Autofiring PD weapons should switch off from ships to target incoming missiles and bombsand about the PD_ONLY weapons tag, will be implemented?
The changes look good, especially the flux capacitor one.. 2k bonus flux on a frigate is something I've wanted, then I can fit a Hyperion with 4x AM Blasters, before I couldn't do that...
Curious that there isn't any ship balance changes in this though... Obviously time is a limiting factor, but I would have thought some ship balance may take place.
Anywho, I love new releases.
Autofiring PD weapons should switch off from ships to target incoming missiles and bombsand about the PD_ONLY weapons tag, will be implemented?
Love the supply cost changes and i cant wait to curse the accident mechanic. I dont get the extended mag nerf unless you want it to regenerate like the other ones in which case rock on.
any chance at getting this sort of think for weapons on the refit screen for example if avd. optics is on the ship the grav beam equiped shows its new range. This would useful for seeing the effect of what we put on the ship or if we have a slow weapon turn speed and we put on avd gyro be nice to see it go up to normal or high turn rate on its tab to get a feel for the inprovement without having to take it into combat to test. Or in the case of avd. optics what weapons it effects would be easyer to see.
Love the supply cost changes and i cant wait to curse the accident mechanic. I dont get the extended mag nerf unless you want it to regenerate like the other ones in which case rock on.
It seems good enough for ballistic weapons in any case (and it's cheap). But it also affects the number of "charges" for burst weapons and the Autopulse Laser - which made it incredibly OP at +100%.any chance at getting this sort of think for weapons on the refit screen for example if avd. optics is on the ship the grav beam equiped shows its new range. This would useful for seeing the effect of what we put on the ship or if we have a slow weapon turn speed and we put on avd gyro be nice to see it go up to normal or high turn rate on its tab to get a feel for the inprovement without having to take it into combat to test. Or in the case of avd. optics what weapons it effects would be easyer to see.
Hmm, it's not quite the same thing. This shows the dynamic effects you get hit with in battle, not mods you've got equipped.
*pokes at his prior post*
Not being able to collect all the ships (even if they aren't in my fleet, but rather just in storage) safely is a dealbreaker for my OCD.
Is it possible to change the beginning charges of a burst weapon or their refresh rate? The ability to regen ammo makes a huge difference esp for ballistic weapons and all you need to do is tweak their regen rate to balance it.
Until you've got the in-battle ammo replenishment system hinted at by those ammo hopper ships, I'm looking forward to getting regenerating ballistic weapons.
Er, Alex said 2 posts above yours that ballistic weapons DON'T regenerate...
This looks awesome. Any ETA on release?Alex has given us his standard release schedule :)
Hmm... this is probably already on the list of things to do that are hard, but I would love if the AI (on both sides) didn't know where every shipr was. Its perfectly fair, but means you can't really sneak units by the enemy to set up a flank or something.
Added ammo optional regeneration for weapons ("ammo/sec" in weapon_data.csv)
How compatible will this be with current mods?
but I think that this will have to be implemented in some form when phase-ships come in
Fixed bug where small missile weapons would get the "PD" flag from the Integrated Point Defense AI hull mod
Heavy Mauler: increased range, projectile speed
Seeing this post about 0.52a being indevelopment made me happy ;D Its like Alex is giving away extra birthdays for everyone
Seeing this post about 0.52a being indevelopment made me happy ;D Its like Alex is giving away extra birthdays for everyone
Well, personally I'd be happier to hear about 1.00 being in development, but yeah, any new version is good to have!
I enjoyed using integrated point defense AI mods in combination with swarmer missiles. They were like intercept missiles.
[/quote]Love the supply cost changes and i cant wait to curse the accident mechanic. I dont get the extended mag nerf unless you want it to regenerate like the other ones in which case rock on.
It seems good enough for ballistic weapons in any case (and it's cheap). But it also affects the number of "charges" for burst weapons and the Autopulse Laser - which made it incredibly OP at +100%.
And in an all Frigate and Fighter battle, the control points lose almost all meaning except for FPs and CPs (Which usually don't matter in such a small-scale fight). The Nav Beacons and Sensor Arrays that used to be essential for a winning edge are now pointless.In addition, wouldn't it basically allow situations where frigates and fighters are nearly useless in large battles? Or situations where a destroyer or maybe even a cruiser is faster than a fighter wing or a frigate?
And in an all Frigate and Fighter battle, the control points lose almost all meaning except for FPs and CPs (Which usually don't matter in such a small-scale fight). The Nav Beacons and Sensor Arrays that used to be essential for a winning edge are now pointless.In addition, wouldn't it basically allow situations where frigates and fighters are nearly useless in large battles? Or situations where a destroyer or maybe even a cruiser is faster than a fighter wing or a frigate?
...
However, I'm HATING the "Sabotage" stuff, though. It's incredibly annoying when I chase down a fleet that I purposely softened up for capture and they sabotage themselves 90% of the time. It's making the whole capture mechanic seem almost pointless as I hardly ever get anything anymore.
Well obviously he's a time-traveling ninja hacker robot zombie!He can be...... BOTH! DUN DUN DUNNNN :D
That, or he's your evil twin from an alternate universe. One of the two.
Not "useless", they're still quite good. The idea here is that in a full fleet action, the first wave of smaller ships prepares the battlefield for the larger ones, instead of simply becoming dominant on their own.But what happens once you get a few NB or SA? Wouldn't the frigates--and possibly fighters--be outmatched when the larger ships are not only outranging them, but possibly outrunning and outturning them?
Not "useless", they're still quite good. The idea here is that in a full fleet action, the first wave of smaller ships prepares the battlefield for the larger ones, instead of simply becoming dominant on their own.But what happens once you get a few NB or SA? Wouldn't the frigates--and possibly fighters--be outmatched when the larger ships are not only outranging them, but possibly outrunning and outturning them?
Once they're completely outmatched, what can the frigates--and possibly some fighter types--possibly bring to the fight to make their existence worth it?
quick ask him about any bugs, balance issues, or anything else you will have added in (then we can just skip right to .53a) [be careful about the chrono-contrdictions that conundrum can cause chaos in the construction of the continuum]
Not "useless", they're still quite good. The idea here is that in a full fleet action, the first wave of smaller ships prepares the battlefield for the larger ones, instead of simply becoming dominant on their own.But what happens once you get a few NB or SA? Wouldn't the frigates--and possibly fighters--be outmatched when the larger ships are not only outranging them, but possibly outrunning and outturning them?
Once they're completely outmatched, what can the frigates--and possibly some fighter types--possibly bring to the fight to make their existence worth it?
you could retreat them - which, imo, is perfectly fine too.
Fighters don't collide. They pretty much outmaneuver anything they can catch.Lack of collision is only a very small bonus in my opinion. They still hit and get hit by anything else.
Can we get the ability to use ships that retreated as reeinforcements again?Yeah, I think the ability to recall forces would be nice.
So that if we choose to retreat our frigates, we can field them again later if we need them?
if i'm not mistaken that's not possible right now
can i get a clarification on "charges" when it comes to the beam weapons.
does this mean a "charge" is used for every full firing of the beam, or that a full clip of charge is required to fire the beam at full strength?
well awesome, but I was asking if there was a schedule for releases and updates such as "updates are every year 'January June and september'" or like dwarf fortress like I said every January.
I've increased the armour by a factor of 5-7 across all ships in the 0.51a and that really addresses some of the balance issues the vanilla has with fighters.
Fighters are still dangerous but it's impossible to blow through an entire enemy fleet with just a few Broadsword and Thunders; without bombers or Daggers, there's no way you can kill off a cruiser(or even a brawler destroyer) without taking unacceptable losses.
MG still causes more overload than it ought to but at least with the increased armour, most ships (destroyers and above) can survive long enough that its buddies will start killing off your ships.
I recommend anyone interested in finding a quick-n-dirty solution to the current fighter dominance to give it a try.
well awesome, but I was asking if there was a schedule for releases and updates such as "updates are every year 'January June and september'" or like dwarf fortress like I said every January.
And as you were told, there isn't a regular schedule. Some patches take longer to produce, others a shorter time. In addition to that, if you'd done coding, you'd know that it's the kind of thing that's pretty hard to estimate the task length for. Updates are released when they're done. When Alex & co. are doing a major overhaul, expect it to take a couple of months or more, when they're doing more minor stuff, a couple of weeks. That's as specific as it gets, in terms of schedule.I've increased the armour by a factor of 5-7 across all ships in the 0.51a and that really addresses some of the balance issues the vanilla has with fighters.
Fighters are still dangerous but it's impossible to blow through an entire enemy fleet with just a few Broadsword and Thunders; without bombers or Daggers, there's no way you can kill off a cruiser(or even a brawler destroyer) without taking unacceptable losses.
MG still causes more overload than it ought to but at least with the increased armour, most ships (destroyers and above) can survive long enough that its buddies will start killing off your ships.
I recommend anyone interested in finding a quick-n-dirty solution to the current fighter dominance to give it a try.
That does sound like it'd make high-tech ships (that rely on shields instead of armour) and ballistic weapons and missiles (which can run out of ammo) hugely under-powered, though. Granted, I haven't tried your suggestion, but it sounds to me like the cure would be worse than the disease.
From what I can tell from the in game descriptions that constitute the "lore" Fighter dominance is kind of intentional The current technological status quo is that fighters kick ass, and old battleship designs are not configured to deal with fighter threats, and the correct response is to have either dedicated PD frigates to guard your big hitters or to shift a larger portion of big guns to PD to deal with fighters. Admittedly The AI could use some greater awareness of fighter threats and try to counter-engage them with PD frigates and so on, but it appeals to me as it stands.
I can't wait for some lower-tech stuff that can rival the high-tech ships for effectiveness get added in.
I can't wait for some lower-tech stuff that can rival the high-tech ships for effectiveness get added in.
I guess that depends, lower tech stuff usually has a lower cost to make up for being weaker. Though they could be slightly stronger.
you could retreat them - which, imo, is perfectly fine too.
Can we get the ability to use ships that retreated as reeinforcements again?
So that if we choose to retreat our frigates, we can field them again later if we need them?
if i'm not mistaken that's not possible right now
Burst PD Laser, Heavy Burst Laser, Guardian PD Laser: these now use ammo ("charges") that regenerate. Charges regenerate slower than the fire rate of the weapons, allowing a front-loaded burst of damage before slowing down to fire at the regeneration rate (rather than the actual rate of fire).Charges are a good idea but i see a problem with PD weapons. If they use all the charges versus a ship, when there is an incoming missile they will fire at it at the (slow) recharge rate, leading to a situation worst than the current one. I suggest a simple change: energy weapons that have charges and pd tag do not fire at ships unless they have more than 50% charge (or 33%).
Burst PD Laser, Heavy Burst Laser, Guardian PD Laser: these now use ammo ("charges") that regenerate. Charges regenerate slower than the fire rate of the weapons, allowing a front-loaded burst of damage before slowing down to fire at the regeneration rate (rather than the actual rate of fire).Charges are a good idea but i see a problem with PD weapons. If they use all the charges versus a ship, when there is an incoming missile they will fire at it at the (slow) recharge rate, leading to a situation worst than the current one. I suggest a simple change: energy weapons that have charges and pd tag do not fire at ships unless they have more than 50% charge (or 33%).
Burst PD Laser, Heavy Burst Laser, Guardian PD Laser: these now use ammo ("charges") that regenerate. Charges regenerate slower than the fire rate of the weapons, allowing a front-loaded burst of damage before slowing down to fire at the regeneration rate (rather than the actual rate of fire).Charges are a good idea but i see a problem with PD weapons. If they use all the charges versus a ship, when there is an incoming missile they will fire at it at the (slow) recharge rate, leading to a situation worst than the current one. I suggest a simple change: energy weapons that have charges and pd tag do not fire at ships unless they have more than 50% charge (or 33%).
I didn't even consider this. That could be a problem... I guess you might have to manually toggle their Autofire on and off to make them really effective PD if something isn't done.
That said...maybe they'll actually be effective anti-ship weapons with the "Charge" system. I mean, they aren't gonna be shredding stuff like most weapons, but maybe they'll be at least as effective against ships as other "PD" weapons like MGs.
Is there any way to play the dev/beta builds?
Lololol.Is there any way to play the dev/beta builds?
Not even Alex has access to beta builds yet.
On account of the game still being in alpha stage, you know. ;)
Ok I get 4 outta 5 in understanding the accedent system, but whays the "going over fleet points" accedent?
Ok I get 4 outta 5 in understanding the accedent system, but whays the "going over fleet points" accedent?
"Your fleet was too big to coordinate, sadly your Paragon crashed into your two Eagles... all are dead!"
Ok I get 4 outta 5 in understanding the accedent system, but whays the "going over fleet points" accedent?
"Your fleet was too big to coordinate, sadly your Paragon crashed into your two Eagles... all are dead!"
Or, the slightly less harsh version - figuring out the right types of different supplies, repair parts, etc was beyond the capacity of you and your logistics staff. In the short term, that means an unanticipated use of supplies (perhaps taking something else apart for spare parts). In the long term, poorly-maintained systems will fail. If it happens to be the ship's reactor core, well, that's the breaks.
Just a small suggestion/request if you don`t mind.
In debug mode in campaign we can unpause the game when in system map screen. Could we have this option for a normal game? Its a very useful way to navigate in the system (seeing where your target is heading, what threats are near by etc.). Just a remind - currently pressing 'space' will get the map closed.
Just a small suggestion/request if you don`t mind.
In debug mode in campaign we can unpause the game when in system map screen. Could we have this option for a normal game? Its a very useful way to navigate in the system (seeing where your target is heading, what threats are near by etc.). Just a remind - currently pressing 'space' will get the map closed.
That's going to stay dev-only for the foreseeable future, I'm afraid. Being able to unpause on the map breaks several things (encounter and accident dialogs don't show up, fleet/refit tab contents don't get updated properly, etc).
Its probably a difficult problem to address, but have any of the AI tweaks you've done improved the behavior that frontal shield ships have against missiles? The Hammerhead in particular tends to drop everything and dance like a bumblebee (best description I could think of - wagging its rear end around apparently at random) for minutes at a time when faced with missiles (LRM's in particular).
Not to mention the "I can't deal with missiles! PLZ HALP!" posterboy, the Brawler. Hell, even if the Brawler DOES catch a missile with it's forward shields, they have 1.2flux/damage point.
Not to mention the "I can't deal with missiles! PLZ HALP!" posterboy, the Brawler. Hell, even if the Brawler DOES catch a missile with it's forward shields, they have 1.2flux/damage point.
The brawler can deal with them if you give him flak guns :D barely have to worry about missiles and shields anymore.
- Tachyon Lances now deal twice the damage against allied targets.
Lier lier pants on fireQuote
- Tachyon Lances now deal twice the damage against allied targets.
No. It would *** me off to no end. :P
True, but then it loses most of it's firepower potential and is hardly the "Gunship" it's supposed to be.
I think the point of gunships are to be a massive lump of guns which do a much damage as possible before getting taken apart.True, but then it loses most of it's firepower potential and is hardly the "Gunship" it's supposed to be.
Well a ship that gets blown up quickly otherwise is just as much lost fire potential xD It's just one strategy of course, you just sit near their missile ports while the shields are up and mash the missiles at the same time as the shields. Plus you get rid of fighters pretty quick too!
Can't remember the Brawler, but I remember that long cannon that shots anywhere. Which reminds me of the Starcraft long range cannon of the Terrains. Not played any of those games in years.
That sounds like a different sort of gunship. As in 'helicopter gunship'.
The Brawler could be based on the same principle, if it got some boosted speed and, if possible, stronger "Strafing" thrusters. I think a strafing-focused ship would be pretty unique in the game and it would really give the Brawler a unique edge in combat.
Why do people think forward locked weaponry = good? It is in every single possible way worse than a turret, at least as the game is now. If the Brawler had a turrets instead of hardpoints for the medium slots it would be a viable ship as it stands, rather than pretty much the worst. Boost the shield to match other midline ships and it would be positively good!
Alex, keep it arcady and fun, don't turn it into another Battlecruiser 3000 AD.
Accidents and 90% sabotage rate look like a *** move to casual player.
limits and punishment for ignoring limits is 101% fine way to do things.
its much more better then system currently implemented in most games - hard limits without any chance to go beyond them.
90% sabotage is not fun way to fix uncrewed ships issue, pesronally i dont see any reason why ship with 399 of 400 crew cant fight and will selfdestruct (killing entire crew cos there is no single guy to carry pizza around)
or just having one supply fleet that travels between the systems?I hope it is this option, with multiple supply fleets. I would hate to see just one TT resupply fleet roaming around the (5,10,20,50?) sectors.
Hey i know this is a reach... but i was wondering if you could add the ability to make new sectors. The modding community would go nuts if you did.
Hey i know this is a reach... but i was wondering if you could add the ability to make new sectors. The modding community would go nuts if you did.
Sectors, as in a new starsystem or as in a whole new part of the galaxy?
If the former, that's going to come soon,
If the latter, :o
Hey i know this is a reach... but i was wondering if you could add the ability to make new sectors. The modding community would go nuts if you did.
Hey i know this is a reach... but i was wondering if you could add the ability to make new sectors. The modding community would go nuts if you did.
Ummm... You can already mod a new starsystem into the game as the Ironclads mod shows. On the other hand, if you're talking about having multiple star systems in the game, we all know that's coming down the road and if you can mod the single star system in the current game I don't see any reason to believe you couldn't those in the larger game to come.
other systems that you get to by hyperspace or gates or what ever?
Increased chance of uncrewed ship to be sabotaged by the enemy (instead of captured) to 90% (up from 50)
Increased chance of for each weapon of a surrendering ship to be sabotaged to 80% (up from 50)
Im talking about "multiple star systems"
Im talking about "multiple star systems"
What's your question, then? We all know it's coming, it has always been part of the design specs for the game. It's not yet in in this version or, judging by the release notes, the next one, but there is absolutely zero doubt that it's coming. I honestly don't understand the source of the confusion here.
Hey i know this is a reach... but i was wondering if you could add the ability to make new sectors. The modding community would go nuts if you did.
Sectors, as in a new starsystem or as in a whole new part of the galaxy?
If the former, that's going to come soon,
If the latter, :o
new starsystem
DO WANT!!!! Like a said modding community would go nuts.
No mentions of B5? Guh, so unknown and underrated.Babylon 5... The reason I didn't add it to that list is rather simple:
But for me Babylon 5 is the single best Sci-Fi series ever.
Alex, keep it arcady and fun, don't turn it into another Battlecruiser 3000 AD.
Accidents and 90% sabotage rate look like a *** move to casual player.
Alex, keep it arcady and fun, don't turn it into another Battlecruiser 3000 AD.
Accidents and 90% sabotage rate look like a *** move to casual player.
It should be obvious by now that this Alex isn't interested in catering to the "casual player", but is interested in creating the game he wants to. A "*** move" would be trying to force your own casual vision down a developers throat when you're in no way involved in the development.
I will say that I hate the Sabotage thing with a passion. In it's current state, there's zero way to avoid it and it really feels like the game saying "Screw you" after a hard-fought battle.
That's just my two cents on it.
I will say that I hate the Sabotage thing with a passion. In it's current state, there's zero way to avoid it and it really feels like the game saying "Screw you" after a hard-fought battle.
That's just my two cents on it.
Should've framed it as a 10% chance to thwart sabotage.
Since we're on the topic of "Biggest gripe."Really? I find myself clustering around one cap point more often than not. Maybe it's the fleets I'm using, though.
Alex: How do you plan to expand combat tactics beyond "Rush cap and hold." Every medium to large battle is focused around that one tactic. Fast ships get sent out first to get fleet points, then send in the big guns to hold the map and blow up the remaining enemy vessels.
Alex: How do you plan to expand combat tactics beyond "Rush cap and hold." Every medium to large battle is focused around that one tactic. Fast ships get sent out first to get fleet points, then send in the big guns to hold the map and blow up the remaining enemy vessels.
Yeah, it might be nicer for a little while if sabotage didn't happen. But shortly after that, you'd be swimming in ships, and any sense of accomplishment from getting them would be gone.
We need either a Heavy fighter type, or medium/heavy missile launcher slot for troop pods/assault shuttles, Marine intensive mid-combat boarding craft designed to sabotage/disable/destroy/capture vessels ( assuming they can get through shields/PD screen)Please no.
I think the point of gunships are to be a massive lump of guns which do a much damage as possible before getting taken apart.
I will say that I hate the Sabotage thing with a passion. In it's current state, there's zero way to avoid it and it really feels like the game saying "Screw you" after a hard-fought battle.
That's just my two cents on it.
Ultimately, boarding isn't supposed to be a sure-fire way to get ships, but rather a bonus if it happens. You want to get a hull reliably, you buy (or later, manufacture) it.
It's sort of like saying that you hate that uniques don't drop every time you kill an enemy in Diablo 2. Yeah, it might be nicer for a little while if sabotage didn't happen. But shortly after that, you'd be swimming in ships, and any sense of accomplishment from getting them would be gone. Also: it's your enemies saying that, not the game :)Should've framed it as a 10% chance to thwart sabotage.
I like the way you think!
Since we're on the topic of "Biggest gripe."
Alex: How do you plan to expand combat tactics beyond "Rush cap and hold." Every medium to large battle is focused around that one tactic. Fast ships get sent out first to get fleet points, then send in the big guns to hold the map and blow up the remaining enemy vessels.
Since we're on the topic of "Biggest gripe."
Alex: How do you plan to expand combat tactics beyond "Rush cap and hold." Every medium to large battle is focused around that one tactic. Fast ships get sent out first to get fleet points, then send in the big guns to hold the map and blow up the remaining enemy vessels.
I have an odd question, is there any way to create an "FX" say an explosion "self animation" form a math equation starting at 0 and with an equation with ratios and have a approx. dimension, etc. Create a (to put plainly) random fractal explosion with various deterministic fractals? Hopefully I put that fairly simply.
dear Alex and dev team.
i can't imagine that what im about to say has not been talked about to some degree already but im curious.
have you considered increesing the map size as your character gets the ability to field more command points worth of ships at a time. i think this could bring an intresting decision proccess to the game when deploying ships if you get a large enough map.
Still, this gives me an interesting idea: rebalancing the game around much shorter range engagements; cut all weapon ranges in half and see how it plays...That sounds fun, but the machinegun family would suffer greatly...
mobility is a huge deciding factor in pretty much any conflict where the target can move comparable to the agressor.
Not really sure why spaceships are as limited as they are - Certainly, absolutely terrible acceleration, but having max speeds of 40ish compared to a frigate's 150.. Then again, its probably because for some reason everyone builds ships with all the gigantic guns locked facing forwards, and they dont want to crash. But thats a completely different design philosophy to argue
Not really sure why spaceships are as limited as they are - Certainly, absolutely terrible acceleration, but having max speeds of 40ish compared to a frigate's 150.. Then again, its probably because for some reason everyone builds ships with all the gigantic guns locked facing forwards, and they dont want to crash. But thats a completely different design philosophy to argue
Big space ships are slow because it's a game. It wouldn't take long to get a capital ship up to speed and crash into the enemy's initial fleet, guns blazing. As cool as that might be, still, balance.
...
btw, does the boost to speed also effect turn rate? if it does not, then it should.
one thing that could work is have the engine boost you get with lowered shields and no weapon fire scale based on the size of the ship. The larger the ship, the more boost they get. They still shouldn't be as fast as frigates for gameplay reasons, but it can be enough to make moving large distances a bit less painful. This would make a lot of sense, because capital ships require a lot more power for combat systems, but when those systems aren't in use, they can throw that power at the engines. (this could also allow fleet's to move faster)
I usually feel like the maps are too BIG. It takes so long to get my flagship anywhere, I end up spending the first few min of a battle just slowly moving to where the battle is.
I find the AI isn't so good with capital ships so my fleets are usually me in that lovely tri-tachion carrier/battleship and a huge swarm of thunder multi-role fighters and wasp swarms.
btw, does the boost to speed also effect turn rate? if it does not, then it should.
Except for that minor bug where ships turning doesnt interact properly with weapon turn rates
Alex, to be a bit more specific: if I were to deploy 6 Auroras, their shield bubbles will be bumping all the way across the map.
............That's 107 points worth of ships.......
wow Alex replys to all other people but me lol ;D
I do have a question as it relates to the campaign and battleships-- will capital class warships be more rare in the final game? Seeing all these Paragons and Onslaughts is a little numbing-- you're impressed with their firepower at first but you get accustomed to it pretty quick. I'm hoping such warships will be impressive sights, seen only in major offensive forces every few months, or in core system defense fleets.
Ultimately, I see a single Onslaught or a Paragon as a centerpiece of a system defense fleet or an expeditionary force.
Aww, the battles will get smaller? Hopefully we'll be able to fight entire wars in the endgame..
What kind of loadout makes an Odyssey outperform a Conquest? Maybe I'm loading them out wrong but my Conquest has significantly more firepower due to its more numerous weapon slots and higher OP capacity. I only have medium/heavy guns on one side of the thing to save OP and a broadside from it is a devastating storm of bullets. Meanwhile energy weapons don't seem all that impressive when it comes to raw, sustained damage output (especially because hiding behind your shield + high weapon flux output are a big risk, the ballistic-based ships can afford lowering the shields and taking some armor hits). Comparing a Conquest to a Paragon is nonsense of course since the Conquest is a battlecruiser and the Paragon a battleship. I haven't piloted an Onslaught so I cannot comment on its power.
What kind of loadout makes an Odyssey outperform a Conquest? [...] I only have medium/heavy guns on one side of the thing to save OP
... Twin plasma cannons are absolutely amazing at shattering armour, they completely outclass any ballistic option. ...
You'd have to spend FP to field it though. The Odyssey is a fantastic ship in that it can be a decent line ship but also provide a very close rearming site for fighters.
Well that reminds me of a point I was going to bring up. ATM the capital ships are massively unbalanced with the paragon and the odyssey capital ships wiping the floor with the conquest and the onslaught. I feel all the capital ships should be more balanced than they currently are or at least the main ones (ie one for each faction).
And its not so much unlimited speed i want- Just a lot faster. If battleships has a max speed of closer to ~100, but still their current acceleration, it wouldnt change that much *in combat*, as you would never actually BE at 100 speed, except for moving between areas of combat
what about this?Burst PD Laser, Heavy Burst Laser, Guardian PD Laser: these now use ammo ("charges") that regenerate. Charges regenerate slower than the fire rate of the weapons, allowing a front-loaded burst of damage before slowing down to fire at the regeneration rate (rather than the actual rate of fire).Charges are a good idea but i see a problem with PD weapons. If they use all the charges versus a ship, when there is an incoming missile they will fire at it at the (slow) recharge rate, leading to a situation worst than the current one. I suggest a simple change: energy weapons that have charges and pd tag do not fire at ships unless they have more than 50% charge (or 33%).
So what does the new burst laser mechanic mean for the guardian pd? :D Let's all speculate wildly until we get an official answer!
what about this?Burst PD Laser, Heavy Burst Laser, Guardian PD Laser: these now use ammo ("charges") that regenerate. Charges regenerate slower than the fire rate of the weapons, allowing a front-loaded burst of damage before slowing down to fire at the regeneration rate (rather than the actual rate of fire).Charges are a good idea but i see a problem with PD weapons. If they use all the charges versus a ship, when there is an incoming missile they will fire at it at the (slow) recharge rate, leading to a situation worst than the current one. I suggest a simple change: energy weapons that have charges and pd tag do not fire at ships unless they have more than 50% charge (or 33%).
Content:
Added music (written by Stian Stark, one track so far)
New graphics for the Hellbore and the Hephaestus Assault Gun
New graphics for Flak, Dual Flak, Light Assault Gun
Added new large ballistic weapon: "Mark IX Autocannon"
Adjusted several variants to use it, made available in campaign (pirate base)
@Changes as of April 12, 2012
WANT
Sabot SRM: reduced the accuracy of the 2nd stage projectile
@Changes as of April 12, 2012
WANT
Autofiring PD weapons should switch off from ships to target incoming missiles and bombs
So good.
How is "AI fleets will dump excess resources and go back to base to resupply when necessary" script controlled? What do "resupply" means?
Great job on the upcoming patch.
This one is confusing. The second stage is already fairly tricky to get it to hit. Maybe there's some underlying improvement to how it leads targets that makes this necessary? Maybe I'm not supposed to be shooting sabots at anything faster than a capital ship? Dunno. I guess we'll see.
either.QuoteAutofiring PD weapons should switch off from ships to target incoming missiles and bombs
Quick question: Does this fix change any behaviour of small non-PD weapons with the 'Integrated point defense AI' hullmod active?
How is "AI fleets will dump excess resources and go back to base to resupply when necessary" script controlled? What do "resupply" means?
So is this coming in the next week? :). Or month. :(
Or just SoonTM. :|
So is this coming in the next week? :). Or month. :(I'd bet next week. But don't count on it. The hardest part is the testing.
Or just SoonTM. :|
So is this coming in the next week? :). Or month. :(
Or just SoonTM. :|
You sir, made my day. (night actually, but well... it doesn't sound appropriate :P )So is this coming in the next week? :). Or month. :(
Or just SoonTM. :|
you missed a few.. here let me help :P
yoctosecond
zeptosecond
attosecond (shortest time now measurable)
femtosecond
picosecond (http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2011/trillion-fps-camera-1213.html) the speed of that camera 1 frame every picosecond
nanosecond
microsecond
millisecond
second
minute
hour
day
week
fortnight
lunar month
month
quarter
common year (365 days)
leap year (366 days)
tropical year (365.24219 days (average))
Gregorian year (365.2425 days(average))
Olympiad (4 years) now you know why its called the Olympics and why there every 4 years.
lustrum (5 years ( also called a pentad))
decade
Indiction (15 years)
Score (20 years ("four score and seven years ago" ... Exactly how many of you knew that, that whole thing was referring to a unit of time in that speach eh.))
generation (17-35 years)
jubilee (Biblical) (50 years)
century (i hope i dont have to tell you that one)
millennium ( or that one)
exasecond ( second??? must be short.... nope its about 32 billion years)
cosmological decade (10 times the length of the previous cosmological decade, with CÐ 1 beginning either 10 seconds or 10 years after the Big Bang, depending on the definition.)
Nanostrike, you tweaked that ship a tad too much imho. No offense ;).
thunders being reduced from 3 - 2 =X
Oh no... :o
You sir, made my day. (night actually, but well... it doesn't sound appropriate :P )
Now I know how to make my exam look like being forever from now - I still have 2.4192x1030 yoctoseconds left!
This is better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pele5vptVgc&feature=related
Yeesss, music. Been waiting for this one for a while.
Couple questions about it:
When does the track play? (On the main menu, battles, flying around the system?)
Not sure how exactly music handling is set up, but is it possible to add multiple music tracks via modding, or will we only be able to replace the one that's already ingame?
Right now it's using some dirty, dirty hacks :)
For now, it plays in the main menu and in the campaign, but not during battles. Also for now, it's not moddable, not even in the "replace the track with something else" way. It certainly will be, though - I plan to add that just as soon as we've got more than one track. Right now it's using some dirty, dirty hacks :)Aww, that's too bad. Hopefully the one track you have is good, then :P
Aww, that's too bad. Hopefully the one track you have is good, then :P
(Actually, is it that "sflvl01d-trailer.ogg" piece of music that's in the game files already?)
Right now it's using some dirty, dirty hacks :)
I've made entire games at work that feel this way, haha. I feel you, Brother.
Wait, you develop games?
Never knew that, actully :)
Awesome ;)
Alex give us a preview of the song! :D
Why remove the pd laser?
- Dagger: changed shield to omni-directional, removed PD laser
Probably because it enabled them to cope with interceptors far too well.Why remove the pd laser?
- Dagger: changed shield to omni-directional, removed PD laser
Even if they are bombers they should have a chance to defend themselves
Even if they are bombers they should have a chance to defend themselves
that's the thing though, they weren't using it for defense, they were using it for offense, which got them killed 100% of the time because they have such weak armor and non omni-shielding, and are pretty slow.
Just wondering i know its far off but how long before we have multiple solar systems?
About the Daggers:
The new omni shield they got led to a big survivability increase - so much so that they utterly dominated a wing of Broadswords 1-1, never mind the lighter interceptors. So now, they certainly have a chance to *defend* themselves - just not annihilate incoming fighters and interceptors without breaking a sweat. Overall, it's a significant Dagger buff.
With. Fighter vs. fighter is very armor and shield based (aside from extreme maneuverability or a lack of it), so broadswords, having no shield, probably just couldn't do any damage to Daggers while Daggers slowly chew through their armor with lasers. Just my in-mind-simulation.About the Daggers:
The new omni shield they got led to a big survivability increase - so much so that they utterly dominated a wing of Broadswords 1-1, never mind the lighter interceptors. So now, they certainly have a chance to *defend* themselves - just not annihilate incoming fighters and interceptors without breaking a sweat. Overall, it's a significant Dagger buff.
was that with or without the pd laser
Without, they have no weapon at all and would be hard pressed to kill much of anything :)
I was looking through the notes and wondering if you thinking about making a Medium version of the Swarmer missiles.
About the Daggers:
The new omni shield they got led to a big survivability increase - so much so that they utterly dominated a wing of Broadswords 1-1, never mind the lighter interceptors. So now, they certainly have a chance to *defend* themselves - just not annihilate incoming fighters and interceptors without breaking a sweat. Overall, it's a significant Dagger buff.
I'd actually like to see a railgun on the longbow, to give it more of a purpose in the escort role. It seems like it would add a lot of functionality to the longbow.That sounds good. Makes the Longbow not have to go rearm every time it uses it's sabot missiles. =)
... /offtopicHell no! Would that not make us more impatient once we know every time he starts to code something?
Wouldn't it be cool if Alex tweeted everytime he started coding something or fixing something different? Maybe we'd be less impatient then.
Well, I prefer a loading bar which tells me what's going on than a loading bar which sits there doing nothing..
Soon(C)
or
As Soon As It Ready(C)
Will there be any way to increase Fleet Size in campaign?
If there's a prophecy to do with Starfarer's patch release schedule, I WANT TO SEE ITSoon(C)
or
As Soon As It Ready(C)
In The Right Place, At The Right Time, In Accordance With Prophecy(C).
We seek the Answer to the Question! The great question- of Life, the Universe, and the Next Update!
...What do you mean, Soon (TM)?!
there is no reasons why player may not have more then 200 FP fleet, artifical limits is not fun for sandbox game.
there is no reasons why player may not have more then 200 FP fleet, artifical limits is not fun for sandbox game.
there is no reasons why player may not have more then 200 FP fleet, artifical limits is not fun for sandbox game.You have to consider what that would do to gameplay, being able to amass an infinitely large fleet will at some point go unchallenged by the AI, unless you counter it with an possibly as large fleet, and then you run the risk of getting into fights against an AI that could so greatly outnumber you it becomes impossible to win. Plus any continues wins and losses can greatly upset any balance in the long run with a setup like this. It's very hard to balance something like this and it does not guarantee the player anymore of a fun experience then having limited sized fleets.
Oh, and the cargo limits mean that if you want to carry loot you'll have to slow your whole fleet down with a cargo ship.
Oh, and the cargo limits mean that if you want to carry loot you'll have to slow your whole fleet down with a cargo ship.
Nice work guys!
Just a question.
How do I update when I've already preordered/purchursed Starfarer
Thanks.
Well hounds ARE supposed to be tramp freighters.
I'm perfectly fine lugging Hounds around. They make good, hardy point cappers and excellent swarm attackers. And it's not hard to get 10 of them.(http://files.sharenator.com/release_the_hounds_RE_Anonymous_Sends_An_Open_Letter_To_The_Westboro_Baptist_Church-s272x348-234111.jpg)
Hounds are damned good at kiting and rather annoying while they do it.
hound is overpowered in it's current stage, its very large fighter with medium mount that able to outrun most missiles and nonbeam weapons.
hound is overpowered in it's current stage, its very large fighter with medium mount that able to outrun most missiles and nonbeam weapons.
...wanders into rage of any opponents...
I was primarily a high-tech guy, but then I decided to try a solo Enforcer fleet. Dual flak in the sides, heavy mauler up front, dual hypervelocity drivers on the diagonals, four single Harpoon MRMs, and Hardened Shields. There's something just so satisfying about laughing off beam damage (thanks to thick armor) while simultaneously overloading their shields from well outside their effective range. The dual flaks make you essentially immune to missiles and tear fighters apart.
Eff numbers crunching, just play the game.Actually naufrago makes a darn good point.
Eff numbers crunching, just play the game.
Also for the record, I did the number crunching while I was on the toilet because I was curious about how useful Hardened Shields was. Not much better things to do while sitting around.
And to Catra, the difference between 12 capacitors and Hardened shields on the Enforcer is only about 100 EHP, and the flux you get from the caps could also be used to fire the guns longer.
QuoteAnd to Catra, the difference between 12 capacitors and Hardened shields on the Enforcer is only about 100 EHP, and the flux you get from the caps could also be used to fire the guns longer.
yeah and? its still an overall performance boost, which is all that matters, if you don't think so then state why not. and being able to fire your guns longer doesnt mean a thing when your shields cause you to overload faster when having to defend a section.
QuoteAnd to Catra, the difference between 12 capacitors and Hardened shields on the Enforcer is only about 100 EHP, and the flux you get from the caps could also be used to fire the guns longer.
yeah and? its still an overall performance boost, which is all that matters, if you don't think so then state why not. and being able to fire your guns longer doesnt mean a thing when your shields cause you to overload faster when having to defend a section.
He did state why not. HS offers 100 EHP while 12 capacitors not only can help out with shielding, but with shooting as well. His conclusion was that the dual benefit of capacitors outweigh HS's 100 EHP.
Interesting points about HS. Something else to consider regarding HS vs capacitors: the damage decreased by HS just disappears, while damage absorbed by extra capacitors still needs to be dissipated.Hmm, good point.
also, that's not stating why not. that's just stating an conclusion.
For a cost of 30 OP, you get the effect of over 100 capacitors. You'll find that with a more skilled crew, the effects of HS are even more dramatic.
For a cost of 30 OP, you get the effect of over 100 capacitors. You'll find that with a more skilled crew, the effects of HS are even more dramatic.
The capacitors are also affected by the efficiency and crew. 14000 shield HP at 0.6 efficiency is 84 capacitors. Still large, not that large. (New version: 42 capacitors.)
Also shield efficiencies may be step functioned. 0.6 * 0.75 = 0.45. That may actually be 0.5 or 0.4, in game.
If it is only displayed in steps and actually calculated precisely, then hardened shields is worth exactly 1/3 flux capacity in HP in all cases.
I will also suggest taking into account firing time. Even if flux/3 is more than you'd get out of capacitors, it still means you can keep the shield up under fire for 33% longer. If you lose more than 33% of your flux dissipation to get hardened shields, HS gimps your firepower to make the ship tanky.
I guess what I'm saying is, I like that this gives some solid, significant choices.Yes, I love that this is always there. In pretty much every aspect of play.
For a cost of 30 OP, you get the effect of over 100 capacitors. You'll find that with a more skilled crew, the effects of HS are even more dramatic.
The capacitors are also affected by the efficiency and crew. 14000 shield HP at 0.6 efficiency is 84 capacitors. Still large, not that large. (New version: 42 capacitors.)
Also shield efficiencies may be step functioned. 0.6 * 0.75 = 0.45. That may actually be 0.5 or 0.4, in game.
If it is only displayed in steps and actually calculated precisely, then hardened shields is worth exactly 1/3 flux capacity in HP in all cases.
I will also suggest taking into account firing time. Even if flux/3 is more than you'd get out of capacitors, it still means you can keep the shield up under fire for 33% longer. If you lose more than 33% of your flux dissipation to get hardened shields, HS gimps your firepower to make the ship tanky.
Oh derp. Yah, definitely forgot to apply the efficiency to the effect of capacitors in the case of the Paragon. Pretty big error on my part, but the point still stands, although not quite as dramatically. Also, I agree with your point about how the shield efficiency might be a step function, which would definitely change things a bit. Some official word on that would be nice. Also, it would be nice to know exactly how much the skill level of the crew affects shield efficiency.
Alex brings up a good point, too. I guess the choice between Hardened Shields and more capacitors is basically an argument of more effective vents vs. more immediate flux available at the expense of longer venting times. In that case, it really comes down to playstyle and the situation, with no clear winner. Still, with the buff to capacitors in the next release, they definitely seem preferable to HS (for enforcers).
EDIT: Also, these arguments completely ignore what else you could do with the 12 OP. Assuming it's equipped with the weapons Temjin mentioned in his post, it would use 64 OP, leaving 36 OP to play with. That means there's a lot of flexibility in where those points can go. Hell, you could get Hardened shields AND max capacitors if you wanted, but that limits your vents. I guess what I'm saying is, I like that this gives some solid, significant choices.
Thanks for not letting the arguments get too out of hand. It's appreciated by everyone, especially when things get a bit heated. We're all civil ladies and gentlemen here. *adjusts monocle*
Thanks for not letting the arguments get too out of hand. It's appreciated by everyone, especially when things get a bit heated. We're all civil ladies and gentlemen here. *adjusts monocle*
Here here! * sips tea *
...Thanks for not letting the arguments get too out of hand. It's appreciated by everyone, especially when things get a bit heated. We're all civil ladies and gentlemen here. *adjusts monocle*
Updated patch notes. Likely the last update before 0.52a is out - mostly small tweaks and testing from here on out. Projected release of 0.52a is sometime next week... unless it's not.
Conquest: increased flux capacity and dissipation, greatly reduced shield efficiency
UI improvements:
- For UI consistency, pressing TAB no longer closes the map when on the map tab
Refit screen: seems to be a bit of information missing from it, correct me if im blind but there's information that just doesn't show on refit and i find myself going to the fleet tab just to check it. this could be easily remedied by allowing the mouseover of a ship on the sidebar to show the same info as it would when in the fleet or buy/sell screen.
Fighters: having dead individual fighters be rebuilt even after they have been destroyed feels a tad cheaty when repairing them out of battle takes some time and sucks when your the on the receiving end. maybe it should only repair planes that are still alive? Maybe if you have more fighters in the hangars of the same type, it simply launches those in its place? Re-arming could still work the same, tho i have yet another nit pick about that relating to how my carrier can rearm a billion dagger wings with torpedos but if it uses torpedo launchers itself its cargo hold is suddenly empty of them when it runs out. In the same vein, my fighter heavy fleet only has half its hangars full, perhaps hangars on ships should be made a little rarer or more costly in terms of balance, requiring dedicated carriers to carry around a legion of the buggers. For example, my apogee has 20 hangars, an Odyssey had 30 and an astral has 50. Should an apogee really have that many fighters on-board only itself? And why would you be using 20 hangars worth of fighters without a flight deck on the field anyway, it seems like a bit of a waste of resources.
:'(
- For UI consistency, pressing TAB no longer closes the map when on the map tab
Conquest: increased flux capacity and dissipation, greatly reduced shield efficiencyBut... wouldn't that make the ship's shield effectively as bad as some lower tech ships and freighters? And wouldn't it make the shield worse than an Atlas or Onslaught shield despite a Conquest being higher tech? Not that it's wrong, but... I'm not 100% sure on it.
Hammerhead: increased arc of medium hardpoints to 10 degrees (up from 5)...Personally, I thought the Hammerhead was already awesome, but I'm not complaining!
For UI consistency, pressing TAB no longer closes the map when on the map tabPersonally, I like hitting tab again to close it. It allows me to take a quick peek and then exit it with minimal effort. :-\
-Added "Run Simulation" option to the refit screen (deploys current variant, lets you pick some opponents)
-Opponents that can be picked for the simulation available from the refit screen can be set in data/campaign/sim_opponents.csv
Ammo counter now shows 4 digits
Hammerhead: increased arc of medium hardpoints to 10 degrees (up from 5)
Where would the music for travelling be specified? In the modgen our .json file for sound?
Where would the music for travelling be specified? In the modgen our .json file for sound?
I believe it was said that this is close to hardcoded at the moment, it will eventually be normally moddable, but the framework for that isn't in place yet.
Storage! Finally, somewhere were we can store our stuff safely - or can we? Will pirates be able to break into the storage facility and steal our stuff?I doubt it. Wouldn't be much use then. :) I think it's probably security by obscurity. Been pillaged so many times no one bothers anymore.
Alex, we want a very meaningful and inspiring post for the 2000th (number of posts).Chances are, it'll be like this:
Quote from: Some random dudeLol maybe you should add deathstar lolololNo, it does not fit in the game lore at all and in general it just doesn't fit.
Added "Run Simulation" option to the refit screen (deploys current variant, lets you pick some opponents)
I think it's probably security by obscurity.
I love all the new changes, but the ones related to modding in general are making me squeal with joy. I said this before, but I'll say it again: Alex, I love you.
Oh, quick question: will we be able to run simulations off of devmode's "Edit Variants" screen on the main menu? If so, that'd be awesome.
YES! Spoken like a true programmer.
Re: Tab not closing the map anymore:I was skeptical of it at first but then I thought this may just be a good thing, will probably force people to rely on either the Esc key or the Space key more which can be a good thing, gives a more smooth experience.
I'm not sure about that one either. Expect it to change again at some point. It just was weird to have F/R/I close the window while you were at station, and the shortcuts all ought to work the same. I'll give it a bit more thought.
I was skeptical of it at first but then I thought this may just be a good thing, will probably force people to rely on either the Esc key or the Space key more which can be a good thing, gives a more smooth experience.I disagree strongly. Generally, forcing people to do something one way is always bad except when there's very little advantages in what they were doing and it had very serious disadvantages. As it stands, as I mentioned, using tab to exit allows you to check, then exit the screen in a few seconds, so it still has advantages. And I'm certain it has no disadvantages by itself.
Well, I actually changed it again yesterday. Right now all the shortcuts, including tab, will toggle the current tab - unless you're at a station, in which case they won't.Umnm...so if you're in the current tab, e.g. the Cargo Tab, and you press I, the tab will go out and back to system travel? If so, yay! ;D
Not sure whether this will end up being confusing due to the inconsistency, too. Ah, the joys of UI work.
The disadvantage is that it isn't consistent with the rest of the controls.But is that actually a problem from the Tab key itself, or is it a problem because of the current layout of keys?
Well, I actually changed it again yesterday. Right now all the shortcuts, including tab, will toggle the current tab - unless you're at a station, in which case they won't.That doesn't sound to bad to me, having two ways to exit things. It's not like it'll kill anybody. Let's give it a try. If three or less people complain about it, chances are it wasn't a bad choice.
Not sure whether this will end up being confusing due to the inconsistency, too. Ah, the joys of UI work.
<good stuff>
:D
Abandoned storage facility, refit screen firing arcs, and 4-digit ammo counter!
Ah, the joys of UI work.
Well, I actually changed it again yesterday. Right now all the shortcuts, including tab, will toggle the current tab - unless you're at a station, in which case they won't.All according to my plans. *evil grin* Mwha-ha-ha-ha!
Not sure whether this will end up being confusing due to the inconsistency, too. Ah, the joys of UI work.
Missiles no longer "cheat" by being able to acquire targets through fog of war
Nothing is more under appreciated than good UI. It's cool that you are even talking to us about your thoughts on UI changes and taking in feedbacks.
the patch is out? where do i dl? D:
the patch is out? where do i dl? D:
<-- Now the Avatar fits the Title.
the patch is out? where do i dl? D:
<-- Now the Avatar fits the Title.
???
The ending ruined it all for me.the patch is out? where do i dl? D:
<-- Now the Avatar fits the Title.
???
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfMe9MBGHsY
*____*
I'm still of the idea that ME3 was a masterpiece.
But... but... I have to get work done tomorrow! Crap!
From Alexes twitter: @Uomoz87 Indeed! On to release candidates a bit more testing (hoping for a release tomorrow, barring something unexpected - knock on wood).*licks chops*
- Added option to repair your fleet at non-hostile orbital stations. Still costs supplies, but not credits.
But... but... I have to get work done tomorrow! Crap!
From Alexes twitter: @Uomoz87 Indeed! On to release candidates a bit more testing (hoping for a release tomorrow, barring something unexpected - knock on wood).
I don't like this analogy, because if I recall, it did not end well for Red Leader :)
Finally, 1000-stack sizes! That's my favorite part so far. ;DYou can edit stack sizes already.
EDIT:
excuse the language, but:
*** YES!!!! IMPROVED CAMPAIGN FLEET RENDERING!!!
I'm gonna love this game even more... ;)
Midterms? What? This is finals week..
But Alex Isin't blizzard. If It's a Monday, and he says tomorrow, it dosent mean a Tuesday next year.
fractalSW is not valve i hope.
- Added an abandoned storage facility in orbit around the sun-scorched world of Covrus I
YEah, I've been busy for the last month or so. And I'm still currently busy through next week, at the very least >.<:D
Abandoned storage facility, refit screen firing arcs, and 4-digit ammo counter!
Long time no see, avan :D
Yeah, can't wait for the new patch, especially since it dosen't crash anything mod-related ;D
Well, I just replaced my dodgy hotlinking with Photobucket goodness, so perhaps the increased reliability will somehow make up for Red Leader's fiery demise. ::)
Well, I just replaced my dodgy hotlinking with Photobucket goodness, so perhaps the increased reliability will somehow make up for Red Leader's fiery demise. ::)
Who knew that even in the grim darkness of the future, hotlinking was still the cause of... wait, sorry, wrong universe.
Yeah, 0.52a is out. Grab it here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2012/05/01/starfarer-0-52a-release/).
FUBAR!!!
0.52a is out????
*faints*
EDIT: Will the release overwrite the mods folder, making us download all mods again? :)
Do we have to reinstall the mods or can we just change the core and keep the mods???
Do we have to reinstall the mods or can we just change the core and keep the mods???
I'd make a copy of the mods folder just to be safe, but in theory the installer should keep it around.
Well, I just replaced my dodgy hotlinking with Photobucket goodness, so perhaps the increased reliability will somehow make up for Red Leader's fiery demise. ::)
Who knew that even in the grim darkness of the future, hotlinking was still the cause of... wait, sorry, wrong universe.
Yeah, 0.52a is out. Grab it here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2012/05/01/starfarer-0-52a-release/).
Thanks again alex. Time for time off work...
thank you for releasing this when you did, i was just about to re-watch evangelion, now my sleepless nights is caused by good things, not because of..that :P
Thanks again alex. Time for time off work...
Now you're making me feel partly responsible for the downturn in the global economy.
No worries my server is off line and my manager is on vacation for a week.
:-[
I got nothing else goin on... ;D
Yeah I'ma have to wait for the weekend to play probably. LAME. :)
Giggity!
What's next? Please say officers/character development.
Will you be releasing a soundtrack? I would definitely pay money for it.
What's next? Please say officers/character development.
"music":{
...
"music_combat":[
# does not work for now
{"file":"StianStark-Starfarer-Exploration_Alpha.ogg","source":"sounds/music/music.bin"}
...
ACK! So now when I buy a new ship it comes without any default weapons... I just *** my game over.It's been like that since the last patch, mate. ;D
This might seem unrelated but:That's never unrelated.
MYAA!!
Sooo. Where is the link? Or do i miss something?http://fractalsoftworks.com/blog/
EDIT:
Now I know why Alex said it doesn't works. Because it doesn't works flawless.
Adding multiple soundtracks to title makes them play, but sometimes one soundtrack shutdown other one and no music played at all.
If you playing campaign, so even after battle, "battle" music continues to play.
I have added "separateRecoilForLinkedBarrels":"TRUE", in the wpn file but doesn't seem to work.
Great wee game.Just make sure to jettison any extra cargo (NEVER supplies, you'll need them for the extra cargo) and you're in the green. But turning of accidents would be nice for all of us to get a grip on it.
Is there any way a noob like me can toggle accidents off while I get a grip on the game. I die too much to be frittering my money away on supply ships. :-[
Is there any way a noob like me can toggle accidents off while I get a grip on the game. I die too much to be frittering my money away on supply ships. :-[
Is there any way a noob like me can toggle accidents off while I get a grip on the game. I die too much to be frittering my money away on supply ships. :-[
The only viable way to disable the incidents without touching the gameplay is adding hard limits. No ty ;)
Yeah but that way you would "touch" the gameplay. The Incident system is a clever way to put limits to the players, it's a design choice. I don't see a *no limits* slider in the foreseeable future.
Guys, guys :)
Right now, there's no way to turn off accidents. I don't see making that a toggleable option in the future (it's too much a part of the core game for that), but I do see exposing it to mods.
You know what I just noticed? Depending on the station you buy a ship from, it has the specific faction tag in front of it (e.g. "HSS" or "TTS"). Now, I'm not sure if that was in the last patch, but it's the little things that count. ;DAlso noticed that, and now I find myself looking only for those with "ISS". I'd be ashamed inside if I used anything not being mid-tech :D
You can still change it in the refit tab, near the bottom-left hand corner. I just though I had to mention the name, tough. ;)Yeah I know that ;) What I also noticed is that when you change fitting of given ship, it changes it's variant to "custom" (unless you name it otherwise), rather than staying as it was before (when you bought/boarded it).
Hmm, ok, so if we cant turn off accidents, is there some way, in small scale battles, to not get your freighters to come to the battlefield?
Lost 2 so far due to them not retreating fast enough to escape fighters.
Also, Alex - when I found about the new space station UI, and used it... Man, you made my dreams come true! It's SO MUCH EASIER now to do all the refitting, selling, heck, I can even buy weapons from the BLOODY REFIT SCREEN. As TheSoldier said, it's the little things that count, and I'd be damned if you weren't good at that Alex ;)
One day I'd like to understand sound design. I like the new ones, but probably just because they're new. This happens to me a lot; I seem to be pretty much indifferent to sounds per se. (Sensitive to novelty, though.) Still, props to Matt(?).
Hmm, ok, so if we cant turn off accidents, is there some way, in small scale battles, to not get your freighters to come to the battlefield?
Lost 2 so far due to them not retreating fast enough to escape fighters.
Hmm, ok, so if we cant turn off accidents, is there some way, in small scale battles, to not get your freighters to come to the battlefield?
Lost 2 so far due to them not retreating fast enough to escape fighters.
No - but hey, if you order them to retreat, then you get to cover their retreat - it's like a mini escort mission! I'm not just trying to be facetious here - it's an added degree of difficulty, sure, but I don't see that as a bad thing.
it's not really micro. You manage a couple variables and trash stuff as needed. Or you could just stop looting stuff you don't need. Not sure why you're so antagonistic about it.
EDIT: I do agree that small engagements are annoying though. I'd not mind at all being able to pick which ships to deploy even in smaller ones. But it's NOT so hard to retreat ships that I'd complain about it.
I would assume that this is a short-term solution - it makes no sense, now that ships can explode if you're carrying too much fuel, that you'd ever risk your freighters in a small engagement that you've initiated. Why wouldn't we just leave the freighters 5 "map lengths" behind the main fleet while engaging those two wings of fighters?
Edit: Also manually retreating every ship detracts from the action enough as it is, I don't know why I'd want to do it for freighters at the start of every combat too.
"Accidents" doesn't seem to add much for me as a player except micromanagement so I'll wait a few more versions before upgrading for the time being I think. Enjoying the prev release very much so far, keep it up guys.
Edit: Also manually retreating every ship detracts from the action enough as it is, I don't know why I'd want to do it for freighters at the start of every combat too.
"Accidents" doesn't seem to add much for me as a player except micromanagement so I'll wait a few more versions before upgrading for the time being I think. Enjoying the prev release very much so far, keep it up guys.
The same technobabble reasons that allow you to actually force an engagement in space probably apply :) Let's say that leaving the freighters alone would leave them vulnerable to the enemy splitting forces and taking them out with impunity, or something else of that nature. Ultimately, you can always come up with explanations that either make sense, or ones that don't. It's entirely up to you which route you choose to go.
Not "every" combat - just the smaller ones. I don't find it much trouble, honestly - and lots of freighters can be kitted out to be both survivable and highly useful in small-scale combat. A Light Needler or even a Light AC on a Tarsus, for example, turns it into a half-decent support ship - and stocking up on capacitors lets it survive pretty well.
Your call, of course, but I think you're rather overestimating the amount of management needed to avoid accidents.
Antagonistic? Here to offer opinions, that's all. Isn't that the idea?
This makes sense, and I can see what you're trying to do. I guess in my mind since you can see the composition and location of all fleets in the system and the fleet you're engaging is undoubtedly "in front" of yours, it would make sense to just park your high-risk assets in the back row.
Retreating in its current state gets to me a bit. I might be missing something but there are situations where I can't actually find and click on the fighter group on the map to see whether it's dying because I can't zoom in enough or the camera is being shifty. The player also gets the greatest benefit from pausing and checking more frequently (tab -> check fighter group 1, check fighter group 2, check frigate in that current combat, etc. Fight for a bit, repeat) which seems to put unnecessary halts on the combat (unlike pausing and giving constructive orders, which makes me feel like I'm actually achieving something positive. Keeping in mind that this is currently without carriers and that might dissipate the situation somewhat. I'd rather be able to give my ships orders to retreat if below X% and use an automated interrupt rather than a human-polling system.
Retreating in its current state gets to me a bit. I might be missing something but there are situations where I can't actually
Fair point, and I'll give it a shot, but I can't see it adding fun (for me) so the desire is not there. It's likely that it's around to add challenge to those who are past the point of just trying not to explode, and I'm not quite there yet. :)
No argument there, it can be fiddly - but it's an entirely different issue. The "retreat freighters at the start of small battle" doesn't suffer from this - since everything is spread out nicely - and takes about as long as picking what to deploy would.
Right, fair enough - though surely, *something* had to be done to enforce limits. I do think you would be missing out on other features that'd make your life easier, though.
Oh, also - didn't realize this was your first post - hi, and welcome to the forum!
Or maybe it's just a simple leftover in our minds - that we didn't have to obey the limits. I for one, tried to obey them in .51a, and it seems to pay now - it's not a problem for me to manage my supplies and cargo, because it feels (and felt before) reasonable. It's a bit tricky when starting new game, but hey, what do you expect to carry with one frigate and maybe a fighter wing ;)
Remind me what the procedure for installing a new version is? uninstall over the old version or install over the top?
I only had a chance to play around for about 20 minutes last night. Is the difficulty level much higher, or is it that I'm a bit rusty from not having played in a while? I mean, I was flying a Lasher and I got owned by a Buffalo Mk II!I actually find it easier. Weird.
I have added "separateRecoilForLinkedBarrels":"TRUE", in the wpn file but doesn't seem to work.
Ah, sorry! Looking at the code again, it's using this to set the wrong value in the weapon spec. Argh. Fixed in the dev build, but that's not much good to you just now.
A lone fighter has zero hangar capacity. It will inevitably have an accident, as it takes up at least 3. Accidents can go up to the loss of a ship. Or wing, in this case.Can't be, I'm over my hangar capacity and I'm not getting any chance of accidents.
Maybe you are below 50% over your capacity? Try having zero hangar space ;) Then everything above 0 is more than 50%, thus increasing accident risk.A lone fighter has zero hangar capacity. It will inevitably have an accident, as it takes up at least 3. Accidents can go up to the loss of a ship. Or wing, in this case.Can't be, I'm over my hangar capacity and I'm not getting any chance of accidents.
I checked this. Apparently hangar space doesn't have the 50% accident cutoff - you can go much higher, possibly infinitely high.Yup. As soon as your supplies are gone, better head to a station.
However, it still cranks up the supply/day cost. Once the supplies are gone, the accidents should start.
I checked this. Apparently hangar space doesn't have the 50% accident cutoff - you can go much higher, possibly infinitely high.Is it fully intended, or just Alex missing one detail in code?
However, it still cranks up the supply/day cost. Once the supplies are gone, the accidents should start.
Edit: Oh yeah, and fighters have no cargo space either, so they'll get accidents on the supplies...
I realized once I saw it that putting in the 50% limit on hangars would break a lot of the existing campaign fleets. Even if it wasn't intended, it's a good idea.
No - but hey, if you order them to retreat, then you get to cover their retreat - it's like a mini escort mission! I'm not just trying to be facetious here - it's an added degree of difficulty, sure, but I don't see that as a bad thing.
I would assume that this is a short-term solution - it makes no sense, now that ships can explode if you're carrying too much fuel, that you'd ever risk your freighters in a small engagement that you've initiated. Why wouldn't we just leave the freighters 5 "map lengths" behind the main fleet while engaging those two wings of fighters?
Edit: Also manually retreating every ship detracts from the action enough as it is, I don't know why I'd want to do it for freighters at the start of every combat too.
"Accidents" doesn't seem to add much for me as a player except micromanagement so I'll wait a few more versions before upgrading for the time being I think. Enjoying the prev release very much so far, keep it up guys.
Fair point, and I'll give it a shot, but I can't see it adding fun (for me) so the desire is not there. It's likely that it's around to add challenge to those who are past the point of just trying not to explode, and I'm not quite there yet. :)
I checked this. Apparently hangar space doesn't have the 50% accident cutoff - you can go much higher, possibly infinitely high.Is it fully intended, or just Alex missing one detail in code?
In regards to accidents, I've noticed so long as I keep my supplies below the cargo capacity limit, I can load as many modules as I please into my cargo hold, and no matter what levels that pushes the cargo capacity too, it wont trigger an accident.
Is that intentional?
yah the music and the new sounds are great. everything in this patch is terrific. thanks for your hard work Alex and everyone else involved. oh and thank you very much for the refresh rate fix, its working perfect!
Why was the fleet capacity cut in half? :(
Holy crap do fighter-heavy fleets chew through supplies at a huge rate! Mid-battle repair/refit is EXPENSIVE.It also seems to me that there is a limited number of supplies available in battle for repair/refit, is that right?
No, all supplies are available in battle.I could swear...
Another question, how harsh are limits on supplying new ships to space stations when it comes to its hangar space? I mean, how many ships can be in the space station before supply fleets will stop supplying new ships?
The new FP limits make me feel like the captain of a small mercenary fleet... I'm tempted to name my Hammerhead the Black Star.
Presumably you'll be able to level up and become the captain of a really big fleet with multiple caps.
Until then you leave your ships in storage. Is the abandoned station a band-aid mechanic too? It'd be cool if some systems had abandoned stations with a few bits of supplies which you could claim, and had to arm and stick crew on (I've seen those hardpoints on the station sprite ;) )
...
Maybe what you need to consider doing is the add an additional chance of accident from having over a certain number of "logistics" ships in your fleet, so as to apply an accident chance to higher level play too. Say for example that beyond a certain number your fleet is simply getting too crowded whilst in transit between planets and battles and the presumably drunk civilian pilots of your logistics ships run the risk of bumping into each other in a crowded fleet, causing an accident.
Just my thoughts! ;)
Also, is it just me or is ship capture extremely difficult now? I feel like the "boardable" rate has been cut to like 25% of what it was in the previous version.
The tritachyon station still seems bugged, its not getting new ships delivered.
Another bug:Hmm, seems like the bug I reported back at 0.51a? Alex stated it got fixed...
If you have so many supplies that you are over the cargo limit, you might have something like 200/150 cargo space used. If you shift-click to sell a portion of those supplies, the cargo space still shows 200/150 cargo space used. If you then "pick up" the remaining stack of supplies in your fleet inventory and "drop it" again, the supply count is properly updated.
Also, is it just me or is ship capture extremely difficult now? I feel like the "boardable" rate has been cut to like 25% of what it was in the previous version.
The tritachyon station still seems bugged, its not getting new ships delivered.It's not anymore, it just delivers them in a rather slow manner.
Capital ships are rare Alex? Try looking at your Hegemony Defense Fleet and your Tr-Tachyon Attack Fleets. ;D Every time one gets destroyed, one comes ten minutes later.
SpoilerThe implementation of accidents seems to be a little odd, now that I've gotten used to it. I can see what you're trying to do, but I don't think its quite accomplished what you intended.
As it stands at the minute, if you're successful, and have a load of cash, accidents simple aren't going to happen to you any more. You'll have a ton of carriers, troop transports and freighters tagging along after your fleet that you can just pick up whatever you please and not have to worry about it. Additionally if your fleet is past a certain size, you no longer even have to risk having to bring your logistics ships to the field of battle, you can simply elect not to deploy them.
Basically past a certain point, accidents cease to be an issue.
However accidents are a severe hindrance at early game, where you only have a ship or two and have to decide whether or not you want to pack in that nice expensive Large launcher you found to sell, or if you want the supplies, to repair the damage your fleet took acquiring your ill gotten gains. Take too much, and you're going to have an accident, and possibly lose a ton of (at this stage in the game) expensive regular crew. Additionally if you do buy a logistic ship to carry about your gains in, and only have a couple of ships, you will be risking that logistic ship on the field of battle in every single battle you engage in. If it dies, say a bomber wing gets all up in its face, post battle, if you win, you then have to go and dump a load of credits via jettison, in addition to having the cost of losing the logistic ship as well. It puts you back about 20k credits, which is a fair bit of you only had a Destroyer and a Condor for example. Got help you if you were using fighters and there's not enough hangar space post-battle too.
You can obviously avoid this by hugging a station and selling your loot after every fight you're in, and not bothering with the logistics ships early game, but that feels awfully restrictive, especially if, in future, you're adding in the ability to travel to different star systems.
Maybe what you need to consider doing is the add an additional chance of accident from having over a certain number of "logistics" ships in your fleet, so as to apply an accident chance to higher level play too. Say for example that beyond a certain number your fleet is simply getting too crowded whilst in transit between planets and battles and the presumably drunk civilian pilots of your logistics ships run the risk of bumping into each other in a crowded fleet, causing an accident.
Just my thoughts! ;)[close]
Capital ships are rare Alex? Try looking at your Hegemony Defense Fleet and your Tr-Tachyon Attack Fleets. ;D Every time one gets destroyed, one comes ten minutes later.
Yes, the Corvus system doesn't fit in with the ultimate vision for the sector, either. It's more of a "here's all the content, go for it".
I hope it's not a placebo but it looks like AI no longer spam shield against kinetic weapon spam.
It's not anymore, it just delivers them in a rather slow manner.This seems right to a degree... my tri-tach station has gotten 3 paragons delivered to it now, no fighter wings, no frigates, no destroyers. Ill keep waiting to see what comes of that, its pretty odd to get paragons and nothing else tho.
I also noticed that. Once I got Wasp wing, but that's all. Now Tri-Tachyon station is full of everything but Tri-Tachyon ships. Except one Paragon ;>It's not anymore, it just delivers them in a rather slow manner.This seems right to a degree... my tri-tach station has gotten 3 paragons delivered to it now, no fighter wings, no frigates, no destroyers. Ill keep waiting to see what comes of that, its pretty odd to get paragons and nothing else tho.
Hm, the difference between a Falcon and a Sunder is kinda small considering one is a destroyer and the other a cruiser...
Hm, the difference between a Falcon and a Sunder is kinda small considering one is a destroyer and the other a cruiser...
Well, the Falcon is a Light Cruiser, which puts it much closer to Destroyer than any of the other Cruisers. It's also tougher than the Sunder, IIRC.
something i noticed thats not a bug but a seroius exploit, at least in my opinion. Is that if you store all of you ships in the storage it gives you the message you get when you lose your ship & you get a new ship. some people might say its not that big of deal but you can make a lot of money form this also after a while it would reset me to 2000 cash & i would no longer lose money from doing it.
So far Alex has been working on the core gameplay; the combat, the AI. Let's not get ahead of ourselves here. New systems don't provide anything significant if there isn't substantial depth to them. Economy and dynamic interaction between worlds, stations, and outposts need to be set up to provide meaning for what you do in system. Before that happens any other system will just be a cookie cutter copy of Corvus.Don't forget we are currently in just the alpha version of the game. I don't think anything that Alex adds needs to be perfect or super significant. If he just wants to add random stuff and build on it later he's more than welcome too. Now of course that's not how he normally works. He adds something and then tries to tweak it to perfection before moving on. I'm not sure if he does this because it's just what he's comfortable with or if it's because the game is already available to so many people and he feels as if any new feature added must be finished before release. But if he wants to just add some rough draft stuff in there and just release it that will be fine with me. When the game is officially finished I'm sure it'll be great, but until then remember that we are only looking at a work in progress.
Capital ships are rare Alex? Try looking at your Hegemony Defense Fleet and your Tr-Tachyon Attack Fleets.
He specifically said the Corvus system (as it currently stands) is not representative of what the final game will be like. To be honest, I've thought that was the case for a while--even if Tri-Tachyon and Hegemony hate each other, for TT to be constantly sending massive fleets to attack the Hegemony station makes no sense! I suspect the "war" between the two is going to be a lot colder and more subtle in the final game.
The current fleet point cap is actually rather close to what the maximum will be, with skills. Still enough for a cap ship (or maybe two) with a solid escort. Fits much better into the overall idea that capital ships are rare. As much fun as having a huge fleet is, it also cheapens things, and doesn't fit with the background of the Sector.
Yes, the Corvus system doesn't fit in with the ultimate vision for the sector, either. It's more of a "here's all the content, go for it".
So I guess combat in future versions will be more central towards small skirmishes between frigates and a few destroyers, perhaps the odd cruiser as well? More emphasis on tactical combat than slugging it out with a pair of capital ships, so to speak.
By the way, in which way do you plan to implement trade goods and the like, presuming you are going add a more fleshed out trading system? Will planets or stations have fixed prices, or will it fluctuate depending on supply and demand? If that's the case, what will influence the production of said goods?
Why is that even needful? There's not much point in restricting the player that way is there? Well I guess we won't know until more of the campaign is out...Well, it isn't necessarily, but the discussion was talking about how to encourage larger total numbers of smaller (and less powerful/lower-tech) ships rather than a few huge high-tech ships.
Hrm...
Well I think the point is to make them rare in the universe. If you're lucky enough to capture the few you find then more's the better for you.
That was my perception anyway.
I really can't wait until availability becomes a major part of the game, for some reason.
At the minute, if the ship or weapon spawns as part of one of the groups, you effectively have an unlimited supply of that thing. Also works conversely, in that e.g. there will only ever be one Hyperion in Corvus.
When we have multiple systems, with a much reduced availability per system but the chance of seeing all sorts of things elsewhere? I just think it will really kick things off in terms of the game balance and the exploration aspect. For the day when we are all fielding a load of Buffalo MkII's, because that's all we can find, and we daren't bring that Tempest / Medusa out of storage because we don't know if / when we will get another one.
I just think it will be really cool.
I really can't wait until availability becomes a major part of the game, for some reason.
At the minute, if the ship or weapon spawns as part of one of the groups, you effectively have an unlimited supply of that thing. Also works conversely, in that e.g. there will only ever be one Hyperion in Corvus.
When we have multiple systems, with a much reduced availability per system but the chance of seeing all sorts of things elsewhere? I just think it will really kick things off in terms of the game balance and the exploration aspect. For the day when we are all fielding a load of Buffalo MkII's, because that's all we can find, and we daren't bring that Tempest / Medusa out of storage because we don't know if / when we will get another one.
I just think it will be really cool.
I totally agree with this.
I concur ;DI really can't wait until availability becomes a major part of the game, for some reason.
At the minute, if the ship or weapon spawns as part of one of the groups, you effectively have an unlimited supply of that thing. Also works conversely, in that e.g. there will only ever be one Hyperion in Corvus.
When we have multiple systems, with a much reduced availability per system but the chance of seeing all sorts of things elsewhere? I just think it will really kick things off in terms of the game balance and the exploration aspect. For the day when we are all fielding a load of Buffalo MkII's, because that's all we can find, and we daren't bring that Tempest / Medusa out of storage because we don't know if / when we will get another one.
I just think it will be really cool.
I totally agree with this.
Yeah, same thing :)
I agree also, but I bet there'll be dozens of posts saying "WAAAH why can't I find a Hyperion?" once something like that gets introduced!Then it's up to us to show them why that is a good thing ;D
I agree also, but I bet there'll be dozens of posts saying "WAAAH why can't I find a Hyperion?" once something like that gets introduced!Then it's up to us to show them why that is a good thing ;D
im not sure why but since this update my starfarer is now running at around 20fps instead of my usual 60fps
I have 0.52.1a and im still having frame rate issues, i haven't made any changes to my system and i haven't got any other programs running.