Added unique capital-class ship that can be acquired by the player. Good luck.Legion LXIX here I come :O
Light Dual AC: reduced OP cost to 5 (was: 6)But it already is 5 OP? I know the patch notes are in progress but just making sure.
Light Needler: reduced OP cost to 7 (was: 9)This is the only thing that I don't get. I mean we all know Light Needler wasn't worth 9 OP currently, but lowering it to 7 AND increasing Railgun to 8 seems a wee bit too much. It makes sense to me that they have the same OP cost at least, then you have an option between burst and sustained damage. With these changes Light Needler seems like a no-brainer unless I'm missing something crucial.
Railgun: increased OP cost to 8 (was: 7)
- Asteroid fields: chance for moderately damaging asteroid impacts on ships when not moving slowly
- AI will move slowly through asteroid fields
- Hyperspace storms: slow-moving fleets do not attract storm strikes
- AI will move slowly through storms instead of trying to avoid them
Onslaught:
Reduced arc of side-facing large turrets
Added built-in Heavy Ballistics Integration
Enforcer:
Increased armor to 900 (was: 750)
Increased hull to 6000 (was: 5000)
Reduced shield flux/damage to 1 (was: 1.2)
I literally said in another thread I felt like something was coming soon holy ***, finally the sacred text! Damn this is gonna take forever to read.
QuoteLight Dual AC: reduced OP cost to 5 (was: 6)But it already is 5 OP? I know the patch notes are in progress but just making sure.
QuoteLight Needler: reduced OP cost to 7 (was: 9)This is the only thing that I don't get. I mean we all know Light Needler wasn't worth 9 OP currently, but lowering it to 7 AND increasing Railgun to 8 seems a wee bit too much. It makes sense to me that they have the same OP cost at least, then you have an option between burst and sustained damage. With these changes Light Needler seems like a no-brainer unless I'm missing something crucial.
Railgun: increased OP cost to 8 (was: 7)
Does that also apply to the player's fleet when flying to a destination under autopilot?
Improved cargo screen performance when taking or leaving a VERY large number of items
Maximum post-Collapse colony growth limited to a maximum of colony size 6
"Pirate bases should no longer spawn in systems with neutron stars/pulsars"
Have to say i'm kinda sad to see this. I was hoping for a more creative solution, such as making it kinda rare/special and with some wonky effects. Something like having a few results where either they're totally unprepared so their fleets are just a mess, or they have some special feature/items that you normally wouldn't find at a pirate base so it's worth visiting, or even them being some sort of super high tech pirates so the base is actually a high tech with high tech ships sort of thing.
Brawler- losing damper field feels sad. Maybe it's more fun to pilot but it made it a great AI ship.
Sick of all those systems filled with size 10s within a decade, huh? :P
Are there any plans for a story mission to break this?
Exciting changes! Truthfully, I'm apprehensive about the new skill system because I find archetypal characters boring, but I trust there will be mods to address that. The content additions sound very enticing. ;D
Alex, you fixed the fleet composition so pirate fleets wouldn't have too much Atlas MKII, right? And the bounty fleets?
I modded the old system too, so as long as I can mod this one I'll be happy. ;D
Brawler:
Changed ship system to Maneuvering Jets (was: Damper Field)
Increased shield arc to 270 (was: 150)
Increased supply cost to 6 (was: 4)
Increased flux dissipation and capacity (200 -> 250, 2500 -> 3000)
Onslaught:
Reduced arc of side-facing large turrets
Added built-in Heavy Ballistics Integration
Light Needler: reduced OP cost to 7 (was: 9)
IR Pulse Laser: reduced flux cost per shot to 40 (was: 50)
Added "personal contacts" mechanics .....Really looking forwards to this. The NPCs on planets always felt sorta faceless, as I never really was able to build the relation meter. Quests from the bar and similar always have you running everywhere instead of working with your one bro in your favorite command station.
Added unique capital-class ship that can be acquired by the player. Good luck.Good luck? Good luck?
Added skill that allows recovery of REDACTED shipsYes. Yes. Yes.
* Joining an ongoing battle, winning, and then your allies pursue: leaving (instead of joining the pursuit) will now give you salvageLots of excellent QoL this patch! I'm a big fan of 'smoothness of operation', and I think it's worth being excited over.
* Laying in a course for a star in the hyperspace map will now lay in course for the closest jump-point into the system rather than the star's gravity well
* Added support for 4k resolutions
Added a new, very rare and powerful enemywtf is that monstrosity. sounds like some kind of dreadnought/mobile station horror.
13 new special weapons specific to this enemy
Maximum post-Collapse colony growth limited to a maximum of colony size 6
Is there an ingame reason for why new colonies can't grow past size 6? Because I feel like it'd be just as unreasonable if your colonies slowly but steadily grow to size 6 and then just...stop. Even after you keep playing for multiple decades.Sick of all those systems filled with size 10s within a decade, huh? :PWell, you have to admit it's a bit... unreasonable. But you get as many industries on a size 6, so mainly it's about taking the scale down a notch while keeping the options about the same.
Are there any plans for a story mission to break this?
As far as breaking the limit - no, nothing I'd call plans. I wouldn't rule it out if a story element called for it, but I don't particularly feel the need to have extra-large colonies in the game. Just that by itself doesn't feel like it adds anything and isn't a "goal", if that makes sense.
(Also, consider that there's a variety of nanoforge-like items that buff various aspects of colonies, which wasn't possible before.)
Important question...
Will there be a Champion (XIV)?
On a more serious note, will there be an improvement to the Codex such as search functions literally anytime in the future? After a couple mods, the Codex is not enough and it leaves a bit to be desired. Of course, the ability to see fighter weapon stats and compare between weapons in refit is great.
"Moving Slowly" -- How about Tactical Speed, Cruising Speed, or Thrusters Only for a name?
QuoteBrawler:
Changed ship system to Maneuvering Jets (was: Damper Field)
Increased shield arc to 270 (was: 150)
Increased supply cost to 6 (was: 4)
Increased flux dissipation and capacity (200 -> 250, 2500 -> 3000)
That is a pretty big supply cost increase. How does this work for the Brawler Variants?
QuoteOnslaught:How much is this? Can you still overlap one of the side facing larger turrets with the front?
Reduced arc of side-facing large turrets
Added built-in Heavy Ballistics Integration
QuoteLight Needler: reduced OP cost to 7 (was: 9)
That is a pretty big buff. The LN was already one of the better small ballistics due to its burst and accuracy. It had the same DPS/OP as the HN (though -100 range) and the HN was one of the better medium ballistics. Do the OP changes to light AC really make up for it?
QuoteIR Pulse Laser: reduced flux cost per shot to 40 (was: 50)
Those are some pretty big changes to small ballistic weapons. -1 OP for a light AC can be translated pretty cleanly to another capacitor or distributor. Does 25% less flux on IR pulse compensate?
Added unique capital-class ship that can be acquired by the player. Good luck.Good luck? Good luck?
Kinda sad about it. I agree, it felt silly to get such big colonies so quickly, but with this limit you will get to the max level even faster. Also, having all colonies limited to the same size feels a bit, i don't know, immersion breaking? You'd expect some planets to be population centers with high cap, while others to be limited to lower cap due to conditions and infrastructure (or lack thereof).
In example - planet doesn't automatically upgrade to the next level, and you have to "upgrade" infrastructure, rising the cap. Maybe make first X upgrades cost progressive amount of credits, and after a certain point require special items (similar to nanoforge), AI cores and story points. That would make colonies more diverse and defined by player choice, instead of every single colony having same population and industry limit.
Anyway, thanks for great work!
And I suspect that without a reduction in OP the nerf to Deck Crews might be a bit harsh, and just lead to dropping it altogether (which is fine with me).
Piloting REDACTED ships sounds like fun, too.
Sure. Size is logarithmic and at some point the ability of immigration to produce new colonists is exhausted in favor of natural growth. Which is much slower. Size 6 is 1 million to 10 million and size 7 is 10 million to 100million.
Maybe you could make growth slow down to like 2% per year(or lower) but this effectively caps growth at size 7 since it would take 35 years to grow from 6 to 7 and 7 to 8.
Thank you all!
"Pirate bases should no longer spawn in systems with neutron stars/pulsars"
Have to say i'm kinda sad to see this. I was hoping for a more creative solution, such as making it kinda rare/special and with some wonky effects. Something like having a few results where either they're totally unprepared so their fleets are just a mess, or they have some special feature/items that you normally wouldn't find at a pirate base so it's worth visiting, or even them being some sort of super high tech pirates so the base is actually a high tech with high tech ships sort of thing.
This mostly has to do with fleet AI just not being able to handle pulsars. If I ever have the time (ha) to dedicated to making it handle them, that might be reconsidered, but the likelihood of this seems low. It's just a complicated problem to solve. (And now that I'm talking about it, I kind of want to try. Must. Resist.)
One question: from what I can tell the Buffalo got some significant stat increases while the Tarsus, which in the current version is effectively equivalent, got an increased fuel/LY nerf.
It looks like
Buffalo: 400 capacity, 2 fuel/LY
Tarsus: 300 capacity, 3 fuel/LY
Is this what the stats should look like at this point?
Edit: also, does the Atlas Mk.II still have the 10 fuel/LY, or was the Atlas reduction to 6 also meant to apply to it?
QuoteBrawler:
Changed ship system to Maneuvering Jets (was: Damper Field)
Increased shield arc to 270 (was: 150)
Increased supply cost to 6 (was: 4)
Increased flux dissipation and capacity (200 -> 250, 2500 -> 3000)
That is a pretty big supply cost increase. How does this work for the Brawler Variants?
I'm not sure what you mean. Ahh - do you mean the Pather variants? They're just, well, more expensive. I don't think this really changes much, and they're frankly quite scary at times, so it might not be unwarranted.
Sure. Size is logarithmic and at some point the ability of immigration to produce new colonists is exhausted in favor of natural growth. Which is much slower. Size 6 is 1 million to 10 million and size 7 is 10 million to 100million.
Maybe you could make growth slow down to like 2% per year(or lower) but this effectively caps growth at size 7 since it would take 35 years to grow from 6 to 7 and 7 to 8.
Hmm - yeah, but then you know someone will feel forced to do it, and I don't want to have that on my conscience :)
Will there be another Damper Field-equipped ship?
Tons of QoL improvements. I'm surprised by the "Move slowly" function but think it's a good addition. Also a (very welcome) surprise is the "historian." That's just a neat touch.
Sure. Size is logarithmic and at some point the ability of immigration to produce new colonists is exhausted in favor of natural growth. Which is much slower. Size 6 is 1 million to 10 million and size 7 is 10 million to 100million.I'd be fine with very slow growth, even if it's to the point where it's effectively soft capped. But what I'm imagining (and which obviously might not be accurate to how it actually is ingame) is that my colony will grow to size 6 and then just...stop. Population growth stuck at 0% forever no matter how many decades pass or what happens in those decades. It'd just look off.
Maybe you could make growth slow down to like 2% per year(or lower) but this effectively caps growth at size 7 since it would take 35 years to grow from 6 to 7 and 7 to 8.
The pather variants but also the TT variant. Which loses a good deal of value here. it has plasma jets(and IEM built in) which are better than maneuvering. But its still running the same (well new)flux stats with medium energy weapons instead of being able to use ballistic. Its not gaining +50% flux/capacity after fitting and its not like the Brawler is particularly mobile as it is, at 100 base speed (150 for the wolf, 120 for the lasher)
For what it's worth, move slowly is already a thing in the current version. Makes you travel at the same speed as go dark right now, i think. Hold S to "activate" it.
IIRC the main use i get out of it is when hiding from a pulsar behind a small planet, where doing nothing makes you enter orbit and moving at normal speed increases the chance of misclicking/moving out of your cover.
Ships/systems:Are you considering increasing the sensor range of [REDACTED] fleets to make sneak salvaging in those systems more difficult? (I have been personally modding my game so that their burn level is increased by 2 to make them more punishing, since they don't have a burn drive ability).
- Added Phantom-class phase troop transport
- Added Revenant-class phase hybrid freighter/tanker
"Move slowly" is pretty bugged in the current version, iirc. Also, it's slower than "go dark"; having "go dark" make the fleet "move slowly" is new, and also "move slowly" is faster.
(Brain's a bit of a mush right now, so maybe I'm not making too much sense.)
One of the things I'm happy with here is at Tech 1, you pick Sensors vs Navigation, and the Sensors skill gives you a burn bonus to "moving slowly". So you can pick to either be a bit faster overall, or to be significantly faster while sneaking, which I think is a more interesting choice than "move faster" and "don't move faster", since we know how that one would go.
Scarab:It makes me happy to see the most (?) underwhelming ship in the game to get a nice buff. Also another feasible ship for slamming beams onto..
Increased flux dissipation to 250 (was: 150)
Increased flux capacity to 2500 (was: 2000)
Removed the two less than optimally placed weapon slots
Paladin PD SystemThe changes make me very happy. I still have a gut feeling that with these changes the Heavy Burst Laser will end up being underwhelming for its cost compared to the small Burst PD and the Paladin PD, but it's been some time since I last looked at the stats. And also a buff to some beam based weaponry makes me happy, goes well with that improvement of the Scarab ;)
Burst PD Laser
Heavy Burst Laser
Mining Laser
Ion Pulser:I'm surprised about these changes, I've always thought the Ion Pulser was one of the most effective energy weapons (and also a lot of fun to use).
Increased range to 500 (was: 450)
Increased damage to 100 (was: 75)
Increased emp damage to 600 (was: 400)
Heavy Armor: reduced maneuver penalty to 10%, moderately increased armor bonusAs I was saying with burst weapons.. seems suspicious :P (but nice to see :D)
All types of contacts allow you to order ships/weapons/fighters, without having a colony
Trade: use your own blueprints only
Military: use own, or faction's blueprints
Underworld: order good stuff regardless of blueprint availability; more expensive
Underworld contact functions as "arms dealer"; not selling production capacity
Is a way to get access to rare ships/items that might otherwise be too hard to find
Increased XP gain from fighting more challenging battles
Can you talk a bit more about the reasoning behind increasing the growth penalties for hazard rating? It already felt to me like it could be hard to justify trying to make a colony on high hazard worlds. I noticed that the synchrotron requires no atmosphere, are there other new industry boosters with similar requirements that incentivize high hazard colonies, or are they just becoming even less desirable in the next release?
Population growth stuck at 0% forever no matter how many decades pass or what happens in those decades. It'd just look off.
Actually, as far as ideas to make very large colonies possible to get but limited/hard/expensive/etc., what about Cryosleepers? New colonies without a Cryosleeper can only get so much growth from natural population growth and immigration before even Chico on it's worst day is able to make much of a dent, but Cryosleepers (optional: and an AI Core/Story Point to speed up the process) can push a colony to size 7/8/9/10/whatever makes the most sense?
As to how it works right now (bugged or not), and how that relates to "go dark", i wouldn't be able to tell, considering how limited my use of it is.
Thanks for the patch notes Alex, and g'luck on assembling everything together for this release!
Also I just wanted to say I'm excited you've thrown me a bone with the megastructure stuff in this release, and I can't wait to engage with what's there in the release, and to see more in future versions. Also, I don't know if David or you are doing the story elements/descriptions for them, but don't forget to check out Charles Sheffield's work - his novels (Summertide) partly inspired my lifelong fascination with them (and the ideas in Jack McDevitt's stuff, even if I found all his novels dry as a desert).
The first thing I'm doing is still changing the Apogee's shield efficiency back to .6 though, the suspiciously combat effective long-range exploration vessel checks every one of my favorite science fiction tropes, and I love her so much.
still no way to restrict maximum AI fleet power?
sad
fighting a fleet with 10+carriers is not fun, it just turns game into a turn based strategy
I never thought about it, but it definitely makes more sense this way, since it's weird that an enemy fleet could detect something like a derelict ship, but not think something's off when that derelict ship suddenly turns into a debris field.
QuoteScarab:It makes me happy to see the most (?) underwhelming ship in the game to get a nice buff. Also another feasible ship for slamming beams onto..
Increased flux dissipation to 250 (was: 150)
Increased flux capacity to 2500 (was: 2000)
Removed the two less than optimally placed weapon slots
QuoteIon Pulser:I'm surprised about these changes, I've always thought the Ion Pulser was one of the most effective energy weapons (and also a lot of fun to use).
Increased range to 500 (was: 450)
Increased damage to 100 (was: 75)
Increased emp damage to 600 (was: 400)
This change along with the decrease in OP for the Light Needler makes me wonder if you want to promote the use of more burst weapons, or if the reasons for the changes are completely something else.
I'm curious, is this also going to mean that we don't need to be commissioned + high relations with a faction if we want to buy their good weapons or even ships?
QuoteIncreased XP gain from fighting more challenging battles
Does this mean challenging in the sense of really high end late game battles, or challenging in the sense of battles against fleets much bigger/higher tier relative to your fleet? If it's the latter then that sounds really exciting and a lot of fun :D, a really nice boost for the early game and a satisfying reward for spending the time to load out a fleet efficiently, and not as many downsides to keeping a small fleet.
Also if it's the latter, does it take into account both fleets' officer levels? I wonder, would it also take into account the player's combat skills level?
Can you talk a bit more about the reasoning behind increasing the growth penalties for hazard rating? It already felt to me like it could be hard to justify trying to make a colony on high hazard worlds. I noticed that the synchrotron requires no atmosphere, are there other new industry boosters with similar requirements that incentivize high hazard colonies, or are they just becoming even less desirable in the next release?
Sounds like the old pay to increase growth which is now hazard pay lets you close the gap? Since its whatever the hazard penalty is + a few? So really high hazard worlds are no worse than zero hazard worlds. Habitable and Mild change that on top of that, but really high hazard growth isn't that bad off? Or maybe I'm misunderstanding something from the notes.
I feel like higher hazard worlds tended to have more mineral/fuel resources.
I am super pumped for the Xyphos having a range of 0! (Yes this is a tiny change, but I don't care, its wonderful.)
Unless I've missed something, higher hazard worlds will still make for higher maintenance costs, which is then reduced by having goods supplied in faction. It will depend heavily on the exact values everything ends up at, but there is the potential for "early" colonies wanting to be habitable in order to avoid maintenance and high hazard colonies being profitable "late", once demanded goods are supplied. Just a bit of theorycraft.
Are we going to get a hyperstorm map layer on the sector map? I don't remember how it was without Adjusted Sector, but at least with it, there doesn't seem to be any way to figure out where the hyperstorms are without almost flying into them. If I could, I'd try looking at a map and navigating around, but as it is, it's too much bother and I'd rather burn through.
Kind of sad about this, but mostly because I like making things bigger and better. Find a big, dark planet orbiting a black hole, build a blazing sun-moon, terraform in some green, add a couple astropoli...
On the one hand, you no longer need to specialize all your ships to get good value out of these mods. On the other hand, it means less to have a specialized fleet. Dunno how to feel about this. Probably good?
Alex I love you.
As always the attention to details is awesome.
Recall Device: now has a 30 second cooldown
Salvaging/scavenging temporarily boosts you sensor profile by 1000; it's in the patch notes - so, no, but also yes.
Greatly decreased pirate base bounty payoutseeeee
Maximum post-Collapse colony growth limited to a maximum of colony size 6Random thought: Cryorevival Facility is an obvious candidate for raising its planet's limit by 1.
Nanoforges: add Pollution when installed; becomes permanent after three monthsOw. Is this a way to incentivize colonies on non-habitable worlds?
Synchrotron: requires "No atmosphere" condition
Spaceport: removed "No spaceport" accessibility penalty when under construction or disrupted*happy dance*
High Tech orbital station:Can you also do something about the shield modules dying early on in autoresolve? This has awkward effects when a player joins an ongoing battle with/against the station.
Fixed issue with wrong type of weapon slot
Added Fighter Chassis Storage to hangar module
Tarsus: increased fuel use to 3/ly (was: 2)I feel like only one of those changes should have been implemented.
Buffalo: increased cargo capacity to 400 (was: 300)
Drover:Drover was overdue for an adjustment, but with Reserve Deployment already having the run-in with the nerf bat, isn't the DP increase on top of that really punitive?
Deployment/maintenance cost increased to 15 (was: 12)
Light Needler: reduced OP cost to 7 (was: 9)This is probably actually bad!
Railgun: increased OP cost to 8 (was: 7)
Added Fury-class light cruiser, high techHa ha ha this is three mod ships and one mod weapon that will now need renaming
Added Champion-class heavy cruiser, midline
Added Phantom-class phase troop transport
Added Revenant-class phase hybrid freighter/tanker
Afflictor: changed two of the front-facing hardpoints from Universal to HybridNoooooo my Reaper backstab bus
Added UI scaling setting
Gonna comment on some specific things, mostly the things I feel have problems.
So first I gotta say: this is almost entirely good news! I had to scroll down three pages to find a thing I specifically objected to.
I mean, not having easy money is good! But taking on any kind of base (especially now that one-module bases are no longer a thing) requires a considerable investment and risk in the early to mid game. It sounds like the problem was more that person bounties and LP base bounties weren't paying enough.
QuoteNanoforges: add Pollution when installed; becomes permanent after three monthsOw. Is this a way to incentivize colonies on non-habitable worlds?
Synchrotron: requires "No atmosphere" condition
Does pollution from nanoforges requite the Habitable condition (like the pollution from bombardment)?
It feels like the heavy industry itself should be the source of pollution, not the nanoforge. Was that deemed too punishing?
QuoteSpaceport: removed "No spaceport" accessibility penalty when under construction or disrupted*happy dance*
Although I fear that straight-up reducing the penalty to zero swings the pendulum to spaceport disruption being too weak. With the +5 in-faction trade capacity bonus, disrupting a core world spaceport will likely have no effect whatsoever on commodity scarcity on the planet or elsewhere in the faction.
Can you also do something about the shield modules dying early on in autoresolve? This has awkward effects when a player joins an ongoing battle with/against the station.
I feel like only one of those changes should have been implemented.
So the idea is that Tarsus is the safe option and Buffalo is the cost-efficient option. But past a certain point, having to fight a disengage scenario at all is a sign you did something wrong (which is why people like me keep suggesting ways to drag civ ships into fights). So the Tarsus's strength will very rarely be relevant.
...unless this is intended to work with the new options to turn civilian ships into combatants?
Drover was overdue for an adjustment, but with Reserve Deployment already having the run-in with the nerf bat, isn't the DP increase on top of that really punitive?
QuoteLight Needler: reduced OP cost to 7 (was: 9)This is probably actually bad!
Railgun: increased OP cost to 8 (was: 7)
The attachment is gone now (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=18065.msg283004#msg283004), but bobucles made a graph which shows Light Needler significantly out-DPSes Railgun early in a fight (for like 20 seconds or such) due to having the large damage spike at t=0. Mind, that's a double-edged sword since it also adds flux to the firing ship, and you pay 2 more OP for the privilege, but it persuaded me that LNs are actually worth using over railguns sometimes. And Needler is more efficient and has faster projectiles.
Ha ha ha this is three mod ships and one mod weapon that will now need renaming
QuoteAdded UI scaling setting
4k time?!?
Kind of bummed about the hammerhead rear turrets not being able to face forward but it's pretty understandable considering how great safety overrides chaingun hammerheads are at ripping enemies to shreds
Added the chance to be able to promote a junior officer to a ship command position after battle, uses a story point-I presume this means that in an RNG post-battle prompt, you'll get the chance to recruit an officer for "free" via story point. Or is this one of those "mentor" things?
The Conquest! From using it alot because midline bestline, I've noticed it tends to just keep itself pointed directly at a target and fire torpedos (in the case of Reapers) until it runs dry, rather than attempting to broadside till flux is driven up, then torpdeo the living smitherines out of things like it really should.
It's cool to see the onslaught get changes! Do the two side mounts now point forwards, or is it still just another glorified place to put a Devastator (but now with less OP cost)
A few other random thoughts now that we're in the story update - Previously when dropping bombs on small raiders, rescuing people from planets, etc - the "Answer the Hail" option you occasionally get from planets with ruins - there was texts saying "Hopefully this was a good idea, hopefully they don't bring sickness, etc" or something of that nature.... With this update, can my people catch the space pox, eat rocks and die, if I accept a buncha refugees?
Decreased Pirate Base Bounties. Oh. Why did you do this? It generally takes 3-4 cruisers to kill a pirate station - unless you have the skills to do it yourself, alone - and usualy by the time you have one to two cruisers, the money is mediocre at best.
- The Railgun/Light Needler change is a little weird to me. I consider them different but equal: one is burst-y with no ability to harm armor while the other is a generally
excellent all-rounder kinetic. Both are very good. I think I'd be fine with both being 8 OP.
QuoteAdded the chance to be able to promote a junior officer to a ship command position after battle, uses a story point-I presume this means that in an RNG post-battle prompt, you'll get the chance to recruit an officer for "free" via story point. Or is this one of those "mentor" things?
- Assault Chaingun being brought back down to Earth. Ion Pulser being being buffed. Warthog being brought back. All good changes.
- IR Pulse being flux efficient is actually a huge change. It makes Small Energy slots Less Bad (I still won't call them "good"). A ton of High Tech ships rely on Small Energy to get things done and none of the options are good for breaking shields.
- Out of curiosity, since I didn't see anything mentioned, but any update on the "Orders" tab?
I was expecting the sabot to be nerfed. It is now anti low tech ships because its burst outranges small ballistic PD's and AI always tries to block it with shield which makes end up being overfluxed all the time.
It would be great if sabot burst range gets significantly reduced considering the amount of damage it does.
Would it be possible to change the max size of (of one or some or all) player colonies in the setting?
How about changing the faction color of the player? Is it still possible?
Is there a cap on how many story points you can have at once?
And has the XP curve been flattened or changed so you don't need millions of XP, even with +XP%, to get the next Story Point?
So, actually, let me make a note to check tomorrow; it seems offhand that requiring habitable for pollution is probably the right way to go.
Re: whether it's heavy industry or a nanoforge, I'm not sure it actually matters all that much which one causes it, since a nanoforge of some sort is almost required. But I suppose this leaves the option of having a safer, low-tier heavy industry, not that it's going to generally be a good option.
- Added a number of story-related missions and a hint of an endgame threat
Added unique capital-class ship that can be acquired by the player. Good luck.
Campaign fleet AI/behavior:Not gonna lie, I thought this was pretty funny. I personally had no issues with this even with a large fleet, as long as I'm able to roughly calculate the speed & direction a given fleet is taking and whether or not was I going to be able to catch up depending on the course of my fleet.
In general a bit worse at avoiding being intercepted; was too good at it
>Onslaught: Added built-in Heavy Ballistics IntegrationIt really does seem weird players prefer to use medium weapons when large slots are available. When on the other hand, you'd do anything to have a large energy mount instead of the medium one. I think the biggest problem are flux costs, where the majority of ships that can mount these weapons, really cannot use them decently. I'm not saying all of the large ballistics are bad, but half of them are either unusable or extremely niche where you could only fit them on one ship, and it's not even low tech.
I've got a feeling that there's an issue not with Onslaught and Conquest, but with large ballistic weapons instead...
Ruins in core systems now start out as exploredWill Tia, Duzahk, and Penelope's still have searchable ruins (should they generate any)?
Nanoforges: add Pollution when installed; becomes permanent after three monthsIs this going to be permanent as in absolutely final, or will you be able to 'upgrade' to a better version of the same thing later?
Added 10 new items conditionally boosting various industriesYes! Hopefully this will be the end of having multiple items stacked in a corner removing any difficult choices.
Found where currently you would find a synchrotron or a nanoforge - so, larger pool of items
Debris fields: can only be scavenged through once; explored fields marked on map
Entities / mission targets / etc spawning in the "outer system" will now generally spawn orbiting a far-out jump-point or planet at a medium range (3000-5000 units)Very welcome changes.
Hammerhead:Highest priority change. Consider highlighting in notes to reflect importance.
Fixed slight alignment issue for left medium hardpoint, this is Very Important
It's not that I need to see colonies 100+ times more populous than Chico everywhere, I just don't want colonies to hit a complete brick wall when it comes to growth when there's not really any reason why it shouldn't be able to keep growing. Growing very slowly because of the 10^x curve, sure, but growing surely all the same.Population growth stuck at 0% forever no matter how many decades pass or what happens in those decades. It'd just look off.
(Pretty sure it'll stop showing the progress bar at max size; if not, it should.)Actually, as far as ideas to make very large colonies possible to get but limited/hard/expensive/etc., what about Cryosleepers? New colonies without a Cryosleeper can only get so much growth from natural population growth and immigration before even Chico on it's worst day is able to make much of a dent, but Cryosleepers (optional: and an AI Core/Story Point to speed up the process) can push a colony to size 7/8/9/10/whatever makes the most sense?
It just comes down to me thinking that size 6 is about what's appropriate on the high end, feel-wise. You can have as many industries in a size 6 as you can now on a bigger colony, and items gives you industrial bonuses you wouldn't have had access to before. I'm not really sure why you'd want bigger colonies, beyond just "it's a bigger number". I mean, if you just want to have the largest colony in the Sector, that's already achievable with a size 6 colony :)
Typo ;).
- When recovering ships after combat:
- In an officer was in command, they will be reassigned back to that ship
Added Revenant-class phase hybrid freighter/tanker
Added Phantom-class phase troop transport
Added Revenant-class phase hybrid freighter/tanker
Raiding grants significant XP
Added story option (50% bonus XP) that removes reputation penalty from raiding
Moving slowly":
Now at half the burn level of the slowest ship rather than being fixed at burn level 2
"Sensors" skill gives bonus to this burn level
Go Dark: forces "moving slowly" instead of having a separate movement penalty
Active Sensor Burst: can move slowly while charging it up
Still reduces sensor profile while in applicable terrain (rings, asteroid fields, debris fields)
Asteroid fields: chance for moderately damaging asteroid impacts on ships when not moving slowly
AI will move slowly through asteroid fields
Hyperspace storms: slow-moving fleets do not attract storm strikes
AI will move slowly through storms instead of trying to avoid them
It's only rational. Onslaught's side slots have very limited coverage, so I see no point in investing much OP there. No flux to use that many large guns either, as you also noted.>Onslaught: Added built-in Heavy Ballistics IntegrationIt really does seem weird players prefer to use medium weapons when large slots are available. When on the other hand, you'd do anything to have a large energy mount instead of the medium one. I think the biggest problem are flux costs, where the majority of ships that can mount these weapons, really cannot use them decently. I'm not saying all of the large ballistics are bad, but half of them are either unusable or extremely niche where you could only fit them on one ship, and it's not even low tech.
I've got a feeling that there's an issue not with Onslaught and Conquest, but with large ballistic weapons instead...
Incidentally, with Pather cells now fixed is there any way to stop their constant attempts at sabotage beyond riding out to destroy their bases every...what was it, 230-365 days I think? Because that's another thing that might end up getting me caught in a cycle of babysitting, if Pathers keep blowing up my Orbital Works and whoops, -3/-50% pirate raid pops up before however long it takes to get fixed.That would make total sector colonization annoying. The only reason I bother with alpha cores and stuff is because the Pathers are broken.
A bigger concern with this change is that it'll have some kind of unexpected result that leads to me having to babysit my colonies even more than they currently need it. To name one thing, fleet size and ground defence strength are both tied to colony size, and I have no idea if a size six colony can defend itself against a -3/-50% pirate raid without me needing to drop everything and rush to it's aid every single time. Sure, Alpha Cores to boost stuff, but than I'd have the Hegemony and their extra buff ships knocking down my doors instead. And Alpha Cores aren't exactly burning holes in my stockpile anyway. Alternatively, Red Planet, but I'd like that to not be a requirement before I start putting down colonies that can defend themselves. And especially with all these profitability nerfs I probably won't have millions of credits burning holes in my pockets for a very long time either anyway...If this becomes a problem, I probably will aim for total core kill to eliminate the babysitting. Babysitting is lame. With that said, size 6 is the smallest size I would consider able to defend against expedition spam, since (without cores), star fortress has high demands that I can only comfortably meet with a size 6+ colony.
Not such a fan of the changes to colonies, though. Putting a hard cap on colony size basically forces the player to play "wide" rather than "tall" (in the parlance of 4X games). Given that the current version of Starsector already requires quite a bit of babysitting your colonies, bouncing back and forth across the Sector as threats pop up, I'm concerned that this will end up being an additional tax on the player's time. Especially since planets that are appropriate for particular industries just got rarer, thanks to the restrictions on industry-boosting items. And this change doesn't play well with an existing cap on colonies: the number of administrators/alpha cores the player has access to.Unless Alex changed colony limits, playing "wide" is only possible with alpha core admin spam, which may be threatened by fixed Pather cells.
• Added a new, very rare and powerful enemy:
• 13 new special weapons specific to this enemy
• A very limited number and subset of these can be acquired by the player during each campaign
When producing ships at a colony, an additional fee will be charged based on the weapons/fighters installed on the shipCan we tell production not to build these extra weapons (i.e., build empty hulls)? Often, when I can build ships, I have more than enough weapons on hand, or I order the extra weapons I want too without relying on weapons provide by some random variant.
This extra cost does not count against the monthly production capacity
Pirate bases should no longer spawn in systems with neutron stars/pulsarsThat should be a relief. Pirates that repeatedly respawn in those systems are a pain, and made Navigation nearly mandatory to avoid crossing pulsars twice per visit.
Bombardments will cause other in-system colonies to stops trading with the player for some time, depending on their relationship with the bombarded colonyDoes that mean if I sat bomb an annoying core world, that my own colonies within a system will stop trading with each other?
Added a new, very rare and powerful enemyWhat does "very rare" mean? Limited spawns like Legion14s, or (re)spawns rarely like rare drops (e.g., high-end uniques) in a Diablo game?
Part of an effort to incentivize colony world variety, yeah; most items have requirements or interactions with planetary conditions.Heavy Industry is a great filler for boosting production limits. If I am avoiding Pather cells (I did before I knew about the Pather bug), I do not use forges on additional Heavy Industries. Anytime I have spare industry slots, I build a Heavy Industry. Also, heavy industry produces machines, and it is nice to have a regenerating stack of machines in colony resources. (Waystation only handles supplies, fuel, and crew if demand is met.)
Pollution doesn't require habitable - consider corrosives, radiation, etc. Good point re: bombardments, though; let me remove the "habitable" requirement there. Hmm. On the other hand, what this does is instead of disincentivizing industry on habitable worlds, it more incentivizes (somewhat) industry on a world by itself. So, actually, let me make a note to check tomorrow; it seems offhand that requiring habitable for pollution is probably the right way to go.
Re: whether it's heavy industry or a nanoforge, I'm not sure it actually matters all that much which one causes it, since a nanoforge of some sort is almost required. But I suppose this leaves the option of having a safer, low-tier heavy industry, not that it's going to generally be a good option.
>Onslaught: Added built-in Heavy Ballistics IntegrationIt really does seem weird players prefer to use medium weapons when large slots are available. When on the other hand, you'd do anything to have a large energy mount instead of the medium one. I think the biggest problem are flux costs, where the majority of ships that can mount these weapons, really cannot use them decently. I'm not saying all of the large ballistics are bad, but half of them are either unusable or extremely niche where you could only fit them on one ship, and it's not even low tech.
I've got a feeling that there's an issue not with Onslaught and Conquest, but with large ballistic weapons instead...
It's only rational. Onslaught's side slots have very limited coverage, so I see no point in investing much OP there. No flux to use that many large guns either, as you also noted.>Onslaught: Added built-in Heavy Ballistics IntegrationIt really does seem weird players prefer to use medium weapons when large slots are available. When on the other hand, you'd do anything to have a large energy mount instead of the medium one. I think the biggest problem are flux costs, where the majority of ships that can mount these weapons, really cannot use them decently. I'm not saying all of the large ballistics are bad, but half of them are either unusable or extremely niche where you could only fit them on one ship, and it's not even low tech.
I've got a feeling that there's an issue not with Onslaught and Conquest, but with large ballistic weapons instead...
Besides, Onslaught really needs flak in side large slots. The only 2 other options to cover these angles are front medium slots (but these reach forward enemies, if onyl barely so, thus can be used for offensive weapons) and central medium side slots (which easily reach front, so offensive weapons are also high priority).
Heavy Ballistics Integration would incentivize using large guns there, but... There is no good alternative to flaks in large slot (outside mods anyway). Devastator is horrible PD.
As for the planet size, I think it's unfortunate that your colonies will never be as large as the core world ones. Probably doesn't matter for gameplay, but it feels bad.
There's one thing I've been meaning to bring up that slipped my mind - filter options. Will we get more of them? I'm specifically thinking of two cases. First is where I've surveyed all the planets in the sector and want to know where all the vast ruins are. Scrolling through the list and trying to spot them all is a pain. Second is rather mod-oriented, but when I'm mounting weapons on my ships I'd like to be able to filter for weapons that match the tech category of the ship, and filter for tech category when mounting weapons in general.
QuoteAdded unique capital-class ship that can be acquired by the player. Good luck.
Reading this, I'm getting a bad omen that something big and scary is coming on top of the hinted end-game threat...
Overall, I had no plans to update the game since my current campaign is going pretty well (I am the type of player that does one, extremely long playthrough. Not so fond of having to restart). But after reading the changelog... I'm starting to contemplate my decisions.
>Added a number of story-related missions and a hint of an endgame threat
I have a feeling that there's way more effort put into this, than this simple entry implies.
Just get rid of manoeuvrability penalty! It has no point, it just makes it hard to use on ships that benefit from it the most.
>Xyphos has no range now
Any particular reason for that change?
>Onslaught: Added built-in Heavy Ballistics IntegrationIt really does seem weird players prefer to use medium weapons when large slots are available. When on the other hand, you'd do anything to have a large energy mount instead of the medium one. I think the biggest problem are flux costs, where the majority of ships that can mount these weapons, really cannot use them decently. I'm not saying all of the large ballistics are bad, but half of them are either unusable or extremely niche where you could only fit them on one ship, and it's not even low tech.
I've got a feeling that there's an issue not with Onslaught and Conquest, but with large ballistic weapons instead...
QuoteRuins in core systems now start out as exploredWill Tia, Duzahk, and Penelope's still have searchable ruins (should they generate any)?
QuoteNanoforges: add Pollution when installed; becomes permanent after three monthsIs this going to be permanent as in absolutely final, or will you be able to 'upgrade' to a better version of the same thing later?
QuoteHammerhead:Highest priority change. Consider highlighting in notes to reflect importance.
Fixed slight alignment issue for left medium hardpoint, this is Very Important
It's not that I need to see colonies 100+ times more populous than Chico everywhere, I just don't want colonies to hit a complete brick wall when it comes to growth when there's not really any reason why it shouldn't be able to keep growing. Growing very slowly because of the 10^x curve, sure, but growing surely all the same.
A bigger concern with this change is that it'll have some kind of unexpected result that leads to me having to babysit my colonies even more than they currently need it. To name one thing, fleet size and ground defence strength are both tied to colony size, and I have no idea if a size six colony can defend itself against a -3/-50% pirate raid without me needing to drop everything and rush to it's aid every single time. Sure, Alpha Cores to boost stuff, but than I'd have the Hegemony and their extra buff ships knocking down my doors instead. And Alpha Cores aren't exactly burning holes in my stockpile anyway. Alternatively, Red Planet, but I'd like that to not be a requirement before I start putting down colonies that can defend themselves. And especially with all these profitability nerfs I probably won't have millions of credits burning holes in my pockets for a very long time either anyway...
Incidentally, with Pather cells now fixed is there any way to stop their constant attempts at sabotage beyond riding out to destroy their bases every...what was it, 230-365 days I think? Because that's another thing that might end up getting me caught in a cycle of babysitting, if Pathers keep blowing up my Orbital Works and whoops, -3/-50% pirate raid pops up before however long it takes to get fixed.
Also also:Typo ;).
- When recovering ships after combat:
- In an officer was in command, they will be reassigned back to that ship
not going to lie, i see that post and feel even more now that "SOON TM" cant come soon enough, I had just started a new game a few days ago after putting it down for a while, you know to not burn out. and now this tease drops. and i just want to get my hands on it just that much more now. I mean if you need us to beg I'm sure many of us will get on our knees and shamelessly cry and beg lol.
I am very curious to see all the changes realized, especially the character level progression and all the things that go with that.
QuoteAdded Revenant-class phase hybrid freighter/tanker
Alex I'm having such a hard time imagining this thing and I love it.
I could go through the entire list and nitpick but overall I think all the changes and additions are great. Its gonna be fun to go in blind to good ol' vanilla and experience new stuff once again.
I remmeber reading somewhere that you said you would look into pirate fleets their composition and behavior in general as in at the moment they do not "feel" like pirates but more like a zombie faction - they have alot of ships, theyre bad and theyre suicidical to kill you, rather than being raiders trying to profit.
Also someway to permanently deal with pather cells (such as destroying the faction as a whole or maybe a dedicated industry required either per planet or system) rather than the periodically having to destroy their bases.
most importantly however... RELEASE WHEN?
Cool, cool, cool :D Thanks for keeping spoilers to a minimum!
I like that there are now more unique industry items to find while exploring. The "unique stuff to find" was really not enough for all the "places to find stuff in". (I also wouldn't mind if there were some really unique stuff to find for the explorer who's currently not that interested in founding a colony, like hulls and weapons.)
Arrrph, I am a Pillaging Phase Pirate now! ;D
Mhh, is there even enough difference left between "moving slowly" and "going dark" to warrant them being separate options? Seems like turning off your transponder and moving slowly archives almost the same thing as going dark. Minus the 50% detection range reduction, which could just be added to moving slowly.
I just had the though that it might be cool if only "go dark" would extend the phase field of phase ships around the entire fleet (and more effectively), but it would cost them CR at a slow rate. So without phase ships in your fleet there would be no "go dark" option and "move slowly" would take over that function.
but... There is no good alternative to flaks in large slot (outside mods anyway). Devastator is horrible PD.
* What are the maximum colonies player can own, and maximum admins he can hire?
* With max player colony size at 6, do we get the cute size 7 images at size 6, or are they reserved for NPC colonies?
Yeah as Histidine mentioned, the graph comparing the LN and Railgun came to mind. Just loading up the simulator with a ship with 2 LNs and then 2 Railguns will show you a drastic difference. Sure the Railgun is more versatile but who cares about that when you have a Sabot in gun form almost. Also every other Needler weapon is the most expensive on OP in their respective tier, so this would just look wrong. I agree with Foof, 8 OP for both would be perfect, 7 is too low for such elite weapons.
Also I kinda forgot about Mk IX, surprised there weren't any changes to it when most of the people agree it's very underwhelming. It really doesn't justify having 1.15 efficiency, sure the dmg/shot is respectable for a kinetic weapon but it's also wildly inaccurate. I'm glad Devastator got some love tho, one meh large ballistic less :)
EDIT: Maybe I missed it, but you forgot to add that the High tech blueprint package now has Fury instead of Apogee.
You've outdone yourself again, Alex! It's difficult to pick my favorite aspect of these patch notes, but the story points system in particular seems like something the genre as a whole has been missing: a way for the player to directly say "this, here, is what's most meaningful to my playstyle."
Not such a fan of the changes to colonies, though. Putting a hard cap on colony size basically forces the player to play "wide" rather than "tall" (in the parlance of 4X games).
One last question: with the introduction of megaprojects, is there a chance we'll eventually see some kind of terraforming option introduced into the base game?
Not much to comment this time around, looking solid. Thank you for your hard work.
Good luck with the playtests Alex, I know they can be quite time consuming.
Can we tell production not to build these extra weapons (i.e., build empty hulls)? Often, when I can build ships, I have more than enough weapons on hand, or I order the extra weapons I want too without relying on weapons provide by some random variant.
In current version, I've noticed that with -10% range (level 1 ECM skill) AI still performs decently, but with -20% (maxed ECM skill) AI just gives up and gets mulched into paste without too much of an issue - it becomes really skittish and can't fight back outside of capitals and fighters.
So here's the question - what is the max range debuff without any skills in next update?
On another note, High Scatter Amplifier. Is it still there? If it is, its 50% range decrease is pretty punishing for energy point defence weapons. Will you do anything about that?
On that note, should producing fighters/weapons also generate supplies/fuel/crew like ship production does?
QuoteBombardments will cause other in-system colonies to stops trading with the player for some time, depending on their relationship with the bombarded colonyDoes that mean if I sat bomb an annoying core world, that my own colonies within a system will stop trading with each other?
QuoteAdded a new, very rare and powerful enemyWhat does "very rare" mean? Limited spawns like Legion14s, or (re)spawns rarely like rare drops (e.g., high-end uniques) in a Diablo game?
This is feels like an early christmas present. Can't wait to test it all out and start a new vanilla run. Really like the look of the new officer mechanics and i'm excited for the new raiding and marines.
Question re: "Revenant"
This is such an odd combination of attributes I'm trying to wrap my head around it. I imagine a phase logistic ship has higher maintenance and you pay a premium for both the reduced sensor profile and the ability for a phase ship to escape from battle.
It's also a tanker/freighter hybrid meaning it likely won't be as good as dedicated freighters or fuel tankers in those specific tasks but something like 2/3rds as good as either in both categories (i.e a Destroyer-sized ship would have 200 cargo and 400 fuel capacity). I suppose if you have a phase fleet, you'll just want to keep adding more and more of these ships.
The real questions I have is whether or not its combat worthy and/or if it's counted as "next size up" like other phase ships in terms of logistical profile. Will I want a Revenant in my fleet if I'm not going "all phase?" Does it offer anything that having both having a Buffalo and Phaeton wouldn't?
Come to think of it, how big is the Phantom and Revenant?
Large Ballistics are amazing and should always be fit (even if you're only using two for a broadside). They're absolutely superior than medium as primary weapons per OP. ...
Hmm, interesting, I'll need to keep an eye on it. The max debuff is 20%, but deployed ships grant a flat +2% each. Gunnery Implants also grants +6%/+3% when in frigate/destroyer. Given both of these, it'll be a lot easier to hit the limit if you have smaller ships on hand, which also means they have a shorter range, which may go some ways towards alleviating this.
Try getting a cruiser and max ECM skills, ships of same size will try backing off because of being outranged even more than they normally do.
That change will make game way easier for competent players, which is a shame in my eyes - I personally enjoy battles where AI puts up decent challenge. I hope it will be something I could change in the config files at very least.
All large kinetics are worse than medium kinetics for flux limited, mount plentiful ships
Fair! More of a reason to tweak those mechanics, though, than it is to allow stuff that makes no in-fiction sense. (Also, there's an item that boosts fleet sizes *a lot*, so I'm pretty sure it'll be doable anyway. But I need to have a look at the frequency of expeditions etc, regardless, so those things become an "interesting event" that you interact with and aren't so frequent that it's a chore.)True, although are those items usable enough that I don't need to find a ridiculously specific system to put down my first colonies and/or have to compromise in some way to actually use them? For instance I wouldn't fancy using those items if it caused factions to send expeditions or ticked off the now fixed Pathers, since that would only replace one problem with another.
giving it a quick try with some cruiser-vs-cruiser mirror matches, not seeing much functional difference between 10% and 20%; the side with the edge wins reliably, but it's kind of expected. I guess it may play differently in a not 1-1, though.
Hmm, how so? You're paying for getting 20% by needing overall weaker ships, so I'm not sure how this makes things easier - could you clarify? I mean, I could see how it might not eliminate the problem, but that's different.
...
Speaking of expeditions, "interesting event that you interact with" just sounds like "annually mandatory babysitting session" to me, honestly. And like it'd limit playstyle because if I have to intervene with my own fleet I'd pretty much be on a timer to amass a final endgame doomfleet whenever I put my first colony down.
...
... As we established in the cap/distributor thread we don't really care as much about flux limiting on DPS we care about cap and raw DPS. We want to trade our flux into theirs as fast as possible. This is especially valuable on a ship like the onslaught. ...
... So the HN (probably the best medium kinetic) does 16.6 DPS/OP. The Mark IX does 19.3 and it starts shooting earlier due to its higher range. There are better medium kinetics (HA is slightly better at 21.4) but we still have the range issue as if we're willing to drop down to a lower range the storm needler offers an absurd 26.78 DPS/OP.
2. Uh, is JDK 8 supported yet?
Speaking of expeditions, "interesting event that you interact with" just sounds like "annually mandatory babysitting session" to me, honestly.
Basically, I'm worried about colonies being overly nerfed in terms of them becoming a permanent ball and chain for the player
... I feel by incentivizing using smaller ships more often, it makes game easier in a way? I don't really know how to explain that.
I've read things like this a lot while lurking in these forums and i still don't understand it. In some of my playthroughs i've started colonizing as soon as half a year into the game and even then i've never found expeditions to be a problem. When fighting them myself i've usually found them to be underwhelming and by the time they might get bigger the colonies tend to be defended enough that they don't even need me.
Maybe they become a problem once they send multiple "very strong" fleets but in my experience they're not in any kind of a hurry to do that. Maybe they will eventually if you keep playing but by that time you'd have all the ships you want in your own fleet anyway.
Now the first pirate fleet, that appears to be scripted to be sent within a few months and tends to be a lot bigger than the ones that spawn from bases afterwards, *that* can be a challenge if you rushed for colonies.
I think maybe ECM should apply straight to the enemy fleet instead of competing with their ECM. This would make ECM less of a battle-winner, but it would still shift how battles work by making long range builds relatively weaker than normal.
RE HBI on Onslaught: I don't think it addresses the ship's core issues with flux usage and armor vs. shields.
IMO a lot of the large ballistic weapon problems would be solved if the Mk IX were a slightly more expensive, but better weapon. I'd pay 25 OP for the same gun at a tighter spread and 1.0 efficiency.I don't want Mk. IX fundamentally changed (like "premiumizing" it); it's nice to have a cheap 'n practical option for large kinetics in contrast with Gauss Cannon and Storm Needler. Less recoil and more efficiency certainly wouldn't hurt though.
P.S. Is the version number supposed to be 0.95 or 0.9.5?
No uses of 0.9.5 somewhere, it just struck me as strange compared to 0.9.1, 0.8.1, 0.7.2, 0.7.1 etc.P.S. Is the version number supposed to be 0.95 or 0.9.5?
0.95a - the way I've been using it, 0.9.5a would imply a 5th hotfix-and-balancing patch of the 0.9a release. ... did I mess up and say 0.9.5 somewhere?
IMO a lot of the large ballistic weapon problems would be solved if the Mk IX were a slightly more expensive, but better weapon. I'd pay 25 OP for the same gun at a tighter spread and 1.0 efficiency.I don't want Mk. IX fundamentally changed (like "premiumizing" it); it's nice to have a cheap 'n practical option for large kinetics in contrast with Gauss Cannon and Storm Needler. Less recoil and more efficiency certainly wouldn't hurt though.
(It's possible that many of the times I'm currently using Mk. IX, I should downsize to a Heavy Needler instead...)
P.S. Is the version number supposed to be 0.95 or 0.9.5?
I don't agree with this interpretation. If its true than optimal ships should have max caps, filling vents with leftovers... and yet extensive playtesting has not settled on that as optimal outside of a few very special ships. I note that your own Broadside Onslaught has 60 vents and 6 caps.
I think maybe ECM should apply straight to the enemy fleet instead of competing with their ECM. This would make ECM less of a battle-winner, but it would still shift how battles work by making long range builds relatively weaker than normal.
Hmm - that'd just effectively reduce range by 20% across the board for everything, no? At least in many, many cases.
RE HBI on Onslaught: I don't think it addresses the ship's core issues with flux usage and armor vs. shields.
Well, you're right about that - but those are ship features rather than ship issues! Which isn't to say that it's a perfectly balanced ship or whatever, but rather than anything that's done to balance it ought to work around these, imo.
Also, to add onto the version naming talk:
If you're using "0.9.1" and "0.9" for example, as far as I recall it makes sense to show it as "0.9.0" instead of just "0.9"
Like, if you're showing iterative hotfix versions then that position should be kept as 0 if none have occured yet..
maybe im just dumb tho
Wouldn't it usually be 0% vs. 10% or 10% vs. 20%, or did you remove the cap increases? Even 20% reduction across the board sometimes could be interesting in its own way, I think.
I'm not against HBI, but I put mediums on the Onslaught's side larges mainly to save flux, not OP. If the movement AI considered turning to face its best PD towards incoming missiles instead of preemptively throwing up shields, overfluxing with more larges might be more viable.
Please let us have Size-7 colonies through cryosleeper!
And +1 industry when a colony reaches size-7
Hmm? The patch notes talk about AI fleet composition changes.
Less top-heavy (i.e. fewer large ships), more even mix of ship classes on the high endthat doesn't seem to address the problem, it only affects composition of a fleet, not the size of it
Use "mercenary" type officers to augment the fleets and go above the 10 officer limit
Do some industries have multiple options for story-point based specialization/improvement? Mutual exclusivity between options?
Hmm? The patch notes talk about AI fleet composition changes.Less top-heavy (i.e. fewer large ships), more even mix of ship classes on the high endthat doesn't seem to address the problem, it only affects composition of a fleet, not the size of it
Use "mercenary" type officers to augment the fleets and go above the 10 officer limit
or am i not understanding something
we have that already, in "maxShipsInAIFleet", but if i set it lower it will not make fleets smaller in the late game, it will only make them to consist of the largest ships possible
i'm talking about hard restrictions of how much fleet points a fleet can possibly have, overriding any other factors(vanilla or modded).
because late game battles can take several hours real time to fight, when combined fleet points of ai fleet exceed maximum possible battle size multiple times over, it's just reinforcements after reinforcements after reinforcements over and over again, all at 10fps at best.
Also, give Conquest some love plz. Now that Onslaught stole its hullmod, it's even more of an odd-man-out.
It is already strange that colonies can summon thousands or millions of new people out of thin air within a timespan of just a few cycles. Frankly, I get where you're coming from re: larger colonies being fun. We all want to rule the galaxy. But it won't play well with the timescale.It would be nice if player could start a colony at size 4 (instead of 3) if player somehow brought more than 10k crew with him.
I think the only vanilla fleets that are clearly oversized are some of the pirate distress call ambushes* (like three fleets of 8-10 capitals + support each) and possibly pirate raids from max level bases. (EDIT: also level >10 person bounties)Hmm? The patch notes talk about AI fleet composition changes.Less top-heavy (i.e. fewer large ships), more even mix of ship classes on the high endthat doesn't seem to address the problem, it only affects composition of a fleet, not the size of it
Use "mercenary" type officers to augment the fleets and go above the 10 officer limit
or am i not understanding something
we have that already, in "maxShipsInAIFleet", but if i set it lower it will not make fleets smaller in the late game, it will only make them to consist of the largest ships possible
i'm talking about hard restrictions of how much fleet points a fleet can possibly have, overriding any other factors(vanilla or modded).
because late game battles can take several hours real time to fight, when combined fleet points of ai fleet exceed maximum possible battle size multiple times over, it's just reinforcements after reinforcements after reinforcements over and over again, all at 10fps at best.
I think you may be missing the "less top heavy" part? The max number of ships is the same but a top-end fleet will have a few capitals (along with smaller ships filling it in) and a bunch of officers rather than a *ton* of capitals and a few token something-elses.
This also reminds me - I may have toned down the number of fleets in the high-end expeditions, but it didn't make it into the patch notes. I seem to remember making some changes with these; will have to have another look.
(Edit: just to be clear, we're very much on the same page as far as what you're describing not being good.)
Mhh, is there even enough difference left between "moving slowly" and "going dark" to warrant them being separate options? Seems like turning off your transponder and moving slowly archives almost the same thing as going dark. Minus the 50% detection range reduction, which could just be added to moving slowly.
I just had the though that it might be cool if only "go dark" would extend the phase field of phase ships around the entire fleet (and more effectively), but it would cost them CR at a slow rate. So without phase ships in your fleet there would be no "go dark" option and "move slowly" would take over that function.
"Go dark" is a bit easier to use for a longer period, just usability-wise, and it auto-toggles the transponder off, so that's more convenient, too. "Move slowly" is more of a thing you do intermittently. Still, I get what you're saying, hmm.
QuoteNanoforges: add Pollution when installed; becomes permanent after three monthsIs this going to be permanent as in absolutely final, or will you be able to 'upgrade' to a better version of the same thing later?
Hmm, I don't quite understand the question. The Pollution condition will be permanent and nothing removes it, if that's what you're asking.
In the current version of the game they're indeed not a problem (aside from making the other factions seem incredibly selfish, suicidal and petty, maybe). But with the upcoming changes I'm afraid of them becoming a problem, if not directly than because of another change indirectly resulting in them being harder to deal with. For example, if the profitability nerfs make it so you just cannot afford to build up colony defences in time they might end up becoming an issue. Of course that specific example I don't think will be an issue, since it should be easily countered by the increased profitability of weapon sales and available work through contacts. But something else unexpected might crop up....
Speaking of expeditions, "interesting event that you interact with" just sounds like "annually mandatory babysitting session" to me, honestly. And like it'd limit playstyle because if I have to intervene with my own fleet I'd pretty much be on a timer to amass a final endgame doomfleet whenever I put my first colony down.
...
I've read things like this a lot while lurking in these forums and i still don't understand it. In some of my playthroughs i've started colonizing as soon as half a year into the game and even then i've never found expeditions to be a problem. When fighting them myself i've usually found them to be underwhelming and by the time they might get bigger the colonies tend to be defended enough that they don't even need me.
Maybe they become a problem once they send multiple "very strong" fleets but in my experience they're not in any kind of a hurry to do that. Maybe they will eventually if you keep playing but by that time you'd have all the ships you want in your own fleet anyway.
Now the first pirate fleet, that appears to be scripted to be sent within a few months and tends to be a lot bigger than the ones that spawn from bases afterwards, *that* can be a challenge if you rushed for colonies.
True. And honestly the "fewer, but more problematic" angle would probably work better in a "the universe actually makes sense" sort of way, because honestly I'm not sure why the various factions repeatedly send these massive doomfleets to die against the vastly superior defence fleets and (Alpha Cored) star fortresses that they died on the last many times they tried. Especially instead of protecting their own colonies against the many pirates that raid them into decivilizing. To name one particularly egregious example, in one save I've got...four or five size 10 colonies (good system Cryosleeper ;D) each with an Alpha Core admin, Alpha Core star fortress, Alpha Core military base (high command in one case), Alpha Core heavy batteries and Alpha Core Red Planet Device. You'd think the factions would learn that sending two fleets is not going to stop me from cutting into their ore export, and yet...Speaking of expeditions, "interesting event that you interact with" just sounds like "annually mandatory babysitting session" to me, honestly.
Eh, that really depends. I mean, I get where you're coming from, but e.g. (numbers totally made up) if an expedition comes once every ten cycles and is a huge problem you have to scramble to deal with, then that's going to feel differently than a drop-feed of weaker stuff every couple of months. So it's definitely a thing where how much of it there is and what it does/what kind of response it requires changes it qualitatively.Basically, I'm worried about colonies being overly nerfed in terms of them becoming a permanent ball and chain for the player
Like I said, fair concern, but per my previous response, I think it'll be ok. And if not, it'll need tuning!
(I don't think the item restrictions are *that* punishing, that is, you should be able to find a planet that you can use any given item on without too much trouble. An optimal one is another question, but that's already the case...)
...
In my experience the scripted pirate base that always spawns and very quickly sends a fleet your way is always a mere level 1 base, even a fledging colony can handle a -1/-10% raid...though they'll start at level 2 in the upcoming patch, and a -2/-30% base will send 2.5× bigger fleets, so...yeah. Anyway the issue isn't -1/-10% bases, it's the existing -3/-50% bases randomly deciding to raid your colonies long before you're ready to handle the fleets they send.
...
...
FWIW, what you're describing sounds exactly right to me. If I had to guess, I think there's a tendency to gloss over this interval - which probably makes up for most of the playthroughs for many players - because it's not a "stable end state", if that makes sense. Which, I mean, fair enough on that count, but also a grain of salt.
...
Again, it's not a bad weapon, but it shouldn't have 1.15 efficiency for its performance.If there will not be an elite medium-range heavy kinetic, I agree. With small, we have light needler and railgun. With medium, we have heavy needler. With heavy, we have... nothing. Closest Mark IX has to a useful medium-range alternative is downsizing to Heavy Needler.
If the option remains to bribe off these fleets, either with money or with favors, that'll also help. Just in case I get caught unprepared (I...might have a bad tendency to cut the defence budget in favor of more growth sometimes ::)) or really don't want to bother right that moment. Especially now that building up faction relationships should be easier with contacts (before like 99% of all mission only boosted the Independents) it'll be easier to grease the wheels with something other than a giant pile of...recycled pirate fleets whenever a system bounty pops up.Patch notes says story points will be required for bribes (that I like to call extortion payments). Urge to kill all of the core worlds rising!
It is stupid that the "massive doomfleets" sent to invade your systems are bigger or stronger than their system defense fleets. It should not be easier to destroy Chicomoztoc (or other major faction's capital world) and the rest of their worlds than it is to defend my colonies.I mean it makes sense if you think about it. For the doomfleet task forces, they take a bit to prepare and bring together ships from where they need to across the faction. Where as, ships defending there territory are just garrisons. I can’t help but think of the Mayasura story mission.
It may make sense, but it is unsatisfying for gameplay. My first priority is to amass enough military strength so that my colonies can take care of themselves and my fleet can be free to do fun things like explore and do quests (or raid enemies like Ordos) instead of being forced to babysit my colonies for an extended period of time. By the time my system defenses are strong enough, killing all of the core worlds becomes trivial.It is stupid that the "massive doomfleets" sent to invade your systems are bigger or stronger than their system defense fleets. It should not be easier to destroy Chicomoztoc (or other major faction's capital world) and the rest of their worlds than it is to defend my colonies.I mean it makes sense if you think about it. For the doomfleet task forces, they take a bit to prepare and bring together ships from where they need to across the faction. Where as, ships defending there territory are just garrisons. I can’t help but think of the Mayasura story mission.
As for the planet size, I think it's unfortunate that your colonies will never be as large as the core world ones. Probably doesn't matter for gameplay, but it feels bad.
That's quite subjective, so: fair enough! I just don't think it makes in-fiction sense.
Mining stations have a chance to drop a very large quantity of low-value commodities
Some of those doomfleets ought to be sent to pirate bases and their mortal enemies too.
Patch notes says story points will be required for bribes (that I like to call extortion payments). Urge to kill all of the core worlds rising!Eh...hopefully once colonies are set up and matured they'll be able to take care of themselves, but if not that's definitely going to result in me hoarding story points at that point in the game. I can't rely on a steady stream of xp to refresh them if I'm out exploring and happen to hit a dry streak, so I either have them on hand or I risk getting called off to go defend the homestead. And with five factions able to send expeditions, two factions determined to burn every (player owned) Free Port down to the ground and one faction needlessly concerned about AI core use...that's a lot of potential trouble that can crop up when I could be flying around in the other side of the sector.
Number of recoverable ships shown not limited by maximum number of ships in player fleetYay!
Now you listed all of the differences but forgot the most important one, losing efficiency
Mark IX Autocannon has much higher per-projectile damage: 200 vs 100, so higher armor stripping power and longer shield overload duration.
Mark IX Autocannon has a 230 per-projectile flux cost, HAC has 100.
(aren't large weapons supposed to be efficient anyways?).
Again, it's not a bad weapon, but it shouldn't have 1.15 efficiency for its performance.
If there will be a new heavy kinetic, or Storm Needler upgraded to 800+ range (why is Heavy Needler the only needler with 800 range), then Mark IX being mildly inefficient may not be a problem.
Now you listed all of the differences but forgot the most important one, losing efficiency
Wait. Is this the pollution being being made permanent?
I read that as the nanoforge getting 'locked' in place and thus becoming permanent, and was slightly concerned that this might introduce 'gamey' behaviour regarding never using 'inferior' versions of things.
1)Improved AI behaviour. Having the AI handle itself better and better every patch would provide us with what I think is a much needed difficulty and quality of life bump at the same time. I am looking forward to my aggressive ships to boost into the enemy with even less abandon also ;)
I've only got back to being active on the forum for a month but I could easily spot changes done out of suggestions and discussions we had. The thread about the Gladius resulting in buffing both Gladius and Warthog, the thread about armor resulting in the Heavy Armor modspec being buffed and I could go on! I am so glad you guys value direct feedback from a loving community as much as you do. I am probably buying Starsector to some of my friends this Christmas!
To name one particularly egregious example, in one save I've got...four or five size 10 colonies (good system Cryosleeper ;D) each with an Alpha Core admin, Alpha Core star fortress, Alpha Core military base (high command in one case), Alpha Core heavy batteries and Alpha Core Red Planet Device. You'd think the factions would learn that sending two fleets is not going to stop me from cutting into their ore export, and yet...
And yes, however the situation will end up actually playing out ingame it'll probably need and get tuned afterwards. Given the number of changes and especially completely new/overhauled features I'm fully expecting a few patches to fix the inevitable mistakes. And they'll be great fun to try out.
Ah yeah makes sense. I think i've only done one playthrough where i played for 15 years or so, and probably colonized pretty late on that one, because there isn't enough "endgame" to keep things interesting/challenging once you start running multiple capitals (plus fully fleshed out support fleet/maxed officers/etc) imo. So might be that i've only dipped my toe in that "stable end state", or never even seen it yet.
The lore junkie in me is positively losing his mind right now...
If it were me, colonies would also start smaller and slower - not with a spaceport and "population&infrastructure" but with landing pads and homesteads.
Mining stations have a chance to drop a very large quantity of low-value commodities
Speaking of, are there any plans to make mining stations (or other non colony-bound stations) available to the player? There is no real reason I can see why they apparently were a common thing in the Sector before the fall and now fell completely out of use. (Giving some (hint of a ) reason in game would also be fine.)
Think of it like a more efficient HVD rather than an HA. The HVD is a great medium kinetic but it only does 1.06 dmg/OP at .78 dmg/flux while the Mark IX is doing 19.3 DPS/OP at .85 dmg/flux.Right, both weapons are pinpoint accurate, right. Totally same comparison. Both weapons have average range for their size. Both weapons deal bonus EMP damage. I can go forever.
You've seen David's tweet about having written a novel's worth of text for this update, yeah? And, I have to say - with as much objectivity as I can muster - his writing is *so good*.Just out of curiosity, any chance of getting a(n estimated) word count?
Think of it like a more efficient HVD rather than an HA. The HVD is a great medium kinetic but it only does 1.06 dmg/OP at .78 dmg/flux while the Mark IX is doing 19.3 DPS/OP at .85 dmg/flux.Right, both weapons are pinpoint accurate, right. Totally same comparison. Both weapons have average range for their size. Both weapons deal bonus EMP damage. I can go forever.
Anyways so far I haven't seen a single argument on why it's actually a good weapon, without the person ignoring one crucial thing about it.
Onslaught:
- Reduced arc of side-facing large turrets
- Added built-in Heavy Ballistics Integration
- Shield Conversion - Omni: significantly reduced OP cost
- Added Breach SRM (small) and Breach SRM Pod (medium), a new anti-armor missile
- Medium version has high ammo, small version is extremely cheap
- Heavy Armor: reduced maneuver penalty to 10%, moderately increased armor bonus
- Fixed issue that would cause weapons turning towards a target to fire too early sometimes, missing the first volley
Does this means there's now no way to protect the fleet against CR degradation caused by terrain? Also how does this affect fleet maneuverability in terrains that pushes/pulls the fleet (namely pulsar and black holes)? They're extremely difficult to navigate without E-Burn cancelling out the external forces, without that it might be close to impossible to escape an event horizon without losing basically all supplies. And if that's the case, Research Stations within event horizons will likely never get salvaged.
- Emergency Burn no longer makes the fleet ignore terrain penalties
Edit: alex if you move mark IX to 1.0 efficiency please do so by lowering flux use and not by increasing DPS. If you increase DPS the mark IX will be obscene. If you lower flux it will merely be exceptionalI probably would prefer less flux over more damage because low-tech ships need it! Their dissipation is terrible. Too many mounts (possibly with less-than-ideal coverage), not enough dissipation.
If I want to compare a heavy kinetic with HVD, I would use Gauss Cannon, not Mark IX. Mark IX is clearly an autocannon relative for the heavy mount. I do not use HVDs on anything that is not a dedicated sniper because it lacks damage and efficiency, not to mention that HVD fires slowly enough for AI to shield flicker against it.
Gotcha, yeah. And very much agree on not enough being there at that point; that entire state is a rough edge that will eventually connect to the proper endgame.
Oh heck yes. Pumped for the story missions, new threats and mega-structures. Still share a bit of concern about the colonial size cap, I get the limit but I don't see why 10^7 or even 10^8 is a stretch given appropriate time, nurturing, funds, Domain-Era tech and maybe lots of story points.Same here, at least for 10^7.
Also on like... your line ships that do not line break you should be using HVD. They’re fantastic. Their minimum armor dmg point is 779(and they have EMP!). Which means that they do appreciable dmg to ships of all but the largest sizes while having a 200+ range advantage over HN/HAC. They should be your go-to weapon for ships like eagle and falcon once you advance to battleships and I would bet that they’re pretty dope on Dominators too.I tried that. It used to be great in pre-0.8a releases. Now, if I use it against a strong enemy like Ordos, they keep advancing then outgun my ships. After switching from HVD to needlers (and sometimes Mauler to Heavy Mortar), the tables get turned and the enemy gets outgunned more often instead.
You don’t have to be a dedicated sniper to get a tonne of use out of HVD.
“But the HN is super more efficient!” You say. And that only matters if we’re shooting exactly at (or under but close to) our flux dissipation... which we don’t want to be doing, we want to be shooting over our flux dissipation with both of these guns. And we want to be shooting as much over as we can in general with both of those guns
Edit: alex if you move mark IX to 1.0 efficiency please do so by lowering flux use and not by increasing DPS.
QuoteDoes this means there's now no way to protect the fleet against CR degradation caused by terrain? Also how does this affect fleet maneuverability in terrains that pushes/pulls the fleet (namely pulsar and black holes)? They're extremely difficult to navigate without E-Burn cancelling out the external forces, without that it might be close to impossible to escape an event horizon without losing basically all supplies. And if that's the case, Research Stations within event horizons will likely never get salvaged.
- Emergency Burn no longer makes the fleet ignore terrain penalties
I think the commerce instability penalty is also steep, maybe have the Alpha AI cut it down a notch?
Orbital solar Arrays are great, but one question: Is that a tied to a planet randomly or something we can build? If it is a build able industry does it take up a slot? Is more fleshed out Terraforming coming down the line? I have so many questions. The Cryo-sleeper AoE is a great touch though.
Overall some great additions and changes across the board I feel. Can't wait to dive in to a new sector!
Sounds to me like you're already making large strides in that direction with this update. Even though there might not be that much in it that's technically "end game stuff" it seems there are lots of things to diversify both the current "end game" and the journey towards it.
All the contact missions. Items to hunt down for your colonies. Industry upgrades for increasing numbers of story points (which in a way is a more active replacement for colony growth beyond size 6/7, i guess. In that both that growth and upgrading your last industry might be an extravagance, but at least story points are something you actively work towards instead of just waiting for time to pass while periodically filling up the growth incentives bar). Etc.
For a given flux budget, whether that is capacity based OR dissipation based, HN's do 43% more shield damage, given full accuracy
For damaging shields, a HN gives 43.75% more damage for the same flux invested, assuming all Mk IX and all HN shots hit*. There is a DPS penalty (250 vs 350), but that can be overcome by using more mounts. In terms of lowering enemy shields while not driving up the firing ship's flux, its shockingly better.
Anyways so far I haven't seen a single argument on why it's actually a good weapon, without the person ignoring one crucial thing about it.
Edit: alex if you move mark IX to 1.0 efficiency please do so by lowering flux use and not by increasing DPS. If you increase DPS the mark IX will be obscene. If you lower flux it will merely be exceptional
Ah - it's less steep than you think, because - due to not providing an income bonus - having super-high stability is less important now :)I don't know for non-income purposes. Stability is useful for more than that, with colony fleets and ship quality being the big one. If stability affects fleets much, then high stability may still be (too) useful just so colony patrols can kill invaders while player is away. Especially now that player colonies are down to 10^6. (Hmmm, I guess if I want core worlds alive, I better sat bomb some of the bigger ones a little bit so their expeditions are not so big.)
So a single volley from HN does much more damage than one Mark IX volley, almost double. The big burst is the reason why you use LN and HN in the first place. On the other hand it means the minimum flux cost is higher for HN at 1200 vs 920 for Mark IX.
And Mark IX has the time to shoot a second volley if so desired while HN is reloading, giving a total of 1600 damage for 1840 flux cost in a 4.6 seconds cycle.
And you know what? Mark IX has the time to shoot a third volley, giving a total of 2400 damage for 2760 flux cost.
So this is where LN/HN have a risk/reward thing. If the first volley hits shield, you win or are instantly in a good position. If the first volley hits armor or miss, it is a big waste and it might put the host ship in danger.
Do note that the mark IX shoots 160 to 140 / speed differential sooner.
Mark IX Autocannon has longer range: with ITU on capitals, that’s 1440 vs 1280, 160 more, so Mark IX will always fire at least one volley before HAC fires its first volley.
Either because they want to back away from you or you want to back away from them. If they have a speed advantage of 20 and want close this is almost 7 seconds.
If it were me, colonies would also start smaller and slower - not with a spaceport and "population&infrastructure" but with landing pads and homesteads.
Hmm, you know, I rather like that concept. Needs a lot of details etc, bu just starting out as a "size 2" colony or something (maybe even size 1), and then needing to do... something, to make it grow beyond that - and then once at size 3, it takes off on its own. That could be quite cool.
Hmm. Well, it seems a bit... I don't know. I guess both a bit redundant (there's plenty of planets!) and complicated (where can you put a good mining station? how does it roll Ore conditions? how do you know ahead of time what the conditions will be? where/how can you build them? Etc). But there's also a "this would be cool" aspect to it which might make it worthwhile regardless, but... there's just a lot that would have to happen to make it work.
I don't know for non-income purposes. Stability is useful for more than that, with colony fleets and ship quality being the big one. If stability affects fleets much, then high stability may still be (too) useful just so colony patrols can kill invaders while player is away. Especially now that player colonies are down to 10^6. (Hmmm, I guess if I want core worlds alive, I better sat bomb some of the bigger ones a little bit so their expeditions are not so big.)
Also, Pathers! If stability 10 is enough to keep Pathers at bay most of the time, then maybe keeping stability at 10 while Pathers hammer away for a long time may be the way to go if I want to attempt the full sector colonization game with alpha cores. I certainly do not want to play whack-a-mole Pathers. Once per year is only good if I can synch all cells to one base. Otherwise, it is whack-a-mole Pathers time.
Orbital solar Arrays are great, but one question: Is that a tied to a planet randomly or something we can build? If it is a build able industry does it take up a slot? Is more fleshed out Terraforming coming down the line? I have so many questions. The Cryo-sleeper AoE is a great touch though.
You can't build them, no. They're basically like a special planetary condition with some extra visuals. Definitely not looking at terraforming; something along those lines may or may not happen, but it's not a "goal".
Very simple idea: Colonies start at size 2 and automatically start building the Population And Infrastructure "building". Once this is build the colony is sufficiently developed ("tamed", "civilized", whichever word works best) to start taking in the waves of immigrants that make up the bulk of a colony's population growth, and so it'll start growing. Building a Spaceport next is technically optional at this point, but would obviously be very helpful to increase the colony's accessibility (and ability to bring in these immigrants).Oh, that would be lovely. Think of the vibe that remote frontier planets in shows like Firefly or The Mandalorian have, at the moment no Starsector planet is at that low (and adventurous) level.If it were me, colonies would also start smaller and slower - not with a spaceport and "population&infrastructure" but with landing pads and homesteads.Hmm, you know, I rather like that concept. Needs a lot of details etc, bu just starting out as a "size 2" colony or something (maybe even size 1), and then needing to do... something, to make it grow beyond that - and then once at size 3, it takes off on its own. That could be quite cool.
Here's some inspiration :Personally I wouldn't mind my first colony being my main quest provider for some time. You might have to fend of local threads, ship in food, survey nearby systems, set up trade contacts with friendly neighbors... and your fledgling colony would basically pay you in growth percentage points. But maybe once you have established a faction all this would be done by them (i.e. automated) for your next colony.Spoiler(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKu9_VVXkAM-XzT?format=jpg&name=medium)
(https://cdnb.artstation.com/p/assets/images/images/002/496/401/medium/kunal-rao-2.jpg?1462427229)
(https://www.thisiscolossal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/simon-10.jpg)[close]
Oh, that would be lovely. Think of the vibe that remote frontier planets in shows like Firefly or The Mandalorian have, at the moment no Starsector planet is at that low (and adventurous) level.
Here's some inspiration :Spoiler(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EKu9_VVXkAM-XzT?format=jpg&name=medium)
(https://cdnb.artstation.com/p/assets/images/images/002/496/401/medium/kunal-rao-2.jpg?1462427229)
(https://www.thisiscolossal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/simon-10.jpg)[close]
Personally I wouldn't mind my first colony being my main quest provider for some time. You might have to fend of local threads, ship in food, survey nearby systems, set up trade contacts with friendly neighbors... and your fledgling colony would basically pay you in growth percentage points. But maybe once you have established a faction all this would be done by them (i.e. automated) for your next colony.
My, they could be an planetary industry (asteroid mining) that you build on planets which have little ore, but which are in a system with asteroid fields of some kind. And then the industry auto-builds a mining station somewhere in that system. That way no new UI is necessary.
And if you settle a system with an ancient station, repossessing it to give the asteroid mining industry a boost seems like an option.
Also, AI run stations seem like a great target for raids, and disabling them a new way to weaken enemies that you can't attack directly. And on the other hand, the vulnerability of your stations would guarantee that planetside mining would remain the more desirable option.
Very simple idea: Colonies start at size 2 and automatically start building the Population And Infrastructure "building". Once this is build the colony is sufficiently developed ("tamed", "civilized", whichever word works best) to start taking in the waves of immigrants that make up the bulk of a colony's population growth, and so it'll start growing. Building a Spaceport next is technically optional at this point, but would obviously be very helpful to increase the colony's accessibility (and ability to bring in these immigrants).
Obviously some concerns that the idea will add to the mandatory babysitting problem, but I'm hoping those could be worked out.
Do the new enemies represent the intended pinnacle of enemy difficulty or are there more intended tiers coming after? (Being only a *hint* of end game after all)
The new fighter AI tags are interesting! What inspired those for vanilla? Or are they more for modders?
Also, does the CONSERVE_FOR_ANTI_ARMOR hint mean the weapon isn't used on shields?
Imagine if the endgame enemy was the Hegemony, and you were facing a couple of Lashers. Maybe with a pre-buff Enforcer thrown in there, to make it a challenge.
:-X
IIRC not generally, and unless the ship is panic-firing. But e.g. it might fire them at a high-flux enemy to force them into a tough choice, etc, so it's not a cut-and-dry binary thing.
Any plans for kinetic torpedoes?
Cruisers and capitals with salvage gantry? Does the phase troop transport come with Ground Support Package?
What if Size-7/5 industry colonies are made a part of endgame colony management instead of something available from the get go?
And since cryosleepers usually spawn in less than optimal systems
Cryosleeper: now has (gradually reduced) effect at up to 10 light-years; spawns in better star systems
Look forward to the implementation of story points. Can they be used to stop pirate/ludic path activity in your colonies? And for a higher cost, would you be able to persuade them to target other factions? A little privateering to help you with the competition!
The fleets of 30 capitals sounds kind of bad, especially from a lore perspective. Will such fleets be rare? Would be cool if they are named, persistent fleets that pop up on the intelligence screen when created. Hunting down and destroying such a fleet would weaken a faction and it would take them some time to build such a fleet again. Major hostile actions, like losing a colony, would drastically accelerate the creation of the next fleet. Named fleets officers would also level, to be a consistent threat to the player.
The phase troop transport does, yeah, "no" on the other stuff.Oh nice!
The fleets of 30 capitals sounds kind of bad, especially from a lore perspective. Will such fleets be rare? Would be cool if they are named, persistent fleets that pop up on the intelligence screen when created. Hunting down and destroying such a fleet would weaken a faction and it would take them some time to build such a fleet again. Major hostile actions, like losing a colony, would drastically accelerate the creation of the next fleet. Named fleets officers would also level, to be a consistent threat to the player.
Are we going to get a hyperstorm map layer on the sector map? I don't remember how it was without Adjusted Sector, but at least with it, there doesn't seem to be any way to figure out where the hyperstorms are without almost flying into them. If I could, I'd try looking at a map and navigating around, but as it is, it's too much bother and I'd rather burn through.
If you press "1" on the map, it turns off the Starscape view and you can roughly see where the deep hyper areas are.
I'd like to further endorse the idea of being able to just plop down a beacon that says "here be colony" and then your organic mission is to actually transition from that into an actual faction - with a variety of options picked from a list to get to that point (mechanics wise, you could have a table of stuff that mods can add to that it draws from where it provides options for population (do you just give incentives for homesteaders, rescue cryosleepers,), administration, industry/resources, etc - seems like it could be a way to add another questline dynamic (that's still just a variation on go here do thing/pick thing up, return, but for engaging story reasons).That sound fun but it seems like a lot of work for Alex.
Besides that, I'd also like to not have too create a fully functioning colony to provide resources to the faction. I'd like the whole vast resources available in space aspect to be leaned further into - drop one lonely guy in an inflated balloon in charge of corralling a bevy of automated mining drones and their tenders in a ring system, mined out nickel-iron asteroids spun up for super cheap habitat space (no antimatter powered grav generators for the poor), lean into the whole 'these planets are *** and we have to make do' aspect of the Persean Sector. It's not as though there isn't the technology to do great things, but there's so much squabbling between the factions that no one's using the resources to do anything - until you the PC explodes upon the scene.
Basically Alex, I just want to put a particle collider around a gas giant and start mass-manufacturing supermaterials - these stars won't harvest themselves!
(Also John C. Wright has some fascinating stuff in his two space opera series)
I think "babysitting" only really applies to things that "just happen" at some random time, rather than things you basically explicitly signed up for doing.Definitely. Colonies requiring extra stuff is fine, just so long as it isn't overly random. Or only able to be supplied once the colony actually demands something. Imagine putting down a colony, getting halfway to further exploration and suddenly the colony goes "actually, we need...eh, let me get out a d4 here...5d100 Food to continue working!", whereas the next colony demands 4d100 Domestic Goods, the next some amount of Luxury Goods and the next Lobster (for some inexplicable reason) or what have you. That'd be...less than ideal.
Imagine if the endgame enemy was the Hegemony, and you were facing a couple of Lashers. Maybe with a pre-buff Enforcer thrown in there, to make it a challenge.I'd just like to note that Frigates and Destroyers individually have killed me more often than Cruisers and Capitals combined. So in terms of fleets that have an actual record of making Swiss cheese of my hull ::)...
(It's possible I'm exaggerating a bit for dramatic effect...)
I feel like there are only so many ways I can say I don't think it's a good fit in-fiction-wise.
I feel that plenty of people complaining about need for colony babysitting and invasions etc didn't play vanilla recently and have their experience coming from Nexerlin overdose.In my case, I refer to vanilla, unmodded gameplay when I talk about babysitting. I have not touched Nexerelin in any of the 0.9a releases. (Played mostly in pre-0.8a, and only once or twice during 0.8a.)
Not only do I agree wholeheartedly that the whole massive colonies thing never really felt like they fit with the game world, I'd add that I think the player should be limited to only one size 6 colony (ie, a designated capital), perhaps two size 5, and any further settlements can only be outposts (ie, for mining). Otherwise, the player will end up with a bunch of size 6 colonies and it would seem odd that the player faction's colonies are all the same size when all the ingame factions have a variety of worlds ranging from densely populated capitals to sparsely populated settlements.Size 10^6 is only millions on the whole planet. If anything, that seems too small on anything bigger than a small moon, especially on a good earthlike world. That is maybe a big city or three and nothing else. It is not like post-Collapse is reduced to caveman or medieval tech. They still have interstellar magitech, just not as much as they had.
Devastator:
Slightly increased explosion radius and core explosion radius and slightly reduced fuse range
More likely to hit ships, and will do more damage with its explosions due to more targets being within core radius
I feel that plenty of people complaining about need for colony babysitting and invasions etc didn't play vanilla recently and have their experience coming from Nexerlin overdose.In my case, I refer to vanilla, unmodded gameplay when I talk about babysitting. I have not touched Nexerelin in any of the 0.9a releases. (Played mostly in pre-0.8a, and only once or twice during 0.8a.)Not only do I agree wholeheartedly that the whole massive colonies thing never really felt like they fit with the game world, I'd add that I think the player should be limited to only one size 6 colony (ie, a designated capital), perhaps two size 5, and any further settlements can only be outposts (ie, for mining). Otherwise, the player will end up with a bunch of size 6 colonies and it would seem odd that the player faction's colonies are all the same size when all the ingame factions have a variety of worlds ranging from densely populated capitals to sparsely populated settlements.Size 10^6 is only millions on the whole planet. If anything, that seems too small on anything bigger than a small moon, especially on a good earthlike world. That is maybe a big city or three and nothing else. It is not like post-Collapse is reduced to caveman or medieval tech. They still have interstellar magitech, just not as much as they had.
Also, it is not hard having 10^4 crew in an endgame fleet if built for it. If I can plop down multiple 10^3 colonies in quick succession, it would be nice to plop a 10^4 colony instantly if I have the crew on hand. Also, I tend to have crew and marines in the tens of thousands stockpiled in colony resources or storage.
I think "babysitting" only really applies to things that "just happen" at some random time, rather than things you basically explicitly signed up for doing.Definitely. Colonies requiring extra stuff is fine, just so long as it isn't overly random. Or only able to be supplied once the colony actually demands something. Imagine putting down a colony, getting halfway to further exploration and suddenly the colony goes "actually, we need...eh, let me get out a d4 here...5d100 Food to continue working!", whereas the next colony demands 4d100 Domestic Goods, the next some amount of Luxury Goods and the next Lobster (for some inexplicable reason) or what have you. That'd be...less than ideal.
You could probably integrate this into the colonization screen pretty easily, I'd say, the one that says you need 1000 dudes, 100 Heavy Machinery and 200 Supplies to found a colony. Have another box below that lists what specific things that particular planet will need for a colony to reach the point where it'll be self-sufficient depending on the planet's conditions - say that every colony needs some amount of food/goods to tide them over until they can establish their own food sources, but planets with Destabilized Subpopulation specifically requires some amount of Marines to keep the initial colonists safe, tectonically active planets need additional supplies/heavy machinery to reinforce structures and build warning systems, High Gravity planets can require Heavy Armaments ("Humans require powered exoskeletons for regular movement and find even basic actions exhausting", which could be a part of the Heavy Armaments item, like power armor style?), etc.
The only real detail to remember (that I can come up with off the top of my head) is how to make sure that secondary list of required items is accessible remotely, without being at the specific planet. If the amount of items you need per hazard condition is static you could just look it up on a wiki and calculate it, or run around the core looking for planets with the right conditions and calculate what you need from that, but ideally it'd just be available from the Intel screen. That shouldn't be hard to add, though, I don't think.
also i agree with the trird guy above me, the devastator is awful to use because most of the shoots explode before they hit the target, i would also add that all the large point defence weapons (devastator, guardian, locust) suck.... it would be better to make them medium sized or give them a strong buff, ebcause as of now, you would be better putting a medium weapon in your large slot than puttting any of them
also also whats the deal with the warthog? just put the 3th mortar back... having 2 of them on a wing is enough of a nerf, they whent from op to COMPLETELY useless now and, form what i read, they gona be even worse, just entirelly useless
Honestly, by this point, shouldn't the 'real' map be the default? The 'pretty' map, as pretty as it is, is sorely not useful in the least as an actual map for navigation, and without a doubt a lot of players miss that little hotkey, and generally the hotkeys on the map screen, so even the fuel limits would be helpful to come pre-loaded.
I'm strangely impressed by the 'Move Slowly' change, which seems like a really elegant way to neaten up the small gameplay things around that.
I feel that plenty of people complaining about need for colony babysitting and invasions etc didn't play vanilla recently and have their experience coming from Nexerlin overdose.
Hey Alex, keep up the incredible work. I'm really excited to see 4k and UI updates are coming, being one of the people that loves playing this game in ultrawide in all its glory. Thanks for what you do!
Besides that, I'd also like to not have too create a fully functioning colony to provide resources to the faction. I'd like the whole vast resources available in space aspect to be leaned further into - drop one lonely guy in an inflated balloon in charge of corralling a bevy of automated mining drones and their tenders in a ring system, mined out nickel-iron asteroids spun up for super cheap habitat space (no antimatter powered grav generators for the poor), lean into the whole 'these planets are *** and we have to make do' aspect of the Persean Sector. It's not as though there isn't the technology to do great things, but there's so much squabbling between the factions that no one's using the resources to do anything - until you the PC explodes upon the scene.
Basically Alex, I just want to put a particle collider around a gas giant and start mass-manufacturing supermaterials - these stars won't harvest themselves!
(Also John C. Wright has some fascinating stuff in his two space opera series)
Definitely. Colonies requiring extra stuff is fine, just so long as it isn't overly random. Or only able to be supplied once the colony actually demands something. Imagine putting down a colony, getting halfway to further exploration and suddenly the colony goes "actually, we need...eh, let me get out a d4 here...5d100 Food to continue working!", whereas the next colony demands 4d100 Domestic Goods, the next some amount of Luxury Goods and the next Lobster (for some inexplicable reason) or what have you. That'd be...less than ideal.
I'd just like to note that Frigates and Destroyers individually have killed me more often than Cruisers and Capitals combined. So in terms of fleets that have an actual record of making Swiss cheese of my hull ::)...
Not only do I agree wholeheartedly that the whole massive colonies thing never really felt like they fit with the game world, I'd add that I think the player should be limited to only one size 6 colony (ie, a designated capital), perhaps two size 5, and any further settlements can only be outposts (ie, for mining). Otherwise, the player will end up with a bunch of size 6 colonies and it would seem odd that the player faction's colonies are all the same size when all the ingame factions have a variety of worlds ranging from densely populated capitals to sparsely populated settlements.
In my case, I refer to vanilla, unmodded gameplay when I talk about babysitting. I have not touched Nexerelin in any of the 0.9a releases. (Played mostly in pre-0.8a, and only once or twice during 0.8a.)
Is the Devastator still going to be using shotRangeVariance for its projectiles?
And if so, is it going to be set the same as it is now?
One of the reasons a lot of people don't seem too keen on this weapon is that many of its shots are effectively 'wasted' starting at ~60% of the weapon's range.If you don't feel that removing the variance entirely would be desirable, would you consider adjusting the range of the projectiles up to 40-45-ish and lowering the shotRangeVariance to match?SpoilerAs an exercise for my own curiosity I removed the variance and changed the projectile range from 30 to 52 (30 * 1.75), and it doesn't seem any more powerful. But it does at least feel somewhat more satisfying seeing most of the shots get near the target before bursting.
Recoil seems to be the limiting factor - as in the Devastator has horrible recoil stats, so the shots will form a perpendicular arc at max range instead of a stripe leading away from the ship.[close]
Just want to say: Thank you Alex, for answering all these many questions, I appreciate it as always :)
Mh, that way you'd just dump in everything they will need at the beginning and forget about it, I don't really see the difference to the current system. To me the appeal is in actually taking care of your colony for a while. What differentiates that from annoying babysitting is that a) that phase has a foreseeable end and b) you have control over when to take growth-enhancing missions, they shouldn't distract you from what you are otherwise doing, like constant invasion fleets do.
I agree that simple fetch quests are not very interesting (but then again, some people like trade missions). But escorting your colony's very first trade fleet on its maiden voyage would be interesting, for example.
I like the idea that a colony's initial requirements are influences by the planetary conditions.
Methinks someone has been a very naughty boy and has been cheesing pirate bases with an Overridden Hammerhead and its two Assault Chainguns ::)
Speaking of Bases and Battlestations, I'm under the opinion that the High Tech base needs a shield arc buff as the non-ultimate versions has very big gaps where the future extension would be wich results in it being overly vulnerable mid game when compared to the other base types.
The fleets of 30 capitals sounds kind of bad, especially from a lore perspective. Will such fleets be rare? Would be cool if they are named, persistent fleets that pop up on the intelligence screen when created. Hunting down and destroying such a fleet would weaken a faction and it would take them some time to build such a fleet again. Major hostile actions, like losing a colony, would drastically accelerate the creation of the next fleet. Named fleets officers would also level, to be a consistent threat to the player.
I think the hazard rating mechanics will natrually add some size spread to colonies, basically doing this - a high hazard mining colony would stay small unless you invested a lot into putting more population there. I'm not 100% sure actually how the economics of this work out - whether increasing colony size to 6 in a case like that would be a net profit or not, actually. It depends on what it's exporting etc. Since you'd be getting, likely, some flat bonuses from AI cores/items/improvements/etc, getting a few more points of production out of a higher size - at high expense, to boot - might not be worth it. Will have to see, though.
My concern with this based on the current version of the game is that high hazard colonies tend to really lag behind other colonies in profits until they get big.Another problem is slower growth. It is a pain to synch grow with other planets, which is important when I want to avoid shortages when one planet grows bigger first and gets shortages while the other planet(s) catch up. However, that is only a problem when sizes reach 7 and up, which will be moot by size 6 limit.
Hmm - does Nexerelin adjust punitive expeditions etc? I've been kind of assuming that whenever I hear about that, it's a vanilla thing, but it'd be good to know if it's in fact different in Nex.Punitive expeditions, not that I'm aware of. And personally I turn random player diplomacy off in Nex' config, so random faction DoWs and the sudden invasions they would bring isn't something I have to deal with either. Unless I actively pull the trigger first, but than obviously I'm fully aware of what I'm signing up for.
Gotcha, yeah - same page here. But e.g. "you need X amount of <whatever> for the colony to get to the next step towards taking off on its own" but there's no rush/consequences if you don't do it now now now sounds reasonable.Something that would stall colony growth would probably end up being seen as a priority task regardless, since obviously we want our colonies to grow. But that would only feel like babysitting if I was only informed of what's needed X days after the colony is founded, and couldn't drop stuff off ahead of time (and not have those resources be consumed for other reasons). Or if, say, a trade fleet gets lost and the colony suddenly needs me to personally go acquire and deliver X amount of goods to resume production of the Spaceport or wait out the (month-long?) shortage, that'd easily end up feeling like babysitting.
I think "oh it's just a Kite with Reapers" has a winning record against player flagships overall.Hmm...I've actually gotten exploded by my own bombers deploying a field of faster-moving mines right behind me and my unshielded rear more often than I've gotten hit by a Reaper, actually, at least hit on something other than my shield. My main supply of crow comes from (usually Phase) ships sneaking behind me and slowly dismantling my engines. Still haven't found a decent way to deal with phase ships either, other than waiting for them to forget that they're functionally untouchable and get slaughtered.
I feel like there are only so many ways I can say I don't think it's a good fit in-fiction-wise.
I think I misread a comment somewhere about concern that the fleet cap would cause capital heavy fleets, but the patch notes say the fleets will be better balanced.
My concern with this based on the current version of the game is that high hazard colonies tend to really lag behind other colonies in profits until they get big. So now if they are forced to be small, then it feels like the will never be as good as low hazard colonies. Do you feel like small mining colonies are valuable enough to be worthwhile over other colonies? The player can only manage a finite number so it feels like in the pursuit of making high hazard mining colonies thematically small, you might make them not very good in general. Unless the in-faction supply bonuses have been increased significantly, or the balance of profits for really good ore resources has changed, I can't really see a small mining colony with only one or two industries being useful. I'd rather just have another size 6 titan colony with 3 big production industries.
Punitive expeditions, not that I'm aware of. And personally I turn random player diplomacy off in Nex' config, so random faction DoWs and the sudden invasions they would bring isn't something I have to deal with either. Unless I actively pull the trigger first, but than obviously I'm fully aware of what I'm signing up for.
Commenting on the babysitting stuff:
I'm pretty sure Nex adds invasions and raids where hostile factions try to capture or harass your colonies, and those can be quite a bit bigger than the expeditions for the current colony level. They're not as common as expeditions though. I'm not sure if nex adjusts expeditions at all.
Something that would stall colony growth would probably end up being seen as a priority task regardless, since obviously we want our colonies to grow. But that would only feel like babysitting if I was only informed of what's needed X days after the colony is founded, and couldn't drop stuff off ahead of time (and not have those resources be consumed for other reasons). Or if, say, a trade fleet gets lost and the colony suddenly needs me to personally go acquire and deliver X amount of goods to resume production of the Spaceport or wait out the (month-long?) shortage, that'd easily end up feeling like babysitting.
But if I'm told "this colony will (eventually) need an additional 200 Heavy Machinery to become self-sufficient" right when I try to put down the colony, that's fine. That doesn't require me to stay near my colonies to manage stuff I can't manage remotely, or for me to drop whatever I'm doing and go do something else somewhere else with no warning because something random happened.
For me personally, I would want 'defend your colony' type missions to be rare and very difficult rather than common and fairly easy. I think the babysitting feeling comes from the fact that current expeditions happen somewhat frequently so that the player ends up constantly going back to their colony unless they build up some impenetrable defenses. This has led me to delay making a colony until I can afford to immediately build up a level 2 station and ground defenses so that I minimize the amount I need to personally defend.
I would like major defense type stuff (expeditions) to only really happen 3-4 times over a campaign, but I would also want it to be very difficult. Something where you know many months in advance and are trying to prepare by building up your fleet or whatever (maybe add some temporary defense mechanics as well). Maybe there could be some intel missions where you get a tip in a bar, or from a contact, that a faction is upset with your production and you can recon the fleet that is assembling or sabotage it etc.
Kind of unrelated, but is the player the de-facto "leader" of planets they colonized, or more like ....a majority stakeholder?
Ah, the mathematician's answer.Kind of unrelated, but is the player the de-facto "leader" of planets they colonized, or more like ....a majority stakeholder?
Yes!
I think the babysitting feeling comes from the fact that current expeditions happen somewhat frequently so that the player ends up constantly going back to their colony unless they build up some impenetrable defenses. This has led me to delay making a colony until I can afford to immediately build up a level 2 station and ground defenses so that I minimize the amount I need to personally defend.The frequency (especially once Free Port is on) is why I want to destroy the core worlds. No core worlds, no more expeditions (or the need to defend them from zombie pirates).
Hmm, I don't think I agree here; "priority" is different from "long-term negative consequences if you don't". Having things to prioritize is fine. I mean, establishing a colony could be considered "babysitting" in that light. And if you know all the requirements ahead of time, that just translates into having to get more stuff together to start a colony, and that just seems boring. This'd have to get thought through some; I don't think pure resource requirements would be all that interesting here - rather, "things to do" might work better. For example, "survey the entire system", "establish a comm relay", "clear out a pirate base that's in a system next door", "deal with a Pather expedition (that may be hostile or friendly, with Consequences either way), etc...Yeah, point taken. I'd be fine with it so long as it doesn't force me to interrupt what I'm doing and doesn't completely stall out colony stuff to the point where I feel like I'm wasting time if I don't get it done. Not that there's a time limit to the game, but it's best if stuff that takes time grows in the background while I go explore the Sector a bit more. Rather than me finishing all my explorations and only then doing the colony stuff, resulting in me sitting around for years waiting for stuff to grow.
However, having impenetrable defenses for my colonies only solves part of the babysitting problem. The other problem is the neverending zombie pirates that successfully raid (the mostly undefended) core worlds constantly unless I intercept the pirates. In one game, I ignored the pirates for a few years and Asharu decivilized and (I think) few other worlds had zero stability from constant pirate raids. If I want to save the core worlds for income purposes, I need to chase pirates constantly to save the core worlds.Random suggestion: Would turning off worlds decivilizing in the configs help with that at all? It makes no sense for it to happen to the core worlds like that and if your own colonies are at stability 0 for that long you'll likely have enough problems to deal with anyway. That's what I did in my last vanilla run, right before...some world, I can't remember which, but right before some core world would have decivilized. Only reason that save still has all the core worlds intact.
Totally important question here.
What is your opinion on sub frigate size pilotable or autonomous craft? By this I mean gunships, patrol boats, corvettes, heavy fighters, the like.
The Robberfly Corvette (from Blackrock) in particular seemed to be a very interesting concept, light, manoeuvrable, unshielded, and very small, but with enough weaponry to pose a credible threat to low level freighters. And incredibly synergistic with tactical lasers.
I can't really speak much about colony development, because the thing I really want with colonies is the orders tab. Colonies by themselves are just puzzles of how to make the most money out of them and custom production is the only unique (for the time being) benefit.
@ AcaMetis: My worlds were fine. It was the Indie worlds in Corvus and Arcadia that got wrecked because I ignored pirates (because I did not want to stop exploring in the fringe where my colonies were, and it should be up to the Hegemony and Indies to defend their worlds and clean up their mess.)I just clear whatever bases have bounties put on them most of the time, and I never have issues with decivilization. I never fight individual raids.
After that game, I have basically played Superman or Batman rushing to intercept every last pirate raid so that core worlds' stability does not drop. (And I do not want their stability to tank so I can raid them for blueprints later and not decivilize those worlds.) Chasing pirates to protect core worlds takes a big chunk of babysitting time, probably more than defending my worlds. Then the core worlds thank me by sending expeditions. It is like a scene right out of the movie High Plains Drifter where player is Clint Eastwood, the cowardly townsfolk whose town is painted red are all of the non-pirate factions, and the outlaws terrorizing the town until they die in the end are the relentless zombie pirates.
Pirates effortlessly decivilizing worlds in five to ten years is sort of lore breaking. AI wars and other big conflicts among major factions are just not believable when zombie pirate overlords overwhelm everyone with ease.
I just clear whatever bases have bounties put on them most of the time, and I never have issues with decivilization. I never fight individual raids.I try to clear base bounties too, but sometimes, I do not always catch them all on time, and I need to intercept a raid (unless I need the raid to succeed to proc a system bounty). Ever since Asharu decivilized after a few years in that one game, I have hunted pirates mostly non-stop to prevent another decivilization (until I decide the core worlds need to die).
decivilizing in 5 or 10 years is also a bit of an exaggeration i'd think. I've had at least a few playthroughs where i kept going more than 10 years and don't think i've ever seen a decivilization warning come up for even a backwater planet of the main factions in an unmodded game.Maybe it is random and I got unlucky. I played unmodded game, and Asharu decivilized sometime between five to ten years in one of my games. It was during the first v0.9a releases. Also, I had no decivilization warning. (That might have came in a later release.) Asharu suddenly decivilized, like sudden death in overtime.
Yes!
Those are all fair points. But the stars look pretty, so... look, let me have this one.
(A somewhat more salient point: I do think it's important to have a real-space view of the Sector visible in the game somewhere, just to make it feel like a "real" bunch of stars somewhere.)
Bit late, but Re: Colony Limits... I don't think putting a hard lock on one size 6 and size 5 for the rest would be a good idea. Or even that a hard limit at all is necessary. Colonies should grow organically. And since every step up is a 10x growth, it should be simple to tweak the formula for anything above size 6 to take too long for comfort.I would not want 10^6 for one and 10^5 for the rest. Makes meeting demand a pain. Also probably would need to babysit my colonies more (unless I sat bomb the big core worlds to lower their populations and weaken their expeditions permanently). Even if limits are higher, having one world having a higher limit than another means the smaller worlds need to produce more to satisfy demand for the bigger planet.
So if a guy wants to play extremely long games where a size 7 colony won't take 30 cycles but thanks to his min-maxing will only take 20 cycles to complete.... shouldn't we let him have it? It's not a massive upgrade and he won't feel like he's arbitrarily locked out of having a "real planet". It's just that like a "real planet", it will happen over a course of decades or centuries and not just years.
So if a guy wants to play extremely long games where a size 7 colony won't take 30 cycles but thanks to his min-maxing will only take 20 cycles to complete.... shouldn't we let him have it? It's not a massive upgrade and he won't feel like he's arbitrarily locked out of having a "real planet". It's just that like a "real planet", it will happen over a course of decades or centuries and not just years.For someone who does not want to wait too long, but wants to get his big planet badly enough for whatever reason, gameplay would be dominated by min-maxing that one stat (population growth).
But if people hang around in the game, actually bored out of their mind, just to see that number change from 6 to 7, that's bad game design.That would be me. I have done this for months, maybe years, with level and item grinding in Diablo 2. Obsession can trump boredom (because the player really want that goal badly enough), and that is not healthy.
just about every person that plays Startsector is, to some extent, a munchkin that will number crunch the game until they can glass the entire sector with the exhaust fumes of their fleet full of cheese.
just about every person that plays Startsector is, to some extent, a munchkin that will number crunch the game until they can glass the entire sector with the exhaust fumes of their fleet full of cheese.
Mh, I think you are confusing "every person that plays Startsector" with "many that play Startsector and are actively discussing it on the internet". The latter is a self selecting group that does not represent the whole playerbase, a vocal minority of of sorts.
I believe most players are simply picking options that seem fun or exciting to them.
Mh, I think you are confusing "every person that plays Startsector" with "many that play Startsector and are actively discussing it on the internet". The latter is a self selecting group that does not represent the whole playerbase, a vocal minority of of sorts.
I believe most players are simply picking options that seem fun or exciting to them.
The idea is to stop people from forcing themselves into gameplay that is not fun, because they feel they have to play "optimally" or "max out everything".What would force players to sit around for 20-30 ingame years to watch colonies grow from size 6 to size 7? It's not a requirement to unlock the super secret final boss (I'm assuming), all it does is make a few numbers bigger. And not in a way that's likely to make any sort of difference by that point. I don't recall anyone feeling forced to sit around until their colonies reach size 10 in the current patch, I don't understand why it would become a problem in the upcoming one.
Mh, I think you are confusing "every person that plays Startsector" with "many that play Startsector and are actively discussing it on the internet". The latter is a self selecting group that does not represent the whole playerbase, a vocal minority of of sorts.
I believe most players are simply picking options that seem fun or exciting to them.
When people pick options 'for fun' in games like Star Sector, they usually must also pick options that are optimized to counter balance it unless they don't care about making progress or essentially running their saves into the ground. Most of the things that I'm talking about, most people wouldn't event think about as Min-maxing, like picking a Buffalo over a Tarsus... which is totally min-maxing the logistical profile of your fleet. Or settling in a system with lots of moons to stack your defenses.
Lots of the stuff that people consider 'just the thing you do', like take Transverse Jump asap, is Munchkin min-maxing. The fact that not doing those things is considered either new-player behavior or an intentional role-play/difficulty increase is proof enough that most people that play this game are, to an extent min-maxing munchkins, even if they don't take every opportunity to be as optimal as possible.
Only read the OP so sorry if you already answered;
Is it possible to make the move slowly key a toggle on? Maybe by a setting?
Thanks!
So if a guy wants to play extremely long games where a size 7 colony won't take 30 cycles but thanks to his min-maxing will only take 20 cycles to complete.... shouldn't we let him have it? It's not a massive upgrade and he won't feel like he's arbitrarily locked out of having a "real planet". It's just that like a "real planet", it will happen over a course of decades or centuries and not just years.
The idea is to stop people from forcing themselves into gameplay that is not fun, because they feel they have to play "optimally" or "max out everything". If just some people who really want to hang around in a save for 50 years were to see the colonies grow to size 7, that would not be a problem. But if people hang around in the game, actually bored out of their mind, just to see that number change from 6 to 7, that's bad game design.
A hard-limit that entirely takes this off the table from the very get-go is kind of taking me out of the "your faction is a real faction" vibe that I want. One of the most amazing strengths of this game is that I am using the same ships, the same mechanics to equip those ships, to staff them with officers, etc. as the NPCs. For the most part it feels like I am playing the same game as them, and that is good. Similarly, the core fantasy of being able to start my own faction is that I am playing on an equal playing field with the big guys and can also get to where they are if I surpass enough hardships (which is also what makes starting your own faction in mount&blade so satisfying, RP-wise), but it kinda takes some of the wind out of the sails if I know from the get-go that there is an insurmountable upper barrier that cannot be surpassed no matter what.My first or second thought about factions exceeding the limit while I cannot is to sat bomb them down to size (6) if I do not want to destroy them outright (for purposes of income), especially if their expeditions are too big. If I cannot have big colonies like them, no one can!
That is why I have not seriously attempted the mad quest of full sector colonization yet, although I did grind Ordos in red systems for about forty-something alpha cores, just to see what kind of grinding I would need to do to get the cores needed to colonize everything, and to find what can kill Radiants the least painfully.Can you please tell us what were your finds for optimally killing Radiants? I've been using Drover-filled with Sparks spam ... Am I far from it?
I wish to ask, is there a way to make the "Shift" key sticky or toggleable in combat so I wouldn't have to keep holding it down?
Thank you for the responses in advance.
Can you please tell us what were your finds for optimally killing Radiants?I did not say I found anything better than what is already known by others. If anything, I had a sub-optimal character with points sunk into colony skills (that became obsolete after I farmed more than a few alpha cores). All I wanted is a way to farm cores without losing most of my fleet whenever more than one Radiant attacks - and without Drover and Spark spam since my character was not built for it.
There are a number of factions which don't have size 7 or 8 worlds. Tri-tachyon maxes at 6, Pirates, Independents and Pathers cap at size 5. So a newly settled player faction caps out like some of the smaller factions already present. If the player can grow a size 8 world over the course of decades, why shouldn't Tri-tachyon also be able to do so? That of course adds more mechanics and late game issues to balance.Tri-Tachyon is the only major that stops at 6.
I wish to ask, is there a way to make the "Shift" key sticky or toggleable in combat so I wouldn't have to keep holding it down?
Thank you for the responses in advance.
I suggested this a few weeks ago and in the short discussion that followed we came to the conclusion that it might be better to make an extra keybinding for it (like caps lock).
An option (checkbox in the menu) to choose wether you want to hold or toggle shift is good enough for most use cases though.
Anyway the other suggestion i made in that post is now part of the patch notes so i have good hopes we might get this one as well ;)
Regarding the "new, very rare, and powerful enemy:"
Of course, you can't say much but will this enemy type just be roaming about in the wild or will there be specific steps that have to take place to trigger them? On the one hand, I would a "There be dragons" part of the map or some kind of event that keeps the player humble while on the other hand, I would hate for a new player to get stomped prematurely. At least the [REDACTED] have warning beacons.
Also, if current threats are "a couple of Lashers/Enforcers" and what is planned is "the whole Hegemony," (even withe hyperbole)...that sounds both terrifying and exciting. I have my theories but I do hope that the player isn't the only one invested in stopping the existential threat.
as expected
Will planets with disruoted spaceports still generate procurement missions? The "Donn raid-and-trait" strategy makes getting credits too easy.
Just as it is with XP currently, which really peters out above level 70 if you have levels unlocked
The idea is to stop people from forcing themselves into gameplay that is not fun, because they feel they have to play "optimally" or "max out everything". If just some people who really want to hang around in a save for 50 years were to see the colonies grow to size 7, that would not be a problem. But if people hang around in the game, actually bored out of their mind, just to see that number change from 6 to 7, that's bad game design.
Personally, I feel like capping colony size is just a solution looking for a problem. Essentially, the only problems of large Colony sizes that I can see, are the lore conflict, the lack of "realism", and the thematic issues, all things you've previously said should move out of the way for game mechanics. Those three things could be more easily 'fixed' just by reducing the population number of each colony size, or giving certain core worlds specific conditions that, for lore-reasons just state they have larger populations than what their size would otherwise state.
Basically, you are never going to get 'high-hazard small mining colonies' organically. Unless you hamfist it in some way, it's just not happening. It just doesn't work with the mechanics. The only option I can think of is either a fundamental change to the mining system so that more population doesn't improve goods produced, a massive increase to mining profitability just for having the industry, or effectively some kind of 'mining colony' button that limits the colony growth, but gives massive bonuses to accessibility and production (and either prevents or doesn't benefit volatiles, farming, refineries, etc).
As for requiring items to bring income up to pre-nerf, or rather '0.95' levels, once again, it feels more like a solution looking for a problem. While currently colonies can quickly make money a non-issue, that's not because they're unbalanced but because the game has a fundamental lack of resource sinks in end game.
A fundament problem with the system is that there will always be a 'best' skill out of every choice. You can get those skills infinitely close, but you can never truly make them equal. Because of this, there will always be a 'best' build, and players will always gravitate towards it.
To give an example, let's take that navigation skill example. The one that increases overall speed is better. Why? Because it's an overall speed boost, vs making up for a penalty. I can just limit the times when I need to 'slow-move', which I will be used to anyway beforehand. In contrast, the slow-move buff only helps in situations that are sub-optimal to begin with, and no matter how fast you go when slow-moving, I assume it's never going to overtake someone going normal speed. The choice is between lessening a penalty that happens when you essentially screw up positioning in the map, or buffing everything else. It's especially egregious because neither really defines your gameplay, it's not a meaningful choice, it's a nobrainer.
If you really, absolutely, want to provoke different builds, in my opinion, the only real option is to make it so either each choice has nothing to do with each other, or fundamentally changes the way you play the game.
What's more, it's more than likely, that the industry/general/utility skills will be, once again prioritized over the combat skills because as always, generally speaking, it's not the player's combat performance that matters most. That's... one more thing that's sort of fundamental to the game as well.
Regardless, I hope my comments don't come off as... pushy or demanding. I believe that I don't necessarily disagree with what you're trying to accomplish. It's just that I think the way you're going about it won't get the results you want. While I certainly have my own desires for what I would 'like' from the game and perhaps I'm projecting my own desires onto you, I'm trying to go on what you've said in the past.
In the end, I'm an opinionated person, and as I write things like this, I tend to get defensive as I pick holes in my own comments. Also its been a few days since I've checked the patch notes or followed the conversation, so maybe some of these have been addressed, or are misunderstandings. I apologize in advance if this is the case.
Have a nice day.
What would force players to sit around for 20-30 ingame years to watch colonies grow from size 6 to size 7? It's not a requirement to unlock the super secret final boss (I'm assuming), all it does is make a few numbers bigger.
Is it possible to make the move slowly key a toggle on? Maybe by a setting?
I think making the Light Needler 7 OP is a mistake. It still won't be useful for ships that want more sustained kinetic pressure, and on ships that can fully utilize the burst like the Sunder or Doom it'll be undercosted. The Railgun nerf is appropriate, though.
I really love game devs like you. You give just enough info to make me get really excited about what's next, but you don't give any big spoilers. I really can't wait for the new raiding mechanics and story content!
Also, completly off-topic, but are there any mods that interest you content or gameplay wise?
Given the easy to modify nature of the game, I think as a core vanilla limit, size 6 is fine, and if someone wants their "Long war" mod that lets you play with interesting game play for decades and eventually become as large as the Hegemony, then the subset of players interested in it will grab that mod. Presumably Alex can make that number easy to change, and given the fact NPC worlds larger exist, should work naturally.
It makes no gameplay difference where the cap is set, since the factions and core are static/scripted so that they can be balanced with whatever the player is allowed to do. Colony size has no significance other than income in the current game, and since income can be independently tuned, it's actually just a matter of 'feeling' which is totally subjective.
Hi!
I'm new here and to the game.
I wish to ask, is there a way to make the "Shift" key sticky or toggleable in combat so I wouldn't have to keep holding it down?
Thank you for the responses in advance.
Very exciting news, and interesting discussions.
Glad to be a part of it.
Thank you for developing StarSector.
It is truly amazing.
English is not my native language. I apologize.
What's more, it's more than likely, that the industry/general/utility skills will be, once again prioritized over the combat skills because as always, generally speaking, it's not the player's combat performance that matters most. That's... one more thing that's sort of fundamental to the game as well.The reason why more people value other skills over combat skills is because there are more people who are bad at combat than who are good. And since combat skills scale with player's skill the most, put two and two together and combat skills are unpopular partially because they really are worth less to some people, and others learned to avoid them, because they used to be worth less to them.
I think that's something that seems like it's numerically correct but actually generally isn't, not if your personal piloting is reasonably good. Even in the currently-out version, combat skills are I think way better than common wisdom gives them credit for. In the next release, with Elite skills, you'll have even more personal impact (compared to an officer which will have very limited access to Elite skills). Plus, every aptitude but leadership has some (thematic to the aptitude) combat skills, so you'd pick some up regardless.Will new combat skills' bonuses be overall greater, than current combat skills? You get more locked in in the next update, so I hope so.
Hi!Hi!
I'm new here and to the game.
I wish to ask, is there a way to make the "Shift" key sticky or toggleable in combat so I wouldn't have to keep holding it down?
Thank you for the responses in advance.
Very exciting news, and interesting discussions.
Glad to be a part of it.
Thank you for developing StarSector.
It is truly amazing.
English is not my native language. I apologize.
Hi! Not quite, but if you go to gameplay settings (a tab in the "Settings" menu), there's a setting to invert the behavior, so that ships will face the mouse by default, and holding shift will temporarily stop it. Not sure if that'll be useful to you; depends on exactly what you're looking for. (As far as an extra control, well, running a bit short on buttons! Not a fan of using caps lock for things, since it has side effects...)
Happy you're into the game otherwise :)
The reason why more people value other skills over combat skills is because there are more people who are bad at combat than who are good. And since combat skills scale with player's skill the most, put two and two together and combat skills are unpopular partially because they really are worth less to some people, and others learned to avoid them, because they used to be worth less to them. I don't know of any particular point at which it's better to get combat skills than not to, but once you play for some time, it's worth to check and see if you're at that point yet.
- Flagging intel as "important" will no longer prevent it from being removed when it expires
The reason why more people value other skills over combat skills is because there are more people who are bad at combat than who are good. And since combat skills scale with player's skill the most, put two and two together and combat skills are unpopular partially because they really are worth less to some people, and others learned to avoid them, because they used to be worth less to them.
I don't know of any particular point at which it's better to get combat skills than not to, but once you play for some time, it's worth to check and see if you're at that point yet.
Will new combat skills' bonuses be overall greater, than current combat skills? You get more locked in in the next update, so I hope so.
A new button for toggling the function temporarily would be the option i wish to be implemented. Making it an optional toggleable function would be also really helpful.
May you please consider implementing combinations. For example by default C is decelerate.
I wish to use W+S or A+D or E+D or Q+A key combinations which otherwise doesn't really make sense to be used / be pressed / holded down together for that.
I'm sorry if I bothered you with these requests and thank you for considering implementing any of these and again for developing StarSector.
So this one's a mixed bag. Something like an incoming pirate raid? Yeah, take that off the list when I've killed it, I don't need that sticking around. Something like a 'survey this research station' mission that I tagged as important so I don't have to keep separate outside-the-game notes? No, I actually don't want that to expire when the mission's no longer being offered; I would very much like the information that "There is a research station in this system" to be something that sticks around.
RE: All the Onslaught discussions.
So the interesting thing here that I noticed recently is that the Onslaught's base flux dissipation is the same as the Dominator's base flux dissipation. Which does, looking at it, neatly explain why I'm happy to use Dominators, but find Onslaughts to be under-fluxed and overall just relatively poor ships for their price tag.
And on a completely un-related note, I'd like to bring this suggestion thread (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15118.0) back to Alex' attention; it would be very useful for modders to have some access to how ships get drawn in non-combat / non-refit contexts.
Hmm? The Dominator is 450, and the Onslaught is 600. Is that not what you're seeing in 0.9.1a? In other words, did I buff that aspect of it and forget about it?...Huh. Yup, looks like I goofed somehow, those are definitely the correct values. Not sure where I got that notion from, then.
Hmm? The Dominator is 450, and the Onslaught is 600. Is that not what you're seeing in 0.9.1a? In other words, did I buff that aspect of it and forget about it?...Huh. Yup, looks like I goofed somehow, those are definitely the correct values. Not sure where I got that notion from, then.
My initial though is you'd be less locked in due to being able to re-spec
@ ProfessionalHuman: Welcome to the forum! The control scheme you are proposing has actually been tried early on, but was found to be disorienting. You can read more here, if you like: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8643.0 (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8643.0)So, after reading http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8643.0 and watching some examples of games that use this approach i came to a conclusion that fixing camera to a ship actually doesn't work as well as i thouth. Thanks for providing a link to that discussion.
If that was changed and the keys mean "move north/south/west/east" instead then how do you see that working when your ship is pointed diagonally? Should the ship just half move forward/half strafe? Changing this would mean you can just move into 8 directions too.I assume that technically the ship will "just move" in desired direction. On screen you of course will see that both side and main engines are firing.
A few skills are permanent and can’t be reassigned; these are ones with effects that would either leave the game in an invalid state if the player had the skill and subsequently didn’t, or just ones that make it optimal to get the skill, use it, and then refund it.I like to know how many such perma-skills are there. Would like to know if the skill I want is permanent before I spend a point on it. No fun stepping on a landmine by trying to re-spec the skill away only to learn "too late, you can't".
Do combat skills really make that much of a difference ????
Ah, whew. I wonder if maybe increasing the efficiency of the TPC slightly might not help It's not *bad* at 0.8, but it's still energy damage on an otherwise-ballistic ship, so I wonder if .6 might not be more appropriate. That would bring it almost to the level of kinetc/HE vs their specialized targets, though...
But there is one thing that wasn't mentioned in that discussion. As i observed, when game chooses in wich direction to propell the ship it takes into account direction to where its nose pointing. What if there was a button that removes ships nose direction from equation? So then if i press "A" ship will always strafe to the left, if i press "D" ship will always strafe to the right, and so on. That could also make piloting broadside ships easier.If that was changed and the keys mean "move north/south/west/east" instead then how do you see that working when your ship is pointed diagonally? Should the ship just half move forward/half strafe? Changing this would mean you can just move into 8 directions too.I assume that technically the ship will "just move" in desired direction. On screen you of course will see that both side and main engines are firing.
I like to know how many such perma-skills are there. Would like to know if the skill I want is permanent before I spend a point on it. No fun stepping on a landmine by trying to re-spec the skill away only to learn "too late, you can't".
I'll point out, you can't swap out the TPC for their specialized variants (kinetic/HE). They also can't be acquired in any other way than on an Onslaught. So the question of TPC efficiency relative to kinetic and high explosive weapons is irrelevant. There's no substitution or decision to be made. Its not like you get to pick TPC over a Storm Needler or a Hellbore cannon. TPC stats have to be considered in combination with the Onslaught itself. The question is, does their current efficiency make the Onslaught too strong, too weak, or just right?
Given the Onslaught has 5 large weapon mounts on a base 600 flux budget, it really favors multiple low flux cost, high efficiency, low damage weapons. TPCs as 20 clip weapons at 200 flux per shot are not low flux cost weapons. 8000 flux in 4 seconds is a little under half base flux pool, and takes ~13 seconds to dissipate at base dissipation. Its really painful to watch when half the shots miss because the target ship is too small for both to hit. If you don't think 0.6 efficiency will break the balance of the ship itself, I'd suggest tweaking it to 0.6 and see how it plays out in the 0.95 release.
Do combat skills really make that much of a difference ???? They never seemed worth it to me, at least on paper, over the skill that get me a faster, cheaper, better, more resourceful, etc., etc. <snip>
Right, yeah - what I meant is that it might feel weird for the Onslaught to have the most efficient energy weapon in the game, so it's not really a mechanical concern - as you say, mechanics-wise, it's a non-issue. And, really, this *is* a point where mechanics beat feel pretty clearly. And the point about it missing a lot is a sound one.TPCs also have the most range of any hard-flux energy (mount) weapon by far. 1000 beats 700.
Ah, why not - let's give this a try; set it to 150/shot.
Thank you for your responses and sharing your thoughts on the matter and sorry again for these requests.A new button for toggling the function temporarily would be the option i wish to be implemented. Making it an optional toggleable function would be also really helpful.
Yeah, I understand what you mean!May you please consider implementing combinations. For example by default C is decelerate.
I wish to use W+S or A+D or E+D or Q+A key combinations which otherwise doesn't really make sense to be used / be pressed / holded down together for that.
I'm sorry if I bothered you with these requests and thank you for considering implementing any of these and again for developing StarSector.
I don't think that would work very well - it's pretty complicated, but also, most keyboards have a hardware limit on the number of nearby keys that they can registered as "pressed" at the same time. So, for example, if you're holding W+S, presses of Q, A, E, D, and some (but not all!) other nearby keys will not register. Again, this is a hardware thing; those input events just won't get generated. So requiring additional key presses like that is asking for trouble.
Will we be able to go beyond 5 weapon groups next patch? I've seen it being suggested and discussed a couple of times but can't remember if you (Alex) weighed in on it or not, and if so what your opinion on it was.
Does seem like something that might easily have slipped the patch notes even you implemented it.
Out of curiosity, are there any new sindrian diktat variants (Or faction-specific variants in general)?
I half expect a simple :-X tbh but might as well ask ::)
TPCs also have the most range of any hard-flux energy (mount) weapon by far. 1000 beats 700.
Thank you for your responses and sharing your thoughts on the matter and sorry again for these requests.
I really like the controls of the ship. Combat is fun.
I think you have to be very careful about buffing TPC efficiency. It hits quite hard against armor/hull so you kinda have to block with shields unlike kinetics with similar efficiency. Maybe there's a balance point somewhere in there though. I think a big part of the problem is actually the range. TPC outranges kinetics so the onslaught has often already spent half its flux pool on TPCs before it can even use the kinetics that might compensate for its weaker flux stats.Normally true, but not if Onslaught uses Gauss Cannon. I have used Gauss Cannon a few times on Onslaught (during mid-game) for long-range assault.
The easy fix for that, for player builds, is to put the TPC firing group on Alternating. That should probably happen to vanilla variants as well.
TPCs don't need a buff - just loosen their inner firing angle a bit so we don't have to hit with one TPC and miss with the other. Easy.Nah I like Alex's approach more. Making them hit closer to each other would be very bad for smaller ships. I think the whole point of those guns is to fire at massive targets and ravage everything without spending too much flux. I don't think they're supposed to be sniper weapons.
The AI can do it. Maybe I should have been more specific and said "player builds for AI use".The easy fix for that, for player builds, is to put the TPC firing group on Alternating. That should probably happen to vanilla variants as well.Alternating does nothing. TPCs are too rapid firing to try adjusting aim every single shot.
@AlexYes please!
Any words about that terrible tariffs?
Maybe make them scale down based on reputation and commission?
Will we be able to go beyond 5 weapon groups next patch? I've seen it being suggested and discussed a couple of times but can't remember if you (Alex) weighed in on it or not, and if so what your opinion on it was.
Does seem like something that might easily have slipped the patch notes even you implemented it.
Nope! It's just enough of a pain to do that I'm hesitant to "just do it".
<snip>
Do combat skills really make that much of a difference ???? They never seemed worth it to me, at least on paper, over the skill that get me a faster, cheaper, better, more resourceful, etc., etc., fleet and 10 officers to cover all my combat skill needs. One of the things I was actually hoping for in the next patch was logistics officers, people that can get the non-combat skills and leave me free to focus on combat without sacrificing my fleet's abilities, logistics profile and/or - somewhat importantly - combat performance. Fleet Logistics 3, Fighter Doctrine, Loadout Design, all useful skills that no officer in the game can cover for me...Your own skill at piloting ships by itself can better than any AI officer. If you augment that, your flagship can match entire fleets or space stations with just token support. Or without any support, if your flagship happens to be a Conquest (https://youtu.be/SecJjpCirtg?t=3866) or a Paragon (https://youtu.be/KKlDcpAcgTU?t=90).
Of course with all the changes coming I've no idea of that idea is still relevant - or whether it was even relevant in the first place, apparently - so we'll just have to see.
The easy fix for that, for player builds, is to put the TPC firing group on Alternating. That should probably happen to vanilla variants as well.That is not good enough for AI.
The AI can do it. Maybe I should have been more specific and said "player builds for AI use".I would like to build for "everybody" use, since I frequently swap ships in mid-battle, and I do not want AI to kill itself if I give my flagship to it. This is one reason Odyssey is my least favorite capital, thanks in part to plasma burn.
Added Breach SRM (small) and Breach SRM Pod (medium), a new anti-armor missileI wonder how the pod compares with Annihilators. It would be nice if the new Breach pod lasts at least as long as Locusts. Even with Expanded Missile Racks, Annihilators do not last long enough in big battles, and Onslaught that relies on Annihilators feels like a quasi-SO ship. If Breach pods last long, and are effective enough, they might replace Annihilator pods on my Onslaught loadouts.
Medium version has high ammo, small version is extremely cheap
Can we please get a buff to PD?This is a good, simple alternative to my dodge mechanic proposal.
Like giving PD a modifier that increases damage to fighters and missiles but reduces damage to everything else.
Honestly I think Conquest has less staying power compared to Onslaught. But also it's a lot cheaper, so I think it's fine.Conquest is not so flimsy if its shield is powered up. Max capacitors or Hardened Shields will give it sufficient durability in a duel. Also, Conquest can use high-end heavy weapons more easily than Onslaught.
I would not want this as a blanket for all. Heavy machine gun (and probably dual light MG too) is a PD weapon, but it is better used as an assault weapon to compliment the chaingun. LR PD laser is a low-powered but efficient general-purpose weapon. Something like Paladin PD would be useful as an autopulse substitute if it was not so inefficient. Nevermind weapons that get converted to PD like IPDAI IR Pulse Laser or Railgun.Can we please get a buff to PD?This is a good, simple alternative to my dodge mechanic proposal.
Like giving PD a modifier that increases damage to fighters and missiles but reduces damage to everything else.
I didn't say that Conquest is a paper tiger. I sad it has less staying power.And way more mobility, which makes it it deadlier in a fleet, especially to smaller targets. It should not match low-tech ships for armour. That would make it too easy to use in any situation.
I didn't say that Conquest is a paper tiger. I sad it has less staying power.
So, another thing. Wouldn't the new shield for EMP resist trade allow for 100% invulnerability in conjunction with armoured weapon mounts?
So, another thing. Wouldn't the new shield for EMP resist trade allow for 100% invulnerability in conjunction with armoured weapon mounts?
Usually reductions to stats are applied multiplicatively in this game, so 2 -50% would yield 25% (and increases to stats are applied additive, so 2 +50% would give 200%, not 225%). That would be my guess at least.
Usually I don't have an issue with the current five weapon groups... but there are some ships where it's a serious limitation, especially with respect to ships that are being set up for AI control. As has been mentioned, the Onslaught is a major contender here - the TPCs being fixed means that you get much better performance from them if you put them in separate weapon groups... and then you need a group for missiles, and a group for PD, and then you're down to one group left for literally everything else. A Dominator with asymmetrical large guns runs into the same problem, and I've had issues with arming Paragons as well.Will we be able to go beyond 5 weapon groups next patch? I've seen it being suggested and discussed a couple of times but can't remember if you (Alex) weighed in on it or not, and if so what your opinion on it was.
Does seem like something that might easily have slipped the patch notes even you implemented it.
Nope! It's just enough of a pain to do that I'm hesitant to "just do it".
@Alex
Any words about that terrible tariffs?
Maybe make them scale down based on reputation and commission?
Can we please get a buff to PD?
Like giving PD a modifier that increases damage to fighters and missiles but reduces damage to everything else.
I wonder how the pod compares with Annihilators. It would be nice if the new Breach pod lasts at least as long as Locusts. Even with Expanded Missile Racks, Annihilators do not last long enough in big battles, and Onslaught that relies on Annihilators feels like a quasi-SO ship. If Breach pods last long, and are effective enough, they might replace Annihilator pods on my Onslaught loadouts.
Often, I pick Conquest over Onslaught because Locusts last longer than Annihilators.
Usually reductions to stats are applied multiplicatively in this game, so 2 -50% would yield 25% (and increases to stats are applied additive, so 2 +50% would give 200%, not 225%). That would be my guess at least.
So far, I use Annihilators on Onslaught because there is nothing better. I use Annihilators mostly for anti-armor because every last forward-facing gun that are not TPCs is Heavy Needler (even in the center heavy mount, for anti-Radiant and everything else). After a few minutes of sustained firing, Onslaught is out of missiles, and if the fight is not mostly decided by then, Onslaught is not very useful. Unlike Conquest where it can launch Locusts non-stop for at least half of an entire fight.I wonder how the pod compares with Annihilators. It would be nice if the new Breach pod lasts at least as long as Locusts. Even with Expanded Missile Racks, Annihilators do not last long enough in big battles, and Onslaught that relies on Annihilators feels like a quasi-SO ship. If Breach pods last long, and are effective enough, they might replace Annihilator pods on my Onslaught loadouts.
Often, I pick Conquest over Onslaught because Locusts last longer than Annihilators.
They're fundamentally different roles - the Breach is more anti-armor, while the Annihilators are for sustained pressure. So the answer is "it depends", since Breach use will depend on how often there's an opportunity to fire them off at armor.
Added support for 4k resolutions
Somewhat experimental; please let me know if there are problems
I'm asking because I just ordered a 34" 3440 x 1440 21:9 monitor.It is, if you can live with very small fonts.
So, I searched the forum but didn't find anything about this: is Starsector compatible with widescreen, or rather will it become with this update?
I'm asking because I just ordered a 34" 3440 x 1440 21:9 monitor.
Relatedly, are framerates >60 supported? ;D
Is the chance to be able to buy a base Atlas (not the bad mk2, which nobody wants, unless you do a Pirate-only run) going to be modified in 0.9.5? In all my runs I hardly get more than 2 from trades and the rest (up to the 5 I usually carry around with me) from having to build them myself on my colonies ...
It's a bit strange since you can find the base Prometheus in almost every big market. I would love that the game would support the "trader" style RP as well, not only the "rush colony" or "rush combat" styles.
If you are able to buy Atlas and Prometheus from major colonies, then a trader style RP run would not even have to build any colonies (in theory)
EDIT: spelling and rephrasing
So, I searched the forum but didn't find anything about this: is Starsector compatible with widescreen, or rather will it become with this update?
I'm asking because I just ordered a 34" 3440 x 1440 21:9 monitor.
Relatedly, are framerates >60 supported? ;D
Well... a 3340 x 1440 monitor is less than ideal, since you'd only be able to scale to 1440/768 = 180%, roughly. Which'll work! But, yeah, there may be some issues with too much visibility/sound playback (there definitely would if it wasn't scaled; when scaled this might there might not be, actually). But mainly, since it can't quite scale things 2x, it won't be as crisp as it could be. It's not *bad* (e.g. I've played at 130% on my monitor, which is 1680x1050, and it's fine), but it won't be as nice as actual 4x with 200% scaling.
As far as fps, you can edit settings.json and there's an "fps" value there. You'd need a really beefy computer, though, especially if playing at 3340x1400 in fullscreen with UI scaling and antialiasing (which is basically required since, not 200%), which all requires extra performance from the graphics card.
from markets.
A question nobody has asked from what I read: can you give details about the Escort Package and Assault Package?
From one of your previous blog, I guess it is not related to ECM or navigation/speed boost which are now specific to frigates. So maybe they provide other fleet bonus (sight range? Manoeuvring boost?), or boost some of the ship capacities (flux for assault package, missile bonus for support package?)?
Thanks for the answer:) Great that it works in generaI, guess I will just have to try out the details.
My PC will also be replaced, would you guess a Rizen 5 3600 and a RTX 1660 would suffice?
Added support for 4k resolutions
Somewhat experimental; please let me know if there are problems
So, I searched the forum but didn't find anything about this: is Starsector compatible with widescreen, or rather will it become with this update?
I'm asking because I just ordered a 34" 3440 x 1440 21:9 monitor.
Relatedly, are framerates >60 supported? ;D
The combination of more pixels (due to widescreen) but needing to use anti-aliasing (due to not-quite-200% scaling) is probably the most performance-intensive situation there is here.
So it's hard-mode for my hardware, got it. Well, I have to somehow justify planning my new PC around a 2D indie game from 2011^^''
But I think the old concepts about alpha, beta, release are long since meaningless.
Is the chance to be able to buy a base Atlas (not the bad mk2, which nobody wants, unless you do a Pirate-only run) going to be modified in 0.9.5? In all my runs I hardly get more than 2 from trades and the rest (up to the 5 I usually carry around with me) from having to build them myself on my colonies ...
It's a bit strange since you can find the base Prometheus in almost every big market. I would love that the game would support the "trader" style RP as well, not only the "rush colony" or "rush combat" styles.
If you are able to buy Atlas and Prometheus from major colonies, then a trader style RP run would not even have to build any colonies (in theory)
EDIT: spelling and rephrasing
You'll be able to custom-order production from contacts/in bars, but: let me make a note to take a look at its baseline availability from markets.
But I think the old concepts about alpha, beta, release are long since meaningless.
I'm sure you're right, but I'm sticking to them :)
(Re: "release", I remember reading sometime back that the initial EA release on Steam is basically "the release", as far as any potential interest from press etc goes, and the actual 1.0 release doesn't really register... so, yeah, I'm sure you're right.)
A question nobody has asked from what I read: can you give details about the Escort Package and Assault Package?
From one of your previous blog, I guess it is not related to ECM or navigation/speed boost which are now specific to frigates. So maybe they provide other fleet bonus (sight range? Manoeuvring boost?), or boost some of the ship capacities (flux for assault package, missile bonus for support package?)?
It's a boost to the individual ships, actually! Escort Package gives a lot of hefty PD bonuses, while Assault Package makes the ship into a brick. The effect of these hullmods is *greatly* increased by a relevant skill.
The combination of more pixels (due to widescreen) but needing to use anti-aliasing (due to not-quite-200% scaling) is probably the most performance-intensive situation there is here.
About that. An idea would be (1) the ability to host a faction without owning a world and (2) the ability to hire captains to (say) trade between various worlds, with the player receiving a cut or something of that sort. Essentially, we can imitate the Hegemony, but we can't imitate the Tri-Tachyon. This would tie into the game's dynamic economy very well too, and provide a very different experience. You could tie this in with colonies, and have the player negotiate trade deals with contacts and in some situations even receive military contracts, and this could further tie into the proposed starting phases of a colony as a mission or two.
Also, diplomacy (ie vassalage and allowing players the ability to found colonies in a faction's name) is a must at some point or another, whether in vanilla or in nex.
Alex, what post-colony credit sinks will there be? Fleets? Research? Megaprojects?
What do you mean by the 200% thing? Whats the relation between 200% scaling & anti-aliasing?
About that. An idea would be (1) the ability to host a faction without owning a world and (2) the ability to hire captains to (say) trade between various worlds, with the player receiving a cut or something of that sort. Essentially, we can imitate the Hegemony, but we can't imitate the Tri-Tachyon. This would tie into the game's dynamic economy very well too, and provide a very different experience. You could tie this in with colonies, and have the player negotiate trade deals with contacts and in some situations even receive military contracts, and this could further tie into the proposed starting phases of a colony as a mission or two.
The question is, how is this interesting mechanically, aside from being a nice roleplaying thing? Colonies have the potential to make some trouble for you (i.e. lead into combat); the specifics of this can certainly be refined, but at least the path is there. If you just hire a fleet to trade for you, is it just a "get more money over time" mechanic? The design work here would be trying to make this interesting.
Usually I don't have an issue with the current five weapon groups... but there are some ships where it's a serious limitation, especially with respect to ships that are being set up for AI control.
Don't forget, there's always room for other factions attacking your companies if they get desperate.About that. An idea would be (1) the ability to host a faction without owning a world and (2) the ability to hire captains to (say) trade between various worlds, with the player receiving a cut or something of that sort. Essentially, we can imitate the Hegemony, but we can't imitate the Tri-Tachyon. This would tie into the game's dynamic economy very well too, and provide a very different experience. You could tie this in with colonies, and have the player negotiate trade deals with contacts and in some situations even receive military contracts, and this could further tie into the proposed starting phases of a colony as a mission or two.
The question is, how is this interesting mechanically, aside from being a nice roleplaying thing? Colonies have the potential to make some trouble for you (i.e. lead into combat); the specifics of this can certainly be refined, but at least the path is there. If you just hire a fleet to trade for you, is it just a "get more money over time" mechanic? The design work here would be trying to make this interesting.
This would mostly just provide more intricacy to colony building, but I could see a company of some sort be interesting. Maybe a combination of warding off pirates (perhaps through mercenaries), having to build trust with contacts, that sort of thing. It wouldn't supplant normal gameplay, just be an option with various difficulties (non-randomised, as discussed before) inherent. Then one can add the black market into the mix too. Now it is rather passive, but a large amount of good could come from a specialised intel tab, allowing the player to view their trade routes, and perhaps even the trade routes of other factions. That brings us to another application for contacts. Spies. I need to go now. Bye!
@Alex
Any words about that terrible tariffs?
Maybe make them scale down based on reputation and commission?
Well, the word is that they're about as punishing as I'd like them to be :) If they're more than you want to pay, sell that Paragon blueprint on the black market!
That is the problem.Riskier should be more rewarding, no?
Black market is all profit and almost zero risks.
I do not understand your opposition to allowing players making money from legal trade.
I do not understand your opposition to allowing players making money from legal trade.
The problems are that the black market isn't risky enough and players aren't rewarded enough for being really friendly with a faction.
If you scale to 200% (or 300%), there's no need for anti-aliasing - it already looks good, because it's double the amount of pixels, so the scaling algorithm has an easier time. For example, a line that's 1 pixel wide becomes 2 pixels wide, etc. If you scale to, say, 180%, a line 1 pixel wide becomes 1.8 pixels wide - which, of course, isn't a thing - and antialiasing is required to make that look reasonably good.
Transponder-off smuggling is more excitingWhile transponder-on trade may be safe, I never use that option because I do not want to deal with patrol scans. Plus there are enough places where I can safely turn off transponder next to the market before docking.
That is the problem.
Black market is all profit and almost zero risks.
I do not understand your opposition to allowing players making money from legal trade.
The problems are that the black market isn't risky enough and players aren't rewarded enough for being really friendly with a faction.
Agreed. Transponder-off smuggling is more exciting, but there's too little reason to do so, because transponder-on black market trade is so safe. Sometimes I wish it wasn't accessible at all with your transponders on.
But there are softer options. If, in case of high suspicion, your ships would get physically searched (causing disruption and lowering CR) instead of just scanned, that would up the stakes. Or if suspicious factions would continuously shadow you with some picket ships while you're in system, that could hinder your operations quite a bit. (Until you lure those watchdogs into a passing pirate fleet, of course.)
If you scale to 200% (or 300%), there's no need for anti-aliasing - it already looks good, because it's double the amount of pixels, so the scaling algorithm has an easier time. For example, a line that's 1 pixel wide becomes 2 pixels wide, etc. If you scale to, say, 180%, a line 1 pixel wide becomes 1.8 pixels wide - which, of course, isn't a thing - and antialiasing is required to make that look reasonably good.
Just to make sure: What keeps me from scaling to 200% (if my screen resolution is smaller than that) is that it would cut off the UI at the top and bottom, because it doesn't move, right?
@Alex
I would like to weigh in on the colony size discussion.
First of all, I completely understand, that the changes won't really affect the mechanics and the balance of power. So I'm not very interested in changing your mind at all.
However, I think many commentators simply don't understand why some players complain about this change, including maybe you. They don't necessarily complain about the change in the balance of power. Many of them see this limit (^6) doesn't make sense in-fiction-wise. Although for you, it makes the world more believable, for them it makes it less believable.
I think I can see the reason. Because it's on the edge of being possible/impossible.
...
Domain Derelicts would be much better early game zombie-like enemies than pirates, IMO. Track them back to their spawners (probes), nests (survey ships), and finally to the origins (motherships), eliminating the threat.
EDIT: When you hit the level cap, does the experience needed to get Story Points level out? Or does the exp needed still increase?
EXP levels out.
I don't think that the magnitude of the world population is a good indicator here.
Most of that population was not even close to technology levels capable of intercontinental travel or had no hope at all to make the journey (from China or British India for eg).
AFAIK that's not the case in SS.
Even if that is the case, the desperation level is more relevant. And IMO the desperation level in the Sector is very-very high, like Irish immigration levels high.
I don't want to say, it's plausible, but I think it's wrong to say, that it's implausible.
Domain Derelicts would be much better early game zombie-like enemies than pirates, IMO. Track them back to their spawners (probes), nests (survey ships), and finally to the origins (motherships), eliminating the threat.
Mechanically, sure! But that has a very different feel ("fight off a von neumann swarm") from the very start of the game that colors the entire experience and backstory in ways I don't like. And, really, pirates could function much the same way; there's nothing stopping that, I don't think? And they already to do some extent; bases etc.
The thing with Pirates as starting enemies is that you have easy access to them, while often having access to a station to repair or refit. Pirate ships are also recoverable letting you build up a small (if faulty) fleet early on.
EDIT: When you hit the level cap, does the experience needed to get Story Points level out? Or does the exp needed still increase?
Why would they want to be in some backwards colony instead?
And population is low because birth control in advanced societies, and because the population had to grow from a few small colonies in a desolate sector to billions in massive city worlds, in less than a thousand years.
It is strange that the population of the entire sector is less than earth in the 1800s. I've always felt like all of the scripted worlds should have population increased by 1-2 orders of magnitude. In that case, the player could have 10^7 colonies while still being firmly behind the scripted worlds.
Why would they want to be in some backwards colony instead?
And population is low because birth control in advanced societies, and because the population had to grow from a few small colonies in a desolate sector to billions in massive city worlds, in less than a thousand years.
Please consult the settlers of the New World, and I'm pretty sure you'll have your answer :)
Another thing.
This, to be honest, is B.S. of the highest order.
Did I stutter?
The thing with Pirates as starting enemies is that you have easy access to them, while often having access to a station to repair or refit. Pirate ships are also recoverable letting you build up a small (if faulty) fleet early on.
EDIT: When you hit the level cap, does the experience needed to get Story Points level out? Or does the exp needed still increase?
I have literally never taken ships from the pirates. Anything with defects is automatic trash, and you get enough money in the first thirty minutes of a game to finance a small carrier fleet.
I see what you're saying, yeah. My counter-point is that for me, 10^6 is very much already stretching the bounds of believability, especially in the timeframes involved.
I see what you're saying, yeah. My counter-point is that for me, 10^6 is very much already stretching the bounds of believability, especially in the timeframes involved.
Real-life migrations, like the one caused by the Syrian civil war, already are on the magnitude of beyond 10^6 today. Tens of millions were displaced within a few years during WW2.
So when assuming future technology for automated construction, 10^7 sounds reasonable to me.
I see what you're saying, yeah. My counter-point is that for me, 10^6 is very much already stretching the bounds of believability, especially in the timeframes involved.
Real-life migrations, like the one caused by the Syrian civil war, already are on the magnitude of beyond 10^6 today. Tens of millions were displaced within a few years during WW2.
So when assuming future technology for automated construction, 10^7 sounds reasonable to me.
That's for countries in constant war. The majority of the Sector's population resides within the Hegemony, a secure, orderly authoritarian state. Why would they move in the first place?
That's for countries in constant war. The majority of the Sector's population resides within the Hegemony, a secure, orderly authoritarian state. Why would they move in the first place?
If a core world somehow drops to or below 10^6 (I forget if this is possible in vanilla), is it "allowed" to go above it again? If so, is there something that clearly distinguishes planets with and without this permission to exceed the cap?
By the way, will factions start with some of those nanoforge-but-for-other-industries items used? It would give some incentive to raid factions besides blueprints, nanoforges and synchrotrons.
I find the colony debate strange. The Sector, as a whole, is on the decline so multiple 10^7 colonies or more popping up randomly makes little sense.
I couldn't care less what the arbitrary cap is to colonies as long as colonies operate, mechanically, the same. I think it odd that there is an expectation for a colony to grow from 1,000 to over 10 million or more in the span of 10-15 years. Soft caps or no, I know I won't be playing 30 in-game years just to see a colony go from 10^7 to 10^8, especially considering there is no in-game benefit for doing so. There's no realism to be achieved here so an arbitrary value doesn't bother me in the least.
I don't understand the fixation, honestly. It's an immersion thing, sure, but there are way bigger fish to fry.
What is less believable?Player can build a core killer fleet in less than five cycles. It is easier to obtain this fleet and bomb the core worlds to death than a fleet that can kill the strongest endgame enemy fleets. The fleets that guard even capital core worlds are roughly on par with 200k bounties, while expedition/named bounty fleets are 300+k. The only fight that is remotely challenging is the TT capital world because the high-tech star fortress can get cheap kills with long-range mine spam.
Becoming the safe heaven in 25 cycles, attracting the 1/10th of the Sector's population, or creating a fleet that could wipe out the Core Worlds...?
Because the latter is very much possible in 10-15 cycles...
IIRC there's a few cases where they do - where needed to make the economy "work" as far as the core worlds producing enough stuff for their demand, or at least close to it - but not generally for every type of item.If you don't want all of them to be available in every run, you can make them random instead.
The time to obtain a sector-destroying fleet is the time to obtain a Paragon and a Conquest. Paragon can destroy any station and Conquest can destroy any fleet. I wonder how fast could I get those, if I used every trick in the book...What is less believable?Player can build a core killer fleet in less than five cycles. It is easier to obtain this fleet and bomb the core worlds to death than a fleet that can kill the strongest endgame enemy fleets.
Becoming the safe heaven in 25 cycles, attracting the 1/10th of the Sector's population, or creating a fleet that could wipe out the Core Worlds...?
Because the latter is very much possible in 10-15 cycles...
@Alex
Btw I could very much imagine 10^7 migration
Yea it's weird to me how so many people got annoyed by that change, but hey it's easily moddable.
Anyways I forgot to ask one more thing. Will we get new ships in the simulator to test against? I know this is super minor and not important as the rest but it's nice to have a wider array of opponents you can test your build versus. Also please add the new combat ships to the random mission, thanks.
He hasn't ruled out making the core elimination harder.Yes please, destroying the core should be far harder.
Industry items are a flat bonus, which is disproportionately good early on.The old items are getting indirectly nerfed. Synchrotron will require a planet without an atmosphere. That sounds like 150% hazard minimum. Nanoforge will put pollution on a habitable planet. Currently, I put those industries are low hazard (100% or less) planets because of upkeep. I cannot really do that next release if I want to use those items.
Maybe it might be worth considering scaling the industry items boosts with the output of said industry?
Reserve Deployment:Can you clarify what this means? Is it 1/2/3 for ship sizes (destroyer/cruiser/capital ships), or maybe wing size (1-2/3-4/5-6), or something else entirely?
- Now adds 1/2/3 fighters above max wing size and affects bombers as well
A lot of complaints about colony sizes and industry changes, but don't you guys agreed that in the carent version colony's way too overpowered and too rewarding, that game aspect had to be changed so...Max colony skills and no cores gives about a million per month. That is enough to rebuild ships I lose and add another structure. Thanks to Pather bug (and easy-bribe Hegemony), building nearly unlimited large colonies is profitable and nearly risk-free.
I'm wondering is there anything related to Doom-class in 0.95? ;) beside Tweaked Mine Strike ship system AI.
Being able to create a colony, build an industy, and then drop an item on it & instantly outcompete most of the sector for production feels like far more of an issue than a number not changing tbh.
Industry items are a flat bonus, which is disproportionately good early on.
Maybe it might be worth considering scaling the industry items boosts with the output of said industry?
Anyways I forgot to ask one more thing. Will we get new ships in the simulator to test against? I know this is super minor and not important as the rest but it's nice to have a wider array of opponents you can test your build versus. Also please add the new combat ships to the random mission, thanks.
Pointing out this inconsistency between colony size and core elimination has two solutions...
I wonder of a habitable planet will be required to use a forge (for unavoidable pollution), or if forge can be used anywhere and pollute only habitables.
QuoteReserve Deployment:Can you clarify what this means? Is it 1/2/3 for ship sizes (destroyer/cruiser/capital ships), or maybe wing size (1-2/3-4/5-6), or something else entirely?
- Now adds 1/2/3 fighters above max wing size and affects bombers as well
Did it become much easier for players to gain reputation? If so, will we get more options to spend reputation for more goodies?
Since the player can't directly control Automated Ships....... will there be a hullmod to allow it?
I *think* that's on my list of items to look at. One thing I half want to do is have the sim opponents be unlocked (and have that carry over across playthroughs), but that's more of a thing than just adding some, so... hm. I don't want to just load the sim opponents list with everything, you know? It's already got a ton of stuff in it.Oh yeah I remember that suggestion about unlocking opponents, sounds interesting but obviously far more work. And I didn't think EVERY single ship should be in the simulator, just more types and varied opponents compared to 2 Lashers + 2 Lashers but with d-mods stuff we have now. Although personally it doesn't seem like it's "a ton" currently but I guess some of us got used to the simulator filled with mods where the list increases tenfold, so you hop back into vanilla and think "it's so small now awww".
And re: random mission - I'll see if I can have a look as well.
so i just skimmed over it, are there no changes worth mentioning to autofit? because as it is right now its all over the place :'(
Hmm, could you be more specific? I recall fixing a few bugs and tweaking faction weapon availability (in particular, iirc, giving pirates more stuff so that their high-tech stations aren't so sad) but I'm not aware of any particular issues with autofit. Perhaps some of this is a difference in expectations? It's not supposed to produce highly optimized best-in-class variants; rather it's "generally a mix of halfway-reasonable stuff, with some variants that are fairly random". It does get more consistent/produce "better" outcome as fleet "quality" goes up, though... anyway, any more feedback here would be very much appreciated!There is perhaps quite a bit of difference in expectation. Many of us are still living with the memory of DynaSector and the incredibly dangerous and absurd fits it provided.
Hmm, could you be more specific? I recall fixing a few bugs and tweaking faction weapon availability (in particular, iirc, giving pirates more stuff so that their high-tech stations aren't so sad) but I'm not aware of any particular issues with autofit. Perhaps some of this is a difference in expectations? It's not supposed to produce highly optimized best-in-class variants; rather it's "generally a mix of halfway-reasonable stuff, with some variants that are fairly random". It does get more consistent/produce "better" outcome as fleet "quality" goes up, though... anyway, any more feedback here would be very much appreciated!There is perhaps quite a bit of difference in expectation. Many of us are still living with the memory of DynaSector and the incredibly dangerous and absurd fits it provided.
Now that said the current iteration of autofit does some... very silly and incredibly dumb things quite often. Like giving ships weapons they can't use effectively at all, such as giving slow ships short range weapons or downsizing mounts in ways that don't make sense (such as the larges on a Conquest).
It's basically to the point that often enough AI fleets simply aren't a threat because their loadouts don't work, or are only threatening because they have weight of numbers. I understand that you don't exactly plan to tune autofit to the point that it's always incredibly dangerous and daunting to even consider combat, but it really does need some fine tuning to give the AI more of a fighting chance.
Downsizing by autofit in any way is almost bound to be a mistake.
When can we expect a .95a realease? :O
The size 6 planet limit seems to be pretty fair all around. It really takes too much game time to hit 8 or try going beyond that in an ordinary game. Still, it might be nice for various planet properties to increase or decrease that limit. Your average crappy post collapse colony might be a 6, but a neutron star might cripple it down to a 5. A super nice highly habitable gaia world can be a 7, and maybe a super rare planet terraforming tool could push it up to an 8? At that point the world would practically be the New Earth of the sector. In any event it would take real extreme circumstances to change a planet's limit, so it'd be the exception rather than the norm.
Since the colony changes keep coming up, as well as the core planets being too much of a pushover, i just wondered if you think they become more resilient or less with all the changes? ... What about adding or upgrading their defences that aren't linked to colony size (like orbital and ground defences)?
And are you filling up the extra colony slots that open up on various AI planets under the new rules? (and if so did you manually adjust total market values or did they "just" automatically increase a bit?)
Definitely not! Just a few items here and there where they were absolutely needed to make the default economy's ends meet. I'd like to keep as many of the items as possible a fun surprise, not, "oh, it's that thing I already saw on some core colony".
I have literally never taken ships from the pirates. Anything with defects is automatic trash, and you get enough money in the first thirty minutes of a game to finance a small carrier fleet.
Oh yes finally I am more excited for this than for christmass :DThere might be some, Alex tends to update patchnotes once or twice.
Can you drop a hint if there's any substantial changes for colony management in the works? It's probably my fav part of the game
Oh yes finally I am more excited for this than for christmass :D
Can you drop a hint if there's any substantial changes for colony management in the works? It's probably my fav part of the game
Ah, I see what you meant not, sorry I misunderstood! Yeah, they're more or less as-is; the stuff found on the core colonies is for 1) making the Sector economy work out and 2) flavor. It doesn't really need to be "optimized according to the rules" because it's not a symmetric 4x type of situation, you know?
Increased XP gain from fighting more challenging battles; up to 500% more XP gained
Story point uses include (but are not limited to):Speaking of Story points, these additions give the player more ways to spend resources on their fleet to further tune its effectiveness in combat and affect combat XP. However, depending on how the equation works, using these features could increase the "fleet strength" value of your fleet, which could make them less worthwhile. (Although using story points does grant bonus XP anyway, so it might cancel itself out)
- "Piloted ship" skills can be raised to "elite" level, unlocking an additional effect
- Building a limited number of permanent hullmods into ships, making the cost 0 ordnance points
- Officers: Can raise one skill to "elite" level (story point)
Cargo Pods: cheaper to stabilize, stabilization adds 400 days (was: 150)This also supports the idea of removing cargo ships to increase combat efficiency to some extent, as it makes it easier for the player to pick up all of the cargo they couldn't at a later time. (Also generally.. I'm quite happy about the prospect of stabilising cargo pods being less costly and more effective, big fan of this change!)
Sorry, did not read all 28 pages of discussion.Story points are renewable. Do not know how quickly player can earn enough XP to level up beyond max for more story points.
I like all changes except for inability to bribe Hegemony's inspectors without spending story points. Its just pointless. Story points will be limited resource (if i get it correctly), so, it will be way easier to eliminate entire Hegemony than going home every time to retrieve cores till inspection is done.
Also, an idea: Hegemony tells you that they will come with inspection... but dont tell which colony they want to check. For example, inspector secretly picks one planet and has a chance to pick second one if player has big number of worlds (more than 4, i guess...).
First of all, thanks for all your hard work, I can't wait to try the game out!
I know the patch is gonna drop when it's ready and I'm not gonna ask that...however if you could respond to these simple questions i bet it would make lots of people happy :p
-Ignoring that things can be added or changed or take more time than expected, what do you feel right now is your current progress on the patch? (50%, 90% etc)
-Compared to previous patches, do you feel you released these patch notes as early in development as those? or did you wait until you were closer to release?
One thing about the game, i would LOVE to have a way to disable CR degradation for the flagship, sometimes i enjoy taking my time and fighting unwinnable battles by slowly taking the edge, however CR heavily hinders this kind of gameplay and instead i feel forced to play in a way i don't really like. I'm fine with the fleet having it for balance purposes, but it really bums me out when i'm almost about to win an extremely difficult and long fight, just for my CR to run out :( (yes, even with the cr upgrade). What about an upgrade that progressively decrease CR usage for the flagship? so if you choose to go that route, you'd have to actually waste points on it, making your flagship immune to cr degradation at max level, but overall weaker/with a weaker fleet. Or maybe even adding some flux penalty to that upgrade/making it impossible to reach CR degradation immunity on phase ships.
Thanks again for your amazing work
I've thought about the gameplay implications of these notes a bit more, focused around this change
These changes add a new meaning to picking player Combat Skills, in the current 0.9.1a patch they can massively increase your fleet's combat efficiency - especially in the early game/for small fleets where you have very few combat ships - but with 0.95a's changes they further give a boost to XP gain and now by extension, Story Point gain.
QuoteCargo Pods: cheaper to stabilize, stabilization adds 400 days (was: 150)This also supports the idea of removing cargo ships to increase combat efficiency to some extent, as it makes it easier for the player to pick up all of the cargo they couldn't at a later time. (Also generally.. I'm quite happy about the prospect of stabilising cargo pods being less costly and more effective, big fan of this change!)
However, I have a few worries about this change to combat XP, depending on how the equation works for deciding on the strength of a fleet. For example if the number of officers in your fleet strongly affects the "strength" of your fleet for the purposes of combat XP calculation, then it could discourage hiring low level officers. If it scales with the level of the officer, it could discourage the use of officers overall (however, even if the scaling was punishing it would at least give you a choice of more Combat XP vs more pure fleet strength).
However, if the "fleet strength" value does scale with your fleet officers' levels, that also raises the worrying question of "Does your Player Combat Skills Level affect "fleet strength" ? I personally think this would be a mistake as it further discourages players from trying Combat Skills if they think they're bad at piloting ships.
Some more questions, does having more/more expensive weapons equipped on ships increase the player's "fleet strength" value? Does having less dmods increase the value?
Of course, all of this depends on how exactly the equation will work, and what the purpose of the change is. Since I don't know I'm just making assumptions about what it could be. It could scale with your officer levels but only a little bit, so that it's still better to have officers than not (as long as you use them). I guess there's a lot of unknowns here so I began thinking about the (in my opinion) worst case scenarios.
As far as I can tell, the main purpose of the change is either to reward the player for their skill (in piloting/ordering and planning/loading out their fleet),
or to reward the player for their skill and all the resources they put into making their fleet more combat effective.
I guess my question comes down to: Is that the case? And if so, which is it? (Although I can understand if you don't want to share exactly how it'll work; people are bound to take the equation and minmax their gameplay choices around its quirks)
I like all changes except for inability to bribe Hegemony's inspectors without spending story points. Its just pointless. Story points will be limited resource (if i get it correctly), so, it will be way easier to eliminate entire Hegemony than going home every time to retrieve cores till inspection is done.
Also, an idea: Hegemony tells you that they will come with inspection... but dont tell which colony they want to check. For example, inspector secretly picks one planet and has a chance to pick second one if player has big number of worlds (more than 4, i guess...).
Ah yes this reminded me, can we have inspections remember the last choice we picked? For example If I say my colony to retaliate, can it do that next time too, instead of just allowing them to take all cores? Obviously we'd still get the message, I'm just talking about scenarios where you forget about the notification.
Well yeah being the default option would be kinda silly. Didn't know it automatically made you hostile no matter what your relation is, I always thought it was a big flat penalty like -50 or something. But I'm sure this happened to me. Could it be that the first time I resisted them they became hostile but I somehow raised relations through missions and other stuff so the next option defaulted to the peace one? If such a thing can happen then honestly I don't know what makes more sense, seeing how you already made them angry once, then again, a player might try repairing those relations. Ehh you're probably right in the end (even tho the Hegemony deserves no mercy :)) )Ah yes this reminded me, can we have inspections remember the last choice we picked? For example If I say my colony to retaliate, can it do that next time too, instead of just allowing them to take all cores? Obviously we'd still get the message, I'm just talking about scenarios where you forget about the notification.
Tn that theoretical example, it'd do that already, right? Since you'd get auto-hostile for resisting. I don't think that defaulting to the option that makes you auto-hostile (when you're not already hostile) is a good idea.
But I'm sure this happened to me. Could it be that the first time I resisted them they became hostile but I somehow raised relations through missions and other stuff so the next option defaulted to the peace one?
Story points are renewable. Do not know how quickly player can earn enough XP to level up beyond max for more story points.If progression is the same as it is now (just scaled a bit to fit 15 max level cap) it will be very hard to get a lot of extra points.
That'd just make it impossible to prep for, no?Yes. But you can try to guess, or, maybe, just use AIs on some planets (not all of them). Or visit all planets and remove all cores, lol. It gives some options.
If progression is the same as it is now (just scaled a bit to fit 15 max level cap) it will be very hard to get a lot of extra points.Maybe, depending how much fighting against endgame fleets player will do. Leveling a few times past 40 now may not be not too slow, but things slow down quite a bit past 50.
Right, yeah; this is a good thing to think about, vis a vis "does this change encourage weird gameplay patterns". I'd be lying if I said I'd considered every detail (this was, to be honest, kind of an impulsive addition based on a suggestion from, iirc, Gothars), but!
I think overall having more/better officers will always be good - they do reduce the difficulty of the fight, but I think not to the point where it's better not to have them. It'd be pretty much impossible to do anything real meaningful without them. And, while officer level/presence matters here, it matters less than e.g. for deployment points distribution, so it shouldn't discourage putting officers in small ships. Player level - rather than specifically combat skills - factors in here, but, again, it's not an overwhelming factor. Weapons/dmods etc don't factor in; it's based off the base deployment points of a hull and officer levels. Again, though, I don't think it's something where trying to optimize out a dmod or two would make much difference.
(Officers that aren't assigned to a ship still count, since otherwise you'd be encouraged to unassign officers you're not planning to use in the fight... made that change just now, actually, since wasn't thinking about that aspect of it before.)
Overall, the hope is this is something that's worth playing around on the macro level - in terms overall fleet size/composition/engagement choices - but not on a micro level, trying to wring an extra couple of percent out of it.
I like all changes except for inability to bribe Hegemony's inspectors without spending story points.
Any chance that there'll be a way to administrate more colonies without having to resort to AI cores at some relatively quick point? I get that colonizing isn't the intended end goal and all, but it never struck me as sensible that some AI colonies can be administrated by a blank portrait saying "no one of particular note" (or some such) whereas your colonies not only must be administrated by someone, but that (given enough skill points invested) four of them can simultaneously be administrated as well as an Alpha Core - and only an Alpha Core - can administrate one planet, by someone exploring the galaxy on the other end of the sector.
Not that having to, you know, basically retire and sit at your colonies to administrate them would be a very fun mechanic, but it's still bizarre every time I think about it.
it is kind of funny that a artificial super intelligence can be outskilled in governing by a normal human
If I want to use cores, it is most likely to expand my empire, that is use them as admins. I do not want to guess where big H will hit next (at least not without an Intel bug) among dozens of alpha-run worlds. If I need to guess where big H will hit next (and chances of success are low and result of failure is bad stuff happening), I will stop that nonsense by wiping them off the map.For me essential usage of cores is Alpha-boosted spaceports. Other stuff is optional. Also... if max colony size will be 6, maybe i dont need Alphas in spaceports too. I mean: size 6 is pretty achievable without any effort (even if the progression will be scaled so size 6 will demand same time as size 8 demands now... if more - than ok, we still need some growth buffs).
If they make piloting skills impactful enough that the officer bonuses aren't needed for high level challenges, yeah I could see this becoming an issue for design.
About secret inspections: what if we dont know what colony will be checked, but if we have contacts in Heg we can ask them about that?
it is kind of funny that a artificial super intelligence can be outskilled in governing by a normal human
Reality is unrealistic.
it is kind of funny that a artificial super intelligence can be outskilled in governing by a normal human
Reality is unrealistic.
what
depends on the AI. They are "smarter" than humans because they can learn in simulations ultra fast. But you tell an combat trained AI that you plucked from a spaceship and tell it to govern millions of people it might not be so smart then.
An alpha-level AI core is capable of excelling at any task. Assigning one to run a colony-wide industry brings benefits well beyond the capacity of human leadership, and there are even rumors of alpha cores surreptitiously assigned to govern entire worlds.
Any chance that there'll be a way to administrate more colonies without having to resort to AI cores at some relatively quick point? I get that colonizing isn't the intended end goal and all ...
... but it never struck me as sensible that some AI colonies can be administrated by a blank portrait saying "no one of particular note" (or some such) whereas your colonies not only must be administrated by someone
... but that (given enough skill points invested) four of them can simultaneously be administrated as well as an Alpha Core - and only an Alpha Core - can administrate one planet, by someone exploring the galaxy on the other end of the sector.
A good thing about avoiding officers early, if this proves to be the case ...
Any thoughts on maybe toning down pirate raids to coincide with their buff to their minimum base modules and nerf to bounties when it comes to starting a colony in the early game?
I find after a pirate raid, they continously raid even if theyve suceeded several times in a row, it would be nice to either pay them protection or have a longer cooldown between raids. P I struggle to stabilize expending so much resources and time in defending my colony. Especially considering I find I get tied down to it very quickly.
If they don't already, Hegemony should send AI check expeditions even when the player isn't using AI cores as both a heads-up to new players that "hey if you use these those inspections are going to find them"
In fact, I'd say they should function similarly to ejecting illegal goods right before a patrol inspects you:
Removing cores leaves evidence depending on core type for x months (3, or variable 2+2 per core rank?) that Hegemony still picks up on. From my PoV, flying back to remove the cores before an inspection is both unfun and a bit of an exploit (since it seems to me the intent is that you either bribe or fight them if you're going to use cores, and in the next version bribe will function much better since it will be story point cost and thus not just a $ in versus $ out calculation).
Is there any place for us to download the 0.95a in progress version to check it out first hand?
Nope, sorry! It's not in an enjoyably playable state, anyway; you'd be surprised at how late in the dev cycle everything actually comes together to the degree that it makes any sense to have someone outside the dev team play it.
Sorry to keep saying no, but - it's strictly on a "when it's ready" basis :)
I've noticed that enemy fighter LPCs on carriers with the Reserve Deployment ability do not self-destruct as the mothership retreats from the battlefield, leading to some rather annoying time after all enemy ships retreated, like in this case:Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/pPELVJP.png)[close]
You guys might want to look into that as you nerf Reserve Deplyment (unless you've already fixed it and I did not spot it in the patch notes). I've also had it happen with a Drover using Broadswords and a modder (SafariJohn) confirmed it seems to be originating from Vanilla. It should be fairly easy to reproduce in a real battle scenario.
Imagine exploring distant part of the sector and getting a message about inspection and needing to travel 40ly+ just to ask your contact about where the inspection is going. That would be super annoying.What a surprise. You already need to travel 40ly+ to remove cores if you get a message about inspection. And yes, it is super annoying. So, i dont see big difference.
Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.
I've thought about the gameplay implications of these notes a bit more, focused around this changeQuoteIncreased XP gain from fighting more challenging battles; up to 500% more XP gained
more than before you're discouraged from going after easy targets, and encouraged to go after larger targets where you can make full use of all of your combat ships.
These changes definitely encourage players to try maximising the efficiency of a smaller fleet through carefully designed fleet strategy and loadouts in order to fight bigger fleets
Combat vs Logistics by asking Combat-focused fleets the question "Do you want to focus on Combat XP, or do you want more space for Salvage?", which adds extra playstyle options even among Combat focused fleets.
QuoteCargo Pods: cheaper to stabilize, stabilization adds 400 days (was: 150)This also supports the idea of removing cargo ships to increase combat efficiency to some extent
Maximum level is 15
You get 4 story points per level. Or maybe 2. Point being, you get more of them than you get skill points, so they keep things flowing between level-ups. You also keep gaining story points after reaching the maximum level, so there’s progression beyond that.
depends on the AI. They are "smarter" than humans because they can learn in simulations ultra fast. But you tell an combat trained AI that you plucked from a spaceship and tell it to govern millions of people it might not be so smart then.
if that what he meant, it still doesnt make sense
Any chance that there'll be a way to administrate more colonies without having to resort to AI cores at some relatively quick point? I get that colonizing isn't the intended end goal and all ...
I can't really see doing that, no. As you say, that's not an intended goal, so I don't see a reason to develop in that direction only to need to cut it back down at some point. I mean, had to do that with colony size (pretty much knowing initially that size 10 would never stay as the limit), and look how much discussion that caused. Ha!
... but it never struck me as sensible that some AI colonies can be administrated by a blank portrait saying "no one of particular note" (or some such) whereas your colonies not only must be administrated by someone
The "blank portrait" is more or less equivalent to the "no skills admin" you can hire, so at most that's a UI issue :)
... but that (given enough skill points invested) four of them can simultaneously be administrated as well as an Alpha Core - and only an Alpha Core - can administrate one planet, by someone exploring the galaxy on the other end of the sector.
Consider that with an Alpha Core, there's a question of trust. There's the core, giving instructions for the optimal and perfect running of a colony, probably. And there's the human overseers, trying to figure out which of the core's instruction *may*, in roundabout and entirely unexpected ways, lead to Bad Things.
This makes me wonder: If the story points are all given at level up, and you have good reason to either spend them all at once to maximise their efficiency, or to hold on to them until you are in real big trouble - that doesn't really help to "keep things flowing", does it? It still leaves you stranded in the (presumably) long intervals between level ups.From Alex's wording I got the impression that story points are awarded as you earn them (at, say, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% of progress towards the next level), not all at once when you level up. They wouldn't "keep things flowing between level-ups", if you earned them only at level-ups, no?
Mh. How about doling out some of the story points at half or quarter level intervals?
The post about stabilizing cargo and the possibility of people going full combat fleet for the exp bonus, and then going back with the haulers to pick up everything in a huge waste of time...An interesting idea, but Alex isn't going to add fleet functionality in this update.
Wouldn't it be possible to have a secondary fleet? maybe heavily limit it to only be able to have max 5-6 ships, only haulers or civilian ships etc (so you can't effectively use it to defend your colony effectively).
This means that you literally make your haulers vulnerable to attacks so they don't hinder your strike fleet, it also means that you actually get to use your haulers to try and escape from fights instead of almost never seeing them, combat haulers would also get taken more into consideration and why not, even strange and fun builds made entirely with combat haulers.
You could have the second fleet in tow at either the same speed or lagging behind, meaning that escaping from an unfavorable fight, means they would target your haulers instead (if they are closeby).
Of course a hauler only fleet would be targeted more heavily by NPCs, reducing its overall effectiveness
(Officers that aren't assigned to a ship still count, since otherwise you'd be encouraged to unassign officers you're not planning to use in the fight... made that change just now, actually, since wasn't thinking about that aspect of it before.)
(Officers that aren't assigned to a ship still count, since otherwise you'd be encouraged to unassign officers you're not planning to use in the fight... made that change just now, actually, since wasn't thinking about that aspect of it before.)
But that makes no sense. Just because you have them the campaign isn't necessarily easier. They should only factor into a battle if they are deployed to a fight.
I've noticed that enemy fighter LPCs on carriers with the Reserve Deployment ability do not self-destruct as the mothership retreats from the battlefield, leading to some rather annoying time after all enemy ships retreated, like in this case:Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/pPELVJP.png)[close]
You guys might want to look into that as you nerf Reserve Deplyment (unless you've already fixed it and I did not spot it in the patch notes). I've also had it happen with a Drover using Broadswords and a modder (SafariJohn) confirmed it seems to be originating from Vanilla. It should be fairly easy to reproduce in a real battle scenario.
I'm sorry if I missed any reply to this Alex, but have you seen this error with reserve Deployment carriers?
Alex, good day. I really like the Starsector and have been playing it regularly since version 0.65. You have already been asked many times in the comments, but let me clarify the question a little. How many chances are there that the patch will be released before the new year? Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.
This, however, has me slightly worried. I hope it doesn't encourage a playstile where you go out hunting with a pure combat fleet to get all those sweet XP, stabilize your cargo, and then later have to come back with a cargo fleet to make a tedious pick up cruise. But I guess in the time that would take you could just fight more targets and get overall more XP that way...
Mh. How about doling out some of the story points at half or quarter level intervals?
From Alex's wording I got the impression that story points are awarded as you earn them (at, say, 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% of progress towards the next level), not all at once when you level up. They wouldn't "keep things flowing between level-ups", if you earned them only at level-ups, no?
Another point - if lvl. ups are now rare and far apart, how about celebrating them a bit more? A fanfare, some fireworks? At the moment I often miss it completely when I just leveled up.
Yeah, point definitely taken on the discussions it'd cause ::). It is unfortunate that playing colony tycoon basically requires resorting to Alpha Cores, though. No way to colonize like crazy while roleplaying as a Luddite or...Hegemon? Eh, whatever the word for a follower of the Hegemony is.
...
Here's to hoping that idea gets expanded on at some point. Because while on one side it'd be very obnoxious if using admin Alpha Cores (AI cores in general, for that matter) caused some kind of unavoidable and permanent problems, because you have to use them in order to put down more than one medium-sized system worth of self-sufficient colonies, on the other side I'd very much like to eventually out-Tri-Tachyon the Tri-Tachyon in terms of AI core usage and research. And that'd just make the Hegemony and Luddites both look like cranky old codgers overdue for a transfer to the nearest retirement home if that didn't result in something going spectacularly wrong ;).
Ah, got it. Any chance that bug will be fixed in the upcoming patch, than? I mean I get it's not a high priority, but, you know. Attention to the fine details.
I think your worries about optimising experience bonus from strength difference are unwarranted. Currently, it's cheaper to go full combat and not get any officers, but do people do that very often? In the next patch, it will be more risky to use smaller force, but also more rewarding, but I doubt the bonus to experience is going to be significant enough that people are going to change their playstyle. Not to mention that this basic desire (to get more, using less) is already present, yet it doesn't break the game in any way — not to mention that it's to preserve resources like credits, supplies, ships, that you can gain or lose, unlike XP, which can only be gained. And there's no time limit on the players yet to rush for XP.
The post about stabilizing cargo and the possibility of people going full combat fleet for the exp bonus, and then going back with the haulers to pick up everything in a huge waste of time...
Wouldn't it be possible to have a secondary fleet? maybe heavily limit it to only be able to have max 5-6 ships, only haulers or civilian ships etc (so you can't effectively use it to defend your colony effectively).
This means that you literally make your haulers vulnerable to attacks so they don't hinder your strike fleet, it also means that you actually get to use your haulers to try and escape from fights instead of almost never seeing them, combat haulers would also get taken more into consideration and why not, even strange and fun builds made entirely with combat haulers.
You could have the second fleet in tow at either the same speed or lagging behind, meaning that escaping from an unfavorable fight, means they would target your haulers instead (if they are closeby).
Of course a hauler only fleet would be targeted more heavily by NPCs, reducing its overall effectiveness
(Officers that aren't assigned to a ship still count, since otherwise you'd be encouraged to unassign officers you're not planning to use in the fight... made that change just now, actually, since wasn't thinking about that aspect of it before.)
But that makes no sense. Just because you have them the campaign isn't necessarily easier. They should only factor into a battle if they are deployed to a fight.
Its not really about 'sense' though: its about removing a tedious thing that a player would "have" to do to play "correctly". Even though the bonus doesn't represent the ease quite as faithfully/accurately, it makes gameplay better.
Here's an example: I come across a pirate fleet that I know I can easily beat without my officers on their ships. If I get more experience from the fight by removing the officers, that means that I can increase the loot I get (xp/story points) from the fight by doing micromangement for a few seconds before and after the fight. Gameplay wise there isn't anything interesting happening: its just some tedious clicking that a player trying to maximize their rewards would be incentivized towards doing before every easy fight.
There's a few other things in the game that share this design philosophy, like the logistics hullmods only being able to be installed in dock. It doesn't make much "sense" when I think about it: I can recover ships that have literally been blown in half, why is it hard to put surveying equipment on a ship while out exploring? But if I COULD do that, I could get the most rewards by installing the efficiency hullmod for travel, then right before every single explore and salvage swap over to the recovery ones. But that doesn't really add any 'fun' to the game, just added clicking before actually doing something interesting.
Thinking about it, this would incentivize you to expand your fleet as soon as possible so that you're fighting larger enemy fleets with more officers (and thus more XP bonus). I'm not sure that dynamic is good - you're kind of... skewing what counts as "challenging" in a direction that punishes using a smaller fleet, since using a large fleet with more officers would make comparatively weaker enemies count as more challenging. That doesn't seem like something adjusting the XP curve could fix.Er, huh?
So, yeah - the thing about using Alpha Cores to fuel endless colonies is that it's also another point that will undoubtedly cause a robust level of discussion when they're finally reined in. The way it is currently is very much a loose end; you're not "supposed" to colonize more than a couple of planets. Alpha Cores already cause a bit of trouble when used, but the amount of trouble is currently - for various reasons - far below the levels it needs to be. Ultimately, I'd expect using more than a couple cores to run additional colonies to be more trouble than it's worth. Well, depending on one's capacity to handle trouble. Lot of details to figure out here, though.
I always assumed Alpha Cores was basically wishing on the Monkey's Paw. Sure you get what you want, but it will come to bite you eventually. Perhaps I've been tainted by Crusader Kings 3 (which if you go down the Intrigue route, you'd have "wit checks" against other characters) but if a rogue AI kept on making harsher and harsher demands of the player, or else scuttling industries or even the whole colony, their fickle nature would be well-learned. Of course, if some Cores did no such thing, or caused minimal trouble, the player may be willing to roll the dice. In short, it'd be cool if Alpha Cores had personalities like Compliant, Mischievous, and Chaotic.
Maybe dmods should factor into it after all, since that's the main point that makes Pirate fleets so weak for their size.
However that would mean the player can exploit dmods to make their own fleet's strength value lower, so you could make the equation pretend Player ships are all at a non-dmod level.
I think it's reasonable to do it this way, it assumes a kind of "best case scenario" for the player, which means a player can't trick the game into thinking he has a weak fleet when actually the player's ships might for be dmodded but without any combat dmods, or they are combat impacting dmods but the player chose ships that have the least impact for their role, and assumes the pirate fleet's ships have all combat impacting dmods. (Although actually, doesn't fighting dmod riddled fleets give less XP anyway?)
I'm thinking it might be good to play it safe and add some slight inconsistencies to the equation just to make sure the player can't abuse it. Because the player can choose what their own fleet's strength will be, where it's possible to keep rolling for the "perfect dmods", but they can't choose their enemy with the same precision as for their own fleet.
Just to kind of reword what I'm trying to say, you can generalise for enemy fleets, that more dmods make them weaker, but you can't use that same generalisation for players.
Of course this might be overcomplicating/overdesigning this feature and might actually make it too much trouble for what it's worth.
I always assumed Alpha Cores was basically wishing on the Monkey's Paw. Sure you get what you want, but it will come to bite you eventually.
Solid points all around! I think it'll actually work better to count d-mods both for the player and for the enemy, so that it doesn't feel like you're being penalized for using d-modded ships. I think the risk of this being optimized around is very low, since it... basically doesn't matter all that much; XP is not a finite resource and there's always more where that came from. Sort of like not every single credit is being wrung out, at some point, it's "good enough" and there's no reason to bother. So I think it's more a question of how it feels.Most importantly, d-mods are not officers or hullmods that you can just swap at any moment.
Assessing each alpha core in a management position could be worth some quest or two, or other interaction. If you were able to identify a malicious alpha core before it escaped you, it could be fun to sell such trojan horses them to other factions to cause a shortage or a stability hit.
Most importantly, d-mods are not officers or hullmods that you can just swap at any moment.
Alex, since you are limiting the number of colonies players can/should have....
Can you make a system which lets players assign their spare ships and officers to a colony as a static(-ish) defense force?
@Zaizai: I like the way you think :)Please say it will be implemented!
(My point was that if something makes your fleet stronger but doesn't make the XP bonus smaller, then you'd want to add as much of that as possible to maximize it. But whether that actually holds up depends on whether these increases in strength add up in a non-linear way, how the bonus XP calculation works, etc...)Yes, exactly. You want all your (combat) ships to have officers. This is true, and in fact the point of my suggestion: to remove any question about whether or not more officers is a good thing.
Still, a fleet with 5 officers facing 10 pirate ships without and being told it's a challenging fight... hm.Then don't phrase it that way? Could even just not display the value at all, just keep the same "You gain 3,000XP" message after the battle, and add in a tip saying something like "The smaller your fleet is relative to your opponent, the more XP you'll gain from battles."
So if I remember years ago, this list will grow for another year, and then result in another huge release after we have all forgotten about this.
I am actually kind of annoyed. I get there has been work done, but why release patch notes before a patch is released. A patch that likely won't be released for another eight to twelve months?
I get it, Alex is alone by choice, but this doesn't build hype (at least with me), it builds resentment. I am getting sick of waiting for a game I paid for eight years ago.
Sorry I am a downer but I am seriously tired of this. An incomplete game for this long should be consigned to the vaporware dustbin of history.
So if I remember years ago, this list will grow for another year, and then result in another huge release after we have all forgotten about this.
I am actually kind of annoyed. I get there has been work done, but why release patch notes before a patch is released. A patch that likely won't be released for another eight to twelve months?
I get it, Alex is alone by choice, but this doesn't build hype (at least with me), it builds resentment. I am getting sick of waiting for a game I paid for eight years ago.
Sorry I am a downer but I am seriously tired of this. An incomplete game for this long should be consigned to the vaporware dustbin of history.
So consider the current release the full game if you want? It's already got a lot more content and polish than plenty of other games...
As far as I know, Alex posts patch notes before the release to mark progress and to show to others that progress is being made. We also get to shout at him for every obviously wrong decision he makes.
Actually, the purchase page makes it very clear that what you're buying is the current version of the game.So consider the current release the full game if you want? It's already got a lot more content and polish than plenty of other games...
...but that would not only be a lie, but a direct denial of reality.
When you preorder, you’re getting Starsector (formerly “Starfarer”) in its current state – that’s why we’re offering it at a discounted price. As an added bonus, preordering entitles you to all future updates, including the final version.Personally, I've had a lot of fun playing Starsector through the various versions I've been around for, and don't regret the money spent; even in its current release it's already a much better game than some completed games.
Still, a fleet with 5 officers facing 10 pirate ships without and being told it's a challenging fight... hm.Then don't phrase it that way? Could even just not display the value at all, just keep the same "You gain 3,000XP" message after the battle, and add in a tip saying something like "The smaller your fleet is relative to your opponent, the more XP you'll gain from battles."
As has been said, this isn't something that the player is meant to be trying to fine-tune.
Still, a fleet with 5 officers facing 10 pirate ships without and being told it's a challenging fight... hm.Then don't phrase it that way? Could even just not display the value at all, just keep the same "You gain 3,000XP" message after the battle, and add in a tip saying something like "The smaller your fleet is relative to your opponent, the more XP you'll gain from battles."
As has been said, this isn't something that the player is meant to be trying to fine-tune.
Still need to make the player fairly aware of it, though! I'm not really sold on the benefits of not counting officers here; they're so much better than without that I think it's trying to fix something that wouldn't actually be a problem. I mean, what you're saying makes sense, but what's currently in the game I think also works, and I kind of want to just stop messing with it :)
@Zelnik: I'm sorry that the way I'm going about it is causing resentment for you! I don't think I can really do anything differently here, though; it's a pretty sizeable project. All I can do is work on the game in the best way I'm able to, and try to provide (hopefully enjoyable!) versions of the game along the way.
I hear what you're saying! I don't mean to discount it, but it's one of those things where... there's no useful action I can take in response to this information, whether voiced by you or someone else. (Well, no action that wouldn't compromise the final product. I'm assuming you wouldn't I rather tie up a few loose ends real quick and call it 1.0. Besides, I don't want that.)Quick question: have you considered making smaller updates over the course of the year, while you work on the "big bad update"? I'm talking about relatively small things like those already included in these patch notes, like adding a ship here and there, balancing some weapons, adding small stuff etc.
So! I'll just hope that when the next version is released, you (and others of a similar mind) will find it to your liking :)
Quick question: have you considered making smaller updates over the course of the year, while you work on the "big bad update"? I'm talking about relatively small things like those already included in these patch notes, like adding a ship here and there, balancing some weapons, adding small stuff etc.
While not substantial and hype inducing, they could help keeping the playerbase engaged and speaking about the game to their friends/making youtube videos etc etc (which of course, means more sales for you).
I personally have no trouble waiting, however i do find myself picking the game for a bit, and then forgetting about it until i randomly remember months later and check about the update progress. If even 20% of the current patch notes were separated into smaller updates every couple months or something, it could make many people happier and keep the community strong imho.
While not substantial and hype inducing, they could help keeping the playerbase engaged and speaking about the game to their friends/making youtube videos etc etc (which of course, means more sales for you).Personally, I find the modding and Tournaments already do a good job of adding 'small updates' to my experience of the game and keeping the community strong.
If even 20% of the current patch notes were separated into smaller updates every couple months or something, it could make many people happier and keep the community strong imho.
How can I be exited for something that hasn't manifested in eight years?Thermonuclear take time:
Plus some changes could be mod-breaking etc.
Thermonuclear take time:
Getting excited (or worse, "hyped") over the game to come in the distant future (hypothetical complete Starsector) instead of the game we already have (Starsector 0.9.1) or the not-yet-out game with visible progress on it (Starsector 0.95a as indicated by the blog posts and patch notes) contributes to the incentives that get you something like Anthem. Or Star Citizen.
More generally: For the purposes of what's beneficial for the customer, excitement is not in itself good (nor bad) and building it should not be a goal.
I see the major relevant risks of the long development cycle as:
- Alex gets tired of the project and drops out
... #1 doesn't look like it either (sure hope not!), but I can't tell from the outside.
Of course, the most direct way to speed up the dev cycle – crunching – is going to be directly counterproductive for #1. Hiring a new dev with Sseth money imposes significant onboarding costs at this late stage, although this could be mitigated if the person was already familiar with the game's innards.
(Alex: Have you ever contemplated contracting one of the major modders here to help you and/or David with development? I can list a few names (not including me though, I'd turn down any offer that was made) who I think would be available and good at it. There's another notable space indie game out now (AI War II) where circumstances led to the dev relying heavily on two volunteers-turned-contractors to get the current release out, so I was wondering if this model might be worth considering elsewhere.)
One thing that would be kind of awesome for these large updates, is if you could somehow get the mod relevant data on the patch change to the modders ahead of time, so they can be working on updating their mods to the new patch when it releases, rather than fans of their mods having to wait for x# of days after the new patch before their mods are updating. (Probably not realistic/feasible I admit, but a gal can dream! 8) )
How well would this work?
Spend story point to do a convoy raid. ...
Ships/systems:
- Added Fury-class light cruiser, high tech
- Added Champion-class heavy cruiser, midline
Alex, would you mind sharing screenshots of the in-game spec-sheet for both of these new ships? Or is it still :-X material?
I've noticed that enemy fighter LPCs on carriers with the Reserve Deployment ability do not self-destruct as the mothership retreats from the battlefield, leading to some rather annoying time after all enemy ships retreated, like in this case:Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/pPELVJP.png)[close]
You guys might want to look into that as you nerf Reserve Deplyment (unless you've already fixed it and I did not spot it in the patch notes). I've also had it happen with a Drover using Broadswords and a modder (SafariJohn) confirmed it seems to be originating from Vanilla. It should be fairly easy to reproduce in a real battle scenario.
I'm sorry if I missed any reply to this Alex, but have you seen this error with reserve Deployment carriers?
Thanks for the reminder - somehow, I just didn't notice this at all, my apologies! Made a note to check this out shortly.
Alex, would you mind sharing screenshots of the in-game spec-sheet for both of these new ships? Or is it still :-X material?Oh yeah this reminds me, giving full stats right now is probably too much and they could change in the meantime, but I'm reaaaally curious what's the flux dissipation of these ships. If I had to guess I'd estimate Fury has around 550 while the Champion has 600. Warm or cold?
Alex, would you mind sharing screenshots of the in-game spec-sheet for both of these new ships? Or is it still :-X material?Oh yeah this reminds me, giving full stats right now is probably too much and they could change in the meantime, but I'm reaaaally curious what's the flux dissipation of these ships. If I had to guess I'd estimate Fury has around 550 while the Champion has 600. Warm or cold?
By the way Alex, have you ever solved the issue with ships randomly stopping when burning in and loosing the boost? I thought it was from asteroids or something and you perhaps solved it already, but someone said he's getting all his ship robbed from burning in boost, which doesn't sound good, so I wanted to check.
Alex there is another issue I was wondering you could take care of.
Though more relevant for mods, if there is a ship variant (either player made or not) that requires a weapon that is no longer present it crashes the entire game on startup. It should be possible, from what others have said, to leave the relevant slot for that weapon empty if it finds the weapon it is looking for no longer exists then popup a warning where the player can see it. Perhaps on the main menu once the preload is complete, the mission screen when starting up a scenario that includes the relevant ship (requiring you to acknowledge the warning before starting the mission) and in the campaign refit screen when selecting the relevant variant in the autofitter.
Alex, would you mind sharing screenshots of the in-game spec-sheet for both of these new ships? Or is it still :-X material?
Alex, another quick question, any chance to expand the current beam weapons? i would kill for a medium/large tactical laser or a large graviton beam. I can see so many fun specialized builds opening up
Alex, any plans for more in-depth colony fleet composition mechanics so it will be more than "get as much FP as possible"?
Any plans for Neutrino Detector changes?
Two ideas for story point spending:
1: Spend at a comm relay to not get purged at the next maintanence, no matter how many sniffers player has.
2. Spend at a planet to destroy pather cell and stop pather plot against that planet. Usable and both NPC and player colonies. Doing so at the first even gets the player some good reputation.
How do the updates usually affect faction/ship mods?
I ask because i've been working on my own mod for sometime and while its pretty mechanically simple and i'm curious as to how much i'll have to go back and redo, if any at all, and if so knowing might give me an idea of how to prep.
To clarify its mostly all handmade sprites with only some of the fighters partially kitbashed from the base game, it doesn't use any of the library mods (Magiclib, etc.) and doesn't have any custom hullmods or systems. For now its only custom ships, weapons, and projectiles using mainly recycled code from the base game. The most i've done with the recycled code is change variables, moved some things around and cleaned up after the Ship/Weapon Creator twisting the code into knots.
Thanks for any info!
I've got a tiny little bit of extra insight regarding the Reserve Deployment bug: the fighters will not self-destruct not only if the carrier retreats while they are deployed, but also if it is disabled or destroyed anywhere on the map.
Oh yeah this reminds me, giving full stats right now is probably too much and they could change in the meantime, but I'm reaaaally curious what's the flux dissipation of these ships. If I had to guess I'd estimate Fury has around 550 while the Champion has 600. Warm or cold?
Let's play. :D
Shrike has 350, Medusa has 400, Aurora has 800. My guess is around 600 for Fury.
Eagle has 525, Dominator has 450. My guess is around 550 for Champion.
(I suspect at this point those both new ships have received extensive playtesting and their stats are ready, hence my question above)
By the way Alex, have you ever solved the issue with ships randomly stopping when burning in and loosing the boost? I thought it was from asteroids or something and you perhaps solved it already, but someone said he's getting all his ship robbed from burning in boost, which doesn't sound good, so I wanted to check.
Oh yeah i'd love to see this fixed. I always assumed it was from asteroids too but not entirely sure. It's most annoying when your ship already lost it before you've even entered the visible part of the map, and ofc it usually seems to happen during a pursuit.
Hey Alex,
Will memory leaks be solved?
I like playing with a lot of mods but my game slows down to a crawl even though I increased the amount of Ram the game could use to maximum. :(
Well - I've fixed one significant vanilla leak, and added something that makes detecting leaks easier. But ultimately *I* can't fix a leak if it's in a mod, or make it impossible for it to happen, so for whatever leaks there are in mods, that's up to the individual modders.
Hmm - just in general, I'm not very keen on "same thing, but larger/smaller" kinds of weapons. "Combat" beams are particularly subject to this because they tend to have the same range regardless of size, and don't have a lot of other variables to tweak. Where, for example, the Mark IX is in some ways a bigger Heavy AC, but there are enough differences - range, recoil, burst size, etc - that it can more get away with it.
Consider this: if you can put the same thing in every slot, then every slot is functionally the same, just bigger or smaller, there's no qualitative difference between what they let you do, just quantitative. On the other hand, if for example a medium energy slot and a large energy slot have quite different things that go in them, then *ships* become more interesting and varied simply due to the differences in which of these slots they have.Thanks for explaining the reasoning, now that i think about it i never had any problem with kinetics, so i guess it just feels like the medium energy slot lacks options in the 1000 range or beam category, and while it could be fixed by slapping a medium tac laser, it could also be fixed by adding something else entirely that follows your philosophy.
Now, having a few weapons that are just a bigger/smaller version of something else doesn't take things all the way to this extreme. But it does take things some ways towards it, and that's why I'm generally not keen on it.
One way to think of it is this - you have different slot types, right- ballistic, energy, missile. They make ships very different! Slot sizes are a little like this, too, and this is good because it makes ships more different. The more similar-but-a-different-size weapons there are, the less this is the case.
By the way Alex, have you ever solved the issue with ships randomly stopping when burning in and loosing the boost? I thought it was from asteroids or something and you perhaps solved it already, but someone said he's getting all his ship robbed from burning in boost, which doesn't sound good, so I wanted to check.Oh yeah i'd love to see this fixed. I always assumed it was from asteroids too but not entirely sure. It's most annoying when your ship already lost it before you've even entered the visible part of the map, and ofc it usually seems to happen during a pursuit.
Whenever it happens it's due to collision danger as far as I know, I'm not aware of any bugs affecting this. I mean, it sucks if your ship stops burning in because there's an asteroid that probably wouldn't have hit it but was enough to set off the emergency braking maneuver, but, well.
If there's an issue where it happens when it shouldn't, I'd love to know more about it!
(Btw, I did just now make it so that the tiny asteroids from rings that do no damage don't factor in here. They shouldn't have much impact regardless, though, but thinking about it, it's actually possible they might cause smaller ships burn to cut short... hmm. Well, regardless, not anymore!)
Consider this: if you can put the same thing in every slot, then every slot is functionally the same, just bigger or smaller, there's no qualitative difference between what they let you do, just quantitative. On the other hand, if for example a medium energy slot and a large energy slot have quite different things that go in them, then *ships* become more interesting and varied simply due to the differences in which of these slots they have.
Now, having a few weapons that are just a bigger/smaller version of something else doesn't take things all the way to this extreme. But it does take things some ways towards it, and that's why I'm generally not keen on it.
One way to think of it is this - you have different slot types, right- ballistic, energy, missile. They make ships very different! Slot sizes are a little like this, too, and this is good because it makes ships more different. The more similar-but-a-different-size weapons there are, the less this is the case.
Consider this: if you can put the same thing in every slot, then every slot is functionally the same, just bigger or smaller, there's no qualitative difference between what they let you do, just quantitative. On the other hand, if for example a medium energy slot and a large energy slot have quite different things that go in them, then *ships* become more interesting and varied simply due to the differences in which of these slots they have.
Now, having a few weapons that are just a bigger/smaller version of something else doesn't take things all the way to this extreme. But it does take things some ways towards it, and that's why I'm generally not keen on it.
One way to think of it is this - you have different slot types, right- ballistic, energy, missile. They make ships very different! Slot sizes are a little like this, too, and this is good because it makes ships more different. The more similar-but-a-different-size weapons there are, the less this is the case.
Thanks for explaining the reasoning, now that i think about it i never had any problem with kinetics, so i guess it just feels like the medium energy slot lacks options in the 1000 range or beam category, and while it could be fixed by slapping a medium tac laser, it could also be fixed by adding something else entirely that follows your philosophy.
Does the speed penalty for exceeding the ship limit apply to AI fleets too?
If it's supposed to be caused by asteroids i don't think it's bugged, or at least not that i've ever experienced bugged behavior, (i've never seen it affect every ship like SCC describes) and i think making it ignore those tiny asteroids will go a long way in solving any annoying/unintentioned behavior.
Re: Ship burn drive at combat start. It happens quite often to me that the burn fizzes out early with no obstacle there, or that the burn continues and plows through a small asteroid. Out of the two, I definitely prefer the latter and wish the detection system wouldn't exist. Could also just give the ships damage immunity until the initial burn ends, if that's not too game-y.
I for one hope you'll never lose sight of this design choice no matter how often it's brought up. The biggest problem i have with all the weapons that most mods add to the game is that they fill every niche which imo really takes away *meaningful* choice by adding too much choice.
100% this! Keep the weapon selection mean and lean and force people to make choices. Having 5 different weapons that all do the same thing with a minute 2% difference for every single role is the worst.
Are wars between factions going to be possible at some point? That's one thing I always wanted to see in Starsector.
Thanks for explaining the reasoning, now that i think about it i never had any problem with kinetics, so i guess it just feels like the medium energy slot lacks options in the 1000 range or beam category, and while it could be fixed by slapping a medium tac laser, it could also be fixed by adding something else entirely that follows your philosophy.
Yeah, hmm. Not sure what that option might be, though, without being either "larger tac laser" or "smaller HIL". At 1000 range it's to be a beam, and, per the previous, there are somewhat less easy options for making them distinct. I suppose a fragmentation beam *might* be interesting...
The old phase beam was basically two tac lasers strapped together. Honestly though I think the graviton beam is fine enough as a medium tac laser - yes it performs very poorly against armor but if shields are down that's most of your work done as long-ranged support.
The only weapon I feel is still missing is a HE ballistic weapon that is to the heavy mortar as the heavy autocannon is to the arbalest.
I mean, it still takes a huge amount of time to kill big tanky ships with the HIL, more than enough time for them to vent and get back into action multiple times. by going HIL+frag beams on a sunder for example, you would be useless against shields as you said, but there's an argument to be made for specializations, you lose some you gain some. I can have my officers take care of the shields for me while i melt them
HIL+graviton is already known to be good against many ships, but having the option to specialize in something different is a good thing imho, doesn't have to be as viable, covering a niche is fine too
The only ships with large energy mounts are Paragon, Odyssey, Apogee and Sunder. I think all of those ships can use any of the large energies (ignoring paladin) effectively, except the sunder has to use SO to support PC. Apogee does not need SO to run a plasma cannon. Max dissipation with a single PC and token PD along with all the shield and range hull mods is by far the best apogee loadout IMO.
Hey, long time player, super stoked to see another update forming up
I have what I hope is a tiny request, could you standardize support in whatever form it needs for unicode characters in names?
I ask because in my attempt to name a planet "Earth 2: Electric Boogaloo" to fit the length requirement I ended up with "Earth²:Electric Boogaloo" which seems to render perfectly fine in small white font, but the larger blue font renders the ² as ? instead. I assume it's a font issue but I'm hopeful there's potentially a solution that isn't too taxing on you? Very minor either way.
Thanks and good luck with the well, rest of the game, aha
There's this rare crash that I don't get too often when assisting an orbital station against multiple invasion fleets so large that the battle span on for multiple rounds. For virtualization's sake, the first round is full-blown very long combat, the second round is also full-blown combat with capitals that haven't been deploy yet plus the one that retreats. In the third round, the enemy just throws all of the support ship and cargo at the station until nothing left. But that's not the end, the screen prompts a fourth round that has no enemy ship in it. If I click to join said combat, the game will immediately crash.
This rarely happened (probably 4-5 times) but I still noticed and avoided not joining in the last round. It probably a NEX mod issue but you could maybe put a check code on empty combat.
Oh just remembered an old suggestion about making Mjolnir projectiles a bit more obvious. I get that visual clutter is a concern but most other deadly weapons are super easily seen. And getting hit by it is very unhealthy for your ship. Honestly, if it weren't for the sound effect, it wouldn't be nearly as scary.
Oh just remembered an old suggestion about making Mjolnir projectiles a bit more obvious. I get that visual clutter is a concern but most other deadly weapons are super easily seen. And getting hit by it is very unhealthy for your ship. Honestly, if it weren't for the sound effect, it wouldn't be nearly as scary.
I think this is one of the changes that didn't make it into the list - having a look just now, they look pretty beefy! Closer to AM Blaster shots.
Are wars between factions going to be possible at some point? That's one thing I always wanted to see in Starsector.
Honestly, I don't really see doing that - that's veering into straight-up 4x territory, and the game isn't really designed around that / it's not a direction I want to go in. I could see something more event-driven happening along these lines, but not for example a fully dynamic situation where colonies are changing hands left and right and so on.
Can someone explain, what "REDACTED" means in this context?
Can someone explain, what "REDACTED" means in this context?
I could totally see there being small to medium sized conflicts (some really big battles in one system, followed by an attempted siege, followed by a temporary ceasefire treaty as both factions recover), implemented as a dynamically-generated event between factions that are very hostile to each other.
On their own, not a big difference, but maybe someone playing very very long campaigns could see a faction grow much more powerful and another faction wiped out?
This could help give the sector some feeling of there being bigger conflicts, without the issues (difficult-to-implement, hard for performance, chaotic for player to be caught in) of a full-blown war.
Yeah, hmm. Not sure what that option might be, though, without being either "larger tac laser" or "smaller HIL". At 1000 range it's to be a beam, and, per the previous, there are somewhat less easy options for making them distinct. I suppose a fragmentation beam *might* be interesting...
I just noticed that the forum broke its number of visitors record two days after the patch notes were posted. The next release is gonna make some waves 8)Yeah, hmm. Not sure what that option might be, though, without being either "larger tac laser" or "smaller HIL". At 1000 range it's to be a beam, and, per the previous, there are somewhat less easy options for making them distinct. I suppose a fragmentation beam *might* be interesting...
A beam that supports other beams would be nice. The biggest disadvantage of beams is their all or nothing nature due to only dealing soft flux - either they overwhelm a targets dissipation and kill it safely, or they can't overwhelm the dissipation and are almost useless.
Hm. How about a medium beam that transforms some soft flux damage a target receives into hard flux damage. To balance this out, it might also produce hard flux on the ship that is firing it, so you cant fire continuously. Such a beam would be useless on its own, a slight disadvantage on a beam heavy ship against targets that ship could overwhelm anyway, and game changing if a beam ship engages a superior enemy.
Thanks for explaining the reasoning, now that i think about it i never had any problem with kinetics, so i guess it just feels like the medium energy slot lacks options in the 1000 range or beam category, and while it could be fixed by slapping a medium tac laser, it could also be fixed by adding something else entirely that follows your philosophy.
Yeah, hmm. Not sure what that option might be, though, without being either "larger tac laser" or "smaller HIL". At 1000 range it's to be a beam, and, per the previous, there are somewhat less easy options for making them distinct. I suppose a fragmentation beam *might* be interesting...
The last thing High tech ships need is yet another armour breaker and hull deleter. Frag constant beam does sound nice but imo the biggest hole is a medium flux efficient projectile weapon.
@Deshara
Did you forget about the Phase lance?
The last thing High tech ships need is yet another armour breaker and hull deleter. Frag constant beam does sound nice but imo the biggest hole is a medium flux efficient projectile weapon.
@Deshara
Did you forget about the Phase lance?
honestly i thought it was a mod weapon lol there was a small mount phase lance from some mod that was my #1 most used small mount & my brain back-filled
We need a kinetic torpedo and energy missiles.
...
There was a mod that introduced energy based missile that were built in on a ship, don't remember the name unfortunately.
they were homing balls of energy that dealt hard flux energy damage, with a recharging magazine but infinite ammo. I had to say, i had a blast using them and i wished i could mount them on all ships.
I kinda hate finite resources and i get that missiles are strong and need to be regulated somehow, but there's nothing worse than running out of missiles and realizing that your build doesn't work anymore...
This is why i use way more piliums and salamanders than i should. Something like that mod, even way weaker than missiles and with high OP, would be amazing imho.
Arcagnello got that right! that's exactly the ship! I wonder if there's any chance for something like this to be added
Why this topic suddenly becomes a suggestion thread? Do not distract the developer with all these suggestions than he almost finished the update, wanna overpowered weapons, and ships go use mods.
ps Alex, do not get distracted, update you made is already huge, leave some space for dlcs.
I apologize in advance for using google translator.
1 Was the possibility of specifying the location of the fleet for deployment considered before the battle? For example, so that battleships appear on the first line, support cruisers and aircraft carriers on the second line? And also so that you can set the behavior for the ships in advance (for example, a certain aircraft carrier must always accompany the cruiser. Now the tracking is configured anew every time, but this routine and it is superfluous).
2 Are there any plans to give the opportunity to change the orbits of the planets? (for example, a super secret technology (REDACTED). As a terraforming tool (for example, dragging a frozen world closer to a star and melting ice on it, turning it into an ocean world.
3 How about putting pins or notes on the card? For example, I constantly keep notes on paper to remember where everything has already been cleaned up (for example, all ruins have been surveyed and all stations (REDACTED) have been cleaned and alpha cores collected).
4 Will it be possible in the future to move the cryostorage from a distant system closer to habitable space? For example, in order to still get out of sleep or for its intended purpose (organ trade). Setting up a colony in remote space is not bad, but sometimes you want to have maximum protection in the system and build several colonies in one system at once, so that the patrol is coordinated and repulsed all the impudent ones.
5 How about two types of ships (or modules for ships) - 1 star refueling (convenient for long expeditions into deep space), 2 special ship to increase the radar (yes there is a module, but it is extremely weak), there are, for example, special ships tankers, civil, etc. As for the ship, the main, and possibly the only function, will be to increase the range of the fleet's radar (literally a ship consisting of several radar installations).
6 How about the "Announce the recruitment of officers" function in one of your colonies?
7 Are there any plans to give the opportunity to send one of their patrol (or punitive) fleets, let's say, to clean up a pirate base? By specifying a specific system and giving a cleaning task.
And the last question ... will it be possible to remove the "flash" of the transition from one game screen to another? Honestly, sometimes my eyes start to hurt.
I usually go big ships first, then small ships. (Deploy battleships, close, open, deploy smaller stuff.) It gets annoying when my small ships die before my big ships even enter fog-of-war radius of a fight.1 Was the possibility of specifying the location of the fleet for deployment considered before the battle? For example, so that battleships appear on the first line, support cruisers and aircraft carriers on the second line? And also so that you can set the behavior for the ships in advance (for example, a certain aircraft carrier must always accompany the cruiser. Now the tracking is configured anew every time, but this routine and it is superfluous).
I've thought about this, yeah. I don't think it'd be a great idea - it's a lot of new UI and work (both for me to add, and for the player to set up stuff), and it's not like you're always deploying the same thing. And you have other options! Say, deploying the frontline/slower ships, then re-opening the deployment dialog to deploy a second wave, if that's what you want. Carriers will naturally - and intentionally - fall back, too, and there's generally enough time before fleets close for them to do that. So this just isn't something I want to add - I think it's far too complex for the limited benefit it might bring.
HYBRID, COMPOSITE, SYNERGY, and UNIVERSAL are now supported weapon types
Fit into that type of slot, or into a slot of a matching primary type
E.G a HYBRID weapon fits into a hybrid, ballistic, or energy slot, but not into a synergy slot
Added "auto_fighter" tag; only fighters with it can be installed on player-fleet automated ships
Added "auto_rec" tag; UNBOARDABLE ships with it can be recovered by the player fleet with the proper skill
Ah, sorry, that's not really possible... at least, not super easily! The idea here is literally the opposite - to make the weapon type less restrictive, not more.
(I'm also not really sold that having this as a restriction makes a ton of sense, since generally speaking those types of slots are pretty rare, so weapons requiring them severely limits where they can be used.)
Do Wasps and Mining Pods have the "auto_fighter" tag?
How do "auto_rec" and "auto_fighter" tags interact - when putting the fighter game checks for presence of "auto_rec" on ship and then check the wing for "auto_fighter"?
Question related to mods:
Can I make a hullmod that will nullifies the "auto_fighter" tag requirement (makes all fighters require 0 crew but gives debuffs to fighters)?
Say I have a ship with 0 crew capacity and want it to accept only drone fighters, I assume I'd have to reference auto_fighter tag in hullmod code to make it accept only drone wings?
Ah I see rip. The idea behind it that you could have a weapon that while not able to used by every ship, could be potentially more potent (I.e More powerful) for ships that can take advantage of it. And I figured by using a tag, it would be possible to keep the way you’re doing it while letting those who may not want a say specific hybrid weapon they add to be as accessible to be more restricted. If that makes sense.
Tho personally, letting hybrid and etc into primary slots feels weird since while I’m not really into like the lore or logistics of ships, if I put like say as an example a hybrid light assault gun that instead of physical bullets, it shoots lasers like those from a small pulse turret. Wouldn’t it thematically make sense for it require a hybrid slot as it uses both ballistic and energy “supplies/components” as composed to one or the other? Might just be me on this one tho.
Ah I see rip. The idea behind it that you could have a weapon that while not able to used by every ship, could be potentially more potent (I.e More powerful) for ships that can take advantage of it. And I figured by using a tag, it would be possible to keep the way you’re doing it while letting those who may not want a say specific hybrid weapon they add to be as accessible to be more restricted. If that makes sense.
Hmm, yeah. I'm not sure that's actually a great way to balance it, though, since ships with composite etc slots are not designed with that in mind, you know? The existence of weapons like that is basically a buff to composite (or whatever) slot ships, in terms of balance, then.Tho personally, letting hybrid and etc into primary slots feels weird since while I’m not really into like the lore or logistics of ships, if I put like say as an example a hybrid light assault gun that instead of physical bullets, it shoots lasers like those from a small pulse turret. Wouldn’t it thematically make sense for it require a hybrid slot as it uses both ballistic and energy “supplies/components” as composed to one or the other? Might just be me on this one tho.
Well... for the vanilla weapons that use this, the reasoning is rather that they can be adapted into either of the slot types! Though I see what you're saying, for sure. But also, something like the Mjolnir - ballistic type, but firing energy bolts. Basically, it's as flexible as it needs to be, lore-wise :)
The answer is no, I think. Firstly because I don't think there is a way for hullmods to make the ship's fighters require no crew (?), but also because this is handled via tags on the fighter wing/whether the "automated" hullmod is there. I suppose if you worked out a way to add the "automated" hullmod to the ship, perhaps?Tangentially related follow-up, mostly for modding
For the second part, the thing to do would be make sure the ship has the "automated" hullmod. But iirc that'd also make it not-transfer-command-to-able...
They don't interact at all, actually. auto_fighter is based on the presence of the "automated" hullmod on the ship, not the auto_rec tag. The auto_rec tag is purely for whether it's recoverable.
The answer is no, I think. Firstly because I don't think there is a way for hullmods to make the ship's fighters require no crew (?), but also because this is handled via tags on the fighter wing/whether the "automated" hullmod is there. I suppose if you worked out a way to add the "automated" hullmod to the ship, perhaps?
For the second part, the thing to do would be make sure the ship has the "automated" hullmod. But iirc that'd also make it not-transfer-command-to-able...
Hi - this actually isn't a bug and can happen in a few cases. What it means is a militarized Prometheus Mk.II requires some auxiliary support (for additional crew capacity) to function. In terms of an in-fiction explanation, crews have to rotate off the ship during off-duty hours, life support systems are strained, etc - it's a bit of a mess in there :)
I don't see an issue with automated carriers launching manned fighters.Hi - this actually isn't a bug and can happen in a few cases. What it means is a militarized Prometheus Mk.II requires some auxiliary support (for additional crew capacity) to function. In terms of an in-fiction explanation, crews have to rotate off the ship during off-duty hours, life support systems are strained, etc - it's a bit of a mess in there :)
Question: can some type of sufficiently important factional contacts broker ceasefires between players and factions? After said factions are exhausted enough, that is :P
Alex, can you make that non-installable thing work for weapons, too? I also find it amusing that you think there might be 1000+ OP fighters in the modiverse.
Super flexible weapons, I think, aren't going to be much fun, since weapons are defined by contrasting qualities. Both synergy and composite weapons would have to have qualities that aren't desirable to low tech or high tech ships. Hybrid weapons would probably be useful for low tech ships only as SO guns. The idea in general sounds like a pain in the neck to keep both interesting and balanced.
What video card do you have now Alex?
Yup! Can verify - while I don't think I'd ever use a (vanilla) medium energy weapon in a hybrid or universal slot, the antimatter blaster, ion cannon, and tachyon lance are all weapons that I have used in such slots; ballistic weaponry simply doesn't have anything that fits the same niches.Super flexible weapons, I think, aren't going to be much fun, since weapons are defined by contrasting qualities. Both synergy and composite weapons would have to have qualities that aren't desirable to low tech or high tech ships. Hybrid weapons would probably be useful for low tech ships only as SO guns. The idea in general sounds like a pain in the neck to keep both interesting and balanced.
It's trickier, for sure, but I don't think the specifics are quite as you say. E.G. a hypothetical "hybrid" type weapon might be very useful in an energy slot if it did kinetic damage, or useful in a ballistic slot if it did EMP damage, and so on. It just depends on which way they lean compared to what's usually available for those slots. They'll probably lean one way or another in terms of net usefulness, though, but if they offer some degree of flexibility or utility they could be worthwhile on different types of ships.
There are at least mod ships (though only cheat level ships afaik) with 1000+ OP in the modiverseAlex, can you make that non-installable thing work for weapons, too? I also find it amusing that you think there might be 1000+ OP fighters in the modiverse.
Ah, good call - did that!
(You mean there aren't? I'm disappointed.)
Alex, can you make that non-installable thing work for weapons, too? I also find it amusing that you think there might be 1000+ OP fighters in the modiverse.
Ah, good call - did that!
(You mean there aren't? I'm disappointed.)
:DAh, reminds me of Wilbur from Darkest Dungeon. That diminutive swine directing the mountainous mass of flesh that is the Swing King has caused untimely end of more adventurers than any other boss in the game, I wager.
..mhh..
Joking aside, it would be pretty cool to fight such a constellation. Some big baddy you have little chance to kill but you can oumaneuver, and it's little squishy companion you have to get at to end the fight. It could be the control unit or energy source or dimensional anchor or whatever.
Would really give you a reason to pilot an elite frigate instead of a battleship.
:DAh, reminds me of Wilbur from Darkest Dungeon. That diminutive swine directing the mountainous mass of flesh that is the Swing King has caused untimely end of more adventurers than any other boss in the game, I wager.
..mhh..
Joking aside, it would be pretty cool to fight such a constellation. Some big baddy you have little chance to kill but you can oumaneuver, and it's little squishy companion you have to get at to end the fight. It could be the control unit or energy source or dimensional anchor or whatever.
Would really give you a reason to pilot an elite frigate instead of a battleship.
I wouldn't say no to more interesting and engaging mechanics like that.
:D
..mhh..
Joking aside, it would be pretty cool to fight such a constellation. Some big baddy you have little chance to kill but you can oumaneuver, and it's little squishy companion you have to get at to end the fight. It could be the control unit or energy source or dimensional anchor or whatever.
Would really give you a reason to pilot an elite frigate instead of a battleship.
... can we have a Mudskipper Mk III that has a built in Onslaught wing (of 4)? That should be worth 1000 OP...
the Heavy Needler is actually even preferrable to some large ballistic weapons on ships with poor flux dissipation like the Onslaught, where its best, vanilla-only setups usually involve two heavy Needlers slapped to the side, into the large ballistic slotsYour onslaughts should absolutely never put heavy needlers in the large ballistic slots. It’s a very bad idea. You have medium slots to put them in
Your onslaughts should absolutely never put heavy needlers in the large ballistic slots. It’s a very bad idea. You have medium slots to put them in
Edit: will heavy Needler spam still be viable in 0.95a? Probably not, but I still find it much more preferable to installing any large kinetic weapon on the side mounts.Remember that Alex may make Mark IX more efficient, and Onslaught will get Heavy Ballistics Integration. Also, the side mounts will have their arcs changed (shortened if I remember).
Remember that Alex may make Mark IX more efficient, and Onslaught will get Heavy Ballistics Integration. Also, the side mounts will have their arcs changed (shortened if I remember)Heavy Autocannon's efficiency may not be the best (at 1.0), but it is not terrible. The worst part of Heavy Autocannon is the accuracy (and it turns a bit slow). We already have a better Heavy Autocannon - the Heavy Needler.
Aye, I wrote that phrase precisely because Onslaught is getting those changes. Heavy autocannon also needs the love Alex is likely going to give it. That flux to damage ratio for a supposedly rugged weapon on the low tech side more or less butchers its widespread use.
Heavy Autocannon's efficiency may not be the best (at 1.0), but it is not terrible. The worst part of Heavy Autocannon is the accuracy (and it turns a bit slow). We already have a better Heavy Autocannon - the Heavy Needler.The poor accuracy is a passable trait given the fact it's meant for shields AND that it does very, very good damage per shot, allowing it to be an OK option to also strip armor on destroyers and below.
How so? The ship still does not have heavy ballistic integration and while it possesses plenty of OP for almost everything you want to give it the mediocre flux dissipation hardcaps it's sustained offensive capability.
The current estimate is February next year.
Wasn't Megas keeping track of the the longest gap in time between patch notes release and then actual patch release? What is the average time between Alex posting notes and then release?Not really. I might have brought it up before, but others have posted charts and the like for greater precision.
... can we have a Mudskipper Mk III that has a built in Onslaught wing (of 4)? That should be worth 1000 OP...
Joking aside, it would be pretty cool to fight such a constellation. Some big baddy you have little chance to kill but you can oumaneuver, and it's little squishy companion you have to get at to end the fight. It could be the control unit or energy source or dimensional anchor or whatever.
Would really give you a reason to pilot an elite frigate instead of a battleship.
Will there be story point based toolbar abilities, like Go Dark but even stealthier or Emergency Burn but even faster?
What are the most interesting new skills?
Seems like everyone is talking about combat skills, but what about the others? Will those have elite levels too?No, so far.
What could we expect from elite industry or logistics skills? Can we mentor admins too? How will admin cores function?
Considering that combat skills can be elited because they disproportionately depend on player skill, I doubt other skills will be. Might as well remove eliting entirely and just make it so that all skills cost a skill point and a story point.Most recent answer from Alex is this.
Hi - welcome to the forum, and glad you've been enjoying the game!
It's close what what SCC said, yeah - the "elite" skill levels are mainly there to give the player a "special" bonus for picking something that only affects their piloted ship, so that you can feel like you're getting something you wouldn't get just from a high-level officer, and so that you can feel that - even with relatively few combat points spent - that your character is a capable pilot; in some ways more capable than the officers under your command. And by requiring story points to unlock these - instead of making them just player-only portions of skill effects - it makes this feel more earned.
This really applies even if you're using autopilot, though you'd naturally get more value out of it depending on how much personal piloting you do and how well you do it.
Non-combat skills don't face the same situation where lots of NPCs visibly have them, and you're comparing your character against them - I mean, admins have some of them, and fleet commanders have some some of the fleetwide skills, but it's much more minor - so there's not much point to locking some of the effects behind a story point. Basically, it's less a progression system for skills and more a way of gating access to some of the effects, and this, imo, only really makes sense for combat skills.
Plus, for combat skills, the "elite" effects are usually something cool and particularly powerful, which is easier to get away with because it's still just one ship. For fleetwide/colony skills, the effects would have to be much more restrained, so it wouldn't be as exciting and would probably just feel like a story point "tax" to unlock the full value of the skills.
Considering that combat skills can be elited because they disproportionately depend on player skill, I doubt other skills will be. Might as well remove eliting entirely and just make it so that all skills cost a skill point and a story point.I predict that a mod will be made for that!
I absolutely love reading the upcoming changes and updates to the game, starsector is proof that you don't need fancy 3D graphics to make a amazing game. I just hope I don't die of old age before the games full release haha. I'm sure the quality and possibilities will be endless :DI agree that gameplay makes good games, not graphics. You shouldn't worry about your demise, tho. You need to be praying that Alex doesn't pull a "Robert Jordan" on us...
Seems like everyone is talking about combat skills, but what about the others? Will those have elite levels too?
What could we expect from elite industry or logistics skills? Can we mentor admins too? How will admin cores function?
Considering that combat skills can be elited because they disproportionately depend on player skill, I doubt other skills will be. Might as well remove eliting entirely and just make it so that all skills cost a skill point and a story point.Most recent answer from Alex is this.
...
I absolutely love reading the upcoming changes and updates to the game, starsector is proof that you don't need fancy 3D graphics to make a amazing game. I just hope I don't die of old age before the games full release haha. I'm sure the quality and possibilities will be endless :D
13 new special weapons specific to this enemyRandom thought - are these weapons going to be hidden from the out-of-campaign missions (unlike say, Sparks and other [REDACTED] fighters)? I'd hate to accidentally spoil myself if I decided to jump in there for whatever reason.
(quote)
Random thought - are these weapons going to be hidden from the out-of-campaign missions (unlike say, Sparks and other [REDACTED] fighters)? I'd hate to accidentally spoil myself if I decided to jump in there for whatever reason.
Quote13 new special weapons specific to this enemyRandom thought - are these weapons going to be hidden from the out-of-campaign missions (unlike say, Sparks and other [REDACTED] fighters)? I'd hate to accidentally spoil myself if I decided to jump in there for whatever reason.
Quote13 new special weapons specific to this enemyRandom thought - are these weapons going to be hidden from the out-of-campaign missions (unlike say, Sparks and other [REDACTED] fighters)? I'd hate to accidentally spoil myself if I decided to jump in there for whatever reason.
Perhaps there could be a variable check based on whether or not the player has a save file where they have encountered anything [REDACTED] in the campaign, and only what they have seen of the [REDACTED] in the campaign appears in not just the missions, but also the codex.
So are the changes listed on the changelog things that HAVE BEEN or WILL BE changed?Have been.
I am eager to try the new version, I have read that there are many new features, great.
Thank you for the work you and your two collaborators are investing in this Pearl.
I won't ask when the new version will be released, because I guess it will only be when it's ready.
So are the changes listed on the changelog things that HAVE BEEN or WILL BE changed?Have been.
Hey Alex honest question.. do you foresee the release of Cyberpunk in December having any impact on the cycle time of updates / future releases?
I remember reading in an interview you had that you play a lot of video games.. will Cyberpunk be one of them?
Hey Alex honest question.. do you foresee the release of Cyberpunk in December having any impact on the cycle time of updates / future releases?
I remember reading in an interview you had that you play a lot of video games.. will Cyberpunk be one of them?
Honest answer! I don't play "a lot of video games", rather, I occasionally play a specific video game *a lot*. Cyberpunk isn't one I'm at all interested in, so it won't have any impact. Generally it's not AAA stuff I gravitate to, anyway; I think the main AAA I've played in recent memory is SC2. Nothing against AAA in general, btw, t's just usually not my cup of tea.
Honest answer! I don't play "a lot of video games", rather, I occasionally play a specific video game *a lot*. Cyberpunk isn't one I'm at all interested in, so it won't have any impact. Generally it's not AAA stuff I gravitate to, anyway; I think the main AAA I've played in recent memory is SC2. Nothing against AAA in general, btw, t's just usually not my cup of tea.
Alex, for 1.0.0, how many in-game years do you want an average game from beginning to endgame to last?
Oh, thought of a potentially interesting question. How are the theoretical composite/hybrid/synergy weapons going to interact with existing weapon-specific ship systems, hullmods, and other stuff? Ex: Will a "Hybrid" weapon count as a Ballistic for the purpose of the Hammerhead's Accelerated Ammunition Feed, as an Energy for the purpose of the Sunder's High Energy Focus, or neither?
So we'll be seeing a 1 OP Universal weapon in vanilla, right? Right? ;D
Alex, I know you're tight lipped on spoilers, but can you describe at least one of the new colony boosting items?https://twitter.com/amosolov/status/1210301167709937668
Will they be distributed among core colonies?
Alex, I know you're tight lipped on spoilers, but can you describe at least one of the new colony boosting items?https://twitter.com/amosolov/status/1210301167709937668
Will they be distributed among core colonies?
So after seeing the IR Pulse Laser flux cost reduction (and the general buff to energy weapons) i was thinking that maybe we hit the point were we can actually make Pulse Laser (Medium Size) a 1.0 flux/damage weapon.Oh god yes please, let Wolf actually be capable of firing something and not overfluxing in 2 seconds.
As long Kinetic Damage is as good as it is right now it shouldn't affect the balance as much. Maybe you would switch out a HE Weapon for Pulse Laser(if you only face low armor targes).
Or does this cause energy weapons to become too efficient as a general purpose weapon? (as they get a -10% flux cost reduction [elite] AND a damage buff for short ranges / high flux levels skill)
Yes. Pulse Laser is too inefficient, even if it is more efficient than Heavy Blaster.So after seeing the IR Pulse Laser flux cost reduction (and the general buff to energy weapons) i was thinking that maybe we hit the point were we can actually make Pulse Laser (Medium Size) a 1.0 flux/damage weapon.Oh god yes please, let Wolf actually be capable of firing something and not overfluxing in 2 seconds.
As long Kinetic Damage is as good as it is right now it shouldn't affect the balance as much. Maybe you would switch out a HE Weapon for Pulse Laser(if you only face low armor targes).
Or does this cause energy weapons to become too efficient as a general purpose weapon? (as they get a -10% flux cost reduction [elite] AND a damage buff for short ranges / high flux levels skill)
IIRC it's not required.So we'll be seeing a 1 OP Universal weapon in vanilla, right? Right? ;D
Doubtful :)
Alex, I know you're tight lipped on spoilers, but can you describe at least one of the new colony boosting items?
.... how about making starless systems a bit dim/dark? Maybe with [REDACTED] creeping around?
The weapon type stuff sounds like fun. I have a hard time thinking up weapons I'd actually want to straddle slot types (the closest I can think of is some kind of energy-missile or rocket-gun weapon), but knowing it's something I can do now fills me with glee.
I assume this is a decision that's linked to all the REDACTED special weapons you've been showing off?
So after seeing the IR Pulse Laser flux cost reduction (and the general buff to energy weapons) i was thinking that maybe we hit the point were we can actually make Pulse Laser (Medium Size) a 1.0 flux/damage weapon.
As long Kinetic Damage is as good as it is right now it shouldn't affect the balance as much. Maybe you would switch out a HE Weapon for Pulse Laser(if you only face low armor targes).
Or does this cause energy weapons to become too efficient as a general purpose weapon? (as they get a -10% flux cost reduction [elite] AND a damage buff for short ranges / high flux levels skill)
Oh god yes please, let Wolf actually be capable of firing something and not overfluxing in 2 seconds.
Ah, bugger. I guess my first 0.95a campaign whill have me feel extra painful for all those empty small mounts where a nice 1OP PD weapon could fit :P
Hmm. Well, one of them has "cryoarithmetic" in the name :)Did you google what Landauer limit is or something?
So we'll be seeing a 1 OP Universal weapon in vanilla, right? Right? ;D
EDIT: Is it required to set the primary type for HYBRID/SYNERGY/COMPOSITE/UNIVERSAL weapons?
idk why but something in my brain would be deeply pleased if the player has an infinite amount of 0 OP mining lasers or something & a "fill empty slots with mining lasers" button
idk why but something in my brain would be deeply pleased if the player has an infinite amount of 0 OP mining lasers or something & a "fill empty slots with mining lasers" button
Hmm. Well, one of them has "cryoarithmetic" in the name :)Did you google what Landauer limit is or something?
Ah, bugger. I guess my first 0.95a campaign whill have me feel extra painful for all those empty small mounts where a nice 1OP PD weapon could fit :P
Fair enough - but I'll just say that I don't see "having a 1 OP weapon that defaults into every empty small slot" as a good thing design-wise.
Why is rare super tech producing pollution when low tech is clean? I don't agree with everything changed but this one thing feels counter intuitive to me.Low-tech appears to be eco-friendly clean, if both Ludd factions are any indication.
"Nanoforges: add Pollution when installed; becomes permanent after three months"
Should be Heavy industry, not Nanoforges. If we are insisting on adding pollution. This is assuming Nanoforges are infact using Nanolithing, which one would think would be clean instead of the un-upgraded lower tech version of it that is Heavy industry.
Why is rare super tech producing pollution when low tech is clean? I don't agree with everything changed but this one thing feels counter intuitive to me.
QuoteWhy is rare super tech producing pollution when low tech is clean? I don't agree with everything changed but this one thing feels counter intuitive to me.Low-tech appears to be eco-friendly clean, if both Ludd factions are any indication.
I have no problem with industries requiring nanoforge to wreck a habitable planet. Pristine nanoforge cranks up production by a thousand-fold. Plus, nanoforge of any kind raises Pather interest a lot, by +4 (in addition to +2 from the industry itself).
"Nanoforges: add Pollution when installed; becomes permanent after three months"
Should be Heavy industry, not Nanoforges. If we are insisting on adding pollution. This is assuming Nanoforges are infact using Nanolithing, which one would think would be clean instead of the un-upgraded lower tech version of it that is Heavy industry.
Why is rare super tech producing pollution when low tech is clean? I don't agree with everything changed but this one thing feels counter intuitive to me.
<snip>
The Pathers are mad about production increases only.They also get mad for adding enough aggravating industries on a world. Trying to build a set of self-sufficient colonies without any Pather cells can be quite the puzzle.
The fuel burn relative speed/distance that can be travelled with equal fuel in High Tech ships vs Low Tech ships. High tech ships use less fuel and are faster, at the same time.More like low-tech (combat ships) are fuel hogs, while many high-tech are CR (and maybe supply) hogs. The faster ships apply to those that are on the light end of their class, which is shared by both midline (Falcon and Conquest) and high-tech (Shrike and Odyssey).
Functionally/mechanics wise, I think penalizing baseline Heavy Industry would be a bit harsh. Though really you'd most often be using both at the same time so...I built extra Heavy Industries on additional planets, sometimes without nanoforges, just for increased production limit. Nanoforges help on those but are not as necessary since I do not rely on them to meet demand. Nanoforge would be wanted for the primary just for bonus to ship quality. Got to have my pristine ships.
I don't think technological development is correlated with efficiency or pollution at all. Efficiency and pollution reduction are goals that technology can be developed for (or not). In recent history, we have developed a lot of technology with the goal of reducing pollution so it might seem like technological development leads to a reduction in pollution, but if you looked the industrial revolution, there was a lot of technological development that lead to increased pollution because our goals were different. In a lot of cases, we actually lose efficiency by implementing technology to reduce pollution (clean coal) because we are wasting some energy to deal with the byproducts of the energy generation process. Nuclear power is the same way, there is actually some really nasty waste generated, but we implement technology to eliminate or contain it that reduces the overall efficiency of the energy generation process.
There is a flaw to this. If these are nanotechnology with the proper tiny machines building things at the molecular level, it means that any and all byproducts can and would be created in a manner that would make them non-waste. A good example is, say, cyanide.
Nanomachines could turn the harmful chemical into something useful before it became an environmental hazard. Carbon dioxide could be turned into O2 and pure diamonds, methane could be converted into plastics. With real nanomachines there is no such thing as waste.
As a side note, pollution is not necessarily inefficiency, it's just the byproduct of reactions being released into the environment. It can be reduced by improving the chemical process to generate less byproducts or by containing/dealing with the byproducts. Perfectly efficient combustion still generates byproducts. Very few reactions actually have zero negative byproducts, even at perfect efficiency (maybe nuclear fusion or hydrogen + oxygen combustion).
"Nanoforges: add Pollution when installed; becomes permanent after three months"
Should be Heavy industry, not Nanoforges. If we are insisting on adding pollution. This is assuming Nanoforges are infact using Nanolithing, which one would think would be clean instead of the un-upgraded lower tech version of it that is Heavy industry.
Why is rare super tech producing pollution when low tech is clean? I don't agree with everything changed but this one thing feels counter intuitive to me.
Functionally/mechanics wise, I think penalizing baseline Heavy Industry would be a bit harsh. Though really you'd most often be using both at the same time so...
In-fiction wise, I think this is another case of "you can have a reasonable explanation for whichever way the mechanics shake out". So, for example here - and IIRC this is referenced in the item descriptions? not 100% sure offhand - what a Nanoforge does is let the industry be built out at scale. It's not that all of the production is performed using nanites, but rather the incredible scaling up of the production capacity, as well as replacing key parts that wear out, and so on. That scaled-up production - as evidenced by the Pollution condition popping up - is not clean.
(Also, the argument that nanite-based production would be clean... it could easily go either way, depending on which direction one waves their hands in.)
Is +25% hazard rating really that gamebreaking? As a player who doesn't cherry pick worlds to settle when I did bother touching colonization, I can't really tell if is or not. I want to say its really not that big of a problem, especially when there will be content to improve planet conditions anyway in this update
Functionally/mechanics wise, I think penalizing baseline Heavy Industry would be a bit harsh. Though really you'd most often be using both at the same time so...
In-fiction wise, I think this is another case of "you can have a reasonable explanation for whichever way the mechanics shake out". So, for example here - and IIRC this is referenced in the item descriptions? not 100% sure offhand - what a Nanoforge does is let the industry be built out at scale. It's not that all of the production is performed using nanites, but rather the incredible scaling up of the production capacity, as well as replacing key parts that wear out, and so on. That scaled-up production - as evidenced by the Pollution condition popping up - is not clean.
(Also, the argument that nanite-based production would be clean... it could easily go either way, depending on which direction one waves their hands in.)
Nanoforge causing pollution change means mostly that heavy industry should go to the lowest hazard uninhabitable planet in the system, not the lowest hazard planet.Logically, a barren, no atmosphere world could not gain pollution as a negative modifier... and probably could never gain decivilized either.
Hey, wait a second, aren't specialisations (alongside the additional content, of course) the point of this update? The contacts mechanic will allow players to influence the number and type of contracts they're offered, the new phase freighter/tanker will allow for more use of the phase-focused skill over the shield-focus one, the new hullmods for civilian ships will encourage more use of those, alongside the changes to carrier and frigate skills. This Pollution mechanic is, in my mind at least, the logical step for colonies to meet the theme of this update, and honestly, I want all of the new Industry Boosters to bring their own long-term hazards to further encourage colony specialisation.
Do Nanoforges cause pollution on every planet they're installed on, or only ones that have the Habitable condition? Or at least some combination of conditions where adding pollution condition makes sense. For example I don't think a Toxic planet with an Inimical Biosphere would really notice the difference.
If it's for a balance reason I get it. But this feels really wrong to me.
Dominion tech is the best tech, literally everything in the game supports that. Now Dominion built tech destroys the environment on a valuable planet. More productive using the same raw materials. Zero increase to materials used, but more output. I can't understand that to mean anything but less waste which is pollution.
Nanoforge could prevent the pollution debuff and that's more in line with what I'd personally expect from Domain era super tech. Again baring balance, which needs to come before immersion.
Logically, a barren, no atmosphere world could not gain pollution as a negative modifier... and probably could never gain decivilized either.
"IonDragonX was the Imposter" and no because my imagination already has his playable copy of v0.95Logically, a barren, no atmosphere world could not gain pollution as a negative modifier... and probably could never gain decivilized either.1) Radiation, toxic micro-dust getting *inside* habitats, etc
2) A few survivors keeping ancient life-support systems going by cannibalizing all the other systems (though, in-game, deciv on a non-habitable world IS more rare - but not impossible, precisely because I want to allow for this possibility)
Your imagination is the limit :)
So Nanoforges will be basically restricted from being on a habitable world realistically since the penalty only exists on them.
Okay.
So Nanoforges will be basically restricted from being on a habitable world realistically since the penalty only exists on them.
Okay.
I mean... That does make sense. You wouldn't want your main refinery, factory and assembly line to be on a world that has more value for population habitation. No one complains about smog if the normal atmosphere is sulfur dioxide with regular sulfuric acid rain storms.
Speaking of Pathers what kind of actual threat will they pose in .95a? Will we see their big ships attacking colonies like pirates do in current? Will bombings actually happen?Bombings may happen. Cells ignore all planetary defenses. If you cannot dissolve cells, you play whack-a-mole zombie Pathers (to disrupt cells for a year) or your colonies suffer disruptions and stability drops. They do not need to invade your colonies when their cells break things automatically.
What levels do player's ship assigned Gamma, Beta and Alpha core have, for calculating DP advantage from Officer contribution?
How many skills do Gamma and Beta cores have as officers? Do player's AI cores and [REDACTED] "officers" have the same amount of skills?
Also for calculating DP, is a level 15 player only considered a level 5 officer for Officer contribution)? Or do admirals, whether player fleet or AI fleet, do not matter for calculating Officer contribution?
While we're looking at upcoming energy buffs next patch, would it be possible to test a few more slight tweaks to burst lasers before the patch is released?
1.Adjusting damage of the Heavy Burst Laser to be just slightly above 150
Reasoning: It's currently at 147 burst damage right now, while the small-size Burst Laser is at 128. Quite a few missiles have ~150 or ~300 health, so in practice, even though the Heavy Burst deals more damage, it still takes the same amount of shots to kill most missiles. A tiny bit "beefier" burst could help it kill some more-common missiles in less shots.
2.Adjusting ammo for both the Burst Laser and Heavy Burst Laser to even numbers
Reasoning: Expanded Magazines rounds decimal values down, so the small Burst laser goes from 3->4, and Heavy Burst goes from 5->7. As a result it doesn't "feel" like such a good upgrade as it could for the OP investment for those specific weapons, if that makes sense?
You don't usually take Extended Magazines because of a couple of energy PD you use but because you synergize it with Autopulses or ABs.
But I agree that having 4 or 6 charges would feel better. Does Burst PD need it in conjunction with the flux buffs it already got and the damage buff you're proposing? I dunno.
Okay, now my question for you, Alex.
Since each time version 1.0 is approaching in time and with it the official launch.
Can we expect content patches after the 1.0 release or will only bugs be fixed?
It's a question you probably can't answer for me in a concrete way, but I'm a little nervous that it's the end of these patches / blog content that keep me excited about Starsector.
I'm sure the 1.0 release will be a success.
Thanks for doing such a great job and such a fun game for so many people.
While we're looking at upcoming energy buffs next patch, would it be possible to test a few more slight tweaks to burst lasers before the patch is released?
1.Adjusting damage of the Heavy Burst Laser to be just slightly above 150
Reasoning: It's currently at 147 burst damage right now, while the small-size Burst Laser is at 128. Quite a few missiles have ~150 or ~300 health, so in practice, even though the Heavy Burst deals more damage, it still takes the same amount of shots to kill most missiles. A tiny bit "beefier" burst could help it kill some more-common missiles in less shots.
...Yes but -when-
Cargo scans by patrols:How much CR loss are we talking here? I assume less than if you get harried, but I'd still like to know if beyond a certain point I'm going to have to do all of my shopping somewhere where I can run dark.
Will more often result in the "suspicious" outcome when smuggling suspicion is high
Will demand you allow a boarding party to examine your ships
This will cause some disruption to several of your ships' combat readiness
More likely to find contraband
Delivery missions: offers will now occasionally exceed player's cargo capacityMeaning the player fleet's maximum cargo capacity? If so I'm not sure what the idea behind this change is. Exceeding cargo limits is not viable in any circumstances (unless the hideous supplies/day penalty got changed I suppose) and periodically/occasionally swapping out hullmods to make more room to take delivery missions sounds like busywork.
Increased time until first pirate raid on player colonyIs that the scripted pirate raid, or does that also include an existing pirate base randomly changing targets to the player's colonies before even the scripted one has shown up?
Reduced frequency of pirate raids targeting the core worlds by roughly a factor of 3Wait, does that mean pirates raids are 3 times more likely to target the player's colonies, if there are any? Obviously would be a problem combined with the above detail, but I'm not sure if I'm reading that correctly.
Increased minimum interval between punitive expeditions to 1-3 cyclesJust checking, but AI inspections are separate from punitive expedition at least for this minimal interval, correct?
Maximum number of weapon groups increased to 7 (was: 5);D
Very cool! I expect there will be modder's changelog so we know what new toys to immediately use?
How much CR loss are we talking here? I assume less than if you get harried, but I'd still like to know if beyond a certain point I'm going to have to do all of my shopping somewhere where I can run dark.
Meaning the player fleet's maximum cargo capacity? If so I'm not sure what the idea behind this change is. Exceeding cargo limits is not viable in any circumstances (unless the hideous supplies/day penalty got changed I suppose) and periodically/occasionally swapping out hullmods to make more room to take delivery missions sounds like busywork.
Is that the scripted pirate raid, or does that also include an existing pirate base randomly changing targets to the player's colonies before even the scripted one has shown up?
Wait, does that mean pirates raids are 3 times more likely to target the player's colonies, if there are any? Obviously would be a problem combined with the above detail, but I'm not sure if I'm reading that correctly.
Just checking, but AI inspections are separate from punitive expedition at least for this minimal interval, correct?
I guess it will still happen if salvage/etc has their own songs but it's a much welcome change.
These are all greatly appreciated; that last one in particular - it's always been a bit of an immersion-breaking thing for me to see when the AI does that.
- Intel screen will remember "show fuel" toggle state when re-opened
- Surveying Equipment: now shows fleetwide totals in tooltip
- Planet tooltip - both in campaign and on the map - will show when the planet has unexplored ruins
- Added indication when post-battle ship recovery includes disabled ships from your fleet
- Maximum number of weapon groups increased to 7 (was: 5)
- Ships will no longer keep targeting a recently-destroyed ship for a second or two before switching targets
Hullmods:Huh, interesting. Isn't Faulty Automated Systems just a sub-set of Increased Maintenance, though?
- Degraded Engines: effect separated into two hullmods, "Degraded Engines" and "Degraded Drive Field"
- Degraded Engines:
- Has combat portion of the effect (lower speed/maneuverability)
- Can only be generated for combat ships
- Degraded Drive Field:
- Has non-combat portion of the effect (reduced burn level, increased sensor profile)
- Can only be generated for non-combat ships
- Added new D-mods:
- Degraded Life Support - reduces max crew (but not min)
- Damaged Weapon Mounts - slower weapon turn speed, increased recoil
- Faulty Automated Systems - larger min crew required
- Degraded Shields - increases shield damage taken
It'd usually be less than getting harried, and doesn't affect *all* the ships. Also, not an 100% chance of it happening.Hmm...we'll have to see how it plays out. I can see this being more annoyance than anything else, but it might also lead to clever solutions being discovered as well. Worst case IIRC ixnaying a patrol check is something one can spend a Story Point on, too.
Right. The player might pick up another freighter, or as you said add some hullmods, etc. Just in general I think that happening a bit will make it both feel like a bigger opportunity and less like it's all tailored to the player.Changing hullmods and back just for a single delivery would be tedious though, and I'm not sure how picking up temporary ships would really work out in practice. If the delivery is for just a little bit more it's not really worth putting down four or five digits for a temporary ship (which will also cost supplies/fuel and potentially crew), and if the delivery is for a ton more you'd have to luck out with being there being a decent freighter available for purchase. Which you'd have to either sell at a massive loss or dump in a storage somewhere afterwards.
The first scripted raid.Can existing pirate bases still randomly change targets to your colonies less than a week after putting them down, incidentally? IIRC the first scripted base will be changed to a T2 base (or at least what would be considered a T2 base in the current patch), but even so that would still make early colonies more viable (consistent?) for me.
Just roughly 3x less raids overall.Ah, okay, gotcha. Going to miss the steady stream of system bounties, though ;).
They're separate, yeah.:)
>Mark IX: reduced flux/shot to 200 (was: 230)Yes, as it should. Currently, default large kinetic was Heavy Needler (medium-sized weapon) unless ship had Heavy Ballistics Integration or really, really needed 900 range. Too bad Storm Needler has 700 range; I would use it more if its range was better.
Now the mark 9 is the official default assault rifle of large ballistics.
Freshly spawned patrols will wait a few seconds before engaging/intercepting the playerDoes this mean that the player can dock and trade with transponder off for a moment after the patrol spawns? or just that the fleet will wait a moment before it chases the player (but docking will still give the 'you are being tracked by a patrol' message).
>Tri-Tachyon: adjusted fleet composition to be more evenly split between warships/carriers/phase ships
Yes, yeees! I want more Medusas and Auroras! Though, myself, I'd probably make it so that it's biased towards phase ships still (to differentiate it to Persean League).
>Maximum number of weapon groups increased to 7 (was: 5)
I don't know if I expressed my approval the first time you showed that, so I do so now. Nice!
>Heavy Needler: reduced range to 750 (was: 800)
Why though? It's already the most expensive medium ballistic. While it's good, I don't think it's overly good, even with its burst. Its main competitor is Heavy Autocannon, and they both were range tied.
Changed Hyperion I might possibly use. It certainly looks more appealing to me, though whether I'll use it will still depend on the combination of power, PPT and maintenance.
Huh, interesting. Isn't Faulty Automated Systems just a sub-set of Increased Maintenance, though?
>Degraded Drive Field:
>Can only be generated for non-combat ships
This is an incredible buff. Bad engines in certain circumstances auto-disqualified ships for me not because of decreased mobility (which I mostly forgot was even there), but because those ships would slow me down. At least all freighters and tankers do the same thing, so instead of missing out on filling some role in my fleet, it will just grow slower instead.
I'm curious about the reasoning behind the Degraded Engines vs Degraded Drive Field split; I can see some situations where it helps the player (Dominator with Degraded Engines being able to keep up with the fleet)... But with the way cargo ship scaling works (i.e. you generally want the largest cargo vessels that fit your fleet's burn level) I suspect that Degraded Drive Field is going to just become another 'nope not worth using' flag...
Can existing pirate bases still randomly change targets to your colonies less than a week after putting them down, incidentally? IIRC the first scripted base will be changed to a T2 base (or at least what would be considered a T2 base in the current patch), but even so that would still make early colonies more viable (consistent?) for me.
Ah, okay, gotcha. Going to miss the steady stream of system bounties, though ;).
Does this mean that the player can dock and trade with transponder off for a moment after the patrol spawns? or just that the fleet will wait a moment before it chases the player (but docking will still give the 'you are being tracked by a patrol' message).
Also, I agree that the storm needler could really use 800 range, especially with this Mark IX buff. Its niche is getting really small.
Targeting Feed system will be used by carriers that only have support fighters installedTo be clear, does this affect interceptors like Wasps and Talons as well as support fighters like Xyphos? I noticed that Targeting Feed wasn't used for pure interceptor lineups either.
Legion XIV derelicts will no longer be restricted to a single constellation
I think the idea behind the cargo mission change is that you would keep any new ships you bought to be able to handle larger contracts in the future. You don't consider buying warships to fight bigger bounties as a problem because you understand you are expanding your capability to fight larger bounties in the future as well as letting you complete the immediate mission, and similarly, it's not considered strange that the player is offered bounties that are too difficult for their current fleet. It seems like a reasonable change to me just for feel/fluff reasons. Cargo missions are too profitable anyway, so getting offered a few infeasible ones seems fine to me.The issue is that once you have your new ship you'll eventually run into missions that require even more cargo space, leading to either tedious refitting or buying yet another ship, after which you run into even bigger contracts requiring even more/re-refitted ships, and so on until you run into a contract you either just cannot do or cannot justify doing, in which case why have the contract be offered at all? I can understand it being there for fluff reasons, but it just seems like a waste of time.
Though, it does sorta irk me that between the small/medium/large needler versions we go from 700 -> 750 -> 700 range, heh.
QuoteTargeting Feed system will be used by carriers that only have support fighters installedTo be clear, does this affect interceptors like Wasps and Talons as well as support fighters like Xyphos? I noticed that Targeting Feed wasn't used for pure interceptor lineups either.
I really liked this touch since it fit with the lore of the XIV coming from a single direction. Having all the derelicts in a single constellation meant that you could "follow the path" as it were.
Do they still have a "path" as it were or are they entirely random now?
Added AmmoTrackerAPI, retrieved via WeaponAPI.getAmmoTracker()
void setAmmoPerSecond(float ammoPerSecond);
float getReloadProgress();
void setAmmo(int ammo);
boolean usesAmmo();
void addOneAmmo();
boolean deductOneAmmo();
int getAmmo();
float getAmmoPerSecond();
int getMaxAmmo();
void resetAmmo();
void setMaxAmmo(int maxAmmo);
Added "ship_unique_signature" ship *variant* tag
If any ship with this tag is present in player's fleet, opposing fleets always know who they're facing regardless of transponder status
Punitive expeditions and Hegemony inspections will instantly fail if the target colony changes ownershipWell thats an interesting little tidbit too...
Re: The Storm Needler, no offense, but maybe it just needs to be-worked. With its current range, I never use it but as was mentioned, if its range was buffed, it'd be universally useful.Same here. It is enough of a flux hog that I use other weapons instead because low-tech ships have trouble sustaining it (plus other weapons). Conquest can sustain Storm Needler without much difficulty, but Conquest has enough extra mounts that I can mount a different combination of weapons (instead of Storm Needlers and Heavy Mortars) and have roughly equal sustained time-to-kill at 800-900 range (instead of 700). The only reason to use Storm Needler is if I find one but have not yet found other heavy weapons.
I made a bug report that didn't sneak into these patch notes about converted hangar (and other fighter slot adding hullmods) not using launch bay weapon slots when provided at this thread (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=19817.0), maybe worth taking a look at? It would be appreciated by a few people. Thanks :)
Anything about grace periods for newly spawned patrol fleets?
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=19634.msg304978#msg304978Anything about grace periods for newly spawned patrol fleets?
Not sure what you mean.
Re: Storm Needler, yeah, no argument from me. It's not a weapon I'm happy with - it's just borderline "ok" - and I remember struggling with it when putting it together.
Maybe something precise and flux efficient, with a decent range (800ish?) that has pretty good burst and efficiency, but underwhelming sustained DPS. So kind of like the other needlers, but also accurate. Hmm...
"onHitEffect":"data.scripts.xxxxWeaponPlugin",
"onFireEffect":"data.scripts.xxxxWeaponPlugin"
Assault Chaingun: reduced damage/shot to 75 (was: 90)Why?
Was Onslaught really underperforming that much? The amount of buffs it receives seems a bit absurd.Yes, TPC are OP.
I think the Mark IX didn't need that buff, it was already the popular choice for cheap-flux kinetics.That's because other kinetics are very niche, and both Gauss Cannon and Storm Needler fit more easily on Conquest than low tech capitals.
Campaign:
- "Moving slowly":
- Now at half the burn level of the slowest ship rather than being fixed at burn level 2
- "Sensors" skill gives bonus to this burn level
- Go Dark: forces "moving slowly" instead of having a separate movement penalty
- Active Sensor Burst: can move slowly while charging it up
- Still reduces sensor profile while in applicable terrain (rings, asteroid fields, debris fields)
- Asteroid fields: chance for moderately damaging asteroid impacts on ships when not moving slowly
- AI will move slowly through asteroid fields
- Hyperspace storms: slow-moving fleets do not attract storm strikes
- AI will move slowly through storms instead of trying to avoid them
- Added campaign tutorial section explaining the "move slowly" key
About the storm needler, how about making it deal frag damage instead, and extending the range & reducing the flux? it's niche could be a flux efficient way for capitals to shred hulls of ships with their armor already stripped down, or even as support role for smaller ships. Kinda like a heavier thumper that's actually good and doesn't need to reload and can put some pressure on the enemies.Complete trash, a 28 OP frag is.
About the storm needler, how about making it deal frag damage instead, and extending the range & reducing the flux? it's niche could be a flux efficient way for capitals to shred hulls of ships with their armor already stripped down, or even as support role for smaller ships. Kinda like a heavier thumper that's actually good and doesn't need to reload and can put some pressure on the enemies.Complete trash, a 28 OP frag is.
If you removed the anti-shield role from the Storm Needler, we'd have exactly one large ballistic anti-shield weapon (Mk.IX). It'd also bug me to no end if one of the Needler variants was a frag weapon while the rest were kinetics, so if it's absolutely necessary to have a large frag gun in the roster I'd rather it be something entirely new.Also Mjolnir. Maybe not as dedicated, but it can work as anti-...everything if paired with more anti-shield weapons like Mark IX and/or Heavy AC/Needler.
Not sure what you mean.https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=19634.msg304978#msg304978
I would go the opposite direction and just make it a buckshot/scatter type weapon using a script; then it could fire bursts of scattering flechette clouds relatively rapidly, making it absolutely devastating to shields and a little better at sandblasting bare hull or weak armor, but useless for overloading or damaging armor.
"onExplosionEffect":"com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.combat.RiftLanceMineExplosion"
Added "onFireEffect" to projectile and missile specs; see OnFireEffectPlugin
So I could make a class implement both onFireEffect and onHitEffect right?
And in the project spec, I could just duplicate the class path likeCode"onHitEffect":"data.scripts.xxxxWeaponPlugin",
"onFireEffect":"data.scripts.xxxxWeaponPlugin"
QuoteAssault Chaingun: reduced damage/shot to 75 (was: 90)Why?
Its short ranged and high flux demanded weapon with not that good flux exchange ratio?
Why its nerfed and why so much?
Was Onslaught really underperforming that much? The amount of buffs it receives seems a bit absurd.
I'm curious about this, will there be a setting to move slowly automatically when entering a dangerous area? Autopilot will happily fly you right down the asteroid field if that's the shortest path...
About the Hyperion:
I really want to like this ship, and I'm fine with a capital size supply cost, however unless the peak active performance timer gets on the same level as bigger ships, I don't see myself using it as a flagship, even though I really want to...and since it's pretty rare or with limited ship numbers, having a spare one is unreasonable.
flagships should only get some minor debuff to speed or something else when out of time imho, having a cool little ship that you like and knowing that you can only use it for a very limited time is not fun imho
Heck maybe even an ability that doubles or triples the minimum crew but makes it so you could keep using the ship past the peak performance timer would be good, just make it so it increases the cooldown on phase and teleporting ships, lowers the speed etc, so you could keep using the same flagship, but at a lower performance...feels kinda weird for a commander to abandon its flagship mid fight and go pilot another ship lol, the flagship should be something that's always there as a morale booster for the army imho, something that costs more in supply, but has to keep on fighting, not the first one to retreat.
On a second note, does this update mean the release is imminent? or do you expect to make more patch notes updates before that? either way good job man, I can't wait to get my hands on the steamy new version :)
Thanks for the extra weapon groups by the way! Was rubbing up against 5 a bit too uncomfortably in some mod ship setups.Even five was too few for some standard ships, namely Onslaught and Apogee.
Ah, gotcha. I think both of those needed the buffs, but that's a fair point; we'll see how it all combines with the Onslaught.
Improved variety of weapons available for AI faction fleetsGreat! Hopefully no more NPC ships with... we'll call it badly misconfigured armament.
Not changing the blueprints a faction has, rather individual ships have better access to all that the faction theoretically has available
VisualPanelAPI.showCustomPanel() now returns a CustomPanelAPIDidn't say it at the time, but thanks for this!
When talking about Onslaught I meant indirect buffs as well. Devastator and Mark 9 are both buffed, heavy armor hullmod is buffed, shield removal hullmod is added, that kind of stuff.
Then again, looking at those new phase AI gifs, I don't want to even try anything without 360 shields. :D
I made a bug report that didn't sneak into these patch notes about converted hangar (and other fighter slot adding hullmods) not using launch bay weapon slots when provided at this thread (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=19817.0), maybe worth taking a look at? It would be appreciated by a few people. Thanks :)
I did see it! Ah, apologies, it's not something I really want to mess with, especially right now. It's got potential to add bugs and the use case is pretty limited - and as you note, not present in vanilla, which makes testing more of a pain, too.
Re: Storm Needler, yeah, no argument from me. It's not a weapon I'm happy with - it's just borderline "ok" - and I remember struggling with it when putting it together.
Maybe something precise and flux efficient, with a decent range (800ish?) that has pretty good burst and efficiency, but underwhelming sustained DPS. So kind of like the other needlers, but also accurate. Hmm...
The fact that I can easily find configurations that make the storm Needler work indicates to me that it’s not a poor weapon in and of itself.I agree with everything above this, it proves a very good point. But what configurations exactly? You just listed imaginary ships and said "see Storm Needler would be good here". Does that mean we need an entirely new set of ships just so one weapon can work? I find that a bit backwards and would rather have the problematic weapon be a bit less problematic on the current roster.
Interesting round of changes overall. Mostly reads like a polish pass with not a lot of drastic changes. So we can wait for release with baited breath.
I think the Mark IX didn't need that buff, it was already the popular choice for cheap-flux kinetics.
That's about it. ;)
The fact that I can easily find configurations that make the storm Needler work indicates to me that it’s not a poor weapon in and of itself.I agree with everything above this, it proves a very good point. But what configurations exactly? You just listed imaginary ships and said "see Storm Needler would be good here". Does that mean we need an entirely new set of ships just so one weapon can work? I find that a bit backwards and would rather have the problematic weapon be a bit less problematic on the current roster.
Is there any plan about adding some interface like "void tryToFire()" functions like "force clicking LMB on a single weapon" to WeaponAPI?
It's really annoying get stuck when trying to find a way to force-fire a single weapon.
Why is DLAC+HM more fair for the HAC+LAG comparison than Railgun+HM? A HAC+LAG combination is 15 OP. DLAC+HM is only 12 OP, quite a bit lighter on the budget. Railgun+HM is 14 OP, so it's much closer to the HAC+LAG combo (actually a bit cheaper, but close enough).
Hmm, just tried Storm Needler + Hellbore + 5 Harpoons, a few vulcans, 4 khopesh, ITU + expanded missile racks, 47 vents no caps, on a Legion. Trying in the mission sim with no skills: its a pretty fantastic loadout actually. More for hunting smaller ships than large because of the range, but it is very good at bursting things down.
I've found that in its current state, it's a reasonable comparison between the two weapons for officers with flux skills (although mark IX is much safer for flux reasons) but now mark IX is getting buffed which is why I was concerned about the storm needler on the next patch. Honestly, even just reducing damage/flux and increasing range would be good IMO, and much less complicated than reworking the whole weapon.I agree.
Re: Storm Needler and HE vs kinetc, etc - some good thoughts here! Is it fair to compare Railgun + Heavy Mortar vs HAC + LAG, though? A more fair comparison would be Dual LAC + Heavy Mortar, I think, and that becomes much less clear-cut. I don't think it's so much about per-shot damage - maybe it's more about the extra range on the higher-quality small kinetics.
But then HE in general doesn't have many "premium" options like the Railgun/Needler. The old Heavy Mauler for example could combine nicely with large kinetics, and iirc it was often the go-to for many loadouts. But HE that's "too good" is more problematic than kinetics that are too good... so in that sense comparing the best-available options for each type does make sense, even if it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.
Regarding ships that *could* make good use of large kinetics, per the idea of combining them with missiles - the Legion seems like a solid candidate, because it both has a bunch of missile slots, *and* fighters which can also benefit from kinetic support. And burn drive, which can potentially let it make use of shorter-ranged weapons...
Railgun + HM costs 14 OP. HAC+LAG costs 15 OP. So i think that the comparison is pretty fair.
Biggest reason Alex doesn't just toss the patch out there is bandwidth $$$. Everyone redownloading new versions gets pricey.
Any guess when the patch might be coming?
Re: Storm Needler and HE vs kinetc, etc - some good thoughts here! Is it fair to compare Railgun + Heavy Mortar vs HAC + LAG, though? A more fair comparison would be Dual LAC + Heavy Mortar, I think, and that becomes much less clear-cut. I don't think it's so much about per-shot damage - maybe it's more about the extra range on the higher-quality small kinetics.I would use medium HE to combo with Railgun because 700 range is better than LAG's 600. Also, HAC has 800 range while LAG is 600 (but there is nothing better than Heavy Mortar, so 700 range is all we have for basic HE). That effectively reduces attack range to 600. (AI may try to armor tank kinetics is they are the only thing threatening it.) I rather take 700 range (from Railgun and Mortar combo) for general-purpose attacking. As for light autocannon plus HE, I do not know.
But then HE in general doesn't have many "premium" options like the Railgun/Needler. The old Heavy Mauler for example could combine nicely with large kinetics, and iirc it was often the go-to for many loadouts. But HE that's "too good" is more problematic than kinetics that are too good... so in that sense comparing the best-available options for each type does make sense, even if it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.
Regarding ships that *could* make good use of large kinetics, per the idea of combining them with missiles - the Legion seems like a solid candidate, because it both has a bunch of missile slots, *and* fighters which can also benefit from kinetic support. And burn drive, which can potentially let it make use of shorter-ranged weapons...
I would use medium HE to combo with Railgun because 700 range is better than LAG's 600. Also, HAC has 800 range while LAG is 600 (but there is nothing better than Heavy Mortar, so 700 range is all we have for basic HE). That effectively reduces attack range to 600. (AI may try to armor tank kinetics is they are the only thing threatening it.) I rather take 700 range (from Railgun and Mortar combo) for general-purpose attacking. As for light autocannon plus HE, I do not know.
A month or two out from a release, the actual dev build has most of the things in it, but I think most players would be shocked at how not-actually-fun-to-play it is. Most of that - things clicking together into a cohesive, playable whole - happens very close to the end of the cycle.
Pretty soon(tm). No, seriously - the playtesting is pretty far along, and going well at this point!
Railgun + HM costs 14 OP. HAC+LAG costs 15 OP. So i think that the comparison is pretty fair.
I think this is more about the relative power of the weapons. Railgun + HM is "balanced" - both weapons have roughly the same power level, as reflected by their OP costs. HAC + LAG, one of the weapons is 2x more expensive; it's a lopsided combination and that contributes to it being worse. It's not the *only* factor, certainly - per-shot damage for HE etc factors in. But using non-premium kinetics for the comparison I think gives a clearer picture of the impact of those other factors.
Well, it's not a direct comparison of individual weapons, but a comparison of how a combination of weapons work as a system. Yes, a Railgun is more premium than a LAG. However, a Heavy Autocannon is more premium than a Heavy Mortar. Those two functionally cancel each other out, at least in terms of OP costs. When I do builds I'm most concerned with how my "system" of weapon arrays performs with each other for a given OP cost, so comparing 2 systems with similar OP costs (Railgun+HM vs HAC+LAG) is more fair and intuitive IMO.Why is DLAC+HM more fair for the HAC+LAG comparison than Railgun+HM? A HAC+LAG combination is 15 OP. DLAC+HM is only 12 OP, quite a bit lighter on the budget. Railgun+HM is 14 OP, so it's much closer to the HAC+LAG combo (actually a bit cheaper, but close enough).
The argument being made here is that "small kinetic + medium HE is better than small HE + medium kinetic" and using a much better - and more OP-costly - kinetic in the small slot, compared to the average-quality small HE weapon, undermines that argument. You could use DLAC + Heavy Mauler instead of Heavy Mortar, or whatever; I don't think that aspect of it matters too much. Or you can assume the rest of the OP go into vents or other good stuff to improve the ship.
But then HE in general doesn't have many "premium" options like the Railgun/Needler. The old Heavy Mauler for example could combine nicely with large kinetics, and iirc it was often the go-to for many loadouts. But HE that's "too good" is more problematic than kinetics that are too good... so in that sense comparing the best-available options for each type does make sense, even if it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.weapons...A part of the reason why HE weapons are preferred for bigger mounts is because kinetics have premium options for smaller mounts and HE guns don't, in addition to bigger mount size giving high explosives better hit strength (and so performance) by default, whereas bigger kinetics mostly get some more range and some more DPS.
I think would rather have the DLAC+Mortar at 13 OP than the Arbalest + LAG at 12. It takes a lot to overcome the additional hit strength on armor that a larger HE naturally produces.
Yes, a Railgun is more premium than a LAG. However, a Heavy Autocannon is more premium than a Heavy Mortar. Those two functionally cancel each other out, at least in terms of OP costs.
A part of the reason why HE weapons are preferred for bigger mounts is because kinetics have premium options for smaller mounts and HE guns don't, in addition to bigger mount size giving high explosives better hit strength (and so performance) by default, whereas bigger kinetics mostly get some more range and some more DPS.
Well, it's not a direct comparison of individual weapons, but a comparison of how a combination of weapons work as a system. Yes, a Railgun is more premium than a LAG. However, a Heavy Autocannon is more premium than a Heavy Mortar. Those two functionally cancel each other out, at least in terms of OP costs. When I do builds I'm most concerned with how my "system" of weapon arrays performs with each other for a given OP cost, so comparing 2 systems with similar OP costs (Railgun+HM vs HAC+LAG) is more fair and intuitive IMO.Why is DLAC+HM more fair for the HAC+LAG comparison than Railgun+HM? A HAC+LAG combination is 15 OP. DLAC+HM is only 12 OP, quite a bit lighter on the budget. Railgun+HM is 14 OP, so it's much closer to the HAC+LAG combo (actually a bit cheaper, but close enough).
The argument being made here is that "small kinetic + medium HE is better than small HE + medium kinetic" and using a much better - and more OP-costly - kinetic in the small slot, compared to the average-quality small HE weapon, undermines that argument. You could use DLAC + Heavy Mauler instead of Heavy Mortar, or whatever; I don't think that aspect of it matters too much. Or you can assume the rest of the OP go into vents or other good stuff to improve the ship.
Re: LAGs in general
My main critique of it is its hefty flux cost. 160 dps is pretty great on paper, but it's small 40 damage shots, and even though they're HE hits it still takes little more than 450 armor (slightly more than light destroyer grade) to reduce it to the minimum 15% damage per hit. That isn't inherently bad by itself, but LAGs are also the most flux-intensive small ballistics to run, as well as one of the most flux-intensive small weapons in the game.
1:1 flux:damage feels a lot less efficient than it actually is in this case since the gun can't rely on its armor penetration and often has to use sheer volume of fire to power through. The weapon itself feels okay outside of its flux cost, which I don't feel is representative of the LAG's actual worth. So if I were to tweak one thing off the LAG, I'd start by looking at its flux efficiency.
\
In terms of OP costs, yes. In terms of how they combine with the other, the Railgun being more premium makes the combination more balanced, while the HAC being relatively more premium makes the combination more lopsided. Which is my point, how balanced the combination is what really matters here, and the effect of these choices on *that* is the opposite of canceling out.
I didn't say make it do less damage, just more flux efficient (less flux cost). SO Lasher works well with LAGs, which is less due to the LAG being good and more due to there simply being no other way for the Lasher to translate a lot of excess flux dissipation into HE damage. Non-SO Lasher w/ LAG is workable but hampered by the flux overhead (as mentioned before), and because of that I've found some Light Mortars and a high-end kinetic simply compliments the Lasher better.Well, it's not a direct comparison of individual weapons, but a comparison of how a combination of weapons work as a system. Yes, a Railgun is more premium than a LAG. However, a Heavy Autocannon is more premium than a Heavy Mortar. Those two functionally cancel each other out, at least in terms of OP costs. When I do builds I'm most concerned with how my "system" of weapon arrays performs with each other for a given OP cost, so comparing 2 systems with similar OP costs (Railgun+HM vs HAC+LAG) is more fair and intuitive IMO.Why is DLAC+HM more fair for the HAC+LAG comparison than Railgun+HM? A HAC+LAG combination is 15 OP. DLAC+HM is only 12 OP, quite a bit lighter on the budget. Railgun+HM is 14 OP, so it's much closer to the HAC+LAG combo (actually a bit cheaper, but close enough).
The argument being made here is that "small kinetic + medium HE is better than small HE + medium kinetic" and using a much better - and more OP-costly - kinetic in the small slot, compared to the average-quality small HE weapon, undermines that argument. You could use DLAC + Heavy Mauler instead of Heavy Mortar, or whatever; I don't think that aspect of it matters too much. Or you can assume the rest of the OP go into vents or other good stuff to improve the ship.
Re: LAGs in general
My main critique of it is its hefty flux cost. 160 dps is pretty great on paper, but it's small 40 damage shots, and even though they're HE hits it still takes little more than 450 armor (slightly more than light destroyer grade) to reduce it to the minimum 15% damage per hit. That isn't inherently bad by itself, but LAGs are also the most flux-intensive small ballistics to run, as well as one of the most flux-intensive small weapons in the game.
1:1 flux:damage feels a lot less efficient than it actually is in this case since the gun can't rely on its armor penetration and often has to use sheer volume of fire to power through. The weapon itself feels okay outside of its flux cost, which I don't feel is representative of the LAG's actual worth. So if I were to tweak one thing off the LAG, I'd start by looking at its flux efficiency.
In general making a weapon use less flux and do less damage at the same time makes the weapon worse. You can always not fire a weapon and so reduce its dps and flux use. You cannot "superfire" a weapon and so increase its DPS and flux usage. LAG are really good(especially for ships like the Lasher), you just don't need a lot of them.
I am not sure why its more or less lopsided. Why is the kinetic medium being relatively more premium vs the light being relatively more premium make it more lopsided? In both instances its the kin weapon that is relatively more premium. In both instances there is a weapon that is relatively more premium... I could use a "premium" HE medium like the Assault Chaingun or the Mauler instead and pretty sure i will come to the same conclusion.
I am not sure why its more or less lopsided. Why is the kinetic medium being relatively more premium vs the light being relatively more premium make it more lopsided? In both instances its the kin weapon that is relatively more premium. In both instances there is a weapon that is relatively more premium... I could use a "premium" HE medium like the Assault Chaingun or the Mauler instead and pretty sure i will come to the same conclusion.
Ahh, I think maybe I see what you mean. What I'm saying, in the simplest terms, is:
One weapon costs 7 OP, the other costs 7 OP = "balanced"
One weapon costs 5 OP, the other costs 10 OP = "lopsided".
So if the 10 OP weapon was more premium and cost 12 OP, then 5-to-12 would be even more lopsided, etc. Obviously the other stats of the weapon (range etc) matter, too, but just in general terms...
Yeah, fair! But if the LAG had +100 range, like the Railgun/LN have extra range... I think it'd be *way* more competitive as far as the "2 LAG + 1 HAC" combo goes.
(FWIW, I've halved the recoil stats of the LAG, btw. Not going to factor in too much here but will hopefully give it more of a niche.)
I checked the list of changes and I didn't see anything about this. Maybe include some contingency for AI fleets to path to a planet that is close enough to its star that it's in the corona a lot of the time. I don't think this is an issue most of the time, but I sat around and started to get a traffic jam of fleets flowing to this planet in the spoiler.Fleets being too afraid of coronas has been fixed, according to this bug report thread (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=17442.msg274820#msg274820).Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/Iik5j24.png)[close]
The new Mk IX probably outperforms a heavy needler, but the current one does not. Poor accuracy and poor efficiency (which is made worse by the accuracy because many rounds will not hit) makes it waste far too much flux. I suspect that even with the buffs the HN will be a better anti-shield weapon, but the Mk IX a better overall weapon because of its longer range and value against bare hull.
I would consider efficiency a far more meaningful statistic than damage/OP because nearly every ship is flux limited rather than slot or OP limited when it comes to damage output. Accuracy also plays a large role: its difficult to make real predictions without data, but in my experience a HN is a fairly accurate weapon with most of a burst hitting, while a Mk IX is an innacurate weapon that will miss many shots even against cruisers, so I do not think your quotes DPS/OP values are accurate. I would even expect a HN to be doing more damage/OP with accuracy factored in, but I have no hard data to support that.
Few of my weapon choices are directly affected by their damage/OP ratio. Many of my weapon choices are influenced by the opportunity cost of mounting it instead of another weapon. (while OP does matter here, slot size, type and quality are even more important.)
So for this particular comparison, I'd rate the Mark IX Autocannon as 348/(18+40)=6 DPS/OP, while the Heavy Needler is 250/(15+20) =7.14 DPS/OP, and the Heavy Autocannon is 214/(10+21.4) = 6.8 DPS/OP. Again ignoring things like range, accuracy, and armor penetration.However, consider that the Railgun is 167/(7+15) = 7.59 DPS/OP yet people don't downsize their HACs for Railguns (personally, the one time I tested it, it performed poorly).
While on the whole, I lean towards Heavy Needler > Mk.IX, I believe when deciding which one to fit where it's much more due to the aforementioned Large HE >> Medium HE while Large Kinetic ~= Medium Kinetic effect.So for this particular comparison, I'd rate the Mark IX Autocannon as 348/(18+40)=6 DPS/OP, while the Heavy Needler is 250/(15+20) =7.14 DPS/OP, and the Heavy Autocannon is 214/(10+21.4) = 6.8 DPS/OP. Again ignoring things like range, accuracy, and armor penetration.However, consider that the Railgun is 167/(7+15) = 7.59 DPS/OP yet people don't downsize their HACs for Railguns (personally, the one time I tested it, it performed poorly).
Efficiency is indeed still the most important stat, imo. But it's not an open shut case if it also has to trade-off against raw DPS and (probably more importantly) range.
(We'll have to see what the various defensive skills are in the next version, as with defensive skills both guns get their DPS vs hull stripped down to near the minimum and kinetic is just a bad choice vs hull.)I didn't really think about this before, but this adds additional weight to my suggestion to make AI more aware of damage types in weapon groups (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=19912.msg308384#msg308384) and more careful with their use. Thanks!
Storm Needler:
Damage reduced to 50/shot (was: 75)
Flux/shot reduced to 35 (was: 65)
Reduced accuracy
Shot visuals changed to match Heavy Needler
I don't think the problem has ever been that it's bad in a vacuum, it's just really hard to fit on the ships that exist because of the huge flux costs. The changes Alex posted look like the would make it a lot more usable to me, but I would have to experiment to see how it performs.Currently, if I put it on Onslaught, it is probably the only weapon mounted because that plus TPCs and PD weapon eat up all of the dissipation, and AI is notoriously trigger-happy. The only advantage Storm Needler had was it was much cheaper than multiple Heavy Needlers, but the 700 range was a big drawback, when Heavy Needlers have 800. Now that Heavy Needlers have less range, and Heavy AC seems to have remained the same...
Been experimenting wit this set of changes for the Storm Needler:Storm Needler:
Damage reduced to 50/shot (was: 75)
Flux/shot reduced to 35 (was: 65)
Reduced accuracy
Shot visuals changed to match Heavy Needler
I don't think the problem has ever been that it's bad in a vacuum, it's just really hard to fit on the ships that exist because of the huge flux costs. The changes Alex posted look like the would make it a lot more usable to me, but I would have to experiment to see how it performs.
That flux drop might actually make Storm Needlers Onslaught viable. Well, enough to at least fit one.
I think conquest still might want it, since it has lots of other ways to dump dissipation into damage. You could try storm needler and heavy blaster combos or stuff like that. I was thinking SN + Mjolnir could be a solid combo as well on conquest.Maybe, if Conquest has OP left. Conquest does not have very much OP, just enough for spartan but effective loadouts. Now instead of 28 OP only for a mega weapon, we will pay more than that for a weaker Storm Needler plus another weapon to make up for damage. Yes, Conquest probably can fill more mounts to make up for damage, but only if it has OP left.
I think conquest still might want it, since it has lots of other ways to dump dissipation into damage. You could try storm needler and heavy blaster combos or stuff like that. I was thinking SN + Mjolnir could be a solid combo as well on conquest.
I believe those changes should result in 350 flux/sec and 500 damage/sec. That feels like it should fit into an onslaught loadout without too much trouble, it's easier to fit in than current Mark IX. It will probably be pretty good on aggressive officered dominators as well.
Probably not. It was always been hard to fit an SN on the conquest because the conquests heavy ballistic integration significantly increases the value of the lower OP weapons and because the conquest is relatively fragile and doesn't want to get in close.That's a fair point, I didn't consider how heavy ballistic integration factored in. I still think it might be interesting to see how a high efficiency source of kinetic damage could enable some low efficiency high DPS weapons that are difficult to support otherwise (heavy blaster Mjolnir etc.) It will be fun to experiment when the new patch comes out.
Eh, low tech ships are more dissipation limited than OP limited. Efficiency is just a measure of how effectively a weapon turns dissipation/flux into damage, so it's more important to be flux efficient than OP efficient on low tech ships that are flux limited IMO.I believe those changes should result in 350 flux/sec and 500 damage/sec. That feels like it should fit into an onslaught loadout without too much trouble, it's easier to fit in than current Mark IX. It will probably be pretty good on aggressive officered dominators as well.
But 28 vs 18 OP is a pretty big disadvantage. The storm needler would not have less DPS/OP than a Mark IX. Which is... Maybe not the direction you would want to go on a dominator or onslaught. 10 OP is pretty huge there since you could instead fit more caps for more peak DPS firing time. I actually think that the changes make the weapon worse and less likely to be fit. Unless it comes with a significant decrease in OP: down to maybe the 18-22 range.
The Onslaught is getting HBI as well next update, keep that in mind.Onslaught needs it because the firing arcs of the side heavy mounts are getting smaller for no more near overlap with the center heavy mount.
Eh, low tech ships are more dissipation limited than OP limited. Efficiency is just a measure of how effectively a weapon turns dissipation/flux into damage, so it's more important to be flux efficient than OP efficient on low tech ships that are flux limited IMO.
Heavy needler is already a good example of how efficiency can be more important than damage/OP.
That's just eyeballing the 33% cut in overall damage output (which would tend to make me think the fitting cost would drop to 66% of its original value - say 18), but then buffing the efficiency by 23% or so, bumps it 22 or 23 OP.
Interesting! 350 flux per second is indeed a reasonable gun for an Onslaught or Dominator flux budget, as current Mk IX is 400 and Heph is 480.
Comparing the new Mk IX and new Storm needler:
Both have 350 flux/second.
Mk IX is 350 DPS, Storm needler is 600 DPS. Accuracy comparison may effect this, but with Storm Needler losing accuracy it may have a similar hit rate to Mk IX
Mk IX has 200 shot size vs 50: significantly better hull damage per shot. Vs a hypothetical 1000 armor reduced to 50 from minimum, Mk IX is doing 66%, or 233. Storm needler is doing 33%, or 200.
Mk IX has 900 range, Storm 700
Mk IX is 18 OP, Storm 28.
So, to sum up: Storm has a massive advantage in close range anti-shield combat but is slightly worse against hull. Mk IX has a large range advantage, and is 10 OP cheaper. I can see using both these guns depending on the situation: the Storm Needler is an excellent anti-high tech weapon, because high tech (other than paragon) needs to get close to engage and relies on their shields. The Mk IX is a more general weapon.
That's just eyeballing the 33% cut in overall damage output (which would tend to make me think the fitting cost would drop to 66% of its original value - say 18), but then buffing the efficiency by 23% or so, bumps it 22 or 23 OP.
Just a thought about this - I'm not sure that a DPS drop for a weapon that's going to be flux-limited regardless is actually that much of a difference. Arguably, the DPS reduction is almost a buff because it makes the weapon easier to use while largely retaining its damage potential. If it takes an extra few seconds of fire to get the same damage out... heck, that might even be better since it's harder to armor-tank against. There will be some situations where it's worse, too, but I don't think it's as clear cut as just "33% weaker".
Instead, compare the stat difference vs the difference in OP, and consider what those OP can get a ship.
A DPS reduction on a weapon is never a buff all things equal. It’s always better to have more available DPS. It’s not always better to shoot that DPS but it’s always better to have it.I think this would be true if the AI fired weapons at partial ROF, but in the actual game, the vast majority of guns are on autofire 95% of the time, meaning you really need to judge a gun as if it is always firing. The only case I agree with this is if the weapon is on the player ship and manually fired.
QuoteA DPS reduction on a weapon is never a buff all things equal. It’s always better to have more available DPS. It’s not always better to shoot that DPS but it’s always better to have it.I think this would be true if the AI fired weapons at partial ROF, but in the actual game, the vast majority of guns are on autofire 95% of the time, meaning you really need to judge a gun as if it is always firing. The only case I agree with this is if the weapon is on the player ship and manually fired.
Also, firing over dissipation in a 1v1 is significantly different from firing over dissipation in a fleet context. You are essentially converting your shield HP into damage. In a 1v1, this is always fine because that damage goes towards reducing your opponents ability to deal damage, but in a fleet, you have to consider it as making yourself more vulnerable to other ships that you haven't been fighting. Especially for slow ships that cannot dictate engagements, this is very risky, and that needs to be weighed into analysis of weapons. High flux cost weapons are basically dealing a bunch of self damage to shields when firing, and reducing that can make the ship a lot more survivable.
Sure. The optimal fleet behavior is to make the thing being targeted as tanky as possible... but only if you’re making the things not being targeted as damaging as possible. For a set behavior and fixed fitting across the fleet the optimal one on one fitting is also the optimal in a fleet*. If it’s better to have two guns and one cap vs one gun and two caps in a one on one it also is in a fleet. Your allies will make the things shooting at you stop faster by firing more.this is... not really the point. You don't control what the enemy attacks and you can't really predict what will be under fire at any given time, so you have to design your loadouts to be successful if any given ship comes under fire from multiple enemy ships. Thats more the point: you want your ship to be resilient to being under heavy fire, i.e. you want to have a significant amount of capacity to spend on defense in order to survive a disadvantageous situation long enough to escape/get backup. If you build ships that are overfluxed so that they spend a lot of their capacity on dealing damage, those ships will be less resilient to suddenly coming under heavy fire and thus more likely to die and cost you money. I personally prefer 'safer' ships that deal less damage, because ultimately, the goal is to maximize the rewards of a fight, not win it as fast as possible. Losing ships is the most significant negative outcomes of any fight and thus my highest priority is avoiding it.
And if you did take HVD off your ships it would be because you suddenly had twice what you needed and could spend the OP on other things. (Like HE dmg or flux stats)This is exactly the point. Current storm needler is more than what you need on most of the ships in the game. They want to spend some of that 650 flux/sec on other weapons that might deal hull/armor damage, or cover a different angle, or simply save some flux for defense. The new storm needler (hopefully) more neatly fits into what is needed on ships that exist in the game, even if in a vacuum, it is less powerful.
You don't control what the enemy attacks and you can't really predict what will be under fire at any given time, so you have to design your loadouts to be successful if any given ship comes under fire from multiple enemy ships
This is exactly the point. Current storm needler is more than what you need on most of the ships in the game. They want to spend some of that 650 flux/sec on other weapons that might deal hull/armor damage, or cover a different angle, or simply save some flux for defense. The new storm needler (hopefully) more neatly fits into what is needed on ships that exist in the game, even if in a vacuum, it is less powerful.
Honestly my take is that this level of brainstorming won't take us much far when there are so many other unknowns. At the end of the day this will be better suited for the post-patch patch that is aimed at refining the experience.
{/quote]
- The Venture should get two Mining Pod Wings instead of just one. It doesn't feel right that its drone complement is weaker than the frigate-sized Shepherd. Could also give it the Salvage Gantry built-in hullmod to make it even more like a big Shepherd, maybe nerf Salvage Gantry's cruiser bonus (30) to be the same as the destroyer-sized Salvage Rig (25).
Agreed, Venture need logistical buffs so much.Disagree, FMR should be given to a new midline destroyer armed with missiles and only missiles.
- The Gryphon's Missile Autoforge should be converted into a built-in hullmod that provides 4x missile ammo and is mutually exclusive with Expanded Missile Racks. As it is it's basically just 2x ammo on top of built-in Expanded Missile Racks that requires you to back off once a fight to vent flux, hardly the most riveting of combat decisions. Its ship system can be changed to Fast Missile Racks instead, always seemed a bit weird that the sole missile-focused ship doesn't have an offensive missile system that other, much less dedicated ships have access to.
Disagree, FMR should be given to a new midline destroyer armed with missiles and only missiles.
The trident has been advantages to the dagger and its speed is one of them. The slower speed means that it’s more likely to cycle properly with longbows or other priority kinetic dmg. Daggers, especially Vs targets a long ways away. Are likely to shoot their atropos into shield before the longbows get there to sabot.
Huh, shouldn't the fighter wing offset positions deal with that? On astrals the daggers and longbows seem ok... but if not, then the offset on daggers should be upped a bit to make them go behind the longbows.
While we're talking about changes to existing stuff, I got a few minor things to suggest...
- The Prometheus Mk.II and the Colossus Mk.II should have built-in Expanded Missile Racks. They're both converted haulers of considerable size, surely there's lots of room for more ordnance in those cargo holds slash giant fuel tank. Hammer Barrage runs out of ammo far too quickly as it is.
- The Venture should get two Mining Pod Wings instead of just one. It doesn't feel right that its drone complement is weaker than the frigate-sized Shepherd. Could also give it the Salvage Gantry built-in hullmod to make it even more like a big Shepherd, maybe nerf Salvage Gantry's cruiser bonus (30) to be the same as the destroyer-sized Salvage Rig (25).
- The Hound (LP) should have Accelerated Ammo Feeder instead of Flare Launcher. This would be in line with the LP Cerberus and Brawler having their ship systems changed to AAF.
- The Hermes should have 75 cargo space instead of 50. It's described as a hauler and is about the same size as the Hound, yet the Hound has 75 cargo space. 50 is the same as the Wolf.
- The Brawler (TT) should have built-in Flux Coil Adjunct and Flux Distributor. Skins can't seem to modify flux stats, so making these built-in would be a way to give the TT Brawler more flux to support less efficient energy weapons.
- The Gryphon's Missile Autoforge should be converted into a built-in hullmod that provides 4x missile ammo and is mutually exclusive with Expanded Missile Racks. As it is it's basically just 2x ammo on top of built-in Expanded Missile Racks that requires you to back off once a fight to vent flux, hardly the most riveting of combat decisions. Its ship system can be changed to Fast Missile Racks instead, always seemed a bit weird that the sole missile-focused ship doesn't have an offensive missile system that other, much less dedicated ships have access to.
- The Trident needs something to make it competitive against the Dagger. It's less OP-efficient per Atropos compared to the Dagger, is much slower than the Dagger, and losing one cuts wing firepower by half instead of one-third. Its better shields is almost completely negated by its slow speed, and better armor means nothing when losing shields disables the bomber completely anyway. I'd suggest giving the Trident some form of PD laser, like it used to have.
If you cannot choose which ship will be shot but can assume the enemy will focus a weak one then the optimal one on one fit is also the optimal fleet fit. *This is not how the AI behaves. It doesn't try to find your weakest ship, it just engages the nearest enemy and does some basic pivoting around allies and enemies to try and flank or retreat based on relative flux levels (as far as I know). I think this is really the main issue here: nothing behaves optimally, and you have to design your strategy around how things actually work (particularly the ship AI, and weapon targeting AI). You cannot make any assumptions about what ships will focus on or fire at, you have to essentially plan for engagements of random subsets of ships from each fleet (although you do have some control with escorts that you can work around). Any ship from your fleet could randomly end up fighting any ship from the enemy fleet, and you want to maximizer the chance of survival in those random engagements.
You want your ship to be tanky so it survives being shot by a bunch of other ships but do not realize that this means you will get shot by multiple ships more, as compared to dumping your flux, because your allies cannot kill a ship they’re ganging up on as fast if they do not dump their flux. Your allies cannot force ships to backup if they do not dump their flux. Your ship cannot force an enemy to back up if it does not win the flux war and dumping flux wins the flux war.
Similarly a weapon that did 7500 kin dps and used 6500 flux a second for 28 OP would be amazing.This is a perfect example. While this weapon in a vacuum with perfectly optimal play would be incredible, it would be extremely volatile and the AI would almost certainly miss while firing it at a fighter or frigate and overload itself for virtually no gain. The AI can target the wrong target or miss entirely, which it does frequently due to weapon inaccuracy, target leading, ship rotation, or range issues. Planning for randomness in weapon usage is also an important part of ship design. IMO, that weapon would be borderline unusable in practice, because while it would sometimes result in instantly overloading an enemy, it would also sometimes result in instantly overloading yourself for no benefit and dying, which is much worse than any positive outcome of overloading the enemy. Using other weapons would reliably result in winning without that chance of dying.
Man all these cool weapon buffs and reworks yet the Pulse laser is crying in the corner with 1.1 efficiency. Ion pulser will straight out be a better choice for most ships, frigates will still have issue mounting any assault medium weapon. Sorry if this was mentioned already but I didn't have time to read everything since my last response here.
This is only true for low-tech ships. For Conquest, it is a nerf because it has no problem sustaining the old Storm Needlers long enough. If I need to pair them with Heavy Mortars for HE just so AI-piloted Conquest will engage at the proper ranges, then it needs the DPS to compete somewhat with other weapon combinations with superior range.That's just eyeballing the 33% cut in overall damage output (which would tend to make me think the fitting cost would drop to 66% of its original value - say 18), but then buffing the efficiency by 23% or so, bumps it 22 or 23 OP.
Just a thought about this - I'm not sure that a DPS drop for a weapon that's going to be flux-limited regardless is actually that much of a difference. Arguably, the DPS reduction is almost a buff because it makes the weapon easier to use while largely retaining its damage potential. If it takes an extra few seconds of fire to get the same damage out... heck, that might even be better since it's harder to armor-tank against. There will be some situations where it's worse, too, but I don't think it's as clear cut as just "33% weaker".
IMO Hammer barrages could use some help overall, a slight base ammo increase would make it a lot less crap compared to the Cyclone. As is its only real selling point is that its cheaper and has a higher rate of fire. Currently its just too of an unattractive weapon compared to the reaper launcher, the only reason any player ever uses it is because it comes as a fixed mount on some vanilla and modded ships.
- The Prometheus Mk.II and the Colossus Mk.II should have built-in Expanded Missile Racks. They're both converted haulers of considerable size, surely there's lots of room for more ordnance in those cargo holds slash giant fuel tank. Hammer Barrage runs out of ammo far too quickly as it is.
IMO Hammer barrages could use some help overall, a slight base ammo increase would make it a lot less crap compared to the Cyclone. As is its only real selling point is that its cheaper and has a higher rate of fire. Currently its just too of an unattractive weapon compared to the reaper launcher, the only reason any player ever uses it is because it comes as a fixed mount on some vanilla and modded ships.Either that or an OP cut (to 16). For me, the main draw of Hammer Barrage is it is sold on Open Market. It is clearly a low-tier basic weapon, but it costs 20 OP. It runs out of ammo way too quickly even with Expanded Missile Racks.
Size 3 colonies will no longer be targeted by punitive expeditions
Faulty Automated Systems - larger min crew required
Degraded Life Support - reduces max crew (but not min)
Increased minimum interval between punitive expeditions to 1-3 cycles
After all that, my point is just that I found that using the current storm needler resulted in ships getting into unfavorable engagements too often because the AI is bad with overfluxed ships, so the penalty to survivability was worse than the benefit to winning the flux war.
This is not how the AI behaves. It doesn't try to find your weakest ship, it just engages the nearest enemy and does some basic pivoting around allies and enemies to try and flank or retreat based on relative flux levels (as far as I know).
Do boarding parties recognize (illegal) automated ships, like Remnants or anything with an AI core shoved in them? If so, do they demand surrender of such ships or simply cut the link and open fire?
- Cargo scans by patrols:
- Will more often result in the "suspicious" outcome when smuggling suspicion is high
- Will demand you allow a boarding party to examine your ships
- This will cause some disruption to several of your ships' combat readiness
- More likely to find contraband
That's just eyeballing the 33% cut in overall damage output (which would tend to make me think the fitting cost would drop to 66% of its original value - say 18), but then buffing the efficiency by 23% or so, bumps it 22 or 23 OP.
Just a thought about this - I'm not sure that a DPS drop for a weapon that's going to be flux-limited regardless is actually that much of a difference. Arguably, the DPS reduction is almost a buff because it makes the weapon easier to use while largely retaining its damage potential. If it takes an extra few seconds of fire to get the same damage out... heck, that might even be better since it's harder to armor-tank against. There will be some situations where it's worse, too, but I don't think it's as clear cut as just "33% weaker".
Just a thought about this - I'm not sure that a DPS drop for a weapon that's going to be flux-limited regardless is actually that much of a difference. Arguably, the DPS reduction is almost a buff because it makes the weapon easier to use while largely retaining its damage potential. If it takes an extra few seconds of fire to get the same damage out... heck, that might even be better since it's harder to armor-tank against. There will be some situations where it's worse, too, but I don't think it's as clear cut as just "33% weaker".
The thing is though, kinetic weapons, especially kinetic weapons where you’re in knife fighting range aren’t ever really dissipation limited. You almost always want to shoot over your dissipation until the enemy puts their shields down.
QuoteA DPS reduction on a weapon is never a buff all things equal. It’s always better to have more available DPS. It’s not always better to shoot that DPS but it’s always better to have it.I think this would be true if the AI fired weapons at partial ROF, but in the actual game, the vast majority of guns are on autofire 95% of the time, meaning you really need to judge a gun as if it is always firing. The only case I agree with this is if the weapon is on the player ship and manually fired.
All that aside, the new patch is looking super promising and I'm eager for a chance to enjoy it when it's ready.
Huh, shouldn't the fighter wing offset positions deal with that? On astrals the daggers and longbows seem ok... but if not, then the offset on daggers should be upped a bit to make them go behind the longbows.
Man all these cool weapon buffs and reworks yet the Pulse laser is crying in the corner with 1.1 efficiency. Ion pulser will straight out be a better choice for most ships, frigates will still have issue mounting any assault medium weapon. Sorry if this was mentioned already but I didn't have time to read everything since my last response here.
This is only true for low-tech ships. For Conquest, it is a nerf because it has no problem sustaining the old Storm Needlers long enough. If I need to pair them with Heavy Mortars for HE just so AI-piloted Conquest will engage at the proper ranges, then it needs the DPS to compete somewhat with other weapon combinations with superior range.
The old Storm Needler is effectively a Conquest-only weapon. The new one will probably require Conquest to stick something in the medium energy mount to make for lost damage, if it even has OP left to afford another weapon or two.
Old Storm Needler is comparable to Mjolnir in flux use, and Conquest can make good use of Mjolnir too.
IMO Hammer barrages could use some help overall, a slight base ammo increase would make it a lot less crap compared to the Cyclone. As is its only real selling point is that its cheaper and has a higher rate of fire. Currently its just too of an unattractive weapon compared to the reaper launcher, the only reason any player ever uses it is because it comes as a fixed mount on some vanilla and modded ships.
All those balancing and QoL patchnotes read like the playtesting is in full swing! Looking forward to the changed game dynamic.
Ahh, does that imply size 1 or 2 frontier-town style colonies (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=19253.msg300373#msg300373) didn't make it into the game?
If combined, this might lead to some ships needing more crew than they can support, right? Cool, role play wise. Might also make passenger ships worthwhile if you're running a junker fleet.
That got me thinking, maybe it would be nice if you could trigger a punitive expedition early (for reputation), so you have a chance to deal with it right away and then explore safely?
Do boarding parties recognize (illegal) automated ships, like Remnants or anything with an AI core shoved in them? If so, do they demand surrender of such ships or simply cut the link and open fire?
I also admit I'm not used to thinking the graph of OP costs of hypothetical weapons versus DPS, going from 0 DP to 750 DPS, as not a line but some sort of curve, but I can see that being true when limited to a some collection of actually existing ships.
Yeah... honestly, from testing, the Ion Pulser feels a bit too strong right now. I might dial it back, and maybe up the efficiency of the Pulse Laser a bit.I think just increasing the efficiency to 1.0 would have been sufficient for Ion Pulser buff. For Pulse Laser, I'd probably try 0.9 efficiency. Either way, if you propose some changes fast, we might get to test them out in a few show battles.
The old Storm Needler is effectively a Conquest-only weapon. The new one will probably require Conquest to stick something in the medium energy mount to make for lost damage, if it even has OP left to afford another weapon or two.Midline thrives on elite ballistic weapons, some of which are getting nerfed now. At least they aren't big, since Storm Needler was just an option for Conquest, and Heavy Needler's nerf isn't big, either.
Old Storm Needler is comparable to Mjolnir in flux use, and Conquest can make good use of Mjolnir too.
They don't.Ha! I wouldn't be surprised if the player character could make the water run uphill, too.
Yeah... honestly, from testing, the Ion Pulser feels a bit too strong right now. I might dial it back, and maybe up the efficiency of the Pulse Laser a bit.I think just increasing the efficiency to 1.0 would have been sufficient for Ion Pulser buff. For Pulse Laser, I'd probably try 0.9 efficiency. Either way, if you propose some changes fast, we might get to test them out in a few show battles.
Huh, shouldn't the fighter wing offset positions deal with that? On astrals the daggers and longbows seem ok... but if not, then the offset on daggers should be upped a bit to make them go behind the longbows.
Yes they do, and the distance from the target doesn't matter for how they line up. In fact a slightly longer distance is better since it gives them a chance to line up exactly as desired. Both the Trident and the Dagger have the same offset.
https://imgur.com/a/GGTGogq
The Daggers do hit a touch earlier because when they get close enough, they accelerate to max speed. But both generally hit before the Longbow and this difference is not affected by the length of the attack run.
Yes they do, and the distance from the target doesn't matter for how they line up. In fact a slightly longer distance is better since it gives them a chance to line up exactly as desired. Both the Trident and the Dagger have the same offset.
https://imgur.com/a/GGTGogq
The Daggers do hit a touch earlier because when they get close enough, they accelerate to max speed. But both generally hit before the Longbow and this difference is not affected by the length of the attack run.
IMO Hammer barrages could use some help overall, a slight base ammo increase would make it a lot less crap compared to the Cyclone. As is its only real selling point is that its cheaper and has a higher rate of fire. Currently its just too of an unattractive weapon compared to the reaper launcher, the only reason any player ever uses it is because it comes as a fixed mount on some vanilla and modded ships.
Hmm, let me have a look.
No, "quality" here is in reference to the quality of the weapon slots themselves. It's not really a variable that can be summed up in a single quantitative number, the quality of the mount is based on where on the ship it's located, the coverage it supplies, and whether the slot is a hardpoint or a turret.QuoteFew of my weapon choices are directly affected by their damage/OP ratio. Many of my weapon choices are influenced by the opportunity cost of mounting it instead of another weapon. (while OP does matter here, slot size, type and quality are even more important.)
I would guess that since slot size and type are pretty fixed that “quality” encompasses dps/OP and DPS/slot almost exclusively and you don’t realize it.
Changed how maximum number of ships in player fleet works:
- Limit is 30, as before
- Is now a soft limit and can be exceeded - can recover ships, buy them, etc
- Penalties for exceeding it are harsh (more supplies used, lower speed) so it's not viable to exceed it for long
- Once the player has 25 or more ships in their fleet, an indicator is shown in the fleet screen
Changed how maximum number of ships in player fleet works:
- Limit is 30, as before
- Is now a soft limit and can be exceeded - can recover ships, buy them, etc
- Penalties for exceeding it are harsh (more supplies used, lower speed) so it's not viable to exceed it for long
- Once the player has 25 or more ships in their fleet, an indicator is shown in the fleet screen
I don't know if this has been discussed in the previous 57 pages, but didn't someone field the idea of making the fleet ship cap OP-based instead? That way you could field a larger fleet of frigates and destroyers if you wanted to, and only bring a few cruisers and capital ships. If you try to do that now you'll reach the 30-ship limit pretty quickly, whereas if you stick with the usual cap ship + cruiser exclusive lineup you always have a lot more room in your fleet for salvaged ships.
--snip--
[/list]
If this can't be implemented at least give us the tools to mod this because i know starsector it's not a x4 game but would be cool if nex or another mod could give us this options.
Amazing game and good job :)
I don't know if this has been discussed in the previous 57 pages, but didn't someone field the idea of making the fleet ship cap OP-based instead? That way you could field a larger fleet of frigates and destroyers if you wanted to, and only bring a few cruisers and capital ships. If you try to do that now you'll reach the 30-ship limit pretty quickly, whereas if you stick with the usual cap ship + cruiser exclusive lineup you always have a lot more room in your fleet for salvaged ships.
I find it unlikely that the improvements to small ships or the increased captain limit will fix this. Those captains could just be assigned to Capital/Cruisers afterall...
For example I don't think we should take away the ability for players to field a bunch of capitals, in previous versions there was a system like that and it felt really restrictive. Extra fleet slots for civilian ships sounds like a better idea.In those previous releases, player could max at about 100+ FP/DP equivalent, if player had max Leadership and Fleet Logistics. Personnel also counted for Logistics. Unskilled, player only had about 25 points. Overpowered combat skills (for those who did not choose Leadership) were a must to let a few frigates or a lone battlecruiser to solo fleets because it was impossible to deploy that many ships. Even with max skills, player could manage about thirty frigates or three to four capitals (or somewhere in between for destroyers and cruisers).
For me at least, having too many ships on the field makes the quality of combat take a real dive. Its fun in a meme-y way for the battlespace to be absolutely filled with frigates, but it really screws up the AI and makes maneuvering silly. Things turn into bumper cars and ships take significant damage from friendly collisions. Even 30 frigates is not very good gameplay IMO.
Not to pressure or rush the update, but do we have a rough eta when the next patch will roll out?
I like both of these changes! :)Yeah... honestly, from testing, the Ion Pulser feels a bit too strong right now. I might dial it back, and maybe up the efficiency of the Pulse Laser a bit.I think just increasing the efficiency to 1.0 would have been sufficient for Ion Pulser buff. For Pulse Laser, I'd probably try 0.9 efficiency. Either way, if you propose some changes fast, we might get to test them out in a few show battles.
I was thinking of reducing the Ion Pulser damage to 90, and reducing the Pulse Laser flux cost to either 100 or 90.
that's actually a good question. I don't think there are any ships in vanilla with no extra crew capacity/skeleton crew > than max, but what happens for things like remnant ships or ships that have a higher skeleton crew? Actually, wonder if different factions react differently to having droneships in your fleet or notSalvage Rig.
There area few - Buffalo Mk II with converted hangar costs more crew than its capacity. Presumably they are in spacesuits on the outside of the hull pushing Talons off by hand.At that point i just mentally assume the whole ship has 0 life support. Just some O2 tanks and tubes you hook up to so you don't run out.
Not to pressure or rush the update, but do we have a rough eta when the next patch will roll out?
Nope. I would guess April or early May based on past experience, but it could be delayed further if something turns up in final testing, as has happened.
Secondly, The Thumper Rework. I mean after all this years it got its well deserved attention.Pre-0.8a was sustained instead of burst, and (with windup delay and 600 range or less) it was so bad that it was worse than Vulcan or even no weapon. Ships could easily tank Thumper. Today, if not for minimum armor, Thumper would shred weakened targets. But thanks to minimum armor, Thumper is just weak except against armor-stripped frigates.
Although reduced OP cost is obviously the step in the right direction. There are other problem with it. Thumper is a burst based weapon and as such has very high "per click" flux cost - 600. What is quite noticeable for a "medium slot filler" tier weapon. Changing it type to simple sustained auto with the same dps will make it much more suitable for its role. If, for some reason, another simple auto weapon is considered as too boring, ammo variant can be implemented (like in Autopulse Laser). Both methods will provide much better flux control without too much work to implement them.
Secondly, The Thumper Rework. I mean after all this years it got its well deserved attention.Pre-0.8a was sustained instead of burst, and (with windup delay and 600 range or less) it was so bad that it was worse than Vulcan or even no weapon. Ships could easily tank Thumper. Today, if not for minimum armor, Thumper would shred weakened targets. But thanks to minimum armor, Thumper is just weak except against armor-stripped frigates.
Although reduced OP cost is obviously the step in the right direction. There are other problem with it. Thumper is a burst based weapon and as such has very high "per click" flux cost - 600. What is quite noticeable for a "medium slot filler" tier weapon. Changing it type to simple sustained auto with the same dps will make it much more suitable for its role. If, for some reason, another simple auto weapon is considered as too boring, ammo variant can be implemented (like in Autopulse Laser). Both methods will provide much better flux control without too much work to implement them.
Not to pressure or rush the update, but do we have a rough eta when the next patch will roll out? I was thinking of starting up a new save over spring break, but it'd be a bit of a downer to start a save and have to trash it if the next version rolls out in like a few days
that's actually a good question. I don't think there are any ships in vanilla with no extra crew capacity/skeleton crew > than max, but what happens for things like remnant ships or ships that have a higher skeleton crew?
There area few - Buffalo Mk II with converted hangar costs more crew than its capacity. Presumably they are in spacesuits on the outside of the hull pushing Talons off by hand.
Ty Alex.As a relative newcomer to this game,I was blown away by the quality and the content and these patch notes seem to be increasing that quality even more.Great job!
One question:Are there any plans for out-of-combat game mechanics(like sensor strength/profile) or burn speed to matter at all in combat???
Although reduced OP cost is obviously the step in the right direction. There are other problem with it. Thumper is a burst based weapon and as such has very high "per click" flux cost - 600. What is quite noticeable for a "medium slot filler" tier weapon. Changing it type to simple sustained auto with the same dps will make it much more suitable for its role. If, for some reason, another simple auto weapon is considered as too boring, ammo variant can be implemented (like in Autopulse Laser). Both methods will provide much better flux control without too much work to implement them.
Pirate raids, punitive expeditions, etc:
- Increased time until first pirate raid on player colony
- Increased time it takes pirate bases to upgrade to a higher tier (minimum changed from 6 to 12 months)
- Increased interval between new pirate bases being established (1-2 cycles)
- Destroying a pirate base increases this interval by another 1-2 cycles
- Reduced frequency of pirate raids targeting the core worlds by roughly a factor of 3
Has the Persean League changed in any way to make them more distinct from Independents?
Pirate raids, punitive expeditions, etc:
- Increased time until first pirate raid on player colony
- Increased time it takes pirate bases to upgrade to a higher tier (minimum changed from 6 to 12 months)
- Increased interval between new pirate bases being established (1-2 cycles)
- Destroying a pirate base increases this interval by another 1-2 cycles
- Reduced frequency of pirate raids targeting the core worlds by roughly a factor of 3
Do these changes also affect Luddic Path cells/bases?
For me at least, having too many ships on the field makes the quality of combat take a real dive. Its fun in a meme-y way for the battlespace to be absolutely filled with frigates, but it really screws up the AI and makes maneuvering silly. Things turn into bumper cars and ships take significant damage from friendly collisions. Even 30 frigates is not very good gameplay IMO.
You ask for Thumper to be a PD weapon. It has stiff competition with HMG and two flak weapons. I guess with 700 range, it could be an LR PD gun.700 range would be the primary reason to take a theoretical PD thumper, yeah. I'd also argue that the HMG is less a "real" PD weapon and more thinly disguised SO-bait.
Jokes aside I feel generally the issue isn't people wanting 30 frigates, basically that'd be dumb, but rather would like a nice mix of not all cruisers/capitals without feeling like they are crippling their fleet strength.
Suggestion:This has nothing to do with the vanilla game as that's a Nexerelin mod feature. AI doesn't colonize anything without mods.
Please stop AI colonizing gas giants or ice giants.
Maybe I'm underestimating how much effect the small ship skills effect gameplay? Alex and his secrets...
Has the Persean League changed in any way to make them more distinct from Independents?
To some degree - i.e. they have access to the new midline cruiser, while the independents don't. But, thematically, they're basically an alliance of what would otherwise be a bunch of independent worlds, so a degree of similarity is to be expected.
Might be asking too much here but is that something I can expect for every faction?
Not really. For 1.0 I'd like there to be ways to get some real insight into each faction and associated characters via narrative missions, but for this update we went more depth than breadth, I feel, so we could tell a story that gets to a place that feels it's at a natural stopping-off point.
Jokes aside I feel generally the issue isn't people wanting 30 frigates, basically that'd be dumb, but rather would like a nice mix of not all cruisers/capitals without feeling like they are crippling their fleet strength. Because right now that's a cargo/fuel/salvage/ox being thrown away if not a cruiser/capital.It was not dumb in releases before 0.7a, when fights were shorter and AI was less cowardly. Player needed some longer-range weapons and possibly homing missiles (because they passthrough friendly ships) to let as many ships as possible to focus-fire on a single enemy ship. 0.65a was really the golden age for frigates, because they could do everything except haul food (when food runs gave about four times more xp than combat). During that release, thirty-something frigates (led by Hyperion flagship) could wrap up an endgame fight in about three to five minutes, just enough time to win without too much CR decay if they had Hardened Subsystems.
Is Alex going to release 0.95 on April 1?
Looking forward to the new patch really hoping it fixes my saved game that isn't loading anymore because of something called java.lang.NullPointerException whatever that is. I've been playing that particular save file for about 600 hours or more :'( :o ;D
Looking forward to the new patch really hoping it fixes my saved game that isn't loading anymore because of something called java.lang.NullPointerException whatever that is. I've been playing that particular save file for about 600 hours or more :'( :o ;D
Looking forward to the update. Each one always manages to revive the game and I end up spending a hundred hours or more on it. It's a insanely good title and judging from the blog posts I'd say you're going in the right direction.
That said, I still want a easter egg where the systems gets invaded by fleets of Buffalos.Is Alex going to release 0.95 on April 1?
Toady did this for Dorf Fortress with a long awaited update and proceeded to crash the entire website, and people didn't believe the news thinking it was a joke. Would be fun to see if Alex does the same.
Release when?When it is done.
So when it is done?Release when?When it is done.
Right, when it is done.So when it is done?Release when?When it is done.
Release when?Next Friday ;)
Play when you want to play, and start a new one to play again when the patch releases! Since early game is so good in SS, there's really no reason not to play at any time.
I might be a bit biased though.
But seriously why do people still ask for a specific dateBecause waiting indefinitely gets old, and feature creep can kill a project.
Bruh even if we knew the exact date, it wouldn't change the fact that we still have to wait...But seriously why do people still ask for a specific dateBecause waiting indefinitely gets old, and feature creep can kill a project.
Also feature creep? The game will finally get some story elements and stronger endgame enemies while improving old systems like the skill tree, raids and contacts. In no way does any of these things fall under the "adding stuff for the sake of it" category.Nobody said that the next update is "feature creep" in particular, read his post again.
But seriously why do people still ask for a specific date when Alex never ever even gave a vague estimate other than various forms of soon, like very soon and soon-ish...
It has been said that every time some one asks for the release date Alex delays it for a bit.
But seriously why do people still ask for a specific date when Alex never ever even gave a vague estimate other than various forms of soon, like very soon and soon-ish...
It has been said that every time some one asks for the release date Alex delays it for a bit.
In that spirit: release when?
I have a crucial deadline at the end of April and a new Starsector release would seriously impact my productivity. So I am grateful for everyone asking for a date. Collectively we might manage to delay it post April!
Alex, please make logistical hullmods built-in with story points not count towards the nominal two logistical hullmods limit.
Meaning the player fleet's maximum cargo capacity? If so I'm not sure what the idea behind this change is. Exceeding cargo limits is not viable in any circumstances (unless the hideous supplies/day penalty got changed I suppose) and periodically/occasionally swapping out hullmods to make more room to take delivery missions sounds like busywork.
Right. The player might pick up another freighter, or as you said add some hullmods, etc. Just in general I think that happening a bit will make it both feel like a bigger opportunity and less like it's all tailored to the player.
Meaning the player fleet's maximum cargo capacity? If so I'm not sure what the idea behind this change is. Exceeding cargo limits is not viable in any circumstances (unless the hideous supplies/day penalty got changed I suppose) and periodically/occasionally swapping out hullmods to make more room to take delivery missions sounds like busywork.
Right. The player might pick up another freighter, or as you said add some hullmods, etc. Just in general I think that happening a bit will make it both feel like a bigger opportunity and less like it's all tailored to the player.
I think having missions less "tailored" to the player is very good. It makes the game's world feel less artificial and less like a tutorial that holds your hand with scaling difficulty. And it can push the player to grab what they can and attempt the mission for a big early payout.
Playing with mods, I commonly swap logistics mods and/or grab an extra freighter on the cheap if I see a juicy trade mission pop, I don't have the cargo cap for it (either because it's early game, I wasn't expecting a big trade deal or I've lost ships recently) and I don't want to risk missing it.
I guess it might mean in absolute terms? As in, if your max capacity is X, it currently won't generate missions asking you to ship more than X (but may result in supplies + machinery + cargo > X) while after the update it can now occasionally ask you to move more than X?That was my interpretation, and past a certain point I can't see myself picking up more ships just to take a big shipping contract, and constantly moving hullmods around just sounds like a hassle, in which case why offer the contract at all? It doesn't add anything to the gameplay like a murderously powerful bounty I couldn't dream of doing does. If I can pick up an extra Shepard or Wayfarer early game to do a big shipping job, or upgrade a frigate freighter to a destroyer-sized one, sure, that's progress (assuming suitable ships are actually available for purchase). But if I'm flying around with as many ships as I'm ever going to want and/or fit in my (soft capped at 30) fleet than what's the point of offering bigger contracts than my fleet can carry? Gameplay wise it's just a waste of time, and I can't see it making sense in universe either if I can get asked to, say, deliver over 80K food to any place once I'm flying around 30 Expanded Cargo Hold Atlases. Even Chico I've never seen ask for more than 30K food at once, so I'd be very curious to know what a size 4 or even size 3 colony would need with over double that amount of food.
Agreed.As Alex has mentioned before,game mechanics are identical between the player and the AI wherever possible.IMO,that's an excellent approach; we should be part of the world,not its god.Not to mention,making trade missions demand more capacity of the player will probably encourage using the new Converted Fighter Bays mod and/or combat freighters(Drover,Condor,Gemini),so your fleet still has bite in case something goes wrong in the trip.Like an actual merchant captain in a Sector in war.My concern is that the game will consistently generate delivery contracts which exceed your capacity even after defanging your fleet and/or putting a greater focus on (combat) freighters, or even reaching your final 30 endgame ships. Leaving you with tedious hullmod micromanagement to trick the game into generating contracts you can actually handle (and more tedious hullmod micromanagement to expand your holds again afterwards). I can't imagine that being fun, not when the game could just limit itself to contracts you can actually handle. Which I personally wouldn't see as the game treating you as a god, I'd see it as the game glossing over details which the player doesn't need to know. I can imagine those people in bars stuck in a bind being in charge of more than one shipping deal, only offering work which I can actually do and which they think I would see as worth my time. I don't need to be offered a delivery contract which takes five more Atlas ships than my fleet can support to know such contracts exist, the AI merchant fleet leaving the planet and flying off to wherever with lots of goodies (and escorts...) does that already.
That was my interpretation, and past a certain point I can't see myself picking up more ships just to take a big shipping contract, and constantly moving hullmods around just sounds like a hassle, in which case why offer the contract at all? It doesn't add anything to the gameplay like a murderously powerful bounty I couldn't dream of doing does. If I can pick up an extra Shepard or Wayfarer early game to do a big shipping job, or upgrade a frigate freighter to a destroyer-sized one, sure, that's progress (assuming suitable ships are actually available for purchase). But if I'm flying around with as many ships as I'm ever going to want and/or fit in my (soft capped at 30) fleet than what's the point of offering bigger contracts than my fleet can carry? Gameplay wise it's just a waste of time, and I can't see it making sense in universe either if I can get asked to, say, deliver over 80K food to any place once I'm flying around 30 Expanded Cargo Hold Atlases. Even Chico I've never seen ask for more than 30K food at once, so I'd be very curious to know what a size 4 or even size 3 colony would need with over double that amount of food.
My concern is that the game will consistently generate delivery contracts which exceed your capacity even after defanging your fleet and/or putting a greater focus on (combat) freighters, or even reaching your final 30 endgame ships. Leaving you with tedious hullmod micromanagement to trick the game into generating contracts you can actually handle (and more tedious hullmod micromanagement to expand your holds again afterwards). I can't imagine that being fun, not when the game could just limit itself to contracts you can actually handle. Which I personally wouldn't see as the game treating you as a god, I'd see it as the game glossing over details which the player doesn't need to know. I can imagine those people in bars stuck in a bind being in charge of more than one shipping deal, only offering work which I can actually do and which they think I would see as worth my time. I don't need to be offered a delivery contract which takes five more Atlas ships than my fleet can support to know such contracts exist, the AI merchant fleet leaving the planet and flying off to wherever with lots of goodies (and escorts...) does that already.
My current exploration fleet involves Expanded Cargo Hold/Efficiency Overhaul pirate Mules being used as "combat" ships anyway, I don't know how much more budget I can cut short of going into battle with actual Buffaloes(?)...
That was my interpretation, and past a certain point I can't see myself picking up more ships just to take a big shipping contract, and constantly moving hullmods around just sounds like a hassle, in which case why offer the contract at all? It doesn't add anything to the gameplay like a murderously powerful bounty I couldn't dream of doing does. If I can pick up an extra Shepard or Wayfarer early game to do a big shipping job, or upgrade a frigate freighter to a destroyer-sized one, sure, that's progress (assuming suitable ships are actually available for purchase). But if I'm flying around with as many ships as I'm ever going to want and/or fit in my (soft capped at 30) fleet than what's the point of offering bigger contracts than my fleet can carry? Gameplay wise it's just a waste of time, and I can't see it making sense in universe either if I can get asked to, say, deliver over 80K food to any place once I'm flying around 30 Expanded Cargo Hold Atlases. Even Chico I've never seen ask for more than 30K food at once, so I'd be very curious to know what a size 4 or even size 3 colony would need with over double that amount of food.
My concern is that the game will consistently generate delivery contracts which exceed your capacity even after defanging your fleet and/or putting a greater focus on (combat) freighters, or even reaching your final 30 endgame ships. Leaving you with tedious hullmod micromanagement to trick the game into generating contracts you can actually handle (and more tedious hullmod micromanagement to expand your holds again afterwards). I can't imagine that being fun, not when the game could just limit itself to contracts you can actually handle. Which I personally wouldn't see as the game treating you as a god, I'd see it as the game glossing over details which the player doesn't need to know. I can imagine those people in bars stuck in a bind being in charge of more than one shipping deal, only offering work which I can actually do and which they think I would see as worth my time. I don't need to be offered a delivery contract which takes five more Atlas ships than my fleet can support to know such contracts exist, the AI merchant fleet leaving the planet and flying off to wherever with lots of goodies (and escorts...) does that already.
My current exploration fleet involves Expanded Cargo Hold/Efficiency Overhaul pirate Mules being used as "combat" ships anyway, I don't know how much more budget I can cut short of going into battle with actual Buffaloes(?)...
I think that you're going to the other extreme as if the game would only give you contracts you "can't do". The game can have a variety of contracts and you grab the ones you want based on what you plan on doing. Small trade contract and you have small capacity? Grab it if you want that money and it lines up with what you wanna do. Big contract and you have the capacity? Same thing. Big contract and you don't have the capacity? Up to you to take it based on what you can do to fulfill the requirement and other factors. Heck why am I writing this out?
The game doesn't have to tailor and scale everything to the player and limit player choice as if the player were an idiot unable to make their own decisions. That's what Bethesda did when they added enemy scaling to The Elder Scrolls games ("what if the player faces something they can't do right this instant, oh not that's bad!" mentality) and part of why that series turned into a joke along with dumbing down anything that required the player to think. Such mechanics contribute to making every part of a game feel artificial and stale and also cut opportunities from enterprising players.
I don't need the game to decide in the background whether I can take or want to take on this trade contract or not. Show me the damn contract and I'll decide myself.
You're going to the other extreme as if the game would only give you contracts you "can't do". The game can have a variety of contracts and you grab the ones you want based on what you plan on doing. Small trade contract and you have small capacity? Grab it if you want that money and it lines up with what you wanna do. Big contract and you have the capacity? Same thing. Big contract and you don't have the capacity? Up to you to take it based on what you can do to fulfill the requirement and other factors. Heck why am I writing this out?Depending on how things get implemented it very well might end up going in that extreme direction. I don't expect it to, but it's not impossible, and what little I'm reading isn't giving me the impression that it's not at least going in that direction. It'd be nice if the game were to offer multiple options in terms of contracts, basically the "I can imagine those people in bars stuck in a bind being in charge of more than one shipping deal" idea I mentioned earlier, but as of right now that's not how the game works, and I haven't heard about any changes along those lines (though in hindsight it would be nice). Right now any given planet might or might not offer the option of one singular contract, which I can do unless I'm already hauling a ton of cargo around. If those contracts end up becoming a chore and/or impossible to take because they exceed my fleet's cargo capacity regardless of what I'm carrying, well, isn't that a step backwards?
The game doesn't have to tailor and scale everything to the player and limit player choice as if the player were an idiot unable to make their own decisions. That's what Bethesda did when they added enemy scaling to The Elder Scrolls games ("what if the player faces something they can't do right this instant, oh not that's bad!" mentality) and part of why that series turned into a joke along with dumbing down anything that required the player to think. Such mechanics contribute to making every part of a game feel artificial and stale and also cut opportunities from enterprising players.
I don't need the game to decide in the background whether I can take or want to take on this trade contract or not. Show me the damn contract and I'll decide myself.
Exactly this.The player can make their own choices no problem.We could go even further and be able to "rent" extra ship capacity to fulfill a contract too big for our current fleet.It's always nice to have the choice presented.You want to trade some of your combat ships for added Atlases to serve a contract???Sure,that's a casculated risk/reward choice.Not to mention,the lore and the game mechanics strongly suggest that these contracts aren't offered to us,they 're broadcast in the vicinity up for grabs.it's not thematically and shouldn't be tailored to us in any way.I'd be fine with being rented ships or having the option to rent ships like that, and with contacts knowing your fleet's capabilities and offering contracts to match, or with bar offers being more flexible and everything. But the patch notes doesn't say anything about any of that. The patch notes says "Delivery missions: offers will now occasionally exceed player's cargo capacity". That, to me, sounds like some amount of the delivery contracts I'll be offered will be for more than my fleet can carry, which means either not taking the contract because I can't do it (in which case why offer it at all?), refitting my ships to focus on cargo space (tedious to do constantly, and if contracts end up exceeding that refitted fleet's limits I'm right back to square one), adding more ships to my fleet (not always available or possible once I reach the 30 ships soft cap) or switching out ships (what's fun about flying to a place to dump a Paragon, pick up an Atlas from somewhere, do a delivery contract which hopefully is still there and afterwards come back to pick the Paragon back up?). I just don't see how this is a change for the better, how cargo contracts that exceed a player's cargo capacity add anything to the game but missed opportunities or tedium (lategame moreso than early game).
Now,the new contacts SHOULD offer more tailored jobs,since they know who they 're talking to and what the player can do.The new patch notes show that we can dictate to some degree what jobs they 'll provide,so that's covered.
Changes as of March 08, 2021
My concern is that the game will consistently generate delivery contracts which exceed your capacity even after defanging your fleet and/or putting a greater focus on (combat) freighters
Brilliant. This patch is shaping up to be exactly what the game needs. Well done.
I've never mentioned this before but now that you say it this always happens late game. The cargo mission requiring WAY more cargo space then any normal fleet would have or requests for cargo exceeding the totals of 10 planets worth of material.
9-16k fuel request? 10-12k supplies? How many planets am I expected to visit in the tiny timeframe they give for delivery? The planets commodity limits aren't scaling like this. But have fun trying to get 9k fuel in 10 days or w/e.
Mid to late game it gets to the point where you would need a specialized merchant fleet to complete those contracts, a playstyle this game doesn't support and sends players into a rage when you suggest that the game should support it in a thread.
I think I saw on twitter, that we will be able to check stats of the fighter weapons with some new UI
Is this still the case?
Alex, any plans to make Combat Freighters still useful in lategame or is that a non-concern?
I purchased after .91a became available and really enjoyed my first playthrough. It was a fantastic experience and scratched an itch I've always had that didn't require the latest and greatest technology to do. Reading through the patch notes, I am excited to play through a 2nd time with all of these changes (and with no tutorial pension this time). There are so many changes to look forward to and I'm very interested in how the story point system will change things in terms of character progression. My only real regret in playthrough 1 was not being able to experiment with more skills - so I'm kinda hoping that you could use story points to reset some of your choices if they're no longer working out for the phase of the game you're in. If not, no big deal... I'll just have to play more. From one engineer to another, thanks for everything.
And, yeah - in the upcoming release, one of the things you can do with story points is refund your skill points. Well, a couple of the skills are "permanent" due to their effects making it awkward to handle a "player had the skill but doesn't anymore" case - but by far most of them are not.Isn't that going to be a little awkward (and exploitable) if respecing will leave valuable, high level skills in paths you don't invest anymore? Or perhaps you have to spend enough skill points to fill the gap when you respec?
So did the Ion Pulser end up getting nerfed? I was looking forward to using the one from the changelog.
I'm pretty ignorant about it all but what causes a release candidate to fail? Why do so many have to be built?
Can I use a story point to persuade Alex to reveal if the update is for today?
... and, it's out!
Blog post/download links here (https://fractalsoftworks.com/2021/03/26/starsector-0-95a-release/).
Yeah it's big brain timeRelease when?Next Friday ;)
You know it's fresh off the presses when Windows Defender gives a warning for the installer.
Thanks Alex, looking forward to playing!
Time to loose myself again and find out what's still broken Alex. ;D
This... This! It's important enough that I'm making a post about this alone.[/list]Made some improvements to view panning
- Should no longer hitch after it's stopped moving
- Fixed issue that was causing it to finish out its movement along a single axis
This... is not a positive change! I used the previous behavior a lot, allowing a group to operate on auto-fire while I was still able to see its firing arcs and range - important information when, for example, piloting anything maneuverable that uses turrets as its main guns. Please revert this.
- Selecting an empty group will now properly hide the weapons from the previously selected group
Time to loose myself again and find out what's still broken Alex. ;D
<fingers crossed>
Randomly generated planets in the core (including Duzahk and Penelope's Star) should no longer be habitableYou know I'll test this to the extreme. I hope you pulled it off since any form of habitables in core worlds was bad. I hope it includes Hegemony space too (in fact they had the most habitable spawns in all core worlds from my memory).
I agree as well.This... is not a positive change! I used the previous behavior a lot, allowing a group to operate on auto-fire while I was still able to see its firing arcs and range - important information when, for example, piloting anything maneuverable that uses turrets as its main guns. Please revert this.
- Selecting an empty group will now properly hide the weapons from the previously selected group
I agree as well.This... is not a positive change! I used the previous behavior a lot, allowing a group to operate on auto-fire while I was still able to see its firing arcs and range - important information when, for example, piloting anything maneuverable that uses turrets as its main guns. Please revert this.
- Selecting an empty group will now properly hide the weapons from the previously selected group
I agree as well.This... is not a positive change! I used the previous behavior a lot, allowing a group to operate on auto-fire while I was still able to see its firing arcs and range - important information when, for example, piloting anything maneuverable that uses turrets as its main guns. Please revert this.
- Selecting an empty group will now properly hide the weapons from the previously selected group
Now that I think of it I used this constantly also.
I agree as well.This... is not a positive change! I used the previous behavior a lot, allowing a group to operate on auto-fire while I was still able to see its firing arcs and range - important information when, for example, piloting anything maneuverable that uses turrets as its main guns. Please revert this.
- Selecting an empty group will now properly hide the weapons from the previously selected group
Now that I think of it I used this constantly also.
Just lookign through the skills on an initial runthrough. Wow, these are fantastically well balanced, with most of these being tough choices. Some are a bit on the nose but others are really hurting. Particular note to navigation V Sensors, and gunnery Implants V Energy Weapon Mastery. And some of those specialist rewards are incredible to boot. Well done
*Industry skills are all mutually exclusive*
Is it intended that the helmsmanship elite skill does not work with shields up as this is considered "generating flux" even if flux levels are decreasing?
Is it intended that the helmsmanship elite skill does not work with shields up as this is considered "generating flux" even if flux levels are decreasing?
Having shields up never allowed you to use zero-flux boost, even though technically you could stay at zero flux. My guess it stayed the same.
Is it intended that the helmsmanship elite skill does not work with shields up as this is considered "generating flux" even if flux levels are decreasing?
Finally getting to play! First impression in the tutorial... new the flux venting graphics are very nice!
Also got first crash in battle.
Would you mind posting the stack trace from the log?I don't mind. Can you tell me where to find it? I knew but forget.
Would you mind posting the stack trace from the log?I don't mind. Can you tell me where to find it? I knew but forget.
I just want to say that I love the quality of the writing. I'm making really slow progress because I'm reading everthing, often multiple times, and let the words unfold their images in my mind.
10601848 [Thread-3] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain - java.lang.NullPointerExceptionI think it is this.
java.lang.NullPointerException
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.tasks.CombatTaskManager.giveDirectOrder(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.tasks.CombatTaskManager.giveDirectOrder(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.tasks.CombatTaskManager.giveDirectOrder(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO._.actionTaken(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO._.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.OoO0.buttonPressed(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.oooO.?00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.oooO.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.OoO0.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO._.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.oOOO.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.traverse(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
Holy wow, CR loss from being under crew is permanent now and needs to be paid for with supplies! Well, it takes a few days, but still, thats a huge change!
219375 [Thread-3] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain - java.lang.NullPointerExceptionIt happen again in the same combat.
java.lang.NullPointerException
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.tasks.CombatTaskManager.giveDirectOrder(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.tasks.CombatTaskManager.giveDirectOrder(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.tasks.CombatTaskManager.giveDirectOrder(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO._.actionTaken(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO._.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.OoO0.buttonPressed(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.oooO.?00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.oooO.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.OoO0.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO._.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.oOOO.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.dispatchEventsToChildren(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.donew.processInputImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.Q.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.traverse(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
I just want to say that I love the quality of the writing. I'm making really slow progress because I'm reading everthing, often multiple times, and let the words unfold their images in my mind.
Just did a smuggling mission and when I got to the planet the contact wasn't in any of the coms lists (so I couldn't complete the mission)
Not had that issue before. Assuming that's a bug?
(Had to just sell the harvested organs on the black market for small profit)
Honestly.
No idea.
I am not best pilot and may push the wrong button at the wrong time.
I win it 3rd time and it didn't crash during it.
I will send the current log and save.
Its the pirate fleet close to sun going on intercept course.
Thank you! Wasn't able to get it to crash on my end to be 100% sure, but still, hopefully the fix I put in will cover it. I really appreciate you taking the time to help with this.You are welcome.
You can turn it off in your settings file.HOW?
Loving the update, but built-in hullmods feel absurdly powerful right now. Maybe they should require a scaling number of story points based on OP cost or something..? I dunnoA hard cap might be less weird. I think ideally you categorize them and give different ships different slots for it, but that's pretty out of scope right now.
You can turn it off in your settings file.HOW?
Share your wisdom.
Basically,whenever I press F5 to quicksave,while the save bar is progressing,the game wobbles a bit(as in,the planets wobble,my fleet wobbles,nearby fleets wobble) as if my camera is wobbling.The game process itself is fine,it's just that everything wobbles when I quicksave.
...I don't have Augmented Drive Field yet, so that's a definite nope, but aside I'm hopeful. I'll have to play with it more, see the mechanic in action in more situations, but either way I am loving that story point option. And story points in general, really
What impresses me less so far is skills, since to me some definitely seem more...not "mandatory", but utterly outclassing their counterpart to the point where it's not a contest. Navigation vs. Sensors is not even close, for starters. Bulk Transport vs. Salvaging seems to be the same, though I might be misreading what the former actually does? I can understand the different playstyles options, like Flux Regulation is a no-brainer if you're not using phase ships and less so if you do, but I can't imagine a scenario where Sensors would be a sensible first pick.
Incidentally, I've found a habitable planet (moon?) in the core, Livueta in Kumari Kandam, map seed MN-6593263186804071588. Not sure if that's intended? It seems to be the only one, so not sure if it's story-related or something.
Does the navigation skill add +1 to the burn speed in ship tooltips now?
I've been trying to figure out why my ships are showing an increase in thier stats despite not having any mods fitted that would do that, and this is the only thing I can come up with.
There is a skill that looks interesting. Randomly reducing incoming damage seems good. Only applying the effects on ships with officers, less so. (I've not even seen an officer yet in this run lol.)
The free repairs skill opposite seems like a much better deal as it applies to the whole fleet without any restriction.
Also a bit unsure about all the skills that 'degrade' as your fleet gets bigger. It doesn't feel all that great spending a limited resource to get an ability, and then having that ability slowly taken away from you.
Loving the update, but built-in hullmods feel absurdly powerful right now. Maybe they should require a scaling number of story points based on OP cost or something..? I dunno
Great, now my entire mod list is unusable.
Thanks a lot, Alex.
I am a moron, they are hard capped. I forgot i lost the ship and got a new one. Still, suuuper good with some mods. Fun though.Loving the update, but built-in hullmods feel absurdly powerful right now. Maybe they should require a scaling number of story points based on OP cost or something..? I dunnoA hard cap might be less weird. I think ideally you categorize them and give different ships different slots for it, but that's pretty out of scope right now.
Congratulations!
Hotfix is up! Re-download here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2021/03/26/starsector-0-95a-release/).
public void reportPlayerNonMarketTransaction(PlayerMarketTransaction transaction, InteractionDialogAPI dialog) {
if (pods == null && dialog != null) {
SectorEntityToken target = dialog.getInteractionTarget();
if (target.getCustomPlugin() instanceof CargoPodsEntityPlugin) {
pods = target;
}
}
processTransaction(transaction, pods);
}
Great, now my entire mod list is unusable.
Thanks a lot, Alex.
I hope that is a joke or sarcasm. You know sarcasm doesn't translate well to text, yea?
Hello, Alex.Encountered this, albeit you have to do built-in a hullmod for this to happen.
I found a bug that d-mod can be freely removed after closing the Build-in hullmod menu.
Even though I did nothing in that menu.
2) Pressing ALT and hovering over items does not sell/buy them any more. Losing this is a shame. :( (And if that was a mod, just ignore this whining!)You have to reenable that feature in settings.json.
2) Pressing ALT and hovering over items does not sell/buy them any more. Losing this is a shame. :( (And if that was a mod, just ignore this whining!)You have to reenable that feature in settings.json.
where's the hotfix link and what does it fix?
Alex has posted a broken link but not replied back with the correct one? Am I imagining that?
It's turning into Cd Projekt red! :'(
I already dislike the new leveling system, hopefully mods will stay on 0.9.1a indefinitely.
Is it possible to alter the leveling system or is it internal to the program?
Oh well still cannot get the Weapon's base range directly...
Congrats on the finished update!
This will throw NPE if the interaction target == null when I use custom dialog and a cargo picker.
Hello, Alex.
I found a bug that d-mod can be freely removed after closing the Build-in hullmod menu.
Even though I did nothing in that menu.
Have put a few hours into it. So far, no major issue, it is a solid release. 8)
I've noticed a non-blocking rendering glitch right from the campaign tutorial. The circle displayed around fleets is not properly rendered when antialiasing is ON, by the look of it. I've posted a message about it in the bug section: https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=20015.0
That was a joke lol. Anyways, congrats on the release. I'll make sure to play the hell out of the new content in the upcoming week.
Although I have found a counter example to one of your update notes: Randomly generated planets in the core (including Duzahk and Penelope's Star) should no longer be habitable
For example, seed: MN-6515539495321392923 placed a 125% hazard habitable Jungle world in orbit of a new random Gas Giant in the Duzahk system. I'm wondering if somehow the recursive generation of planets around new gas giants may provide a path to still provide habitable worlds there. Or is this intended but just rare?
There is plenty of great things in this update.
But...
I really dislike the new skill system. Its feel extremely limiting and artificial. I feel like there is practically no satisfying choice, not for min/maxing but for RP.
Its simply not fun.
The old system have its problems(mostly the empty usage of skill points to unlock skill tiers) but the new one feel worse in this category forcing me to take skills I don't want to be able pick skills I want.
No fun. Simply not fun.
The other(minor but annoying) issue is that unshielded ships still getting close to exploding enemy ships to get blasted. Its much lesser issue than in 0.9.1 but its still problem especially with bigger enemy ships. Although I am not sure how much it affect that my ships run with SO(so they have rather short range). Still they keep some distance and don't hug enemy ships more. When they face enemy frigates and destroyers its moslty fine - problem arise when they face enemy cruisers and up - the enemy explosion radius still can catch them in.
Another potential bug.I have a Log mentioning a Heavily Shielded Cargo crate which is out in Hyperspace.The Log writes normally until "..a shielded cache is located in the Unkown Location",which directs me to a place in Hyperspace that has nothing.No interactable Cache,nothing.Is it intended to spawn caches outside of systems??Am I missing some equipment/new mechanic??
Otherwise,amazing release.
General feedback on new release:
omg omg omg!!!
That is all.
The first link in the updated blogpost links to the 0.9.1a changelog, not the 0.95 one.
Is it possible, Alex to ask for Mission Listeners and Bar Event Listener to see if they've been started/accepted and then completed/failed?
I would like to do a mod that records the events of the player's actions, but I'm having a hard time looking for any sort of these listeners.
The skill revamp is quite good, so far. Truly meaningful choices though the Elite Skills aren't quite as punchy as I originally thought. The one at the end of combat (which improves ship systems) has "+30 seconds deployment time." Great for a Frigate, I suppose but I'm already piloting a Fury and I'm still in the early game. I just don't think that "Elite" skill is all that Elite. Also, going back through the whole Combat Tree and grabbing Fighter bonuses (when I will likely never pilot a carrier) feels a little hard to swallow. I'm not sure if should be possible to "skip" skills in a tree using Story Points but I think I'd prefer that over getting skills I know I'll never see much benefit from. I think I understand the rationale but like "empty" Aptitude points in the last patch, it kind of feels empty (even though it isn't).
Btw, the Fury is a nice starter ship. I purchased one from the black market probably 40 minutes into the run and it's been fun. However, I'm discovering its limitations in raw damage output. I have a Ion Pulser and Phase Lance along with a Reaper in the missile and 2 IR Pulse. Maybe if I could find some Heavy Blasters it would open up for me but the damage is very anemic against Ventures and Enforcers. (Enforcers are true bricks now and I love it). I say this because I think the Fury would be a really good "high-tech Fast Start" kind of option with an introductory malus (kind of like when the Scarab was an option and you were hostile with Tri-Tach to start). An undergunned Fury (maybe 1 D-mod), a TT Brawler, a TT Buffalo and a Dram.
Oh, and the Gates tab...oh my. :)
Nice work, congrats!
Can't wait to get stuck into this one!
Cosmetic issue:
Orbital stations are only displaying thier base on the campaign layer. Modules aren't showing at all.
You can still see the modules on the tooltip though.
Doesn't affect gameplay at all, but it looks odd seeing bare stations.
1) Weren't we supposed to get a slightly more extensive "Settings" menu, with some toggable graphics settings to tweak in there, or am I mixing this up with some other game? Because I still can only adjust volume levels and about five toggles.
2) Pressing ALT and hovering over items does not sell/buy them any more. Losing this is a shame. :( (And if that was a mod, just ignore this whining!)
Congrats on the release ;D
One minor discrepency I noticed on the new launcher, is that the antialiasing warning message that pops up states at the end
"Otherwise, use 12 samples or higher".
I believe this should read 2, as I can only see antialiasing options going up to x8.
I like the release a lot. Very nice skill system with meaningful choices. Contracts also very fun with a lot of stealth and raiding.
- The bounty contracts: I have taken 3 bounty contracts until now to kill a patrol in a star system. I have been hanging around the star system and all meaningful points (the base planet/station, jump points, nav/comm relay/etc...) for ~100 days but could not find the patrols for all 3 contracts. Am I just unlucky or anyone else experiencing this problem?
- The bounty contracts: I have taken 3 bounty contracts until now to kill a patrol in a star system. I have been hanging around the star system and all meaningful points (the base planet/station, jump points, nav/comm relay/etc...) for ~100 days but could not find the patrols for all 3 contracts. Am I just unlucky or anyone else experiencing this problem?
Hmm. I'll keep an eye on this; would also like to know if anyone else had this experience or has managed to find the patrols ok.
Also, is there an expected number of contracts before you get a real contact as opposed to just bar missions? Curious when I might find my first contact - admittedly my intel explore missions to bar mission ratio is probably something like 5:1 though.
Black markets no longer sell combat capital ships (can still be acquired from arms dealer contact)It appears that combat capital ships still spawn on the non-military open markets (albeit rarely), which works as intended, but it seems a bit odd? That it's impossible to find one on any black market, but a public open market might have one? Incidentally, the XIV Onslaught I just found on Chico's open market was listed as Onslaught XIV (D) (BB) for some unknown reason. I don't know what the (BB) stands for. I also noticed that the TPC's Primary Role is apparently "No description... yet". Very tactical ;).
Ah, it's indeed 12. x8 is not really enough for it to look reasonable, imo; if it's only going up to 8 then that's all your card/driver supports, unfortunately.
I don't know what the (BB) stands for. I also noticed that the TPC's Primary Role is apparently "No description... yet". Very tactical ;).
Something that hopefully isn't another problem with my poorly aging graphics card, is that some of the dialogs are misgendering people - I had a dialog recognise someone (who was ostensibly by appearance and name, a male) as a she in one sentence, for the next sentence to properly identify them as a male again.
Along with a grammatical error when developing contacts, wherein it only states "Develop a relationship this contact", and is missing the 'with'.
Another issue is that some of the bar missions have a price tag associated with them - for example, blueprint locations. However, even if you have less money than that requested price, it still lets you accept the offer, and the transaction proceeds as usual. Doing this I was able to do a $62,000 credit monitor blueprint location, for only $200 credits.
Dude, you're a machine!
Time to speed up my bugtests then and try and break even more! /sDude, you're a machine!
:D
(A very tired machine that's totally taking the rest of thedaynight off, but: thank you!)
Time to speed up my bugtests then and try and break even more! /s
Edit: Is the Abandoned Terraforming Platform in Corvus not supposed to have the "dockyard" flag that allows the install of "Dock" mods?
What would it take to allow the ATP to install Dock mods?Time to speed up my bugtests then and try and break even more! /s
Oh noEdit: Is the Abandoned Terraforming Platform in Corvus not supposed to have the "dockyard" flag that allows the install of "Dock" mods?
This is one of those "how it works is probably how it's supposed to be", I don't have a strong opinion here.
Aaaaahhhh officers your get through special events can be level 6!!!!Officers you get through special events can be level seven. (I found one on the floating hulk of a derelict Atlas, just drifting along somewhere in hyperspace.)
Sorry, just freaked out about that a bit! :D
Thank you!
They do scale based on OP cost, actually - it's 1 story point regardless, but you get less bonus XP for more expensive mods. I feel like that matters more than it probably feels like it matters right now.
(And, the top end challenges are pretty tough, so I suspect you'll need that power...)
Maybe it is too "universal" for such a 25DP ship, it has no significant drawback and just stand there beating almost everything out.This sounds promising. At least we have a decent ship that can lob Hammer Barrage and is not limited like Legion14 last release.
But... the combat soon turned out to be boring, since nothing can stop 2 Champion's co-work assaultOh, I can think of one thing...
Maybe it is too "universal" for such a 25DP ship, it has no significant drawback and just stand there beating almost everything out.
Randomly generated planets in the core (including Duzahk and Penelope's Star) should no longer be habitable
Black markets no longer sell combat capital ships (can still be acquired from arms dealer contact)I just found a Conquest on Sindria's black market, so this change doesn't seem to fully work.
Field Repairs has been quietly increasing my recovery costs.
And since combat seems significantly more difficult now for reasons I can't adequately pin down, I've been needing to regularly deploy my entire fleet to even have a chance of winning.
Faster repair does not increase total amount of supplies to finish repairs/CR restoration, it only affects rate at which repairs happen. If anything, since you get some free repairs after combat, overall supply consumption should be lowered.I thought he was referring to bimonthly d-mod removal chance.
Faster repair does not increase total amount of supplies to finish repairs/CR restoration, it only affects rate at which repairs happen. If anything, since you get some free repairs after combat, overall supply consumption should be lowered.D-mods are being removed, and with them the recovery cost reduction.
EDIT: One annoying mechanic is that Militarized Subsystems ships all count as combat ships, even when they're absolutely not intended for any sort of combat. I'm losing +1% max combat readiness on all ships because I've got two Salvaging Rigs with MS, pushing me four points over the 180 limit. What are salvaging rigs supposed to do in a fight, swipe space cranes at pirates?
What would it take to allow the ATP to install Dock mods?
Having gotten to this point...wow, you weren't kidding ;D
Maybe issue: shield shunt doesn't have a unique icon and uses heavy armor's icon.
I'm very happy to see the new heavy cruiser "Champion-Class" at first, it can provides extreme firepower(using heavy needle, tac lance and locust missile), protects itself with efficient shield, and engages in high speed. It can perform well in almost all fleet roles, defend/suppport/assault, seems nothings can't be held?
But... the combat soon turned out to be boring, since nothing can stop 2 Champion's co-work assault: fighters got scattered by anti-CV missiles, frigate can seldom escape after entering lance's range, destroyers just appeared and then disappeard, even battleship like Onslaught-Class can not endure their supportive firepower.
And, what's more:I can deploy more Champion-Class there.
Maybe it is too "universal" for such a 25DP ship, it has no significant drawback and just stand there beating almost everything out.
Alex are you sure you fixed capital spam? Every top end bounty has 7 capitals and like 10 cruisers in it
SpoilerWell, two to be precise...[close]
how to apply damagedealtlistener if not use afterShipCreation?
I mean, while I was developping UNGP, I use BuffManager, and member.getStats().addListener(), but it seems that it doesn't know apply it correctly
I can't believe how excited i am for an update to a game i bought in January 2013.
It's not like i play Bioshock Infinite or GTA V any more.
Keep up the good work sir.
Find a bug.
When a ship's d-mod is repaired automatically, the ship's class keeps unchanged (like Enforcer(d)) though there is not any d-mod.
The new raiding mechanic has a weird interaction where, after assigning 3/6 marines to a medium danger objective, assigning the remaining 3 marines to a minimal danger objective actually does more to reduce expected casualties than holding them back. The issue(?) is that assigning the remaining three to the minimal danger objective reduces the danger level of objectives from ×0.1 to ×0.06, whereas holding them back only adds another ×0.85 multiplier.
I'm not entirely sure if this is unintended behaviour, I could totally see this working as intended in a "send guys to cause a distraction elsewhere, then hit the priority target" kinda way, but if so the game should probably mention this interaction in the same place where it says holding marines back will reduce expected casualties.
Can you capture every single unmanned ship? for example can i capture the one defending the cryosleepers? or there's a limit on what i can capture?
portrait_mercenary08
is not used anywhere
which is shame because its pretty cool
QuoteBlack markets no longer sell combat capital ships (can still be acquired from arms dealer contact)I just found a Conquest on Sindria's black market, so this change doesn't seem to fully work.
OMG, it's finally there! i'm so happy! Thank you Alex! I hope mods will update soon. But i'm so excited that will play unmodded version anyway.
Just wanted to say I'm really loving the update. Most skill choices are now giving me choice anxiety so a good sign that it's definitely an interesting decision to make now!
And story points are quite plentiful which is very nice, but stuff like eliting a skill feel like a no brainer every time. Very excited for what direction this is gonna go in.
Time to go back to working on my mod update...
It would be fantastic to have access to the intel tab (or any map) during conversations. Case in point, I just printed the sector map (on actual paper, made from real wood!) so I have at least an idea if a job offer lays on my current route or in the opposite direction.
By the way, has anyone else trouble with the shift key in menus? It doesn't work for me all the time, not sure if it's my keyboard or if something in the game changed.
Contact reputation decay is too fast
What's the intended form of the new 0-Flux speed boost? Should it be active when flux is decreasing or only when a ship is completely disengaged? E.g., do I need to toggle off my PD whenever I see pilums? Should shields be inoperable while in use?
One thing that's kinda disappointing is that only combat related skills can be made elite
Unrelated Addendum - Just encountered a bug with Disruption missions.
"The Task is done to $dsp_personName's specifications".
This happened when disrupting Thulian Raider Bases Spaceport, on behalf of another pirates wishes (This seemed odd to start with). I believe I recieved the mission from Derinkuyu Mining Station.
can officers you find have more than one elited skill as well? If so this would make officer management a clearly superior choice to officer training.
On ships like a Kite, Gemini or Venture, sure, but I'm getting docked max CR because I've got (completely unarmed) Atlas, Prometheus and - one especially egregious example - salvaging rig ships with MS. What am I supposed to do in a fight with a 16 OP ship with zero weapon mounts, zero build-in fighter slots, no shield and Frigate-tier defensive stats? Confuse my enemies to death?
EDIT: One annoying mechanic is that Militarized Subsystems ships all count as combat ships, even when they're absolutely not intended for any sort of combat. I'm losing +1% max combat readiness on all ships because I've got two Salvaging Rigs with MS, pushing me four points over the 180 limit. What are salvaging rigs supposed to do in a fight, swipe space cranes at pirates?
I believe thats intended behavior - it is called Militarized Subsystems afterall, transforming it into a ship designed for battle. Combined with Auxiliary Support, its designed to let ordinally civilian ships be combat worthy.
It makes sense that is has this downside as well - 1 burnspeed, and doubled sensor output, and halved sensor profile is an absolute steal for the OP cost.
To put it in prospective, on a destroyer, you'd be getting half of Augmented Engines, which is worth 8 OP, and then insulated engines, worth 6 OP, and almost half of High Resolution Sensors, which I'll round down to being worth 4 OP. Thats effectively 18 OP worth of upside, for only 10 OP, with the negligable downside of doubled crew requirements, and if you're building it in, taking only one build in slot instead of 3.
On ships like a Kite, Gemini or Venture, sure, but I'm getting docked max CR because I've got (completely unarmed) Atlas, Prometheus and - one especially egregious example - salvaging rig ships with MS. What am I supposed to do in a fight with a 16 OP ship with zero weapon mounts, zero build-in fighter slots, no shield and Frigate-tier defensive stats? Confuse my enemies to death?
Atlas and Prometheus are basically in the same boat, really. I'd never use an Atlas as a makeshift carrier when a Condor is a superior carrier in every possible way, and it doesn't have the slots to be a PD platform (not to mention Atlases are so rare I'm literally turning to piracy for the civilian freighter ships, the loot therein is just bonus). Prometheus I could almost see being used as a makeshift PD platform, but that thing would be ungodly ungainly compared to, what, two Omens?
Put simply: Something has gone wrong when a Militarized Subsystems Salvaging Rig counts as a combat ship, but a civilian grade Venture does not.
The first image is of an armada with 27 combat ships and they all have Officers. The second image is a fleet with 21 Officers. Isn't that unbalanced when the player can't even come close to half of that?Alex are you sure you fixed capital spam? Every top end bounty has 7 capitals and like 10 cruisers in itFairly:
https://imgur.com/a/nR3Kun7
Ah - for Combat, that's the story point sink. For other kinds of skills, that aptitude generally unlocks more story point uses. E.G. more elite skills on officers, more s-mods to build in, etc. Also: the point of elite perks in personal combat skills is to make them feel better to take, like you're getting something that you wouldn't get just from sticking an officer into the ship. Given that rationale, there's really no *point* to having elite levels to other types of skills - it's just more story points to spend there.Point taken on the story point stink. Still would like logistics officers, though, since I still don't see much point in speccing into combat when I've got 8 officers to do combat and zero anyone to cover all the other skills my fleet wants/needs.
Is it intended for you to have to pay a story point (With 0% XP bonus to boot), every time you want to rescue a prisoner for a mission?Raiding a planet allows you to "achieve other objectives", including breaking out prisoners, assuming you've got enough forces to commit to the objective. I think the quest tells you roughly how many marines you'll need?
It seems odd, as the dialog indicates that you just have to pay their monetary offer to complete it, but the story point option is the only option available that actually progesses it, and using the story point also ends with you paying the full fee anyway.
Unless I'm missing something, this seems like a rather steep price to completing a mission, that as far I can tell doesn't have any special payout.
Is it intended for you to have to pay a story point (With 0% XP bonus to boot), every time you want to rescue a prisoner for a mission?Raiding a planet allows you to "achieve other objectives", including breaking out prisoners, assuming you've got enough forces to commit to the objective. I think the quest tells you roughly how many marines you'll need?
It seems odd, as the dialog indicates that you just have to pay their monetary offer to complete it, but the story point option is the only option available that actually progesses it, and using the story point also ends with you paying the full fee anyway.
Unless I'm missing something, this seems like a rather steep price to completing a mission, that as far I can tell doesn't have any special payout.
Is it intended for you to have to pay a story point (With 0% XP bonus to boot), every time you want to rescue a prisoner for a mission?
It seems odd, as the dialog indicates that you just have to pay their monetary offer to complete it, but the story point option is the only option available that actually progesses it, and using the story point also ends with you paying the full fee anyway.
[Looks at images Alex posted of enemy fleets]
Waaaait a minute, those enemy fleets have like 30 officers. Doesn't that really wreck the ECM and NAV skills? I haven't reached that stage yet, but won't the player always be at -20% range?
The first image is of an armada with 27 combat ships and they all have Officers. The second image is a fleet with 21 Officers. Isn't that unbalanced when the player can't even come close to half of that?
Oh oops, my bad.What would it take to allow the ATP to install Dock mods?Hmm - it wouldn't be that complicated, probably. Just... not something I want to touch for a hotfix. And since Asharu is *right there*, it doesn't seem like a very pressing issue.
Alex are you sure you fixed capital spam? Every top end bounty has 7 capitals and like 10 cruisers in it
Fairly:
https://imgur.com/a/nR3Kun7
and lone Drams shouldn't be willing to initiate combat just because they've got a station behind them (something that has happened to me)Mine didn't even have a station to hide behind. Just one Dram, one mission, and one extremely impossible dream vaporized by a single Tacyon Lance. Don't know who piloted it, but whoever did is the bravest person the Sector has ever seen.
Thanks so much for the update! I noticed something with the tutorial that may be a bug, figured I'd mention it just in case. After you recover the derelicts from Tetra and return to the Ancyra station, there's a blurb about some weapons and supplies being moved into storage for you to use to refit the ships, but I'm not seeing them.
Aaaaahhhh officers your get through special events can be level 6!!!!I just got my first level 7 officer :D
Sorry, just freaked out about that a bit! :D
If you don't have the elite helmsmanship perk, it should be the same as before. If you do, then the boost is also active as long as nothing (such as, say, raised shields) is adding flux to the ship.Since the behavior of flux at high values is to float in the 1-9 range even when your dissipation is greater than your generation*, the 0 bonus doesn't kick in under those circumstances now (a PD weapon firing, shields toggled up but undamaged). This means a pretty substantial mechanical change for larger ships from 0.91. It's not necessarily a bad thing, capitals feel properly slow, but it's incongruous because 1, having to toggle off PD is tedious and 2, because the capital I pilot goes twice as fast as any other in the battle. It'd be nice to have the <0.25% margin from before. That seemed pretty successful at tagging ships in combat from those just traveling.
I will say that as I get farther into the game and up against more powerful enemies: its starting to bug me a little bit how "invisible" the strengths of enemy ships isI bumped into this a lot earlier than you it seems.
I will say that as I get farther into the game and up against more powerful enemies: its starting to bug me a little bit how "invisible" the strengths of enemy ships isI bumped into this a lot earlier than you it seems.
I'm still stuck trying to do mid-tier bounties and constantly bouncing off them because I just can't seem to get enough damage onto a target before it just nopes off into the distance to reset its flux, even despite deploying my entire fleet. Which is absolutely killing my supplies.
(Caveat: I'm not great at combat, and I am fully aware of this.)
Doesn't help I've been apparently quite unlucky by only finding a single officer so far.
Honestly, it really doesn't feel good that officers have been changed from "nice to have" to "you will fail if you don't have". Especially at such an early stage of the game.
This (imo) feels like it would be a far better fit for late game stuff rather than a global mechanic.
I've also noticed that the bounties that are being posted seem to have vastly outpaced my fleet's capabilities fairly quickly.
I'm seeing bounties with multiple capitals regularly despite still being effectively in the "can barely manage cruisers" stage, because of all these invisible boosts.
The skills that boost ships with specific foo with a limitation on the amount of foo are interesting, but the limits seem quite restrictive. If you're building a fleet that's going heavily foo, a lot of the time it seems like you'd be better off taking the general skill instead....These skills seem undertuned in general.
Yeah, top end bounty fleets haven't gotten that much smaller (for example: 12 Conquests instead of 20 + assorted smaller ships), but now they have 15+ top tier officers to boot (instead of being constrained to same max as player as in 0.91).
Hmmm, so if I want to add damagedealtmodifier, I have to add it to the ShipAPI?how to apply damagedealtlistener if not use afterShipCreation?
I mean, while I was developping UNGP, I use BuffManager, and member.getStats().addListener(), but it seems that it doesn't know apply it correctly
Ah - I'm pretty sure that the listeners in ship stats are only for OP cost modifiers.
To be fair, 8 capital ships less is not a small thing. It actually be interesting to find out if the enemy "leader" can also have leadership skills and bonuses across the whole fleet like the player. If so it might give those fleet limits a lot more sense(at least in terms of sheer number counting, not the 'max fighter bay' limits since AI dont really take advantage of that). Can we get any confirmation if the AI use those skills at all? Or is that a player only thing. It doesn't change my statement but...still.
Re: invisible boostsFor example:
Some of the early game fleets I fought were insanely durable. Combined with the cowardly AI, fights are slow, and PPT is a real problem.
Unrelated to the above, I changed my monitor since I last played and the flashing effects entering and exiting menus or using a jump point are surprisingly strong, to the point where I've started turning away from my screen regularly. I'm not sure the best method, but it'd be really appreciated if there was a way to tone those down. Still worth it, though. ^^Now that you mention this... yeah, those are surprisingly painful.
Unrelated to the above, I changed my monitor since I last played and the flashing effects entering and exiting menus or using a jump point are surprisingly strong, to the point where I've started turning away from my screen regularly. I'm not sure the best method, but it'd be really appreciated if there was a way to tone those down. Still worth it, though. ^^Now that you mention this... yeah, those are surprisingly painful.
High Resolution Sensors has had an overhaul - its not broken,
Does the Tachyon Lance sound not work for anyone else with this new patch?
I'm having a blast discovering all the new things in the update! One thing I'm noticing so far as I advance into the midgame: enemy officer count and level is becoming a greater and greater problem.
My own main combat ships can keep up because of the 2 free hullmods. Thats enough to close the gap between their level 6/7 officers and my level 5's, but it costs me 2 story points per ship and makes losing those ships suddenly really bad. I've always liked to keep frigates around as distraction/support/torpedo boats even in larger fleets, but now they are up against enemy frigates with officer and they just cannot engage on equal terms. Against enemy admirals with the proper skills, even 2v1 my frigates are losing against what should be inferior enemies, as those enemies also have a 20% speed bonus that I've lost and a 20% range penalty in their favor.
Still early days in terms of playing, so this is very off the top of the head impressions!
[Edit] Oh snap hotfix!
small Typo in the Title (should be RC11) :D
And thank you, it fixed my save-game bug. Keep up the good work!
Does the Tachyon Lance sound not work for anyone else with this new patch?
I'm having a blast discovering all the new things in the update! One thing I'm noticing so far as I advance into the midgame: enemy officer count and level is becoming a greater and greater problem.
My own main combat ships can keep up because of the 2 free hullmods. Thats enough to close the gap between their level 6/7 officers and my level 5's, but it costs me 2 story points per ship and makes losing those ships suddenly really bad. I've always liked to keep frigates around as distraction/support/torpedo boats even in larger fleets, but now they are up against enemy frigates with officer and they just cannot engage on equal terms. Against enemy admirals with the proper skills, even 2v1 my frigates are losing against what should be inferior enemies, as those enemies also have a 20% speed bonus that I've lost and a 20% range penalty in their favor.
Still early days in terms of playing, so this is very off the top of the head impressions!
I just want to say that I'm once again having a grand time with this game. I don't have that many opportunities to play atm, and when I find one I play pretty slowly and inefficiently. But between the intriguing story pieces, exciting exploration and rejuvenated combat, I'm really losing myself in the game when I play. That's rare nowadays. I know this is not my usual differentiated feedback, which might come later, I just wanted to say: Thank you, Alex.
Little bug: The colony supply quest (every month produce at least x resource)
Every month i get the notification that i successfully completed the assignment and that my relations increased by 5.
Problem is that it's been a few months and while i get this message, the relations with that person are still at 5/100. Not sure about the money, I'm swimming in cash so I didn't check
Little bug: The colony supply quest (every month produce at least x resource)
Every month i get the notification that i successfully completed the assignment and that my relations increased by 5.
Problem is that it's been a few months and while i get this message, the relations with that person are still at 5/100. Not sure about the money, I'm swimming in cash so I didn't check
I got a completion notification for this at one point, but now I can't seem to track down whether I'm actually getting paid. Should it show up in budget? The quest said something like 'Congratulations! You've completed it! You will get paid for 0 remaining months' but I had just freshly completed it... very confused what happened.
A reliable crash snuck through the hotfixes. Clicking on "Sinking the Bismar" will crash the game and throw a fatal error when it tries to load the Hyperion.
Hi Alex, I have a question regarding how deployment points are distributed at the beginning of a battle. It seems that I am always "greatly outnumbered" with 160/400 deployment points even with a max-size fleet with 2 capitals, 5 cruisers, 6 destroyers and 6 frigates, plus eight officers. This occurs against fleets of the same size or even slightly smaller.
...Hi Alex, I have a question regarding how deployment points are distributed at the beginning of a battle. It seems that I am always "greatly outnumbered" with 160/400 deployment points even with a max-size fleet with 2 capitals, 5 cruisers, 6 destroyers and 6 frigates, plus eight officers. This occurs against fleets of the same size or even slightly smaller.
The tootlip over the deployment points bar describes how it works in detail. Briefly, it's mostly based on officers and officer quality; ships factor in only a little bit. But capturing objectives will let you make up the difference.
Haven't had a chance to test this in RC11 yet, but I noticed that the story-offered Hegemony contact on Caotl(?) does seem to have an issue where his relationship decays for unknown reasons. I've done at least one bounty mission and bought a surplus Hammerhead from him, but his relationship is currently at 0.Contact reputation decay is too fast
Huh? AFAIK there's no rep decay.
"You have 30 days to develop the contact" or something like that, I thought I had a month to do some quests for them, but they always had nothing to say...I realized i just had to press "develop" in the intel tab when I already lost all the story contacts. It's a bit unforgiving, is there really no way to have those contacts back?
Changes as of Hotfix #3 (-RC11), March 28, 2021, 6:00pm EST
- ...
- Potential contact intel no longer expires and is flagged as important
- ...
I can confirm that you get no monthly money or rep for completing colony supply quests.Little bug: The colony supply quest (every month produce at least x resource)
Every month i get the notification that i successfully completed the assignment and that my relations increased by 5.
Problem is that it's been a few months and while i get this message, the relations with that person are still at 5/100. Not sure about the money, I'm swimming in cash so I didn't check
I got a completion notification for this at one point, but now I can't seem to track down whether I'm actually getting paid. Should it show up in budget? The quest said something like 'Congratulations! You've completed it! You will get paid for 0 remaining months' but I had just freshly completed it... very confused what happened.
Thanks for the report(s)! Made a note to check this all out.
E-BurnSpoilerEmergency Burn losing it's 'ignore terrain effects' feature has made it significantly less useful.
Storm surfing now always results in supply loss. Annoying but not the end of things, they can be avoided (somewhat).
Getting neutron beamed upon entering a system and instantly losing 100+ supplies is now an instant re-load event.
Eating the fuel cost plus whatever supply damage was done before activating E-Burn was an acceptable loss. Having a non-trivial player activity severely curtailed or even aborted because of rng is not good design.
As it stands, E-Burn is only really useful for avoiding enemies now, so it doesn't see regular use.
Which in turn makes the Containment Procedures skill much less valuable.[close]
You can change:
"enableUIStaticNoise":true,
to false in data/config/settings.json
Got strange event in a bar. Was told about possible Perdition blueprint location for 10K. After paying it I got rep boost. However when I traveled to the system there were no blueprints or quest marking of any kind (checked with the unlimited scan range). I'm OK with being lied by the AI but the problem is that quest will stuck in the Accepted unless I abandon it. No negative effects whatsoever but I really don't like that kind of litter in the logs.Blueprints can also be in ruins of a planet. Did you survey everything and explore the potential ruins?
1. Is it just a bugged quest or genuine con-action?
2. In any case, is it possible to auto-remove it from the list just as all other completed quests without manual abandon option?
Reducing built in hullmods to base 1 to lower player power to compensate also makes ships less 'story point' valuable, so losing them wouldn't be as bad as it currently feels.With the loss of Loadout Design 3, I want those built-in mods. Without built-in mods, ships feel OP starved. I had to give up Reinforced Bulkheads and/or campaign mods to have ships fight well enough. I really miss the extra OP from Loadout Design 3. Sure, perma-mods will mean more OP than before, but it also means the ship cannot be replaced just by building a new one without spending more story points.
Got strange event in a bar. Was told about possible Perdition blueprint location for 10K. After paying it I got rep boost. However when I traveled to the system there were no blueprints or quest marking of any kind (checked with the unlimited scan range). I'm OK with being lied by the AI but the problem is that quest will stuck in the Accepted unless I abandon it. No negative effects whatsoever but I really don't like that kind of litter in the logs.Blueprints can also be in ruins of a planet. Did you survey everything and explore the potential ruins?
1. Is it just a bugged quest or genuine con-action?
2. In any case, is it possible to auto-remove it from the list just as all other completed quests without manual abandon option?
Maybe its mercenaries? I've seen fleets with 25+ officers, most level 6+ (no idea on how many elite skills they have, if any).
It's mercenaries, yes. Though they're currently apparently bugged for the player in that you can't go over the limit with them; about to go fix that one now.
Also, having played this version more - is Officer Management even a good skill, long-term (given it's permanent)? The only drawbacks mercs seem to have is doubled salary (and difficulty of finding ones with good personality + skills). So, Officer Management just reduces my upkeep by 5k, compared to having 2 extra mercs instead of normal officers.
Maybe its mercenaries? I've seen fleets with 25+ officers, most level 6+ (no idea on how many elite skills they have, if any).
Hmmm, what if we just removed the player limit on officers entirely if thats what the AI is doing? Things like deployment, nav bonuses, ecm bonuses, and skills like coordinated maneuvers/wolf pack, and using a fleet with more than 10 ships start working mid/late game that way. Officers are also a pretty large money sink at ~2.5k/month each: late game balance expecting 50k+ in officer maintenance per month would help offset colony income.
Reducing built in hullmods to base 1 to lower player power to compensate also makes ships less 'story point' valuable, so losing them wouldn't be as bad as it currently feels.
Got strange event in a bar. Was told about possible Perdition blueprint location for 10K. After paying it I got rep boost. However when I traveled to the system there were no blueprints or quest marking of any kind (checked with the unlimited scan range). I'm OK with being lied by the AI but the problem is that quest will stuck in the Accepted unless I abandon it. No negative effects whatsoever but I really don't like that kind of litter in the logs.
1. Is it just a bugged quest or genuine con-action?
2. In any case, is it possible to auto-remove it from the list just as all other completed quests without manual abandon option?
Blueprints can also be in ruins of a planet. Did you survey everything and explore the potential ruins?
Would it be somehow possible for the intel map to pop up during the mission dialogue, so that you could see exactly where you're going and where your other mission targets are and if it makes sense?As a note, this is much more of an issue for regular contacts than it is for, say, the Galatea Academy missions - and the key difference there is that the GA missions generally don't have timeouts, so if something comes up that's the wrong way you just... don't do it right then, and can go back later.
It would be especially nice when you want to clump missions together. Right now that can be a big pain.
Would it be somehow possible for the intel map to pop up during the mission dialogue, so that you could see exactly where you're going and where your other mission targets are and if it makes sense?
It would be especially nice when you want to clump missions together. Right now that can be a big pain.
Fighters: I've only seen this once, but I've had fighters (3 bomber wings from the same carrier) inexplictly stop functioning properly, and instead all tighly circling the exact same spot on the battlefield, right in the midst of enemy ships. Sadly I can't tell you much more than this.
Medusa Destroyer: Consistently refuses to aim, and thus fire its 2 frontal hardpoints, which really hampers its combat potential (Example image in spoiler). My best guess is that it is caused by prioritising getting 3 of the small energies on target, over the frontal hardpoints.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/HqRetAU.png)[close]
Edit: The new XP threshold changes caused me to jump from level 12 to 15. However, despite gaining 2 skillpoints from this, I only gained 1 story point.
Hmm - can't reproduce this at all over here, with a loadout that looks the same. Maybe the weapon groups you have on it are borked?
The weapon groups are visible in the bottom of that screenshot - fairly normal.
I forgot to mention, it was also piloted by an aggressive officer, maybe thats why?
What I usually do is decline the quest, go to the intel screen go to the second tab "planets", and filter to only stars and sort by name. It should be relatively easy to find the location mentioned in the quest, decide if it is worth taking, and if it is then go back to the bar or wherever you go the quest and accept it.
Though I do agree showing this information while getting the mission would be much more useful.
Would it be somehow possible for the intel map to pop up during the mission dialogue, so that you could see exactly where you're going and where your other mission targets are and if it makes sense?
It would be especially nice when you want to clump missions together. Right now that can be a big pain.
I'm really on the fence about the fleet numbers in leadership and I think I just need more playtime to wrap my head around the skills. I keep waffling between extreme opinions (so both are probably wrong).
A few numbers for the carrier replacement time skill: carriers last version had very high replacement rates because of the fleetwide skill and expanded deck crew. To get the same bonus as the skill from last version, the player can still have 20 decks, or 10 drovers. So that fleet limited skill is more like... if you have just a few carriers they get a massive boost, if you have a full large carrier wing its the same as last version (well the skill is: other changes have tweaked things I'm sure).
Oh, I don't think I've mentioned this yet: The new escort order is fantastic! I feel like my escorts are almost always doing the exact right thing. They don't get in my way, they cover my flanks, and they wrap around to attack targets in my frontal/side region.
"Field Repairs" seem to have a relatively low limit of 60 deployment recovery points. For example with the exploration start, you are sitting at about 38 deployment points, so it is fairly easy to hit the cap. Any chance of bringing that up to somewhere around "Crew Training" and "Makeshift Equipment" levels (eg ~180 to 200 deployment supplies)?
Microsoft seems to not like the RC12 installer for some reason. Think I saw the same thing with RC9 for 0.95 as it flagged both as suspect when trying to start them.
Bit curious about the need for heavy armaments for defensive works, yet they don't seem to give any benefits to the attacker in turn which does not seem to really go with the revamped raiding. Really loving it thus far though!
Carriers with Pilums seem to want to stay at pilum range instead of getting into fighter range even when manually clicking on them then right clicking on an enemy ship in the command view.
Having this issue with condor class carriers.
This seems like wrong behavior. They don't have an officer on them.
So far level cap feels a *little* stingy at 15; next game I'll try with some awkward middle number (17, 18 or 19); I do understand a reluctance to let the player pick up a lot of the level 5 skills, but at the same time, a little more ability to branch out juuuust a little more might feel better (even if that could make players want more and more and more and I guess this is fairly easily tweaked by individual players regardless).
Hello!
I'm having problems loading my saves after updating from RC10 to RC12. Could anyone please share with me the RC11 installer for troubleshooting?
Regards
I'm really on the fence about the fleet numbers in leadership and I think I just need more playtime to wrap my head around the skills. I keep waffling between extreme opinions (so both are probably wrong).
A few numbers for the carrier replacement time skill: carriers last version had very high replacement rates because of the fleetwide skill and expanded deck crew. To get the same bonus as the skill from last version, the player can still have 20 decks, or 10 drovers. So that fleet limited skill is more like... if you have just a few carriers they get a massive boost, if you have a full large carrier wing its the same as last version (well the skill is: other changes have tweaked things I'm sure).
Delved a little more into the problem with the Medusa AI, and found a couple of interesting things.
1: This AI problem only occurs with an officer with the Gunnery Implants skill
2: The small weapon slots didn't even matter! Even with just the Heavy Blasters and Light Needlers, it still constantly tilts to the side
3: Officer Aggressiveness wasn't a factor - this behavior occurs on Timid, Reckless, and everything inbetween.
Following these criteria, I am able to consistently replicate this issue.
I can also provide a copy of my save if that would help - I have no mods installed that would be affecting AI (Only Console Commands and Lazy lib - I wanted to refund myself a few story points after I wasted a fair few coming to grips with the new skill and officer system).
Edit: Heres a screenshot of the Ship loadout as well, just in case.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/u46pObC.png?1)[close]
Two things I've noticed about colony-related stuff. First, punitive expeditions seem more common now than they were in 0.9.1. I think I've yet to not have at least one expedition be planning or underway at any point I checked in with my colonies since the first one was launched.
Noticed a potential issue with raids.
Currently with marines gaining XP you are unable to separate them from the green rookies to the hardcore marines that could pinpoint a coin 3 miles way with a sniper rifle during crosswind while half drunk on vodka.
When you try to split the amount of troops the amount left shows the insignia of a higher rank, with the more you split the higher the rank goes, leading me to think that its how the system is supposed to work. Unfortunately even if I merge a stack of veterans and rookies, the split function does not seem to work. Each stack is left with the same bonuses. So can't get a hardcore veteran unit even if I want to.
Hmm - is this vanilla? Looking at the code, this seems very unlikely, so if it's happening it's a bug, but I'm not seeing how it could happen. With vanilla settings (which can be changed with settings.json tweaks) there's a 95% chance after 1 expedition to have a 1-3 cycle timeout on all expeditions. This chance goes to 100% after two expeditions are sent. If you've got a vanilla save where this is happening, I'd love to take a look!Save should be 100% vanilla minus one change in settings.josn ("decivProbPerMonthOverStreak":0, vanilla value is 0.1). As for the numbers, I'm not sure. I'll admit I could have failed to notice time passing while I'm off exploring, but those numbers sound a lot more restrictive than I recall seeing. I know I've seen at least several double expeditions so far, so a 95% chance of them not happening is curious. For the record I've got all my four colonies set to freeport, but none have any AI cores installed...yet ;).
Thank you! If you can send me the save, that would be *great*. I did try it with Gunnery Implants yesterday and it wasn't happening, so the save would be really handy.That'll teach me to respond before reading.
fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com
A little behavior bug, Radiant beta-ai, uses his sabot missiles(all 4 launchers) on every enemy ship especially fighters but at the same time almost don't use it on enemy capitals (mostly fighting redacted fleets now, he almost doesn't use sabots against big ships), similar with his 2xHammer barrage launchers but not in such scale.
CompositionSpoiler(https://i.imgur.com/VkV2g7F.png)[close]
Save should be 100% vanilla minus one change in settings.josn ("decivProbPerMonthOverStreak":0, vanilla value is 0.1). As for the numbers, I'm not sure. I'll admit I could have failed to notice time passing while I'm off exploring, but those numbers sound a lot more restrictive than I recall seeing. I know I've seen at least several double expeditions so far, so a 95% chance of them not happening is curious. For the record I've got all my four colonies set to freeport, but none have any AI cores installed...yet ;).
I've got a save, though it's too large to attach, so where should I send it?
EDIT: Derp.QuoteThank you! If you can send me the save, that would be *great*. I did try it with Gunnery Implants yesterday and it wasn't happening, so the save would be really handy.That'll teach me to respond before reading.
fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com
Does this happen vs a "run simulation" opponent? If so: would you mind emailing me your save? fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot]comSpoilerA little behavior bug, Radiant beta-ai, uses his sabot missiles(all 4 launchers) on every enemy ship especially fighters but at the same time almost don't use it on enemy capitals (mostly fighting redacted fleets now, he almost doesn't use sabots against big ships), similar with his 2xHammer barrage launchers but not in such scale.
CompositionSpoiler(https://i.imgur.com/VkV2g7F.png)[close][close]
Thank you!
Omg. I've not managed to do any of the plot until now, and Sebestyen is such a wonderful puppydog.
He's just so excited about science! And it's possibly one of the most (https://i.imgur.com/vEQpb0n.gif) things I have ever seen in a game.
David doing Ludd's work.
I've noticed this behavior with a gryphon in my fleet - I stopped deploying it outside of piloting it myself for this reason. It almost completely refuses to use sabots against cruisers and capitols, but would dump them on the first fighters to come into range of it. Didn't have enough hangar bays in my fleet to get complete fighter coverage and sweep the skies, so I couldn't even use the linked missiles with pd weapon trick to force it to fire them. It also incidentally almost never fires a hammer barrage I have equipped on it (for personally piloting), only hurricane mirvs are fired about as you'd expect. A legion XIV I have performs quite admirably with locusts/hurricanes, but almost never used hammers. Default fit conquest never once fired the cyclones as far as I could tell, it was always at 20/20 whenever I swapped control to it.
I appreciate the burn AI being changed to be more cautious, but as far as I can tell, my legion doesn't actually use it at all outside of full assault. Not even as mobility to hurry through the battlespace.
Does this happen vs a "run simulation" opponent? If so: would you mind emailing me your save? fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot]comSent my save.
Thank you!
Hmm. So I just fixed an aggression-related issue - even reckless/eliminate-ordered ships were considering optimal rather than minimal weapon range under certain circumstances.
...
Hmm. So I just fixed an aggression-related issue - even reckless/eliminate-ordered ships were considering optimal rather than minimal weapon range under certain circumstances.
But regarding Sabot use, no luck so far. E.G. that Radiant from Anvel's save vs an Atlas and 3x Condor in the simulation, I haven't seen it fire Sabots at the fighters even once. If anything, it looks to be doing a competent job of dispatching everything on the field quickly while largely ignoring the fighters buzzing around it. Wonder what the key is here...
So far every RC build has fixed issues I've had, other than that it's like learning a whole new game in regard to new ships and the skills are really important now. I'm still getting a handle on skills, started a new game so I wasn't sitting on permanent ones that I couldn't see the other side of but I am very happy so far with this patch. The AI seems a little over eager to use ship capablities just to stay in formations, plasma jetting with no visible enemies just to move back into place after burning, but it does seem much smarter now. Perhaps the cautious and aggressive modes need a little more of a line between them, and I'm unsure why my cautious Medusa tactical build is the most insane dude I've ever seen, he charged into a remnant station but then somehow survived it with 150 hp hull left for 7 minutes more.....
Loved the game since I've first fell into it, but this was truly a second life that I can't imagine modders won't be able to do a lot with.
Also the writing is just fantastic, love the Galatia Academy characters and even though it is something you can skip, reading the writing is always entertaining and makes the world feel a little more alive, even in this massive sandbox.
That could be it! I recalled when reading this that Dominators are slower than Brilliants, so they couldn't catch it without burn driving which brings them much closer than optimal. They probably were trying to close in and didn't have any options to get to optimal.
I'm sorry, Astral not Atlas ;D, not much of a carrier user here.
Way to recreate it - start Radiant test, spawn 3 Condors and Astral, manually raise shield and let fighters start to attack you, and then give the ship search and destroy command, at some point fighters will hit his armor/hull or maybe that's emp damage issue, but after his hp gets hit he starts to shoot sabots at them.
Seem like it mostly happens then his flux level is close to max.
Officers don’t respect it anyways so why does player have to?
My AI Greeble so far was a Gryphon loaded entirely with missiles and point defenses that was consistently pushing to the front of the engagement to unleash the power of its Flak Cannon in direct combat. I attempted to discourage the behavior by removing the Flak for more Vulcans, which had the opposite of the desired effect.
From a general game design theory standpoint i think its good to have a skill system where you need to take some skills you might not really want in order to progress down the tree. The reason is this gets around the problem that occurs with min/maxing of removing more specialist or secondary abilities.
people ARE min maxing to take the skill that is the least useless to them, instead of a skill which they would WANT to take
... I do think there are some flaws in the specific tree that could be improved ...
Raiding proc-gen pirate stations for supplies seems really strong, especially with Ground Operations. It's just money, but I haven't paid for supplies in like 10 in-game years.On further consideration, I'm paying 10,000 credits per month for these 500 marines, and my fleet needs about 250 supplies per month. So if I'm not using them for anything but raiding for supplies, and that's how I'm getting all my supplies, I'm only saving 15k credits per month plus however many supplies I use on combat; call that another 15k. That's good, but not overpowered IMO.
My phase frigates with officers that have elite Phase Mastery don't give themselves enough time/space to slow down when coming out of phase and keep ramming stations and exploding themselves.
Any skill system that doesn't give you every single skill will force you to give up certain things for other things, there's no getting around that.
For what it's worth I guess here's mine:... I do think there are some flaws in the specific tree that could be improved ...
(I just want to say, I absolutely agree here, and appreciate all the feedback!)
I feel like the automated ships skill is extremely cool in practice, but has way too little of an impact compared to the alternative. Just 30 points means that with just 3 [REDACTED] version of the kite with 3 gamma cores, i'm already at full capacity... sure i could take a bigger ship with reduced CR, but as much strong a single redacted ship can be, other than the novelty, giving 10 to flux capacitors and vents, and an extra hullmod to every single ship is just too good to pass out. My suggestion would be to raise the maximum points, even doubling it, reducing the points cost of the gamma core while increasing beta and alpha cores cost.Agreed. There should be enough to pilot an alpha Radiant at full CR. Maybe have cores not eat into the pool too.
I think it would be balanced if you could have a single good ship with a good commander and enough leftover points for a couple of smaller ships with trash commanders, or a lot of smaller ships with trash commanders , or some medium sized ship with good commanders etc, opening up to various combinations that are impossible right now
I've just noticed a strange issue where assigning a Gamma Core to either Population and Infrastructure or Light Industry decreases my colony's profits, because it increases the market upkeep multiplier when the demand for Organics goes down by one. For reference I've got another colony exporting more Organics than either needs without the core, so it's all in-faction one way or another.Imagine your colony demands 1 unit of food and 1 unit of organics, that's all. You supply food yourself, so you supply 1/2 of the colony's demand, so you get half the upkeep reduction.
That is...really less than ideal. Especially because you end up with dozens upon dozens of gamma cores after exploring through a few systems which have Domain Era derelicts, and numerous industries which can use gamma cores (or better ones, but those tend to be a lot more rare). Maybe Gamma Cores can be made to reduce the impact of losing a trade fleet, losing only 1 of a supply instead of 2? Not sure if it'd make much (if any) difference, but even "no difference whatsoever" would be better than "actively detrimental".I've just noticed a strange issue where assigning a Gamma Core to either Population and Infrastructure or Light Industry decreases my colony's profits, because it increases the market upkeep multiplier when the demand for Organics goes down by one. For reference I've got another colony exporting more Organics than either needs without the core, so it's all in-faction one way or another.Imagine your colony demands 1 unit of food and 1 unit of organics, that's all. You supply food yourself, so you supply 1/2 of the colony's demand, so you get half the upkeep reduction.
Now, you put a gamma core on the building that demands food. Colony demand is now 0 food and 1 organics. Since food is not demanded anymore, you don't get any upkeep reduction from satisfying that demand. The only remaining demand is 1 organics, and you don't supply it, so since you satisfy 0/1 of the colony's demand yourself, you lose upkeep reduction.
Something similar happened here. If you needed and supplies 5 organics and had 15 units worth of other demands, you would get 5/20 (25%) of the upkeep reduction. If you reduce organic demand, it means you now supply 4/19 (21%) of the colony's demand, so your upkeep reduction gets lower. There isn't much of a point to gamma cores, really. (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=20120.0)
Raiding proc-gen pirate stations for supplies seems really strong, especially with Ground Operations. It's just money, but I haven't paid for supplies in like 10 in-game years.On further consideration, I'm paying 10,000 credits per month for these 500 marines, and my fleet needs about 250 supplies per month. So if I'm not using them for anything but raiding for supplies, and that's how I'm getting all my supplies, I'm only saving 15k credits per month plus however many supplies I use on combat; call that another 15k. That's good, but not overpowered IMO.
My phase frigates with officers that have elite Phase Mastery don't give themselves enough time/space to slow down when coming out of phase and keep ramming stations and exploding themselves.
About the skills system, the best solution would be separating each skill tree exp gain from one another, let combat give exp to personal skills, colony building and management give exp to industrial, etc. And skill three is a good idea, to get to better, top skills you have to learn something simpler.
maybe issue, crashed when finishing a CustomProductionContract, infering that the person is not in the market from the trace stack
(https://ftp.bmp.ovh/imgs/2021/04/9db8706223de8669.png)
Third, although I'm sure it's more a "me" problem than a "game" problem, same as in 0.9.1, there's no way to get fleet-specific skills any way other than to get them yourself. Combat skills? Hire officers. Colony skills? Hire administrators. Of the 40 skills ingame 22 of them are player exclusive or at least have some kind of player-exclusive effect (Ground Operations' raiding bonus), so it seems like a no-brainer choice for the player to grab them. Especially since many of them have pretty powerful effects in their own right.
Well, that was my suggestion, too. Instead of picking every skill, we should be able to pick from the remaining skills after wrapping around.
With the current skill system, I can't even max out the colony management skills.
I feel like the automated ships skill is extremely cool in practice, but has way too little of an impact compared to the alternative. Just 30 points means that with just 3 [REDACTED] version of the kite with 3 gamma cores, i'm already at full capacity... sure i could take a bigger ship with reduced CR, but as much strong a single redacted ship can be, other than the novelty, giving 10 to flux capacitors and vents, and an extra hullmod to every single ship is just too good to pass out. My suggestion would be to raise the maximum points, even doubling it, reducing the points cost of the gamma core while increasing beta and alpha cores cost.
I think it would be balanced if you could have a single good ship with a good commander and enough leftover points for a couple of smaller ships with trash commanders, or a lot of smaller ships with trash commanders , or some medium sized ship with good commanders etc, opening up to various combinations that are impossible right now
There isn't much of a point to gamma cores, really. (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=20120.0)
oh shitttttttt
Really loving the update so far! I think the new approach to skill trees is different and interesting! It allows for flexibility in playstyle and no one branch seems overpowered. I do have a couple of items I wanted to call out to see if Alex had any feedback, apologies if these were covered earlier in this long thread :
1. Previously, alternate versions of base ships had different stats based on the faction: Example being pirate variant ships had unique hullmods but worse stats in hull/armor/flux/shields etc. In 0.95a, Pirate variants have the same stats as base and keep unique hullmods, making them the superior choice over standard variants.
2. Trade missions seem to pay much better than raid or covert missions that are much higher risk. Raid missions needing marines and require you to disrupt a target for 60+ days is high risk and a considerable time/resource sink compared to a "take these goods to location X", yet the pay for the Raid mission is not any higher than the trade one. Same goes for "drop this spysat off at HEGEMONY HOMEWORLD DEFENDED BY 4 ARMADAS AND DONT BE SEEN! Pay is 35k" Ummm, I think Ill go move these goods instead!
3. Trader or smuggler professions are tough to maintain due to availability of missions/goods. Trade or smuggle missions are slightly on the rare side and inconsistently found, requiring you to hop around quite a lot to find them. To do freelance trading, puts you at the mercy of goods availability and finding a profitable route. This is fine and all as it requires skill, but then you are punished by double taxation (30% at buy, 30% at sell). This really grinds the "legal" trader into the ground. Freelance smuggling is much more attractive in that the taxation part is wiped out, and given #1 above, you now have much less risk of getting caught because your pirate trading fleet is the creme de la creme :D
All in all, great update and I am loving it! Just curious on some of the risk/reward evaluations and if they are intended or are open for rebalance. Great job Fractal team!
Really loving the update so far! I think the new approach to skill trees is different and interesting! It allows for flexibility in playstyle and no one branch seems overpowered. I do have a couple of items I wanted to call out to see if Alex had any feedback, apologies if these were covered earlier in this long thread :
1. Previously, alternate versions of base ships had different stats based on the faction: Example being pirate variant ships had unique hullmods but worse stats in hull/armor/flux/shields etc. In 0.95a, Pirate variants have the same stats as base and keep unique hullmods, making them the superior choice over standard variants.
2. Trade missions seem to pay much better than raid or covert missions that are much higher risk. Raid missions needing marines and require you to disrupt a target for 60+ days is high risk and a considerable time/resource sink compared to a "take these goods to location X", yet the pay for the Raid mission is not any higher than the trade one. Same goes for "drop this spysat off at HEGEMONY HOMEWORLD DEFENDED BY 4 ARMADAS AND DONT BE SEEN! Pay is 35k" Ummm, I think Ill go move these goods instead!
3. Trader or smuggler professions are tough to maintain due to availability of missions/goods. Trade or smuggle missions are slightly on the rare side and inconsistently found, requiring you to hop around quite a lot to find them. To do freelance trading, puts you at the mercy of goods availability and finding a profitable route. This is fine and all as it requires skill, but then you are punished by double taxation (30% at buy, 30% at sell). This really grinds the "legal" trader into the ground. Freelance smuggling is much more attractive in that the taxation part is wiped out, and given #1 above, you now have much less risk of getting caught because your pirate trading fleet is the creme de la creme :D
All in all, great update and I am loving it! Just curious on some of the risk/reward evaluations and if they are intended or are open for rebalance. Great job Fractal team!
(Yeah, this is something that could probably use another look at some point. Really, though - unless the cores just provide meaningfully *different* bonuses that don't just amount to "pick whichever one gives more income right now" - what gamma cores do doesn't matter terribly much since chances are you'd get beta or alpha cores fairly soon anyway. Unless, say, gamma cores just did not attract Pather cells or inspections? Some qualitative differences, again.)I'll have 39 structures/industries to put cores into as soon as my final colonies hit size 6, before using Alphas as extra admins to expand my empire. So far I've collected 6 Alphas, 8 Betas and 67 Gammas (obviously not counting the one I turned in as part of the tutorial).
Thank you again! And, yeah, fair points re: rewards. Some of the patrol-related changes (demanding inspections, CR loss from them) are intended to increase the risk of smuggling but perhaps they don't go far enough.I'd be worried about them going too far, though. Smuggling is already highly encouraged if not outright required, to the point where I think open markets could be removed from the game without making any real difference. Well, minus the fact that come midgame you'll be visiting every port and black marketing their entire fuel supplies as a matter of course just to keep a fleet going, unless you want to eat 30% tariffs. If smuggling becomes too much of a hassle I'm not sure where you're supposed to get supplies and fuel from, especially because smuggling is already not enough in terms of fuel.
I think the problem with not being able to get all the colony skills, as opposed to combat skills, is that to do certain things, you NEED the colony skills.
-If you make too many colonies, eventually, they WILL kill themselves due to stability penalties. You can do a lot of things to increase stability, but eventually you'll hit a point where you MUST have the T5 skill to get more colonies and admins.
-Even more of a big deal: If you want to useSpoilersome of the crazy colony stuff that requires 10 of a specific resource, then i'm pretty sure you NEED to have the skill to give you more out of each industry. Unless i've missed something in my calculations, I don't think there's any other way to get to 10 of most/all resources except to use EVERY method available.[close]
On the other hand
-Unless you're doing a Starsector Tool Assisted Speedrun, you CAN always do better in combat. You can always aim a little better, dodge a little better, have a slightly better formation or strategy for your fleet, that would allow you to beat a slightly tougher opponent.
-It is, of course, possible to say that 'without combat skills there are things you cannot do'. No matter how good you are, you can't use your skills to magically increase the speed you turn... But there are so many more details in those mechanics that it really doesn't matter. If you can't turn quite fast enough to survive, you could just find a way to stall until you can turn. Maybe rotating your shield, or turning it off, or using your ship special, or maybe turning off your weapons to save flux, or maybe throwing it in reverse while you turn in order to avoid getting hit by just a couple of shots and give you enough hull left over to finish your maneuver. With colonies, though, you can't really do things like that. You can build comm relays, you can keep your system safe... But you WILL run out of stability eventually. There's no way around it.
That is why I think the complaints about 'Needing' both the top skills in the industry tree are valid.
I think the problem with not being able to get all the colony skills, as opposed to combat skills, is that to do certain things, you NEED the colony skills.
-If you make too many colonies, eventually, they WILL kill themselves due to stability penalties. You can do a lot of things to increase stability, but eventually you'll hit a point where you MUST have the T5 skill to get more colonies and admins.
-Even more of a big deal: If you want to useSpoilersome of the crazy colony stuff that requires 10 of a specific resource, then i'm pretty sure you NEED to have the skill to give you more out of each industry. Unless i've missed something in my calculations, I don't think there's any other way to get to 10 of most/all resources except to use EVERY method available.[close]
On the other hand
-Unless you're doing a Starsector Tool Assisted Speedrun, you CAN always do better in combat. You can always aim a little better, dodge a little better, have a slightly better formation or strategy for your fleet, that would allow you to beat a slightly tougher opponent.
-It is, of course, possible to say that 'without combat skills there are things you cannot do'. No matter how good you are, you can't use your skills to magically increase the speed you turn... But there are so many more details in those mechanics that it really doesn't matter. If you can't turn quite fast enough to survive, you could just find a way to stall until you can turn. Maybe rotating your shield, or turning it off, or using your ship special, or maybe turning off your weapons to save flux, or maybe throwing it in reverse while you turn in order to avoid getting hit by just a couple of shots and give you enough hull left over to finish your maneuver. With colonies, though, you can't really do things like that. You can build comm relays, you can keep your system safe... But you WILL run out of stability eventually. There's no way around it.
That is why I think the complaints about 'Needing' both the top skills in the industry tree are valid.
That is why I think the complaints about 'Needing' both the top skills in the industry tree are valid.
Or you can be like me and just use Alpha cores as admins for every colony.
But right now the choices are not really choices, but sacrifices. I'm not choosing a playstyle with my skill points, because I don't have enough for even one playstyle.
Hi!Colonies are safe from punitive expeditions at size 3 (or lower, I guess, if colonies can get lower than that). Pirates can still randomly choose to attack whenever, either from an existing base or by spawning a player colony-specific base.
Remarkable work and it has been a learning experience to read all the nitty-gritty details about some Mark9 advocates.
So far I have only made my way through page 29 of this thread, so I apologize if this was already mentioned.
I created a colony with the latest release to date, R 12, and a fleet of pirates spawned. They intend to attack the Size 3 colony. It was my understanding that the safety threshold was Size 3.
Does that mean that the "safe" sizes are 1 and 2?
Again, I am very pleased with the community and wanted to add my grain of sand ;D
PS: got a couple of friends a hit of this and they got addicted. I should feel bad xD
Hi!Colonies are safe from punitive expeditions at size 3 (or lower, I guess, if colonies can get lower than that). Pirates can still randomly choose to attack whenever, either from an existing base or by spawning a player colony-specific base.
Remarkable work and it has been a learning experience to read all the nitty-gritty details about some Mark9 advocates.
So far I have only made my way through page 29 of this thread, so I apologize if this was already mentioned.
I created a colony with the latest release to date, R 12, and a fleet of pirates spawned. They intend to attack the Size 3 colony. It was my understanding that the safety threshold was Size 3.
Does that mean that the "safe" sizes are 1 and 2?
Again, I am very pleased with the community and wanted to add my grain of sand ;D
PS: got a couple of friends a hit of this and they got addicted. I should feel bad xD
Ohhh! Thank you!Punitive expeditions, not AI core inspections ;). I'm not sure if freeport-related expeditions count as punitive expeditions or not in this context, though.
Now that means that the colony, as long as it stays at size 3....could use an Alpha Core and avoid Hegemony thugs dropping by?
QuoteOhhh! Thank you!Punitive expeditions, not AI core inspections ;). I'm not sure if freeport-related expeditions count as punitive expeditions or not in this context, though.
Now that means that the colony, as long as it stays at size 3....could use an Alpha Core and avoid Hegemony thugs dropping by?
I did, It was the obvious thing to do with that skill, as that feels like the best use case of this skill, and the radiant is quite powerful, but it just starts to feel like a cheaper and stronger paragon that i can't pilot myself once the novelty dies out.I feel like the automated ships skill is extremely cool in practice, but has way too little of an impact compared to the alternative. Just 30 points means that with just 3 [REDACTED] version of the kite with 3 gamma cores, i'm already at full capacity... sure i could take a bigger ship with reduced CR, but as much strong a single redacted ship can be, other than the novelty, giving 10 to flux capacitors and vents, and an extra hullmod to every single ship is just too good to pass out. My suggestion would be to raise the maximum points, even doubling it, reducing the points cost of the gamma core while increasing beta and alpha cores cost.
I think it would be balanced if you could have a single good ship with a good commander and enough leftover points for a couple of smaller ships with trash commanders, or a lot of smaller ships with trash commanders , or some medium sized ship with good commanders etc, opening up to various combinations that are impossible right now
Thank you for the feedback, I'm keeping an eye on this. Have you spent much time running with a Radiant with an integrated Alpha Core?
Hmm... is this vanilla? Offhand I'm not sure what this would be. If it's vanilla, could you send me your save? fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com
I would also like to report the Heavily Shielded Cache thing, I am on pure vanilla - massive spoilers below to anyone reading this post:SpoilerThe Intel log seems to point to the exact same hidden area where Alpha Site and Ziggurat are located - however, there is no actual cache to be found in it. Is there supposed to be one?[close]
I'm not choosing a playstyle with my skill points, because I don't have enough for even one playstyle.
(https://i.imgur.com/rvFRHcu.png)
Best boy saga continues.
The Bonus XP mechanic is also somewhat deceptive. In my playthrough, I believed the hype that 100% bonus XP story points were effectively free real estate and would spend them on whatever, with the end result being that I have a farcically large pile of bonus XP that I will never see the end of and those SP are functionally just gone. Bonus XP also creates some weird incentives early game since it accelerates the advancement of your regular level. I spent a period in the early game desperately looking for another officer to mentor just so I could get my leveling back on track. I think it would be better to decouple the regular XP track and the Story Point track suck that you don't feel pressured to spend story points merely as an XP doubling mechanic and so that you could revise the Story Point track such that you don't end up with a bunch of Story Points buried behind an insurmountably large Bonus XP backlog.
I did indeed do that, so I guess that means my XP rate is gonna be messed up, though I should mention that it was still like, hundreds of millions of bonus XP - more than I could ever hope to accumulate in a reasonable game, and that's without ever getting more.
When our character hears music under certain circumstances, especially the first time, I can't help but think (spoiler!) this was the reason (https://i.imgur.com/ePynMOX.mp4). Some funky space dubstep going on here!
is it just me, or do certain planets not decivilize anymore?
i have been trying to raid these pirates out of the system for 15 years now and they are still just rolling around
I did indeed do that, so I guess that means my XP rate is gonna be messed up, though I should mention that it was still like, hundreds of millions of bonus XP - more than I could ever hope to accumulate in a reasonable game, and that's without ever getting more.
I wonder - it might be worthwhile to just convert ALL of the deferred bonus XP to story points when the player maxes out their level. Since they're not gaining levels at that point, parceling out the XP piecemeal doesn't seem super necessary. That might create a weird incentive to spend the points right before reaching max level, though... maybe the "deferred" bonus XP can just spend 10x more quickly, or something. I'm definitely on board with the idea of somehow giving the player those spent SP back more quickly, though - having a huge backlog to eat through for forever isn't great.
Edit: I'd also appreciate more feedback on how the new/reduced XP requirements for SP past max level feel! Though, yeah, given a pre-RC12 save does make that kind of impossible.
I wonder - it might be worthwhile to just convert ALL of the deferred bonus XP to story points when the player maxes out their level. Since they're not gaining levels at that point, parceling out the XP piecemeal doesn't seem super necessary. That might create a weird incentive to spend the points right before reaching max level, though... maybe the "deferred" bonus XP can just spend 10x more quickly, or something. I'm definitely on board with the idea of somehow giving the player those spent SP back more quickly, though - having a huge backlog to eat through for forever isn't great.If it were me, I'd just multiply the bonus payout rate by how many story points are in the backlog.
A few colonies are story-critical and can't decivilize until you've done the relevant story missions.
is it just me, or do certain planets not decivilize anymore?
i have been trying to raid these pirates out of the system for 15 years now and they are still just rolling around
Edit: I'd also appreciate more feedback on how the new/reduced XP requirements for SP past max level feel! Though, yeah, given a pre-RC12 save does make that kind of impossible.
For personal combat skills, it turns out you can actually get pretty close! (double back through entire Combat aptitude, then pick one skill each from the Tech 2 and Industry 2 pairs, for 12/14). Fleet combat buff skills too (11/14 with a double Leadership line and single Technology line).I'm not choosing a playstyle with my skill points, because I don't have enough for even one playstyle.Hmm - I'm not sure that "being able to pick absolutely every single thing that improves X" is a super reasonable definition of "having enough for a playstyle".
If it were me, I'd just multiply the bonus payout rate by how many story points are in the backlog.
Edit: I'd also appreciate more feedback on how the new/reduced XP requirements for SP past max level feel! Though, yeah, given a pre-RC12 save does make that kind of impossible.
Essentially wrapping up my first run (which started in RC9 and is on RC12 now), with all the bonus XP I'm gaining SP at a fairly rapid clip. Essentially 1 per end game fight because of the backlog of bonus XP and the fact I'm using a relatively compact fleet (5 capitals, 4 cruisers + logistics ships). At this point, I've started S-modding my logistics fleet of Revenant cargo ships, to add surveying equipment in addition to expanded cargo holds and auxiliary fuel tanks. I've spent 10 on personal skills, 38 SP in hull mods, another 10 invested in colonies, and spent about 17 on officers (fired one and replaced with a found level 6). Another 5-10 have been spent on other things like escaping a fleet early game, recovering my flagship twice, some story line dialog options because they sounded interesting, and historian blueprints. So late game, I feel like I've got plenty of story points at the new rate. Although I was already post level 15 at the time RC12 came out. XP tool tip says I've got 32 million bonus XP still.
Speaking of s-mods on Revenants, I find it slightly odd they count as combat ships, and thus count against Weapon Drills, yet can't be equipped with weapons. Are they missing the civilian-grade hull mod, or is that intentional? Are there other reasons they aren't civilian (to prevent militarized subsystems?). Maybe they need a built in non-combatant hull mod that makes them not count against combat DP skill limits?
Alex, I want to poke you on the skills thing a bit:
For personal combat skills, it turns out you can actually get pretty close! (double back through entire Combat aptitude, then pick one skill each from the Tech 2 and Industry 2 pairs, for 12/14). Fleet combat buff skills too (11/14 with a double Leadership line and single Technology line).
More to the point though:
If you want some fleetwide or combat buffs in general, they're always available, even if the specific skills that are available may not be the ones you want. Like, if you want a missile buff in particular then having to get all the way to Combat 5 is annoying, but there are other skills you can get instead that are also pretty good. Players investing in Technology and Industry can also pick up some handy combat skills in their own aptitudes (albeit this is a double-edged sword, they may not want combat skills).
Colony skills? It takes 5 skill points to get the first skill. Then 5 to get the next. Then 5 to get the next! (and now we're out of skill points)
Have you seen my thread here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=20311.0)? Not necessarily the specific mechanics changes proposed, but rather the discussion about what people want from their skills and the barriers in the current system.
I'm sorry if this is a stupid question/it's been answered before and I just failed to see the answer but I was wondering if the update is compatible with the previous update.
I wonder - it might be worthwhile to just convert ALL of the deferred bonus XP to story points when the player maxes out their level. Since they're not gaining levels at that point, parceling out the XP piecemeal doesn't seem super necessary. That might create a weird incentive to spend the points right before reaching max level, though... maybe the "deferred" bonus XP can just spend 10x more quickly, or something. I'm definitely on board with the idea of somehow giving the player those spent SP back more quickly, though - having a huge backlog to eat through for forever isn't great.
For personal combat skills, it turns out you can actually get pretty close! (double back through entire Combat aptitude, then pick one skill each from the Tech 2 and Industry 2 pairs, for 12/14). Fleet combat buff skills too (11/14 with a double Leadership line and single Technology line).Yeah, combat is an outlier in that it's really focused. It buffs your flagship and that's it. Though I personally don't think combat is worth double-dipping, since many skills only benefit one playstyle and you don't want to be switching ships constantly, but be using the strongest ship in your fleet instead.
I did see your thread, btw! I think that some relatively small tweaks can smooth things out nicely. L1 needs some help, I4 needs to sort itself out so that getting both isn't counter-productive (somehow! that one's tricky), perhaps C1R could have some nominal effect that affects the ship and not just fighters so it feels better to get on second go-around. The fleetwide-DP-limited skills could probably use a boost in the DP cap. T4 needs to be more clear about which one of them is better for phase ships without asking "how many"; that sort of thing. IMO trying to revamp the entire system as a result of the feedback so far would be an overreaction. It's *different*, yes. I think for that reason alone it needs some time to settle.O sidhe, me naming scheme is canon now! I mentioned in that thread that C1R and L1L should perhaps get swapped. For I4R, if you're going to change it significantly, I'd make it let you recover all the ships and/or possibly let you recover your own ships when retreating. Now you have synergy with I4L, because any ship you fight, you get, and no matter the ship's initial condition, you'll fix her up.
Probably a bit pedantic, but I would love it if the s-mods would appear in the order that they are installed in (ie how normal hull mods are installed), rather than being sorted alphabetically. I've just got my first Paragon (despite how late it is in the game) and 'Efficiency Overhaul' is something I like to put at the end of all my hull mods, however it will insert itself between the 'Augmented Drive Field' and 'Hardened Shields' when using a story point to integrate it into the ship (the first 2 mods are already installed).Ah! Alphabetically is a nice feature! I was waiting to get more hullmods so that I can install them alphabetically. Nice that I can integrate mods whenever and they will list alphabetically. Please do not remove that feature!
I'm just suggesting being able to install them in whatever order you wish (alphabetical, OP point size, type, colour, etc). Currently there is no choice in the matter; sure an automatic sort option would be good for some, but a manual option wouldn't have any restrictions. Alternatively allowing the player to alter the s-mod order after installation would be fine (and you would still have the automatic alphabetical sorting), I just want to put the s-mods in a particular order for my ships. :DProbably a bit pedantic, but I would love it if the s-mods would appear in the order that they are installed in (ie how normal hull mods are installed), rather than being sorted alphabetically. I've just got my first Paragon (despite how late it is in the game) and 'Efficiency Overhaul' is something I like to put at the end of all my hull mods, however it will insert itself between the 'Augmented Drive Field' and 'Hardened Shields' when using a story point to integrate it into the ship (the first 2 mods are already installed).Ah! Alphabetically is a nice feature! I was waiting to get more hullmods so that I can install them alphabetically. Nice that I can integrate mods whenever and they will list alphabetically. Please do not remove that feature!
I'm noticing a strange issue where ordering weapons, not ships, from my production tab gives me supplies, fuel and crew for some reason. I'm not ordering any ships and I don't have any active Tech Mining industries, so I'm not sure where they're coming from.
EDIT: One of my colonies has an active Pather Cell supported from an unknown base, but I'm not getting the bar event to figure out where the base is located. I had the same problem with pirate bases, come to think of it, but at least in their case the game gives a hint as to their relative distance and "right next door" isn't difficult to guess at any rate. But Pather bases could be anywhere from next door to the other side of the sector as far as I know. Is this intended or a bug?
After all these effortposts, it's occurring to me that I might have completely pooched my Bonus XP totals by playing with settings. I usually raise the level cap and let the natural growth of the XP requirements serve as a soft cap, but it didn't occur to me immediately just how much this would mess with the Bonus XP calculations (I was aware of how it would mess with my SP after level 15, but I figured that was something I could deal with later). I'm guessing stacking up bonus XP with the level cap set to 40 (before the tuning to lategame development, no less) made the math go some kind of crazy.
I still maintain that the pace at which the player earns SP doesn't line up with their actual demand for them and judging from the comments we've seen from other people there's still an issue with the backlog, but it's not as insane as it is on my file. Sorry for taking your time on bad numbers.
Maybe increase bonus exp multiplier if player has more than X deferred SP after max level?
x2 for 1-7 SP, x4 for 8-15 SP, x8 for 16-31 SP, etc.
Is there a way to make expedition not overlap? I encountered overlapping triple fleet (3x2) expedition and there is no possible way fending it off.
Same faction in-system supply getting interrupted is unreal, not to mention I'm only hostile to pathers and none of my colony has pather cell.
proc gen mission survey shouldn't use the mission [Redacted] system
Why is there a hard cap of size 6?
O sidhe, me naming scheme is canon now! I mentioned in that thread that C1R and L1L should perhaps get swapped. For I4R, if you're going to change it significantly, I'd make it let you recover all the ships and/or possibly let you recover your own ships when retreating. Now you have synergy with I4L, because any ship you fight, you get, and no matter the ship's initial condition, you'll fix her up.
And can you make Revenant and Phantom not count for phase skill, thanks.
Before RC12 I was in late level 12, then after the hotfix it launched me to the end of level 14 so from 12 to 15 I got only 2 story points, I can't really comment there. But at lvl 15 story point gain seems alright, it's certainly better than at RC11 lvl 12 which says a lot. That said I'm pretty much using story points just for s-mods (I have the tech skill for the 3rd s-mod) because that seems like the best way to power up my fleet without just adding new ships. So in the end it's kinda dry for me but I'm curious how it'll go once I'm happy with my fleet. Anyways I wouldn't try to lower it back, this currently seems like a sweet spot, but I'll comment again once I'm done with the playthrough.
I'm noticing a strange issue where ordering weapons, not ships, from my production tab gives me supplies, fuel and crew for some reason. I'm not ordering any ships and I don't have any active Tech Mining industries, so I'm not sure where they're coming from.
EDIT: One of my colonies has an active Pather Cell supported from an unknown base, but I'm not getting the bar event to figure out where the base is located. I had the same problem with pirate bases, come to think of it, but at least in their case the game gives a hint as to their relative distance and "right next door" isn't difficult to guess at any rate. But Pather bases could be anywhere from next door to the other side of the sector as far as I know. Is this intended or a bug?
Yeah, I've got an item about this - apparently that and pirate base bar events got borked somehow.I have, if it helps, seen the pirate base bar event. Once. In some random core system I didn't care about. So it clearly can trigger, it's just not getting the priority it should.
Same faction in-system supply getting interrupted is unreal, not to mention I'm only hostile to pathers and none of my colony has pather cell.
Hmm. As far as I can tell that'd require some hostile presence in the system - possibly pirate fleets? Let me make a note though; in some cases it really wouldn't make sense regardless.
Re: Derelict Contingent, I'd like it to somehow enable a "junk fleet" style, though. Actually, recalling some of the original thinking here - that it's relatively "ok" for it to be useless on second go around, since functionally that makes getting the second I5 colony skill cost two points, which doesn't seem all that unreasonable. Still, it'd be nicer if it wasn't.
Re: Derelict Contingent, I'd like it to somehow enable a "junk fleet" style, though. Actually, recalling some of the original thinking here - that it's relatively "ok" for it to be useless on second go around, since functionally that makes getting the second I5 colony skill cost two points, which doesn't seem all that unreasonable. Still, it'd be nicer if it wasn't.The issue with making junker fleets viable, at least as far as I see it, is that the only natural benefits that d-modded ships currently have over pristine ones is that they're cheap to get and deploy in battle. But spamming ships like Pirates really isn't viable for the player because of the 30 fleet limit (going over the limit costs more supplies to maintain the fleet -> no benefit to many d-modded ships over fewer pristine ones). Not to mention the inflated fuel costs for maintaining a large fleet, supplies to repair and bring salvaged ships back to combat readiness, and so on.
Yeah, I've got an item about this - apparently that and pirate base bar events got borked somehow.Also about Pather cells, what determines whether they're active or sleeping? I've had one pather cell activate, go dormant and than re-activate all within the span of like one ingame week. I thought for a second that the pathers were strategically shutting down their cell whenever I got close to my colony so I wouldn't be able to get the pather cell bar event ::).
Also about Pather cells, what determines whether they're active or sleeping?
QuoteAlso about Pather cells, what determines whether they're active or sleeping?
cells that have a station linked to them are active, cells that dont have a station arent
QuoteAlso about Pather cells, what determines whether they're active or sleeping?
cells that have a station linked to them are active, cells that dont have a station arent
Oh yeah, to clarify! Cells go from sleeper to active if the colony is "ranked" as important enough. Basically the top worst-offenders (from LP's point of view) get active cells, then the next X get sleeper cells, which are kind of a warning. This includes non-player colonies as well. So thinking about it.. in theory selling items that boost Pather interest to other colonies could divert their attention from you.
Doesn’t this mean player can alway get away with 9 interest since there is a AI admin on one of the core colony? That’s a big oof for me trying very hard to prevent cells from spawning. Cutting in big margins.
Minor (potential?) bug/error: got a pirate fleet spawned from a salvage ping thingy ("whatever it was, it has to be close nearby") with 14 (I counted) Atlas MKII plus a bunch of smaller things in it; I guess it might be an intended rare thing or something, but if not it looks a bit like a leftover from a more capital-spammy time.It has been there since 0.9.1a iirc.
Minor (potential?) bug/error: got a pirate fleet spawned from a salvage ping thingy ("whatever it was, it has to be close nearby") with 14 (I counted) Atlas MKII plus a bunch of smaller things in it; I guess it might be an intended rare thing or something, but if not it looks a bit like a leftover from a more capital-spammy time.
Minor (potential?) bug/error: got a pirate fleet spawned from a salvage ping thingy ("whatever it was, it has to be close nearby") with 14 (I counted) Atlas MKII plus a bunch of smaller things in it; I guess it might be an intended rare thing or something, but if not it looks a bit like a leftover from a more capital-spammy time.
Minor (potential?) bug/error: got a pirate fleet spawned from a salvage ping thingy ("whatever it was, it has to be close nearby") with 14 (I counted) Atlas MKII plus a bunch of smaller things in it; I guess it might be an intended rare thing or something, but if not it looks a bit like a leftover from a more capital-spammy time.Those are from a mod, not vanilla.Minor (potential?) bug/error: got a pirate fleet spawned from a salvage ping thingy ("whatever it was, it has to be close nearby") with 14 (I counted) Atlas MKII plus a bunch of smaller things in it; I guess it might be an intended rare thing or something, but if not it looks a bit like a leftover from a more capital-spammy time.
Were any of them a XIV battlegroup MKII Atlas? If you ever get a chance to salvage one, give it a try. They are actually a lot of fun to fly I find.
Were any of them a XIV battlegroup MKII Atlas? If you ever get a chance to salvage one, give it a try. They are actually a lot of fun to fly I find.
A few times now I've found over 30,000 ore in mining stations or their debris field. If you happen to hit salvage all and not notice, the extra cargo will eat up all your supplies in a few seconds.
A few times now I've found over 30,000 ore in mining stations or their debris field. If you happen to hit salvage all and not notice, the extra cargo will eat up all your supplies in a few seconds.
While you are at TODO, maybe have difficult recovery not be the first thing that pops up if they are the only ships. More than once, I clicked recover all, and almost confirmed until I saw green and held at the last second before wasting SP by accident.
I also think you rank up way too quickly at the early ranks.
I feel somewhat punished for taking "fun" skills like personal combat, when it would be more "optimal" to go for the fleet bonuses.This is how I feel about Automated Ships vs. Special Modifications. Special Modifications is great for those with story points to burn. Automated Ships, is fun, but less so when one Radiant has to work with low CR (or even Brilliant with less than max CR).
Were any of them a XIV battlegroup MKII Atlas? If you ever get a chance to salvage one, give it a try. They are actually a lot of fun to fly I find.
@ The Soldier: Is that blueprint quest given by a "flashy" guy? If so, you need to survey a planet for ruins and loot the blueprint from there. I got a Phantom blueprint quest, killed all of the Indie claim jumpers in the system (had to detour to Red Planet to recover a Radiant to overpower and kill that Odyssey and friends), then scanned the planets. Found Phantom blueprint after looting one of the ruins.Aye, given by a "flashy" guy, so plenty of overly-aggressive indies. As said though, I cleaned out the system a dozen cycles previously. All planets surveyed, all ruins explored. Double and triple-checked all the planets again after I got the quest. I peeked in the save file, and it implies the blueprint is locked in the hypershunt, which as far as I can tell, I can't actually loot (it seems to think the hypershunt is any other station that I can salvage). The indies were also interested in the hypershunt, though they could never get close.
Question: Is Decivilized more common on habitable planets now, or is that just unfavorable sector generation?In my sector gen, I've only got a dozen or so Decivilized worlds, with dozens more habitable planets. Just unfavorable generation.
Just dropped in to say holy crap I'm loving this release! I took a few days off and i'm already 30 hours into my new vanilla campaign. The changes feel great to me!
Are there more than two cryosleepers per map in 0.9.5? If not I don't think they should be able to generate within 3.3 lightyears of each other as they did in my game. Makes them really...well, of limited use.
(MN-6593263186804071588, Mokosh and Delta Zabazio, bottom-left of the map, in case that's helpful)
Fly into the sun and click on it!Oh, well I'll be....
I was near a bounty pirate station in an unclaimed system when a small pirate fleet tried to chase me. I moved far enough away from the station that the small fleet changed its status to running away, but instead it kept tailing my fleet and wound up inside the circumference of my fleet. It did not engage and kept bouncing around instead. Eventually I changed direction and it flew off, so I raided then blew up the station. It was very amusing.
Fly into the sun and click on it!
Fly into the sun and click on it!
Comments so far: Energy Weapon Mastery is funny, but probably too strong. I can see the bonus being 25% at max flux instead of 50% for a level 2 skill being about right. That puts it in line with other lower tier damage boosters (10% for L1, 0 to 20% for C2). I think the reason its so strong is that for ships that want to use it, they are always going to be in range so there's no tradeoff happening. The elite skill for it is also really excellent, one of the best elite skills out there.I have to admit that I have chosen this skill for four of my level 6 Lieutenants (3 for my Hyperion frigates, one on my Doom cruiser).
... yeah, let me at least add a loading screen tip about it. It's pretty well hidden. (Not in the help popups, no.)
Comments so far: Energy Weapon Mastery is funny, but probably too strong. I can see the bonus being 25% at max flux instead of 50% for a level 2 skill being about right. That puts it in line with other lower tier damage boosters (10% for L1, 0 to 20% for C2). I think the reason its so strong is that for ships that want to use it, they are always going to be in range so there's no tradeoff happening. The elite skill for it is also really excellent, one of the best elite skills out there.I have to admit that I have chosen this skill for four of my level 6 Lieutenants (3 for my Hyperion frigates, one on my Doom cruiser).
Still it feels about right for the additional risk it entails to get close to that 50% bonus buff (you need to be under 600 units as well as have high flux) and it's unlikely your sitting at 50% regularly unless you have your shields down or are decloaked. I haven't really paid much attention to what the average damage is however. I think my Doom tends to run a bit higher in flux normally than my Hyperion's so it is quite possible I'm averaging less than 25% for my Hyperion's, but more for my Doom.
If the maximum damage was reduced to 25% and the flux bonus needed to max the effect was halved (ie max damage at 50%+ flux level), it probably wouldn't make much difference to the overal damage of my fleet.
In comparing it to other skills I was guestimating half flux for about a 12.5% damage boost, pretty in line with L1 and C2... it is a lot smaller, but medium energy hardflux weapons only go out to 600 range anyways before hullmods, so frigates and destroyers are probably operating within the range band no matter what. Comparing it to ranged specialization, which is level 3, competes with armor, and requires either a specialized long ranged cruiser build or a capital with 900 range weapons, gunnery implants, and ITU to get the max bonus, energy weapon mastery is just very easy to get a very large damage boost.
I was near a bounty pirate station in an unclaimed system when a small pirate fleet tried to chase me. I moved far enough away from the station that the small fleet changed its status to running away, but instead it kept tailing my fleet and wound up inside the circumference of my fleet. It did not engage and kept bouncing around instead. Eventually I changed direction and it flew off, so I raided then blew up the station. It was very amusing.
Fixed this one up just now, actually!
10 New (spoiler) enemies are just hell and vietnam! Cool! But! Why, for example, when we take Ziggurat away from it becomes much weaker than when we try to defeat him? I was hoping to cause hell for the pirates ... but it turned out the opposite.
16 Lobsters! How about lobsters! I did not find an object or planet where and how they can be grown - I saw only in the Ascona system.
Do bounty sizes still scale faster than linearly (while bounty payout scales linearly, with the difficulty tier)? Eyeballing CBPirate and the FleetSize enum, it kind of seems that way (and also since the difficulty component of payout is added to a flat amount).Early bounty strength seems the same as before, which is too fast like in earlier 0.9a releases. Also, it jumps from one or two capitals in 200k bounties to six or more at 250+k, sort of like last release.
If the consensus is that late game bounties remain too hard (as they were in 0.9.1), this may be a contributor to it.
I think current best solutions to high tier bounties are player-piloted Afflictors or Doom. Or Derelict Contingent cheese, possibly combined with AI ships.I want to avoid cheese if I can, because I do not want to learn Spec.Mods. permanently, and respeccing gets expensive after several skills become elite. (I did not elite any of my skills yet because I do not want to burn too many story points after respec.)
In my game (0.95), the planet Yamaros' Work in Duzahk is habitable, with low gravity, abundant organics, sparse rare ore deposits, adequate farmland and widespread ruins (100% hazard). Actually a very nice planet.
- Randomly generated planets in the core (including Duzahk and Penelope's Star) should no longer be habitable
Same here, but with pirates.I saw pathers base directly from colony threats tab, without bar meeting or something
They targeted my colonies with -3/-50 and I can't find the guy in the bar who reveals the location.
I checked all the nearby systems...
I saw pathers base directly from colony threats tab, without bar meeting or somethingThis happens when someone has set a bounty on them at some point in the past, and you therefore already 'know' they're in that system.
I still can't find the pirates...You can use the console commands mod to help with this - it's not a perfect solution by any means, but you can run 'openmarket' with no arguments to get a list of markets that exist, and just start going through the pop-up pirate and pather stations at the end; 'openmarket xyz123' or whatever the market ID string is, double-check that it's actually a pirate station, then blow it up. Repeat until your pirate infestation magically goes away.
And 3/50 is very damaging...
Story spoilers nextThere's a bug with it, you can work around it by doing the thing Alex says in this thread (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=20493.msg313439#msg313439) (note that devmode can also be turned on and off with Console Commands mod).SpoilerI've completed story missions in Academy, decided to not use gate when was running away from pirates after raid variant of getting the last scientist from Kanny. But when I got to Academy they still shown me my fleet running through the gate and teleporting... Maybe photoshop will still exist. Ok, so after that I've got the device that, as it's description says, will allow my fleet to use gates if I'll right click on it, so that was done; some message about devicename was installed appeared. But how to use gates now? Nothing still happens then I choose to fly through the gate, only able to scan the gates that wasn't scanned yet. Got the device two patches ago maybe, but still can't get how to use it on the newest patch.[close]
Just realized that a nanoforge creates pollution when installed on an Orbital Works. I think it sounds silly that something installed orbiting the planet causes pollution...Gravity still exists in orbit and garbage will fall down.
Observation: the current battle system, where the deployments points aren't redistributed and almost entirely officer dependent creates a situation that is very disadvantageous for low-tech capital ships.
Suggestion: increase the battle size to 500 or reintroduce redistribution or make the deployment point a bit more dependent on fleet size.
Just realized that a nanoforge creates pollution when installed on an Orbital Works. I think it sounds silly that something installed orbiting the planet causes pollution...Gravity still exists in orbit and garbage will fall down.
Officered enemy ships take like 20 times more damage before they die, it's insane. Germlin just casually tanking autopulse like it's nothing.I think I might have seen it once this release.
Also, what happened to the merc marines bar event? I thought patch notes said it was changed to give you more and veteran marines, but it's just gone. I really liked it, even if it's just flavor, sad to see it gone.
Ooof, ate that one too.
And lol @ the <event> that pushed my entire fleet into red CR all at once and cost me 700+ supplies in recovery.
David did it to us on purpose.Ooof, ate that one too.
And lol @ the <event> that pushed my entire fleet into red CR all at once and cost me 700+ supplies in recovery.
David did it to us on purpose.Ooof, ate that one too.
And lol @ the <event> that pushed my entire fleet into red CR all at once and cost me 700+ supplies in recovery.SpoilerOf course we were gonna stick around to watch the pretty explosion, did anyone expect differently?[close]
The thing I find annoying there is that the explosion only affects you. Not the pirate fleet that was right next to me. No, they're somehow fine.
AFAIK the game only allows for auto-resolve if the enemy is running (a pursuit battle). So the fleet being nearer or farther from the station makes sense: presumably when its close it will drag the station into the fight with it.In both cases it wasn't close enough to drag the station into combat, though that said only being able to pursue fleets that are actually fleeing makes sense. I do wish I could auto-resolve more fights, though, at least things like low-quality pirate fleets which haven't been an issue in I don't know how many cycles.
Just got the event on my own colony. damn, it's so rare, it's been like 15 in-game years, first time seeing it.Officered enemy ships take like 20 times more damage before they die, it's insane. Germlin just casually tanking autopulse like it's nothing.I think I might have seen it once this release.
Also, what happened to the merc marines bar event? I thought patch notes said it was changed to give you more and veteran marines, but it's just gone. I really liked it, even if it's just flavor, sad to see it gone.
That said, in last release, I mostly saw it in worlds with low stability.
Is the tri-tach story mission phase fleet intended to show off how powerful the harbinger's system is? Because trying to beat that mission legitimately without using carrier spam was one of the most frustrating things I've attempted to do in my recent memory, before I gave up.
If you reduce the transplutonics demand of a flux shunt tap to 9, it does not work. I also don't think it's possible to get 10 transplutonics. I believe it's base 4 production for a size 6 colony +1 from admin + 2 from item + 1 from alpha core + 1 from story points is 9 total. Unless I'm missing a boost I could apply? Pretty disappointing tbh after all the effort I went through to get there.Simply pile up like 10k into storage and flip the switch to use storage while shortage. 0 production needed.
That's even worse than it not working. I have to play supply mule now?If you reduce the transplutonics demand of a flux shunt tap to 9, it does not work. I also don't think it's possible to get 10 transplutonics. I believe it's base 4 production for a size 6 colony +1 from admin + 2 from item + 1 from alpha core + 1 from story points is 9 total. Unless I'm missing a boost I could apply? Pretty disappointing tbh after all the effort I went through to get there.Simply pile up like 10k into storage and flip the switch to use storage while shortage. 0 production needed.
I'm like 90% certain my new Refinery colony has 4 Transplutonics at size 3, with only the Item currently buffing it. At size 6 that should be 7, +1 from admin, +1 from alpha core, +1 from story point for the full 10. In that case, it's feasibleI have a size 6 colony with refining and it only produces 4 base (I have the screen open while writing this). I don't know of any reason why that would be different from your game, so I think you might be misremembering. I have an admin with +1 resources, the +2 refining item installed, an alpha core in refining (+1) and 2 story points invested (+1). That leaves me at 9. It is not possible unless there is another buff that I have not just listed.
Of course, that still means you have to spec into T5 Industry (unless you just so happen to find an Administrator with it, but finding skilled admins at all is a crapshoot), a special refinery item, spend at minimum 2 skill points, get on the Hegemony's bad side (AI core), clobber the end-game threat at the superstructure, and acquire and invest twelve and a half Atlas's worth of raw material at the superstructure (in one bulk payment, no less), just to have the opportunity to make use of another item which unlocks the ability for one colony to acquire one extra industry.
That's a lot of investment, and I don't really see me ever going on a run long enough to actually be able to make use of it. Special items are also really rare and I doubt either of the required items are guaranteed to spawn, so I'd imagine it's not just a question of when, but if.
For the transplutonics: You need a planet that has +1 (or 2) bonus to transplutonics production.I think you're confusing the unrefined ore with the refined metal?
For some reason, the skill that lets you have an AI ship isn't permanent - doesn't this mean you could get an AI ship, then respec and keep it?You're missing the not-clarified-in-the-skill built-in hullmod 'Automated Ship' that reduces the ship's maximum CR by 100%. The base 100% bonus from the skill counteracts that exactly, leaving you at the regular +70% CR. Lose the skill and max CR goes to zero or less. (Well, I guess maybe you could manage up to 15% with all the CR-boosting skills including derelict contingent. But that's not really useful.)
despite the location being inside a stars corona, the battlefield conditions are normal, although this is probably intentional.For what it's worth, it is stated to be intentional when you Explore the structure - your tactical officer explains the magnetic field generated by the structure deflects the star's corona, and that you should be able to fight unaffected by it.
Ah, you're right. I forgot that I had +1 from the admin skill, and was effectively counting it twice. In that case, it really is impossible to get enough production to run the tap....I'm like 90% certain my new Refinery colony has 4 Transplutonics at size 3, with only the Item currently buffing it. At size 6 that should be 7, +1 from admin, +1 from alpha core, +1 from story point for the full 10. In that case, it's feasibleI have a size 6 colony with refining and it only produces 4 base (I have the screen open while writing this). I don't know of any reason why that would be different from your game, so I think you might be misremembering. I have an admin with +1 resources, the +2 refining item installed, an alpha core in refining (+1) and 2 story points invested (+1). That leaves me at 9. It is not possible unless there is another buff that I have not just listed.
Of course, that still means you have to spec into T5 Industry (unless you just so happen to find an Administrator with it, but finding skilled admins at all is a crapshoot), a special refinery item, spend at minimum 2 skill points, get on the Hegemony's bad side (AI core), clobber the end-game threat at the superstructure, and acquire and invest twelve and a half Atlas's worth of raw material at the superstructure (in one bulk payment, no less), just to have the opportunity to make use of another item which unlocks the ability for one colony to acquire one extra industry.
That's a lot of investment, and I don't really see me ever going on a run long enough to actually be able to make use of it. Special items are also really rare and I doubt either of the required items are guaranteed to spawn, so I'd imagine it's not just a question of when, but if.
Why is capital and escort ai so bad?Ive heard some explanation for this. I dont know if its right but its the only explanation ive heard so far: A combination of ai tweaks and enemy fleet composition changes conspiring to create a lot of circumstances where your fleet defaults to defensive behavior and refuses to do anything but an anemic fighting retreat. Apparently your ai will change its behavior to timid if it judges the enemy fleet to be stronger than its fleet, and this seems to be based on number of officers present in each fleet and the comparative weapons ranges. Because there are many situations where the enemy has more officers than you, and situations where even if you are fully specialized towards ecm you will still get out-ecmd, there are many opportunities for your ai to see itself in a losing condition even if it could win if it would just act normally.
More feedback: I feel like the missions I've been offered so far pay ridiculously little, to the point where they are not worth it.Worse, doing those raid missions may send a revenge fleet after you even if you stealth raided the place. If they do not know for certain who did it, why should they send a fleet after you? Said fleet was close to 200k bounty strength. I tried to kill it but my fleet could not win in a fair fight without taking too many casualties (not waiting a year to clean up new d-mods when I already have other d-mod ships to fix). Eventually, I led it to my colony where it got totally crushed and humiliated by my orbital station for easy flawless victory.
Let's see, do I do a raid mission and make 37,000 credits? Or raid a convoy or just do some trading to a place that has shortages and clear 500,000 easy?
More feedback: I feel like the missions I've been offered so far pay ridiculously little, to the point where they are not worth it.Worse, doing those raid missions may send a revenge fleet after you even if you stealth raided the place. If they do not know for certain who did it, why should they send a fleet after you? Said fleet was close to 200k bounty strength. I tried to kill it but my fleet could not win in a fair fight without taking too many casualties (not waiting a year to clean up new d-mods when I already have other d-mod ships to fix). Eventually, I led it to my colony where it got totally crushed and humiliated by my orbital station for easy flawless victory.
Let's see, do I do a raid mission and make 37,000 credits? Or raid a convoy or just do some trading to a place that has shortages and clear 500,000 easy?
Basically, now I know to skip those missions unless my fleet is endgame strong because of the risk of having a high-powered headhunter fleet after you. Better to raid zombie pirates for supplies or drugs and sell them elsewhere for better profit and no chance of revenge fleets.
@ Farlarzia: All star fortresses had mines since v0.9a. High-tech just spawns more of them than midline. Low-tech do not mine strike the same way the other two do.
For the transplutonics: You need a planet that has +1 (or 2) bonus to transplutonics production.I think you're confusing the unrefined ore with the refined metal?
@ Farlarzia: All star fortresses had mines since v0.9a. High-tech just spawns more of them than midline. Low-tech do not mine strike the same way the other two do.
For lore reasons, I suppose it's also reasonable to ask why the magfield doesn't also deflect the corona on the campaign map. Might be nice for it to act like a planet in that fashion, stopping the corona in the area behind it. Would make getting to somewhat easier, too. Tough fight, and going in with less CR (from getting lightly toasted by the corona, emergency burn, or both) kinda hurts.
Ive heard some explanation for this. I dont know if its right but its the only explanation ive heard so far:
...
Apparently your ai will change its behavior to timid if it judges the enemy fleet to be stronger than its fleet, and this seems to be based on number of officers present in each fleet and the comparative weapons ranges. Because there are many situations where the enemy has more officers than you, and situations where even if you are fully specialized towards ecm you will still get out-ecmd, there are many opportunities for your ai to see itself in a losing condition even if it could win if it would just act normally.
On top of that, they always seem to turn their flank to the core of enemy fleet to shoot some frigate...
It's nice that you are reading feedback.On top of that, they always seem to turn their flank to the core of enemy fleet to shoot some frigate...Hmm - do you happen to have a save handy where I can directly observe the behaviors you're describing? That'd be very helpful.
Ive heard some explanation for this. I dont know if its right but its the only explanation ive heard so far:
...
Apparently your ai will change its behavior to timid if it judges the enemy fleet to be stronger than its fleet, and this seems to be based on number of officers present in each fleet and the comparative weapons ranges. Because there are many situations where the enemy has more officers than you, and situations where even if you are fully specialized towards ecm you will still get out-ecmd, there are many opportunities for your ai to see itself in a losing condition even if it could win if it would just act normally.
(Ah - I have no idea where you got this information, but this has absolutely zero basis in reality. There's nothing even remotely similar to that going on.)
Could this just be from individual ships judging that they are unsafe to attack based on multiple nearby enemies rather than some overall behavior calculation?
QuoteApparently your ai will change its behavior to timid if it judges the enemy fleet to be stronger than its fleet
that actually explains SO MUCH, cause this only seem to happen in large battles
There's a bug here - getting minus one to the requirements should lower them but doesn't, actually, so it's not usable. Well, without putting transplutonics into the stockpile, but that's... not a good way to do it.I happened to set my first colony within max distance of the Omega station (found it by chance much later after building colonies). If meeting the threshold is currently impossible, at least I do not need to try to meet the requirements.
(Similar issue affects the Fusion Lamp, though there at least you can use it, just with the hazard penalty.)
It feels like I should be able to hit 10 transplutonics with a story point invested, would you consider buffing the item or the the base value for all colonies (and reducing the market share value if that's necessary to keep things balanced)?Player already needs to spend (at least) two story points to boost production of a refinery (if that's its improvement).
Could this just be from individual ships judging that they are unsafe to attack based on multiple nearby enemies rather than some overall behavior calculation?
Yeah, that's quite possible; they generally speaking try to avoid getting flanked since that's how ships get destroyed.QuoteApparently your ai will change its behavior to timid if it judges the enemy fleet to be stronger than its fleet
that actually explains SO MUCH, cause this only seem to happen in large battles
(... except that it's definitely not a thing! I'm not saying nothing is happening, but that specific explanation - re officers etc - is flat-out wrong.)
I'd really love to get my hands on a save where this is easy to reproduce. So far I'm just seeing this sentiment, but not seeing the actual behaviors described in my testing.
if thats not a thing then all is well, still, big battles ARE very frustrating, especially thanks to the command limit
Hmm, I'll have a look when I get to it. Why does it feel that way - just for "pleasing number" reasons, or?I guess it feels nice to meet the requirement directly and gives a little wiggle room, i.e. I can choose between not use an alpha core, or story points, or an admin with the bonus and still meet the requirement.
As much as I'd love to sink another 100 hours into the game, the meta is just too easy. 2h in everything seems to lose purpose as your power level just explodes.
Hyperspace travel is essentially hassle-free. The factions are either not aggressive enough or they don't have enough fleets overall ( and I'm on negative with all but Hegemony ). The only hassle is the annoyance of navigating the "storms" and occasionally avoiding the very few stronger faction fleets. Avoiding the fleets is fairly easy as the strong ones are generally much slower.
The skill-driven power explosion was unsatisfactory as well. Overall skills feel meaningless when you get so many so quickly.
The stipend + commission down-right break the already fragile economy.
By fragile I mean:
The over-supply of ships ( they are more common than ore or basic supplies .... )
The ship prices are ludicrously low. Even at 2x their current cost they would still be ridiculously low. ( I had an Onslaught with 1D 4h in, did not break the bank either )
Trade routes are way too easy to abuse ( it's worse than in the usual grind-trading systems since your viable options are actually lower but the payouts much higher )
Rewards are way too big for non-combat "quests". ( to be read as those without a cost sink )
Basic supplies are way too cheap and abundant.
I have more weapons than storage slots to put them in ( from salvage ). Granted, they are not rare but nor did I ever feel the need for rare weapons or stronger ships ( 7h in this run ).
To make things worse, the faction standings are too easy to recover from and overall feel very artificial. They switch and change too often and easily, making them lose substance.
IMHO accepting a comission should be a big, game-changing thing, not just an easy way into cash.
I also just want to say: I would really appreciate a hard mode for the game. The normal difficulty is fine starting out, but it's just not very challenging economically.Maybe the spacefarer difficulty should be enabled by default. Even if it isn't exactly what people are looking for maybe it'll at least be a step in the right direction?
Thank you for the added info! Could you clarify on the exact order setup you have to make them "blob"?Well, I can't quite remember, as I've done multiple fights. Usually, I assign auroras to escort an onslaught, each, then I send the capitals to a control point or a rally point, closer to my side of the map. Depending on how the points generate, sometimes our fleets meet on one, me getting there first. Pretty much all enemy ships go to the point, except for a few frigates/destroyers and pile on from one direction, slowly trickling around.
I also just want to say: I would really appreciate a hard mode for the game. The normal difficulty is fine starting out, but it's just not very challenging economically.I would suggest looking at the settings.json file. A few lines there can do stuff like turn off the stipend and enable starfarer mode, which gives you a debit that you need to pay every month. More lines like recovery rates or ship sale prices are also there. You should spend some time looking through it and change anything you like
While searching, I found this good post (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=14114.msg245817#msg245817) on the subject from someone in 2019:QuoteAs much as I'd love to sink another 100 hours into the game, the meta is just too easy. 2h in everything seems to lose purpose as your power level just explodes.
Hyperspace travel is essentially hassle-free. The factions are either not aggressive enough or they don't have enough fleets overall ( and I'm on negative with all but Hegemony ). The only hassle is the annoyance of navigating the "storms" and occasionally avoiding the very few stronger faction fleets. Avoiding the fleets is fairly easy as the strong ones are generally much slower.
The skill-driven power explosion was unsatisfactory as well. Overall skills feel meaningless when you get so many so quickly.
The stipend + commission down-right break the already fragile economy.
By fragile I mean:
The over-supply of ships ( they are more common than ore or basic supplies .... )
The ship prices are ludicrously low. Even at 2x their current cost they would still be ridiculously low. ( I had an Onslaught with 1D 4h in, did not break the bank either )
Trade routes are way too easy to abuse ( it's worse than in the usual grind-trading systems since your viable options are actually lower but the payouts much higher )
Rewards are way too big for non-combat "quests". ( to be read as those without a cost sink )
Basic supplies are way too cheap and abundant.
I have more weapons than storage slots to put them in ( from salvage ). Granted, they are not rare but nor did I ever feel the need for rare weapons or stronger ships ( 7h in this run ).
To make things worse, the faction standings are too easy to recover from and overall feel very artificial. They switch and change too often and easily, making them lose substance.
IMHO accepting a comission should be a big, game-changing thing, not just an easy way into cash.
The explosion of skills has been addressed, but that's pretty much it.
I suppose I can look into making a "hard mode" mod myself. I've never done any modding before, but I really like this game in every other respect.
One of the biggest issues to me is that it feels like the actual fun parts are quite separated from how to make money. If I want to make money, I do a bunch of trading. Then, with that nest egg, I can go around having fights. But fighting because you're some leisure-class dilettante who wants to hunt the "most dangerous game" is very different from the idea in the lore of struggling to survive. Fighting, exploring... these are money losers (certainly when you look at the opportunity cost).
I guess right now making money from trade is not particularly difficult, however, it is very hard to collect bounties profitably.
I think commissions need a major rework, but I've thought that for a while. Free money with no strings attached is too much.Maybe if factions which are in war would try to raid each other, player could get you-must-do-it missions to defeat raiding fleets, losing rep and payment in case of not defeating enemy fleets, and getting additional rep and payment in case of defeating it. There may be another missions, cause if you are getting paid like a mercenary, you must do something like a mercenary.
Also, the Bulk Transport skill that gives every ship +50% capacity of everything is... really good. Not to mention it throws +1 burn on top. I don't know if it's "too good", but it definitely seems more attractive to me than the alternative skill (more resources from exploration... but the limiting factor for me is always carrying them all). Really helps out with early game Spacer start.Bulk transport's cargo boost is good earlygame but falls off quickly and it only applies the +1 burn to civvie ships without militarized subsystems that spike your sensor profile insanely high. I find it completely useless.
And I continue to find it mystifying that the game acts like crew matter. Salvaging gives -75% crew loss in non-combat... but this is useless. Crew don't matter. I think they should matter. But to matter, they should cost at least 10x more, maybe 20x more. Then I might care if they die.
A quick question because I'm not sure: Do upper level enemy officers also have all elite skills? I know I mentioned this earlier, but I think I see the elite nav skill on all remnants, so I'm wondering about things like kinetic damage on armor, etc.All skills are elite on Automated Ships with cores. They also can be changed at will on the officer screen for Automated Ships.
Also, the Bulk Transport skill that gives every ship +50% capacity of everything is... really good. Not to mention it throws +1 burn on top. I don't know if it's "too good", but it definitely seems more attractive to me than the alternative skill (more resources from exploration... but the limiting factor for me is always carrying them all). Really helps out with early game Spacer start.Bulk transport's cargo boost is good earlygame but falls off quickly and it only applies the +1 burn to civvie ships without militarized subsystems that spike your sensor profile insanely high. I find it completely useless.
And I continue to find it mystifying that the game acts like crew matter. Salvaging gives -75% crew loss in non-combat... but this is useless. Crew don't matter. I think they should matter. But to matter, they should cost at least 10x more, maybe 20x more. Then I might care if they die.
Also, the Bulk Transport skill that gives every ship +50% capacity of everything is... really good. Not to mention it throws +1 burn on top. I don't know if it's "too good", but it definitely seems more attractive to me than the alternative skill (more resources from exploration... but the limiting factor for me is always carrying them all). Really helps out with early game Spacer start.Bulk transport's cargo boost is good earlygame but falls off quickly and it only applies the +1 burn to civvie ships without militarized subsystems that spike your sensor profile insanely high. I find it completely useless.
And I continue to find it mystifying that the game acts like crew matter. Salvaging gives -75% crew loss in non-combat... but this is useless. Crew don't matter. I think they should matter. But to matter, they should cost at least 10x more, maybe 20x more. Then I might care if they die.
How does a flat 50% bonus fall off? I guess if you have more storage than you could possibly need...
The +1 burn I find useful in not having to stick militarized on everything, which synergizes well with the skill that buffs the hell out of that but drops off after 5 deployment points of militarized. I stick Insulated Engine Assembly on everything to cut the signature in half. Sure, you can put militarized on too and cut it into quarters, but to make it worth it I have to slap IEA on all my combat ships of the same size as well, which isn't really worth it.
[long post about mercenary officers]
It is not a flat 50% bonus, it's one of many Threshold skills. It's a 50% bonus until your base storage becomes more than 2000, and the percent increase becomes less and less than that as your base storage continues to climb.Also, the Bulk Transport skill that gives every ship +50% capacity of everything is... really good. Not to mention it throws +1 burn on top. I don't know if it's "too good", but it definitely seems more attractive to me than the alternative skill (more resources from exploration... but the limiting factor for me is always carrying them all). Really helps out with early game Spacer start.Bulk transport's cargo boost is good earlygame but falls off quickly and it only applies the +1 burn to civvie ships without militarized subsystems that spike your sensor profile insanely high. I find it completely useless.
And I continue to find it mystifying that the game acts like crew matter. Salvaging gives -75% crew loss in non-combat... but this is useless. Crew don't matter. I think they should matter. But to matter, they should cost at least 10x more, maybe 20x more. Then I might care if they die.
How does a flat 50% bonus fall off? I guess if you have more storage than you could possibly need...
Far as I can tell, it isn't. Tried hovering within the circle of the Hypershunt for a while, all I did was bleed supplies at an alarming rate for being stuck in a corona. Before defeating the baddies, after defeating them, and repairing the structure, no effect. Either it's not working or I'm misinterpreting how it's supposed to work - but, I can see lots of forethought went into the design of small details like that!For lore reasons, I suppose it's also reasonable to ask why the magfield doesn't also deflect the corona on the campaign map. Might be nice for it to act like a planet in that fashion, stopping the corona in the area behind it. Would make getting to somewhat easier, too. Tough fight, and going in with less CR (from getting lightly toasted by the corona, emergency burn, or both) kinda hurts.
It does protect you from the corona in the campaign as long as your fleet circle is touching it, IIRC.
storypoints ARE precious, and having to spend one per officer per yer, while having to deal with the extra micro of managing your officers AND the mercs not only is annoying, but its wasteful...
+1 Base valueDid you improve Mining for another +1? Also, Alpha core adds another +1 (and stacks with the colony skills it has too).
+2 Plentiful volatiles
+3 Plasma dynamo
+1 Administrator
That is a total of 7. If I didn't have Plasma Dynamo I would not get up to even 5, which I thought would be a more reasonable number but, looking at this now, ouch yeah Fusion Lamp feels extremely pricy for what it does. Might actually be more beneficial to switch to a +1 Volatiles planet instead that does not have Extreme Cold and Darkness debuffs so I would not have to use the lamp.
Officers are not a fun SP sink - you end up paying SP for mere maintenance rather than any long term power gain.Agreed, especially when I want to hoard SP for s-mods and especially colony improvements (thanks insane 2^n cost). Once I find the planets I want to colonize (my current game seed has somewhat crummy planets), I plan to dump SP like crazy into colonies.
+1 Base valueDid you improve Mining for another +1? Also, Alpha core adds another +1 (and stacks with the colony skills it has too).
+2 Plentiful volatiles
+3 Plasma dynamo
+1 Administrator
That is a total of 7. If I didn't have Plasma Dynamo I would not get up to even 5, which I thought would be a more reasonable number but, looking at this now, ouch yeah Fusion Lamp feels extremely pricy for what it does. Might actually be more beneficial to switch to a +1 Volatiles planet instead that does not have Extreme Cold and Darkness debuffs so I would not have to use the lamp.
+2 Volatiles is the highest a planet can have. (Same for Farmland, for that matter.)
I did not improve mining with a +1 from story points. I see the storypoint upgrades as an extra, so don't look at them as a "vanilla" part of the colony experience. That and they are horrendiously expensive! Avoiding AI core use so luddics won't come bothering me.What I dislike about them is it encourages the grind for story points to feed the ever-growing black hole, much like soft-capped level limits of earlier releases.
I also just want to say: I would really appreciate a hard mode for the game. The normal difficulty is fine starting out, but it's just not very challenging economically.
While searching, I found this good post (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=14114.msg245817#msg245817) on the subject from someone in 2019:QuoteAs much as I'd love to sink another 100 hours into the game, the meta is just too easy. 2h in everything seems to lose purpose as your power level just explodes.
Hyperspace travel is essentially hassle-free. The factions are either not aggressive enough or they don't have enough fleets overall ( and I'm on negative with all but Hegemony ). The only hassle is the annoyance of navigating the "storms" and occasionally avoiding the very few stronger faction fleets. Avoiding the fleets is fairly easy as the strong ones are generally much slower.
The skill-driven power explosion was unsatisfactory as well. Overall skills feel meaningless when you get so many so quickly.
The stipend + commission down-right break the already fragile economy.
By fragile I mean:
The over-supply of ships ( they are more common than ore or basic supplies .... )
The ship prices are ludicrously low. Even at 2x their current cost they would still be ridiculously low. ( I had an Onslaught with 1D 4h in, did not break the bank either )
Trade routes are way too easy to abuse ( it's worse than in the usual grind-trading systems since your viable options are actually lower but the payouts much higher )
Rewards are way too big for non-combat "quests". ( to be read as those without a cost sink )
Basic supplies are way too cheap and abundant.
I have more weapons than storage slots to put them in ( from salvage ). Granted, they are not rare but nor did I ever feel the need for rare weapons or stronger ships ( 7h in this run ).
To make things worse, the faction standings are too easy to recover from and overall feel very artificial. They switch and change too often and easily, making them lose substance.
IMHO accepting a comission should be a big, game-changing thing, not just an easy way into cash.
The explosion of skills has been addressed, but that's pretty much it.
I suppose I can look into making a "hard mode" mod myself. I've never done any modding before, but I really like this game in every other respect.
One of the biggest issues to me is that it feels like the actual fun parts are quite separated from how to make money. If I want to make money, I do a bunch of trading. Then, with that nest egg, I can go around having fights. But fighting because you're some leisure-class dilettante who wants to hunt the "most dangerous game" is very different from the idea in the lore of struggling to survive. Fighting, exploring... these are money losers (certainly when you look at the opportunity cost).
officersYeah, it bothers me that officers you level up are inferior.
Thank you for the added info! Could you clarify on the exact order setup you have to make them "blob"?Well, I can't quite remember, as I've done multiple fights. Usually, I assign auroras to escort an onslaught, each, then I send the capitals to a control point or a rally point, closer to my side of the map. Depending on how the points generate, sometimes our fleets meet on one, me getting there first. Pretty much all enemy ships go to the point, except for a few frigates/destroyers and pile on from one direction, slowly trickling around.
However, Leadership 4L is devalued by all of the random level 7s the player can eventually loot (if he bothers to check out all random derelicts and distress calls).
Some modding questions, but I think they are serious issues...
Are "getDamageToFighters" and "getDamageToMissiles"(MutableStat) should use "modifyFlat" to increase the percentage damage bonus?
All new vanilla codes which are created after 0.95a from "starfarer.api" use "modifyFlat" to increase percentage damage bonus, but codes created before 0.95a use "modifyPercent", which is confusing...
There are no carrier skills for officers, just warship or general-purpose skills.
About those level 7 officers you can find, is it possible to add some way to make them...well, not completely useless in some cases? Being able to fully re-spec them is probably a bit much, but IIRC I once found a level 7 officer specced for close range brawling...who was Timid. I mean he could pilot a really mean Buffalo pretending to be a PD platform, I guess, but...
i just dont understand why contracted officers are even a thing now, they bust the balance out of the door for everyone, but the ai especially, since they can just spam them without regards for, well, the upkeep and upcost
storypoints ARE precious, and having to spend one per officer per yer, while having to deal with the extra micro of managing your officers AND the mercs not only is annoying, but its wasteful...
just remove them, and keep the hard limit for everyone
8 officers is more than enough
(thats not mentioning the problem officers have with skills, and random officers ALWAYS being better than... the ones you train (hardcap on level and elite skills compared to, well, no cap on level AND again elite skills for officers youd find in pods and such)
i just find it wierd that officers you actively teach and guide... can never be as good, hell, nearly as good as officers you just... pick up randomly, especially "promising" officers
just compare them at face value
random officers are almost always level 7 (although i think i have seen a level 9 at some point iirc), meaning... 2 more skills than youd get by growing an officer yourself... and ANY of those skills have the ability to be elite too, and not limited to 1 either (granted... ironically, the "elite" in some elite skills is kind of... weak imo)
there are already alot of good uses for storypoints (especially when you get into colonies my gawd), that we (or the ai in this case)really dont need the ability to spam better officers and ecm the crap out of anything
Also:
Stipend can be turned off in the config file.
You can choose not to take a commission, or adjust how much it is worth.
You can enable spacer start (which IIRC starts you with literally nothing) in the config.
You can adjust the prices of ships and basic supplies yourself... hell, pretty much any "number isn't right for my tastes" problem you have can be solved by editing a simple text file in the game folder.
Eventually Alex will probably make a big boi difficulty himself, but until then we can help ourselves while he does more important things that we can't just adjust ourselves in text files.
I get the feeling that the contracted officers need to go, and become contracted mercs force, their own independent command that travels with you (at your supply and fuel expensens) and fight with you, much like a friendly AI force would, but for X ammount of time
My personal favorites are:
- you can't buy ships, ever; only loot-restore them or build your own, but!
- no exploration until you have at least 1 cruiser(+)-sized exploration ship (like Apogee); with the above rule you have to hunt for it first
"economyIterPerMonth":10,
"economyMinDemandForPricing":100,
"economyMinStockpileForPricing":100,
"economyNoDemandPriceMult":0.5,
"economyGreedFraction":0.25,
"economyDeficitPriceIncrPerUnit":0.125,
"economyDeficitPriceMultMax":1.5,
"economyExcessPriceDecrPerUnit":0.11,
"economyExcessPriceMultMin":0.67,
After having put a couple of afternoons into the new version:
I'm really liking the new economy and the industry items, overall I'm really enjoying the whole of the exploration and colonization aspect.
I'm really not a fan of the new combat though.
First, the AI is back to feeling way too timid like they were a few updates ago, it feels like they all just cluster up at the edge of enemy ship's firing range. They also have an infuriating tendency to block each other's firing line. Most noticeable with slower Hagemony fleets.
Second, officers were fun in the beginning, but it's time to reign them in. They're making the early game where the player doesn't have officers extra frustrating, and then end up making the late game too easy when the player gets a full roster of their own officers. My last system defense, I tied up two wolves and a Shepherd on a single Wolf with an officer, which leads to number three...
Third, why the hell does the AI still have such a massive deployment advantage over the player? Especially when we have a meta where the player may need to tie up 3 of their ships to match one of the enemies? I'm getting increasingly fatigued of getting overrun at the beginning of the battle and not being able to control enough of the battlefield to even come close to matching the number of hulls the enemy is throwing at me.
Code"economyIterPerMonth":10,
"economyMinDemandForPricing":100,
"economyMinStockpileForPricing":100,
"economyNoDemandPriceMult":0.5,
"economyGreedFraction":0.25,
"economyDeficitPriceIncrPerUnit":0.125,
"economyDeficitPriceMultMax":1.5,
"economyExcessPriceDecrPerUnit":0.11,
"economyExcessPriceMultMin":0.67,
What is "GreedFraction"? And this says the max price multiplier is 1.5, but I'm almost sure I've seen prices higher than that?
Alex, would you make skills 3x4 or even 4x3 instead of current 2x5?That’s still outright bad
Might have found a bug. Spoilers ahead for those who haven't completed story missions yet.Spoiler
Finished the storyline up to a point where I unlocked gate access and went to the Aztlan system's ring gate.
Even though there is no nearby hegemony fleet nearby, I keep getting the message that a nearby hegemony fleet is blocking scanning attempts. Screenshot below.
https://i.imgur.com/95oFBft.png[close]
Might have found a bug. Spoilers ahead for those who haven't completed story missions yet.Spoiler
Finished the storyline up to a point where I unlocked gate access and went to the Aztlan system's ring gate.
Even though there is no nearby hegemony fleet nearby, I keep getting the message that a nearby hegemony fleet is blocking scanning attempts. Screenshot below.
https://i.imgur.com/95oFBft.png[close]
god i actually hate that so much, the whole "a nearby hostile fleet is tracking your movements", as if ID CARE WITH MY 5 PARAGON FLEET THAT A FAST PICKET IS TRACKING ME WHEN SALVAGING
Might have found a bug. Spoilers ahead for those who haven't completed story missions yet.Spoiler
Finished the storyline up to a point where I unlocked gate access and went to the Aztlan system's ring gate.
Even though there is no nearby hegemony fleet nearby, I keep getting the message that a nearby hegemony fleet is blocking scanning attempts. Screenshot below.
https://i.imgur.com/95oFBft.png[close]
god i actually hate that so much, the whole "a nearby hostile fleet is tracking your movements", as if ID CARE WITH MY 5 PARAGON FLEET THAT A FAST PICKET IS TRACKING ME WHEN SALVAGING
That is a pretty good point. It might even be preferrable if the enemy fleet which was tracking you would either be forced to fight you or to let you do your thing if they don't want to stop you with weapon fire.
That is a pretty good point. It might even be preferrable if the enemy fleet which was tracking you would either be forced to fight you or to let you do your thing if they don't want to stop you with weapon fire.
Might have found a bug. Spoilers ahead for those who haven't completed story missions yet.Spoiler
Finished the storyline up to a point where I unlocked gate access and went to the Aztlan system's ring gate.
Even though there is no nearby hegemony fleet nearby, I keep getting the message that a nearby hegemony fleet is blocking scanning attempts. Screenshot below.
https://i.imgur.com/95oFBft.png[close]
god i actually hate that so much, the whole "a nearby hostile fleet is tracking your movements", as if ID CARE WITH MY 5 PARAGON FLEET THAT A FAST PICKET IS TRACKING ME WHEN SALVAGING
That is a pretty good point. It might even be preferrable if the enemy fleet which was tracking you would either be forced to fight you or to let you do your thing if they don't want to stop you with weapon fire.
especially when you have dedicated salvage ships that do the salvaging... youd imagine that your military ships would stand guard during the process... but apparently even those participate in the salvage ops
Might have found a bug. Spoilers ahead for those who haven't completed story missions yet.Spoiler
Finished the storyline up to a point where I unlocked gate access and went to the Aztlan system's ring gate.
Even though there is no nearby hegemony fleet nearby, I keep getting the message that a nearby hegemony fleet is blocking scanning attempts. Screenshot below.
https://i.imgur.com/95oFBft.png[close]
god i actually hate that so much, the whole "a nearby hostile fleet is tracking your movements", as if ID CARE WITH MY 5 PARAGON FLEET THAT A FAST PICKET IS TRACKING ME WHEN SALVAGING
That is a pretty good point. It might even be preferrable if the enemy fleet which was tracking you would either be forced to fight you or to let you do your thing if they don't want to stop you with weapon fire.
especially when you have dedicated salvage ships that do the salvaging... youd imagine that your military ships would stand guard during the process... but apparently even those participate in the salvage ops
You know that could be a neat battle, you have your ships with the salvage vessels deployed (freely) behind you doing their thing and the enemy fleet coming towards your battleline
it would be a neat sort of battle (and as much as I hate escort missions, it would be neat to have some of that, if anything for mission variety)
Also: the Gemini is getting Civilian-based Hull, so is its base burn being reduced to 8 as well?Noticed that the base burn speed is still 9, so Militarized Subsystems puts it at 10 / frigate burn speed. Just wanna double check if that is intended?
some guy at a bar asked me to produce 9 units of organs at a colony, is that even plausible?
Bulk transport skill kinda doesn't make sense considering trading isn't supposed to be a main focus of the game (at least from what I gathered). More sense for me it would make first tier have you choose between increase in common goods scavenge + storage increases OR increased chance for rare finds. It would let player focus on either scavenging wreckage in safer areas and go for the bulk transport/sale of scrap (thus letting for more sustainable existence if someone wants to play as space hobo) OR to become an artifact hunter delving deep into wild parts of the Sector, going for high risk/high reward play.With that, I want the rare item skill until I do not need more rare items, then respec to the bag of holding skill.
Bulk transport skill kinda doesn't make sense considering trading isn't supposed to be a main focus of the game (at least from what I gathered). More sense for me it would make first tier have you choose between increase in common goods scavenge + storage increases OR increased chance for rare finds. It would let player focus on either scavenging wreckage in safer areas and go for the bulk transport/sale of scrap (thus letting for more sustainable existence if someone wants to play as space hobo) OR to become an artifact hunter delving deep into wild parts of the Sector, going for high risk/high reward play.With that, I want the rare item skill until I do not need more rare items, then respec to the bag of holding skill.
Bulk Transport is nice for 1) absorbing loot bombs (from ruins or big fights) with fewer ships and 2) no need for Militarized Subsystems on civilians for +1 burn alone.
Even if player does not care to trade, he may want room to loot if he plays (tomb) raider.
Noticed that the base burn speed is still 9, so Militarized Subsystems puts it at 10 / frigate burn speed. Just wanna double check if that is intended?
Minor question: are the offers of 'discount' ships from contacts based upon what the player has in their fleet or what they'd purchased last? I ask because last time, my hegemony contact offered me a gryphon right after I'd bought one on the market, and then kept offering my dominator XIVs (most common ship in my fleet thanks to him). In this one, a bar event is offering a drover right after another bar event let me get one on the cheap, and my most common ship type is carriers. Just confirmation bias, or is there some behind the scenes logic at play? Either way, they keep offering me useful ships so its good!
extra-esoteric bug
Another piece of feedback.
Since we no longer have the OP boosting skill, but instead we have the built-in hull mods some ships became more potent while others somewhat lost their appeal.
One particularly striking example is the Legion. At first glance, you might think that having 260 OP + 3 built-in hull mods is a big step forward. However, the improvement is less game-changing compared to the Onslaught. One reason might be, that the Legion has 4 fighter wings and a similar amount of hardpoints but only 260 OP. So giving 3 built-in hull mods can still leave the Legion to feel OP starved, while giving +26 Op might make the ship less OP starved as a battle carrier, without the hull mods.
It's not a complaint at all, it's just an impression. Legion is a big loser of this update, and other ships might get better or worse, with this new system.
i cant speak for the regular (buu hegemony) legion, battlegroup legion is SO good, and the best flagship in the game imo
2 hyperdrivers, 1 flack in the "nose" slot, 2 hurricanes (slot out one for a locust if fighting high fighter fleets if you are scared of their... "ordinance", 4 xyphons, both missile mods, 2 maulers, whatever other hullmods you want, and on the small slots with lots of coverage s-mortars is so good for a fleet anchor
obviously dont use it as a "carrier" and more like a "you aint gonna go past me whatever you do" point for your fleet
i cant speak for the regular (buu hegemony) legion, battlegroup legion is SO good, and the best flagship in the game imo
2 hyperdrivers, 1 flack in the "nose" slot, 2 hurricanes (slot out one for a locust if fighting high fighter fleets if you are scared of their... "ordinance", 4 xyphons, both missile mods, 2 maulers, whatever other hullmods you want, and on the small slots with lots of coverage s-mortars is so good for a fleet anchor
obviously dont use it as a "carrier" and more like a "you aint gonna go past me whatever you do" point for your fleet
I think for that role the XIV Onslaught is waaaay better. Especially after the buffs.
Stronger armor, hull (basically you can afford to lose the flux war sometimes, you have so much hull and armor) heavy ballistic integration etc...
With that, I want the rare item skill until I do not need more rare items, then respec to the bag of holding skill.Ah, right, the whole rare find chance thing pushes the player to maximize it because it's a limited resource.
Bulk Transport is nice for 1) absorbing loot bombs (from ruins or big fights) with fewer ships and 2) no need for Militarized Subsystems on civilians for +1 burn alone.
Even if player does not care to trade, he may want room to loot if he plays (tomb) raider.
I've noticed something with the new Converted Fighter Bays hull mod: it can be used on three ships in the base game: the Shepherd, Tempest, and Venture since you can only install it on ships with built-in fighter wings. To use it on the Tempest would be insane, the Venture meh, and the Shepherd decent. But, you can only use it on 3 ships - very limited, and even more limited by the fact it's a dock-only modification. I feel like it's use could be expanded more by allowing it to be installed on any ship with fighter bays (rather than built-in fighters only), remove the dock requirement, and remove the CR penalty to do a space install, but keep the CR penalty for space uninstall. With those changes I could see slapping this on some of my ships if I'm out exploring and go over the cap, but I gimp my combat capabilities considerably. Otherwise, case use is ridiculously limited and the hullmod just aught not to exist.It feels like a Shepherd-only mod. I throw it on all of them for 150 cargo frigate-sized freighter. I would not use it on Tempest even if I want it because it needs all of the OP it can get for combat stuff.
I still wonder if Bulk Transport could be improved, because people probably will still prefer Salvaging skill
@Alex, can you please make Atlas more common at market? I'm played 3 runs and managed to buy Atlas only once, while Prometheuses are pretty common. :-\
I noticed that Astrals tend to activate recall device as soon as first wave of bomber drops bomb.#
This is very problematic when using long bow + cobra: Astrals AWLAYS recall cobra before they use their reapers.
Does the colony output/input system work in a manner if say. I have a colony that is outputting 10 Volatiles (in theory). Said colony can supply an infinite amount of input demands long as each demand source does not exceed 10 volatiles. So in theory 1 Colony which produces 10 volatiles can supply 5 planets with their own sunlamps that each have their own demand of 10 volatiles?
I noticed that Astrals tend to activate recall device as soon as first wave of bomber drops bomb.#
This is very problematic when using long bow + cobra: Astrals AWLAYS recall cobra before they use their reapers.
easy fix: dont mix bombers
which you shouldnt do anyways because of the way wings work
- Randomly generated planets in the core (including Duzahk and Penelope's Star) should no longer be habitable
a few buggy things noticed
-achieving 10 transplutonics production for hypershunt tap seems impossible as max output is 5+1+1+2 while using a core to reduce consumption dose not activate its effect. Similar situation happen on orbital fusion lamp as core reduces consumption but the hazard rate still get 5% penalty labeled volatiles shortage.
Nagh, sorry I didn't make it clear when I said OFL I mean the reduction made by core raise hazard penalty, achieving 10 volatiles is fair enough to be done as long as +2 condition and plasma_dynamo are applied together on a gas giant.Spoilera few buggy things noticed
-achieving 10 transplutonics production for hypershunt tap seems impossible as max output is 5+1+1+2 while using a core to reduce consumption dose not activate its effect. Similar situation happen on orbital fusion lamp as core reduces consumption but the hazard rate still get 5% penalty labeled volatiles shortage.[close]
I take that it is 5 from regular production, plus 1 from admin, plus 1 from core, plus 2 from equipment for a total of 9. The last transplutonic can be produced by making improvements with story points. Should be the same with Volatiles although I haven't found an item for those.
An other solution would be to mod the settings file and allow the player colonies to grow larger and thus produce more stuff.
I noticed that Astrals tend to activate recall device as soon as first wave of bomber drops bomb.#
This is very problematic when using long bow + cobra: Astrals AWLAYS recall cobra before they use their reapers.
easy fix: dont mix bombers
which you shouldnt do anyways because of the way wings work
40‘s too less, 45 I say. Also that one type bomber like Longbow, Dagger and Flash do well on themselves. Longbow's sabot may be countered via lowering shield and use armor but then its EMP damage well take effect and cause problems, especially on ships having main output weapon at front of hull#SpoilerI noticed that Astrals tend to activate recall device as soon as first wave of bomber drops bomb.
This is very problematic when using long bow + cobra: Astrals AWLAYS recall cobra before they use their reapers.[close]
easy fix: dont mix bombers
which you shouldnt do anyways because of the way wings work
One type damage bombers countered by AI pretty efficient. AI drop shield before Longbows to take kinetic damage on armor or just shield deflect HE bombers like Cobra.
@Sutopia Tridents+Longbows combo should work for Astral.
Btw, imho, with nerf to recall device Astral should cost now 40 DP, not 50.
40‘s too less, 45 I say. Also that one type bomber like Longbow, Dagger and Flash do well on themselves. Longbow's sabot may be countered via lowering shield and use armor but then its EMP damage well take effect and cause problems, especially on ships having main output weapon at front of hull
- Randomly generated planets in the core (including Duzahk and Penelope's Star) should no longer be habitable
Ithaca isn't random-gen. The description hints at that.
Haven't had a chance to test this in RC11 yet, but I noticed that the story-offered Hegemony contact on Caotl(?) does seem to have an issue where his relationship decays for unknown reasons. I've done at least one bounty mission and bought a surplus Hammerhead from him, but his relationship is currently at 0.Contact reputation decay is too fast
Huh? AFAIK there's no rep decay.
For the record this doesn't seem to be an issue related to losing standing with the contact's faction, as I initially thought - neither my independent or pirates contacts cared about me getting dinged points for getting caught selling to the black market wholesale and doing everything in my power to squeeze every last possible credit out of them no matter how much death and mayhem I caused, respectively.
Yeah, colonies has been nerfed a bit too much, I think, at least the early stages. Unless a planet has 125% or less hazard rating it's pretty much not going to grow without hazard pay, and unless a planet is godlike in terms of it's profitability it's going to be bleeding tens of thousands of credits if it offers hazard pay, to say nothing of the cost of hiring an administrator. It's interesting, and kind of annoying, that it's not the threat of pirates that's keeping me from exploring right now, but the fact that if I don't stick around the core and hunt down every last credit I'm going to go bankrupt.
Maybe try disable all mods and re-install the whole SS file. I personally didn't notice any rep decay, it may be a random bug but something must have gone wrong for your games. Wish you guys can get yourselves out, good luck.Haven't had a chance to test this in RC11 yet, but I noticed that the story-offered Hegemony contact on Caotl(?) does seem to have an issue where his relationship decays for unknown reasons. I've done at least one bounty mission and bought a surplus Hammerhead from him, but his relationship is currently at 0.Contact reputation decay is too fast
Huh? AFAIK there's no rep decay.
For the record this doesn't seem to be an issue related to losing standing with the contact's faction, as I initially thought - neither my independent or pirates contacts cared about me getting dinged points for getting caught selling to the black market wholesale and doing everything in my power to squeeze every last possible credit out of them no matter how much death and mayhem I caused, respectively.
Yeah, colonies has been nerfed a bit too much, I think, at least the early stages. Unless a planet has 125% or less hazard rating it's pretty much not going to grow without hazard pay, and unless a planet is godlike in terms of it's profitability it's going to be bleeding tens of thousands of credits if it offers hazard pay, to say nothing of the cost of hiring an administrator. It's interesting, and kind of annoying, that it's not the threat of pirates that's keeping me from exploring right now, but the fact that if I don't stick around the core and hunt down every last credit I'm going to go bankrupt.
wtf apparently me and a couple other people are having a bug where the contact reputation resets to zero after speaking with them (or just randomly or it just resets to zero somehow)
(https://i.imgur.com/d3qYbkM.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/KIk35vJ.png)
Fly into the sun and click on it!
Fixed this up! The game was, ah, setting the reputation to 0 on save unless it was 5 points or more; the "is this reputation pretty much zero aside from a rounding error" check was missing a couple of zeroes after the decimal point.thanks so much was losing the will to play ;D ;D
It seems kind of weird and broken that this would happen. If I am getting attacked by them, it shouldn't act like I am the one making things hostile. If TT is going to be hostile to me no matter what now, shouldn't they have just changed to hostile? Or, if this isn't supposed to happen like this at all, then I think 'move in to engage' is incorrectly assuming that I am the one who initiated combat, for some reason, but I don't know why.
Normally if I get a message that attacking would start a war, it'd be in a situation where I can also just walk away from the encounter.
Is there a rationale behind battlestations and star fortresses no longer natively having officers?
That said, I'm not opposed to changing some specific encounters to give a smaller rep change instead of insta-hostile. Which ones specifically bothered you? I can note them down to have a look.I know one fleet which does the "always hostile towards you, causes hostilities if you defend against them" thing is the revenge fleet that spawns from using bought access codes during a raid. Which on paper makes sense, but I'm not sure if that holds down to the details. For instance if you use a SP to cover up your involvement in that specific raid, does the revenge fleet still spawn? If so I don't think it should cause instant hostilities if you defend yourself against it, since the revenge fleet wouldn't be able to prove you were the one that did the raiding...or something along those lines.
What do access codes do? Increase raid strength/decrease raid defenses?×0.05 modifier to the amount of marines lost in one raid, IIRC. Access codes require a bar mission to buy, are only good for a month/one use, and are faction-specific. And summon a vengeance fleet some time afterwards.
That said, I'm not opposed to changing some specific encounters to give a smaller rep change instead of insta-hostile. Which ones specifically bothered you? I can note them down to have a look.
Ahh, so it doesn't raid success chance? The codes tend to cost about 30k, and 30k is worth 150-200 marines, so the break even point would be around 150-200 marine casualties prevented, not counting the time take to find a set of codes and the chance of not getting to use it in time due to patrols and other unknowns.It's not worth it if you're raiding some backwater for supplies or drugs, but if you're raiding a heavily defended system for a nanoforge or blueprints it's well worth the price.
I feel like the automated ships skill is extremely cool in practice, but has way too little of an impact compared to the alternative. Just 30 points means that with just 3 [REDACTED] version of the kite with 3 gamma cores, i'm already at full capacity... sure i could take a bigger ship with reduced CR, but as much strong a single redacted ship can be, other than the novelty, giving 10 to flux capacitors and vents, and an extra hullmod to every single ship is just too good to pass out. My suggestion would be to raise the maximum points, even doubling it, reducing the points cost of the gamma core while increasing beta and alpha cores cost.
I think it would be balanced if you could have a single good ship with a good commander and enough leftover points for a couple of smaller ships with trash commanders, or a lot of smaller ships with trash commanders , or some medium sized ship with good commanders etc, opening up to various combinations that are impossible right now
A REDACTED battleship with an alpha core integrated is the second most powerful ship in the game (below singing friend encounter 1 and above REDACTED 2: Electric Boogaloo). Operating at 45% combat readiness doesn't even figure into that. The larger issue with the automated ship skill is that that is the best use of it and it makes every other recoverable automated ship redundant once you can get your hands on one.
Automated ships skill gives you free officered ships. Meaning free ECM and some other stuff. A lot of it actually.
One choice is to make my whole fleet stronger, doubling the vents on frigates [or easing flux pressure on flux-hungry capital ships], adding otherwise extremely costly hullmod to capital ships [for just the cost of a story point] etc; the other is to get a single strong ship that i can't even use as flagship [or maybe one or two cruisers] and has lower cr than the rest of the fleet [to the point where it has accuracy and other debuffs or suffers risk of malfunction while at max CR].
AI cored ships do not count toward officer limit. You can have up to 10 human officers. And about five gamma cores in frigates with some combat worthy CR left. If you go full support that means +50 ECM rating. Where was a fuss about ECM wars and how you win them. This is how.
AI cored ships do not count toward officer limit. You can have up to 10 human officers. And about five gamma cores in frigates with some combat worthy CR left. If you go full support that means +50 ECM rating. Where was a fuss about ECM wars and how you win them. This is how.
When I can do the same thing by taking and holding points on the map and just having normal ships in play do the same thing (hell, I could use the extra hullmod from Specialized Modifications to build in an extra ECM hullmod to most of my capitals and cruisers if I really wanted), I don't consider that an overwhelming argument against it. Plus there are more interesting/fun things to do with [REDACTED] ships than deploying 5 frigates for ridiculous ECM ratings by stacking the maximum number of "officers" possible (especially if you're not playing a "wolf pack" style fleet). This is just as undesirable IMO as the other meta being "get and deploy a [REDACTED] battleship with an Alpha Core and nothing else matters". To me that sounds more like the "DP cost" of cores for the Automated Ships skill needs to be reconsidered, or have a separate limit on AI cores used as officers (e.g. 1 base, 3 by making the skill Elite with a story point) or something.
The question was that the skill in question "has way too little of an impact compared to the alternative". Now we are debating two meta things about it. One is that it allows you to turn the ECM war the other way around and provide the option to achieve -20 to range against any fleet you encounter. And the other is the overpowered battleship "tearing almost everything near it to shreds". How is that "too little of an impact" compared to a third SP mod and 10 caps and vents as a permanent choice?
Optimized loadouts and officers being the key to winning fleet battles is better than ECM being the key. Figuring out optimized loadouts is a fairly deep skill; you need to understand your options and the enemy you're up against and plan accordingly. ECM is just "get bigger number and you win."
I don't really care if limiting ECM makes it useless. ECM isn't interesting in the first place.
You don't have to be "advanced" to understand that putting ECM mods on your ships or taking the "+2% ECM for each deployed ship" skill are good ideas. Both are extremely simple decisions. They're simpler decisions than almost anything else you could do to get an advantage, in fact.
Okay? That doesn't really have anything to do with what I'm saying.
The problem is not that people can't adapt or don't understand. You complained earlier about people being able to just auto-win by slapping an ITU on everything; if you're able to understand why that's bad, it shouldn't be hard to understand why auto-winning by getting a 20% range advantage is also bad. It's the exact same thing, the only thing that's been shuffled around a little is how you get there.
No. I was saying that right now people can no longer auto win. The most critic came in the "I'm always at -20% range disadvantage so nerf the ECM" form. Not the other way around. It happened to be too difficult to devise the particular set of skills and fleet composition to auto-win the ECM game.
I didn't "miss the point." I was never talking about using frigates or not in the first place. It makes absolutely no difference to what I'm saying. If you're going to reply to a post I made then please address my argument and not some other argument you were having with someone else.
2 RedHellion
You didn't find it. You was told by me. And if, for some reason, Starsector would be a game with the rail-fixed mechanics when any given skill or game feature was supposed to be used in a given manner, we would't be talking right here. Because I wouldn't even buy the game in the first place.
It is about the random distribution of skills. 1. Cores are needed to be in frigates. 2. Cores have to have the GI skills. Low tier Ordos have lots of low tier cores with limited skill choices and frigates may be left core-less. So, your "Remnant Ordos rarely have more than 40-50% ECM strength" translates into "I rarely meet full alpha remnant fleets". Well, what can I say, this game is full of interesting discoveries and you are about to make yours.
It is about the random distribution of skills. 1. Cores are needed to be in frigates. 2. Cores have to have the GI skills. Low tier Ordos have lots of low tier cores with limited skill choices and frigates may be left core-less. So, your "Remnant Ordos rarely have more than 40-50% ECM strength" translates into "I rarely meet full alpha remnant fleets". Well, what can I say, this game is full of interesting discoveries and you are about to make yours.
So what you're actually saying is that in a tiny, RNG-based minority of the hardest non-unique fleets in the entire game, if the stars align against you, and if you insist on taking those fights, you might need to use slightly more small ships?
Those goalposts are so far away from where they started, you'd have to re-activate the gate network to reach them.
So to be clear: in 99% of the game you don't need a frigate-based fleet to win the ECM war, and in the 1% that's left over, after the game is essentially over and you're doing a victory lap... you probably still don't, you just need to think a little bit about DP:ECM ratio and hull modding.
What's the highest ECM rating you've seen a single enemy fleet generate?
I've cleared all three Omega fights. You should probably try focusing on substance instead of just calling people bad when they point out that you're wrong.
Again, though: what's the biggest ECM rating you've seen a single enemy fleet generate?
Flying around on 180dp mid-low tech plus Odyssey fleet stumping everyone, ~80 ECM rating, the biggest remnant ECM I saw was 108. The game becomes easier than in 0.9.1, just don't spam big and dp hungry ships and capture points to even dp points with the enemy.
You can completely ignore it, if your ships are strong and aggressive enough they will obliterate everything even with that penalty, you have so many opportunities to make yourself op, like Wolf pack that obvious, SO ships - you can use it on any frigate-destroyer-cruiser and make it a beast, you can use phase ships(even bigger cheat than SO), you can spam missile boats, you can pick AI skill and Radiant with right loadout would kill whole fleets without your interference, you can make capitals with 30k hp invulnerable to emp and unbreachable missile protection. I mean common, look at opportunities game have, use some of those above, or find a new one.Flying around on 180dp mid-low tech plus Odyssey fleet stumping everyone, ~80 ECM rating, the biggest remnant ECM I saw was 108. The game becomes easier than in 0.9.1, just don't spam big and dp hungry ships and capture points to even dp points with the enemy.
Right, thank you, I appreciate having a specific number to work with.
Naturally-spawning Ordo fleets have about 21-28 ships, of which about a third are frigates. To hit 108 ECM before control points, you'd need 8+ officer frigates who rolled Gunnery Implants -- basically every single frigate in the fleet -- or two officer destroyers for each missing frigate.
Officer placement is pretty obviously not fully random; larger ships are more likely to have officers and more likely to have alpha / beta cores, while frigates are more likely to have gamma cores or no officers at all; most fleets have 2-4 non-officer ships in total, but if even one of those missing ones is a frigate, you're gonna come up short. (This would mean that only about 10-20% of fleets even pass this stage at full randomness, and less since it isn't actually random.)
If skills are random, a draw-without-replacement probability for getting Gunnery Implants is ~57% for an 8-skill Alpha Core, ~42% for a 6-skill beta, and ~28% for a 4-skill Gamma. So even if you end up with all alpha core frigates, you're roughly looking at eight coin flips coming up in the AI's favor in a row. It has a probability of happening that is just slightly over one percent... if the frigates all had Alpha Cores.
I'm sure spending hours on finding a Very High importance contact and driving their internal bounty difficulty rating up to 10 can improve on these values a little more, but you'd have to actively go out of your way to do that, and eventually even a stupid-huge, all-alpha core fleet is going to be restricted by the battle size limit, especially if you play on the default setting of 300 instead of cranking it to 400. (Which hey, I do -- but changing a setting like that away from the default is kind of asking for problems.)
This is, bluntly, not a scenario worth balancing the game around. But as it happens, the player does have the tools to do the same thing back -- it'll cost a lot of story points on ECM s-mods and hiring mercenary officers, but if you're chain-killing dozens of Ordo fleets, it's not like story points are going to be in scarce supply. It might be the only situation in the entire game where hiring and keeping mercs is actually worth it, but there you go. You still won't need an all-frigate fleet, or even a majority-frigate fleet. You'll just need the match the AI's ratio -- or not even, in fact, because Remnant ships don't pack ECM hullmods and you do.
All of which, of course, is just a distraction from what I was actually saying earlier: is winning the ECM war interesting? Is it good gameplay? Is it a complex or deep decision? No, of course not. Everything I've described is just "make this one number REAL big, bigger than the biggest unfair, post-game, easter egg enemy the game is potentially capable of spawning." There aren't real trade-offs here; just a huge resource sink.
Does that mean Gamma Cores never have it, or just that they might have it or they might have Combat L1 L2 L3 instead?
Either way, there's still not much call to balance around it if it'll never happen in naturally-occurring fleets and is a problem that only exists in completely maxed out contact bounties. It's like okay, you mashed the button saying HARDER PLEASE until it broke, and the game delivered. And even in that situation you still have the story-point intensive merc option or, I suppose, one of the methods Anvel offered.
I mean, to be fair, the whole frigate officer thing is only really an issue in super endgame against redacted and the highest levels of bounties. For 90% of the game you don't really need to care about it, and I don't think there is any content outside of those specific fights that requires you to really optimize ECM.
... its all or nothing nature. If you have 60 ecm rating but the enemy fleet has 80+ then all the resource you put into getting 60, the skill points and loadout considerations, are simply worth nothing.I can see that. It certainly 'feels bad' to invest for no reason.
My point was that you can easily beat fights without focusing on ECM for 90% of the game, it's just a small part of late game where it's a problem, and that part is completely optional.I mean, to be fair, the whole frigate officer thing is only really an issue in super endgame against redacted and the highest levels of bounties. For 90% of the game you don't really need to care about it, and I don't think there is any content outside of those specific fights that requires you to really optimize ECM.
Frigates is the best way to level up officers (up to lvl 5 in a single fight). And to farm story points (2-3 in the same fight).
x5 xp gain from the difficulty is a great thing.
I've been waiting a few weeks for stuff to get caught up, bug fixes to drop, and so on.
Any planned bugfixes, necessary updates, and whatever coming up in the near future? There's like a hundred pages here, don't have much interest in scrolling back through to check.
So I know 0.95 just dropped, but I was wondering if there was any sort of roadmap in regards to the direction the game is going in in the future. I know right now the devs are in bug squashing mode but this release, as far as game releases go as of late, seemed very stable and one of the better in recent memory as far as the industry goes. I know that it's contentious, and I'm not going to pretend that I know all that's going on, but I think the recent additions could make for a decent Steam early access to drum up a bit more support, grow the community a bit. Not right now, but after the bug crunching concludes and focus is back on content development.
Regardless, I hope for only the best for all folks involved. Loved the update.
So I know 0.95 just dropped, but I was wondering if there was any sort of roadmap in regards to the direction the game is going in in the future. I know right now the devs are in bug squashing mode but this release, as far as game releases go as of late, seemed very stable and one of the better in recent memory as far as the industry goes. I know that it's contentious, and I'm not going to pretend that I know all that's going on, but I think the recent additions could make for a decent Steam early access to drum up a bit more support, grow the community a bit. Not right now, but after the bug crunching concludes and focus is back on content development.
Regardless, I hope for only the best for all folks involved. Loved the update.
Thank you! The FAQ (https://fractalsoftworks.com/faq/) touches on the Steam question a bit, but the tl;dr version is "it's complicated". (And, yeah, very much in bug-squashing mode right now, in any case!)
Alex, what is the current direction of skill rebalances and skill system changes?
My point was that you can easily beat fights without focusing on ECM for 90% of the game, it's just a small part of late game where it's a problem, and that part is completely optional.If in 90% of the game this is not an issue, why is it possible to have early game trash-battles where the player ship is the only one contributing to the fight, while all the other friendlies just weave about a bit and slowly back off?
A potential bug I ve found.Certain questsallow the dialogue of completion to repeat infinitely,potentially allowing you to farm character reputation over and over at no cost.I am not sure if this is intented behavior or my saves have an issue( I updated the game to the latest hotfix only after seeing this behavior,so this might be the cause).Spoilerlike using the Janus device or returning Kanta's pet to her[close]
I should also add thatAgain,I do not know if this is intended,but seemed important,considering the use of this equipment.Spoilerif you DONT use the Janus device to exit the Magec system in the questline and return normally,even though the game says you received the Janus device,it does not work.It can not be used to teleport between Gates.Going through Magec as the quest adds also gives the "You received the Janus device" notification,but the device works properly in this scenario.[close]
A potential bug I ve found.Certain questsallow the dialogue of completion to repeat infinitely,potentially allowing you to farm character reputation over and over at no cost.I am not sure if this is intented behavior or my saves have an issue( I updated the game to the latest hotfix only after seeing this behavior,so this might be the cause).Spoilerlike using the Janus device or returning Kanta's pet to her[close]
I should also add thatAgain,I do not know if this is intended,but seemed important,considering the use of this equipment.Spoilerif you DONT use the Janus device to exit the Magec system in the questline and return normally,even though the game says you received the Janus device,it does not work.It can not be used to teleport between Gates.Going through Magec as the quest adds also gives the "You received the Janus device" notification,but the device works properly in this scenario.[close]
The second one, you should have it in your inventory and need to install it like a blueprint.
It's a bug, you need to go to dev mode via editing settings file, interact with the gate and activate ability to use them (gray color option), save, turn off dev mode.A potential bug I ve found.Certain questsallow the dialogue of completion to repeat infinitely,potentially allowing you to farm character reputation over and over at no cost.I am not sure if this is intented behavior or my saves have an issue( I updated the game to the latest hotfix only after seeing this behavior,so this might be the cause).Spoilerlike using the Janus device or returning Kanta's pet to her[close]
I should also add thatAgain,I do not know if this is intended,but seemed important,considering the use of this equipment.Spoilerif you DONT use the Janus device to exit the Magec system in the questline and return normally,even though the game says you received the Janus device,it does not work.It can not be used to teleport between Gates.Going through Magec as the quest adds also gives the "You received the Janus device" notification,but the device works properly in this scenario.[close]
The second one, you should have it in your inventory and need to install it like a blueprint.
I know,I ve activated it.I also reloaded multiple saves to confirm that behavior.Unless I teleport out as the quest asks,the Gate mechanic just doesn't work properly,whether I install the device or not.
Potential bug: I don't think you should be able develop contracts with pirate/luddic path operatives located in raiding bases given the fact you blast them to smithereens the moment you find them ???This Abaeze Mendez fellow must feel right at home among the space debris orbiting a Barren World ;DSpoiler(https://i.imgur.com/hWKdoip.png)[close]Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/fzdim8G.png)[close]
Safety Overrides can no longer be built into ships using story pointsI suppose that solves that problem, but is there an ingame reason why Safety Overrides is the only hullmod that can't be s-modded? And why Pather ships can have SO build in anyway, albeit at the cost of having the Ill-Advised Modifications d-mod as well? This really sounds like a meta-game band-aid rather than anything that actually make sense in-universe...
Congrats Alex, thats a lot of fixes! Time for a new game :)
Is derelict contingent going to be looked at or will it be staying as is ?
QuoteSafety Overrides can no longer be built into ships using story pointsI suppose that solves that problem, but is there an ingame reason why Safety Overrides is the only hullmod that can't be s-modded? And why Pather ships can have SO build in anyway, albeit at the cost of having the Ill-Advised Modifications d-mod as well? This really sounds like a meta-game band-aid rather than anything that actually make sense in-universe...
I think if SO isn't supposed to be free (and I agree it shouldn't be), then pather ships with built-in SO should not be able to get the Ill-advised Modifications removed. Make the Ill-advised stick even through restorations and that problem is solved. It's weird that they can be fixed anyway - they're a result of the SO.
QuoteSafety Overrides can no longer be built into ships using story pointsI suppose that solves that problem, but is there an ingame reason why Safety Overrides is the only hullmod that can't be s-modded? And why Pather ships can have SO build in anyway, albeit at the cost of having the Ill-Advised Modifications d-mod as well? This really sounds like a meta-game band-aid rather than anything that actually make sense in-universe...
New build is up! Full list of changes in the OP.
Skills changes are generally bad, for example ECM now totally useless, this 10% is not worth the point =\
That's a serious bug fix / balancing release, good job! Be sure to have some days off. :)
Anyway, as far as in-universe reason, this *definitely* makes sense. We're already talking about a "use story points to do something" mechanic, which is essentially "make up your own reason for why something special can be done". It's easy to make up a reason why SO can't be built in. It can be as simple as "the changes required are simply too extensive"."Make up your own reason for why something special can be done, except for this one specific thing which is the only one of it's kind which absolutely cannot be done" does not sound like it's internally consistent to me. I mean I could definitely see it pushing a ship too much and causing issues (see: Pather ships and Ill-Advised Modifications, even if they're regularly build in and not technically s-modded), but than why prevent it entirely rather than forcing Ill-Advised Modifications on a ship with SO s-modded in? I'd think the option of going full Pather would be an interesting choice to offer a player rather than just taking it off the table entirely.
On a side note, I haven't seen a single Commodity Procurement remote mission in 6 cycles (the entire playthrough). Is it a mod causing it or something else? I only have Nexerelin effecting gameplay atm.Those random procurement missions were removed in 0.9.5, or rather they were moved to trade contacts.
Skills changes are generally bad, for example ECM now totally useless, this 10% is not worth the point =\
Well, at least fixes are good.
Safety Overrides can no longer be built into ships using story pointsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Skills changes are generally bad, for example ECM now totally useless, this 10% is not worth the point =\
Well, at least fixes are good.
I dunno about the ECM change being that useless. It's a 20% final calculation swing. Or in other words, if the enemy has it and you don't, it's -10% to you, and if you have it and the enemy doesn't it's -10% to them. As a final multiplier, on say, ITU capital ships, that's the difference of being 144% range vs 160% (1440 range vs 1600 range on a TPCs for example) or 160% vs 144%.
Non-elite Gunnery implants range bonus is +15% range (plus some other nice perks, but it's for a single ship, not an entire fleet). At the capital scale at least, having ECM advantage versus not having it is like twice the base range value of gunnery implants. So having that 10% ECM edge still strikes me as worth it compared to losing to that edge.
The old ECM was either must have, or must have a way of dealing with it (speed, ECCM, etc). It turned ITU capitals (160*0.8=128) into less range than DTU cruisers (135). Which traditionally equals kiting to death without a way to shoot back.
QuoteSafety Overrides can no longer be built into ships using story pointsAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Tactical bombardments are no longer atrocitiesPraise Ludd!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Was that heavy nerf to Impact Mitigation really necessary?
High tech skills are much better anyway.
RC14, very nice! Was RC13 skipped for luck purposes? If so, 10-4 is a lot like that in Chinese.
It seems a bit weird to me though that in a patch which seems to be buffing High-tech (Much more prevalence/focus in mobility and buffs to energy weapons specifically) that Impact Mitigation received a nerf and the insanely tanky Derelict Contingent was left untouched. Flat bonus for damage calculation might give more armor to lower armor high-tech, but higher values are exponentially stronger and so would affect low-tech more right?
Say, what happens to ships that have safety overrides on as an s-mod from a previus patch? Are the mods automatically removed?
... but overloaded ships gaining helmsmanship elite boost doesn't?
The nerfs to IM are more about what happens to stripped armor, in particular how much kinetics are still shut down by itWhile making the (now obsolete) armor calculator, I found that there was a HUGE difference in damage taken between the tiniest strip of aluminum foil foil armor and completely naked hull. If a ship was taking just one point of yellow damage, then it would gain a lot of bonuses from talents. Something like a gauss cannon would do very little damage, but once that last bit of tin foil was gone it was taking big meaty chunks out of hull.
Safety Overrides can no longer be built into ships using story points::)
Say, what happens to ships that have safety overrides on as an s-mod from a previus patch? Are the mods automatically removed?
They'll keep them.
Safety Overrides can no longer be built into ships using story points
So, total number of skillpoints is still 15?
Edit: could you actually consider adding the chance for a good officer as a potential reward for distress calls? Seems very thematically fitting (you save someone's life - they join your fleet).
Any news on officers,especially mercenaries??Perhaps some measure of control over their skills/personality would be good,considering they sometimes have absolutely unusable combinations of skills or a non matching personality.Not a big deal since you can just shop for a better one,but doesn't hurt to ask :D
Once again,thanks for the good work and please don't forget to rest.
QuoteSafety Overrides can no longer be built into ships using story pointsSpoiler(https://i.imgur.com/mHVCmXe.jpg)[close]
Hm, which skills had their DP/bay limits changed? Carrier skills now have a limit of 8 bays, anyone remember other values?It was 6 bays, most other values were 180 dp. Not really a big change
RC12 DP and related values:
Weapon Drills: +10% at 90 DP or below
Crew Training: +15% max CR and +30 seconds peak performance at 180 DP and below
Carrier Group: +50% fighter replacement rate at 6 bays and below
Fighter Uplink: -50% crew lost from fighter losses and +25% top speed at 6 bays and below
Auxiliary Support: +900% at 5 Deployment Recovery Cost and below
Flux Regulation: +20% capacity and dissipation at 180 Combat Ship Recovery Cost
Containment Procedures: -75% crew lost in combat at 60 Deployment Recovery Cost and below
Field Repairs: 100% ship repair rate, 50% of hull and armor damage repaired after battle for free, at 60 Deployment Recovery Cost and below
Phase Corps: -30% flux generated in phase and +180 seconds peak performance at 30 Phase Ship Recovery Cost and below
Automated ships: +100% combat readiness at 30 automated ship points and below
Bulk Transport: +50% capacity at up to 2000 base cargo capacity, 2000 base fuel capacity, and 5000 personnel capacity
Makeshift equipment: Supply cost reduction of 50% or 100 units/month, whichever is lower
Wow, pathers sure seem to take a liking to colony items now. I'm getting +4 for every single one.
@Flet I refer you to HirumaKai's comment from last page: 10% isn't small, its just not as crazy as 20%
@Flet I refer you to HirumaKai's comment from last page: 10% isn't small, its just not as crazy as 20%Perhaps ecm could just be removed entirely.
I'm not sure why the SO change is getting so many people up in arms. You can still use it just fine and get all the benefits from it. That you can't build it in just makes it less easy to bypass the downsides, one of which was always he hefty OP cost. It's hard for me to justify the extreme performance boost SO gives for "free."
And it's not like you can't still build in two other S-mods on top of OP-costing SO. Build in Hardened Subsystems or another expensive hullmod: you're still save OP and making SO ships way better than they ever were in 0.9. They just won't be grossly overpowered. Is there perhaps a more nuanced approach to built-in SO? Maybe, but I'm not particularly surprised by the implementation here.
The ECM nerf is probably for the best, but as one poster said, ECM is now a "eh" skill. I hated that it was mandatory both in the previous patch and this one because a -20% range decrease was just too much to overcome and it caused the AI to do some really foolish things. +/- 10% isn't a killer if you don't have it but is a relatively nice perk to have if you do. I don't think it's worth gearing an entire fleet for anymore so that affects other skills to some degree.
All-in-all, I think most of the changes are good or at least going in the right direction.
At least it is not +6 with an item like last release.Wow, pathers sure seem to take a liking to colony items now. I'm getting +4 for every single one.
If they're going to do that despite me using no Alpha Cores on my colonies, I see no reason why I shouldn't go 100% Alpha Core.
I'm not sure why the SO change is getting so many people up in arms.
While we're on the subject, the Fury definitely needs to be gazed upon by Alex's baleful eye. I've had a lot of fun with that thing but it is absolutely wild for 15 DP.Yeah, with all the medium energy weapon improvements, it feels quite strong. Probably should be at least 18 DP, maybe 20 IMO.
Changes as of Hotfix #5 (-RC14), April 21, 2021, 1:20pm ESTEh what... there goes my 12 ingame years playthrough, gotta start anew.
- Fixed issue with "improved" tech mining actually being 4x less effective
The issue with ships rotating 360 degree in full assault still stays.
Impact Mitigation is overnerfed. The +50 armor as an elite choice part. There are human officers still in the game. Not just player itself and his ai core harem. +8 story points for captains, +1 each time I want an officer with a different skill set and the permanent Officer Training is now more of a must have. Not fun.
Impact Mitigation is overnerfed. The +50 armor as an elite choice part. There are human officers still in the game. Not just player itself and his ai core harem. +8 story points for captains, +1 each time I want an officer with a different skill set and the permanent Officer Training is now more of a must have. Not fun.
I'm a bit confused: are you saying that the -25% armor damage and -50% engine/weapon damage is too weak, or that the 50 armor for damage reduction as elite is too strong and becomes must have, or both?
I'm a bit confused: are you saying that the -25% armor damage and -50% engine/weapon damage is too weak, or that the 50 armor for damage reduction as elite is too strong and becomes must have, or both?
Yeah, Fury is about 2\3rds of an Aurora for half the price.While we're on the subject, the Fury definitely needs to be gazed upon by Alex's baleful eye. I've had a lot of fun with that thing but it is absolutely wild for 15 DP.Yeah, with all the medium energy weapon improvements, it feels quite strong. Probably should be at least 18 DP, maybe 20 IMO.
- Tactical bombardments no longer count for "atrocities committed by player"
There's no way Fury should have an equal or greater cost than an Apogee. Maybe play around a bit more with the nerfed Energy weapon mastery, because the old one made every non capital high tech ship seem vastly better than it actually is.Fury doesn't need EWM to be exceptionally good. I've never actually used EWM on my Furies (due to forgetting and getting Gunnery Implants instead). Fury has a lot of things going for it at only 15 DP, if there's no other stat changes the Fury could easily become 18 DP.
What is exceptionally good about it lol? People start comparing it to Aurora and then go "woah 2 Furies is much better than 1 Aurora". Well duuuh since Aurora is overpriced, and I've been saying that ever since it got nerfed. Compare it to a Hammerhead plus a frigate escort and you'll see it's not that crazy. If any high tech ship needs a slap on the wrist then it's Apogee, it should be at least 20 DP. Only then we can start discussing the real place for Fury, but I still wouldn't go higher than 16 DP.There's no way Fury should have an equal or greater cost than an Apogee. Maybe play around a bit more with the nerfed Energy weapon mastery, because the old one made every non capital high tech ship seem vastly better than it actually is.Fury doesn't need EWM to be exceptionally good. I've never actually used EWM on my Furies (due to forgetting and getting Gunnery Implants instead). Fury has a lot of things going for it at only 15 DP, if there's no other stat changes the Fury could easily become 18 DP.
Fury hasWhat is exceptionally good about it lol?There's no way Fury should have an equal or greater cost than an Apogee. Maybe play around a bit more with the nerfed Energy weapon mastery, because the old one made every non capital high tech ship seem vastly better than it actually is.Fury doesn't need EWM to be exceptionally good. I've never actually used EWM on my Furies (due to forgetting and getting Gunnery Implants instead). Fury has a lot of things going for it at only 15 DP, if there's no other stat changes the Fury could easily become 18 DP.
Compare it to a Hammerhead plus a frigate escort and you'll see it's not that crazy.My current favorite All-Purpose Fury (HB, 2x EMR Sabot Pods, 2x Ion Cannons) convincingly KO's a Hammerhead + Omen escort with little fuss under AI control, and that's without skills, officers, or SP. Against less premium and more likely escorts in the campaign (ex: Lashers, Brawlers, Centurions) the Fury will effortlessly chew through the duo unsupervised, and that's before taking into account force multipliers like skills and S-mods.
what linux dist do you use?
I'm playing on linux mint with openJDK and ./ starsector.sh
it works but I can not switch to desktop while game is runnung
but no other issues yet (have not the newest patch but it is also .95a)
Hi,
A minor note - since at least 0.91 when I bought the game, the Linux version gives the relatively high severity error message
Security framework of XStream not initialized, XStream is probably vulnerable.
This shows up on the second and subsequent invocations of "sh starsector.sh > junk" in a terminal window.
On a different note, a minor QOL improvement I would much appreciate would be basic cursor text editing so I could rename "ISS Ten Thousand LIghtyears" to "VS Ten Thousand Lightyears" without having to retype the whole name. I love the starship names, they add a lot of colour, but the prefixes get changed when they join my fleet. ;)
"altMouseMoveToMassTransfer"
Story request/thought that I thought might be useful. Spoilers, careful.
Most damage is boosted now because of officer spam, often quite significantly. Not sure how well armor really stands up to all the all the stacked damage boosts you can get without some crazy derelict contingent shenanigans
New skill system is about major things what makes the noticeable difference. Not about minor details. You don't have the skill points for them.
Well, before this patch +150 armor was incredibly huge, just a must-have for any ship. But you maybe forget that enemies won't have it now too, so since you are killing them way faster, you are getting way less damage. Cause there are usually more enemies than your ships it's not a bad change for your fleet to not be running of ppt at the middle of battle.
Hi,
A minor note - since at least 0.91 when I bought the game, the Linux version gives the relatively high severity error message
Security framework of XStream not initialized, XStream is probably vulnerable.
This shows up on the second and subsequent invocations of "sh starsector.sh > junk" in a terminal window.
Oh - hi! Just wanted to mention, this isn't something to worry about. This could be a problem if, say, a program using xstream was downloading random XML files off the internet and some of them could be malicious. But since we're talking about a self-contained game loading XML files it itself is generating, it's not a problem.On a different note, a minor QOL improvement I would much appreciate would be basic cursor text editing so I could rename "ISS Ten Thousand LIghtyears" to "VS Ten Thousand Lightyears" without having to retype the whole name. I love the starship names, they add a lot of colour, but the prefixes get changed when they join my fleet. ;)
(Yeah - I'd love to add that in at some point! It's kind of a royal pain, though - an outsized amount of effort compared to the result - so it's just never made it to the top of the TODO pile.)
You want undead frigates, don't you? I'm pretty sure that's how it should work when small ships stay on the battlefield along with capitals and 25 dp cruisers.Well, before this patch +150 armor was incredibly huge, just a must-have for any ship. But you maybe forget that enemies won't have it now too, so since you are killing them way faster, you are getting way less damage. Cause there are usually more enemies than your ships it's not a bad change for your fleet to not be running of ppt at the middle of battle.
Major cause of destruction for my frigates were random potshots or intense bursts from the large weapons. Frigate, DPSed down with the small arms fire, is my blatant mistake and nothing else.
My offensive package has already included effect of the old IM. AM Blasters and Reapers do not really care about it thanks to their huge single shot damage. No noticeable change in time to kill the target.
What would be nice is a reroll button to randomise a ship's name
because i'm uncreative
You want undead frigates, don't you? I'm pretty sure that's how it should work when small ships stay on the battlefield along with capitals and 25 dp cruisers.Well, before this patch +150 armor was incredibly huge, just a must-have for any ship. But you maybe forget that enemies won't have it now too, so since you are killing them way faster, you are getting way less damage. Cause there are usually more enemies than your ships it's not a bad change for your fleet to not be running of ppt at the middle of battle.
Major cause of destruction for my frigates were random potshots or intense bursts from the large weapons. Frigate, DPSed down with the small arms fire, is my blatant mistake and nothing else.
My offensive package has already included effect of the old IM. AM Blasters and Reapers do not really care about it thanks to their huge single shot damage. No noticeable change in time to kill the target.
What would be nice is a reroll button to randomise a ship's nameI'll second that!
because i'm uncreative
@MegasWhich release did you play? As soon as I updated to RC14, at least three more core worlds (Sindria, Aztlan, and one other) that did not have cells previously suddenly got them.
In my last game I didn't have any Pather interest (or at least I don't remember having any problems with them) despite having heavy industries with a Nanoforge and fuel production with a Synchrotron. My hostility though isn't quite at 100% (89%), maybe that is the reason for that? I've also never had Free Port on at any of my colonies. It's kind of nice not being bothered by the Ludic Path, though there still is a decent amount of pirate raids and expeditions.
Which release did you play? As soon as I updated to RC14, at least three more core worlds (Sindria, Aztlan, and one other) that did not have cells previously suddenly got them.
Also, if your colony was size 3, then cells never appear until size grows to 4. (If I plan to then spam spam Alpha colonies, I plan to keep all of those colonies at size 3.)
Like I wrote before, as soon as I installed items into Ground Defenses and Patrol HQ, my colony got a Pather cell because both items added +4 interest each. Nanoforge and Synchrotron still add +4 interest, so I know I will get a cell if I put those two together on a colony bigger than size 3.
I may of dived in at the wrong time (sorry), this was on RC12 before I ran the update. The planets are all at maximum population, I think this one should of gained their attention:You will probably get Pather cells after updating to RC14. More core worlds suddenly got cells after the update, and they are not completely loaded like your colony.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/XJBeHlk.png)[close]
Still I was surprised I didn't get any Pather interest at all in this game, though the Pirates and expeditions still kept me busy.
Which release did you play? As soon as I updated to RC14, at least three more core worlds (Sindria, Aztlan, and one other) that did not have cells previously suddenly got them.
Also, if your colony was size 3, then cells never appear until size grows to 4. (If I plan to then spam spam Alpha colonies, I plan to keep all of those colonies at size 3.)
Like I wrote before, as soon as I installed items into Ground Defenses and Patrol HQ, my colony got a Pather cell because both items added +4 interest each. Nanoforge and Synchrotron still add +4 interest, so I know I will get a cell if I put those two together on a colony bigger than size 3.
I may of dived in at the wrong time (sorry), this was on RC12 before I ran the update. The planets are all at maximum population, I think this one should of gained their attention:Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/XJBeHlk.png)[close]
Still I was surprised I didn't get any Pather interest at all in this game, though the Pirates and expeditions still kept me busy.
Alex, is it really intentional that the non-combat phase ships count against the Phase Corps op limit?
I was hoping that would be patched. I don't know what purpose this serves, and it makes the description rather misleading.
Well, before this patch +150 armor was incredibly huge, just a must-have for any ship.I think it’s the flat number that is the biggest factor. It should have been something like 50/100/150/200 based on hull size from the start. 150 is just out of balance for Frigates
Just took a quick peek in one of the data files with the items in it, and noticed "pather4" for most equipped items, which explains +4 to interest. The exception is Hypershunt, which has "pather8". I guess that means +8 to interest, which is more than enough for a cell. Since the colony needs to be big to meet 9 or 10 demand for transplutonics, I probably end up throwing the hypershunt in the trash, or maybe do some devious exploit against a core world (like plant a Pather cell to destabilize the place, unless it enforces the 10 ly restriction).Last I checked it does enforce the 10LY restriction (and activation) in order to work, but they'll install it regardless, so it might still generate interest even though it won't generate any demand or do anything else?
yea, 200 on top of 2000*0.05=300 indestructible armor. It would make capitals and some cruisers unkillable. No thanksWell, before this patch +150 armor was incredibly huge, just a must-have for any ship.I think it’s the flat number that is the biggest factor. It should have been something like 50/100/150/200 based on hull size from the start. 150 is just out of balance for Frigates
Changes as of Hotfix #5 (-RC14), April 21, 2021, 1:20pm ESTWhat does it actually mean? I still cannot launch tactical bombardment without becoming hostile, no matter of transponder being turned off or on.[/list]
- Tactical bombardments no longer count for "atrocities committed by player"
[/list][/list]Changes as of Hotfix #5 (-RC14), April 21, 2021, 1:20pm ESTWhat does it actually mean? I still cannot launch tactical bombardment without becoming hostile, no matter of transponder being turned off or on.
- Tactical bombardments no longer count for "atrocities committed by player"
You know what? Maybe you're right.yea, 200 on top of 2000*0.05=300 indestructible armor. It would make capitals and some cruisers unkillable. No thanksWell, before this patch +150 armor was incredibly huge, just a must-have for any ship.I think it’s the flat number that is the biggest factor. It should have been something like 50/100/150/200 based on hull size from the start. 150 is just out of balance for Frigates
So I've started a low tech run in RC14, and the larger armor tankers feel a lot squisher than they did in 0.9.1a. Now this may be intentional, but officered Onslaughts are noticeably weaker to small and medium weapons fire.I didn't see you mention the +20% damage to capitals and Frigates dealing another +20% to everything. Did I miss that? I feel like Onslaughts in particular are pretty vulnerable to both these cumulative debuffs since they can't shield their rear nor turn very well.
-snip-
So I've started a low tech run in RC14, and the larger armor tankers feel a lot squisher than they did in 0.9.1a. Now this may be intentional, but officered Onslaughts are noticeably weaker to small and medium weapons fire.I didn't see you mention the +20% damage to capitals and Frigates dealing another +20% to everything. Did I miss that? I feel like Onslaughts in particular are pretty vulnerable to both these cumulative debuffs since they can't shield their rear nor turn very well.
-snip-
Currently, I have ten Phantoms in my fleet (and plan to go even higher) to help steal blueprints from Culann. That place is a meatgrinder even after I kill the battlestation to lower its defenses, and it is only size 5. Lose about a thousand marines. (I do not want to think about what I need to steal from size 7 places, namely Kazeron and Sindria. Not touching Chicomoztoc except for its forge.)
Kanta's Den is nowhere near the meatgrinder the quest for Zal claims. I lose much less than what I lose from raiding low defense planets with blueprints.
Just took a quick peek in one of the data files with the items in it, and noticed "pather4" for most equipped items, which explains +4 to interest. The exception is Hypershunt, which has "pather8". I guess that means +8 to interest, which is more than enough for a cell. Since the colony needs to be big to meet 9 or 10 demand for transplutonics, I probably end up throwing the hypershunt in the trash, or maybe do some devious exploit against a core world (like plant a Pather cell to destabilize the place, unless it enforces the 10 ly restriction).I've had a hypershunt spawn within 10 ly of the core worlds. Also I get the sense that Alex likes the word "shunt".
is it safe to just copy paste my init file onto the the new downloads? Kinda getting tired of manually redo'ing my init file every time.
Impact Mitigation has lost the -50% kinetic damage to armor bonus. Advanced Countermeasures is now 1/3 dead!Agreed about removing HE dr bonus and giving a bonus to shields rise/move speeds instead.
Now let's go 2/3 by removing the HE damage reduction to shields from Shield Modulation. Either bring back shield upkeep reduction as the elite bonus, or move the hard flux dissipation to it.
is it safe to just copy paste my init file onto the the new downloads? Kinda getting tired of manually redo'ing my init file every time.For the longer term, it can be easier to make your own mod that contains the settings overrides you want (works with config files of other mods too).
May we have something in the .faction file like for officerSkills similar to how commanderSkills work? It's weird to see officers that are available to hire having phase mastery, when the faction itself never has access to phase ships.
Hmm; made a note re: fighters, thank you! Is there an easy-to-reproduce case of frigates over-targeting them when it's *not* a case of the target having drones?May we have something in the .faction file like for officerSkills similar to how commanderSkills work? It's weird to see officers that are available to hire having phase mastery, when the faction itself never has access to phase ships.
Maybe? I'm not sure Phase Mastery itself will stick around as a phase-exclusive skill; so, we'll see!
(not sure if bug, sure is odd) Stumbled upon a nascent gravity well about a lightyear away from the nearest star system (Yma, I think? I'm terrible at remembering names). Didn't try to jump into it on the off-chance that it might actually throw me so far away from system's center that I'll have to waste a couple weeks getting out.That gravity well being there is not a bug, for the record.
(not sure if bug, sure is odd) Stumbled upon a nascent gravity well about a lightyear away from the nearest star system (Yma, I think? I'm terrible at remembering names). Didn't try to jump into it on the off-chance that it might actually throw me so far away from system's center that I'll have to waste a couple weeks getting out.That gravity well being there is not a bug, for the record.SpoilerShort version: It's part of the main story quests. I think you can go there early without breaking anything in the most recent RC, but don't quote me on that.[close]
There is energy spec and missile spec but no ballistic spec.
I smell a racial discrimination here.
t. Chaingun hobbyist
If I had to replace a skill to make room for a Ballistic Specialization, I would pick Phase Mastery or Strike Commander. Or maybe it could be in Industry somewhere.I like Phase Mastery because it speeds those ships up. I am sick of bullet time in phase ships. I want phase cloak to make my flagship faster, not slower. Phase Mastery makes phase ships at least as fast as uncloaked (except Ziggurat at times).
Neat thing about modding in a skill is that it doesn't have to replace another, you can just stick #11 into any of the tiers.There is energy spec and missile spec but no ballistic spec.If I had to replace a skill to make room for a Ballistic Specialization, I would pick Phase Mastery or Strike Commander. Or maybe it could be in Industry somewhere.
I smell a racial discrimination here.
t. Chaingun hobbyist
I don't mind high-OP hullmods being better candidates for being sMods as much as I thought I would, but there's one exception. I integrated ADF as an sMod on most of my cruisers and caps, and it broke my heart every time because I knew I was permanently gimping the ship. I even put it on the Ziggurat... I think ADF should grant only 1 burn for half the OP for this and a few other reasons. Even in 0.9.1 I modified ADF this way in my personal tweaks mod. With 2 burn and such a high OP cost it stratifies fleet compositions and makes base burn levels strangely inconsequential.I want Augmented Drive Field to stay because I made full use of +2 burn at times. Lone big ship in a frigate fleet, lone Apogee explorer (for burn 20), Burn 6 capitals without Militarized Subsystems.
What I would like is another hullmod that is cheaper and adds +1 burn. All of my burn 7 capitals late in the game have ADF to keep up with my burn 8 fleet.
If I had to replace a skill to make room for a Ballistic Specialization, I would pick Phase Mastery or Strike Commander. Or maybe it could be in Industry somewhere.I like Phase Mastery because it speeds those ships up. I am sick of bullet time in phase ships. I want phase cloak to make my flagship faster, not slower. Phase Mastery makes phase ships at least as fast as uncloaked (except Ziggurat at times).
Phasing ships experience time 3x faster than normal meaning the other ships are 3x slowerYes, it makes the whole world outside of the flagship three times slower, which I do not like because gameplay is agonizingly slow. I prefer my flagship sped up three times as fast, not the whole world slowed to a third. Slow world makes traveling while phased painful.
What I would like is another hullmod that is cheaper and adds +1 burn.I think that would be an improvement, too. And honestly, in spite of personally wanting +2 ADF gone, I think that would make the most people happy. It wouldn't address my biggest gripe with ADF though, that it's such a tempting sMod candidate.
Augmented Drive Field on combat ships or even build-in it... well, that's not the best idea, do you guys even know about Ox?Tugs are great for certain things, but their downsides aren't insignificant. Maybe it's just because I'm a cowardly miser, but I prefer to keep my fleet stealthy and lean most of the time.
Fair enough! Double hammer barrage is a wonderful feeling after burn drive :)
Hammer barrage is amazing, while it still has ammo. I would really like to argue all "Hammer" missile systems should get more ammo since they run out incredibly quickly even with both Missile Racks and Missile Spec, but that'd also imply a nerf in reload speed or an even worse spread.If I want slow loaders, I would pick Cyclone Reaper, and the spread of Hammer Barrage is wide enough. There are plenty of partial misses because of the spread.
That said, they could just be made a bit more expensive...
well one fix i found is installing the speedup mod, u can disable that slowdown effect by pressing bQuotePhasing ships experience time 3x faster than normal meaning the other ships are 3x slowerYes, it makes the whole world outside of the flagship three times slower, which I do not like because gameplay is agonizingly slow. I prefer my flagship sped up three times as fast, not the whole world slowed to a third. Slow world makes traveling while phased painful.
Hmm... looks like I had gotten the Tesseract bounty before I knew of or cleared any hypershunts. Is this expected behavior, or is the wiki wrong?
......
- Fixed issue with "improved" tech mining actually being 4x less effective
without changing the Pulse Laser numbers
I also think that using 1650 for average armor is a bit high... the AI doesn't use built in heavy armor like the player does, so its really only going to be enemy Onslaughts that have that level. Even Radiants "only" have 1500. So the number are for dealing hull damage to the toughest hulled targets in the game.
I think you may want to look again at phase lance, HIL, and tachyon lance when it comes to hull damage. All are very efficient (and HIL is very efficient as an armor cutter, though not as good as the low DPS Hellbore) and the large energy have a significant range advantage (HIL Sunder can have 1550 range with an officer). Soft flux isn't a problem when the enemy has their shield down due to flux, as it usually the case when thinking about hull damage anyways, and for the lances if the AI wants to keep its shields up and overload then thats even better. Heavy blaster is king of medium DPS, and against very heavily armored targets its damage/flux vs hull is better (using your number its .59 vs a pulse laser's .53), but its poor vs shields (.69 vs1.0).
For Mjolnir vs Hephaestus: as long as the mounting ship has the flux to fire it its a better weapon for anti hull and anti shield, but its 667 fps instead of 480 fps. For your numbers, the Mjolnir has a damage per flux of .66 vs .74 for the Hephaestus. If the player ship has the flux (and spare OP) then Mjolnir is better, and its a good compromise weapon to pair with a shield buster for high shield enemies, but if flux is the limiting factor it doesn't necessarily win out. I do like Mjolnir's a lot though, very good weapons.
Your explanation is good, but has one flaw: almost every real build is operating at maximum vents already, so we can't analyze balance by getting to add more vents. There's nothing more to add. Its evaluating the efficiency of what to do with those vents that I was getting at with the efficiency numbers.I do not have maximum vents with my blasters. At first I was also scared by the flux of blaster. Due to the low damage to the hull and armor of other guns, the decision was made to simply install blasters and get used to how it will be. Okey, it is better than other options.
As an example, a Tempest without any skills or system or officer or anything (for ease of numbers) can get 355 flux dissipation with 10 vents and the hullmod. Running 2 pulse lasers gives 600 DPS vs shields and 600 flux for a deficit of 245 + shields. Running 1 Heavy blaster leaves them with 500 DPS vs shields and 720 FPS for a deficit of 365 + shields, and 8 free OP. Those free OP could be used for a lot of good things and this might even be a good build, but nothing is going to change the fact that the pulse lasers are doing more damage to shields while building up less flux.
For the Mjolnir its the same thing - its a much better anti-shield option than a Hephaestus, but for a given flux budget it has worse efficiency vs armor and hull. The hardest enemies in the game have really strong shields, so I agree with you thats the performance thats needed. But if the strongest enemies had really strong armor and hull, I would consider swapping. The gun is also always going to be used alongside other weapons unless the flux budget of a ship lines up perfectly which I don't think any do.
Okey, maybe 1650 it is too highMaybe? 1650 is more base armor than any ship in the game has except 1 (2 if accounting for variants), and you declared it to be an average value.
Also i use all medium slots with blasters,
I do not have maximum vents with my blasters.I'm curious yet concerned as to what your builds look like. That sounds eerily like the builds newbies show up with when asking why their guns aren't firing, and why are their flux bars full all the time...
Okey, maybe 1650 it is too highMaybe? 1650 is more base armor than any ship in the game has except 1 (2 if accounting for variants), and you declared it to be an average value.QuoteAlso i use all medium slots with blasters,QuoteI do not have maximum vents with my blasters.I'm curious yet concerned as to what your builds look like. That sounds eerily like the builds newbies show up with when asking why their guns aren't firing, and why are their flux bars full all the time...
Not sure if this is something new to 0.95a or not, but I've noticed a variety of AI stupidity. Currently using RC12.
The only thing I have not done yet is develop a contact to spawn Tesseract bounties (for their weapons), but I do not feel like grinding for that.
Not sure if this is something new to 0.95a or not, but I've noticed a variety of AI stupidity. Currently using RC12.
(Hi - just super quick; I'm pretty sure the majority of what you're talking about AI-wise is fixed in RC15.)
Alpha Core Radiant still gets a bit shy in RC15 when the two sim onslaughts start their annihilator rocket barrages. Usually starts happening at 1600 range (Bridge to Bridge?) when one Onslaught is almost fluxed out and the Radiant backs off to 1800-1850, drops shield and vents (with very little flux) and lets a couple rockets hit armor.
Outside of the sim there are very few rocket pods and there are lots of supporting ships guarding the flanks so it is far more aggressive. If I recall correctly, the Squalls can also spook it.
Okey, maybe 1650 it is too highMaybe? 1650 is more base armor than any ship in the game has except 1 (2 if accounting for variants), and you declared it to be an average value.QuoteAlso i use all medium slots with blasters,QuoteI do not have maximum vents with my blasters.I'm curious yet concerned as to what your builds look like. That sounds eerily like the builds newbies show up with when asking why their guns aren't firing, and why are their flux bars full all the time...
1650. Okey, key. Than calculate 100 armor, not 83 as I
All medium mounts with blasters. No maximum vents. That ship can hunt everything including remnants, and it has sane armor/hull damage. You shoot hull fast, no need to shoot it for half of hour with weak bullet weapons. (https://i.imgur.com/LTTgkqu.png)
(Hi - just super quick; I'm pretty sure the majority of what you're talking about AI-wise is fixed in RC15.)
I still see Medusas disengaging from easy kills when at low/zero flux
I have contacts on my colonies offering me Surplus Nanoforge Production opportunities with my own blueprints at a markup. It's very amusing. Do they not realize that those are my nanoforges? Now if they offered use of their own blueprints, that could be interesting.
I have contacts on my colonies offering me Surplus Nanoforge Production opportunities with my own blueprints at a markup. It's very amusing. Do they not realize that those are my nanoforges? Now if they offered use of their own blueprints, that could be interesting.
My favorite way of dealing with that would be to have a dialog option where you reveal your identity and them fleeing the bar in a panic ;D Same with some other underworld bar missions, btw.
Okey, maybe 1650 it is too highMaybe? 1650 is more base armor than any ship in the game has except 1 (2 if accounting for variants), and you declared it to be an average value.QuoteAlso i use all medium slots with blasters,QuoteI do not have maximum vents with my blasters.I'm curious yet concerned as to what your builds look like. That sounds eerily like the builds newbies show up with when asking why their guns aren't firing, and why are their flux bars full all the time...
1650. Okey, key. Than calculate 100 armor, not 83 as I
All medium mounts with blasters. No maximum vents. That ship can hunt everything including remnants, and it has sane armor/hull damage. You shoot hull fast, no need to shoot it for half of hour with weak bullet weapons. (https://i.imgur.com/LTTgkqu.png)
You realize Safety Overrides completely changes the flux economy for a ship and also necessitates specialized builds to leverage the rules it imposes, right? Most ships won't have SO, and the ones that do don't play by the same rules as normal ships.
I was wondering, will we not be getting any sneak peeks? like uhm, Dev Diaries, etc
Sorry if this is the wrong spot to report a minor bug, but I caught a typo during the search for Scylla plotline that I thought I'd bring up.
I built a one sided long range conquest with a flak cannon and an aggressive officer. Its minimum range is 1750, but it keeps on closing into 1200 in the simulator, and stopped doing that once I removed the flak cannon. Is it trying to melee the enemy with the flak cannon? Flak cannon had its own weapons group.Yep. Aggressive officers will do that; "all the ship's weapons" includes PD weapons. Unfortunate here, yeah, but also necessary for, say, having an aggressive officer on a Lasher close to machine-gun range.
*Sigh* I should have known this earlier..........I built a one sided long range conquest with a flak cannon and an aggressive officer. Its minimum range is 1750, but it keeps on closing into 1200 in the simulator, and stopped doing that once I removed the flak cannon. Is it trying to melee the enemy with the flak cannon? Flak cannon had its own weapons group.Yep. Aggressive officers will do that; "all the ship's weapons" includes PD weapons. Unfortunate here, yeah, but also necessary for, say, having an aggressive officer on a Lasher close to machine-gun range.
...I do wish we had some finer-grained control of AI behavior. Doubt we'll get it, but one can wish.
I'd like better/more options for controlling ship AI behavior, most notably Aggressive officers who don't count PD weapons for determining engagement range.
Hey, that could be the new "Steady"! Move the Steady AI down to "Cautious", Cautious down to "Timid", and bump the current Timid off completely because it is useless.
...
Question: why Heavy Ballistics Integration buff for Onslaught? It wasn't underpowered in 0.9.1. Legion could have used it much more, though that would get weird with the Legion (XIV) having missiles instead.
. the changes made to sychron core and nanoforge, given how hard they were to find, the change to scavenging, plus the added pollution (to nanoforge) and condition requirement (to synchron core) makes them golden turds (and disincentivize installing mods that add to the loot pool).Player NEEDS synchrotron and a nanoforge to meet demand for Military Base (and High Command) if he wants to meet demand in-faction, even if they are too picky for location criteria.
.the bribe option for inspections requiring a storypoint to do... idk makes glassing or razzing the hegemony into oblivion at the first opportunity seem REALLY appealing in comparison, that seems kinda bad... i've not had the event yet but i'd rather use the story point to pay a less ridiculous bribe or if ones not available pay a LOT of money.
Now, the question is, how do you remove the pollution effect from the nanoforge? Which file is it? Thanks.Just put it on uhabitable world.
Now, the question is, how do you remove the pollution effect from the nanoforge? Which file is it? Thanks.
Just put it on uhabitable world.Yeah, already have my main industrial colony on a habitable planet....
Now, just take a look: [snip]
Now, just take a look: [snip]
What mod makes the explosions so pretty?
I was wondering, will we not be getting any sneak peeks? like uhm, Dev Diaries, etc
I'll write a blog post! ... at some point in the not-too-distant future. Already know the likely topic, but want to get further with it first.
Why must you toy with me Alex!Now, if only it was a Dram IED (LP) from the Luddic Enhancement mod! Boom!(https://i.imgur.com/vuxElm9.png)Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/qecdmha.png)[close]
How am I supposed to enact Ludd's Path if our Avatar's very soul is reincarnated into such a vessel?!
Have you forsaken us Luddites? How could a sacred being like you hurt our fervent pride and purpose this way!
I am contactng the nearest Pather Cell near you to write a formal mail of complaint about our damaged expectations in addition to an official Luddic Path reinbursement lawsuit of Supplies and Antimatter Fuel that were required scouring the entire known sector for our foretold Prophet only to come to the conclusion he resided inside a Dram Light Tanker!
No more Tea at a local bar for you!
Another report about maybe-typo in 0.95a RC-15.
com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.hullmods.OperationsCenter, line 43
Maybe, fleet commander won't be assigned to variable `commander`, making enemy fleet never acquire the bonus effect?
AI fleet commander doesn’t use command points at all iirc.
AI fleet commander doesn’t use command points at all iirc.
They do!
Same's the player IIRC? Been a while since I looked at that but I'm not sure why it'd be different.
My Radiant has sabots and reapers on alternating and it isn't afraid of dumping them to destroy frigates (or even fighters...).
1)AI core officer spam wrecking the Deployment Point Balance is an issue I definetly feel you already got on your sights
3)Radiant is still 40DP despite being significantly stronger than a Paragon, I've got a solid feeling it would be much more in line with the rest of the [redacted] units at 60 Deployment Points even accounting for the fact it's significantly stronger than any other ship in that DP range. A quick look at both its Standard and Strike variants to make use of the rebalanced weapons/hullmods might not be a bad idea either, but the main issue with the ship is mostly revolving around Autofit really, really liking to install medium sized weapons into the large slots.
4)Some [Redacted] variants seem to be very outdated and could use some quick modifications. Both Strike and Support versions of the Scintilla for example don't even have Expanded Deck "Crew" and that's not the most questionable set of cases either.
5)Do you have plans for introducing some simple Overridden variants to [Redacted] ships which could most benefit from the hullmod? Namely the Glimmer, Fulgent and Brilliant?
I'm not really sure why this is an issue; in 0.9.1a we started out at 40% of battlesize, vs 60% enemy battlesize, against large fleets as well. Just that in 0.95a we have an option to get ourselves up to 60% early on now, rather than grind it out at 40% of battlesize until the end.
Rather than thinking about Radiant DP cost in terms of how it "should" be in terms of ship powerfulness relative to other ships, think of it instead in terms of how it affects gameplay.
If the Radiant is on the enemy side, then changing it to 60 DP means that 1) the initial enemy fleet spawning with the initial Radiant will be smaller and thus easier, and 2) fewer Radiants spawn together near the end of the fight. Endgame fleets capable of farming Ordos fleets can be as little as roughly 120-160 DP; assuming the player can get 2 objectives, getting to say 55% of battlesize, this means a battlesize of 220-290 or so, meaning the Ordos fleet might only be able to put out as little as 131-175 DP at a time. At 40 DP, this means there can be up to 3 Radiants on the map at a time, but at 60 DP, it would mean only 2 Radiants, which then makes the fight much, much easier. Undervaluing the DP is a way to preserve the challenge of the endgame fight.
If the Radiant is on the player side, then it's a matter of balancing if having an under-DP ship is too strong relative to the other fleet options (taking Special Mod instead, frigate spam, whatever), considering that the player had to take the Automated Ships skill to get it. IIRC if you're not using Derelict Contingent, then you basically get 1 Radiant at 60% CR or 2 Radiants at 30% CR each. The question is whether or not that's too powerful for the player to have relative to the other possible uses for 40 or 80 DP (and getting other skills instead of Automated Ships). Thus far (while it's fun to watch 2 Radiants running around) I haven't found it to be more powerful than other fleet setups. So I don't think it really needs to be weakened (i.e. by raising DP to 60).
I'm not sure how the game creates enemy ships (it can be found in the game files though, look for something along the lines of "fleet factory" I think), but I don't think it strictly adheres to the variants given in \starsector-core\data\variants\remnant\. I count 5 unique variants for the 7 Brilliants in my test fleet, even though there is only 1 variant file in that folder. Of those 7, only 1 has a plasma cannon, despite it being the large weapon shown in the file. Basically so I don't think you should put too much weight in the variants as given in that folder as what enemy ships will actually spawn with.
Brilliants can already spawn with SO. Though in my case the SO Brilliant had a graviton, a heavy autocannon, a mining blaster, a PD laser, a pilum, 2 ion cannons, a spark wing, and ITU. So it clearly wasn't exactly optimized for SO...
Brilliant-class Droneship Cruiser
(https://i.imgur.com/coKujWR.png)
Codex EntryBrilliant's Stats (above) compared to a Dominator (Middle) and an Aurora's (below)Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/4Ah1oj1.png)[close]OverviewSpoiler(https://i.imgur.com/oTMS1ln.png)(https://i.imgur.com/HZ4Ab3X.png)(https://i.imgur.com/51cK0dq.png)Please don't mind the "Low Maintenance" Hullmod on the Dominator reducing its maintenance, which is from a mod called "Low Maintenance" by Zym.
Or do mind it and install it from its official thread link over here, since it's really good!
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=21715.msg327897#msg327897[close]
This asymmetric Cruiser a mixture of everything that's Remnant and is the only ship in the roster (so far) that can mount ballistic weapons, two medium hardpoints worth of them in fact, along with 1 medium missile, 1 large energy, 1 medium energy and 2 small energy. It's the second most potent Remnant ship in their roster at 25 Deployment Points and it's one of the only three ships that generally deal the most damage to your fleet along the Fulgent and the Radiant. There apparently is no Overridden variant in the Starsector Variant files, so it must be a rare occurrence for when the stars align and Autofit does something good for once.
Vanilla Variants
Standard Personal Rating: Annoying Shielded Gaming Mouse
Armament : 1x Plasma Cannon (alternating), 1x Sabot Pod (linked), 2x Hypervelocity Driver (linked), 1x Heavy Burst laser & 2 Burst PD lasers (linked)
Hangar Bay: 1x Spark Interceptor Wing
Hullmods: Integrated Targeting Unit
Despite the rather terrible weapon range synergies, this variant somewhat works and poses a hassle when faced not because it does a lot of damage compared to other Remnant Ships, but because it's incredibly durable for the amount of DP it takes to deploy, especially when an AI officer with Elite Shield Modulation and possibly even Elite Impact Mitigation and Elite Damage Control is sotting at the helm.
... as opposed to (I don't know) having Vanilla Starsector stop spamming the moloch-cursed officers upon reaching a treshold (which would be difefrent depending on factions) and start applying INtegrated Hullmods on the bigger, badder ships instead?
On a quick side-note: what's your current view on [Redacted] balance-wise?
1)AI core officer spam wrecking the Deployment Point Balance is an issue I definetly feel you already got on your sights
2)ECCM spam got somewhat adressed by nerfing the maximum nerf to -10% maximum energy/Ballistic weapon range only, but I don't think you see it as a complete "fix" just yet
3)Radiant is still 40DP despite being significantly stronger than a Paragon, I've got a solid feeling it would be much more in line with the rest of the [redacted] units at 60 Deployment Points even accounting for the fact it's significantly stronger than any other ship in that DP range. A quick look at both its Standard and Strike variants to make use of the rebalanced weapons/hullmods might not be a bad idea either, but the main issue with the ship is mostly revolving around Autofit really, really liking to install medium sized weapons into the large slots.
4)Some [Redacted] variants seem to be very outdated and could use some quick modifications. Both Strike and Support versions of the Scintilla for example don't even have Expanded Deck "Crew" and that's not the most questionable set of cases either.
5)Do you have plans for introducing some simple Overridden variants to [Redacted] ships which could most benefit from the hullmod? Namely the Glimmer, Fulgent and Brilliant?
Edit
6)This is a very minor but also very needed change: can [Redacted] Ship Variants get their missiles firing in LINKED mode instead of Alternating? Even the poor Strike Version of the Radiant has those 4 Sabot Pods firing on alternating...
Nitpick: Second AI war did not involve AI ships. Just a... dispute between Hegemony and TriTach that involved the use of a planet killer on HP, in a system with the League plus pirates at Qaras.
The game does limit the number of officers for most factions, btw, with the actual limit depending on the faction. The Remnants just aren't one of them. Their officers aren't really "officers" and don't need to follow anything like the same rules. Expectations for them to do so are misplaced, and, frankly, they're supposed to be a challenge! This could also involve integrated hullmods (and does in places) but exactly which levers are used to make ships tougher... well, that's just a detail.
[insert Complaingnello comments here]
Probably not a surprise after reading the above, but: that's all working entirely as intended.
(Edit: I wouldn't rule out possible tweaks to the mechanic itself, though, but I don't have anything specific in mind right now.)
[Regarding the ECM rating]I don't have any specific plans but it's something I'll have another look at and give it a think. Was just thinking about it the other day, actually. I think the maximum value feels good, but is reached too quickly. So maybe something like reducing the various sources of it across the board, or something along those lines...
[Regarding the Radiant being 40DP]
I'll probably adjust it when I tweak the AS skill!
Radiant-class Drone Battleship
(https://i.imgur.com/UGnAZar.png)
Codex EntryRadiant's Stats (above) compared to a Paragon's (below)Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/bIOXSEv.png)[close][..]Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/m2TLvAg.png)[close]
Vanilla Variants
1)Standard Personal Rating: Wasted Large Weapon Mounts
Armament: 2 Autopulse Lasers (Linked), 2 Locusts (Alternating), 1 Paladin PD & 6 PD Lasers (linked), 4 Ion Beams (Linked), 4 IR Pulse Lasers (linked)
Hullmods: Integrated Targeting Unit, Expanded Magazines, Heavy Armor
9 Capacitors, 50 Vents
Without going into potential modifications to the Vanilla autofit, this is a textbook example of how to NOT set up a Radiant and it's the setup you wish for when fighting an Ordo. Heavy Armor is a 40OP dead weight unless it's integrated, Locusts not only do pathetic damage to anything but weaksauce frigates but they also don't even have expanded missile racks, 4 Ion beams is overkill even for me and IR pulse lasers are as pointless as nipples on a breastplate.
2)Strike Personal Rating: Deployment Point Imbalance Incarnate
Armament: 5 Tachyon Lances (linked), 4 Sabot Pods (Alternating), 10 PD Lasers (Linked)
Hullmods: Integrated Targeting Unit, Advanced Optics, Resistant Flux Conduits
0 Capacitors, 50 vents
This is the most infamous Remnant setup in the whole roster despite being horribly unoptimized. It's more or less a testament to how the Radiant Stats are so broken across the board for a 40DP ship they are able to pull the suboptimal setups up in performance by sheer brute force. Advanced Optics is not only useless since the ship never makes use of that extra range but it also makes T-lances and PD lasers even more unwieldy to swing around and hit their targets. Sabots are both firing in ALTERNATING MODE and without Expanded Missile Racks.
[Referring to the possiblity of both Scintilla Drone Carrier Variants having Expanded Deck "crew"]
I mean, "crew", so no, they wouldn't!
[Referring to the possibility of introducing Overridden Variants of Glimmer, Fulgent and Brilliant]
Not really! I mean, I'm not specifically against that, either, but it's not something I've really thought about one way or another.
[Referring to all Vanilla Remnant Ship Variants having their missile weapons on "Alternating" instead of "Linked"]
Hmm, I'll need to have a look. I don't think I'll want to do that, though; if anything I'd want to adjust alternating group behavior to be more effective. But generally the idea is to have missiles last longer.
Remnants aren't the only faction whose performance iscrippleddiminished by poor-quality goal variants and autofit randomization. All factions struggle with that really, except maybe the [super-redacted]. It's just more visible for Remnants because people expect them to be strong.
For what it's worth: I'm working on a mod that addresses this, among a few other things :)
I don't speak from experience since I've "only" been playing this game for a year and a half, but I remember being informed that ECM rating used to affect things other than maximum energy/ballistic range.Before ECM, it merely increased stats like Nav does for speed. Originally, it extended shot range. Then, for a few releases, it increased damage (like old Ordnance Expert). Lately, it reduces the shot range of the enemy.
... but what I mean to say is that the "Elite Skill Count" of Remnant fleets is so off the charts even serious officer tryharding plus the Automated Ships skill does not even come close to contesting the DP balance of, say, even a decently sized ordo like this one:
Assuming the game also values Elite Officer Skills more than normal Officer skills when calculating the Deployment Point Balance...
I don't speak from experience since I've "only" been playing this game for a year and a half, but I remember being informed that ECM rating used to affect things other than maximum energy/ballistic range.
Addendum: I know what I'm about to write will sound both entitled and silly considering it's adressed to someone that's been nicely balancing this game for almost a decade (as in you) but I'll say it anyway: be very wary of buffing the amount of Automated Ship Points we get from the AS skill. We players can already abuse the skill to disgusting degrees by either blotting out the sun with Gamma Core Frigates and their 10%+ ECM rating each and also deploy two Alpha Core radiants still sitting above 42% Combat Readiness with the help of both Crew Training (and a fleet under 240DP of combat ships) plus 3-Dmods at minimum on each ship with Derelict Contingent.
I don't speak from experience since I've "only" been playing this game for a year and a half, but I remember being informed that ECM rating used to affect things other than maximum energy/ballistic range.
Ah - I think that was before ECM rating etc? At one point Sensor Arrays gave a bonus to weapon damage.
The thinking is that for ECM to be worthwhile, it has to affect a really primary gameplay stat, and that means either weapon range or ship speed. Hmm..
My 2 cents on improved variant packs: just don't do linked missile tricks, its too mean. Good variants with default weapon groups are a good challenge for players without just exploding the first ship that comes into contact. (And realistically if the enemy had those tricks, players would use bait frigates with like 7 D mods and reinforced bulkheads and just deploy them to deplete enemy missiles every fight, which is just cheesey.)
Oh the D-mod removal skill is fantastic and maybe OP in my opinion which how much $ you save just... existing. As much as I love it, it maybe should be elite?Making everything good Elite means respec hurts more, making the story point cost more than one. I rather have Elite stuff minimized so that respec stays relatively cheap.
Making everything good Elite means respec hurts more, making the story point cost more than one. I rather have Elite stuff minimized so that respec stays relatively cheap.I halfway agree with you. I'd like to see the Elite tag on the skill say even if you respec out of it. That way, you can have strong Elite effects that you voluntarily disable if you respec out of it. Then, if you change your mind later, you can respec back to the Elite-tagged skill. Basically, you bleed out Story Points for being indecisive.
So after a good number of hours and a few start overs, I have to say I'm not loving the new skill system. So it certainly doesn't seem worse. It just feels like a lateral movement. There is less overall progression, I feel limited by it and I really don't like that there are skill I have to get that I don't want just to get to the next one I actually DO want. I like that we can remap the skills but some are permanent and therefore you're stuck with an entire skill branch that may no longer be needed. Are there less skills over all now too? I didn't find the old system confusing at all, I thought I had read that was one reason for the revamp?
Anyways, just some feedback, I don't hate it but I don't love it.
Oh the D-mod removal skill is fantastic and maybe OP in my opinion which how much $ you save just... existing. As much as I love it, it maybe should be elite?
I don’t know if it’s proper to ask here, but is there plan to extend contact related content?
For example, spend contact rep instead of faction rep to avert expedition. It’s currently a never pick because beating expeditions result in merely 5 rep loss while averting cost much more.
It’s also (probably) a popular request that you should be able to ask contact for a favor.
Overall I feel there’s a lot of potentials in this.
Well, the good news is I'm doing a fairly extensive update of the skill system - keeping the aspects that I think worked well, and adjusting the rest. I'm pretty excited about it, actually, since I think/hope this'll really make the whole thing click.
I appreciate the feedback! Well, the good news is I'm doing a fairly extensive update of the skill system - keeping the aspects that I think worked well, and adjusting the rest. I'm pretty excited about it, actually, since I think/hope this'll really make the whole thing click.
This is for the .1 release, yeah!About the 0.95.1 update, I'm concerned about the respeccing of permanent skills... especially in a mod that I'm developing that involves invisible skills assigned to the player. I'm afraid of them respeccing and getting more spec points than necessary. Will there be a tag to make respec ignore these skills? Much thanks!
So between the new destroyer's hullmod and the latest AI change, are we getting a snipe order or anything to force AI to engage from maximum range?Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Steady and below already do that?
If that's true then we need to add information about officer aggression to the game tips or the codex.So between the new destroyer's hullmod and the latest AI change, are we getting a snipe order or anything to force AI to engage from maximum range?Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Steady and below already do that?
This is for the .1 release, yeah!I can't wait for people to get disappointed you didn't revert back to 0.9.1 skills.
So between the new destroyer's hullmod and the latest AI change, are we getting a snipe order or anything to force AI to engage from maximum range?Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Steady and below already do that?
My steady Dual Gauss Cannon Conquest officer tried to get flak cannons into range so often that I completely removed PD from the ship.
Another piece of feedback is adding a facility that produces a small amount of organs that allows player to have self sufficient organ supply without using any AI or improvement. It’s the only vanilla commodity that I simply have no way to get a closed loop when role playing pather.Without Freeport I don't believe you colonies will import Organs/Recreational Drugs even if you have a sufficient supply in-faction, so such a facility would really only be useful for the colony it's build on.
I would also like to add that both Luddic and Pather worlds are exempt from Pather Cells even if they exceed the usual thresholds, so I don't believe that roleplaying a Luddite (of either shade) should exclude you from using Domain-era tech or even AIs. Pathers won't judge their own, so a fanatic using the tools of Moloch against itself is not out of the question.
My steady Dual Gauss Cannon Conquest officer tried to get flak cannons into range so often that I completely removed PD from the ship.
Are you sure that's what was going on? The AI makes a distinction between PD and non-PD and a steady officer generally speaking shouldn't do that (unless, perhaps, ordered to Eliminate a target), and I'm not seeing any hints of that behavior with such a loadout. If you've got a case where I can see this behavior in a vanilla simulator setup, I'd love to take a look!
I can try it - worst case I'll just install Detailed Combat Results, it's just one mod.
fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com
Thank you!
Looks like a successor to the Derelict Contingent. And it is good old Shield Modulation. Not Manipulation.PA is pilot/officer skill, not fleet skill.
(Quick update: thanks to the video, had another look and found the issue. Medium and large PD weapons were being counted for "minimum non-PD range" - though not for the "optimal" range; this would occasionally have the effect of a ship closing in more than it should. Fixed this up.)
Loadout, officer aggresiveness and doctrine (in the command tab) if no officer assigned?(Quick update: thanks to the video, had another look and found the issue. Medium and large PD weapons were being counted for "minimum non-PD range" - though not for the "optimal" range; this would occasionally have the effect of a ship closing in more than it should. Fixed this up.)
Seeing this,I wanted to add that my Gryphons also suffered from the same problem.When given the order to eliminate with 2500 range missiles,they always close in on PD range.You think that this was the culprit for this too???Also,when can we download this fix so I can(hopefully) fulfill my fantasy of space artillery :D?
Looks like a successor to the Derelict Contingent. And it is good old Shield Modulation. Not Manipulation.PA is pilot/officer skill, not fleet skill.
My fleet is very skilled at retreating against orders.Looks like a successor to the Derelict Contingent. And it is good old Shield Modulation. Not Manipulation.PA is pilot/officer skill, not fleet skill.
Fleets do not have skills.
Loadout is PD weapons,except for the missiles,which aare all 2500 range missiles(Squals+Harpoons).Gryphons aren't officers,but doctrine focuses on Steady officers.I don't know the exact behavior of Eliminate(Does it bring ALL guns to bear,even PD??Does it just use the range of the shortest non PD weapon???In this case,it should all be the 2500 range of the missiles,as i want it to).Loadout, officer aggresiveness and doctrine (in the command tab) if no officer assigned?(Quick update: thanks to the video, had another look and found the issue. Medium and large PD weapons were being counted for "minimum non-PD range" - though not for the "optimal" range; this would occasionally have the effect of a ship closing in more than it should. Fixed this up.)
Seeing this,I wanted to add that my Gryphons also suffered from the same problem.When given the order to eliminate with 2500 range missiles,they always close in on PD range.You think that this was the culprit for this too???Also,when can we download this fix so I can(hopefully) fulfill my fantasy of space artillery :D?
Seeing this,I wanted to add that my Gryphons also suffered from the same problem.When given the order to eliminate with 2500 range missiles,they always close in on PD range.You think that this was the culprit for this too???
Seeing this,I wanted to add that my Gryphons also suffered from the same problem.When given the order to eliminate with 2500 range missiles,they always close in on PD range.You think that this was the culprit for this too???
Ah - that'd be expected behavior for the Gryphons, actually - "Eliminate" makes the ship behave as if the officer is reckless, for many (but not all) purposes, and one of them is closing to minimum weapons range.
Reliability Engineering is now called Combat Endurance and is now a Combat Skill.Those aren't live yet, are they?
Not to mention, Retrain! Those LV7 officers will finally be useful!
I hope L4L will get some buff to make it more attractive over getting more officers and finding those level 7 popsicles everywhere.Phase Mastery.
Also, Reliability Engineering is Combat Endurance again? I wonder what skill does it replace.
You could put an "Engage" order on the target, that *should* do it. Of course that means other ships won't have the "Eliminate" behavior, either.
Sorry Alex,I feel like an idiot and felt I should correct this report.It was my fault all along,I had set up the fleet Doctrine wrong.When switched to Cautious,my Gryphons behaved exactly as I d want them to,so everything ok now :D.
Also, I feel like changing personality so drastically is odd. Perhaps it should be 1CP for one step in changing temper? So that if you want to turn a timid officer into reckless youll have to spend 4cp total. I mean, if it was an AI core then yes, it would make total sence to be able to alter the personality radically in one step
Sorry Alex,I feel like an idiot and felt I should correct this report.It was my fault all along,I had set up the fleet Doctrine wrong.When switched to Cautious,my Gryphons behaved exactly as I d want them to,so everything ok now :D.
Ahh! So I Cautious doesn't close to min range with Eliminate on? Could've sworn they would! ... and looks like they do. So I'm assuming you've got a combination of Engage + Cautious, right? Since that's the combo that produces the results I think you want.
I remember seeing like a month ago that there would be a final 0.95 release soon, do you have any timeframe for when you plan on releasing it???? ::facepalm:: Don't you know that, every time you ask for a date/time, it pushes it back a month?! :'(
Sorry, all timeframes are on "when it's ready" basis :) That said, it *is* a .1 release, not a full-blown major release - but also, it'll probably be a bit more meaty than the typical .1 release, too...
- Unusually high-level officers now only found in cryopods generated on Sector creation
Any officer above level 7 is from mods, yeah.
- Unusually high-level officers now only found in cryopods generated on Sector creation
Just curious, what are the chances of getting the level 10 officers that people post about here and there? I've started multiple new games looking for them (going into save file and looking for "l="10"" or "l="9""), but have never seen any above level 7. Yes I know that "maxSleeperPodsOfficerLevel" in settings.json is set to 7, but I'm wondering if vanilla has a hidden override that occasionally spawns level >7 officers, or if those are from mods (or the person changing settings.json).
0.95a makes it apparent that the later-game largescale colony development and management I rather enjoyed is not an intended game feature, to the point of putting hard caps on player colony development (see above re: different for the player).Do you mean the population limit? While you can still makes lots of money (thank you Commerce, very cool), you cannot have all the numbers be big, no. You can still have as many alpha core colonies as you want. On the upside, there are more colony items now.
Speaking of skills, the whole 'diminishing returns' skill amusements pushes towards relatively 'tight' fleets (well, when it doesn't simply end up with me disregarding the skill entirely)... which in turn pushes strongly for direct player control in engagements as doing slightly better than the AI improves outcomes substantially. I also find the 'I can find x% extra space on ship A or ship B, but if I put them in a fleet together suddenly I can't find x% extra space?' thing annoying in the player-is-special department.It isn't necessary to deploy the flagship, actually. Nor the flagship has to be a combat ship. I wonder, do you even get any DP advantage, if you have no combat skills?
The deployment point changes... been talked about to death already, but adding my two cents: it makes it more important to directly control the flagship (and see above re: obviously different for the player), and is obviously different for the player directly (primarily due to officer limitations).
0.95a has made me completely disregard ECM and design things assuming the deck is stacked against me, compared to in 0.9.1a where it was a definite tradeoff and another set of decisions to be made. Retaining the changed mechanics and dropping to +-10% makes this even more the case.The tables have turned and this time it's the player that's range-crippled! I wonder if Alex is going to do something with ECM or remove it, since I don't think it serves any real purpose beyond making Remnants even harder to fight.
RIP carriers... which I used largely because I really didn't like the RNG of ship losses and D-mods (you overextend with a carrier fleet, you lose a bunch of supplies and crew, depending. Reasonably consistent. You overextend with a ship... salvage being salvage, not so much.) Ship loss RNG is still annoying, and the 'use carriers' workaround is no longer viable... and the improvement on that front (removing d-mods) is _itself_ RNG-based, and a (even more so with 0.95a) limited skill too. And meanwhile the balance changes seem to encourage non-AI-friendly designs.If you have never or rarely lost ships while using carrier fleets, I have a feeling that you were (knowingly or not) powergaming and removing the challenge from your game, only now experiencing the intended gameplay experience.
He probably wants a large empire at least the size of Hegemony or League. Today, that is not really possible without core abuse, which leads to perpetual harassment from zombie Pather cells (if worlds grow to size 4+) and Hegemony (if not wiped off the map).0.95a makes it apparent that the later-game largescale colony development and management I rather enjoyed is not an intended game feature, to the point of putting hard caps on player colony development (see above re: different for the player).Do you mean the population limit? While you can still makes lots of money (thank you Commerce, very cool), you cannot have all the numbers be big, no. You can still have as many alpha core colonies as you want. On the upside, there are more colony items now.
So much of the game's focus is on controlling a ship in combat - I can respect that it's not your thing, but the fact that you can actually play the game without it (and, as far as I'm aware, that's still quite doable, if harder) is more of a happy accident than a specific goal.
He probably wants a large empire at least the size of Hegemony or League. Today, that is not really possible without core abuse, which leads to perpetual harassment from zombie Pather cells (if worlds grow to size 4+) and Hegemony (if not wiped off the map).0.95a makes it apparent that the later-game largescale colony development and management I rather enjoyed is not an intended game feature, to the point of putting hard caps on player colony development (see above re: different for the player).Do you mean the population limit? While you can still makes lots of money (thank you Commerce, very cool), you cannot have all the numbers be big, no. You can still have as many alpha core colonies as you want. On the upside, there are more colony items now.
So much of the game's focus is on controlling a ship in combat - I can respect that it's not your thing, but the fact that you can actually play the game without it (and, as far as I'm aware, that's still quite doable, if harder) is more of a happy accident than a specific goal.
I only discovered this game at 0.95a. I didn't know that was true, it's not stated anywhere that I noticed. I skipped the tutorial and finished the game without knowing how deep the ship controls were. I thought you could only use wasd to move the ship and shoot with the mouse hehe. So needless to say I always ran on autopilot...
Great game considering I played and explored/finished everything the wrong way and had a blast!
- Couldn't fully eliminate the core factions. I warning dialogs should warn you that it breaks game mechanics, but otherwise you should let the player do what they want. I wanted to conquer the galaxy and I couldn't :(
Default ship controls are still A-D to turn, right? It's almost impossible to play that way; turn-to-cursor should be the default.
I've got to say, that's really subjective - you're not wrong *for you*! But for example, I play exclusively with hold-shift-to-turn and use tank controls quite a lot.As a former long-time Doom/Quake player (and other games that need a lot of keys to move and shoot like Robotron ports), tank controls are natural for me. I only use mouse to aim weapons and pan the screen. I use the keyboard for piloting my ship, and it is much like playing Doom with the keyboard.
Anyway Alex, I know you're planning a colony and strategic overhaul...
so a change to how industries work ?It's more about giving Industries additional functions: Patrol Bases can send fleets to assist the player, Tech-Mining might give missions to find Domain goodies etc
instead of locking a industry slot down when build we get to switch them around as is needed with a downtime period ?
or maybe roll refineries into heavy industry/light industry/mining for a lesser output than dedicated refineries ?
or industry slots added by medium and large space stations ?
It's more about giving Industries additional functions: Patrol Bases can send fleets to assist the player, Tech-Mining might give missions to find Domain goodies etc
He probably wants a large empire at least the size of Hegemony or League. Today, that is not really possible without core abuse, which leads to perpetual harassment from zombie Pather cells (if worlds grow to size 4+) and Hegemony (if not wiped off the map).In this respect, nothing has changed between versions, you are limited by planet limit and administrators either way.
Game mechanics is less of concern. I want a big empire because I do not want my character to be a big stupid dog completely reliant on the largesse from his masters. I want my guy to be in charge, keeping my bases healthy and producing everything my fleet needs to function.
Default ship controls are still A-D to turn, right? It's almost impossible to play that way; turn-to-cursor should be the default.For most omni-shielded ships, it's good to at least occasionally rely on tank controls to control movement and shields independently. I do this even on Tempest, sometimes.
I imagine it would be a gameplay shift, likely a good one.I imagine that this precisely is the reason for Alex not to do it, since this means he has to make another game again... It's probably also why he's so against letting you control other fleets, unfortunately.
Not exactly. Last release, you could get up to seven with Industry alone, maybe eight with Ground Ops too. That did not take all of your points.He probably wants a large empire at least the size of Hegemony or League. Today, that is not really possible without core abuse, which leads to perpetual harassment from zombie Pather cells (if worlds grow to size 4+) and Hegemony (if not wiped off the map).In this respect, nothing has changed between versions, you are limited by planet limit and administrators either way.
Game mechanics is less of concern. I want a big empire because I do not want my character to be a big stupid dog completely reliant on the largesse from his masters. I want my guy to be in charge, keeping my bases healthy and producing everything my fleet needs to function.
Gameplay may not need to change too much. But it could evolve into more than just cowardly AI duels with bigger numbers and/or cheap gimmicks for bosses.I imagine it would be a gameplay shift, likely a good one.I imagine that this precisely is the reason for Alex not to do it, since this means he has to make another game again... It's probably also why he's so against letting you control other fleets, unfortunately.
Default ship controls are still A-D to turn, right? It's almost impossible to play that way; turn-to-cursor should be the default.For most omni-shielded ships, it's good to at least occasionally rely on tank controls to control movement and shields independently. I do this even on Tempest, sometimes.
Default ship controls are still A-D to turn, right? It's almost impossible to play that way; turn-to-cursor should be the default.For most omni-shielded ships, it's good to at least occasionally rely on tank controls to control movement and shields independently. I do this even on Tempest, sometimes.
I could play using tank controls. It would suck, but I could do it. That's not the problem, the problem I see is it's the default. How many new players are being lost because they don't realize turn-to-cursor is an option?
So yeah, that was my experience/perspective. Like I said I had a blast so hopefully it doesn't sound like a complaint ;)
Some players will have a player-centric perspective so the ships in their fleet and even their ship itself is to aid the player. I guess the rest all flows from that naturally, too (The limitations on your colony's ability to become fully self-sufficient and grow without limitation etc... As it would render a player-centric perspective moot).Player-centric playstyle is pretty viable, since AI isn't good at pushing aggerssively and assessing risk, whereas the player can be. If you capitalise on that with some powerful ship, you can either finish off enemies your ships have been bothering the entire fight, or you can make your ships follow you and make your seemingly suicidal charges quite unsuccessful at killing yourself.
So then you see the game from a very different perspective (Ships are just meta at this point, right? All I cared about were very specific stats like the ship's deployment points, movement speed (To quickly take the beacons for more deployment points lol), time to kill and combat rating (If their combat rating's too low, the ttk drops off a cliff very quickly in large battles and esp. in repeated battles).Considering having AI ships in your fleet isn't optional (or wasn't, until Phase Mastery and System Expertise...), I imagine most people think about ships in terms of what they can do for your fleet, though perhaps with different priorities (such as survivability - I don't babysit my ships).
I later experimented with a Medusa fleet ('cause their ttk doesn't drop off as quickly as the Wolfs), but they didn't have the teleportation ability and their deployment points made the actual combat fleet much smaller.Wolf and Medusa have the exact same ship system. Maybe you mistook Shrike for Medusa? Shrike has the plasma burn ability, which AI won't use for anything but going forwards.
Aren't the .1 patches mostly just balance tweaks and QoL changes? What be the hold up, bub?
Yeah, let's just say that this .1 is going to have stuff that's a good bit meatier than the usual .1 fare. I'm not sure I'd call it "feature creep", since it's all stuff that I'd like to be in the game eventually - but I suppose strictly in the context of a .1, one might reasonably see it as that. I'd rather look at it as me taking an opportunity to sneak some fun stuff in that I'm super excited about, though :)Yes please, we all would like to see whatever you're planning.
(On a related note, I'd love to do another blog post in the near-ish future...)
(And I'm kind of debating whether to call it .1 or .96 at this point.)
(And I'm kind of debating whether to call it .1 or .96 at this point.)98. Then ME.
(And I'm kind of debating whether to call it .1 or .96 at this point.)
98. Then ME.
(And I'm kind of debating whether to call it .1 or .96 at this point.)
[...]Sounds like you ended up playing in much the same manner as I did.
I mostly fought battles by flipping between the tactical map and queuing orders like in StarCraft... Capturing the points to get more deployment points for more ships hehe.
Great game considering I played and explored/finished everything the wrong way and had a blast!
[...]
Hi - just wanted to say, I appreciate your feedback. Much of this does seem to be just a "you're looking for something that's not the game's focus", as you say - which, I mean, it's absolutely fair, but, right. So much of the game's focus is on controlling a ship in combat - I can respect that it's not your thing, but the fact that you can actually play the game without it (and, as far as I'm aware, that's still quite doable, if harder) is more of a happy accident than a specific goal. Still, feedback duly noted!My frustration is mostly... well, intentional or not, it was a manner you could play in a fairly decent manner.
0.9.1 felt like you were able to bootstrap up to better and greater things; 0.95 feels like you're being railroaded into being a dumb mercenary. (Perhaps hyperbole, but the trend is there. Much of the flexibility of choice in 0.9.1 has been nerfed in 0.9.5, and, perhaps more importantly, has been decreed to be unintentional or unsupported. The writing is on the wall.)
Is it intentional that you can make ~250k (or likely more) in Galatia before the tutorial finishes by just repeatedly shuttling recreational drugs from Ancyra to Derinkuyu? At this point ships don't care about you having your transponder off, so the only issue is the pirate patrol around Derinkuyu, which is very simple to avoid. (It also pushed my level high enough that I actually had improved salvaging before I grabbed the ships at... Tetra I think?)
... so I can largely avoid the small-scale mercenary portions I don't like".
People complained about income too high for colonies. It would have been a great opportunity to introduce actions that require millions of credits to execute and make the player feel like a ruler or pirate king. Instead, income was slashed and we still feel more or less like low-level thugs at a dead-end path.
Maybe take a page from Crusader King and start giving us titles... :DSpeaking of this, one idea that's come up on the Discord server a couple of times is letting the player specify a rank/title (maybe in the faction name/flag setup screen?), which gets used in dialogs. Instead of always "captain", which starts looking weird when the player has a large fleet and even more so when they have a multi-system faction.
As it is, Star Fortresses cost literally a million credits. I don't know how much higher you'd want to go. Relative to fleet expenditures, this is insane (in a good way). Colonies themselves are massive money sinks: it's just that once you have a decent income, that kind of expenditure doesn't seem that ludicrous. I've got a single colony making 650k/mo right now and at that point, I've "beat" the economy portion of the game. Even if there was some end-game expenditures that cost 5 million, all it's done is delayed the inevitable. That's why I like the Coronal Hypershunt "mega project:" its cost isn't credit-based. That would be too easy. You have to plan the logistics of transporting that kind of giant payload.Income from colonies is like a curve. Big sink early, but once it is size 6, player can remove hazard pay, and the colony is likely big enough to take care of itself, which means Free Port! It is like after reaching a point of singularity, the colony goes from barely making ends meet to a massive cash cow in an instant. But by then, the game is practically over unless my goal was to colonize the whole sector with cores.
Again, we're still lacking an end game to use all the credits on so I think it can be forgiven that we're drowning in them right now. If [Super Redacted] suddenly started popping up out of Gates and routinely wrecking our fleets, all that cash would go into repairing/rebuilding. Or raising our own Secondary/Auxiliary fleet to run errands, hunt bounties or tag along with us for really difficult targets. We just don't have those kind of options right now.
We do need better ways with of dealing with Pathers that doesn't involve babysitting.I'm pretty sure that's planned. The unused and non-functional "Orders" tab in the colony management screen and the vestigial High Command upgrade for the Military Base implies quite a bit. I wouldn't hold your breath about it though, it's at least one or two major updates out.
Also, I've never felt like a "low-level thug." Thugs don't have 5-6 planets underneath them and own entire systems. I suppose that is all in the eye of the beholder but once I (or my fleet) start piloting Cruisers, I think the moniker of "thug" just doesn't carry weight anymore. I never feel like a proper faction but I'm ok with that: a rose by any other name. I mean, when you own something like 35-40% of every commodity market, you might not get treated like your own faction but you're actually more profitable than any of them. Maybe take a page from Crusader King and start giving us titles... :DFive to six worlds would be nice, except player needs either Colony Management or cores. Out-of-the-box, he can have up to four worlds. Without favorable planet generation, that is the minimum he needs. That said, four is on par with a minor major faction. Okay, sure, not everyone can be a land baron, but currently, player can do little with it. It is mostly a vault and/or factory that has some guards. It does not feel like the player commands more than just his personal fleet. He has mostly those mascots or cheerleaders that are semi-common to anime protagonists.
If it's any consolation, I really like starting over. I'm rarely married to any particular run-through. :DSame.
While you the player will only have the number of officers you have managed to find. It is not uncommon in my case for this number to be zero for a significant amount of time since I don't obsessively check comm directories on the few occaisions I visit the core, mostly because I'll forget about it.Have you not found any officers in cryo pods? They aren't terribly common, but I typically found at least five of them. At some point I was even thinking that Officer Training skill is pointless, since you will find enough level 7 officers out in the rim anyway...
Now, I'm not exactly great at combat in the first place. I have less than great physical dexterity because I used to be a riveter and whitefinger is a ***t of a thing.If you don't bother hiring officers, that's probably it. 0.9.1 could be played without ever taking Officer Management, so the base number of them was 4. Now it's 8, and you (and the enemy) can get mercenaries, too.
But I've found the combat in 095 to be significantly harder than it was in 09.1 to the point that I just don't want to deal with it.
I can't quite identify what it is that's making things feel this different, but I suspect it's because I don't have nearly as many officers as the opponent and that's making them really aggressive, while my guys are really passive.
(This is all guesswork on my part - so ??)
Honestly, I think this is one of the worst design descisions. Basing fundamental game mechanics off luck based events.That's basically campaign, isn't it? You can be certain to find in the outer rim, in the enemy fleet, for sale or raid for a ship/weapon/officer/blueprint, but if you want the ship/weapon/officer/blueprint, you have to get lucky the game rolled the dice in your favour. At least now you can mentor officers to change their personality slightly and get more skills to choose on promotion.
If this is staying in, there really does need to be some way for the player to create officers. Raise crew from the ranks etc.There's an intel message you can receive after combat (it's random), that let's you promote a member of your crew to a full officer.
In 09.1 the player could ultimately control 4 planets directly, plus another 3 via governers for a total of 7. This was fine.Plus 1 more directly and 1 more via admin, if you take Colony Management.
In 095 the player can control 2 planets directly, plus another 2 via governers for a total of 4. This, less so.
* AI can have more than ten officers and break caps if they want, which they did not do before. I blame mercs for this, and I wished they were never implemented. At least AI would have no excuse for breaking caps if mercs were never implemented (and if it did anyway, it would be a blatant violation of rules like fleet caps were in previous releases.)Two mercenaries at all times are sustainable. Alex is also extending contract duration to double, so it should be possible to have four. I hope he will implement a way to find multiple mercs to hire (not hire multiple mercs, because I don't want to pay four story points to get one good merc and three I don't care about).
They did not affect DP distribution back then, so officers were less critical than today.Now, I'm not exactly great at combat in the first place. I have less than great physical dexterity because I used to be a riveter and whitefinger is a ***t of a thing.If you don't bother hiring officers, that's probably it. 0.9.1 could be played without ever taking Officer Management, so the base number of them was 4. Now it's 8, and you (and the enemy) can get mercenaries, too.
But I've found the combat in 095 to be significantly harder than it was in 09.1 to the point that I just don't want to deal with it.
I can't quite identify what it is that's making things feel this different, but I suspect it's because I don't have nearly as many officers as the opponent and that's making them really aggressive, while my guys are really passive.
(This is all guesswork on my part - so ??)
How many will human endgame fleets have? 12? 14? All at level 6 and 7. Will player be assumed to get both officer skills (for ten level 6 officers)? I probably will not get officer skills myself. Today, AI cores in player's fleet count toward officers, but they will not next release.* AI can have more than ten officers and break caps if they want, which they did not do before. I blame mercs for this, and I wished they were never implemented. At least AI would have no excuse for breaking caps if mercs were never implemented (and if it did anyway, it would be a blatant violation of rules like fleet caps were in previous releases.)Two mercenaries at all times are sustainable. Alex is also extending contract duration to double, so it should be possible to have four. I hope he will implement a way to find multiple mercs to hire (not hire multiple mercs, because I don't want to pay four story points to get one good merc and three I don't care about).
This is p. great as far as settings go, and imo it felt p. great to jive with this by leaning into it super hard and using whatever stuff could be found or recovered.
There were even skills available that allowed you to do that more effectively, and that was really apropos for the setting.
And so I spent a ton of time just repeatedly doing this as my core gameplay, and building around it as various things happened or were found.
Really leaning into the mechanic that these ships might be trash, but I can support and deploy more of them explictly because of that.
It felt right.
So having those particular skills straight up removed from the game in 095 was... Not really the best feeling I've ever had tbh.
Even more galling was the (excuse my language) absolute dogs dinner that was the new Derelict Contingent skill, which would have been the perfect place to put those particular abilities but instead had some really odd/unbalanced effect that runs into another issue I have.
"not using officers" is a choice you might make, but it just makes the game 10x more difficult for no real benefit,
... and when I am I'm pre-occupied with other things.
That the 'raise from the ranks' is a thing that already exists is good.
I've not seen it yet though (in my admittedly small time playing this version).
And those that are 'rescued' have to be evaluated as 'is this person useful right now?', because it's going to be a non-trivial amount of time before I can throw them at an academy to change them to a disposition I can actually use.
It just seems a bit rough when officers are now hard required or it makes the game 10x harder, but the only way to get them is play 3 separate lotteries each of which involves a significant investment of playtime which may or may not line up with what you actually want to do.
If officers are so vitally important that the game is significantly harder without them, why is there no guaranteed way of getting them regardless of what the player is doing?
I feel like many veteran Starsector players have a giant stash of weapons they collect and never sell, since selling them isn't really worth it, and the stores never have that one weapon you're looking for when you need it.The better question is, why don't you have a hoard of weapons? It's the only way to guarantee you'll have at least basic access to every role you need.
Although, question to Alex, would it hurt to allow it to at least shift a max or higher level officer's nature, even if you don't get the leveling benefits? It would certainly mean those high level cautious/steady officers I find in escape pods in the wild would be more likely to be used.
Officers at or beyond max level and with maxed out elite skills can be "retrained"
Elite skills changed
Personality changed (+- 1 step)
Costs 1 story point and grants 100% bonus XP
Works on level 7 cryopod officers
I feel like many veteran Starsector players have a giant stash of weapons they collect and never sell, since selling them isn't really worth it, and the stores never have that one weapon you're looking for when you need it.The better question is, why don't you have a hoard of weapons? It's the only way to guarantee you'll have at least basic access to every role you need.
I feel like many veteran Starsector players have a giant stash of weapons they collect and never sell, since selling them isn't really worth it, and the stores never have that one weapon you're looking for when you need it.The better question is, why don't you have a hoard of weapons? It's the only way to guarantee you'll have at least basic access to every role you need.
It just seems a bit rough when officers are now hard required or it makes the game 10x harder, but the only way to get them is play 3 separate lotteries each of which involves a significant investment of playtime which may or may not line up with what you actually want to do.
If officers are so vitally important that the game is significantly harder without them, why is there no guaranteed way of getting them regardless of what the player is doing?
... and when I am I'm pre-occupied with other things.
Honestly - I mean, I get how this might happen, and do the same sort of thing in other games sometimes (hello, never using the Adrenaline ability in Jupiter Hell...)
Spoileroh my god i do that too!! lol thats why i only play recon at this point. idk what it is about the way the game is presented to the player but i never think to use adrenaline but i will remember to use stealth -- and the funny thing is, I only use stealth in the exact way that adrenaline is supposed to be used; to get myself out of a bind on the turn before im probably gonna die by getting off a safe heal. it's just, for some reason using energy to pop stealth so i can use medkits without being attacked hits my brain different than using fury to pop adrenaline so i can ???? heal in some way ????. my brain never quite glued on to how its healing works or how much its supposed to be. probably why i dont play that class. its a solid abject lesson in the importance of informational clarity[close]
As vital as they are, and as much as veteran players know how valuable they are, I don't think the game really tells you this. If you don't pick bounty hunter with a starting officer, I don't even know that a new player would be aware of their existence until they start surveying skills. Granted, it has been awhile since I've done the tutorial but granting an officer as a reward during the tutorial (and explaining what they do and how to acquire them) would go a long way in telling new players "hey, these guys are super important in combat." Or heck, make the reward officer a "free" Mercenary and kill two birds with one
stone. It would be a temporary power-up for a new player and it would explain how both officers and Mercs work.
Also, if I didn't know from patch notes that officers and/or their level increase your deployment size against larger fleets, I would not guess that at all. I can't seem to find any tooltip in-game that suggests this.
Hmm, that's a good idea - at least specifically about introducing officers in the tutorial (maybe the agent you contact at Derinkuyu needs a lift off the station and joins you?). Not 100% on it being a merc, worth thinking about though.
My understanding is: all of this is by design.
Player fleet size limit, late game fleet being stronger than player fleet, officers, ...
The point is precisely to provide a greater challenge compared to previous version of the game, largely preventing player brute force, having player use legitimate tools to succeed (including officers!).
Regarding officer availability, I have not seen any issues: every time I visit a core market in the early to mid game, I look at potential contacts and recruitable officers, easy-peasy. My main complain regarding this process would be the UI, that I don't love. Also, I think I have only used mentoring once, and never used mercenaries.
That said, maybe officer promotion should happen more often, especially very early game? Could happen right at the end of the campaign tutorial - when completing the last mission before leaving starting system, getting some money ensuring player can afford the new officer's pay for long enough. Tutorial would then explain the different method to recruit officers. If there's a guaranteed recruitable officer waiting in Jangala and player is told about it, then player learns by example the other way to obtain an officer while starting his campaign journey.
Also there could be some bar events/missions where player end-up encountering a character that wants to join his fleet as officer (uhhh, this one doesn't already exist, right?).
I remember reading on the forum that some improvements are coming for mercenaries.
By the way, you guys are monsters! Every time this thread gets updated I'm like: this is it, new release available! - Hmmm, wait, what did I just do. ;D
Also there could be some bar events/missions where player end-up encountering a character that wants to join his fleet as officer (uhhh, this one doesn't already exist, right?).
Does mentoring re-roll available skills for an officer if they have unselected skills? I usually mentor officers to get more choices and adjust aggressiveness, but I just realized it would be really advantageous to save mentoring for the last skill or two if it let you re-roll to try and get a skill you missed.
When I'm doing frigate or phase officers, I usually have some specific set of 5 skills I want and so I frequently miss on the last skill and have so settle for something suboptimal.Does mentoring re-roll available skills for an officer if they have unselected skills? I usually mentor officers to get more choices and adjust aggressiveness, but I just realized it would be really advantageous to save mentoring for the last skill or two if it let you re-roll to try and get a skill you missed.
I'm not sure, but I'll note that I've never had a mentored officer that didn't have pop up one of the skills I wanted. Mentoring is one of the +100% XP uses of story points, so in my mind every officer should be mentored.
As for the end game, I'm routinely smashing Ordos with far less than a maxed out Fleet Size (usually only 1-2 capitals) but I'm always maxing officers. I can't imagine not trying to cap out your officer limit as early as possible because an officered ship is just so much more powerful, whether it's a frigate or an Onslaught. It also makes going the Leadership tree sort of mandatory because either way you go with the Officer skill, you dramatically increase your fleet's effectiveness. I can't think of a run where I didn't pick it.The near mandatory of Leadership is what I do not like. I like Combat, Technology, and/or Industry more, and since we have limited skill points, I leave Leadership out, but it hurts. First with Wolfpack Tactics for frigates (I do not think frigates are worth using without Wolfpack - too low PPT without it), and then officer skills to keep up with the DP balance when everyone else has greater officer power.
The point is precisely to provide a greater challenge compared to previous version of the game, largely preventing player brute force, having player use legitimate tools to succeed (including officers!).Brute force is fun. Especially before 0.8a when AI was less cowardly and more macho.
Gating an element of gameplay (combat) behind trading items back and forth between colonies is something that Starsector was specifically designed to avoid, because it's not "fun" gameplay unless that's explicitly what your game is about.Looking at weapon availability, I wouldn't be as sure so as to make such a bold claim...
A non-trivial investment of effort which is required before you're "allowed" to have fun.
Yeah, comms screen and bar being separated is pointless. In fact, there should be a unified "interact with the colony" screen for comms, bar and other activities, like going to meet Arroyo or Daud.
Yeah, comms screen and bar being separated is pointless. In fact, there should be a unified "interact with the colony" screen for comms, bar and other activities, like going to meet Arroyo or Daud.
Oh yeah, those are also in the first set of options. Compressing all that into one spot is a good idea.
I was thinking it would be nice to be able to add more location buttons in the comms directory than just the bar - for example the Roider Union's ship retrofitting service could be there instead of tucked away in the bar. Something like:
COLONY NAME
|-----------|
| Bar |
|-----------|
| Retrofits |
|-----------|
| Meet Daud|
|-----------|
| NPC | NPC |
| NPC | NPC |
| |
|-----------|
I am trying to make it easy to look at the comm directory at the slight expense of the bar's interaction flow. Like you are thinking with the submenu, but the comms directory is the submenu so it is streamlined.
Going to the bar would be "arrive at market" -> press 1 "look at comm/market directory" -> press 1 "go to bar". 1-1 instead of 2; no big deal, just a quick double tap.
I'm one of those players who really stuggle to fill up on officers too. My main reasons for being this way are:Story points eventually catch up if player starts grinding endgame battles constantly. BUT... if the player does not want to fight (because he does not have the fleet to kill endgame fights flawlessly, or wants to do some non-combat stuff like trading instead of non-stop combat), then story points may not catch up.
1) I don't spend much time in the core worlds. Cryopod officers are 95% total garbage because they have afwul skill combos and personalities. Promoting just feels like a noobie trap because 100% story points are not really free at all with how god damn long it takes to farm XP at max level.
Story points eventually catch up if player starts grinding endgame battles constantly.
It is true that fights must be flawless. It is a reason why I took Field Repairs so that fights do not always need to be flawless, but given how slow d-mods are removed, the fleet cannot afford more than a few casualties.Story points eventually catch up if player starts grinding endgame battles constantly.
I do grind battles constantly (at around +200-250%). It's not enough unless you do it flawlessly, because recovering ships and s-modding lost ones costs more points.
I greatly look forward to what Hull Restoration can do.Oh yeah, I bet both of us will love that one, lmao. Especially since it gives CR for s-mods, so it doesn't even feel like a "waste" when you want combat power.
Not to mention one of the new Industry combat skills (Polarized Armor) has one of my favorite buffs from old Power Grid Modulation 2, faster vent speed - great for high-tech ships (piloted by player), even if it is an elite effect. Maybe the return of vent spamming when combined with Resistant Flux Conduits.I greatly look forward to what Hull Restoration can do.Oh yeah, I bet both of us will love that one, lmao. Especially since it gives CR for s-mods, so it doesn't even feel like a "waste" when you want combat power.
Alex, good day. We all really appreciate your work and I will repeat myself again - your game is amazing. I closely follow the development diaries.
While playing, I once again caught myself on the following thought: in the main quest chain there is a location that can only be reached with the help of a skill (everyone who played knows), but this is the only place (that I have seen) where this method is applied.
Will there be more places like this in the next patch? Secret places or places that can only be accessed through a gate? New coordinates for the gate?
Thank you in advance
Hm here's a thought
with the whole "damper field instead of shields" deal, does that mean there'll be ways to add more effects to defenses of ships ?
Like say, someone feels like making the Damper fields not disable weapons and give a speed boost, would a modder be able to get to that or is the system just not built for that ?
Overall I feel like the current update was a big step forward in this regard. The pather interest values from the new colony items feel a bit too much though, basically if you ever use any you'll more or less automatically spawn a cell, which was something that could be avoided in the previous version with careful planning.
I'm not sure whether this is being addressed in the coming skill tree revision but the skills that have diminishing returns based on the player's fleet composition/size feel bad in general. I'd suggest making them work so that the player'll always get a baseline benefit and a bonus on top of that based on fleet metrics. Even if the final numbers would end up being more or less equal to what we have now it would in my opinion feel better that way around (i.e. no skill would ever give _zero_ benefit regardless of the player's fleet because of the "baseline" bonus).Agreed!
The fighter skills feel a bit too weak overall with the bonuses enemy officers can get vs. fighters. I generally don't bother with fighters at all now becuse they get shot down in quick order when deployed against any serious opposition which is very sad. Maybe giving them some sort of evasion stat so that only point defence weapons/anti-fighter missiles would be able to target them consistently would help?Agreed on fighters too weak.
This might be a personal thing but I feel that the progression from lvl 10-12 onwards feels a bit too fast? At least with the big fights that I was constantly getting into I reached max lvl really quickly. Maybe tweak down the xp awarded from fighting numerically superior but weak enemies like the domain drones? Fighting those always makes me feel dirty with how much xp I get for bullying them, especially later on once their numbers go through the roof.You need the fast XP gain by max level to clear the story point debt you will get from spending story points with bonus +xp%. If anything, it is not fast enough once player reaches max level, unless the player is a dedicated combat junkie.
Items and explorationI like the idea, but I do not like that it makes it harder to find the ones you need, namely pristine nanoforge and synchrotron, because it dilutes the item pool. Before 0.95, it was unlikely player did not find at least one. Now, player will probably need to raid Chicomoztoc, Kazeron, and/or Sindria to get those two vital items to meet demand for Military Base.
The new domain artifacts that can be found are an awesome addition overall, but I feel like the supply demands for some of them (fusion lamp and hypershunt tap) are way way overtuned for what benefit -and when in the campaign- they give. When exactly is the player supposed to make use of them? It's only possible with maxed out colonies and perfect or near-perfect mining setups, but the added benefits are barely noticeable then.
Weapons and shipsSome are indeed mediocre, but there seem to be a few gems among the junk.
Most of the "spoiler" weapons feel disappointing for their extreme rarity & generally high op costs. Maybe I'm just not using them right? Also, the hidden cache the player can find early should not have totally random weapons in it in my opinion, feels really bad when you don't get any of the better ones. Maybe buffing the rest would help, I dunno.
The new AI-driven ships that can be salvaged with the right skill feel a bit weak overall with the exception of the bigger ones, they keep getting blown up with little to show for it. The suicidal ai might be to blame here, would it be possible to manually set the ai to cautios/steady/agrressive etc?AI is suicidal thanks to being locked at Fearless.
Also, had a new hull mod idea when fitting out the Venture which imo is really let down by the built in drone wing: Convert hangar housing "built-in fighters" to one that can use any fighters (no penalties other than the increased crew requirement since it's already an actual hangar and not a shuttle bay). Can't be used on (non-civilian?) frigates.So far, Venture is the only standard ship bigger than a frigate that has built-in wing. Just give the Venture back its normal fighter bay from before 0.8a without any hoops. It used to be a decent warship back in the day.
Colonies and economyIt is annoying. You need pristine nanoforge and synchrotron to feed your military bases, so you have items for two more planets. Best one after classic nanoforge/synchrotron is Dealmaker Holosuite for boosting Commerce. Runner-up is the biofactory to boost drug production.
Overall I feel like the current update was a big step forward in this regard. The pather interest values from the new colony items feel a bit too much though, basically if you ever use any you'll more or less automatically spawn a cell, which was something that could be avoided in the previous version with careful planning.
Also, it would be nice to get a more transparent breakdown on how much interest you're generating with ai core usage (is there even a limit value or is it just a timer that'll eventually trip even if you're just using a single gamma core?). Given how limited the benefit from the lowest tier cores generally is I feel like a certain ability to "fly under the radar" with limited use of cores would not be too overpowered.If you use even a single gamma in your colony, big H will come to inspect, so it does not matter with them! If you get Pather cells, they tell you how much interest cores generate for cells. If you plan to use cores (and suffer cells), might as well go big and use as many cores and other items as you can... and colonize more and more planets with alpha core admins.
I'm not sure whether this is being addressed in the coming skill tree revision but the skills that have diminishing returns based on the player's fleet composition/size feel bad in general. I'd suggest making them work so that the player'll always get a baseline benefit and a bonus on top of that based on fleet metrics. Even if the final numbers would end up being more or less equal to what we have now it would in my opinion feel better that way around (i.e. no skill would ever give _zero_ benefit regardless of the player's fleet because of the "baseline" bonus).No skill ever gives zero benefit to you already, even if you have a lot of ships, the benefit just gets spread so much it isn't very much - but, for comparison, if you have 50 Paragons in your fleet, aren't your flagship skills similarly less significant, simply because you have to outperform 50 Paragons?
The new AI-driven ships that can be salvaged with the right skill feel a bit weak overall with the exception of the bigger ones, they keep getting blown up with little to show for it. The suicidal ai might be to blame here, would it be possible to manually set the ai to cautios/steady/agrressive etc?Autonomous Ships skill is balanced entirely around the Radiant and it's the only ship worth taking currently, but it's very much worth it.
Also, it would be nice to get a more transparent breakdown on how much interest you're generating with ai core usage (is there even a limit value or is it just a timer that'll eventually trip even if you're just using a single gamma core?). Given how limited the benefit from the lowest tier cores generally is I feel like a certain ability to "fly under the radar" with limited use of cores would not be too overpowered.Yeah, AI inspections will go after you if you use any AI cores in any capacity in your colonies. And yeah, gamma cores still suck, even though Alex made economy more dependent on other factions to make money for you.