Fractal Softworks Forum
Starsector => General Discussion => Topic started by: Null Ganymede on December 30, 2019, 03:30:56 PM
-
Nebula clouds slowing ships down (and affecting vision range?) were cool.
Yes the AI couldn't abuse them, whatever, they were a pretty subtle effect. More subtle than beacons are, though more impactful than asteroid fields.
-
Nebula clouds slowing ships down (and affecting vision range?) were cool.
Yes the AI couldn't abuse them, whatever, they were a pretty subtle effect. More subtle than beacons are, though more impactful than asteroid fields.
Asteroid Fields exist to block shots (they are so annoying). I've had Tachyon lance shots blocked by asteroids countless times.
-
Asteroid Fields exist to block shots (they are so annoying). I've had Tachyon lance shots blocked by asteroids countless times.
How to fight Sunder in a frigate 101: find a big asteroid, push it in front of yourself as ablative shield.
...Of course, AI is completely oblivious to stuff like this.
-
I'm fine without environmental effects. They feel a little artificial to be honest, in the same way that objective points feel artificial.
-
I enjoyed (and hated) the slowdown. I wish it was in the game still. It's one thing besides obstacles that actually affects the battlespace. I would also enjoy more CR degradation for fighting in a corona, kinetic projectile asteroids when fighting in a belt, a speed & agility hit when fighting close to a planet etc.
Edit: Totally forgot.. CR degradation in Ion Storms is already a thing. All it takes is a bit of bad luck. ;D
-
Nebula clouds slowing ships down (and affecting vision range?) were cool.
Yes the AI couldn't abuse them, whatever, they were a pretty subtle effect. More subtle than beacons are, though more impactful than asteroid fields.
+1
-
Fighting in a Corona actually does have heightened CR decay in combat, so a tiny bit of terrain still exists.
I also miss the in-combat gas clouds though, they were cool.
-
Fighting in a Corona actually does have heightened CR decay in combat, so a tiny bit of terrain still exists.
I also miss the in-combat gas clouds though, they were cool.
AI isn't keen to enter those, so it's not a good tactic for dealing with Pather fleets. Baiting them into nebulas was much easier.
-
Some of my favourite battles are against Pirate armadas because they end up with so many huge obstacles floating around. Sneaking up behind them, or carefully venting as one crosses between you and the enemy, adds a really nice tactical wrinkle.
Less frustrating than small random asteroids, too, as you can see where they are more easily! I'd love to see battles happening in wreckage fields, or dense asteroid belts.
-
I'm fine without environmental effects. They feel a little artificial to be honest, in the same way that objective points feel artificial.
Same here. If I wanted environment, I would not play a space game.
-
Exactly. Guess what's gonna surround you in a random space battle 99.99% of the time? SPACE
-
Additional tactical options make for more varied and interesting battles. It's also one of the few ways battles interact with the campaign-level map.
...If you're looking for hard sci-fi space sim, don't expect squishy meatbags to play a key role.
-
Tactical options are best served by the ships themselves. The game does this already well enough. Only the player can exploit environmental effects and I don't need to have environmental effects for varied and interesting battles. Is it really more varied and interesting to exploit nebula and asteroids?
-
...If you're looking for hard sci-fi space sim, don't expect squishy meatbags to play a key role.
I am not looking for a space sim. I want a game that plays like a classic arcade space game that does not have space trees, space swamps, space mountains, or other space terrain to make things "interesting", unless shooting them up was the point, like Asteroids. If anything, it ruins the ambience.
-
Most space is empty, but in the parts that *aren't* empty (around planets, in asteroid/salvage fields), there is scope to introduce interesting and impactful mechanics. Not hard to avoid these if you aren't a fan of them - simply don't fight in locations with a lot of local debris.
I don't think this runs counter to the aim that Alex has for combat in Starsector either. The use of nebulae and battle objectives shows that he *does* want some tactical variation across engagements. To me, the addition of larger debris would be a simple and effective tactical twist.
-
Most space is empty, but in the parts that *aren't* empty (around planets, in asteroid/salvage fields), there is scope to introduce interesting and impactful mechanics. Not hard to avoid these if you aren't a fan of them - simply don't fight in locations with a lot of local debris.
I don't think this runs counter to the aim that Alex has for combat in Starsector either. The use of nebulae and battle objectives shows that he *does* want some tactical variation across engagements. To me, the addition of larger debris would be a simple and effective tactical twist.
I agree, larger debris when in combat inside of debris fields or asteroid belts would be much more interesting, forcing players to rely on missiles and long range weapons less... although it would feel semi forced as actual debris/asteroids would be spaced pretty far apart.
-
The number of times I've seen debris from ships I've destroyed drift RIGHT into my firing arc RIGHT when I need it not to is maddening, but then again I've gotten pretty good at shieldkicking said debris right at the enemy to block at least as many of their shots so...tit for tat as they say.
Would be fascinating to see some kind of gravity gun ship that can grab asteroids and fling them hard enough to deal damage though ;D
COSMIC DODGEBALL COMMENCE!