unrelated but even if my CPU has a lot idle left, streaming/recording SS gives me roughly a 50% FPS cut. :P Not sure what to do about that. (Win7x64, i7 2700k@4ghz)

    Hmm - maybe try disabling vsync in settings.json? Possibly both the recording software and Starsector are both doing it and messing each other up.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on November 16, 2018, 09:38:38 PM
    I'd be fine with HIL going back to Energy damage personally. The old HIL's problem was it did 250 DPS, now it does 500 I think it's fine with Energy damage. Still burns through armour, better at pressuring shields.

    At 500 dps, it's too good at pressuring shields imo. With that range it's just god-tier.

    Gauss Cannon costs 5 OP more and does a lot more hard flux Shield damage at greater range, and with its per-shot damage is pretty dangerous vs armour too. Plus 250 vs 500 soft flux Shield DPS is barely more than 1x Graviton Beam's worth of difference.

    I don't think the new Plasma Cannon is underpowered, I just said it's a faster-firing Heavy Blaster which feels odd.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 09:40:49 PM
    (Gauss is also ballistic, so not a fair comparison...)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Draba on November 16, 2018, 09:53:28 PM
    Awesome as usual, so much for my plans for being productive today :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Embolism on November 16, 2018, 09:54:08 PM
    (Gauss is also ballistic, so not a fair comparison...)

    Indeed, Gauss is a lot better than HIL even if it were Energy. Just saying I don't feel Energy HIL is god-tier where it still is very behind the actual god-tier anti-shield weapons.

    Plus it's still a bit more than 1x Graviton Beam's worth of damage. I don't think it makes it god-tier just because of that difference, especially since it's paid in the loss of 500 anti-armour DPS.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 16, 2018, 09:54:52 PM
    A bit unrelated but even if my CPU has a lot idle left, streaming/recording SS gives me roughly a 50% FPS cut. :P Not sure what to do about that. (Win7x64, i7 2700k@4ghz)

    Hmm - maybe try disabling vsync in settings.json? Possibly both the recording software and Starsector are both doing it and messing each other up.

    Same with/without. Dropping me into 30-35 from 60, fullscreen or no, core affinity tweaks (Core2/Java) on OBS or no.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 16, 2018, 09:56:11 PM
    When you take more officers than you can take you can`t know they AI type(Steady, timid and another.) because you see only "Max officers limit". I dont want to kill one of my officers when i dont know who i take on board.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on November 16, 2018, 10:07:50 PM
    I laughed at solar shielding, but seeing how dense are hyperspace storms, they appear to be less of a convenience and more of a must... Sometimes I accidentally get into one of the storms and it flings me into another and I'm forced to plow through a screen's worth of lightning.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 10:10:24 PM
    Awesome as usual, so much for my plans for being productive today :)

    Thank you :)

    Indeed, Gauss is a lot better than HIL even if it were Energy. Just saying I don't feel Energy HIL is god-tier where it still is very behind the actual god-tier anti-shield weapons.

    Plus it's still a bit more than 1x Graviton Beam's worth of damage. I don't think it makes it god-tier just because of that difference, especially since it's paid in the loss of 500 anti-armour DPS.

    Maybe god-tier is not the right word. 500 unavoidable shield pressure from it at that range just feels like too much. Gauss etc can at least be avoided and there are choices to make re when to raise/lower shields, where the HIL would just completely neutralize anything smaller/that can't out-dissipate it, with not much counter-play. I think it becomes uninteresting; I did indeed try it before settling on the HE damage type.

    Same with/without. Dropping me into 30-35 from 60, fullscreen or no, core affinity tweaks (Core2/Java) on OBS or no.

    Ah, alright. Maybe just not enough performance for 60, then - as soon as there's even just barely not enough, it'll drop to 30. That it's dropping to 30 with the recording software means that it's vsyncing, though. Could try to force vsync off through the NVIDIA control panel or equivalent.

    When you take more officers than you can take you can`t know they AI type(Steady, timid and another.) because you see only "Max officers limit". I dont want to kill one of my officers when i dont know who i take on board.

    I'm not sure what you mean - when you rescue an officer from a cryopod, they should just go in your officer list but you can't use them. You should still be able to scroll down to see them, though.


    I laughed at solar shielding, but seeing how dense are hyperspace storms, they appear to be less of a convenience and more of a must... Sometimes I accidentally get into one of the storms and it flings me into another and I'm forced to plow through a screen's worth of lightning.

    (Well, it's definitely not a must, since I don't think I've ever gotten it in my playtesting, but, yeah. Big thing is storms do *so* much less damage in terms of supplies, though.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 10:16:42 PM
    A CLASSPATH variable in your environment is about the only thing that comes to mind at this point, hmm. If you have that, removing it should make it work. That is, it still seems like the game is running with the wrong version of xstream (the save/load library) somehow, not the one it actually comes with.

    Hmm .. Where can I find it?

    Aha - looks like it's indeed a bug with the 32 bit install. Sorry! See here for temporary workaround:

    http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=13760.0


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Death_Silence_66 on November 16, 2018, 10:23:45 PM
    YES! Something to play over thanksgiving break!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 16, 2018, 10:35:13 PM
    Quote
    When you take more officers than you can take you can`t know they AI type(Steady, timid and another.) because you see only "Max officers limit". I dont want to kill one of my officers when i dont know who i take on board.

    I'm not sure what you mean - when you rescue an officer from a cryopod, they should just go in your officer list but you can't use them. You should still be able to scroll down to see them, though.

    Yep, i can scroll, but cant see he behavior type. It is blocked by a red inscription about max count of officers. Ony this red line. No any information about officer type.

    Also, sun colony has fixed on last hotfix?

    P.S. Sometimem after long play music has stoped. It not new bug, it old bug.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on November 16, 2018, 10:46:22 PM
    Wow. Just wow.

    Just set up my first colony on a water world. Holy crap it's a high initial cost. Found a Synchrotron in an abandoned research facility can't wait to use it. Blueprints, industry...

    Bounties are bonkers now. Conquests, Legions, etc. for 80k? I'm still flying around with two destroyers and a Drover.

    I really don't want to re-start but I'm in a pickle financially due to the colony. I've got a net income but I'm strapped all the time because I'm trying to build it too fast.

    Lots of QoL improvements and the missions just popping up as I go by is nice.

    This is fantastic and I'm only a few hours in. Good job Alex!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 11:06:48 PM
    Yep, i can scroll, but cant see he behavior type. It is blocked by a red inscription about max count of officers. Ony this red line. No any information about officer type.

    Ah, I see - thank you, made a note.

    Also, sun colony has fixed on last hotfix?

    It's not; trying to keep the hotfixes limited to crash bugs etc, to minimize the risk of introducing additional bugs, since I'm also trying to do it quickly.

    P.S. Sometimem after long play music has stoped. It not new bug, it old bug.

    Thank you, I'll keep an eye out. Haven't seen this myself; how long are we talking about?


    Wow. Just wow.

    Just set up my first colony on a water world. Holy crap it's a high initial cost. Found a Synchrotron in an abandoned research facility can't wait to use it. Blueprints, industry...

    Bounties are bonkers now. Conquests, Legions, etc. for 80k? I'm still flying around with two destroyers and a Drover.

    I really don't want to re-start but I'm in a pickle financially due to the colony. I've got a net income but I'm strapped all the time because I'm trying to build it too fast.

    Lots of QoL improvements and the missions just popping up as I go by is nice.

    This is fantastic and I'm only a few hours in. Good job Alex!

    Thank you :)

    (Yeah, how much and how quickly you invest into the colony is definitely a decision to make. Well, if you're strapped for cash, you can always head to TriTachyon space; that's all I'll say on the matter.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Nicke535 on November 16, 2018, 11:09:01 PM
    Not sure if it's just on my device, but after a clean install of 0.9a (with hotfix) weapons no longer show when damaged visually (or via text [the option for that is turned on, I tried both on and off but neither had an effect]). The sparks and damage overlays simply don't appear.

    The "disabled" sound does, though, which tells me the weapons are, in fact, being disabled properly

    Engines do not have this issue.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 16, 2018, 11:10:07 PM
    About music. It dont have a hard time threshold. It can be appear after 3hours or can be appear after 7h. Or can`t be seen after 13h. (Yep, i mad and can play on you game  full day).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 11:11:21 PM
    Not sure if it's just on my device, but after a clean install of 0.9a (with hotfix) weapons no longer show when damaged visually (or via text [the option for that is turned on, I tried both on and off but neither had an effect]). The sparks and damage overlays simply don't appear.

    The "disabled" sound does, though, which tells me the weapons are, in fact, being disabled properly

    Engines do not have this issue.

    Hmm, you're right. Ooops? Looking into it now.

    About music. It dont have a hard time threshold. It can be appear after 3hours or can be appear after 7h. Or can`t be seen after 13h. (Yep, i mad and can play on you game  full day).

    Thank you :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 11:21:48 PM
    Not sure if it's just on my device, but after a clean install of 0.9a (with hotfix) weapons no longer show when damaged visually (or via text [the option for that is turned on, I tried both on and off but neither had an effect]). The sparks and damage overlays simply don't appear.

    The "disabled" sound does, though, which tells me the weapons are, in fact, being disabled properly

    Engines do not have this issue.

    So it turns out I'd turned this off at some point while testing its impact on performance and never turned it back on. And then never noticed it. *facepalm*

    Thank you for bringing it up :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 16, 2018, 11:26:42 PM
    Ok, i'm relatively surprised at how reasonable the start is. Played for two and a half hours, made a few fun mistakes but weirdly i'm far from the horrible dread of 'i'm going to slowly bleed credits/supplies' and i haven't even abused system pirate bounties. Part two of the playthrough here (https://tinyurl.com/y7gavwxr).

    I really enjoy the changes to fighters and Harpoons have gotten less deadly apparently, but i'm thankful for it.

    The intel screen is neater than the previous incarnation but it still feels.. incomplete. I have so many filters but sometimes i just care about what's to do in the exact system i'm in, not caring who made the mission and what type the mission is. LE: While writing i decided to check if 'ctrl/shift-clicking' selects all clicked. And they do, but maybe UI wise that should be a default once nothing is selected anymore? Or an <ALL> button? Having nothing clicked sets it back to <Important> which ehh, i'm not sure how important it is but having that as the default 'pane' does feel off.




    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 16, 2018, 11:30:09 PM
    I think that sometimes systems do not populate themselves with objects? I had a strange experience when on my first trip out, I found absolutely nothing in terms of derelicts, stations, probes, etc. Then on a later trip where I had a 'scan derelict ship' mission in a system I'd already been in, it was full of things.

    Still, this patch is awesome! Found a mysterious planet with [REDACTED] and [REDACTED].


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 16, 2018, 11:33:01 PM
    Ok, i'm relatively surprised at how reasonable the start is. Played for two and a half hours, made a few fun mistakes but weirdly i'm far from the horrible dread of 'i'm going to slowly bleed credits/supplies' and i haven't even abused system pirate bounties. Part two of the playthrough here (http://"https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5O2uHw70DU").

    I really enjoy the changes to fighters and Harpoons have gotten less deadly apparently, but i'm thankful for it.

    Cool! Did you go with one of the "faster" starts?

    (Btw, link is broken.)


    I think that sometimes systems do not populate themselves with objects? I had a strange experience when on my first trip out, I found absolutely nothing in terms of derelicts, stations, probes, etc. Then on a later trip where I had a 'scan derelict ship' mission in a system I'd already been in, it was full of things.

    Huh, interesting. That seems... not possible? All the populating happens at new game creation, with the exception of like one or two REDACTED things.


    Still, this patch is awesome! Found a mysterious planet with [REDACTED] and [REDACTED].

    :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: ROFLtheWAFL on November 16, 2018, 11:33:48 PM
    Anyone having trouble downloading the update? A couple times the download's 'completed', then frozen with 0 seconds left. Canceling the download would then delete it. Now the links don't seem to work for me, they don't do anything.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: ROFLtheWAFL on November 16, 2018, 11:35:40 PM
    Anyone having trouble downloading the update? A couple times the download's 'completed', then frozen with 0 seconds left. Canceling the download would then delete it. Now the links don't seem to work for me, they don't do anything.

    Disregard, it was just Chrome being a pain.  ::)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 16, 2018, 11:38:58 PM

    Cool! Did you go with one of the "faster" starts?

    (Btw, link is broken.)

    Hotfixed the link. :)

    Yeah, merc start, i think i earned my stripes with enough Wolf/Hound/Lasher fights/starts since 0.51a to skip all of that. However... it would be highly recommended to have supplies purchasable in the tutorial bases, same for fuel. I literally ran out of supplies with the salvaged/merc fleet start that i had to rush it and kick the miner's ass for some in between running around doing the quests. They triggered for the proper stocking after i finished the quest and opened the system, but i take it it's just a matter of scripting.

    PS: Button for 'resume plotted course'? Or is my muscle memory forgetting me.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Schwartz on November 16, 2018, 11:56:33 PM
    The stipend helps a lot with making the start easier. Still getting to grips with the intel screen. One weird thing happened to me just now.

    Got a bounty near a 'giant primary star' in the Irkalla constellation, but none of the 3 giant primary stars have the fleet. It's just not there. Should this happen? I don't mind the occasional blind bounty or fleets deciding to go off and do their own thing, but in the old version they were either present or already killed.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: noego on November 17, 2018, 12:03:48 AM
    All of my YES would not be enough. Christmas came early. THANK YOU.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on November 17, 2018, 12:06:23 AM
    Just FYI, having a Fuel Range on the Intel Screen would be helpful. Knowing whether or not I have the fuel (or close to it) to do a survey mission is vital to whether or not I go for it. As it is, I have to go to the Map Screen (even the Press "S" to center is one-click too many).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 17, 2018, 12:12:34 AM
    Just FYI, having a Fuel Range on the Intel Screen would be helpful. Knowing whether or not I have the fuel (or close to it) to do a survey mission is vital to whether or not I go for it. As it is, I have to go to the Map Screen (even the Press "S" to center is one-click too many).

    Press W while on the Intel screen, it's shown in a tiny white text in the upper right of it. It shows circles which show exactly that. First circle is 'get there and also get back here', second one is 'how far i can go and then run out of fuel'.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 12:13:37 AM
    Got a bounty near a 'giant primary star' in the Irkalla constellation, but none of the 3 giant primary stars have the fleet. It's just not there. Should this happen? I don't mind the occasional blind bounty or fleets deciding to go off and do their own thing, but in the old version they were either present or already killed.

    Hmm, that shouldn't happen. Send me the save if you've got it?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: AgroFrizzy on November 17, 2018, 12:21:20 AM
    Anyone having trouble downloading the update? A couple times the download's 'completed', then frozen with 0 seconds left. Canceling the download would then delete it. Now the links don't seem to work for me, they don't do anything.

    Had this issue too (to the t). Thanks for your follow-up post about Chrome just being a pain - opened up an alternative and bam, download is going :D. Saved me. I thought maybe we were hugging things to death  :o ; :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 12:40:13 AM
    Another hotfix is up; fixes windows 32-bit issues, plus adds back in weapon disabled effects. Also fixes a save-loading (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=13763.0) issue.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 17, 2018, 12:46:04 AM
    Um. Alex.

    Err.. Why can i go into "Cargo" at an enemy station, then force them to eject their ***? :P Not gonna abuse that but lol.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 12:54:26 AM
    Unless I'm mis-interpreting what's going on, you just lack docking clearance and are about to eject your own cargo :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 17, 2018, 01:16:26 AM
    Hot take: The monthly income from Ancyra is fantastic because it scales opposite of progress. If you aren't progressing that much you get a (relatively) lot of money, but once you have a decent little fleet going its eaten up in maintenance.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 17, 2018, 01:23:29 AM
    Nebulas, nebulas everywhere. I blow up pirates - in debris field i found nebula. I blow up derelicts -  in debris field i found nebula.  I blow up remnants -  in debris field i found nebula. WTF?!

    Also i can do Sun-colony on every system where i found >1 star. So strange :D

    Build colony on Yma near pirate planet and grind this little boys >:D
    (https://i.imgur.com/1J8ROkz.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 01:28:45 AM
    Hot take: The monthly income from Ancyra is fantastic because it scales opposite of progress. If you aren't progressing that much you get a (relatively) lot of money, but once you have a decent little fleet going its eaten up in maintenance.

    Awesome :) Nice to know it's working out in practice!

    Nebulas, nebulas everywhere. I blow up pirates - in debris field i found nebula. I blow up derelicts -  in debris field i found nebula.  I blow up remnants -  in debris field i found nebula. WTF?!

    Hmm, the game uses a Nebula when for whatever reason it can't find the ship variant it's trying to find. So this could be a bug. No mods of any sort, right?

    Edit: when you find this sort of ship (i.e. a Nebula) and it was due to an error, there may be a stack trace in the log with what variant it was actually looking for. Could you take a look next time that happens?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Hiruma Kai on November 17, 2018, 01:33:19 AM
    First: Thanks to Alex for the release. :)

    Second: Should have I gotten a total of two gamma cores from the tutorial mission domain probe?  I got one immediately after defeating the defenders in a cargo pop up, and then one when I salvaged within the same post battle dialog.  Did I simply get lucky?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 01:34:48 AM
    First: Thanks to Alex for the release. :)

    :D

    Second: Should have I gotten a total of two gamma cores from the tutorial mission domain probe?  I got one immediately after defeating the defenders in a cargo pop up, and then one when I salvaged within the same post battle dialog.  Did I simply get lucky?

    Yep, it's possible - the one from the combat is luck-based, the one from the salvage is guaranteed.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 17, 2018, 01:35:36 AM
    Unless I'm mis-interpreting what's going on, you just lack docking clearance and are about to eject your own cargo :)

    That's exactly what happened. (https://tinyurl.com/y7l323my) Oh well. Blew up that pirate base anyway thirty seconds later. \_o.o_/


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Death_Silence_66 on November 17, 2018, 01:50:40 AM
    It seems like the various stations that can be placed in stable zones reappear almost immediately. You can farm them for lots of loot early on.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 01:53:33 AM
    It costs reputation, though, iirc? And they're often protected by patrols. So that seems alright? Unless I'm missing something.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on November 17, 2018, 03:04:20 AM
    I'm playing the advanced start (Starting with an Apogee...way too tempting), went through the tutorial missions (was a bit unfair on them).  I haven't yet gotten to base building, but I found a "Pristine" nano-forge during my salvaging expeditions (not quite sure how good this is, but it's got a pretty hefty price tag on it)...so I'm looking forward to seeing how this fits into base building. :)

    Really appreciate the transponder warning (when off) when entering a system after a bit of time out in deep space...such a little thing, but really nice.

    Very much like the new "Efficiency" hull-mod..the apogee is so very cheap now; missing the frontal damage, but really can't complain with it's new cost.

    Issue:
    I've noticed that my "Autofit" saved profiles don't seem to equip the correct weapons or even modules on occasion.

    For example I saved a wolf profile with the Pulse laser equipped, but on loading that same profile, even if I have the Pulse Laser equipped on that same Wolf it will swap it out for a Heavy Blaster.

    Also noticed this on my Dram "Autofit" custom profile, where I would use the hull-mods "Unstable Injector" & "Militarized Subsystems" but it would swap "Militarized Subsystems" for "Reinforced Bulkheads" instead on loading the profile.
    I just discovered that while I couldn't do this at the Abandoned Terra-forming platform around Asharu, but I could at Asharu itself.  I guess I need a populated colony or a starbase/orbital station belonging to a populated colony?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 03:06:51 AM
    Issue:
    I've noticed that my "Autofit" saved profiles don't seem to equip the correct weapons or even modules on occasion.

    For example I saved a wolf profile with the Pulse laser equipped, but on loading that same profile, even if I have the Pulse Laser equipped on that same Wolf it will swap it out for a Heavy Blaster.

    There's an "upgrade weapons if possible" checkbox in the autofit dialog, that's probably checked as IIRC it's checked by default.

    I just discovered that while I couldn't do this at the Abandoned Terra-forming platform around Asharu, but I could at Asharu itself.  I guess I need a populated colony or a starbase/orbital station belonging to a populated colony?

    Yep - it requires a colony with a Spaceport! I believe the hullmod tooltip says this in red near the bottom.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on November 17, 2018, 03:35:50 AM
    Had my first "Sindria doesn't like me producing so much fuel" retaliatory strike. Man...4-5 of my own patrols, my fleet, and a mid-line battlestation vs. 2 Conquests, 2 Eagles, a host of Sunders/Hammerheads and what not. Truly epic. We won by the skin of our teeth. Hegemony came later but weren't nearly as...dedicated. They were crushed.

    These fleet mechanics are awesome, battlestations are awesome, this game is awesome. :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on November 17, 2018, 03:36:56 AM
    There's an "upgrade weapons if possible" checkbox in the autofit dialog, that's probably checked as IIRC it's checked by default.

    Ahh, TIL...that fixed it, but I wonder if there is something still wrong with the "Upgrade weapons using extra OP" ; I didn't actually have any extra OP, but on applying the profile, it strips off some of my capacitors and vents, adds a Heavy Blaster and also adds the hull-mod "Blast doors" (which isn't in my original profile).

    Yep - it requires a colony with a Spaceport! I believe the hullmod tooltip says this in red near the bottom.
    Yeah, I paraphrased that from the tool-tip :)

    I just wanted to make sure as I thought that the Abandoned Terraforming Platform might qualify as an "Orbital Station".


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 03:50:11 AM
    Ahh, TIL...that fixed it, but I wonder if there is something still wrong with the "Upgrade weapons using extra OP" ; I didn't actually have any extra OP, but on applying the profile, it strips off some of my capacitors and vents, adds a Heavy Blaster and also adds the hull-mod "Blast doors" (which isn't in my original profile).

    Hmm, possibly. Let me make a note to take a look.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Originem on November 17, 2018, 04:15:26 AM
    Big bug. Ships with d mods in black market. Their d mods will disappear after save & load.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: RedHellion on November 17, 2018, 04:23:26 AM
    Long time lurker and fan, etc etc. Looking forward to sinking deep into 0.9 over the next few months!

    Just got around to trying out 0.9a-RC8, and the monthly income/costs seem to be incorrect? Not sure about further into the game, but just past the tutorial when I get my first monthly paycheck a couple of the monthly costs seem to be off by a factor of 10.

    My officer is level 2 and says she demands a 700-credit monthly salary (500 per month base + 100 per level), but only showed up as a 70-credit cost. Similarly: crew costs should have been 1580 per month according to the tooltip (10 credits per crew per month) but were only 158 credits for my 158-crew fleet, and storage costs say they're supposed to be 189 credits per month but it only actually charged me 18. Bug/typo causing huge savings, or incorrect tooltips?

    (https://i.imgur.com/P3RoiFM.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 17, 2018, 04:38:48 AM

    ...


    I laughed at solar shielding, but seeing how dense are hyperspace storms, they appear to be less of a convenience and more of a must... Sometimes I accidentally get into one of the storms and it flings me into another and I'm forced to plow through a screen's worth of lightning.

    (Well, it's definitely not a must, since I don't think I've ever gotten it in my playtesting, but, yeah. Big thing is storms do *so* much less damage in terms of supplies, though.)

    Just remembered this: its not a must as storms do much less and they speed you up (kind of) now, but it is true that almost the entire map is just one constant, unending storm.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 17, 2018, 04:56:07 AM
    Hot take: The monthly income from Ancyra is fantastic because it scales opposite of progress. If you aren't progressing that much you get a (relatively) lot of money, but once you have a decent little fleet going its eaten up in maintenance.

    Awesome :) Nice to know it's working out in practice!

    Nebulas, nebulas everywhere. I blow up pirates - in debris field i found nebula. I blow up derelicts -  in debris field i found nebula.  I blow up remnants -  in debris field i found nebula. WTF?!

    Hmm, the game uses a Nebula when for whatever reason it can't find the ship variant it's trying to find. So this could be a bug. No mods of any sort, right?

    Edit: when you find this sort of ship (i.e. a Nebula) and it was due to an error, there may be a stack trace in the log with what variant it was actually looking for. Could you take a look next time that happens?

    No any mods. It bug everywhere.

    And new bug found. When i buy or sell something on my colony in open market after purchase i can back to main colony menu and return to market and wow! Everything what i sell disappeared from market and everything what i buy appear again on this market and i can buy it again!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 05:13:28 AM
    Had my first "Sindria doesn't like me producing so much fuel" retaliatory strike. Man...4-5 of my own patrols, my fleet, and a mid-line battlestation vs. 2 Conquests, 2 Eagles, a host of Sunders/Hammerheads and what not. Truly epic. We won by the skin of our teeth. Hegemony came later but weren't nearly as...dedicated. They were crushed.

    These fleet mechanics are awesome, battlestations are awesome, this game is awesome. :D

    Thank you! Made me so happy to read :D


    Big bug. Ships with d mods in black market. Their d mods will disappear after save & load.

    Thank you! Made a note. Fixed something similar during playtesting, guess I missed some aspect of it.


    My officer is level 2 and says she demands a 700-credit monthly salary (500 per month base + 100 per level), but only showed up as a 70-credit cost. Similarly: crew costs should have been 1580 per month according to the tooltip (10 credits per crew per month) but were only 158 credits for my 158-crew fleet, and storage costs say they're supposed to be 189 credits per month but it only actually charged me 18. Bug/typo causing huge savings, or incorrect tooltips?

    (https://i.imgur.com/P3RoiFM.png)

    Hi, and welcome to the forum :) What's probably happening here is iirc monthly costs don't start ticking until the tutorial is over, so you only got docked for 1/10th of the month (which is roughly the increment when costs are calculated). Next month, you should see the full cost.

    No any mods. It bug everywhere.

    Are you seeing any non-Nebula ships for salvage? That's just really weird. I forget if you mentioned if you'd tried reinstalling.

    Also: do you get an exception in the log when this happens? The game wouldn't crash but should still print a stack trace there.

    And new bug found. When i buy or sell something on my colony in open market after purchase i can back to main colony menu and return to market and wow! Everything what i sell disappeared from market and everything what i buy appear again on this market and i can buy it again!

    Thank you, will check this out.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Hussar on November 17, 2018, 05:21:25 AM
    <resurfaces after months>

    Ayyyy! I was waiting for past 6 months for this! Thank you Alex! I'm anxious to rekindle my spacefaring love with the new update!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 17, 2018, 05:49:33 AM
    No any mods. It bug everywhere.

    Are you seeing any non-Nebula ships for salvage? That's just really weird. I forget if you mentioned if you'd tried reinstalling.

    Also: do you get an exception in the log when this happens? The game wouldn't crash but should still print a stack trace there.
    Yep, i see non-Nebula ships. Like after big battles but on this still appears some Nebulas. In campaing ratio of the regular ships to Nebulas be near >60/<40. But it very strange when after killing [REDACTED] i receive Nebulas on debries fields :D

    It be on RC6-7, soon i download RC8 and look on this again. And so, after what stage i need to look in SS.log?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Zaphide on November 17, 2018, 06:05:17 AM
    Nice work Alex :D

    Can't wait to get stuck into 0.9!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 17, 2018, 06:26:49 AM
    Never mind, question answered.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: HELMUT on November 17, 2018, 09:31:37 AM
    Just wanted to say thank you for this update Alex. It just feels so weird now after all this time, my mind is still stuck in 0.8.

    "That Nexerelin battlestation sure looks weir- Oh, oh... 0.9, i forgot, again."


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on November 17, 2018, 09:34:28 AM
    Four more minor things: having "perform survey" and "create a colony" have the same hot key is bad. Fuel indicator in the bottom RIGHT, if course is set to travel in hyperspace, will count realspace travel as using fuel as well. Efficiency overhaul seems so... Cheap. And the last one: in intel screen fuel range indicator is "W", but on normal map it's "2". Annoying.
    Also sector generation is a bit broken; once had a gas giant and it's L4/L5 asteroid groups misaligned not only in the distance from the star, but also asteroids were too close/too far away as well. Now I have a black hole system, where outer system and fringe jump-points are half a screen away from one another.
    You can "unlock" orders tab on Command panel without having any colonies. Go to Doctrines and Blueprints, click select all - unselect all, voila. It's all empty, but you can still open it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: rin on November 17, 2018, 09:35:18 AM
    Yes! Finally! Thank you so very much. I've been waiting for this. Have been getting more into Starsector with mods for the past few months after playing it on and off for the past few years. This is looking great! I still remember when I bought this game in 2011. Ah, good times. :>


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Histidine on November 17, 2018, 11:02:30 AM
    The new jump point look-ahead functionality ruins the surprise of ambush distress signals. (Which is arguably good, because the distress signal surprise is terrible if your fleet is too weak.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SirOstrich on November 17, 2018, 11:46:53 AM
    After years of shamelessly pirating that gem, i finally bought it on that release. GG fractalsoftworks :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on November 17, 2018, 12:00:08 PM
    Resetting to defaults sets battle size to 200, not 300.

    I think the bar would profit tremendously from ambient sound effects:)  Also, why not make it the place to hire officers? Or at least, let's say, high-level officers.


    Does the AI maybe not always recognize stations as obstacles? I saw a domain cruiser burn-drive into a domain mothership without apparent cause.


    Ha, I love the hyperspace storm travel ping-pong! ;D



    After years of shamelessly pirating that gem, i finally bought it on that release. GG fractalsoftworks :)

    Well, thank you for supporting the game. However, shame on you for pirating it in the first place. That is not something we want discussed on this forum, please refrain from that in the future.

    Anyway, welcome to the forum.



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 17, 2018, 01:17:22 PM
    Mhm, i have had a hope that the reputation penalties would be... lessened, for accidental issues.

    I had 35 rep with Hegemony. A fast picket, after catching me once with my transponder off, and not much after, with it again (turned on before combat) because i was trying to hack a relay, engaged me. Ran away sucessfully the first time, but the picket continued to chase me. I tried to run away again, not that i was unable to defend myself, but they got too hard on my carrier and i destroyed i think one destroyer and two frigates from their side. Boom, i was at -55 reputation in one go.  I am wondering whether that would have been lessened if i /didn't/ turn it on before combat, but either way, as much as it makes the roleplay of 'high-and-mighty-holier-than-thou-fringe-sherrif pushes around traveller' more genuine, this little problem left me in the back-end of Haegemony space with no fuel to really go anywhere else and far from capable to slip under the radar and blackmarket some fuel. Had my entire fleet crushed not long after when trying to procure said fuel.

    Isn't there a lessened penalty when i /didn't/ engage the fight? Not like i attacked a defenceless trade convoy and erased it from existence to get put on their kill-on-sight list.

    Video of the encounter. (https://tinyurl.com/ycct2u6x)

    This cut a fair bit of the steam i had under my sails. Thankfully made a tiny nest-egg to get back to at least a modest trading fleet (thankfully trading is improved in 0.9a) before i get back on my feet, but this entire situation was not cause by agressive playing or by taking big risks, just one transponder fluke and one agressive picket. I usually don't really play iron-man so i would have just reloaded after this situation, but it does not mean it's fair. My only other alternative would have been to /not/ defend myself and take the carrier hit but it seems entirely anti-play since i was not supposed to be trading '80 rep points versus a dead 20k credit carrier' then, or even '80 rep points versus 40k worth of enemy ships'.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: niiiick on November 17, 2018, 01:56:23 PM
    Hey,

    Is it possible to turn off/disable the 3-year monthly stipend?
    Ruins the masochistic experience a bit. :')

    Thanks for the update!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Mr_7 on November 17, 2018, 02:16:56 PM
    0.9RC8 getting some odd flickering on certain planet surface textures in the campaign mode. Gathering more data on it as it’s intermittent.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ubik on November 17, 2018, 02:44:33 PM
    Is seeing the best places to buy or sell a product (when pressing F1) a new feature?

    Either way it's quite handy but could you expand it somehow to also show the prices for the stations inside the system you are when checking it?
    Would reduce the need to fly from station to station to find the best deal.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: TJJ on November 17, 2018, 03:03:01 PM
    0.9RC8 getting some odd flickering on certain planet surface textures in the campaign mode. Gathering more data on it as it’s intermittent.

    Slightly different, but I've noticed occasional complete screen white flickering.

    Though I don't think it actually requires any input from the user for it to occur, just leave the game idle for a while (I was watching a movie on a different monitor) and you'll see an occasional white flicker.
    It's the same symptom as when a draw surface is invalidated during rendering, and you fail to check for it/re-render before the page flip.

    Win 10 x64, GTX 1070, 3 monitors.
    To my knowledge the previous version didn't do it.

    I'll have a go at screen capping it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: TJJ on November 17, 2018, 03:17:07 PM
    Oh yeah, can the installer be signed?

    (https://www.dropbox.com/s/a7pwsz0s8px3i1g/smartscreen.png?raw=1)

    Not only does Windows Defender pop up this scary warning, but it automatically does a thorough scan of the entire installer archive*.

    *Which for unknown reasons, takes upwards of 1 minute even on a Ryzen 2700 reading from an nvme ssd.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on November 17, 2018, 03:30:21 PM
    ( I had trouble downloading too, it was infinitely stuck on a security scan (win 10, both chrome and edge). Could still start the installer, though.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 17, 2018, 04:48:21 PM
    Few quick comments:
    * Restarted game after first hotfix.

    * Started with Wolf and Shepherd.  Thought about taking the Hammerhead start, but decided not to.

    * Noticed that story missions are highlighted in green instead of blue in the bar.  Nice.  (Found grandma talking about the Red Planet.)

    * Started up a colony as soon as I got about 200k.  Planet is class V water world near the east edge of core worlds.  Have not progressed much yet, just built the spaceport and aquaculture.  Have not enough money yet for further development.

    * Fleet Logistics is probably too good.  It was almost too good in 0.8.  With colony bonuses on top of that, it seems to give a bit much compared to other skills.

    * The skill that increases admins and your colony limits appear very attractive.  I want bases of my own, and two or three colonies does not seem like enough (for sector conquest).

    * Complaint:  Salvaging 3 often does not give me more rare loot, but instead changes the rare loot I get.  Instead of getting extra on top of the more useful general-purpose packages, those useful packages get replaced by crap like Luddic Church, Luddic Path, and/or Pirates' hack packages.  One time, unskilled found a synchrotron.  Level 3 did not get the synchrotron, but got corrupted nanoforge instead.  In terms of rare loot found, Salvaging 3 looks like a total dud of a skill.  Lower levels may or may not replace loot.

    More detailed feedback will probably come in about a month or so, maybe.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: trias10 on November 17, 2018, 05:31:52 PM
    I'm quite a noob to Starsector so apologies for these questions, but I could not find any info in the official FAQ. Couple of questions about this update:

    - what is the recommended update procedure? Do we need to fully uninstall our existing installation of Starsector first, and then install the new version fresh, or can we just point the 0.9a installer to our existing installed 0.8 directory and it will intelligently overwrite the old version with the new version correctly?

    - I only bought Starsector recently, with the latest 0.8 release. I just last night started playing the tutorial for the first time, am about 90 minutes into the tutorial. Are Starsector new version releases savegame compatible, or is it like Paradox games and you need to start a new save each time a major update hits?

    Following up from the above, I uninstalled Starsector 0.8 completely, installed 0.9a fresh, and then went to load my savegame from last night, where I'm 90 min into the tutorial. Unfortunately, the game would not load my save (I'm not using any mods nor was I using any under 0.8a). The log file shows this error:


    54611 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Invalid reference
    ---- Debugging information ----
    message             : Invalid reference
    reference           : 84691
    referenced-type     : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.reach.ReachEconomy
    referenceable       : true
    class               : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Economy
    required-type       : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Economy
    converter-type      : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.ReflectionConverter
    line number         : 242895
    class[1]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Market
    class[2]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignPlanet
    class[3]            : java.util.ArrayList
    converter-type[1]   : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter
    class[4]            : com.fs.util.container.repo.ObjectRepository
    class[5]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem
    class[6]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem$UpdateFromHyperspaceLocation
    class[7]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation$LocationToken
    class[8]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.Hyperspace
    class[9]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine
    converter-type[2]   : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.I
    version             : not available
    -------------------------------
    com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.ConversionException: Invalid reference
    ---- Debugging information ----
    message             : Invalid reference
    reference           : 84691
    referenced-type     : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.reach.ReachEconomy
    referenceable       : true
    class               : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Economy
    required-type       : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Economy
    converter-type      : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.ReflectionConverter
    line number         : 242895
    class[1]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Market
    class[2]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignPlanet
    class[3]            : java.util.ArrayList
    converter-type[1]   : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter
    class[4]            : com.fs.util.container.repo.ObjectRepository
    class[5]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem
    class[6]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem$UpdateFromHyperspaceLocation
    class[7]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation$LocationToken
    class[8]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.Hyperspace
    class[9]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine
    converter-type[2]   : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.I
    version             : not available
    -------------------------------
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:58)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:73)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.addCurrentE lementToCollection(CollectionConverter.java:98)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:91)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:85)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.unmarshal(CollectionConverter.java:80)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:73)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.addCurrentE lementToCollection(CollectionConverter.java:98)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:91)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:85)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.unmarshal(CollectionConverter.java:80)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:503)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:429)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:281)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:70)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.start(TreeUnmarshaller.java:134)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractTreeMarshallingStrategy.unmarshal(AbstractTreeMarshallingStrategy.java:32)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.XStream.unmarshal(XStream.java:1486)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.XStream.unmarshal(XStream.java:1466)
       at com.thoughtworks.xstream.XStream.fromXML(XStream.java:1346)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager.super(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager.super(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.menuItemSelected(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.title.C.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.k.buttonPressed(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.I.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.I.processInput(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.ui.O0Oo.o00000(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
       at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
       at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)


    So is 0.9a not savegame compatible with games saved under 0.8?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volfgarix on November 17, 2018, 05:36:11 PM
    Shelled out my second-world money to buy the game at last.
    Hooo boy, I'm excited!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: ahrenjb on November 17, 2018, 05:58:55 PM
    Guests in town all weekend... but out of work all next week. It's going to be hard to be a good host.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 06:00:52 PM
    Also sector generation is a bit broken; once had a gas giant and it's L4/L5 asteroid groups misaligned not only in the distance from the star, but also asteroids were too close/too far away as well. Now

    You don't happen to have a screenshot handy, do you? Just reading it I'm not sure if it's a problem or not, could be many factors involved.

    I have a black hole system, where outer system and fringe jump-points are half a screen away from one another.

    Yep, can happen in an empty-ish system, but not something I'd call a bug.


    You can "unlock" orders tab on Command panel without having any colonies. Go to Doctrines and Blueprints, click select all - unselect all, voila. It's all empty, but you can still open it.

    Thank you, noted!


    Resetting to defaults sets battle size to 200, not 300.

    Noted as well.


    I think the bar would profit tremendously from ambient sound effects:)  Also, why not make it the place to hire officers? Or at least, let's say, high-level officers.

    Ahh, that's a really good idea. Wrote that down :)

    Does the AI maybe not always recognize stations as obstacles? I saw a domain cruiser burn-drive into a domain mothership without apparent cause.

    Hmm, possibly. That was an issue way back but I thought I'd fixed it - well, I probably did *mostly* fix it, but it appears not entirely. I'll keep an eye out.


    Hey,

    Is it possible to turn off/disable the 3-year monthly stipend?
    Ruins the masochistic experience a bit. :')

    Thanks for the update!

    data/config/settings.json, set "enableSpacerStart":true, and select the 5th starting option. Don't say I didn't warn you.


    Is seeing the best places to buy or sell a product (when pressing F1) a new feature?

    Yep!

    Either way it's quite handy but could you expand it somehow to also show the prices for the stations inside the system you are when checking it?
    Would reduce the need to fly from station to station to find the best deal.

    Hmm, let me take a look. Sounds like a good idea in principle but could get a bit tricky UI-wise.


    0.9RC8 getting some odd flickering on certain planet surface textures in the campaign mode. Gathering more data on it as it’s intermittent.
    Slightly different, but I've noticed occasional complete screen white flickering.

    I'd appreciate any data on this. Does seem like a driver issue, though, so I'm not too optimistic about being able to work around it, without redoing the entire rendering code.


    Oh yeah, can the installer be signed?

    Prooobably not in the near future but I'll investigate. From what I understand I'd need to buy a cert from a CA (though, actually, I've already got one for the website), and then <do something>.


    * Fleet Logistics is probably too good.  It was almost too good in 0.8.  With colony bonuses on top of that, it seems to give a bit much compared to other skills.

    Yeah, it probably is.

    * Complaint:  Salvaging 3 often does not give me more rare loot, but instead changes the rare loot I get.  Instead of getting extra on top of the more useful general-purpose packages, those useful packages get replaced by crap like Luddic Church, Luddic Path, and/or Pirates' hack packages.  One time, unskilled found a synchrotron.  Level 3 did not get the synchrotron, but got corrupted nanoforge instead.  In terms of rare loot found, Salvaging 3 looks like a total dud of a skill.  Lower levels may or may not replace loot.

    Hmm, you can't just compare the results of two rolls like that. If there's a 1/10 chance to get a Synchroton, and you bump it up to 1.5 out of 10 and re-roll and don't get one (or get something else) that doesn't mean that 1.5 out of 10 is worse than 1 out of 10, if that makes sense.


    - what is the recommended update procedure? Do we need to fully uninstall our existing installation of Starsector first, and then install the new version fresh, or can we just point the 0.9a installer to our existing installed 0.8 directory and it will intelligently overwrite the old version with the new version correctly?

    (Hi, and welcome to the forum!) If you just install, it *should* work - the installer uninstalls the game first - but for Windows Reasons, that will occasionally run into trouble, i.e. it won't be able to delete some files or some such. So generally speaking, you don't need to uninstall first, but occasionally you might have to do a clean install if there's any trouble.


    - I only bought Starsector recently, with the latest 0.8 release. I just last night started playing the tutorial for the first time, am about 90 minutes into the tutorial. Are Starsector new version releases savegame compatible, or is it like Paradox games and you need to start a new save each time a major update hits?

    Following up from the above, I uninstalled Starsector 0.8 completely, installed 0.9a fresh, and then went to load my savegame from last night, where I'm 90 min into the tutorial. Unfortunately, the game would not load my save (I'm not using any mods nor was I using any under 0.8a). The log file shows this error:

    So is 0.9a not savegame compatible with games saved under 0.8?

    Yeah, the major releases are not save compatible. Way too many things are entirely different under the hood. I do try to keep the .1 releases compatible, though, so for example the 0.9.1a release (with tweaks etc) *should* be save-compatible with 0.9a, unless there's an issue that makes this flat-out impossible.


    Shelled out my second-world money to buy the game at last.
    Hooo boy, I'm excited!

    Thank you for your support!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Soren on November 17, 2018, 06:37:57 PM
    Utterly delighted by the new update, I'm enjoying it immensely.

    Minor question, since I have procgen stuff to debug - the old ctrl-d to turn off sensors no longer works in devmode. Is there a new command for that?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 06:53:23 PM
    Utterly delighted by the new update, I'm enjoying it immensely.

    :D Happy to hear that!

    Minor question, since I have procgen stuff to debug - the old ctrl-d to turn off sensors no longer works in devmode. Is there a new command for that?

    It's ctrl-z now, because d opens the command tab.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 17, 2018, 07:14:07 PM
    Still found Nebulas on debries, i try to found something on starsector.log but dont see anything related to this.
    Code:

    52131 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Loading stage 37
    52131 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Loading stage 38
    52132 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Loading stage 39 - last
    53134 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
    53161 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
    53162 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
    54393 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [miscallenous_main_menu.ogg]
    54663 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    54664 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    74414 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from ancyra_market, 40 total available
    76125 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Ismara, faction: Luddic Path
    77015 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Garnir to Chicomoztoc
    78258 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Tri-Tachyon
    78889 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at chicomoztoc, 40 total available
    79062 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Fikenhild to Ancyra
    79957 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: heavy_machinery to Ilm
    81418 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Skathi to Tartessus
    81808 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: heavy_machinery to Cibola
    83305 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Supply Cache, faction: Persean League
    85021 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Persean League
    85202 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from volturn, 40 total available
    85891 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Suddene to Kazeron
    87189 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    88120 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 4.0 for market [Port Tse Franchise Station]
    98234 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Chicomoztoc to Epiphany
    98265 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 4.0 for market [Donn]
    98387 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Grendusa, faction: pirates
    99416 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Ancyra to Yesod
    99465 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at raesvelg, 40 total available
    99547 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: pirates
    100262 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100263 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (1589.3738, 0.0)
    100263 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100263 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (2.3247056E-15, 8.4006786E-4)
    100263 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100263 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100264 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (9.393692E-4, 0.0018671155)
    100264 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100264 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100264 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100264 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100265 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100265 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (660.2333, 1589.3711)
    100265 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (1.1953329E-16, 0.0)
    100265 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    100763 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.BaseLimitedFleetManager  - Spawned fleet [Luddic Path watchers] at hyperloc Vector2f[40824.766, -12653.304]
    100894 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Salamanca to Ailmar
    101198 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    101198 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    101349 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Salamanca
    102783 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    105829 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Luddic Path
    106242 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    107474 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: supplies to Volturn
    107751 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from suddene, 20 total available
    109423 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Orpheus, faction: independent
    110744 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    111015 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at suddene, 20 total available
    111284 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_metals to Mazalot
    112815 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: Luddic Path
    113155 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Culann to Cibola
    114566 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Minor Supply Cache, faction: Hegemony
    115249 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    115352 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from mazalot, 20 total available
    117176 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: pirates
    118892 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SystemBountyIntel  - Ending bounty at market [Sindria]
    119042 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at orthrus, 20 total available
    119776 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: domestic_goods to Qaras
    122189 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    126756 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    127446 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: drugs to Qaras
    127884 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Donn to Gilead
    129677 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: volatiles to Raesvelg
    129758 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    133535 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 5.0 for market [Poland]
    134140 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Research Station, faction: independent
    136051 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from tibicena, 20 total available
    136492 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at epithany, 20 total available
    136560 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Weapons Cache, faction: independent
    137025 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Pshe to Port Tse Franchise Station
    137740 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137740 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (1589.3738, 0.0)
    137741 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137741 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (2.3247056E-15, 8.4006786E-4)
    137741 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137741 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137741 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (9.393692E-4, 0.0018671155)
    137741 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137741 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137741 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137742 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137742 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137742 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (606.57153, 1589.3711)
    137742 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (1.1953329E-16, 0.0)
    137742 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    137763 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    138094 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 3.0 for market [Poland]
    138150 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Union, faction: pirates
    140180 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Nachiketa to Tigra City
    140555 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Sorpen, faction: Luddic Path
    142133 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Sagon, faction: independent
    142265 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    143766 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    143932 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Pair, faction: Tri-Tachyon
    145493 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SystemBountyIntel  - Starting bounty at market [Sindria], 1680 credits per frigate
    145898 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: drugs to Qaras
    146114 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from yama, 40 total available
    147142 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Nova Maxios to Yama
    148246 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: drugs to Qaras
    149272 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 4.0 for market [Citadel Arcadia]
    150521 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_metals to Salamanca
    151857 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    152498 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at eldfell, 40 total available
    153633 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: pirates
    154629 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from ilm, 40 total available
    155039 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Ghan, faction: Hegemony
    155511 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at sindria, 40 total available
    156968 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: organs to Laicaille Habitat
    159361 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: luxury_goods to Volturn
    160266 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.PersonBountyIntel  - Ending bounty on Lynn Tjon by Hegemony
    160609 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Cibola to Sphinx
    161931 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Survey Ship, faction: Persean League
    163778 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    163779 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    163790 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.OOoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  - Creating music buffer #3
    193152 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    193298 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [battle_ambience_01.ogg]
    193298 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [battle_ambience_01.ogg]
    388116 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [battle_ambience_01.ogg]
    388423 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    388424 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    393934 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.bases.LuddicPathBaseIntel  - Removing luddic path base at [Erlig Star System]
    395201 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    395430 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    395826 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Mazalot
    397593 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Baetis to Chicomoztoc
    398151 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from market_system_ab2:planet_1, 40 total available
    398489 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    398802 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Garnir to Poland
    399941 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399942 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (1589.3729, 0.0)
    399942 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399943 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (2.3247056E-15, 8.4006786E-4)
    399943 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399944 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399944 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (4.696846E-4, 9.3355775E-4)
    399945 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399945 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399946 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399946 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399948 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    399950 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (606.57153, 1589.3711)
    399950 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (1.1953329E-16, 0.0)
    399951 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    400010 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    401287 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Ragnar Complex to Poland
    403729 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at madeira, 40 total available
    404141 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: volatiles to Tartessus
    404684 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Lost Astropolis to Eochu Bres
    406070 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: pirates
    406140 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 4.0 for market [Orthrus]
    407550 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Rocannon's World, faction: independent
    407937 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    408720 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.PersonBountyIntel  - Ending bounty on Orion Patel by independent
    409340 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Kosambi, faction: Sindrian Diktat
    411056 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Tannin, faction: independent
    412242 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Asher to Kazeron
    412270 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 3.0 for market [Pshe]
    412761 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.PersonBountyIntel  - Starting person bounty by faction [Hegemony] for person Guy Nelson
    412790 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from mazalot, 40 total available
    412928 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Sindrian Diktat
    414336 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Persean League
    415750 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: Persean League
    418444 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    420441 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Azathe Armurrus, faction: pirates
    420788 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at mazalot, 40 total available
    424426 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    424448 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    427707 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: fuel to Chicomoztoc
    428001 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from port_tse, 20 total available
    428467 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Yama to Umbra
    428750 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at ailmar, 20 total available
    431196 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Madeira
    432575 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432576 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (885.2713, 0.0)
    432576 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432576 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (2.3247056E-15, 8.4006786E-4)
    432576 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432576 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432577 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (4.696846E-4, 9.3355775E-4)
    432577 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432577 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432577 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432577 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432578 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432578 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (606.57153, 885.26953)
    432578 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (1.1953329E-16, 0.0)
    432578 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    432795 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Supply Cache, faction: pirates
    434765 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    436473 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: Hegemony
    437124 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Volturn to Sindria
    438012 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Persean League
    438302 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from tartessus, 20 total available
    438920 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at salamanca, 20 total available
    438925 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Citadel Arcadia to Jangala
    440459 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    440459 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    465222 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    465477 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    465729 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: lobster to Asharu
    468885 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Alpha Prisma I, faction: Tri-Tachyon
    470620 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Sindrian Diktat
    471822 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Chalcedon to Cibola
    472237 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Delta Mojave III, faction: pirates
    473085 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Gilead to Sindria
    473916 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Zepar, faction: independent
    486233 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Orthrus to Nova Maxios
    487244 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Jeresh, faction: Hegemony
    487471 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Ilm to Gilead
    488677 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from fikenhild, 40 total available
    489019 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    489221 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Ancyra to Coatl
    489285 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Bolunda, faction: independent
    501139 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: organs to Garnir
    502495 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at kazeron, 40 total available
    504031 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    504301 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: lobster to Nachiketa
    505532 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    505933 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from coatl, 20 total available
    506215 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Maida, faction: Persean League
    506614 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 4.0 for market [Citadel Arcadia]
    507906 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 8.0 for market [Poland]
    507939 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: independent
    508363 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at market_system_a49:planet_3, 20 total available
    508535 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    509405 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Gusoyn, faction: independent
    510906 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510906 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (794.6873, 0.0)
    510906 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510907 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (2.3013546E-15, 8.4006786E-4)
    510907 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510907 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510907 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (4.696846E-4, 9.3355775E-4)
    510907 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510908 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510908 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510908 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510908 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    510909 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (330.11664, 794.68555)
    510909 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (1.1953329E-16, 0.0)
    510909 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    512032 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: ore to Salamanca
    512078 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    514579 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    515481 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: supplies to Tartessus
    518136 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: independent
    519375 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Research Station, faction: pirates
    520995 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Nortia to Suddene
    521357 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from suddene, 40 total available
    521993 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Cibola to Culann
    525088 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    525089 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    545103 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    545601 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    545851 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Eldfell to Eventide
    547909 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Azathe Armurrus, faction: independent
    548773 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at cruor, 40 total available
    549571 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    550938 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: organics to Madeira
    551329 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Yama to Olinadu
    552707 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    554295 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Persean League
    557641 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Nachiketa to Volturn
    558604 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558604 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (794.6869, 0.0)
    558604 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558605 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (1.1623528E-15, 4.2003393E-4)
    558605 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558605 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558606 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (4.696846E-4, 9.3355775E-4)
    558606 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558606 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558607 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558607 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558607 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    558608 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (330.11664, 794.68555)
    558608 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (5.9766645E-17, 0.0)
    558608 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    559369 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: luxury_goods to Volturn
    559779 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from madeira, 40 total available
    560089 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Umbra to Fikenhild
    560716 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Qaras
    565613 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    566114 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    566114 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    567858 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Faiella, faction: independent
    568013 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Poland to Cethlenn
    572390 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Turms, faction: independent
    574842 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at mairaath_abandoned_station2, 40 total available
    575374 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Weapons Cache, faction: independent
    576645 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    576645 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    584123 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Salamanca to Kazeron
    584286 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [faction_generic_market_01_neutral_var01.ogg]
    584651 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    585279 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: New Guayaquil, faction: Hegemony
    587886 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Orpheus, faction: pirates
    588121 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Agreus to Raesvelg
    589352 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Cruor to Madeira
    589902 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: hand_weapons to Nomios
    590818 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Nomios to Kazeron
    590885 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from market_system_a49:planet_3, 20 total available
    591032 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at kazeron, 20 total available
    591513 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: volatiles to Fikenhild
    595276 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Kanta's Den
    596623 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Ragnar Complex to Chicomoztoc
    598389 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: lobster to Coatl
    599288 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Donn to Culann
    599848 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from mairaath_abandoned_station2, 40 total available
    599996 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Hegemony
    601624 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Schrat, faction: Luddic Church
    602899 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Gargeneiron, faction: independent
    603862 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603863 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (794.6869, 0.0)
    603863 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603863 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (1.1623528E-15, 4.2003393E-4)
    603863 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603864 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603864 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (4.696846E-4, 9.3355775E-4)
    603864 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603864 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603865 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603865 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603865 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    603865 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (330.11664, 794.68555)
    603865 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (5.9766645E-17, 0.0)
    603866 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    604094 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at yesod, 40 total available
    604230 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Nova Maxios to Cibola
    605602 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Mazalot to Madeira
    605913 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 3.0 for market [Poland]
    606050 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    606919 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Port Tse Franchise Station to Madeira
    607895 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Minor Equipment Cache, faction: Hegemony
    609211 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: domestic_goods to Volturn
    609688 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Raesvelg to Pshe
    611179 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: organics to Chicomoztoc
    612557 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Persean League
    614037 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from qaras, 20 total available
    614666 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: domestic_goods to Mazalot
    614683 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Garnir to Cethlenn
    615336 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at culann, 20 total available
    616258 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    617728 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Rhogog, faction: Hegemony
    619756 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: ore to Jangala
    622306 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.BaseLimitedFleetManager  - Spawned fleet [pirate raiders] at hyperloc Vector2f[37887.0, -13530.0]
    622406 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622407 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (794.6869, 0.0)
    622407 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622407 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (1.1623528E-15, 4.2003393E-4)
    622408 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622408 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622408 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (4.696846E-4, 9.3355775E-4)
    622408 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622408 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622408 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622408 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622409 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622409 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (330.11664, 794.68555)
    622409 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (5.9766645E-17, 0.0)
    622409 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    622522 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from nachiketa, 40 total available
    622765 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Eochu Bres to Hesperus
    622953 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Lamnos, faction: independent
    625362 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Eventide to Poland
    626758 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Yaahl, faction: independent
    627548 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Olinadu to Ilm
    628267 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at arcadia_station, 40 total available
    628320 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: volatiles to Ragnar Complex
    630343 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: ore to Ancyra
    631720 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.BaseLimitedFleetManager  - Spawned fleet [Luddic Path watchers] at hyperloc Vector2f[37035.984, -12112.166]
    632115 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: independent
    633485 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: pirates
    635573 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: drugs to Qaras
    636375 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from asher, 40 total available
    636930 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 3.0 for market [Poland]
    670272 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Ragnar Complex
    670721 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at eldfell, 40 total available
    671546 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671546 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (794.68646, 0.0)
    671548 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671549 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (1.1623528E-15, 4.2003393E-4)
    671549 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671550 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671551 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (4.696846E-4, 4.6677887E-4)
    671551 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671551 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671551 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671552 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671552 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671552 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (303.28577, 794.68555)
    671553 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (5.9766645E-17, 0.0)
    671553 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    671788 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Weapons Cache, faction: independent
    672547 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Asharu to Tibicena
    673254 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Goodfellow, faction: pirates
    673802 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Cethlenn to Tartessus
    674981 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: metals to Salamanca
    675073 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from hesperus, 40 total available
    675094 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at sphinx, 40 total available
    675242 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Cruor to Gilead
    675856 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.PersonBountyIntel  - Ending bounty on Orion Spann by Persean League
    676376 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Eldfell to Eochu Bres
    676950 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    679029 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: Tri-Tachyon
    679151 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Skathi to Asharu
    680410 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Luddic Path
    681638 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Jangala to Sindria
    682130 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Borlu, faction: independent
    683463 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: organs to Eochu Bres
    684671 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from agreus, 20 total available
    685136 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Zahrat Diyu, faction: pirates
    686725 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Chicomoztoc to Laicaille Habitat
    703092 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Pelesius, faction: Luddic Church
    704484 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: volatiles to Tartessus
    704665 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704665 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (456.30753, 0.0)
    704666 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704666 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (1.1623528E-15, 4.2003393E-4)
    704667 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704667 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704668 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (2.348423E-4, 4.6677887E-4)
    704668 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704668 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704668 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704668 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704668 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704669 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (303.28577, 456.30664)
    704669 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (5.9766645E-17, 0.0)
    704669 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    704909 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at raesvelg, 20 total available
    706007 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: ore to Madeira
    708068 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: pirates
    708352 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from asher, 40 total available
    709331 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.PersonBountyIntel  - Starting person bounty by faction [Luddic Church] for person Glowing Rotten
    709452 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: hand_weapons to Laicaille Habitat
    709510 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at cibola, 40 total available
    709873 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 3.0 for market [Garnir]
    709881 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Mazalot to Jangala
    710836 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Sindrian Diktat
    711320 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Pshe to Baetis
    712270 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Palaver, faction: independent
    712572 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Athulf to Nortia
    712737 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.PersonBountyIntel  - Ending bounty on Paul Allred by Hegemony
    713646 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Salamanca to Cibola
    714016 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: metals to Ragnar Complex
    714209 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.PersonBountyIntel  - Starting person bounty by faction [Hegemony] for person Alastair Michael
    715585 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Volturn
    718346 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: ore to Jangala
    719932 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.bases.LuddicPathBaseIntel  - Added luddic path base in [Brador Star System], isLarge: false
    720095 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from volturn, 40 total available
    720579 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Sphinx to Nova Maxios
    723490 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Suddene to Raesvelg
    723819 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: independent
    724085 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at 45881, 40 total available
    725649 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: organs to Eochu Bres
    726255 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Baetis to Asher
    728273 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728273 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (397.34366, 0.0)
    728273 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728273 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (1.1623528E-15, 4.2003393E-4)
    728274 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728274 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728274 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (2.348423E-4, 4.6677887E-4)
    728274 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728274 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728274 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728274 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728275 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    728275 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (303.28577, 397.34277)
    728275 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (5.9766645E-17, 0.0)
    728275 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    729084 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Mazalot
    731381 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Minor Supply Cache, faction: pirates
    734354 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: organics to Chicomoztoc
    737790 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    737790 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    739478 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from coatl, 40 total available
    740424 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    740792 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    741065 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Derinkuyu Mining Station to Fikenhild
    742010 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_metals to Ragnar Complex
    743129 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at 7c5bc, 40 total available
    744403 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Chalcedon to Gilead
    744404 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: Persean League
    746438 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Kigameng, faction: Luddic Church
    746917 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Epiphany to Tartessus
    750553 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: rare_ore to Salamanca
    750798 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    752218 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Domain-era Probe, faction: Hegemony
    754801 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    755045 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from sindria, 40 total available
    758303 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    760306 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Tri-Tachyon
    761025 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at cruor, 40 total available
    762005 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Minor Supply Cache, faction: Persean League
    763878 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Zepar, faction: independent
    765138 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Raesvelg to Athulf
    765724 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Bull Moose, faction: Sindrian Diktat
    768816 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    768818 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    772128 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    772322 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [battle_ambience_01.ogg]
    772323 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [battle_ambience_01.ogg]
    1028599 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [battle_ambience_01.ogg]
    1029010 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    1029010 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    1035887 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: food to Chicomoztoc
    1036025 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [faction_generic_market_01_hostile_var01.ogg]
    1036046 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    1037146 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed freelance admin from asher, 20 total available
    1042048 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    1042798 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Hegemony
    1042816 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Port Tse Franchise Station to Agreus
    1042962 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added admin at kazeron, 20 total available
    1043418 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.PersonBountyIntel  - Starting person bounty by faction [Hegemony] for person Dimas Tanner
    1046550 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    1046678 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the remnant for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046679 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the pirates for a rep change (397.34344, 0.0)
    1046680 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with Tri-Tachyon for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046681 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the independents for a rep change (1.1506773E-15, 2.1001697E-4)
    1046681 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Path for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046682 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Lion's Guard for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046682 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Luddic Church for a rep change (2.348423E-4, 4.6677887E-4)
    1046683 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the scavengers for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046683 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the sleeper for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046683 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Persean League for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046684 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the refugees for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046684 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the derelict for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1046684 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Hegemony for a rep change (303.28577, 397.34277)
    1046685 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Sindrian Diktat for a rep change (5.9766645E-17, 0.0)
    1046685 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.RepTrackerEvent  - Not enough trade/smuggling with the Knights of Ludd for a rep change (0.0, 0.0)
    1047055 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Cruor to Coatl
    1047488 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Tri-Tachyon
    1047589 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Creating trade fleet of tier 5.0 for market [Ragnar Complex]
    1052055 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    1052751 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Gream, faction: independent
    1053017 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SystemBountyIntel  - Ending bounty at market [Nachiketa]
    1053957 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.EconomyFleetRouteManager  - Added trade fleet route from Thulian Raider Base to Sindria
    1054396 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Removed officer from madeira, 40 total available
    1054824 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel  - Created AnalyzeEntityMissionIntel: Derelict Ship, faction: Persean League
    1055375 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent  - Added officer at tartessus, 40 total available
    1056247 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Comiaken, faction: independent
    1196717 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    1220323 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.SurveyPlanetMissionIntel  - Created SurveyPlanetMissionIntel: Raum, faction: independent
    1222355 [Thread-4] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.ProcurementMissionIntel  - Created ProcurementMissionIntel: heavy_machinery to Madeira
    1230670 [Thread-8] INFO  sound.public  - Cleaning up music with id [miscallenous_corvus_campaign_music.ogg]
    1230747 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.public  - Creating streaming player for music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]
    1230747 [Thread-10] INFO  sound.null  - Playing music with id [campaign_music_part_2_v28.ogg]

    Also, Alex, can we see on future new panel "Military Operation" on "Command"? For organize strike fleets for this stupid Pather stations and other bad guys. So boring hunting down this stations.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bastion.Systems on November 17, 2018, 07:21:34 PM
    Same occasional flicker, win10 gtx1080, all latest drivers/updates, single 1920x1080 screen.

    The update has been a perfect experience so far. The gameplay loop is just so smooth now.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Flix on November 17, 2018, 07:59:51 PM
    How do I follow up on the missions I accepted in the bar? I took a mission from an academic lady to survey something but I can't find a trace of this in my Intel and I don't know where to go exactly.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 08:05:06 PM
    Also, Alex, can we see on future new panel "Military Operation" on "Command"?

    There is a mostly grayed out "orders" tab...

    The update has been a perfect experience so far. The gameplay loop is just so smooth now.

    :)

    How do I follow up on the missions I accepted in the bar? I took a mission from an academic lady to survey something but I can't find a trace of this in my Intel and I don't know where to go exactly.

    If you click on the "Accepted" tag in intel, you should see it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 17, 2018, 08:19:51 PM
    How do I follow up on the missions I accepted in the bar? I took a mission from an academic lady to survey something but I can't find a trace of this in my Intel and I don't know where to go exactly.

    If you click on the "Accepted" tag in intel, you should see it.
    Speaking of that mission, the target in question spawned circling very close to a Black Hole for me.  So close in fact that most ships don't last more than 60 seconds (even with Combat Endurance) in combat before having total loss of control down to 0% CR.  Nothing should spawn so close to Black Holes at all, under any circumstances.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 08:22:14 PM
    Hmm - variety is the spice of life, no? I think this is more of an interesting/weird thing to happen rather than a bad thing.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 08:24:25 PM
    Hotfix is up! Mainly for the autofit related campaign crash.

    http://fractalsoftworks.com/2018/11/16/starsector-0-9a-release/


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 17, 2018, 08:36:20 PM
    Hmm - variety is the spice of life, no? I think this is more of an interesting/weird thing to happen rather than a bad thing.
    I mean, when I clearly have the superior force but can't win the battle in any meaningful way because I just don't have enough time to destroy all those fast, teleporting REDACTED just turns that battle into a save-scum fest.  The return trip was genuinely interesting, as I had to make some tough decisions on if I wanted to scuttle any ships for fuel and supplies, and I did end up scuttling two of them.  I also decided to use Hyperspace Storm Surfing to improve my fuel efficiency on the way back (as my ships were already on the brink) and still ran out of fuel a little ways away from the nearest civilized system.  Was tense and exciting.  But the battle?  Disappointing and frustrating.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Troll on November 17, 2018, 08:39:18 PM
    Congrats on the big update Alex. It feels like relearning parts of the game with how much has been added / changed.
    I took the Apogee start to get quickly get a feel of the colony system (and surveying in general, since I never played a surveyor game). It's great how it quickly throws the player in the late early game but might be confusing for new players. It's a great ship choice in any case since it has the bonuses, is sturdy and yet not too powerful for the start.

    I colonized a system very early and managed to upgrade it a lot even though I didn't properly manage my stability and was raided early on.
    It was a sector north-east of the core one, with 2 planets of 3 (barren) with medium and large ruins specifically. I felt like I was a prospector from the Cosmic Computer uncovering caches from the war with my Tech Mines  ;)
    All my money went in it and it soon became a prime fuel (hail to the synchroton) and metals exporter and thus was I doomed.
    I was raided all the time, and my still infant but overly teched colony was becoming a nightmare.

    The 1st raid took down the Fuel factory, the 2nd the Tech mine.
    The 3rd raid by both the Dictat and League took down the Megaport for a full year.
    After a few month of learning and trying to survive without it, I was 700 000 credits in debt. By then I decided to sell almost everything of the colony and see what would work. It works somewhat, but it's a lot of lost time.

    tl,dr : Be strong before you try to be the economic powerhouse the others don't want you to be.



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 08:48:09 PM
    I mean, when I clearly have the superior force but can't win the battle in any meaningful way because I just don't have enough time to destroy all those fast, teleporting REDACTED just turns that battle into a save-scum fest.

    Seems like a legitimate use of a "deploy a ship or two, wear them out, deploy mop-up force" tactic, since it'd be so fast. But perhaps I'm underestimating the impact of the event horizon. Still, a minute seems like it ought to be enough time for a superior fleet to clean out 0-cr enemies. Honestly, I hear what you're saying, but I'd really have to see it for myself.


    Congrats on the big update Alex.

    Thank you!


    It feels like relearning parts of the game with how much has been added / changed.
    I took the Apogee start to get quickly get a feel of the colony system (and surveying in general, since I never played a surveyor game). It's great how it quickly throws the player in the late early game but might be confusing for new players. It's a great ship choice in any case since it has the bonuses, is sturdy and yet not too powerful for the start.

    I colonized a system very early and managed to upgrade it a lot even though I didn't properly manage my stability and was raided early on.
    It was a sector north-east of the core one, with 2 planets of 3 (barren) with medium and large ruins specifically. I felt like I was a prospector from the Cosmic Computer uncovering caches from the war with my Tech Mines  ;)
    All my money went in it and it soon became a prime fuel (hail to the synchroton) and metals exporter and thus was I doomed.
    I was raided all the time, and my still infant but overly teched colony was becoming a nightmare.

    The 1st raid took down the Fuel factory, the 2nd the Tech mine.
    The 3rd raid by both the Dictat and League took down the Megaport for a full year.
    After a few month of learning and trying to survive without it, I was 700 000 credits in debt. By then I decided to sell almost everything of the colony and see what would work. It works somewhat, but it's a lot of lost time.

    tl,dr : Be strong before you try to be the economic powerhouse the others don't want you to be.

    Ahh, yeah. In retrospect, probably should've cut the losses before going that far into the red, but that's a tough choice to make. At least you've still got the Synchrotron!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Troll on November 17, 2018, 08:56:32 PM
    Ahh, yeah. In retrospect, probably should've cut the losses before going that far into the red, but that's a tough choice to make. At least you've still got the Synchrotron!

    'twas all in the name of science.
    To see how far one can go and still rebound. My answer was, not very far.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SpaceMonster on November 17, 2018, 09:51:07 PM
    I noticed a black hole that was marked as "Unsurveyed". If I clicked on it action '1' was survey, but it was greyed out. Methinks those shouldn't even be surveyable in the first place.

    The custom production tab should show storage amounts of the items (well, storage of the gathering point).
    Too many times I've taken a look at it an wondered how many X I have and what I need more of. I have to go to the planet, check storage, and try to remember what's needed as I go back and forth between screens.

    On that point, I'd love a way to remotely view the storage contents of a colony.

    PS: Thanks for keeping me up till 4am yesterday.  :P


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ranakastrasz on November 17, 2018, 10:06:12 PM
    I noticed a black hole that was marked as "Unsurveyed". If I clicked on it action '1' was survey, but it was greyed out. Methinks those shouldn't even be surveyable in the first place.


    Whats wrong with surveying a black hole? You can fit a lot of stuff in there.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 17, 2018, 10:35:40 PM
    So, I just had an...incident with an Alpha AI Core.  Alex will know what it means. :) Spoiler territory ahead!  As well as feedback on ensuing incidents.

    So, having put an Alpha AI Core as the head of my first colony because I couldn't afford to use an administrator (and I hadn't any of the skills to improve player colony management), this core eventually got cozy and refused to leave.  Blackmailed me to keep it there on threat of revealing I was using AI Cores to the sector.  So of course I left it there grudgingly, but I wanted it out.

    So a couple of cycles later, the Hegemony caught up the idea that there might not be a human running that colony and sent an Inspection Fleet.  Seeing a prime opportunity to get rid of that pesky Alpha core, I let them go in and take the cores away.  However, a funny thing I noticed is that if I try to remove the core, it gets offended and goes into hiding to strike out at another time (the consequences of which I haven't explored), but the Hegemony Inspection Fleet seems to have no problems finding it and doesn't result in the "Rogue AI Core" negative trait the colony gets.  Works fine for me.

    The one thing I'm concerned with is the Inspection Fleet absolutely ravages the entire colony, and not just the facilities that had AI Cores in them.  There wasn't a single facility in my colony that wasn't disrupted for more than 120 days, most of them at 245 days.  This is absolutely worse than anything else the game can throw at you, and there's the one upside to getting rid of that pesky AI core is hardly worth the effort.  The force is within legal bounds, meaning you can't fight back without incurring massive penalties.  Bribing the force off / using political clout is the ONLY remotely reasonable way to deal with this - you can't remove AI cores to hide them - the end result won't change - and it won't even get rid of the "Rogue AI Core" trait if you removed the Alpha Core previously.  In fact, compared to the damage this can do, bribing off the force is more than worth the cost that would be incurred if they found the cores in the first place - I would go into a death spiral of -312,000 credits a month if I let this event play through.

    I'd suggest some changes to this.  Compared to other expedition / raid events, this is a shotgun blast rather than a pinpoint target like raiding is.  If all the facilities are going to be disrupted, it can't be for more than 15 days at the very most (searching is hardly equivalent to damaging and disrupting the facility as in raids, which for reason reason it has even more of an impact than).  30 for those facilities that did have cores in them, to be fair.  This puts this event back in line, where it should be.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volfgarix on November 17, 2018, 10:37:18 PM
    I was caught near Kanta's Den by small fleet of pirates, at first I thought I would be fine because the station cannot chase me and small pirate fleet won't do much alone against me.
    Boom, turns out I had to lose few ships to be able to walk away from stationary threat.

    There is a bug(?) that seems to be from at least 0.8 version - when you run out of fuel in hyperspace and start drifting towards star, you can slow down by going dark. It seems like you can drift slower in the river if turn out lights on ship. It's not something critical, but sorts of bother me.

    Besides that, everything is alright so far, the new mission system is fun and at last I can get some decent trade info. The news about valuable convoys is neat as well, previously I had to chase around for non-indie trade fleets and count for luck.
    Still didn't get to the colony stuff, still getting resources for that.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 17, 2018, 10:39:40 PM
    >:D
    (https://pp.userapi.com/c852016/v852016096/475bf/Ag0GpREV6aI.jpg)

    When it can be fixed?
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    And Alex, multiple enemy strike fleets it normal? Or it bug?
    (https://pp.userapi.com/c852016/v852016096/475c9/viuSMb71u5I.jpg)
    Or this? Then more i play then more big everything...
    (https://pp.userapi.com/c846320/v846320060/130b52/iLx12Z9PqrQ.jpg)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 17, 2018, 10:51:57 PM
    @TheSoldier:
    (Let's just say there's a different outcome if you don't try to outsmart them by hiding the cores they're expecting to find!)

    When it can be fixed?

    For the .1 release, whenever that is. While it's silly, it's also very minor :)

    And Alex, multiple enemy strike fleets it normal? Or it bug?

    Normal! Subsequent expeditions get bigger and bigger, to a point.

    Got caught near Kanta's Den by small fleet of pirates, at first I thought I would be fine because the station cannot chase me and small pirate fleet won't do much alone against me.
    Boom, turns out I had to lose few ships to be able to walk away from stationary threat.

    Yeah, that bit is definitely a bit awkward.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: orost on November 17, 2018, 10:57:21 PM
    I have a colony now, and also some feedback.

    * I don't really get some things about colony economy. I have a couple Gamma AI cores, and I tried installing them, but reducing demand for commodities seems to have no effect on the bottom line, even if it reduces how much of them the colony needs to import. Do imports not cost the colony at all? In fact, if installing a gamma core does anything at all, it is to decrease the net income slightly, which I don't understand at all.
    * I ended up in a situation where I was out of supplies at my own colony, sucking them up from stockpile as they trickled in, waiting to very slowly accumulate enough to make a trip somewhere to buy them. I felt a bit ridiculous, considering I was hovering over a supplies factory *and* a spaceport capable of importing supplies, both of which I owned. I would love a way to tap more deeply into a colony's resources if necessary, even if it has negative effects.
    * My colony was raided by a pirate force. The only effect of that I can see is -1 stability, and I *presume* this is because the force was small and the colony had ground defenses, so the raid was not very successful. But I don't know. Some feedback here would be welcome.
    * Something minor, but maybe it shouldn't happen: I got into a fight with repairs suspended. I lost one ship in it, and recovered it. Instantly after the battle, before I could do anything at all like resume repairs, an accident triggered, destroying the ship.
    * While exploring, sometimes I want to suspend repairs to save supplies. This is problematic in this version because at any time a storm hit can drop a ship to 0% CR, which is an inconvenience with repairs on but a danger with them off. So if I have repairs off, every single time I take a storm bump I have to into the fleet screen, scan to see if anything is down to 0, if it is unsuspend repairs on it, then remember to suspend them back a moment later once it's above 10%. It gets old. I would love an option like "essential maintenance only", that spends enough supplies to prevent accidents but no more, or perhaps just make suspending repairs work that way - I don't see myself ever choosing to not do that.

    Now that I'm done complaining, let me just say that the update is fantastic and I enjoy it very much!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 17, 2018, 11:06:59 PM
    Regarding my Alpha Core incident:
    I suppose that works.  Nothing bad at all happens - cores are expendable and my wallet is not, and that damnable Alpha Core is also gone without any side effects.  I can swap out Betas for Gammas without them being the wiser, but the effects of attempting to hide them are still far too severe.  This is the first time I've ran into that inspection event, and with my colony being so far along the consequences were massive.  I also do suggest having the Inspection remove any Rogue Alpha Core as well for the sake of being consistent - the rumor mill does start about the rogue Alpha Core after all, according to the description.

    EDIT:
    So, something I've noticed.  A Pirate base keeps on getting rebuilt in a system literally right next to my colony.  I've totally destroyed it 3 times, making sure to wipe out the rest of the pirate presence in the system, but it keeps on getting rebuilt every few months.  Now it's cropped up again for a 4th time.  Is that intended?  Honestly it's starting to mundane.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on November 17, 2018, 11:29:10 PM
    So...I have 3 colonies, a High Command on one of them, major fleet patrols and a booming economy the rest of the Sector keeps trying to tear down.

    But, I still have no idea how to use the "Orders" tab under Command. What am I missing?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shoat on November 17, 2018, 11:46:41 PM
    So... when my colony grew from size 3 to size 4, it suddenly required like 314 quadrillion consumer goods every month. I assume this has something to do with having had an AI core installed to the base colony thing (reduces required goods by 1) and the whole thing underflowing.

    Restarting the game seems to have fixed it (I forgot to make a screenshot to show here, so i booted the game up again and saw it was fixed), but you obviously need to know about stuff like this.

    I am, however, now stuck with an absurdly huge debt because I left "fix deficits from stockpile" on and my colony apparently just bought all those 314 quadrillion consumer goods from the internet and paid with my credit card. I might have to get the console commands mod and fix that manually.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 18, 2018, 12:31:19 AM
    * Complaint:  Salvaging 3 often does not give me more rare loot, but instead changes the rare loot I get.  Instead of getting extra on top of the more useful general-purpose packages, those useful packages get replaced by crap like Luddic Church, Luddic Path, and/or Pirates' hack packages.  One time, unskilled found a synchrotron.  Level 3 did not get the synchrotron, but got corrupted nanoforge instead.  In terms of rare loot found, Salvaging 3 looks like a total dud of a skill.  Lower levels may or may not replace loot.

    Hmm, you can't just compare the results of two rolls like that. If there's a 1/10 chance to get a Synchroton, and you bump it up to 1.5 out of 10 and re-roll and don't get one (or get something else) that doesn't mean that 1.5 out of 10 is worse than 1 out of 10, if that makes sense.
    I would think the synchrotron would appear regardless of skill level, and extra items may or may not appear.  So far, the main effect of the skill is to replace blueprints or other rare items I want with other rare items I do not want as much.  I may or may not get more items.  To use a Diablo II example, it feels like unskilled Salvaging gives me Windforce (elite unique), while level 3 Salvaging gives me one or two among Griswold's Edge, Frostburn, and Nagelring (low level uniques).  Or, rune example, unskilled gives me a Ber rune, while Salvaging 3 gives me Tal, Ral, and Ort for Ancient's Pledge.

    I tried about six or so ruined planets or abandoned stations, and all but one time, the rare items simply changed to something else (often Ludd blueprint junk instead of more useful generic blueprints).  I do get more weapons and other vendor trash... which I do not care about (enough to give up three skill points).  I have not explored too much yet, and I still test more locations I find.

    However, if I want to max Salvaging, I feel like I can exploit this by looting few of the stashes while unskilled, then max the skill to get what I am guessing what the game thinks is rarer or more valuable stuff to spawn.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Shoat on November 18, 2018, 12:39:54 AM
    So, little design question here:

    You can get a fuel production in a colony that seems to produce 1 fuel per tick for the cost of 1 canister of blue.

    The game tells me of a legendary "synchotron" relic that can let you produce fuel out of thin air... but simply installing an AI core onto the fuel production industry will reduce the demand of the fuel production industry to zero and allow infinite free fuel to flow.

    So unless the synchotron also does something else on top of making fuel production free (haven't gotten one yet so I can't see for myself), I see very little reason for it to exist.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 18, 2018, 12:48:11 AM
    Alex, why [REDACTED] station have so small loot after battle?
    (https://i.imgur.com/qjnHmdq.png)

    And why all another stations dont have officers?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: ArkAngel on November 18, 2018, 12:54:52 AM
    I had a minor bug where my survey data was worth less then 30 credits. Didn't matter if it was Class V or class I. The price would differ by a few credits, but it didn't seem to do a whole lot. I tried selling it at Jangala, Sindria, Kazeron, no change.
    I ended up starting another game, and it worked fine, selling remotely correct credit amounts, but it was weird.

    I have to say, I enjoy the mission intel now coming, rather then having to go to mission boards, but at times it can get a tad overwhelming to have six different mission/intel flash by on the left side of the screen. I probably just need to play a bit more to get used to it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 18, 2018, 02:40:51 AM
    Minor bug maybe? If you have 2 colonies in the same system and switch which one has the "orbital works" improvement (ie remove it in one and put it in the other) then your fleet quality no longer registers the improvement at either location.

    Also, just ran into
    the tier 2 low tech station attempting to shut down a luddic path cell and: AAHHHhhhhhhh!!!
    But in a good way!

    I'm enjoying the hell out of this update, thank you so much Alex for making it happen.

    [Edit] If I remove the Orbital works on the second planet and then rebuild it, the problem becomes fixed.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on November 18, 2018, 02:56:25 AM
    Bug report:
    When enemy "expedition" fleet destroyed station but failed to compromise the wanted facility, the task force get stuck at the planet, locked state at "traveling" and kill station whenever it respawn. It's quite annoying my star fortress get literally pinned down.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 18, 2018, 03:03:15 AM
    Bug report:
    When enemy "expedition" fleet destroyed station but failed to compromise the wanted facility, the task force get stuck at the planet, locked state at "traveling" and kill station whenever it respawn. It's quite annoying my star fortress get literally pinned down.
    Just ran into this now, yeah.  Can't really access my colony with 2 Persian League strike fleets and 2 Sindrian Diktat strike fleets (yes, 2 factions decided to attack at the same time...for the 3rd time in a row, that needs to be toned down) hovering around indefinitely, the colony repulsed both attacks successfully but the station was destroyed.  I also made the same mistake of upgrading the station (remotely, while off exploring) a month or two after expecting that the strike fleets were gone, but nope, now that bug has kicked in and my colony has no spaceborne defenses with 4 strike fleets mauling everything that comes out.

    That sure as hell put a stopper on any progress I was making.  So much so that I decided to move next door and settle a new colony. :P


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on November 18, 2018, 03:26:15 AM
    New Bug:

    The Port Tse Franchise battlestation was engaged in combat with the pirate battlestation from across the solar system. I was even able to join the Tri-Tach station and the two stations spawned on top of each other and shot each other.

    It was weird.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 18, 2018, 03:31:30 AM
    New Bug:

    The Port Tse Franchise battlestation was engaged in combat with the pirate battlestation from across the solar system. I was even able to join the Tri-Tach station and the two stations spawned on top of each other and shot each other.

    It was weird.
    Can you give a screenshot? I want see this!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 18, 2018, 03:33:37 AM
    I have an odd problem with my factions' ship patrols. I've got several planets in system with military bases, and out-system colonies. This is what the patrols look like. One jump point of three has a fleet nearby sometimes, the other planets are undefended, and hyperspace gets maybe one fleet on an extremely inconsistent basis. Merchants are periodically cut to ribbons nearby, is there a way for me to goose my faction's fleets out of my homeworld's orbitals?

    (https://i.imgur.com/kd0cKsV.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 18, 2018, 04:03:19 AM
    After more than 24hours of play i want say something - i really dont love new sale bar mechanism. (i talk about thing on screenshot)
    (https://i.imgur.com/xzEHTz3.png)

    It seems more illogically and less convenient than old. Especially during the work with small quantity. Why need to put 50% in this bar if i want to sell 10% of things? And Why after 70% bar progress i sell much bigger amounts of things? Maybe you can put on "settings.json" parameter like "Use legacy sale bar"?

    Much better when 10% bar progress sell 10% of goods.

    Only this thing was not pleasant to me in this patch. Excepting bugs.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Kirschbra on November 18, 2018, 05:23:53 AM
    NO! NO!!!! I'm having some kind of issue downloading this whats going on


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Kirschbra on November 18, 2018, 05:25:11 AM
    nevermind


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 18, 2018, 07:17:39 AM
    Alright, I've basically played through a whole game (~4.5 cycles). Have a 31.5k defense, size 7 (and growing) jungle colony that is the top supplier for almost everything it produces (>150% accessibility), and 3 other colonies besides. I'm not even using any AI cores. (Well, one gamma on the 7's pop, but that hardly counts.) There's still some stuff I haven't done, but meh, no point besides doing it to do it.

    On a side note, had fun exploring the fringe with an Afflictor and 2 Harbingers - turns out Harbingers don't make half-bad phase tankers. With limited fuel and supplies, and the high cost of recovering CR, whether to storm glide or not was a real judgment call.


    Colony feedback:
    Vast ruins seems terribly powerful. Once I colonized the planet and got a tech mining industry up I basically never had to worry about money again. Tech mining in general just gives you everything right away. Supplies, fuel, and heavy machinery AND money, weapons, and blueprints!? Crazy!

    I think the fuel is what makes tech mining so good. Metal, supplies, and heavy machinery on my world currently provide about 63k credits from exports, whereas fuel provides 57k credits. That's all just from the tech mining, there's no refinery, heavy industry, or fuel production on this world. And besides the income you can use the fuel yourself of course, which is a huge boon early on.

    Moving on, [REDACTED] looks great, but I prefer the view unobstructed. Maybe make it blue for player colonies and way more transparent?

    Light industry seems to have too high of an upkeep. With 150% accessibility, size 7, I'm only making like 37k credits off of domestic and luxury goods combined, but LI has an upkeep of 40k (50k after hazard).

    The midline tier 1 orbital station seems much weaker than the low tech one. Didn't fight a high tech one for comparison, though. Didn't fight the other tiers enough to get a good judge on them, though it is clear the AI has no idea how to fight a station (big surprise :P)


    Getting away from colonies a bit, it still seems like there are a ton of frigates in every fleet. Related: when I was fiddling with my faction's doctrine the difference between size focus 4 and 5 was huge compared to 3 and 4.


    Unlike Drakon, I like the new sale bar mechanism. Much more convenient and made perfect sense to me.


    To end on a positive note, it's great to see lots of ships on the open markets. They were quite bare before.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on November 18, 2018, 09:47:24 AM
    Sindrian Diktat sent two bully fleets to my colony, but only one showed up. Also that's how I learned that the game holds no punches and you basically shouldn't make a colony at all, unless you can build heavy industry, patrol HQ and space station all at once (and afford that), otherwise you're getting shat all over. Space port raid seems a little too strong, since it basically affects everything, to the point that my colony went from ~100k profits per month, to -40k deficit, for 4 months! And I lost my entire growth progress. The worst part is that I didn't expect that at all and I had to cannibilise and luck my way into not dying. Duration bar doesn't move at all, until the month the disruption fades.
    Also there's way too many storms. There's no decision to take, you just clench your teeth and power through. Detours take a lot of time and make you waste your fuel.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ishman on November 18, 2018, 11:36:14 AM
    Can confirm getting flashing white screens here too. Ryzen 1 1800x with 1080ti and 16 gigs ram (look, ram was almost as expensive as my cpu :V).

    I adore that you're always adding more knobs and levers to the campaign layer stuff, means way more avenues to expand and interlink together with mods and being able to drop in more content of our own.

    Excited to be able to one day rule the sector with an iron fist and slowly convert all material into thinking matter, post-singularity style.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 18, 2018, 12:26:20 PM
    So every fight I've been having against derelicts have been spawning the Bastillions for the destroyer class. Always and constantly. What happened to the Berserker?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Igncom1 on November 18, 2018, 01:06:02 PM
    So when the Hegemony comes looking for your AI cores but you removed them and they still catch evidence that you did, are they supposed to be able to disrupt your colonies industries for 350 days? Like everything one one of my colonies has been annihilated.

    I thought it was supposed to be an inspection, not a planetary bombing? Hell I could rebuild stuff faster then it takes for them to recover. I just might even.

    They even blew up my space fortress. How?  :-\


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on November 18, 2018, 01:15:36 PM
    Hell I could rebuild stuff faster then it takes for them to recover. I just might even.
    Don't, it doesn't influence the disruption timer. Complying with inspection is a trap, it's better to bribe them or even flip them off.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Igncom1 on November 18, 2018, 01:20:03 PM
    Hell I could rebuild stuff faster then it takes for them to recover. I just might even.
    Don't, it doesn't influence the disruption timer. Complying with inspection is a trap, it's better to bribe them or even flip them off.

    Fair. If the colony was working then 200,000 bribes seem more then fine as that's pocket change to me now. Or was.

    But I figured they would get mad, not atom bomb my capital. Should have done anything else really.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 18, 2018, 02:33:27 PM
    Found a Reinforced Bulkheads hullmod, it dropped for an invasion fleet iirc. I thought those weren't supposed to drop anymore? I mean, it's learned by default and all.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volfgarix on November 18, 2018, 03:14:07 PM
    Decided to found a colony on planet with ultrarich ore and ultrarich transplutonics.
    The catch?
    It's a goddamn volcanic planet, 250% hazard rating. It turned into moneysink, obviously, but maybe things will turn around when I get heavy industries...
    On top of that Pathers created a cell in that colony, they're going to wreck things for sure and I'm too weak to deal with their station, so yep, I'm screwed.
    What do?

    Edit: Guess what? Sindrian Diktat sends an expeditionary force, they're mad over my production of transplutonics...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Madao on November 18, 2018, 03:33:09 PM
    As always, thank you for your hard work.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on November 18, 2018, 03:40:39 PM
    I should stop complaining a for a while. I tried to make two colonies at first, and while one was going along, even if slowly, the other was just a total failure. I then abandoned it, almost went broke, but eventually colonised some easy going planet, with farming, mining, refining, industry. After intensive scavenging custom production is so good, I actually forgot I don't have any commission (that, and loot from derelicts/redacteds is just too good). It went a lot better than the older colony, which was the most noticeable in the fact that, indeed, trading fleets were flying there and doing stuff. It was rewarding to see and also an indicator of progress. I recall seeing scavengers and prospectors more, at first, but now it's mainly giant fleets hauling supplies and ships back to the core.
    Speaking of that, heavy industry seems to be a bit broken at the moment; it does everything and it's pretty easy to get big. My size 5 colony is now the biggest supplier of supplies, heavy machinery, armaments and ships, making about 3 times as much as it costs to maintain. On the other hand, light industry doesn't seem to be worth it even in ideal conditions!

    Decided to found a colony on planet with ultrarich ore and ultrarich transplutonics.
    The catch?
    It's a goddamn volcanic planet, 250% hazard rating. It turned into moneysink, obviously, but maybe things will turn around when I get heavy industries...
    On top of that Pathers created a cell in that colony, they're going to wreck things for sure and I'm too weak to deal with their station, so yep, I'm screwed.
    What do?

    Edit: Guess what? Sindrian Diktat sends an expeditionary force, they're mad over my production of transplutonics...
    Have as little infrastructure on high hazard planets as possible. Colonise low hazard worlds (desert, tundra, the like) and build the infrastructure there, where it's cheaper and it's easier to increase colony size.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Igncom1 on November 18, 2018, 03:51:00 PM
    That's along the lines I have been thinking. Are hazardous worlds filled with mineral wealth worth colonising at all? It's not like we can colonize the whole sector with the games built in limits, so should we all be holding off on the colonisation for those super worlds filled with grass and wealth?

    Anything else seems like a bad investment.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 18, 2018, 04:23:33 PM
    Thank you for your feedback/bug reports/etc, everyone! Made a whole bunch of notes.


    (@Megas: let's say you buy 1 ticket and win the lottery. Then you buy 10 tickets and don't win the lottery. Would you conclude that buying 10 tickets gives you a worse chance of winning? Because that exactly maps to the situation in-game, since just due to how the RNG works, getting +50% salvaging essentially means a re-roll. But it also mean a re-roll for the "bad" rolls, too.)

    Re: high-hazard worlds - I wouldn't build anything except for Mining there. That could be profitable, but high-upkeep industries would likely not be, or would be more profitable elsewhere.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 18, 2018, 04:26:50 PM
    Re: high-hazard worlds - I wouldn't build anything except for Mining there. That could be profitable, but high-upkeep industries would likely not be, or would be more profitable elsewhere.
    Actually I built my first colony on a 200% Hazard rating world.  Turned out fine in the end after liberal use of AI Cores, but it certainly didn't produce as much profit.  Heavy Industry, Mining, Tech-Mining, Spaceports, all make it useful enough to be my main base.  Kinda overlooked the maintenance penalty the first time around, and by time I did see it, it was too late to Abandon the colony.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on November 18, 2018, 04:33:09 PM
    Alex, can you explain how does the intel screen calculate a planet's worth? It values high-hazard planets way too much. Do gas giants get their own, unique buildings, or what? I haven't colonised any, but I can't see why would I (I can just settle a cryovolcanic planet instead and get some ores as well). Barren, rocky, etc. planets seem to have a similar issue.
    And nebulas don't slow anything in combat anymore, and you can zoom to see way more than tactical screen shows you. Did I mention that custom production can stack any hullmods it wants, including DTC and ITU on a Heron?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volfgarix on November 18, 2018, 04:48:21 PM
    1. Managed to get money for the bribe for Diktat
    2. Tri-Tachyon wanted the fun, too, had no money for them. Miraculously managed to fight them off. Dear god, they had phase ships and two herons.
    3. Net income for my colony is about -$18000, so I THINK that if I manage to upgrade, then colony might be able to pay for itself.
    4. I was considering getting heavy industries, but i will have to wait for a while
    5. I have to survive by taking bounties and other missions
    6. Money from academy has run out
    7. I wonder if getting AI cores will be worth getting in trouble with/paying off Hegemony, I got decent relations with them.
    8. There is a planet (200% hazard score) with Widespread Ruins in my system, I heard tech mining is profitable.
    Current state of my first colony ever.
    (https://i.imgur.com/bdFV8h8.png)
    Have as little infrastructure on high hazard planets as possible. Colonise low hazard worlds (desert, tundra, the like) and build the infrastructure there, where it's cheaper and it's easier to increase colony size.
    I had problem finding low-hazard world with decent resource, originally I wanted to get with decent farmland.


    Edit: Holy crap, the colony grew to size 5. Apparently hundreds of thousand people like this hellhole. Hopefully income will rise a bit.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: orost on November 18, 2018, 05:14:15 PM
    So, uh, I guess I'm not allowed to have a colony.

    (https://i.imgur.com/URoyJVD.png)

    (https://i.imgur.com/BshT5eI.png)

    Two capital fleets roll in to raid my size-4 colony and put it into -110k per month for 6 months. (It peaked at +25k per month previously.)

    Not super sure what the lesson is here - don't start colonies until I'm ready to go toe-to-toe against the main powers of the Sector?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volfgarix on November 18, 2018, 05:22:32 PM
    NEEEEEVEEERMIIIIND
    Hegemony already wants to wreck my colony because of "Free Port" status. At least I didn't have to spend money, they liked me enough.

    EDIT: AW SHIET I GOT SYNCHROTRON CORE.

    So, uh, I guess I'm not allowed to have a colony.

    (https://i.imgur.com/URoyJVD.png)

    (https://i.imgur.com/BshT5eI.png)

    Two capital fleets roll in to raid my size-4 colony and put it into -110k per month for 6 months. (It peaked at +25k per month previously.)

    Not super sure what the lesson is here - don't start colonies until I'm ready to go toe-to-toe against the main powers of the Sector?

    The lesson is that you should have some green on you. Money=power, simple.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 18, 2018, 05:37:35 PM
    7. I wonder if getting AI cores will be worth getting in trouble with/paying off Hegemony, I got decent relations with them.
    8. There is a planet (200% hazard score) with Widespread Ruins in my system, I heard tech mining is profitable.
    AI Cores are quite useful, when used moderately.  Otherwise the Hegemony get involved and you end up having to give them up or have your facilities disabled for an unreasonably long amount of time.

    Tech-Mining on Widespread (or larger) Ruins will instantly earn you the ire of the Persean League and Sindrian Diktat.  Tell me about it, both of those factions have decided to raid my base regularly, at the same time, every 6 months or so.  I literally can't leave my colony alone nowadays, they'll just have their asses handed to them.  I did just get the reward for a certain story arc though, and I've yet to test it, so maybe that'll improve my chances.  Orbital Stations and their upgrades have been pretty much useless in my experience, as the raid fleets are becoming so big and numerous not even that combined with my patrols are doing anything useful.

    Something else I noticed is the Colossus Mk.III is slightly more useful now.  This is 2-fold - it now has 2 (!) Fighter Bays, and it, in fact, does NOT have the "Converted Hangar" built-in hullmod which would make bombers cost 100% more OP + 25% damage taken increase and -17% speed, but rather it's own dedicated "Converted Cargo Bay" built-in hull mod, which has the same effects but doesn't increase OP cost.  Also has Ground Support Package, which makes the hordes of these that pirates bring with them utterly unstoppable.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 18, 2018, 05:40:26 PM
    Alex, can you explain how does the intel screen calculate a planet's worth?

    It's just a sum of some internal values based on the conditions; iirc it's related to how much XP you get for surveying it. It's no meant to be an objective "this is better or worse" thing, just a quick way to see what might be more interesting.

    Did I mention that custom production can stack any hullmods it wants, including DTC and ITU on a Heron?

    Hmm, odd. Pretty sure there's a bug in autofit - it *can* do this, but there shouldn't be a situation where it ever *would*, but apparently that does come up.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 18, 2018, 05:42:54 PM
    The secret to defending against those task forces is to focus on ground defense. Build Ground Defenses then upgrade to Heavy Batteries ASAP. They can't disrupt your industries if their raids fail.

    I mean, don't neglect your space defenses of course. Get them up and running quickly too, but don't expect them to do much early on. Later, with multiple colonies in a system all spawning patrols, the task forces will get demolished before they can even land.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 18, 2018, 05:44:20 PM
    Did I mention that custom production can stack any hullmods it wants, including DTC and ITU on a Heron?

    Hmm, odd. Pretty sure there's a bug in autofit - it *can* do this, but there shouldn't be a situation where it ever *would*, but apparently that does come up.
    Speaking of, fresh off the production line.
    (https://i.imgur.com/iue9Dt6.jpg)
    Also, I assume production not taking advantage of the possible +10% Ordnance Points from character skills increase is intended?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volfgarix on November 18, 2018, 05:44:40 PM
    AI Cores are quite useful, when used moderately.  Otherwise the Hegemony get involved and you end up having to give them up or have your facilities disabled for an unreasonably long amount of time.

    Tech-Mining on Widespread (or larger) Ruins will instantly earn you the ire of the Persean League and Sindrian Diktat.  Tell me about it, both of those factions have decided to raid my base regularly, at the same time, every 6 months or so.  I literally can't leave my colony alone nowadays, they'll just have their asses handed to them.  I did just get the reward for a certain story arc though, and I've yet to test it, so maybe that'll improve my chances.  Orbital Stations and their upgrades have been pretty much useless in my experience, as the raid fleets are becoming so big and numerous not even that combined with my patrols are doing anything useful.
    Well, hegemony already wants me dead for Free Port things, The Church as well is sending an "expedition". So some AI cores wouldn't hurt.

    Now I don't understand why would League and Diktat get mad over ruins.

    Edit:
    On other things. I'm thinking about shutting down refining plants if AI core won't help. Mining is able to pay for itself, but smelting not.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Graploos on November 18, 2018, 05:52:20 PM
    Is it me or is running a simulation with multiple ships bugged?
    Select 2 of my ships >  select 1 enemy > my 1 extra ship is unselected


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 18, 2018, 06:00:17 PM
    You have to deploy allies, reopen the screen, then deploy enemies (or vice versa). Annoying, but that's the way it is.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sin on November 18, 2018, 06:02:50 PM
    Hi, i hope this bug is not here yet but is do many pages it is hard to keep track.

    In middle of combat i saw enemy ship (hound) spinning very fast (lets say 300pm if i exaggerate a bit) which i found hilarious even though i did not know what caused it.
    later in another combat enemy fleet was almost defeated and i saw another hound charging at me with an abnormal speed, which seemed to be similar to one if you retread or enter when pursue someone. So i am wondering if there is some bug referred to retreating and the ships heading wrong way, or entering combat and they never turn of their burn speed.
    Never happened to me in the 0.8.1a version and happened twice in a new one which i played only for about 4 hours.

    Otherwise i love the game and the update as well.
    Thanks


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Bishi on November 18, 2018, 06:12:28 PM
    Released? OMG Hyyyype!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 18, 2018, 06:15:07 PM
    Aquaculture is double counting its base value. I can't get a screenshot of the info-panel for whatever reason, but this is what the commercial bit looks like. While I do appreciate effortlessly owning a large amount of the obscenely profitable food market, I don't think this is intended.

    (https://i.imgur.com/vvPvDld.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Midnight Kitsune on November 18, 2018, 06:15:36 PM
    Hey ALex, you might want to pin the release news in your Twitter! Unless you are waiting to have a more stable RC


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 18, 2018, 06:19:48 PM
    Also, I assume production not taking advantage of the possible +10% Ordnance Points from character skills increase is intended?

    Hmm, sort of - let me see how easy that is to actually take into account.

    Hi, i hope this bug is not here yet but is do many pages it is hard to keep track.

    In middle of combat i saw enemy ship (hound) spinning very fast (lets say 300pm if i exaggerate a bit) which i found hilarious even though i did not know what caused it.
    later in another combat enemy fleet was almost defeated and i saw another hound charging at me with an abnormal speed, which seemed to be similar to one if you retread or enter when pursue someone. So i am wondering if there is some bug referred to retreating and the ships heading wrong way, or entering combat and they never turn of their burn speed.
    Never happened to me in the 0.8.1a version and happened twice in a new one which i played only for about 4 hours.

    Otherwise i love the game and the update as well.
    Thanks

    Hi!

    The spinning can happen to some ships when they lose an engine, depending on their engine placement. In particular the Shepherd has this happen pretty frequently. For the Hound burning towards you, it's most likely because it tried to retreat, hit an asteroid, and got turned around during the retreat-burn maneuver. So: not perhaps "standard" behavior in either case, but not bugs, either.

    Hey ALex, you might want to pin the release news in your Twitter! Unless you are waiting to have a more stable RC

    Thanks for the reminder! But it's already pinned, hmm - you're not seeing that? That'd be super odd.

    Aquaculture is double counting its base value. I can't get a screenshot of the info-panel for whatever reason, but this is what the commercial bit looks like. While I do appreciate effortlessly owning a large amount of the obscenely profitable food market, I don't think this is intended.

    (https://i.imgur.com/vvPvDld.png)

    Thank you, noted this down! (Jeez, that's a lot of food.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 18, 2018, 06:29:50 PM
    The spinning can happen to some ships when they lose an engine, depending on their engine placement. In particular the Shepherd has this happen pretty frequently. For the Hound burning towards you, it's most likely because it tried to retreat, hit an asteroid, and got turned around during the retreat-burn maneuver. So: not perhaps "standard" behavior in either case, but not bugs, either.
    Ah, I do love it when Sheperds do that.  They're like obscenely large dogs chasing their own tail. :) Not to mention what the poor souls crewing the ship feel, but it's incredibly funny and I hope it never gets changed, heh.  


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 18, 2018, 06:32:29 PM
    Investigating military options at Port Tse station while being neutral to TT presents an option to aid the station even though there is no battle going on. Turns out the battle is counting the pirate station in the system so if you choose to aid you'll end up with a battle between 2 battlestations, though the Tri Tach one "retreats" before it begins.

    Bizarre bug.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 18, 2018, 06:41:39 PM
    Ah, I do love it when Sheperds do that.  They're like obscenely large dogs chasing their own tail. :) Not to mention what the poor souls crewing the ship feel, but it's incredibly funny and I hope it never gets changed, heh.  

    Have to be honest, only keeping that one around for the "this is funny" factor. In theory could fix it by capping the spin-rate and so on.

    Investigating military options at Port Tse station while being neutral to TT presents an option to aid the station even though there is no battle going on. Turns out the battle is counting the pirate station in the system so if you choose to aid you'll end up with a battle between 2 battlestations, though the Tri Tach one "retreats" before it begins.

    Bizarre bug.

    Huh, thank you! Guess the orbits must line up so the stations are nearby. Made a note!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Volfgarix on November 18, 2018, 07:25:01 PM
    Is there a way to make your patrol actually stand up along with you to fight the invasion? My patrols run away from "Expeditions" despite my fairly decent fleet sitting by the planet.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 18, 2018, 07:25:16 PM
    So I've been planning my routes with the main map and checking on everything in the minimap, and frankly they're not that accurate. This isn't the only incident or example of such around, merely one of the most obvious. There are other places closer to the sector I can probably find again. I'm guessing you updated the hyperlanes and didn't do anything with the sector or minimap?

    Normal play map - note the radar display
    (https://i.imgur.com/BDCvAmY.jpg)
    Tab map
    (https://i.imgur.com/jSwb5AD.png)

    To be clear, I don't particularly mind inaccuracies especially as you get further from the main sector, I just want to be sure that they're intentional.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Igncom1 on November 18, 2018, 07:43:28 PM
    Using the intel tab to look at systems show you pirate bases that might not have been revealed yet?

    Has anyone else seen this?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 18, 2018, 07:47:17 PM
    To be clear, I don't particularly mind inaccuracies especially as you get further from the main sector, I just want to be sure that they're intentional.

    Yep! This nebula detail on any of the maps is just not that accurate - it averages out nearby "cells", in part for performance reasons, in part because a more detailed version didn't turn out to look too good.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Stormking on November 18, 2018, 07:53:09 PM
    Great update. It got me addicted in half an hour. Again! And there went my weekend with no end in sight. Great job.
    I also found a funny bug where a freelance admin I rescued from a pod at the edge of the map was sooo grateful that he's not leaving. Even after I kicked him out. (Or at least he's still on the pay-roll, if not on the job!) I hope there's an option to stuff him back into a pod in the future.

    Also: can someone tell me where the faction management screen is? I must be sleep deprived from playing so much because I can't find it. I know the intro told me I could change the flag later, but I can't even find that. What I'd really like to find there is to set which goods are classified as "illegal" in my faction, cause someone got the wrong memo and put recreational drugs on that list and I'm sure I didn't say that. There's no state of over-workedness that would cause me to ban drugs. ;)

    Lastly, the exploration section of the intel tab fills up awfully quick. Or maybe I'm flying around so much. In any case, I'd be just grand if there were a way to manage these the contents myself a little better, other than just marking things as important. When it comes to exploration in particular, I'd like a notice when I've last visited a system, and to note if I want to go there again/later. That way, I won't have to hold all that in my head until next weekend, which can't come quick enough now.

    Cheers, and keep up the great work.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 18, 2018, 07:56:55 PM
    Yep! This nebula detail on any of the maps is just not that accurate - it averages out nearby "cells", in part for performance reasons, in part because a more detailed version didn't turn out to look too good.

    Cool. Thank you.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 18, 2018, 08:26:28 PM
    So, I've beaten down a pirate station that's spawned in the same sector 2 light-years away from my colony for the 5th time (we're next door neighbors and the neighbors don't move out no matter how many times I blow up their house), and I notice that the Pirate Activity is still going on, giving a monstrous -50% Accessibility debuff to 2 of my colonies even though there's not a single pirate fleet for 2 LY around my colony.  I look for the pirate base and it's...22 LY away, literally all the way across the Core Systems.
    (https://i.imgur.com/VyNhxSp.png)
    This feels far too out of place, and if I daresay, deliberately increasing difficulty for no particular reason.  Nuking the pirate probably won't be a problem (I've yet to get there...), but getting there?  That's literally 30 days of travel just to get there.  Why would a pirate bother to go that far to raid a place when they can choose literally any other inhabited system in the entire sector?  I respect the Pirate's decisions to make a base 2 LY away from my colony (the one that I've been dealing with since Day 1), but this, a base 10x as far away with every other Core system in between me and them, is just silly.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 18, 2018, 09:04:21 PM
    That seems like a pirate base that's not specifically targeting you deciding to target your colony, like they periodically do other core worlds. If you don't deal with it, it'll most likely switch targets within... half a cycle or so?

    The ones nearby specifically target your stuff, though I've got a todo item to look at why it'd get built in the exact same system 5 times in a row. Might be the only "suitable" one nearby; will take a look.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 18, 2018, 09:11:55 PM
    @Stormking

    I believe colony management can be accessed with the 'd' button? (Not at game right now, sorry) I found it by accident the first time and then tested all the keys looking for what they did.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sebenko on November 18, 2018, 09:15:36 PM
    Long time listener, first time caller.

    Loving the update, especially the sneaky addition of Brigador portraits, even if having a Spacer as my first officer isn't exactly... reassuring.

    To offer some hopfully helpful nit-picking:

    1) Expeditionary forces are ridiculous. Just beat back the half-a-dozen large fleets that hung around after their raids failed, and one raid attempt later (which had failed by the time I got in-system) there's five more large fleets. I can beat them back without too much trouble (though a good degree of save scumming), but it means I have to spend all my time hanging around to clear up.

    2) Rarity of blueprints/ other colony rare loot. I've found 6 synchrotrons, 4 pristine nanoforges, 8 corrupted nanoforges, 2 astral blueprints and a Paragon blueprint, gained millions of credits and have the resources to keep a spare fleet of 0-d-mod Paragons and Astrals running sufficient to dunk on all those pesky expeditionary forces... yet I can't build a single Odessey, the blueprint for which I've been searching for since I finished my heavy industry construction. It's at the point where the blueprint is useless to my colony because of the near-unlimited supply of high-tech capital ships, I just want to find it on principle. I'm aware there's no guarantee of a particular blueprint, but it would be nice to have a way of finding out if scouring half the sector is a waste of time. I think TT has one, but it seems a bit backwards to build up enough advanced ships to raid a faction for a blueprint that isn't as useful as the ships you're using to get it.

    Minor confusions:

    1) I think my colony's star fortress is in need of both rebuilding and have a 90 day disruption, and I can only see the disruption in the colony UI, so I don't know if its a lack of rebuilding or expeditionary fleets turning up that's keeping it stuck at 90 days disruption remaining.

    2) Getting to the ship buy/sell screen is a bit obtuse in the new docking screen, as there doesn't seem to be an option for it on the list.

    3) I have more cash than I know what to do with from a single colony, seems a bit over-tuned.

    4) The limit for buildings on colonies is high enough that I don't seem to have to put much thought into what I build.

    5) I was slightly confused at first with whether population interacted with colony buildings in terms of how many I could build. It seemed a bit odd that my colony of a few thousand people could support a starport, tech mining, interstellar capable military command, heavy industry and the farms to keep them all fed.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 18, 2018, 09:48:47 PM
    Long time listener, first time caller.

    Loving the update, especially the sneaky addition of Brigador portraits, even if having a Spacer as my first officer isn't exactly... reassuring.

    Welcome to the forum :)

    1) Expeditionary forces are ridiculous. Just beat back the half-a-dozen large fleets that hung around after their raids failed, and one raid attempt later (which had failed by the time I got in-system) there's five more large fleets. I can beat them back without too much trouble (though a good degree of save scumming), but it means I have to spend all my time hanging around to clear up.

    This looks like a bug - had a couple of reports of this; fleets should not hang around after the raid fails. If they didn't, then you'd generally have months of time between having to defend against raids.

    1) I think my colony's star fortress is in need of both rebuilding and have a 90 day disruption, and I can only see the disruption in the colony UI, so I don't know if its a lack of rebuilding or expeditionary fleets turning up that's keeping it stuck at 90 days disruption remaining.

    Do you have the latest hotfix, -RC9? There's a bug where sometimes a station will fail to rebuild and be stuck at its building time; the hotfix fixes that, among a couple of other things.

    2) Rarity of blueprints/ other colony rare loot. I've found 6 synchrotrons, 4 pristine nanoforges, 8 corrupted nanoforges, 2 astral blueprints and a Paragon blueprint, gained millions of credits and have the resources to keep a spare fleet of 0-d-mod Paragons and Astrals running sufficient to dunk on all those pesky expeditionary forces... yet I can't build a single Odessey, the blueprint for which I've been searching for since I finished my heavy industry construction. It's at the point where the blueprint is useless to my colony because of the near-unlimited supply of high-tech capital ships, I just want to find it on principle. I'm aware there's no guarantee of a particular blueprint, but it would be nice to have a way of finding out if scouring half the sector is a waste of time. I think TT has one, but it seems a bit backwards to build up enough advanced ships to raid a faction for a blueprint that isn't as useful as the ships you're using to get it.

    2) Getting to the ship buy/sell screen is a bit obtuse in the new docking screen, as there doesn't seem to be an option for it on the list.

    3) I have more cash than I know what to do with from a single colony, seems a bit over-tuned.

    4) The limit for buildings on colonies is high enough that I don't seem to have to put much thought into what I build.

    5) I was slightly confused at first with whether population interacted with colony buildings in terms of how many I could build. It seemed a bit odd that my colony of a few thousand people could support a starport, tech mining, interstellar capable military command, heavy industry and the farms to keep them all fed.

    Thank you, noted!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on November 18, 2018, 10:06:18 PM
    Just a quick question:
    I currently have 4 colonies, of which 3 have Tech-mines.  When I get the monthly report about Tech-mining hauls, it only shows a single Tech-mine; my first colony.  Is that because all Tech-mining hauls are automatically forwarded to the first Tech-mine you built?



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on November 18, 2018, 10:08:37 PM
    I got myself in a LMAO situation
    When Persean League and Sindrian Diktat literally locked down my main cashcow with like 6~7 task force, someone saved me.
    The PIRATES!!!
    I was like LMAO ROFL.
    Pirates decided to send an extremely heavy raid on my colony to find there are some super capital fleets (well, from other factions) wandering around. They had a GREAT fight and all of them just go boom in the end, now the sky is clear, my industries get working again.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on November 18, 2018, 10:11:01 PM
    Just a quick question:
    I currently have 4 colonies, of which 3 have Tech-mines.  When I get the monthly report about Tech-mining hauls, it only shows a single Tech-mine; my first colony.  Is that because all Tech-mining hauls are automatically forwarded to the first Tech-mine you built?


    It's similar to the request ship build, they send everything to your first colony by default. You can adjust the gather point, however.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sebenko on November 18, 2018, 10:14:18 PM
    Do you have the latest hotfix, -RC9? There's a bug where sometimes a station will fail to rebuild and be stuck at its building time; the hotfix fixes that, among a couple of other things.

    I was running RC8, looks like that was the issue. Thanks for the response!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: xenoargh on November 18, 2018, 10:24:51 PM
    Woooohoooooooooo!  This made my weekend.

    Looking forward to testing stuff to oblivion and beyond soon  :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on November 18, 2018, 10:36:09 PM
    Just a quick question:
    I currently have 4 colonies, of which 3 have Tech-mines.  When I get the monthly report about Tech-mining hauls, it only shows a single Tech-mine; my first colony.  Is that because all Tech-mining hauls are automatically forwarded to the first Tech-mine you built?


    It's similar to the request ship build, they send everything to your first colony by default. You can adjust the gather point, however.

    I just swapped the planet and sure enough all of the Tech-mining ended up being forwarded there; Thank you!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 18, 2018, 10:46:47 PM
    I got myself in a LMAO situation
    When Persean League and Sindrian Diktat literally locked down my main cashcow with like 6~7 task force, someone saved me.
    The PIRATES!!!
    I was like LMAO ROFL.
    Pirates decided to send an extremely heavy raid on my colony to find there are some super capital fleets (well, from other factions) wandering around. They had a GREAT fight and all of them just go boom in the end, now the sky is clear, my industries get working again.

    (Had a similar moment during playtesting when a Hegemony and League expeditions showed up, fought it out, and promptly left.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 18, 2018, 10:48:02 PM
    i got a question about Solar Shielding and the Safety Procedure rank #2 perk: do these also reduce the hull/armor damage from hyperstorm strikes, or only the CR damage? the tooltips only mention CR, but i think it would make sense if actual damage was affected as well.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 18, 2018, 10:52:22 PM
    That seems like a pirate base that's not specifically targeting you deciding to target your colony, like they periodically do other core worlds. If you don't deal with it, it'll most likely switch targets within... half a cycle or so?

    The ones nearby specifically target your stuff, though I've got a todo item to look at why it'd get built in the exact same system 5 times in a row. Might be the only "suitable" one nearby; will take a look.
    Ehh, it just feel silly that a Pirate base can declare "I'm disrupting your trade" and not have a single fleet nearby while still imparting the -3 Stability and -50% Accessibility debuffs, all the while being an insane distance away.

    Good to know repeating bases are getting looked at.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sebenko on November 18, 2018, 10:58:38 PM
    Just a small thing I noticed- If a planet with a space station is renamed, the station doesn't change to match.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: TJJ on November 18, 2018, 11:23:53 PM
    If you deploy a single capital ship against a large (15-20 ships) force of the Domain-era drone defences, you will frequently (5 out of 6 so far) end up on a wild goose chase looking for the final ship.

    No idea where it goes (perhaps deployed in a 2nd wave?), but it typically takes a few minutes of aimless flying to find it. (I just stick autopilot on, and alt-tab out)

    It's specifically the Bastillion-class ships that seem prone to wandering off.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 19, 2018, 12:03:08 AM
    @ Alex:  I would have thought that you buy one ticket then, if you had Salvaging, roll the dice to buy one more ticket or not.  Thanks for explaining otherwise.  I will test it more, but so far, Salvaging 3 has been a royal disappointment so far, a contender for one of the worst skills in the game (if all I want is more rare stuff).

    So far, I am really tempted to put points into the last two right Industry skills (for more colonies and/or stability, and better self-sufficiency and profits).  While I do want the most powerful combat monster, that monster needs a home of its own and income to pay for his war machine.

    Re: Tech Mining
    It has superb yields, but I get Diktat bullies coming after me, and my "Lone Star" faction is not strong enough to kill endgame or even late midgame fleets yet.  (My fleet is not yet strong enough to kill the biggest pirate fleets, let alone major factions.)  Thus, I have not built tech-mining yet.  If player is powerful enough to repel endgame threats, then sure Tech Mining is overpowered.  If not, player might attract enemies he cannot deal with yet.

    So far, I reached a point that I cannot add more stuff to my colony without it costing money to maintain (and attract unwanted enemies too early if I try to tech mine).  I need to finish more bounties before I can build another colony or upgrade my fleet, or at least earn enough money to absorb losses for a few months.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 19, 2018, 12:59:05 AM
    I'm still trying to figure out how to find Pather bases. I've been hitting up bars on planets with Pather cells in them, but no luck. I'm also not finding Pather fleets around to beat up either, and I've seen these bases spawn at wild distances away so...hmm. Regardless:

    (https://i.imgur.com/Z0WUkJj.png)

    Are my fleets supposed to be using tankers and freighters as top flight capital ships? It has tankers and freighters in it, and none of those designs are emphasized in my doctrine tab.

    (https://i.imgur.com/UNXMdiC.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 19, 2018, 01:03:04 AM
    Patrols will have some freighters and tankers, though it looks like it's too much. It's not taking away from the combat strength of the patrol, though - rather the civilian ships added are based on the target number of combat fleet points. Let me make a note to check this out and possibly add freighters/tankers to the "typical heavy patrol" display, as I can totally see how that'd be confusing.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 19, 2018, 01:08:56 AM
    Btw, I just want to say a big thank you to everyone that's posted bug reports, both here and in the bug reports board. My apologies for the lack of response to everything! There's a lot going on all at once, and I'm also trying to decompress a bit (the two weeks before the release were, let's say, fairly intensive), so aside from hotfixes, I've mostly been taking notes. (And my todo list <checks> has around 80 things on it so far. Cool.)

    Going to dive into the meat of all this stuff sometime this week!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 19, 2018, 01:28:30 AM
    you definitely deserve some downtime, imo! ^^

    0.9 is awesome so far, even though it still has some rough edges. :]


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 19, 2018, 01:57:04 AM
    Despite my posts in here mostly being about what I think might be bugs, I want you to know you've annihilated my weekend with this. Take your time, it's plenty fun.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on November 19, 2018, 01:57:15 AM
    I think the humble Omen has quickly become my favourite frigate with that powerful EMP emitter ability, coupled with superb 0.6 shields (Reading the notes EMP arcs got buffed to 100% damage, but I figured that was on the weapons rather than the ability), and so it's replaced my Tempests and Wolfs altogether.

    The Doom-Class phase Cruiser teleport mines are well.... powerful, I love the new buffs to this ship :)

    EDIT: Whoops; Cruiser not Frigate.

    On another note, those teleport mines have been known to be rather lethal to a few friendly Omen's on occasion...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 19, 2018, 02:23:07 AM
    Despite my posts in here mostly being about what I think might be bugs, I want you to know you've annihilated my weekend with this. Take your time, it's plenty fun.
    Same here! I'm mainly posting bugs instead of other discussions because I'm playing the game so much and only pause to say things that need details right. :P


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cycerin on November 19, 2018, 03:54:47 AM
    0.9 is fantastic fun so far, great work Alex. ;D

    Some oddities I've noticed:
    -I restored a falcon(p), ended up with a normal falcon with an illegal loadout (way over OP allowance due to the hullmods) that you can then keep using provided you don't refit it afterwards
    -You can colonize non primary orange stars, they have 100% hazard rating and no other features. Not sure if it applies to other stars as well
    -It seems to be really hard to find certain pather bases connected to your colonies. I've scoured about a fourth of the entire sector trying to figure out who's supplying the cells on my main colony but no luck. Is there any trick to it that I'm missing?



    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SpaceMonster on November 19, 2018, 04:17:31 AM
    It seems to be really hard to find certain pather bases connected to your colonies. I've scoured about a fourth of the entire sector trying to figure out who's supplying the cells on my main colony but no luck. Is there any trick to it that I'm missing?

    This and the occasional pirate base targeting me from some unknown system a thousand light years away.

    All the other colony threats have some "spend money to negate it" mechanic, and this could really do with something like "spend money to have scouts locate the base".
    Or something like that. I have a colony with 1bn peeps. Can't I hire some of them to do some searching? Then I don't have to spend months trying to find these things.

    (I dug through campaign.xml to find one pather base. Turns out it was 7 squares (not sure what the SI is) away.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: TaLaR on November 19, 2018, 04:19:19 AM
    -It seems to be really hard to find certain pather bases connected to your colonies. I've scoured about a fourth of the entire sector trying to figure out who's supplying the cells on my main colony but no luck. Is there any trick to it that I'm missing?

    Yeah, I'd like to know too.
    Maybe putting sniffer in pather relay near unrelated Pather base in opposite end of sector would help? Or is it actually that base that causes my problem, I just don't see links between it and my colonies?

    At least with pirates you can go look in direction raiders come from.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 19, 2018, 05:01:13 AM
    Auto assign idle officers seems to be able to assign officers to ships even if they are over the limit.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 19, 2018, 05:06:36 AM
    Thank you all for your support :)

    Re: Pather bases, yeah, they're not that easy to find. When a faction posts a bounty on one you find out where it's located, and that's about it as far as "free" ways to find the location. Totally agree that there ought to be some other way to make progress on finding one, aside from scouring everything.

    Auto assign idle officers seems to be able to assign officers to ships even if they are over the limit.

    Thank you, noted!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SpaceMonster on November 19, 2018, 05:20:52 AM
    If you swap two officers on the fleet screen, the tooltip (of the officer) on either of them shows the data of the other. (Swap them, but the tooltip stays the same as if they were not swapped.)
    Refreshing the Fleet screen (pressing 'F') is enough to fix this.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 19, 2018, 05:41:18 AM
    Don't know if I've seen this mentioned: The income/maintenance numbers on a colony screen are different from on the "income" tab in empire management. Bug or just taking more factors into account?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 19, 2018, 05:59:30 AM
    Don't know if I've seen this mentioned: The income/maintenance numbers on a colony screen are different from on the "income" tab in empire management. Bug or just taking more factors into account?

    Hmm, the only case that comes to mind is if things change during the month, i.e. stability goes up or down, an industry gets built, and so on. In that case, the actual income/upkeep for a month would be different since it would reflect the different states it was in throughout the month. Aside from that, I believe they should be consistent with each other.

    (Also, looks like there's a bug in the "add industry" dialog, showing too high an upkeep.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 19, 2018, 06:17:57 AM
    I FOUND OUT TO FIND LUDDIC PATH BASES GUYS! It's also really easy and I feel really dumb. Some strange feeling also tells me it's going to get the crap patched out of it come the next release  

    :D :D :D

    Check your intel tab, sort the planets by size. The Size 3 Luddic Path space station with no backstory off in nowheresville is the culprit.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 19, 2018, 06:20:40 AM
    Brb hotfixing

    (Kidding, kidding)
    But no really I will have to fix this at some point.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 19, 2018, 06:24:10 AM
    Brb hotfixing

    What, space covert terrorist groups don't enter their secret space base locations in Space Wikipedia? *faints*


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 19, 2018, 06:41:24 AM
    Echoing what DrakonST said before.

    Just took down a pristine Remnant station and the loot was really underwhelming. Just a couple of weapons, about 60 supplies and no extra items like cores or blueprints.

    Running with 4 rigs and lvl3 salvaging.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on November 19, 2018, 08:32:49 AM
    I FOUND OUT TO FIND LUDDIC PATH BASES GUYS! It's also really easy and I feel really dumb. Some strange feeling also tells me it's going to get the crap patched out of it come the next release 

    :D :D :D

    Check your intel tab, sort the planets by size. The Size 3 Luddic Path space station with no backstory off in nowheresville is the culprit.
    I thought that you could just click on the , then follow tge arrow in reverse. That's how I got rid of Ludd terrorists in my colony.
    Same here! I'm mainly posting bugs instead of other discussions because I'm playing the game so much and only pause to say things that need details right. :P
    Who isn't?

    Alex, is orders tab goinh to be enabled Soon™, or in the next big update?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Draba on November 19, 2018, 10:19:15 AM
    I also lost most of my weekend, great update!
    Special mention for the explosive high intensity laser, so much fun I'm still driving the Sunder I got ages ago. Edit: realized this has been in for ages, just didn't notice in the notes and didn't use it :)

    Some notes:
    • Got an administrator pod early on, didn't find a way to dismiss her without a colony. 2500/month isn't that much, was just an annoyance
    • Can't find a way to remove finished/unwanted fleet log entries from the exploration intel tab
    • IIRC combat officers show the max level notice at level 15
    • Waystation, patrol base and some other buildings show crew/supplies/... requirements that aren't affected by AI cores.
      Probably intentional, just confusing(+same for the already mentioned different maintenance cost in new infrastructure view)
    • Plasma burn can glitch out on collisions. Tried to bowl a midsized asteroid into an enemy, speed stayed with my ship for ~5-10 seconds.
      See the spoiler screenshot at the bottom.
    • I think beta/alpha AI core maintenance reduction is a bit too high, they make hazard rating much less important.
      You do have to collect them, but after that the benefits are ridiculously good
    • I think price of removing D-mods is a bit too punitive. Not really a problem, just looks strange that you can build 2 brand new ships instead of fixing up a slightly dented one
    • Didn't find anything on planet size, does it affect colonies in any way?
    • Is there a way to equip orbital stations? I paid an arm and a leg for the star fortress, would be nice adjust it and see its stats out of combat

    For reference, I started with the scavenging/exploration skills and got into colony management after.
    Found a system with 4 awesome planets(with 2 big ruins) just "south" of the core systems, no nebula between only downside is 150(the best anyway)/175/225/250 hazard. 1-1 domain era comm and nav.
    I just plopped down beta/alpha cores on everything and they aren't that much different in profit(~150-250K at size 3-5).

    Techmining/AI core drawbacks seem insignificant to me, compared to their benefits.
    All my things being in 1 system probably skews the picture, but even 2 level 1 orbital bases and patrol HQs dealt with the task forces by themselves at the start(admittedly after 2 raids wrecking my unprotected free ports :) ).
    After seeing what hegemony inspectors do when I uninstall AIs now they just run into mysterious enemies on the way.
    Colony income is ~600-800K every month and I can easily kill everything thrown at them with a 1 Sunder/1 Hammerhead/1 Shrike(?)/~10-15 wolf fleet at level 40-ish, only coordinated maneuvers and ECM skills.
    Just noticed I can actually build ~15 Sunders/Hammerheads a month so fleet composition will also get a drastic overhaul :)

    Also not sold on ground defenses, similar to MoO2: the way the game is built you want space superiority anyway. Might as well go for starbase/patrols.
    Ground defenses are essentially a stability bonus, not that expensive but slots are limited so their upkeep could be reduced a bit(you usually give up income to get them anyway).

    Very first impressions so could overlook some obvious things ofc :)


    Plasma burn glitch example, started next to the frigate at ~3000 distance in the top left:
    (https://i.imgur.com/E01OpPo.jpg)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sutopia on November 19, 2018, 10:54:54 AM
    Pirate activity is kinda nonsense. I got a system that is able to support one another with some very good patrol fleet (95% quality and over 200% size on all 4 colony) and pirates are still able to "interrupt" my trade. I don't even need cross-system trade and I've never seen any pirate fleet in my system, how can they possible interrupt it?
    Also it's quite frustrating having instant -3 stab -50% ass just upon a pirate base/activity spawn. I thought it's supposed to be gradually increasing like luddys, causing huge trouble if left alone for too long, not just randomly kick your economy's ass.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Andrius227 on November 19, 2018, 11:03:34 AM
    Hi. I think i found a little exploit. Not sure if it was reported, but i thought to report it anyway, just in case.

    Basically, if a market has a bunch of damaged ships for sale, i can reload the save and all the ships get magically fixed.

    Here i made a couple of screenshots to explain it better.
    What i find initially:
    (https://i.imgur.com/AqBRwIn.png)

    What happens if i save and load my game:
    (https://i.imgur.com/DWzKOgl.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Berty on November 19, 2018, 11:33:25 AM
    I had a pirate base targeting my colony and was able to locate it by going to a bar in my colony and talking to a person.  That was pretty cool, but it wasn't necessarily obvious.

    If the message in the intel screen gave some suggestions for finding hidden bases I reckon people would find it all less frustrating.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 19, 2018, 01:25:25 PM
    I had a pirate base targeting my colony and was able to locate it by going to a bar in my colony and talking to a person.  That was pretty cool, but it wasn't necessarily obvious.
    Happened to me too!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 19, 2018, 01:26:43 PM
    Some things about balance:
    1. WTF with misslies? 2-3 Reapers now blow up Onslaught with 2350 armor and all skills on ship survivality! In 0.8 for this battleship need much more torpedos. I have a full set of combat skills and when i take first Reaper on my Paragon i lost 15%HP and all armor and when i take second Reaper this rocket leave near 10% of total ship HP eating >8000HP.

    So what has happened?

    2. Nerf "Radiant". Ship with such stats of shields, weapons and armor/hull to op with jump system. I very despise creation of the battleship capable to overtake on speed battlecruisers flying a back forward. I see lots of this overpowered monsters on mods and really hate this.

    It good for Guardian because it really boss ship. But line, serial ship too overpowered.

    Battleship will be show or can fast moving only forward like Onslaught. Maybe better give Radiant new "Plasma Burn" system? Because no one Remnant have it and Radiant become a analog of high tech Onslaught.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Another bug, small fleets protecting some stations like mining stations or orbital habidat.
    (https://i.imgur.com/OBeKz2e.png)
    Also, Guardian on Cryosleeper well be as solo battleship? Or he will have escort ships?

    Because after this single remnant defender i think Guardian it should not be lonely and it is simple bug.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 19, 2018, 01:44:40 PM
    Is there a way to equip orbital stations? I paid an arm and a leg for the star fortress, would be nice adjust it and see its stats out of combat
    I would very much like to see what the battlestations can do (either codex entry and/or simulator).  If I spend big bucks on the station, I like to equip it and know what its stats are.  When I tried adding orbital station, I get offered which tech type, and I have no idea which style I want, so I decide not to build it.

    I have some idea what the various bases do after smashing some pirate bases, but the only thing that stands out so far is high-tech has mediocre energy weapons and annoying fortress shields.  Low-tech was more intimidating (if it focuses on guns instead of fighters).  Not sure what midline does, but it seems a bit like a variant low-tech.

    If high-tech is (or can become equivalent of) like the Remnant battlestation, then yes, I want that death machine!  If it is nothing but tactical and graviton beam spam with maybe a few mining/heavy blasters, and its only gimmick is fortress shield, then... YUCK!  If I do not like high-tech, then it is a choice between low-tech and midline, and I have no idea what the differences are.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 19, 2018, 02:40:00 PM
    minor bug: looking at the stats of my d-modded Heron, it seems either Malfunctioning Comms or Defective Manufactory doesn't reduce deployment supply cost as it should, though both do mention the reduction in their tooltip.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: planeswalker on November 19, 2018, 02:42:38 PM
    Hey all, quick question, as of the current time of this post, is RC 9 the latest version that's out? Thanks


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 19, 2018, 02:44:26 PM
    Yep. You can double-check trying to re-download it from the page. RC9 is the newest.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 19, 2018, 02:48:35 PM
    High tech station has mines which are really useful. Also the Fortress Shield ensures it survives while you soften the invading fleet, it's been working really well for me.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Recklessimpulse on November 19, 2018, 03:08:52 PM
    They use best tech available to you so a high tech fortress with no weapon tech uses mining blasters and lasers. I don't know a way to control the process though.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Elijah on November 19, 2018, 03:34:01 PM
    High-tech fortresses should probably cost more, right? Isn't in the lore that high-tech is better than low-tech, but low-tech is less expensive? Or is it more like Protoss vs Terran in Starcraft 2 where protoss are elves with fancy magic and low stats, while terran is less resourceful but more brute force?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Recklessimpulse on November 19, 2018, 03:37:42 PM
    ANd just to put out a counter arguement, I have 6 bases one makes 200k two make -50 to -10k and the rest make 50k.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 19, 2018, 04:13:47 PM
    High tech station has mines which are really useful. Also the Fortress Shield ensures it survives while you soften the invading fleet, it's been working really well for me.
    All of them should have mines when upgraded to Star Fortress.  (I have not fought anything that big yet.)

    I know high-tech has Fortress Shield.  That is the only thing I see going for it.  It is a pain to kill, but other than that, offense of just beams and the occasional blaster is just not scary unless I try to solo it.  Against my fleet, high-tech station is simply not a threat.  The other types had significantly better offense and felt generally more dangerous.

    I guess high-tech station is nice if you have a buff fleet and you want your station to not die from sustained assault.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 19, 2018, 04:46:24 PM
    Took a bunch more notes!

    Reaper damage maybe is too high (that is, higher than stated) for some reason? Going to take a detailed look.

    ("Pirate Activity" is more of a "shame what'd happen to you in a dark alley if you didn't pay protection fees" kind of thing, not necessarily involving direct fleet action. Think of it as more of a surge in organized crime.)


    Another bug, small fleets protecting some stations like mining stations or orbital habidat.
    (https://i.imgur.com/OBeKz2e.png)
    Also, Guardian on Cryosleeper well be as solo battleship? Or he will have escort ships?

    Because after this single remnant defender i think Guardian it should not be lonely and it is simple bug.

    Guardian is supposed to be solo, yeah. The particular lone escort for a habitat is just the RNG rolling that fleet, I think.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Dostya on November 19, 2018, 05:12:14 PM
    I thought that you could just click on the , then follow tge arrow in reverse. That's how I got rid of Ludd terrorists in my colony.
    You can do that if the base has been rendered visible by one of the other factions placing a bounty on it. Play on for a bit - a new base will spawn, and it'll be invisible on that screen for quite a while.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Deshara on November 19, 2018, 07:40:16 PM
    Took a bunch more notes!

    Reaper damage maybe is too high (that is, higher than stated) for some reason? Going to take a detailed look.

    I no-joke barely managed to dodge a reaper in my new Shrike flagship, but cut it so close that I had to drop the shield to avoid setting it off, only for it to hit a piece of dust (Magec! *shakes fists*) next to it and boom no more new ship. Never realized there was so much AOE damage


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: ciago92 on November 19, 2018, 07:45:45 PM
    Minor bug: when talking to a potential new officer, the amount of credits you have on hand isn't updated if you just completed a mission. I dropped off some fuel, got 35k credits, went to hire an officer, and it said I only had 1100. Accept wasn't greyed out so I hit it anyways and it worked fine, just caught me off guard for a second until I remembered I had completed the mission.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 19, 2018, 07:48:16 PM
    Some more colony feedback, in no particular order:

    Pop increases way too fast, and boosting needs to cost more so it actually sucks as much money as you can put into it. Maybe the costs should be: 1k(3) 5k(4) 50k(5) 500k(6) 1m(7) 5m(8) 10m(9). That should soft lock the player to size 5/6 colonies (so they can't brute force the economy) and help push them to go do high-value tasks instead of rolling in the colony income.

    Seems like Cryosanctum should increase defense.

    Battlestations seem much deadlier in real combat than in autoresolve.

    Free-standing stations should suffer hazard penalties like planets: low gravity, extreme temperature, no atmosphere, etc. Would help explain why they're not everywhere.

    Luddic Path sleeper cells are way too common/easily revealed. Like every planet and their dog has sleeper cells.

    Shouldn't AI colonies without a Commerce industry lack an open market? Maybe size 5 and up colonies should get an open market automatically; if they have Commerce too then it has more/better stuff.

    Related: it felt weird that player colonies never have black markets or military markets.


    Took a bunch more notes!

    Reaper damage maybe is too high (that is, higher than stated) for some reason? Going to take a detailed look.

    I was testing a Harbinger vs. an Onslaught in the sim on Saturday and noticed sometimes 3 Reapers would wreck an Onslaught and other times it took 10 to kill it. Not sure if it was because the Onslaught was shooting the Reapers down or if they were sometimes doing crazy damage.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Ubik on November 19, 2018, 07:51:12 PM
    Regarding colony management:

    I find it slighty confusing that I have to click every industry/structure to find out which one might be upgraded.

    Any chance to add an optical cue for that on the depiction?
    For example a greyed out arrow when I lack items for the upgrade, a green one when I can upgrade the industry/structure right now and none when there is no upgrade...

    Colony defense:
    One of my colonies gets raided. The enemy i stronger than my defense fleet but weaker than my own fleet, so they only engage when I am a bit off.
    When I try to join the fight, my own defense fleet always defaults to let the enemy go, preventing me from fighting the raiders.

    I'd like to be able to tell my own defense forces what I expect them to do...


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 19, 2018, 07:55:11 PM
    Quote
    Related: it felt weird that player colonies never have black markets or military markets.
    I vaguely remember some comment that player does not know where it is (because the criminals do not want to tell the judge, jury, and executioner of the state).  Player is the king of his castle.

    As for military market, it would be nice to have a military base market if only to dump excess vendor trash if I have a military base.

    I was testing a Harbinger vs. an Onslaught in the sim on Saturday and noticed sometimes 3 Reapers would wreck an Onslaught and other times it took 10 to kill it. Not sure if it was because the Onslaught was shooting the Reapers down or if they were sometimes doing crazy damage.
    If it explodes like Devastator, it could have variable damage.  I remember testing Proximity Charges and they did less hull damage than blasters despite having the same damage per shot.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 19, 2018, 08:02:40 PM
    I find it slighty confusing that I have to click every industry/structure to find out which one might be upgraded.

    Oh yeah, forgot that bothered me too. I think upgrading should be in the same menu as adding industries/structures. It would be much more obvious and would tempt us with previews of the illustrations.

    Icons as you mention would be helpful, too.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sarissofoi on November 19, 2018, 08:24:58 PM
    Bug report
    Don't know if it was reported but I get constantly Nebula civ transport drop from fight s against derelicts and AI ships.
    They are usually recoverable and are inside of debris.
    Kind of strange.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 19, 2018, 09:00:14 PM
    Not sure if this is a bug: I think procurement contracts don't reduce the demand/shortages on a world?

    I've run about 600 units or organs on missions to Keptyn Starworks, which has a shortage of 200 units, and the contracts keep coming. Made several hundred thousand quite quickly. That said, the work is dangerous as I need to smuggle it out of lawful stations, past patrols, and then past pirates to get to the station. Quite fun!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Chronosfear on November 19, 2018, 09:27:17 PM
    Hi Guys,

    0.9 is in a nutshell is a blast.
    I really enjoy it. still on my first play through.

    My current play through.
    I have been really lucky with my start.
    took a easy bounty in a system nearby and while scouting the rest of the system,
    I found a Legion only with "minor" d-mods. It was a real struggle to get it home (hat to scuttle parts of my fleet)
    and was running dry in an empty system though my distress call was answered by a really friendly Sindrian fleet which saved me an my crew.
    I had to bank it for some time until i needed a bigger fleet.
    (https://preview.ibb.co/dnEPjf/Fast-Start-First-Bounty-and-a-wreckage-nearby.png) (https://ibb.co/eC7zH0)
    Now I own a class 5 earth like planet with ruins and a class 5 jungle moon orbiting it,with ruins, too.
    Also somewhat close to the core sector (~8 Days at Burn 16 to Westernesse, 9 to Tyle )
    (https://preview.ibb.co/gnpRVL/Home.png) (https://ibb.co/hKQ0qL)

    Now to the patch itself.

    I really like the Apogee. Using it with the (buffed) Plasma Cannon which I now is worth using.
    The Perdition (Luddic Path bomber) (but why is it classified high tech?? bug?) is okayish. (might be to weak for 12 OP) but i still use it in combination with a Khopesh Wing.
    Warthog wing is not as bad a I thought it would be. Its more in line with other ships.
    My new Mod to go is Efficiency Overhaul. (I use it on every ship) like ITU or Burnspeed before they got tweaked.-> Still think no need it needed due to the fact its only about resources and the player is the only
    one in need of them and i reduces the combat power due to not having the little OP on other things.
    I like how D-Mods a now more common even in the sector
    The bar is a good one and I cant wait to see more Quests and such.
    Bug in the bar?
    Someone offering Heavy Armament for a cheap sum of supplies ~20. Which you can sell at the same(!) station for far more supplies then you traded it for
    Red Planet!
    Man did i get mauled the first time...
    since I only took a small fleet since it was very far away. The redacted 5! Tachyon Lances BB kicked my ass





    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Deshara on November 19, 2018, 09:31:57 PM
    I find it slighty confusing that I have to click every industry/structure to find out which one might be upgraded.

    Oh yeah, forgot that bothered me too. I think upgrading should be in the same menu as adding industries/structures. It would be much more obvious and would tempt us with previews of the illustrations.

    Icons as you mention would be helpful, too.

    the game has this problem with diagnosing fleet speed as well; there's plenty of room on the fleet UI for there to be some way to highlight your fleet's speed bottlenecks.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Pimpio on November 19, 2018, 09:40:01 PM
    There is a problem with hyperspace sector map generation. The stellar clouds are not in the place that map shows them to be.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SpaceMonster on November 19, 2018, 09:43:32 PM
    Bug report

    Expected: When you click on a column you can change the sort to that column. Click on the same column again to toggle between Asc/Desc.

    The bug: Clicking on a different column that the current sorted one *also* toggles Asc/Desc for the clicked column.
    e.g. On the blueprint production screen, keep clicking between 'ship hull' & 'size'. This changes the sort column but also keeps reversing the sort direction.

    So far I can repro this on custom production, colony / planet list, etc.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 19, 2018, 09:49:12 PM
    the game has this problem with diagnosing fleet speed as well; there's plenty of room on the fleet UI for there to be some way to highlight your fleet's speed bottlenecks.

    Press F1 while hovering over the Burn counter.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on November 19, 2018, 09:59:20 PM
    Battlestations seem much deadlier in real combat than in autoresolve.

    I thought this too (but figured I was imagining things), but I've joined a battle on my High-Tech Star Fortress (From Mining Lasers then Heavy Blasters and Finally Tachyon Lances so they do upgrade with what weapons you can make which is cool), and it lives up to it's name quite well; huge range, fantastic shields and very much like a super-unfair, bullet-hell, boss on a ship shooter.  Maybe the reason is the ship-size limit when I join a battle; so even with numbers they can't swarm in (and so are easily picked off), where with auto-resolve enemy fleets have no restrictions on how many ships they can field at once?

    On another note, this is purely subjective...I wasn't going to bring it up, but since someone bought up the Battlestation, has anything changed with AI controlled ships during combat?  I'm not sure if I'm imagining things, but I've seen cases with dropping shields while under 25% flux to take damage, or not backing away at high flux levels, or backing away to safety and not venting, only to reengage with it's flux still above 60/70% or so.  FYI most of my officers are Steady/Cautious, but the same could be said for ships not commanded by an officer.

    It's a subjective thing, so I don't know whether it's something I'm imagining, but I have found myself wishing for the seemingly more careful AI from the last version of the game.

    EDIT:
    I have a habit of doing this (Finding the answer to my question immediately after posting), but I figured the doctrine "Aggression" only applied to faction created ships.  I just read the tool-tip now and so found it applied also to ships in your own fleet that don't have officers.  I had it on the middle setting which is Aggressive, so I'm going to dial it all the way down to the lowest setting and see if that helps. Whoops  ::)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sebenko on November 19, 2018, 10:33:32 PM
    Possibly related to the Reapers doing excessive damage, just witnessed a pair of Kopesh one-shot an intact hull Dominator.
    Ships produced with custom production still have ISS prefixes instead of player faction ones for their initial names.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 19, 2018, 11:23:28 PM
    what governs the strength of colony patrols? it shows the size and quality in the colony screen, but i think my numbers look pretty good, as does the rest of the colony. yet it only has two tiny "Fast Picket" patrols, and has had exactly those two for ~half a year now.

    i got my doctrine set up, i got max stability, i got great access, i got good ship production, i got a Military Base and a Megaport. but even the occasional mercenary patrols that i've seen spawn from it are much bigger than my colony's own patrols.
    (https://i.imgur.com/J2F7ger.jpg)

    typical heavy patrol supposedly looks like this. except it never spawned anything even close to such a heavy patrol:
    (https://i.imgur.com/G7Rd5KK.jpg)

    i understand there's some randomness, and patrols can get thinned out by fending off pirates and such, and then will likely need a while to respawn. but i don't think that's what's happening here, because those two tiny patrols i do have are the same as they have been for quite a while, even though the colony had everything i thought it could need to spawn more and/or bigger ones for quite a while too.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 19, 2018, 11:25:56 PM
    @Sy: could you email me your save?

    The "typical heavy patrol" thing is way off, btw, but you should still have more than two fast pickets given the colony size and stats.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 19, 2018, 11:28:09 PM
    I've also noticed that the 'typcial heavy patrol' doesn't take into account the universal colony modifiers (nanoforge and orbital works) when calculating quality.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 19, 2018, 11:35:00 PM
    yup, will do.

    edit: wait, what's your email adress? ^^


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 19, 2018, 11:41:27 PM
    fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com

    Thank you :)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 19, 2018, 11:45:50 PM
    done


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: FooF on November 20, 2018, 12:14:09 AM
    I only have anecdotal evidence but it feels like ships are going down a lot faster. There have been many times I've watched my flagship Hammership crumple like paper under only moderate fire. It didn't feel like this in the previous patch. Was there a change in armor or damage calculation? I doubt it but it does seem like something is off from previous.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 12:23:42 AM
    @Sy - hmm, this looks normal, at least, a few days after I load up the save, a regular patrol spawns, and 2 pickets + 1 medium patrol is what's expected here.

    @FooF - I'll keep an eye out! Possibly related to the issue with Reapers and Sabots seeming like they're doing too much damage in some situations.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 20, 2018, 12:28:29 AM
    alright, i'll see if it improves on my end as well then. although, even 2 pickets and 1 medium patrol seems to me like a rather pathetic defense for that kind of colony, to be honest. ^^


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Flow_Rate on November 20, 2018, 12:46:26 AM
    Hey Alex, I'm really stoked on the new release!

    About colony economy:

    I have two colonies, one is actually on a planet that is orbiting the other. On the orbital colony (A), I have mining and tech mining and some basic accessibility and military facilities, given it's a high hazard planet but has very rich ore/rare ore/ruins. On the other colony (B), I have refining and industry, as it's low hazard but also low resource. The UI does not show any internal trade, despite A making more than enough ore/rare ore/metal/organics for B.

    Maybe they're leveraging nearby exports and imports with a trade differential? (more advantageous to buy+sell than to use internally?) Is there a way for me to figure that out easily?

    I'll try to get some screenshots here in a bit.

    Also, is the blue symbol on the right that looks like the "import from external sources" to mean "exporting to external sources"? I don't see that symbol in the F1 UI explanation panel.



    About combat: I'll echo others that there are a few weapons which seem very powerful right now.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 20, 2018, 12:46:37 AM
    About Reapers, it seems not problems of separate rockets, it seems like problems in the "HE" damage mechanics. One Hellbore shot almost kill Lasher.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 12:49:11 AM
    Also, is the blue symbol on the right that looks like the "import from external sources" to mean "exporting to external sources"? I don't see that symbol in the F1 UI explanation panel.

    Hmm, not sure what you mean by this?

    (As far as the colonies supplying each other, it doesn't really matter where they get the stuff provided they get it. There's a (fixed in dev version) bug that caused a commodity to be shown as being imported from out-of-faction when there's an in-faction source, though, so possibly that's it.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 20, 2018, 01:14:19 AM
    After playing for a while, I realize having the date of events in the intel screen would be rather nice.  I've had so many attempts to attack my colony that I'm unable to tell if the current attempt has failed or not, and having dates would make it much easier.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 01:15:56 AM
    If it failed, the intel item should say "failed" in the title. Is that not the case somewhere?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 20, 2018, 01:18:27 AM
    @FooF - I'll keep an eye out! Possibly related to the issue with Reapers and Sabots seeming like they're doing too much damage in some situations.

    There is 100% for-sure a bug with damage. I was testing for it using Reapers and killed a 22k HP Onslaught from full hull and armor with one salvo of four. Reapers only do 4k damage each, and 4x4000 is definitely less than 22,000.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Thaago on November 20, 2018, 01:29:36 AM
    Did you have any skills? 22k/16k is only 1.375, and I think you can get up to that with skills.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Baqar79 on November 20, 2018, 01:33:51 AM
    Hmmm, it certainly is worth checking research station debris after the original haul...twice.  Wasn't impressed by the initial haul, but it was ok (Needler & Mauler blueprints), check debris first time; Medusa blueprint found...ahh ok that's decent, lets check it again to be sure; Shade blueprint found.

    I think the salvager occupation just became a lot more hazardous.... :D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 20, 2018, 01:41:08 AM
    It is worth spamming salvage on an object with rare stuff until you get literally nothing.  One time, I got a rare item on the sixth or seventh salvage attempt.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 01:49:20 AM
    There is 100% for-sure a bug with damage. I was testing for it using Reapers and killed a 22k HP Onslaught from full hull and armor with one salvo of four. Reapers only do 4k damage each, and 4x4000 is definitely less than 22,000.

    Are you positive? I can only kill it with 5 Reapers with maxed skills, though there's not too much health left after the 4th. It takes 7 with no skills.

    I did just find and fix a bug with Strike Commander causing the damage multiplier be almost double what it was supposed to, but that doesn't apply to regular HE damage, and stepping through it with a debugger, the calculations all look correct.

    If anyone has more info/something to test out for this, that'd be super helpful!

    (Another possibility, perhaps: Entropy Amplifier is more common now that it's on the Afflictor?)

    Edit: just tried it vs an enemy with all skills, in case having skills somehow made the ship take more damage, but that doesn't appear to be the case. I wonder if this "suddenly taking too much damage" feeling is due to fighters doing way more than they should w/ Strike Commander, but it feeling like the damage came from something bigger-looking that happened around the same time.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Arrath on November 20, 2018, 01:52:36 AM
    Are there any thoughts as to adding the ability to dictate which variant fittings a custom ordered ship will get produced with?

    Say I come up with a custom Gryphon loadout and want all that I produce to come with that.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 20, 2018, 02:00:10 AM
    Did you have any skills? 22k/16k is only 1.375, and I think you can get up to that with skills.

    I used a mission ship in the simulator. Usually the Reapers did normal damage, a couple times they did way more. I watched carefully but saw no clues as to why they would do different damage in different runs. I am pretty sure, however, that all the Reapers were affected at the same time; maybe that will narrow it down some for Alex.

    I would guess it is related to AoE damage. It's the only thing that seems even semi-likely.


    There is 100% for-sure a bug with damage. I was testing for it using Reapers and killed a 22k HP Onslaught from full hull and armor with one salvo of four. Reapers only do 4k damage each, and 4x4000 is definitely less than 22,000.

    Are you positive?

    One. Hundred. Percent.

    I'm also sure it has nothing to do with Entropy Amplifier.

    I have seen it with no-skills Harbinger and no-skills Afflictor (not using system). They're easy to test with because you can use Reapers against the sim Onslaught, but I highly suspect this is not limited to Reapers.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 20, 2018, 02:01:32 AM
    If it failed, the intel item should say "failed" in the title. Is that not the case somewhere?
    It does, but at one point there were 3 different raids going on at the same time and 7 previous ones that had failed.  Maybe that's just a side effect of the current bug where if the Orbital Station is destroyed and they fail the ground attack, the fleets stick around, hm.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 20, 2018, 02:12:03 AM
    One. Hundred. Percent.

    I'm also sure it has nothing to do with Entropy Amplifier.

    I have seen it with no-skills Harbinger and no-skills Afflictor (not using system). They're easy to test with because you can use Reapers against the sim Onslaught, but I highly suspect this is not limited to Reapers.

    I have to tag on this bandwagon with damage here. Maybe my memory is fuzzy, but the damage model, even on Buffallos, had a bit of a curve/give which was always satisfying pushing through. Right now it feels like either armor doesn't exist in some instances or it's getting straight unmoderated damage that hull would get. I have given and taken shots from anti-armor weapons that just seem to 'penetrate'/pierce right through armor. And i even have the +150 armor/bonused armor skills.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 02:13:42 AM
    @TheSoldier: that's really odd, not supposed to be more than 2 expeditions, an inspection, and a pirate raid (or more, but that's unlikely) going on at the same time *tops*. Basically expeditions are capped to 2 simultaneous and the rest can add in randomly.

    I used a mission ship in the simulator. Usually the Reapers did normal damage, a couple times they did way more. I watched carefully but saw no clues as to why they would do different damage in different runs. I am pretty sure, however, that all the Reapers were affected at the same time; maybe that will narrow it down some for Alex.

    I would guess it is related to AoE damage. It's the only thing that seems even semi-likely.

    ...

    One. Hundred. Percent.

    I'm also sure it has nothing to do with Entropy Amplifier.

    I have seen it with no-skills Harbinger and no-skills Afflictor (not using system). They're easy to test with because you can use Reapers against the sim Onslaught, but I highly suspect this is not limited to Reapers.

    Thank you for the added info. Good idea re: AoE damage; going to look at that angle.

    I have to tag on this bandwagon with damage here. Maybe my memory is fuzzy, but the damage model, even on Buffallos, had a bit of a curve/give which was always satisfying pushing through. Right now it feels like either armor doesn't exist in some instances or it's getting the same HE damage that hull would get. I have given and taken shots from anti-armor weapons that just seem to 'penetrate'/pierce right through armor.

    Hmm.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 20, 2018, 02:18:20 AM
    I guess I should detail how I tested. For the record, I am on RC7; I don't think that affects anything though.

    As I mentioned, I first saw it (but wasn't sure) on Saturday while testing a triple Typhoon Harbinger (no combat skills) against the sim Onslaught. The three Reapers would sometimes take the Onslaught to near-dead with one volley.


    This evening, I took the Ambush mission's Afflictor, loaded it up with 4 Reapers and EMR, and killed the sim Onslaught with it by flanking to the rear. Never used the ship system.

    I did this like 10 times. Usually it took 7-8 missiles as you would expect (1 or 2 get shot down sometimes). Twice, however, the first volley of 4 missiles was enough to destroy it.

    With more controlled conditions (disabling the target's AI, using one of those meat-block ships in that testing mod, etc.), the effect can probably be observed with other weapons.


    Okay, tested twice more as above while writing this and killed it with 5 Reapers both times. I'm going to keep testing.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SafariJohn on November 20, 2018, 02:42:06 AM
    Okay, I've tested quite a few times, and here's what I've confirmed:

    Without Entropy Amplifier:
    7 hits to kill
    6 hits to kill
    5 hits to kill

    With Entropy Amplifier:
    5 hits to kill
    3 hits to kill

    I have a PD laser on the Afflictor and the low number kills seem to happen when I let it fire, but not when I tell it to hold fire. However, I'm not sure of this. I haven't seen a 4 hits to kill again yet.

    I'm going to see if using different weapons in the turret has any effect. I hope not.

    Edit: 2 tests with Ion Cannon

    First test, hold fire - 7 Reapers fired to kill
    Second test, free fire - 4 Reapers fired to kill

    Edit 2: 4 more tests of each.

    Hold Fire: 7 shots
    Hold Fire: 8 shots (1 bounce)
    Hold Fire: 7 shots
    Hold Fire: 7 shots

    Free Fire: 5 shots
    Free Fire: 5 shots
    Free Fire: 5 shots
    Free Fire: 5 shots

    There is definitely a relation there.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 02:59:56 AM
    ... ok, this is crazy. Got it in 4 with no skills Ion Cannon firing. Not sure yet what the issue is, but just being able to reproduce it is a major step forward. Thank you!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 20, 2018, 03:04:40 AM
    @TheSoldier: that's really odd, not supposed to be more than 2 expeditions, an inspection, and a pirate raid (or more, but that's unlikely) going on at the same time *tops*. Basically expeditions are capped to 2 simultaneous and the rest can add in randomly.
    Everything was in line, there was an expedition from the Sindrian Diktat, an expedition from the Persean League, and a pirate raid going on at the same time.  Just the log kept all the previous attacks in the Colony Threats tab (it's cleared up now, don't know what caused that in the first place) and it was a bit difficult to tell what was actually going on.

    Something I did notice is that custom production ships don't add in your faction prefix, they use ISS instead.  Ships that you buy from the Open Market do have your faction's prefix, though.

    If it helps anything, I've conducted the same tests as above and haven't gotten the same results.  Using RC8, it consistently takes 7-8 Reapers to down the SIM Onslaught.  Had it in 6 a couple times, but that's it.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 20, 2018, 03:45:52 AM
    Doing the same tests, RC9, and i'm not sure if these numbers are what you guys are discussing (since 200% HE damage vs armor), but i can utterly and consistently get a Reaper, Ion Cannon or not, to to 5829 HULL damage on an Onslaught with 2695 armor damage. Hitting the side/back, the Reaper seems to auto-aim for the turret mount (flak i think on the SIM Hairtrigger but any of the two work) and it always does the exact same damage.

    But yeah, hitting the back, for /reasons/ with the Ion Cannon firing there is a chance for 4/5.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 03:56:43 AM
    Alright, finally fixed this! Turns out a collision-related performance optimization (with the ominous commit message of "shouldn't break things, but it's possible") caused projectiles to occasionally - fairly frequently, even - to hit twice, provided another projectile hit, or was still existing and fading out, in almost exactly the same area in the same frame. So the PD laser wouldn't cause this issue, I believe, but the Ion Cannon and other projectile weapons would, whenever the torpedo hit while the projectile was still visible during/after its own impact.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: MesoTroniK on November 20, 2018, 04:03:00 AM
    So Alex, think an RC10 hotfix might happen? For this issue and all the other ones fixed since RC9, then let things roll as they are while working on 0.9.1a. Some of the issues fixed since RC9 are pretty serious IMO, and this option is worth considering at the least perhaps after waiting another day or two for anything else that maybe should be corrected to be reported.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: MajorTheRed on November 20, 2018, 04:04:38 AM
    This version is awesome, definitly worth the wait!
    I will post some comments after playing a couple dozens of hours, but I wanted to pointed that I'm always savaging Nebulat civilan transport on post-battle debris fields.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 04:10:28 AM
    So Alex, think an RC10 hotfix might happen? For this issue and all the other ones fixed since RC9, then let things roll as they are while working on 0.9.1a. Some of the issues fixed since RC9 are pretty serious IMO, and this option is worth considering at the least perhaps after waiting another day or two for anything else that maybe should be corrected to be reported.

    Hmm - I'm actually a bit hesitant because of the damage fix, since much of the playtesting was with the bug active. Let me think about it tomorrow, and look through the commits to see how confident I feel about it not breaking something else.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cosmitz on November 20, 2018, 04:20:51 AM
    I think we'd all rather have a game system that plays out in a consistent fashion, even if some things end up out of balance because of it. Unbalanced we can play with/around, but randomly occuring damage-buffs, ehhh.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 20, 2018, 05:57:23 AM
    High tech station has mines which are really useful. Also the Fortress Shield ensures it survives while you soften the invading fleet, it's been working really well for me.
    All of them should have mines when upgraded to Star Fortress.  (I have not fought anything that big yet.)

    I know high-tech has Fortress Shield.  That is the only thing I see going for it.  It is a pain to kill, but other than that, offense of just beams and the occasional blaster is just not scary unless I try to solo it.  Against my fleet, high-tech station is simply not a threat.  The other types had significantly better offense and felt generally more dangerous.

    I guess high-tech station is nice if you have a buff fleet and you want your station to not die from sustained assault.

    So after some experimentation, I confirmed that stations follow the weapons you highlight in the doctrine, even those already built. Here is my high tech.

    (https://my.mixtape.moe/lehhxt.png)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 20, 2018, 06:09:54 AM
    Also, I'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but I've raided and bombed 3 stations in my game, and after about a year or so all 3 became decivilized. I didn't saturate bomb, I just raided them, took out their station and precise bombed them.

    Now I can imagine that doing all that damage can eventually lead to them to perish, but all three of them? Very similar timespan too. If it's always like this I could probably cleanse the sector without declaring war with all factions at once.

    Moreover, I feel that being hostile to a faction doesn't change things much. I imagined that being at war meant that they would often raid your stations and try to attack you but that never happened. In fact I never even received a single raid from them.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Histidine on November 20, 2018, 06:17:34 AM
    Also, I'm not sure if this is a bug or not, but I've raided and bombed 3 stations in my game, and after about a year or so all 3 became decivilized. I didn't saturate bomb, I just raided them, took out their station and precise bombed them.

    Now I can imagine that doing all that damage can eventually lead to them to perish, but all three of them? Very similar timespan too. If it's always like this I could probably cleanse the sector without declaring war with all factions at once.
    Oh, it takes a year? That would explain why it hasn't happened for me yet. (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=13883.0)

    Yeah, markets will decivilize if their stability drops low enough for long enough, and tactical bombardment probably does too much stability damage.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Madao on November 20, 2018, 07:01:06 AM
    Alright, finally fixed this! Turns out a collision-related performance optimization (with the ominous commit message of "shouldn't break things, but it's possible") caused projectiles to occasionally - fairly frequently, even - to hit twice, provided another projectile hit, or was still existing and fading out, in almost exactly the same area in the same frame. So the PD laser wouldn't cause this issue, I believe, but the Ion Cannon and other projectile weapons would, whenever the torpedo hit while the projectile was still visible during/after its own impact.

    So we now have TeamFortress 2 style critical hits lol

    In all seriousness we can live with it awhile whilst you do your do.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Obsidian Actual on November 20, 2018, 07:38:23 AM
    • Got an administrator pod early on, didn't find a way to dismiss her without a colony. 2500/month isn't that much, was just an annoyance

    (In case this hasn't been answered already)

    @Draba: When you bring up the Comman(d) interface from the campaign, then go to Colonies (1), there should be a button on the right labelled "Manage administrators (Q)". You'll be able to dismiss them from there.

    Lost a few thousand bucks for several months before I got around to finding it myself too.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: StahnAileron on November 20, 2018, 08:51:59 AM
    Two things:
    • Bug: Is anyone else getting a bug where salvage attempts from battle debris fields can have tons of Nebula Passenger transports as recoverable hulls even if the battle had none of them in it at all. (I realized it was VERY odd when I got Nebulas after [REDACTED] fights or like 3-4 Nebs ONLY for a few other fights.) I'm not sure what causes this; it happens occasionally and there isn't anything I can think of that in common with each occurrence. Saw this in RC7 once or twice and now in RC9. I'm pretty sure I saw it non-modded in RC7. By RC9 I have a handful of utility mods installed and see it a bit more often (or so it seems; have spent more time in RC9 by now). Apologies in advance if this was mentioned already...
    • Request: In the Custom Production window, would it be much to add a column for the amount of items in-stock from your storage? (Not cargo holds or current fleet.) If combing ALL storage would be a problem, at least from the destination location? Seeing those numbers would help remind me what I need/should produce in the coming month(s).


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The2nd on November 20, 2018, 09:31:59 AM
    Two things:
    • Bug: Is anyone else getting a bug where salvage attempts from battle debris fields can have tons of Nebula Passenger transports as recoverable hulls even if the battle had none of them in it at all. (I realized it was VERY odd when I got Nebulas after [REDACTED] fights or like 3-4 Nebs ONLY for a few other fights.) I'm not sure what causes this; it happens occasionally and there isn't anything I can think of that in common with each occurrence. Saw this in RC7 once or twice and now in RC9. I'm pretty sure I saw it non-modded in RC7. By RC9 I have a handful of utility mods installed and see it a bit more often (or so it seems; have spent more time in RC9 by now). Apologies in advance if this was mentioned already...

    Yes happened to me several times as well. Nebula transport. Still on unmodded RC6.

    Also is autofit behaving weirdly for anyone else?

    Here is an example:
    (https://i.imgur.com/zQHQRJn.jpg)

    It is replacing the burst pd with regular pd despite enough being in my cargo holds. It's adding Reinforced Bulkheads as well despite the option turned off.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Draba on November 20, 2018, 09:53:52 AM
    Some more notes after a bit more time
    • Doom is super awesome now :)
    • A way to get specific blueprints for a high cost would be great(spying on factions for a possible rep hit, reverse engineer, whatever works).
      I can already build Paragon/Onslaught/Conquest but only have plasma cannons for L energy and couldn't fit my destroyer fleet with proper S/M weapons earlier.
      IMO AI cores/free loot/surveying are enough incentive to explore without being the only source of blueprints, running around the faction markets to get weapons is a chore.
      If getting blueprints is expensive enough(without being prohibitive) incentive is still to make do with what you have early, without the pain later on.
    • A way to reduce pirate/ludd tedium
      I would be happy to put a bounty on their bases or order a colony to send a fleet there. Doomfleet traveling weeks to swat a smallish base gets annoying.
      Alternative would be making them target large colonies very rarely, but with higher penalties and a big support base.
    • Early colonies could be a bit better
      Once you have enough to colonize it's better to just sit on the money until you get ~500K extra and plop down everything important at once, add starbase when spaceport finishes.
      Even without AI cores/free port factions will hate it with all their hearts and 100K in early bribes is still a lot, especially if you try to avoid the hegemony inspections.
    • IMO sector nebulas/storms are too common
      I'm playing in a mixed sector and they are everywhere. Storm riding is nice for flavor but I mostly just ignore them and plow through.
      Not ideal trading supplies for a tiny bit of fuel but nobody travels without sustained burn and dodging them would be impossible/a massive headache.
    • As others already mentioned, core systems are a massive free-for-all on top of a ship graveyard.
      In general the "just casually trying to destroy your infrastructure, not a war at all" thing feels strange.

    Didn't see a recent roadmap so probably stating the obvious, something like an intelligence agency structure would be nice.
    Can spend lots of money on discovering/killing ludd cells and stealing blueprints.


    @Draba: When you bring up the Comman(d) interface from the campaign, then go to Colonies (1), there should be a button on the right labelled "Manage administrators (Q)". You'll be able to dismiss them from there.

    Lost a few thousand bucks for several months before I got around to finding it myself too.

    Of course I just didn't notice it, thanks :)

    Yep, also seen lots of Nebula transports in salvage.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: DrakonST on November 20, 2018, 10:16:17 AM
    Alex, what you think about bigger loot after battle against Guardian? In current moment almost no any sense to fight againts him. Maybe give after battle "Alpha Core"?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 20, 2018, 12:25:23 PM
    @StahnAileron & The2nd: the Nebula salvage and autofit mismatch bugs have already been reported, yeah. a lot of players seem to encounter these.


    • Request: In the Custom Production window, would it be much to add a column for the amount of items in-stock from your storage? (Not cargo holds or current fleet.) If combing ALL storage would be a problem, at least from the destination location? Seeing those numbers would help remind me what I need/should produce in the coming month(s).
    i'd really like to see this as well. manually checking for any weapons i may or may not want to stock up on is a bit tedious, and a simple "x units in local storage" text or something along those lines would easily fix that issue.[/list]


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Hiruma Kai on November 20, 2018, 03:23:08 PM
    Re: Pather bases, yeah, they're not that easy to find. When a faction posts a bounty on one you find out where it's located, and that's about it as far as "free" ways to find the location. Totally agree that there ought to be some other way to make progress on finding one, aside from scouring everything.

    Hmm... How does one setup a "spy game" in a space game?  Have an intel officer in the comm directory after you build a specific industry, like a HQ?  Go to the bar, get a mission for "catch the spy" or "intercept the smugglers?" from kind of contact, and then hunt down a fleet in system who in turn knows the location of the base?  Spend credits for counter espionage like we do for convincing expedition fleets to go away from the intel screen?  Assign an AI core to finding them, who sometimes gets blown up by Pathers in response?

    Actually, a second question is what are the ways to continue to find cores?  Should I not blow up all [REDACTED] stations?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Deshara on November 20, 2018, 05:17:34 PM
    Re: Pather bases, yeah, they're not that easy to find. When a faction posts a bounty on one you find out where it's located, and that's about it as far as "free" ways to find the location. Totally agree that there ought to be some other way to make progress on finding one, aside from scouring everything.

    Hmm... How does one setup a "spy game" in a space game?  Have an intel officer in the comm directory after you build a specific industry, like a HQ?  Go to the bar, get a mission for "catch the spy" or "intercept the smugglers?" from kind of contact, and then hunt down a fleet in system who in turn knows the location of the base?  Spend credits for counter espionage like we do for convincing expedition fleets to go away from the intel screen?  Assign an AI core to finding them, who sometimes gets blown up by Pathers in response?

    Actually, a second question is what are the ways to continue to find cores?  Should I not blow up all [REDACTED] stations?

    All the aspects of this would be so abstracted on the campaign map that you could probably insert a campaign-level process-of-elimination puzzle. I know for a fact there are some that'd fit really well and one is on the time of my tongue but I haven't slept and I can't quite bring it to mind

    but ignoring citing another pre-existing example since that part of my brain has been hit by an ion beam; the text fluff for pather cells mentions they require support from pather fleets to function. You then could make it so killing pather fleets drops a broken intel that gives three pieces of market information that is relevant to three pather cells that use aliases (cell [a]'s market has a volatiles mine, cell 's market doesn't have a starport, cell [c]'s market is on a barren world). Different intel uses different aliases and it's up to the player to piece together the clues to figure out what the real market is (the other two are fake?). Dropping marines on the wrong world causes backlash, but bc it's just marines dropped in to kill what might have been pathers and not, like, a raid or a tactical bombing the repercussion isn't "targeted market goes hostile". Maybe the fake cells are pather traps and targeting the fake cells causes a pather cell (with no valueable cargo) to appear and strike your fleet from the nearest hiding terrain?

    oh shoot that was the intel from the recent cold war x-com ripoff that had shockingly poorly implemented combat
    aw well, that part was worth stealing and putting into a better game


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 06:27:24 PM
    Another hotfix (maybe at this point it's just "slightly warm fix") is up, RC10. See OP for list of changes/fixes.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: The Soldier on November 20, 2018, 06:35:20 PM
    • Hegemony Inspection industry disruption in case of hidden REDACTED reduced to maximum of 2 months
    As an outspoken supporter of AI Core rights, I whole-heartedly support this. :)

    Has it been said that the Orders tab under Command does anything yet?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Sy on November 20, 2018, 06:45:30 PM
    much appreciated, Alex!


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: SCC on November 20, 2018, 07:02:42 PM
    Alex, can you check if the high-tech Star Fortress has Stealth Minefield module somewhere? None of the modules accessible in game does.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 07:08:04 PM
    Two of the "main" modules have a ship system (via skin) that spawns mines. Unlike the low tech/midline stations, the high-tech one doesn't have a minefield per se, but rather those two modules spawning mines like the Doom does, except more/longer range.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Gothars on November 20, 2018, 07:09:52 PM
    Good decision to not wait until .1 to fix these issues!

    So far I had a lot of fun with the update, although I find it rather hard to get used to the increased scope of things. Some of the finer points like deployment costs and battle strength of individual ships seem to have lost much of their import, with all the mega scale fleet fighting going on all the time, and the huge sums of credits being tossed around once you have a good colony. I have to collect my thoughts on that some more before I can draw any conclusions, though.

    Oh, one thing: It's not strictly a bug, but you should probably not have the same bar encounters on your own colonies as you have on foreign planets. I just had to sneak a bunch of marines from my own planet, to avoid the "local authorities". I guess that meant dodging mirrors on my way out?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: ciago92 on November 20, 2018, 07:21:08 PM
    Good decision to not wait until .1 to fix these issues!

    So far I had a lot of fun with the update, although I find it rather hard to get used to the increased scope of things. Some of the finer points like deployment costs and battle strength of individual ships seem to have lost much of their import, with all the mega scale fleet fighting going on all the time. I have to collect my thoughts on that some more before I can draw any conclusions, though.

    Oh, one thing: It's not strictly a bug, but you should probably not have the same bar encounters on your own colonies as you have on foreign planets. I just had to sneak a bunch of marines from my own planet, to avoid the "local authorities". I guess that meant dodging mirrors on my way out?


    That's at least partially addressed, as I know when I went to the bar I found a procurement/transport mission that started with "Oh! It's you!" or something to that effect, that they recognized who they were talking to.



    also, I have to give props to Megas' "spam salvage debris field until nothing is left" strategy: just found a paragon blueprint on my 4th(!) salvage run of what had been a research station


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Megas on November 20, 2018, 07:23:00 PM
    Oh, one thing: It's not strictly a bug, but you should probably not have the same bar encounters on your own colonies as you have on foreign planets. I just had to sneak a bunch of marines from my own planet, to avoid the "local authorities". I guess that meant dodging mirrors on my way out?
    That is silly.  It would be funny if the player replied "I own this colony.  I am the law!"


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Cyan Leader on November 20, 2018, 07:48:12 PM
    Alex, is there a system in place to pace out the invasions of multiple factions? I love the way it is now actually, but I worry that once the mod factions start getting updated they will all start sending expeditions to player bases it'd be too overwhelming. I actually look forward to fighting their invasion fleets but I wouldn't want one every 20 days.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 07:50:37 PM
    Good decision to not wait until .1 to fix these issues!

    (The tutorial supplies bug really cinched it for me.)

    So far I had a lot of fun with the update, although I find it rather hard to get used to the increased scope of things. Some of the finer points like deployment costs and battle strength of individual ships seem to have lost much of their import, with all the mega scale fleet fighting going on all the time, and the huge sums of credits being tossed around once you have a good colony. I have to collect my thoughts on that some more before I can draw any conclusions, though.

    Yeah, I'm curious to see how it shakes out, myself. I think it's probably safe to assume stuff will get toned down a fair bit at some point, in terms of income, fleet numbers, and so on.

    Oh, one thing: It's not strictly a bug, but you should probably not have the same bar encounters on your own colonies as you have on foreign planets. I just had to sneak a bunch of marines from my own planet, to avoid the "local authorities". I guess that meant dodging mirrors on my way out?

    Hmm, yeah, maybe. On the other hand, there are levels of "local authorities" you probably don't want to undermine publicly, so it could be RP'ed in a few ways.


    Alex, is there a system in place to pace out the invasions of multiple factions? I love the way it is now actually, but I worry that once the mod factions start getting updated they will all start sending expeditions to player bases it'd be too overwhelming. I actually look forward to fighting their invasion fleets but I wouldn't want one every 20 days.

    There is, actually - maximum of two concurrent, and the rate at which factions get "angry" slows down when more factions (that send expeditions) are in play.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: dandylions on November 20, 2018, 08:11:14 PM
    Amazing update for an amazing game. There are so many new hooks (buildings! slots within buildings! custom production!) that the possibilities for additional gameplay through mods or ongoing development makes me salivate.

    A few comments, in no order in particular. This is coming from two most-games (as in up to level 35-45 in each, with a healthy empire going).

    Does the underlying simulation tie into what the default AI-controlled markets offer for sale? If so, I am seeing some signs that entire sector economy takes a nosedive beginning right around when you start a new game. While that may be intended, the overall quality of weapons/LPCs/ships starts off significantly above equilibrium at the beginning.

    - Markets - both open and black - seem to offer better stuff at the very beginning of the game. Particularly noticeable in terms of energy weapons and high-tech LPCs (the dual Atropos and Reaper torpedo bombers) at smaller, non-military markets. This inventory disappears within a few months and never appears again.
    - The first expedition fleet sent against my colony in a game where I started a colony early on was a pristine Diktat fleet with two Conquests and almost no D-mods. No subsequent fleet has been as good from both the ship quality and quantity perspective. This is purely anecdotal though, as I haven't played multiple early colonization starts...

    This may also lead to the "markets are emptier than they should be" issue. In the early colonization game, this also led to a dynamic where the first attack set the benchmark for what I could possibly expect, and the difficulty level would only decrease after that initial fleet.

    -  -

    I do think there's some funkiness around rolling for rare loot, as per Megas's earlier comments.

    - Are you certain that the rare loot salvage skill does not cause weightings to change, specifically around blueprints? In one game, I went full salvage and exploration right off the bat. Due to the overwhelming amount of stuff to do, I did not get around to the story mission for the technology cache, so all rare items have been found organically. That fleet has a dozen nanoforges and synchrotron cores, a couple dozen AI cores, pretty much every hullmod, and yet has only managed to find the Luddic Path blueprint package... twice.
    - Extremely low sample size for this, but there may also be a weird interaction with repeat/incomplete fights against dormant Remnant fleets. I did the "second in command" option against a small fleet and it took three separate attempts to fully wipe out the defending fleet. Each post-fight salvage report included the same rare loot. The lowest level AI core, to be clear, so not that rare, but I ended up with three of them from a defending fleet of four or five small Remnant ships.

    I think rare loot should only roll on the first attempt; in any case, the "keep salvaging until literally nothing comes out" is not ideal behavior, but people will end up doing it if blueprints are what are at stake.

    -  -

    Random final thoughts:

    - In early game fights where I did not have sabots, I kept seeing sabot explosions appear against enemy ships? This was early enough in the game that I definitely did not have Longbows and I tend not to use sabots normally, plus in some cases I am pretty sure I saw no missile, just the sabot cone appearing out of thin air. (I mean, that explosion is pretty distinctive, or am I overlooking a visually similar weapon?)
    - Colony economics are a bit weird right now. As other have said, they can ramp up to make too much money too quickly. Maybe limit construction to one item at a time, increase the up-front costs, or both?
    - Is it intended that star systems can spawn with zero "stable locations"? I pretty much abandoned by first game as a result of that, since flying 20- days round trip to get intel updates was becoming cumbersome. (This game was also hit by the issue where a pirate base would spawn continuously in the closest star system that had stable locations, so any attempt at using those for a comm relay would get taken by the pirates almost immediately.)


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: dandylions on November 20, 2018, 08:24:11 PM
    Oh, just to shoot myself and anyone else who uses this exploit in the foot. ;D It's been around as long as Sustained Burn has: you can blank your fleet inertia by pausing the game and double-tapping sustained burn. This allows you to change directions effectively instantly, as frequently as you want, with zero downsides.

    Interestingly, the hyperspace storm speed boost cannot be manipulated in this manner.

    And I agree that hyperspace has a bit too much weather. Or maybe too many clouds. Either way, manual control (with screen lock off) doesn't bring any real benefits for long-distance travel, in my opinion. The timing of the storms implies "surfing" is very much a valid strategy, but I'm not sure the visual cues are clear enough that this can be taken advantage of explicitly, rather than just dumb luck and timing.


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Vayra on November 20, 2018, 08:26:29 PM
    god bless you alex for not taking our black hole colonies away from us


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Alex on November 20, 2018, 08:31:05 PM
    Does the underlying simulation tie into what the default AI-controlled markets offer for sale? If so, I am seeing some signs that entire sector economy takes a nosedive beginning right around when you start a new game. While that may be intended, the overall quality of weapons/LPCs/ships starts off significantly above equilibrium at the beginning.

    To a degree - Pather cells ramp up attacks, and pirate bases grow over time, causing higher penalties to colony stability and accessibility.

    That shouldn't cause huge/widespread changes in the availability of weapons, though. Individual colonies could get crippled - say, if Pathers disrupt a spaceport, that colony is in trouble - but overall, hmm.


    ... this also led to a dynamic where the first attack set the benchmark for what I could possibly expect, and the difficulty level would only decrease after that initial fleet.

    Interesting - but later expeditions consist of a lot more fleets!

    I do think there's some funkiness around rolling for rare loot, as per Megas's earlier comments.

    - Are you certain that the rare loot salvage skill does not cause weightings to change, specifically around blueprints?

    Yep, pretty positive. I mean, bugs are possible etc, but I just re-looked at the code and stepped through with a debugger, and everything looks good.

    god bless you alex for not taking our black hole colonies away from us

    Oh, crap, how could I forget! Hotfix incoming

    Kidding, of course. Is that getting old yet?


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: Troll on November 20, 2018, 08:35:37 PM
    With the Nebula bug cleared, I currently only have one gripe left.
    When fighting Remnants at probe (or other) locations solo, there tends to be one or two that will fly away from the battle and will wander around the map, making me hunt for it, sometimes calling low CR ships to locate it.
    So far it's only the Bastion ones if I remember well / the one unique to such battles, that never appears in fleets otherwise.


    Finally started a colony in my bounty hunting focused game. Found a great Terran planet not too far from the Hegemony systems to the east. The only problem is that it is in a high danger zone, which I didn't wipe before.
    It turns out when I came back with 2 other Conquests and my whole stack of stuff I stashed in Jangala, the Remnants built a base and now the fleets are gigantic with no hope to dislodge with two or three times the firepower...
    At least the incoming pirate raid shouldn't be very successful  ;D


    Title: Re: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes
    Post by: dandylions on November 20, 2018, 09:02