*snip*
- Fortress Shield - drastically improves shield efficiency at the expense of a constant flux buildup and inability to fire weapons
- Paragon
*snip*
Miscellaneous:
Toned down ship explosion whiteout, fixed case where it would stay washed out for too long
Ship AI:
- Improved logic for deciding which side to turn towards enemy for broadsides
Ahem: The fortress shield. What's the point exactly? If you're facing down a couple Onslaughts, won't raising shields and disabling weapons be useless unless you're in retreat? It pretty much just buys time...
infernium injector rename? :D
But now I wonder how do we implement these in mods, (hopes for mod example 3 ) :P
Looks awesome. Bit sad no new campaign things are coming soon tho.
I have a question about this change. The Odyssey's large mounts are in a weird place arc-wise, as there's no overlap between left/right until a fair distance from the ship, but at Tachyon Lance distances, the overlap is wider than a capital ship - here's what I mean (http://i.imgur.com/qb8wo.png). Will my Fire Support Odyssey now try to hit with all three Lances, or will the AI just use the two on the left?
The odyssey's ability seems like its going to limit it to tachyon lance use, sort of sad about that because i liked using it in close with autopulse lasers. Not using it's subsystem would feel like a waste, but no shields and 50% extra damage taken is just a death sentence for any high tech ship thats in anything but tachyon lance range. Not sure what i would have preferred tho.
The odyssey's ability seems like its going to limit it to tachyon lance use, sort of sad about that because i liked using it in close with autopulse lasers. Not using it's subsystem would feel like a waste, but no shields and 50% extra damage taken is just a death sentence for any high tech ship thats in anything but tachyon lance range. Not sure what i would have preferred tho.
I have a question about this change. The Odyssey's large mounts are in a weird place arc-wise, as there's no overlap between left/right until a fair distance from the ship, but at Tachyon Lance distances, the overlap is wider than a capital ship - here's what I mean (http://i.imgur.com/qb8wo.png). Will my Fire Support Odyssey now try to hit with all three Lances, or will the AI just use the two on the left?
It'll fire with all three, but only if it's a Fire Support assignment (there, it actually evaluates a wide range of possible facings for optimal firepower). In regular, close-in fighting (even when it might be able to sneak in a shot with all three), it'll pick the left side.
It should already be doing this in Fire Support mode, though - it's not a recent change.
The odyssey's ability seems like its going to limit it to tachyon lance use, sort of sad about that because i liked using it in close with autopulse lasers. Not using it's subsystem would feel like a waste, but no shields and 50% extra damage taken is just a death sentence for any high tech ship thats in anything but tachyon lance range. Not sure what i would have preferred tho.
I just want to take a second to point out that I was completely right on the teleportation thing in that medusa screenie Alex posted. ;)
I just want to take a second to point out that I was completely right on the teleportation thing in that medusa screenie Alex posted. ;)
I suppose you'll get that cookie then :)
The odyssey's ability seems like its going to limit it to tachyon lance use, sort of sad about that because i liked using it in close with autopulse lasers. Not using it's subsystem would feel like a waste, but no shields and 50% extra damage taken is just a death sentence for any high tech ship thats in anything but tachyon lance range. Not sure what i would have preferred tho.
Hmm can't see much use for this but then i'm tactically challenged sometimes.
- Fortress Shield - drastically improves shield efficiency at the expense of a constant flux buildup and inability to fire weapons
- Paragon
I like this one, interesting tactics are already in my mind now.
- High Energy Focus - boosts energy weapon damage by 50%, increases damage taken by 50%, can't use shields
- Sunder, Aurora, Odyssey
Okay my favorite ship (Medusa) just got more awesome...
- Phase Skimmer - teleports a fixed, short distance along the ship's current velocity vector
- Wolf, Medusa
I suspect that with a bit of creativity, the could be used to create hulls that transform into a somewhat different shape :) You can also make it alter ship stats in any way you want while drones are deployed (as the Apogee's Sensor Drones do).
Burn Drive - temporarily engages the drive used for system travel. Massive speed boost for a fixed time, can't turn or use shields (but can fire), risk of full engine flameout on significant collision...Hmm, isn't this ability is a little useless in a way? Sure, you can get to battle faster, but there's still the major disadvantage to the Dominator and Onslaught of not being able to turn very good and having fixed shields, so getting into battle faster may not actually be a good thing since you have less flank support. And using it in battle would only make it easier for your enemies to flank you because you just zoom past them.
...Tarsus, Enforcer, Dominator, Onslaught...
Maneuvering Jets - activates extra thrusters to greatly improve ship maneuverability...Huh, personally I thought their maneuverability was already top of the line for cruisers and didn't need to be any higher.
...Falcon, Eagle...
Phase Teleporter - teleports anywhere (to cursor location) within a significant range (~1500 pixels)...Oh dear god. That is scary. What is the cooldown? Because it sounds like it could make the Hyperion ridiculously dangerous since it's a great strike ship. Potentially too dangerous.
...Hyperion...
Accelerated Ammo Feeder - doubles ballistic weapon rate of fire for a fixed durationOh god, the mental image of two Heavy Maulers running with the firepower of 4. Beautiful. :)
...Hammerhead...
Increased Pilum missile hitpointsBy how much?
Improved Buffalo Mk.2 speed and maneuverability significantlyHey, now it's no longer an easy target that thinks it's better than a frigate but is actually horrifically worse!
Toned down ship explosion whiteout, fixed case where it would stay washed out for too longAww, the effect of a battleship completely whiting out the screen was vaguely hilarious when it wasn't happening to you. :P
Removed key binding for raising flux on purposeAww, that was a slightly useful ability in very rare cases, to raise flux and thus damage without firing at nothing. Oh well, it wasn't that important.
I suppose the main advantages are either defensively getting out of the way of big ships that have taken your rear by surprise, or probably more usefully allowing your slow ships to be deployed in the second and subsequent waves of reinforcements, and getting to the front line that much quicker.QuoteBurn Drive - temporarily engages the drive used for system travel. Massive speed boost for a fixed time, can't turn or use shields (but can fire), risk of full engine flameout on significant collision...Hmm, isn't this ability is a little useless in a way? Sure, you can get to battle faster, but there's still the major disadvantage to the Dominator and Onslaught of not being able to turn very good and having fixed shields, so getting into battle faster may not actually be a good thing since you have less flank support. And using it in battle would only make it easier for your enemies to flank you because you just zoom past them.
...Tarsus, Enforcer, Dominator, Onslaught...
Please enlighten me on what advantage this gives. Does it allow them to ram their enemy or something? Run away faster?
I suppose the main advantages are either defensively getting out of the way of big ships that have taken your rear by surprise,But... shouldn't you be keeping yourself aimed at the big ships at all times with those last two ships? I mean, to me that seems like the logical thing to with ships that turn slowly which also have fixed weapon slots and fixed shields.
or probably more usefully allowing your slow ships to be deployed in the second and subsequent waves of reinforcements, and getting to the front line that much quicker.Yes, that is an advantage, but the advantage is only in getting places. Once battle starts, I personally see myself only rarely using it if at all, which is what I'm uncertain about, because it seems like the only Ship System in the game that I wouldn't use in battle itself out of all the other Ship Systems, for ships that seem to get less use out of it than they could get with, say, Maneuvering Jets.
I suppose the main advantages are either defensively getting out of the way of big ships that have taken your rear by surprise,But... shouldn't you be keeping yourself aimed at the big ships at all times with those last two ships? I mean, to me that seems like the logical thing to with ships that turn slowly which also have fixed weapon slots and fixed shields.Quoteor probably more usefully allowing your slow ships to be deployed in the second and subsequent waves of reinforcements, and getting to the front line that much quicker.Yes, that is an advantage, but the advantage is only in getting places. Once battle starts, I personally see myself only rarely using it if at all, which is what I'm uncertain about, because it seems like the only Ship System in the game that I wouldn't use in battle itself out of all the other Ship Systems, for ships that seem to get less use out of it than they could get with, say, Maneuvering Jets.
Yeah, of course you should. But then you wouldn't have been taken by surprise ... :PI suppose the main advantages are either defensively getting out of the way of big ships that have taken your rear by surprise,But... shouldn't you be keeping yourself aimed at the big ships at all times with those last two ships? I mean, to me that seems like the logical thing to with ships that turn slowly which also have fixed weapon slots and fixed shields.
In my experience, getting fast into the battle at the beginning of it, is crucial to win it.So that's why we have frigates and fighters and deploy them first.
And conversely, I think it could prove to be a big deal in deciding the effectiveness of e.g. an Onslaught as part of a larger fleet.Good point, actually. But the enemy could also send out a strong and quick advance force, and just skirmish with your Onslaught and Dominators--which are horrible at doing so with smaller ships--until your own big ships arrive, which have better systems.
This frees up a whole bunch of FPs to structure a strong and quick advance force, knowing that you have the latitude to e.g. reliably capture and hold a comm relay, and get your hulking Onslaught in to the battle as part of the second wave very quickly.
Personally I can't wait to charge into a group of Tri-tachyon frigates and destroyers with a machine-gun-slaught and watch them all melt under a hail of bullets. Bwahahahaha!
I don't know about you guys but i can't wait to ram a ship to death with my onslaught going at full speed.
I believe that it may be more effective than that. A few bumps with a smaller ship normally puts their flux up 50%. To ram them at that speed, they will overload straight away. Who cares if you lose your engines.I don't know about you guys but i can't wait to ram a ship to death with my onslaught going at full speed.
That's probably just gonna make you lose your engine. Could still be fun.
The infernium injector got cut - could never nail down what it was supposed to do, in a satisfying way (it was meant to be a high-tech movement enhancer, akin to Burn Drive, but different).
What happens if you teleport into another ship/asteroid?
HELL YEA! Finally. ;D
Heyyy, automatic drones! Are they repaired in battle when they return to the mothership?
Drones: you've got X amount that can be deployed at any one time, and a total number of drones the ship carries (replenished between battles). You press 'F' to deploy the drones in a pattern around the ship. 'F' again to let them roam on a longer leash. 'F' again to recall all drones - they land on the ship, and any damaged ones are repaired - though lost drones are gone for good. While drones are active (not "recalled"), it'll continue to deploy reserve drones to replace losses, until it's out of reserve drones.
Bah, I didn't do a good job of explaining.
Also: the pattern that the drones deploy in can be modded - in particular, you can have them deploy in a fixed position, or set up multiple orbits around the ship. I suspect that with a bit of creativity, the could be used to create hulls that transform into a somewhat different shape :) You can also make it alter ship stats in any way you want while drones are deployed (as the Apogee's Sensor Drones do).
High Energy Focus - boosts energy weapon damage by 50%, increases damage taken by 50%, can't use shields
Sunder, Aurora, Odyssey
how is telefragging handled in the game?
(teleporting right into another object)
Ha ha, you're honestly saying that about a ship that has fixed shields and mostly frontal weapons?I believe that it may be more effective than that. A few bumps with a smaller ship normally puts their flux up 50%. To ram them at that speed, they will overload straight away. Who cares if you lose your engines.I don't know about you guys but i can't wait to ram a ship to death with my onslaught going at full speed.
That's probably just gonna make you lose your engine. Could still be fun.
Question about a few of the systems, namely the High Energy Focus and Fortress Shield. You didn't mention that they were for a limited amount of time (like you did for Burn Drive for instance). Does that mean it's going to be something like a toggle ability? When you choose whether they are on or off constantly?
how is telefragging handled in the game?
What happens if you teleport into another ship/asteroid?
3. teleportation. What happens if we intentionally teleport on any other ship? What happens if we do it unintentionally (skimmer type teleport)? I assume that there is some safe-guard code that prevents such collisions?
1. drones. Can a ship have drones and hangars for standard fighters? Are drones shown on the ship (attached) like turrets or do they just launch from bays? Is there a new hardpoint type for drone hangars?
2. ship systems. How do we put those on a ship? Via variants or through other ways? I ask because i`d like to know if those are hull-specified or variant-specified. If it is a variant-specified than all drones/flares etc. probably launch from the ships center...
4. missile flares. Once again - are there any hardpoints for those? Or do they launch from the center of a ship? How much flares are launched?
Lastly - nice MOO2-ish names! I love how those classic things end up in this game with almost the same features.
And - congrats on finishing a really interesting combat element ;)
... especially the Buffalo MK2. Jesus Christ, it's about time it got a buff. Mind telling us how much more speed and manueverability it recieved?
Wow this all sounds awesome! Im hoping the midline drones are not OP, can they target shields? Or just missiles?
Good point, actually. But the enemy could also send out a strong and quick advance force, and just skirmish with your Onslaught and Dominators--which are horrible at doing so with smaller ships--until your own big ships arrive, which have better systems.
I don't know about you guys but i can't wait to ram a ship to death with my onslaught going at full speed.
That's probably just gonna make you lose your engine. Could still be fun.
The infernium injector got cut - could never nail down what it was supposed to do, in a satisfying way (it was meant to be a high-tech movement enhancer, akin to Burn Drive, but different).
Well, you've got something that fits that bill quite nicely: the phase skimmer.
QuoteHigh Energy Focus - boosts energy weapon damage by 50%, increases damage taken by 50%, can't use shields
Sunder, Aurora, Odyssey
I'll have to wait to play this and see how it goes. In my mind either 50% extra damage or no shields would be appropriate. Of course I'll probably eat those words the instant I switch this on and gore an overloading enemy to death. My main concern, like a lot of other people, is how this will affect the Tachyon lance. Because of the range tachyon Odyssey's will have no downsides to this ability...
Alex, how do you feel about the Tachyon lance?
I like the ship systems that are being implemented, but there are a few systems that I'd be interested in seeing that aren't there:
•A system that increases ballistic/energy/beam weapons' range and velocity by, say, 25-100% while active (perhaps with increased flux cost or something, to offset it). Range is one of the most powerful stats, though.
•A system that just deals damage. I like the idea of a ship built around a weapon, like a weapon so large for its ship class that the only way to feasibly accomodate it is to build it right into the frame. Also, think 'Death Star'.
QuoteRemoved key binding for raising flux on purposeAww, that was a slightly useful ability in very rare cases, to raise flux and thus damage without firing at nothing. Oh well, it wasn't that important.
Is the function still in, though? Can I still bind it to a key if I really want it for some strange reason?
Ah, but with Burn Drive, these ships become quite good at bullying smaller ships. It's a bit of a bull vs matador thing, but the matador doesn't always win. If a frigate gets behind it, the ship can get away. If a frigate is in front of it, it can close the gap with frightening speed. It's an awesome system, with tons of combat utility, especially vs smaller ships - and, lets face it, the main problem for these ships was mobility, not firepower or armor. Burn Drive is a tool to overcome that limitation. It's got some downsides (no turning, no shields) but without those it would be incredibly OP.Hmm. How much speed does it add, anyway? How long does it last? Can you cancel it?
The flameout chance only comes into play when you hit something as big as your ship or larger.Is that defined by the class, the mass, or the size in pixels?
Alex, I think you missed one of my questions:QuoteQuoteRemoved key binding for raising flux on purposeAww, that was a slightly useful ability in very rare cases, to raise flux and thus damage without firing at nothing. Oh well, it wasn't that important.
Is the function still in, though? Can I still bind it to a key if I really want it for some strange reason?
Ah, but with Burn Drive, these ships become quite good at bullying smaller ships. It's a bit of a bull vs matador thing, but the matador doesn't always win. If a frigate gets behind it, the ship can get away. If a frigate is in front of it, it can close the gap with frightening speed. It's an awesome system, with tons of combat utility, especially vs smaller ships - and, lets face it, the main problem for these ships was mobility, not firepower or armor. Burn Drive is a tool to overcome that limitation. It's got some downsides (no turning, no shields) but without those it would be incredibly OP.Hmm. How much speed does it add, anyway? How long does it last? Can you cancel it?The flameout chance only comes into play when you hit something as big as your ship or larger.Is that defined by the class, the mass, or the size in pixels?
I call shenanigans! The preview video you posted clearly showed an infernium injector on an Aurora!The infernium injector got cut - could never nail down what it was supposed to do, in a satisfying way (it was meant to be a high-tech movement enhancer, akin to Burn Drive, but different).
Well, you've got something that fits that bill quite nicely: the phase skimmer.
Yeah, good call - the skimmer is indeed the "spiritual successor" to the injector - it's on the same two ships the injector was supposed to go on.
My suggestion would be a mix of reduced range (4000 was what I tested) with either further increased flux generation, or less damage; part of the issue, I think, is that the last balance pass, while it did increase flux generation some, also (due to a bug fix on burst beam weapons) increased the lance's damage output by about 50%. (I think? Don't have the game in front of me, but if it's still listed as 200 sustained DPS, that's 50% more than it had before.)QuoteHigh Energy Focus - boosts energy weapon damage by 50%, increases damage taken by 50%, can't use shields
Sunder, Aurora, Odyssey
I'll have to wait to play this and see how it goes. In my mind either 50% extra damage or no shields would be appropriate. Of course I'll probably eat those words the instant I switch this on and gore an overloading enemy to death. My main concern, like a lot of other people, is how this will affect the Tachyon lance. Because of the range tachyon Odyssey's will have no downsides to this ability...
Alex, how do you feel about the Tachyon lance?
We'll see - there hasn't been an awful lot of playtesting, beyond just making sure the systems "feel" good. I have to admit, I hadn't considered the "Odyssey with Tachyon Lances and always-on HEF" angle - but was already thinking of reducing Tachyon Lance range to around 3000 (from 5000). Definitely something to keep an eye out for, though.
As for a "ship around a weapon", I've been thinking about that a bit - came up early on during this dev cycle. *IF* that happens, it probably won't be handled through ship systems. You actually could do this with a mod - easy enough to strap any kind of weapon onto a hull using the same functionality that, say, the flare launcher uses - but the problem would be in making the AI use it. Needs a bit more thought on my end.We have a ship around a weapon: the Sunder. We will have another one with this patch: the Omen. In fact, if I was setting up ship systems, I'd give the Paragon something akin to the Omen's EMP Emitter, spewing lightning bolts from an orb of energy generated in that curious hole in the middle of the ship...
... especially the Buffalo MK2. Jesus Christ, it's about time it got a buff. Mind telling us how much more speed and manueverability it recieved?
The top speed is 80 now - not great, but no longer horrible. It's still not a good ship, and really isn't supposed to be one.
...Yes, ok, so that's slightly tongue-in-cheek. Still, I find the notion of the High Energy Focus on the Aurora to be an odd choice; it can't mount the long-range energy weaponry (HILs or lances) needed to avoid the drawbacks, nor does it have the armor or hull to survive for long with its shields down - even without the extra 50% damage taken. It's not useless, of course; you can get some good value out of it against overloaded targets or things that you're flanking... but I'd still find the phase skimmer or fortress shield to be a more fitting choice.
...Speaking of which, you may want to consider some more complicated algorithm for "is this ship fire support" than just "does it have any weapon with extreme range" - because Auroras really shouldn't be held on the back lines until they run out of MIRV ammo.
My suggestion would be a mix of reduced range (4000 was what I tested) with either further increased flux generation, or less damage; part of the issue, I think, is that the last balance pass, while it did increase flux generation some, also (due to a bug fix on burst beam weapons) increased the lance's damage output by about 50%. (I think? Don't have the game in front of me, but if it's still listed as 200 sustained DPS, that's 50% more than it had before.)
Sooooo i guess this means the Omen is finally in the campaign?
I think you should add small, red lightning arcs to the Burn Drive active engines. Would look hella awesome and you've already got the lightning fx working for the Omen, yeah?
It's less than mediocre, every other combat ship in the game outperforms it in every way. Speed buff, great, flare system, even better, but if you yourself say that it's still not a good ship then why have it in the game? Variety is always good, no doubt about that, and every ship has its place but for the Buffalo that place happens to be on the scrapyard. Have you considered turning it into a pure missile platform instead? That small energy mount at its front is rather misplaced so it could be switched for something else.
I just want it to have a role that doesn't involve rushing to a station and getting rid of the damn thing as fast as possible.
Well, I'm visualizing tiny little bolts of lightning coursing across the engine - sorta like when overloaded but confined only to the engine area. You know, like they're seething/overcharged with power and energy. Maybe the overload fx, with red/oragen tinting, would be better than the lightning fx after all.
Anyways, these systems should be pretty awesome but thinking of early game against Hounds with flares makes me... ?_?
but in general, large ships teleporting around seems too powerful.
The engines aren't really overcharging though. They are using travel drives, which would be quite stable as they must be constantly used for non combat travel, in a combat situation.This is a game, not a real-life combat simulation like Arma 2. This is where we can enjoy the marvels of Alex's coding. ;D
If everything is special than nothing is! Sometimes you have to have a few less-than-ideal ships - 'sides the Buffalo has decent cargo capacity and can be sold for a good amount when full repaired.
How shall I put it... it's not a good ship, and it's not supposed to be. When character skills and such come in, you might be able to make something presentable out of it, and it could make a reasonable short-term stop on your way to something better. With how the campaign works *now*, with the lack of character skills and the ease of acquiring better ships, it's simply never going to be all that useful.
Some ships are just flat out worse than others, and this is ok.
Also: the pattern that the drones deploy in can be modded - in particular, you can have them deploy in a fixed position, or set up multiple orbits around the ship. I suspect that with a bit of creativity, the could be used to create hulls that transform into a somewhat different shape :) You can also make it alter ship stats in any way you want while drones are deployed (as the Apogee's Sensor Drones do).
How shall I put it... it's not a good ship, and it's not supposed to be. When character skills and such come in, you might be able to make something presentable out of it, and it could make a reasonable short-term stop on your way to something better. With how the campaign works *now*, with the lack of character skills and the ease of acquiring better ships, it's simply never going to be all that useful.
If you do have abilities/skills/perks/something that enhanches it, won't these buffs be for all or for specific ship sizes? Right now I'm speculating since these things have not yet been implemented yet, but shouldn't that make every other ship even more attractive compared to the Buffalo?Some ships are just flat out worse than others, and this is ok.
Absolutely, when it is justified in cost. Talon squadrons are among the weakest ships in the game, but they're brutally cheap and expandable. I completely understand that not every ship is supposed to tackle a Paragon 1vs1, but every ship has a role of some sorts. The Buffalo has nothing really redeemable about it, it's like a flying kinder egg just waiting to be smashed apart and eaten by the player... and its toy being sold to a trader.
My point is, it lacks a role, it lacks a purpose. If it does have a role or purpose and if that is to either be sold at stations or used as target practice, there are perhaps better ways of doing it. Why not let it retain some of its cargospace or fuel capacity, make it a more heavily armed transport instead?
[/li][/list]
- Bombing runs and fighters firing at a ship while directly on top of it will no longer hit the bounds, but rather other points inside the hull
It would then stop being a bad ship - but it's supposed to be - so, it makes no sense to do this now.
It's meant to be the kind of thing you use because you couldn't get anything better at the time - but now, that's never the case. So, I'll revisit it (and lots of other things) when the campaign is further along. Giving it somewhat better campaign-level stats might not be a bad idea, though.
i think the issue is just that its so expensive for being so bad. Why would pirates buy it at its current price? being an all around bad ship even in the campaign is a role thats cool to exist but then the price should really reflect it or it wouldn't even exist in the world at all.But the pirates don't buy it. The point of the Buffalo Mk 2 is it's a crude refit of the Mk 1 transport, the pirates capture Mk 1s from traders and turn them into things that roughly approximate a combat ship. It's certainly better than a Buffalo Mk 1 in a fight, and even with how bad it is a Mk 2 + Lasher is a better fleet than just a single Lasher. If anything, the price should reflect the demand from traders for the hulls to convert back into Mk 1s.
i think the issue is just that its so expensive for being so bad. Why would pirates buy it at its current price? being an all around bad ship even in the campaign is a role thats cool to exist but then the price should really reflect it or it wouldn't even exist in the world at all.
Honestly, I'd just suggest swapping two of its salamader launchers for swarmers; that alone would make it a more credible threat.
Unless, scarcity. Anything is better then nothing, and if no other ships are available then even the worst ships become pricey.
Unless there's more of them? Haha. Supply and demand is weird.Unless, scarcity. Anything is better then nothing, and if no other ships are available then even the worst ships become pricey.
If scarcity was an issue the value of all other ships would rise at the same pace...
Unless, scarcity. Anything is better then nothing, and if no other ships are available then even the worst ships become pricey.
If scarcity was an issue the value of all other ships would rise at the same pace...
The economy needs to be implemented. Though that's probably a boring and complicated thing. But makes my eyes sparkle!
What about cloaking and scanning the cloaked ships?
What about writing custom AI?
What about drive or engines inhibition to make ship unmovable?
What about weapon jamming and improved weapon targeting?
What about adding all these new modules through hull mods?
: DThe economy needs to be implemented. Though that's probably a boring and complicated thing. But makes my eyes sparkle!
Complicated? Certainly. Boring? Certainly not!
Re: Buffalo 2 - I think the horse you're beating might be deceased :) I get what you're saying, but seeing how there isn't an economy at this point, it's not exactly something that can be argued one way or another, or dealt with in a satisfactory manner. For now, the Buffalo 2 role is squarely that of "punching bag". And some fire support - it's not quite useless, though there are better choices.
What about cloaking and scanning the cloaked ships?Awesome.
What about writing custom AI?
What about drive or engines inhibition to make ship unmovable?
What about weapon jamming and improved weapon targeting?
What about adding all these new modules through hull mods?
What about it? :) Seriously, though, there's an almost unlimited number of ship systems that could be made. Custom AI... it's a possibility, at some point. Would require a good amount of work on the API, though, which is why I'm holding off on it.
- Phase Teleporter - teleports anywhere (to cursor location) within a significant range (~1500 pixels)
- Hyperion
Ah but what about when it can burn drive away long enough for his escorts to swoop in?
EDIT: Should at least be more interesting now. :)
That brings a question to mind. If the engines are disabled, can the burndrive still activate or is it useless until the engines are back online?Also what if you burn drive outside map boundaries? Or teleport for that matter.
That brings a question to mind. If the engines are disabled, can the burndrive still activate or is it useless until the engines are back online?
The economy needs to be implemented. Though that's probably a boring and complicated thing. But makes my eyes sparkle!
Complicated? Certainly. Boring? Certainly not!
I believe you cannot use it until the engines are repaired.I'll bet it possible with the Phase Skimmer, but you probably end up with similar results as just moving to the edge of the map.
Also, i think you cannot teleport outside of the map, but that's just me rambling...
That ECCM hullmod sounds friggin awesome. Finally i can hit those hounds with my harpoons! I hope
EMP Emitter - targets missiles and nearby ship's weapon and engine subsystems, dealing a lot of EMP damage (and some energy). Mostly neutralized by shields.
Omen
EMP Emitter - targets missiles and nearby ship's weapon and engine subsystems, dealing a lot of EMP damage (and some energy). Mostly neutralized by shields.
Omen
That brings a question to mind. If the engines are disabled, can the burndrive still activate or is it useless until the engines are back online?
Also, i think you cannot teleport outside of the map, but that's just me rambling...
Hmm, I hope the ships that have the Phase Skimmer skip at different distances, with the smaller ships skipping much further distances.
EDIT: I hope the distance is not dependent on your current movement speed.
I just realized... is that EMP damage going to be enough to knock unshielded fighters out cold in one shot? I'm guessing thats the point in which case... damn! Thats awesome!
QuoteEMP Emitter - targets missiles and nearby ship's weapon and engine subsystems, dealing a lot of EMP damage (and some energy). Mostly neutralized by shields.
Omen
A major point of concern, Alex.....Which one of the following three target-sets will this EMP shipsystem engage:
1) All enemy missiles & enemy ships within its EMP range? (best-case result)
2) Only enemy missiles targeted specifically at the Omen, plus any enemy ships within range? (median result, but IMHO inadequate)
3 ) ALL missiles & ships within its range, friend and foe alike?? (worst-case result)
The answer will have a tremendous impact upon the shipsystem itself as well as all future modder use of it, so I'm...well...kind of nervous until this gets decisively nailed down. :-[ TIA for any clarification you can provide.
QuoteEMP Emitter - targets missiles and nearby ship's weapon and engine subsystems, dealing a lot of EMP damage (and some energy). Mostly neutralized by shields.
Omen
A major point of concern, Alex.....Which one of the following three target-sets will this EMP shipsystem engage:
1) All enemy missiles & enemy ships within its EMP range? (best-case result)
2) Only enemy missiles targeted specifically at the Omen, plus any enemy ships within range? (median result, but IMHO inadequate)
3 ) ALL missiles & ships within its range, friend and foe alike?? (worst-case result)
The answer will have a tremendous impact upon the shipsystem itself as well as all future modder use of it, so I'm...well...kind of nervous until this gets decisively nailed down. :-[ TIA for any clarification you can provide.
It's #1. What it actually does is target enemy missiles, and the actual engines/weapons on enemy ships and fighters. So, it delivers all the EMP damage right where it's doing to be most effective at disabling stuff. For fighters, that means it'll knock out their engines very fast. VS a ship like the Enforcer, the lightning will dance around all the weapon mounts and engine nozzles, knocking out absolutely everything with ease - unless, of course, the ship uses shields. There's also a slight energy damage component to the EMP arcs (both damage type, amount, and emp damage amount are moddable, as well as the range at which it works).
For missiles, a single hit *always* knocks out the missile's engine, leaving it to fizzle out in a bit. Missiles already knocked out are much less likely to be targeted by repeated EMP blasts - so, for example, if there are 3 Pilums coming in, the most likely outcome is they'll all get their engines knocked out first, and then, assuming no other targets are in range, the system will continue to hit the disabled missiles - eventually destroying them with energy damage.
The order in which things are targeted is entirely random, though it's a weighted random. (Less likely for knocked-out missiles, more likely for something near something that was already hit).
Sooo. EMP system is actually a fine-tuned Lightning Field :)
Once again - those lightnings will be fired from the same SYSTEM hardpoints?
I still can`t get the whole SYSTEM hardpoint feature. The more you have those on a ship - the more drones, flares and lightnings you`ll get?
Also - can you modify the drone`s weapons? I remember you saying that you can recreate similar systems by slightly adjusting the existing ones. So i assume that it is possible to have multiple drone systems with various weapons, images, numbers etc. defined (not per ship, but in overall)?
Sooo. EMP system is actually a fine-tuned Lightning Field :)
Once again - those lightnings will be fired from the same SYSTEM hardpoints?
I still can`t get the whole SYSTEM hardpoint feature. The more you have those on a ship - the more drones, flares and lightnings you`ll get?
Also - can you modify the drone`s weapons? I remember you saying that you can recreate similar systems by slightly adjusting the existing ones. So i assume that it is possible to have multiple drone systems with various weapons, images, numbers etc. defined (not per ship, but in overall)?
(both damage type, amount, and emp damage amount are moddable, as well as the range at which it works)
Sooo. EMP system is actually a fine-tuned Lightning Field :)
Once again - those lightnings will be fired from the same SYSTEM hardpoints?
I still can`t get the whole SYSTEM hardpoint feature. The more you have those on a ship - the more drones, flares and lightnings you`ll get?
Also - can you modify the drone`s weapons? I remember you saying that you can recreate similar systems by slightly adjusting the existing ones. So i assume that it is possible to have multiple drone systems with various weapons, images, numbers etc. defined (not per ship, but in overall)?
There's not a new type of hardpoint, each hull type gets one ship system specific to its hull. In other words, you can't customize what ship system a hull has from within the game.
In order to do the things you're describing, you'd have to mod the game.
But the ECCM helps missiles ignore flares...That ECCM hullmod sounds friggin awesome. Finally i can hit those hounds with my harpoons! I hope
Good luck making those missiles catch him....
Not talking about his new flare system.
In other words: The hound after the update will be the ultimate "troll and rage-inducing machine to ever exist"
Thanks ever so much for the detailed (and quick) answer, as well as your chosen method for the EMP effect! If there was an emoticon handy for "massive sigh of relief," I'd be using it.
The Omen became my kid's "eventual favorite ship" once I mentioned the upcoming EMP device. I'm now doubly certain that it's going to get a lot of play. ;D
Once again - those lightnings will be fired from the same SYSTEM hardpoints?
I still can`t get the whole SYSTEM hardpoint feature. The more you have those on a ship - the more drones, flares and lightnings you`ll get?
Also - can you modify the drone`s weapons? I remember you saying that you can recreate similar systems by slightly adjusting the existing ones. So i assume that it is possible to have multiple drone systems with various weapons, images, numbers etc. defined (not per ship, but in overall)?
Will you be able to add a ship system to a new ship from a mod? Just wondering.I think he said the system is determined in mod able files. So yes, you'll be able to add systems to modded ships.
And the lightning bolt for the Omen, is that from a texture or made from coding?
Epic! Now, I want to see a talon spawn a talon over and over again. ;D
Or have the Scourge multiply endlessly!
But the ECCM helps missiles ignore flares...That ECCM hullmod sounds friggin awesome. Finally i can hit those hounds with my harpoons! I hope
Good luck making those missiles catch him....
Not talking about his new flare system.
In other words: The hound after the update will be the ultimate "troll and rage-inducing machine to ever exist"
Note to self: first thing to do once .53a is released is to make a binary fission simulator.
For drones: yes, you can create new drones - they're implemented as ships, with .ship and .variant files. At one point I had an Onslaught launching Onslaughts that launched Onslaughts. That ended very badly - imagine this, but with Onslaughts:
*snip*
:)
I shouldn't have said that... ;DOr have the Scourge multiply endlessly!
(http://www.thebort.com/www/Smileys/default/whistle.gif)
So what is the downside of the Hyperion's teleporter? And if there isn't one, what is the cooldown?
I'm worried that I could warp in behind a ship, let loose all of my torpedoes before they can get their shields up, and then warp back without taking any damage.
This drone talk has gone too far.
No, no it hasn't. Why not have a buffalo MK 2 spawn a trio of onslaughts? PUNCHING BAG NO MORE.
What about it? :)1) Will I be able to put more then one system per ship?
Seriously, though, there's an almost unlimited number of ship systems that could be made.Yep, such thing limited only by imagination of creator and... you don't have problem with this, aside from the damage types :P
Custom AI... it's a possibility, at some point. Would require a good amount of work on the API, though, which is why I'm holding off on it.Good to know... that there is a possibility for one. Because if it will be possible, players will be able to encounter my second self in my mod :)
I'm worried that I could warp in behind a ship, let loose all of my torpedoes before they can get their shields up, and then warp back without taking any damage.Yeah, I'm also worried about this. The Hyperion already has the highest firepower and largest shield of any frigate (at least, I think), if it can just jump everywhere at any time you'd basically have to fill the entire area with missiles before you could even stand a chance of hitting it.
I'm sure the cooldown for the teleporter is long enough to prevent the Hyperion from doing that. And if it isn't, a simple downside such as temporarily disabled shields after a teleport would prevent a player from unloading missiles up an Onslaught's backdoor without thinking twice.That would limit the teleporter to only a escape system instead of being able to use it for both offensive and defensive maneuvers.
Not really. Just because you don't have shields doesn't mean you can't still put up a tough fight with the enemy even with minimal armor and integrity. The Hyperion is fast, and with the teleporter it can choose what guns will be firing at it.The Hyperion simply can't rely on its puny armor and speed is meaningless at point blank range. It really needs its shields. You already have a risk when using the teleporter, if you teleport yourself into combat you are at risk, systems come with a cooldown timer, using it to move in behind an onslaught and being unable to get away instantly is a big risk all of its own.
The Hyperion simply can't rely on its puny armor and speed is meaningless at point blank range.Who said you needed to get into point blank range? You have medium energy slots, and missile slots, you don't need to get into point blank range.
You already have a risk when using the teleporter, if you teleport yourself into combat you are at risk,Why would you teleport yourself into combat instead of burning your engines for a few more seconds? Wouldn't you use it to teleport behind your enemies instead? ;)
systems come with a cooldown timerYes, I'm pretty sure I've caught that by myself from the various things said around this thread.
using it to move in behind an onslaught and being unable to get away instantly is a big risk all of its own.Yes it's risky, especially without the shields. But it's not an impossible move to teleport behind your enemy and let loose, no? If it's not impossible, then it doesn't limit the teleporter to an escape system, does it? ;)
I think instant jumps would make it more interesting (dodge projectiles that way!) but maybe your shields could not be re-enabled for a few seconds after the teleport. Keep in mind that the enemy will also need some time to turn its guns towards your new position so it's not an instant kill.Are you implying that the turrets on the back of a ship can point forward? If it where are Hammerhead yeah but not on most ships.
I'm really hoping we can make a system which toggles on and off and trades a reduced shield arc for better damage efficiency. It would work wonders for narrow ships burdened by wide shield bubbles in combat with larger ships (yes I'm thinking of my ships in particular) whilst still having a reasonable defense against fighters and peripheral threats. At the moment it's kind of either/or in terms of reasonable balance. Having a system which provided this flexibility would increase tactical options and flexibility.Nice idea, make a suggestion out of it!!
Just a lil tidbit, can the drone subsystem be installed on a ship without a landing deck? since atm I notice they are on ships that essentially carriers possibly to aid in launching and landing? I have a feeling that it's standalone though.Ship systems use their own hardpoints so yes its possible to have these on ships that don't have a landing deck. Its most obvious when you consider that the Apogee is going to get this system yet does not have a landing deck.
Hi guys - just wanted to let you know that I'm out of town this week (vacation!)Well at least we know that the next update won't be for at least another week.
I'm going to actually try to tear myself away from everything (yeah, right... well, I'll try) and get some rest, so, if you don't see me around here much, that's why, and my apologies :)
Hi guys - just wanted to let you know that I'm out of town this week (vacation!)
I'm going to actually try to tear myself away from everything (yeah, right... well, I'll try) and get some rest, so, if you don't see me around here much, that's why, and my apologies :)
Hi guys - just wanted to let you know that I'm out of town this week (vacation!)No need to apologize man, you have already given us many things other games have failed to give, and for only $10.
I'm going to actually try to tear myself away from everything (yeah, right... well, I'll try) and get some rest, so, if you don't see me around here much, that's why, and my apologies :)
Burn it down, burn it all down!Hah, good luck on burning the forums down. If B12 can survive on two moderators (one, most of the time), you're not going to get far on a far smaller forum with (I'm pretty sure) more than two moderators. :P
Bwahahahaha!
Hahaha!
Haha.
Ha...
Oh, Alex is still here. Feel free to ignore me for the time being.
Hi guys - just wanted to let you know that I'm out of town this week (vacation!)
I'm going to actually try to tear myself away from everything (yeah, right... well, I'll try) and get some rest, so, if you don't see me around here much, that's why, and my apologies :)
Your crew eagerly await your return. ;D
Your crew eagerly await your return. ;DI'm not so sure about that, Alex did get Bob and Bobby killed by not paying attention to a Lasher's Harpoon barrage.
Your crew eagerly await your return. ;DI'm not so sure about that, Alex did get Bob and Bobby killed by not paying attention to a Lasher's Harpoon barrage.
Saw this today, made me laugh. Also think of starfarer.xDSpoiler(http://oi48.tinypic.com/29euc7.jpg)[close]
*Looks at the chart*Please, Fractal, never be bought by a bigger company.
"Commander, it seems we have a new threat to homeland security"
"What do you wish to do, sir?"
"We'll play a waiting game at first, but once they grow to a larger threat, we'll try to annex then into the EA corp. If they become to unmanageable, we'll destroy their economy. Got that, commander?"
"Yes sir."
Sadly, that's the truth about EA these days :(
Still no mining? :'(
I don't wanna play without it... bring it on :D.
Because I always get smoked with the beginners Ship by a huge ass fleet -.-.Still no mining? :'(
I don't wanna play without it... bring it on :D.
Why do people always love to do boring stuff in a videogame!
JK bro, I like growing a fortune too.
Because I always get smoked with the beginners Ship by a huge ass fleet -.-.Still no mining? :'(
I don't wanna play without it... bring it on :D.
Why do people always love to do boring stuff in a videogame!
JK bro, I like growing a fortune too.
That's a matter of personal taste and personal perception. Everyone plays a game differently and some will play game way different then you would think. I wouldn't mind doing some mining first and then doing battle.
That's a matter of personal taste and personal perception. Everyone plays a game differently and some will play game way different then you would think. I wouldn't mind doing some mining first and then doing battle.
Pretty much any ship you start with (at least initially) should be able to deal with single pirate lashers and hounds. Most will deal with two or three at once once you really get the hang of the controls and the flow of combat.Modding the ship can help maintain it's future usability and general combat use.
Unless you start with a Dram Tanker, in which case you facepalm, delete the character and restart, since comoddity trading isn't in the game yet and a Hound will kick your ass.
Unless you start with a Dram Tanker, in which case you facepalm, delete the character and restart, since comoddity trading isn't in the game yet and a Hound will kick your ass.
Starting with a Dram is actually really nice, especially if you have some money stored up. You can jump straight to a destroyer half the time after selling all the fuel.
Arg, don't start up that conversion again on quotes... ;D
And yea, 350 fuel gets you about 5000 credits, which is REALLY nice!
Unless you start with a Dram Tanker, in which case you facepalm, delete the character and restart, since comoddity trading isn't in the game yet and a Hound will kick your ass.
Well, Alex should be back tomorrow if he's right on one week, I await new patch notes. ;D
Really looking forward to ship systems and I hope they're as moddable as they seem. Sure wish these patches came sooner--can you imagine if Alex won $100M and put it all into development. Awww yeahh.
if he gets money he gets maybe more coders and stuff
That's all I meant. You can still make something yours without doing all the work; I'm working on a digital short film and it's still my film, despite working with almost 20 other people.That's a debatable point, though. I'm sure there are plenty of people who would think the opposite given the same situation.
don't think money is the problem... Mana is
!!NEED MORE MANA!!
..::mana transfer~~~~~~~~X
PS: ::)
don't think money is the problem... Mana is
!!NEED MORE MANA!!
..::mana transfer~~~~~~~~X
PS: ::)
I would go with additional pylons.
I remember needing more Spice in Dune 2 the original.
don't think money is the problem... Mana is
!!NEED MORE MANA!!
..::mana transfer~~~~~~~~X
PS: ::)
I would go with additional pylons.
i remember needing more minerals in red alert.. the original.
do the sensor drones bonus apply to the one ship or to the entire side?Probably just the one ship. What would happen if you have many apogees? ;D
do the sensor drones bonus apply to the one ship or to the entire side?Probably just the one ship. What would happen if you have many apogees? ;D
do the sensor drones bonus apply to the one ship or to the entire side?
do the sensor drones bonus apply to the one ship or to the entire side?
Just the ship.
Also: I'm back from vacation and working away on things once again :) Nothing patch-notes-worthy yet, though - just trying a couple of things out.
things
if pro is the opposite of con does that mean congress is the opposite of progress? ;D
To be honest I'm not quite sure I'm liking the idea that only the Omen has the EMP blast thingy for two reasons
1: They are a pain to get
2: Unless its EMP attack is strong enough to knock out a destroyer/cruiser or spammable like no tomorrow, they'll still have a ridiculously low potential compared to any other ship in the game...
Side note: the ability to exchange ship systems would be much appreciated such as:
Hound can upgrade to active flares BUT it would have somesort of drawback, more flux, actual OP used for upgrade or slower recharge....That kinda thing...
However it would be daft to have all ships capable of having all systems (Burn Drive on an Odysee would be stupid) wich is why I propose to limit certain systems to certain Tech levels to prevent ridiculous things from happening...
When will we see multiple starsystems in play? Will it be this upcoming version, or a few ahead?
Is that some information you can disclose, alex, instead of the ordinary soon(TM) :D
I remember needing more Spice in Dune 2 the original.
Fixed that up for you.
I'm terrified of the introduction of ship systems. I think I'm going to have to learn to play the game all over again.
Hounds with flares. Could those things get more annoying in the early game? Apparently they can.ECCM package will ruin hounds now. Harpoons might hit
Hounds with flares. Could those things get more annoying in the early game? Apparently they can.ECCM package will ruin hounds now. Harpoons might hit
Which won't hurt nearly as much as a better tracking harpoonHounds with flares. Could those things get more annoying in the early game? Apparently they can.ECCM package will ruin hounds now. Harpoons might hit
They still have that dual mg though.
Which won't hurt nearly as much as a better tracking harpoonHounds with flares. Could those things get more annoying in the early game? Apparently they can.ECCM package will ruin hounds now. Harpoons might hit
They still have that dual mg though.
Didn't the ECCM package just give missiles better anti-flare detection systems?Better tracking too
Didn't the ECCM package just give missiles better anti-flare detection systems?Better tracking too
Didn't the ECCM package just give missiles better anti-flare detection systems?Better tracking too
It says: improves tracking and engines. Im guessing engines means speed.
Burn Drives on a freighter. Battle Barges ftw~!
Hell naw!Burn Drives on a freighter. Battle Barges ftw~!
Since the normal role of a freighter in combat is "GTFO ASAP" wouldn't that be far too useful for preventing interception?
:oHell naw!Burn Drives on a freighter. Battle Barges ftw~!
Since the normal role of a freighter in combat is "GTFO ASAP" wouldn't that be far too useful for preventing interception?
Overdrive one of these suckers right in there and 'ave at it.
(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15428102/Starfarer%20sprites/Hades.png)
::oHell naw!Burn Drives on a freighter. Battle Barges ftw~!
Since the normal role of a freighter in combat is "GTFO ASAP" wouldn't that be far too useful for preventing interception?
Overdrive one of these suckers right in there and 'ave at it.
(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15428102/Starfarer%20sprites/Hades.png)
You just have to practice patience.What he said. The more you check for updates, the longer it is going to seem before there is one.
Still nothing patchnote-worthy? There must be a ton of tiny fixes. ;D
Aww, !@#$. There's that one time for every game where the forums die down and the game slips out of your mind. I know people aren't glued to the computer screen 24/7, they have a worldy life to live, but I'm just wondering why this happens. Maybe it's because of a lack of content (no offense) or a large project that was hyping everyone up just sorta dying out (Project Caelus, maybe), but I've been through enough forums to know this happens sometimes.
Yeah, it's interesting. I know I've been a fair bit less active on the forum lately (away on vacation for a week, and more focused on dev for a while before that)... but I don't know that I'm conceited enough to say that's the reason :) Perhaps the reason it feels like things are slower to me precisely because I haven't been on the forum as much.
I've played through the game too many times with the current content, and mods don't interest me. I'm just going to wait until there is a reason for me to come back and play more. Starfarer is a great game, but it isn't finished yet, and it needs more content for me to start playing again.
I'm kinda in the same boat here, I haven't played the newest version at all, mostly because of lack of motivation on things. I sincerely hope that turns around with 0.53a. Given recent news though... I just don't know any more.
I'm kinda in the same boat here, I haven't played the newest version at all, mostly because of lack of motivation on things. I sincerely hope that turns around with 0.53a. Given recent news though... I just don't know any more.
Fair enough - hopefully, you'll be back when something more exciting to you personally is released :) Thinking about it, the dev cycle is pretty long - how often does a *finished* game keep one's uninterrupted attention for that long? I personally can't think of one that did that for me - it's usually on and off.
You just have to practice patience.
I would just like to say that I cannot begin to imagine what these people are talking about who think that Starfarer's development is going anything resembling slowly. I can only guess that these people have absolutely zero experience with indie game development whatsoever, even just watching and waiting on any previous titles in development, and are letting their excitement for this title severely cloud their reasoning.
Starfarer's development has so far consistently been what I would call blisteringly fast, and I have kept tabs on (and even participated in a few small examples of) many, many developing indie games, of all genres and sizes, over a course of about the last decade and a half.
My website bookmarks list alone contains, let's see... seventeen different websites, mostly individual titles, almost all of them unfinished, ongoing projects, and 3 addresses which are aggregate sites dedicated to tracking various developing indie games. I check and recheck many of these daily, all of them weekly, and have done so with many more over the years than my bookmark list covers even the merest fraction of.
And I have to say, Starfarer, which I also check just about daily, has been standing out as a very frequently updated game, a notably updated website, and an extraordinarily active dev presence in the game's community.
The rate of progress and dev communication is simply, undeniably exceptional, especially when compared to the format and frequency of other titles' updates.
Hell, I'd even just point to the likes of Cortex Command or various long stages of Minecraft's development as the other end of the spectrum.
I guess it's in the nature of the enthusiastic fan to keep demanding more, and that's fine and dandy, but a wise fan should know the difference between the absurd, machine-like efficiency and speed of Starfarer's dev team, and the likes of the rest of the indie chaff out there, where entire teams of people don't say a word and can't work a dozen lines of code together or even update their website to tell anyone what's going on for years at a time.
I would just like to say that I cannot begin to imagine what these people are talking about who think that Starfarer's development is going anything resembling slowly. I can only guess that these people have absolutely zero experience with indie game development whatsoever, even just watching and waiting on any previous titles in development, and are letting their excitement for this title severely cloud their reasoning.
Starfarer's development has so far consistently been what I would call blisteringly fast, and I have kept tabs on (and even participated in a few small examples of) many, many developing indie games, of all genres and sizes, over a course of about the last decade and a half.
My website bookmarks list alone contains, let's see... seventeen different websites, mostly individual titles, almost all of them unfinished, ongoing projects, and 3 addresses which are aggregate sites dedicated to tracking various developing indie games. I check and recheck many of these daily, all of them weekly, and have done so with many more over the years than my bookmark list covers even the merest fraction of.
And I have to say, Starfarer, which I also check just about daily, has been standing out as a very frequently updated game, a notably updated website, and an extraordinarily active dev presence in the game's community.
The rate of progress and dev communication is simply, undeniably exceptional, especially when compared to the format and frequency of other titles' updates.
Hell, I'd even just point to the likes of Cortex Command or various long stages of Minecraft's development as the other end of the spectrum.
I guess it's in the nature of the enthusiastic fan to keep demanding more, and that's fine and dandy, but a wise fan should know the difference between the absurd, machine-like efficiency and speed of Starfarer's dev team, and the likes of the rest of the indie chaff out there, where entire teams of people don't say a word and can't work a dozen lines of code together or even update their website to tell anyone what's going on for years at a time.
You are exactly right, this is a really fast development, and with big updates too! It is really a shame people are too impatient, I too have loads of games I'm waiting for, e.g. Firefall, Towns...
The speed of development is bound to be brought up again and again as people aren't familiar with indie development. Afaik, Alex is the only dev. Considering this, Starfarer is doing very well--there are regular releases and every one is very stable and complete feeling. That's commendable.
Know that given the scope of Starfarer, it will take years to build the game to what most imagine it will become. Some titles, such as Cortex Command, are ten years in the making...thank god Alex is more communicative than Data (CC's dev). My advice is to pick up a few more games to follow or get a hobby--you will burn out long before Starfarer becomes what you want it to be if you're expecting miracles every release. Welcome to indie game development, one developer style.
The speed of development is bound to be brought up again and again as people aren't familiar with indie development. Afaik, Alex is the only dev. Considering this, Starfarer is doing very well--there are regular releases and every one is very stable and complete feeling. That's commendable.
Know that given the scope of Starfarer, it will take years to build the game to what most imagine it will become. Some titles, such as Cortex Command, are ten years in the making...thank god Alex is more communicative than Data (CC's dev). My advice is to pick up a few more games to follow or get a hobby--you will burn out long before Starfarer becomes what you want it to be if you're expecting miracles every release. Welcome to indie game development, one developer style.
I thought there was a five men team?
In Rockville, Maryland. It's pretty close to Washington DC, a bit north of it.
Had a crazy storm here two days ago... non-stop lightning, literally non-stop to the point where you could see by it. And some major winds - hence, the power outages - falling trees + power lines. Wish they'd just run the lines underground, but apparently that's too expensive. Not sure when we'll get power back, either - could be a while.
For some odd reason I think most indie games are European-based operations, but I've been pleasantly surprised. ;D Finally, some good game content from somewhere I know.
Had a crazy storm here two days ago... non-stop lightning, literally non-stop to the point where you could see by it. And some major winds - hence, the power outages - falling trees + power lines.Bummer.
... We are actually about to start round 2 of the storms right now (Fort Wayne, Indiana). We're a little more prepared this time though.
Today’s high of 107 at GSP breaks old record of 99 (1970) for the day, and is also the ALL TIME HOTTEST TEMP EVER recorded for GSP… The old all time hottest was 106 recorded in 1887."
*lives in London, England and only gets temperamental rain that lasts a couple minutes*
We don't get any awesome weather over here :(
I'm sure right about now those poor folks in the US would take a bit of average weather! :)
Hope those of you over the Atlantic are getting on okay with it all and the worst thing you have to worry about is a bit of a power outage. Looks pretty dreadful in some parts :(
I would just like to say that I cannot begin to imagine what these people are talking about who think that Starfarer's development is going anything resembling slowly. I can only guess that these people have absolutely zero experience with indie game development whatsoever, even just watching and waiting on any previous titles in development, and are letting their excitement for this title severely cloud their reasoning.
Starfarer's development has so far consistently been what I would call blisteringly fast, and I have kept tabs on (and even participated in a few small examples of) many, many developing indie games, of all genres and sizes, over a course of about the last decade and a half.
My website bookmarks list alone contains, let's see... seventeen different websites, mostly individual titles, almost all of them unfinished, ongoing projects, and 3 addresses which are aggregate sites dedicated to tracking various developing indie games. I check and recheck many of these daily, all of them weekly, and have done so with many more over the years than my bookmark list covers even the merest fraction of.
And I have to say, Starfarer, which I also check just about daily, has been standing out as a very frequently updated game, a notably updated website, and an extraordinarily active dev presence in the game's community.
The rate of progress and dev communication is simply, undeniably exceptional, especially when compared to the format and frequency of other titles' updates.
Hell, I'd even just point to the likes of Cortex Command or various long stages of Minecraft's development as the other end of the spectrum.
I guess it's in the nature of the enthusiastic fan to keep demanding more, and that's fine and dandy, but a wise fan should know the difference between the absurd, machine-like efficiency and speed of Starfarer's dev team, and the likes of the rest of the indie chaff out there, where entire teams of people don't say a word and can't work a dozen lines of code together or even update their website to tell anyone what's going on for years at a time.
I've been following Arcen Games too much, that creates unrealistic expectations. "So we released 1.1 last week, now we ripped out the whole progression system along with crafting and citybuilding and replaced them with completely new implementations."They patch appallingly fast. D: It was off-putting for a while, haha.
Thanks for the support, guys! Ultimately, all I can do is work at the best pace I can, but I'm glad to know that it's not universally considered slow :)The speed of development is bound to be brought up again and again as people aren't familiar with indie development. Afaik, Alex is the only dev. Considering this, Starfarer is doing very well--there are regular releases and every one is very stable and complete feeling. That's commendable.
Know that given the scope of Starfarer, it will take years to build the game to what most imagine it will become. Some titles, such as Cortex Command, are ten years in the making...thank god Alex is more communicative than Data (CC's dev). My advice is to pick up a few more games to follow or get a hobby--you will burn out long before Starfarer becomes what you want it to be if you're expecting miracles every release. Welcome to indie game development, one developer style.
I thought there was a five men team?
Just to clear this up - I'm the only one working on it full-time, so I think that's where a lot of the confusion comes in. Matthew also isn't working on it anymore, but, of course, is still in the credits - at this point, four people are working on the game in various capacities. So, I'm definitely not the only dev - but at the same time, saying "fivefour man team" - while absolutely true - probably creates some unrealistic expectations, given the actual circumstances.
Btw: I've been without power for about two days now, and still don't have it back (posting this from relatives' house). Temperature's been in the 90s, too, so this is oh so very much fun.
Alex, pardon my possibly idiotic/assholish/younameit suggestion, but why don't you ask modders to help you develop the game?
Pretty sure many of them would lend a hand occasionally. If i knew how to code i'd volunteer tbh.
Looking at most of the mods out there, letting modders balance the game is not a good idea... ;)
Looking at most of the mods out there, letting modders balance the game is not a good idea... ;)
Hahaha yup ;)
The community in general does give lots of feedback on weapon balance though. When half of people are whining about it being overpowered and the other half declaring it worthless, you know a weapon is balanced. :P
These all look like a lot of fun :)- was ever answered, though I may have missed it in looking over this thread;
One comment though: should the Tempest really be getting Active Flares? With its high speed and omni-shield, it's already nearly invulnerable to missiles, unless fired when the Tempest ventured too close and is nearly overloaded--and now, in that case, it can just fire off its flares. I'll have to try it, but I think it might be OP and make it even easier for the Tempest to kite far larger ships.
-snip-I don't think that they would be affected by flares but i think they would get all but the tracking bonus from the ECCM package.
3)How will Non-guided 'Missile' weapons be affected by things like Flare Launchers and the ECCM Package?
-snip-
1)Any hints as to what systems the Phase-ships might be getting?
2)From the listed changes, it seems like Missiles are getting the short end of the stick in this patch; It seems most ships can out-run, shoot down, or shrug them off now. Between the high cooldowns, low ammo, Ordnance Point costs, and growing intercept-abilities of other ships, it seems fielding missiles is becoming a losing proposition, whose only real use seems to be herding enemies into lines of fire, distractions, and a 1-2 punch for some of the quicker ships who can sneak in Reapers and Atropos.
Sure, missiles (will) have the ECCM Package and Extended racks option, and maybe the fast racks systems, if you wish to outfit one of the three hulls who have it, but it doesn't seem like it will be enough...anyway, here's the question:
Are you planning to do anything with missiles to make them more viable, especially for larger ships?
(Notes:I understand that missiles likely meant to be used in conjunction with Ballistic/Energy weapons/Fighters but they still feel underwhelming and costly to me)
3)How will Non-guided 'Missile' weapons be affected by things like Flare Launchers and the ECCM Package?
4)How is the AI Handling ship systems? I am particularly interested in how it handles the Burn Drive, Phase Skimmer/Teleporter, and High Energy Focus systems, and any significantly foolish mistakes it makes with regularity.
5)I don't believe this question -These all look like a lot of fun :)- was ever answered, though I may have missed it in looking over this thread;
One comment though: should the Tempest really be getting Active Flares? With its high speed and omni-shield, it's already nearly invulnerable to missiles, unless fired when the Tempest ventured too close and is nearly overloaded--and now, in that case, it can just fire off its flares. I'll have to try it, but I think it might be OP and make it even easier for the Tempest to kite far larger ships.
Compared to the other ships with Flare Launcher systems, it seems very out of place - it's a lean, mean fighting machine, where the others aren't, except maybe for the hound.
6)The Condor and Tarsus; With such a difference between their systems, I wonder if some humans out there still have a piece of advanced Dominion knowledge tucked away, or if I missed some detail about the refitting process involved; Did I? It seems strange that there would be those willing to improve ships like the Buffalo and the Tarsus, but not others - save maybe for the explanation of cost or abundance/scarcity.
You just carved up and served Strifen's post, Alex. ;D
Anyway, I still think the Tempest will be a bit OP with the Active Flares, and unless I'm misunderstanding something, don't they have a greater change to distract a regular missile?
1)Phase cloaks? http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Cloaking_device#The_interphase_cloak with some sort of flux buildup? will enemy ships remain 'visible'?
2)I try to use missiles when the enemy ships 1-Shields drop 2-Vents 3-Overloads 4-are trying to stay in that sweet spot between my weapons range and theirs(Looking at you, hounds)
In these cases, usually point defenses, manuevering, momentum, recovery of shields, enemy allies, or lack of missile fuel are the reaons the missles fail. Some still hit, but not enough to make it worthwhile imo. Wonder what I could be doing wrong...I tend to stick with Pilrums, Sabots, and Harpoons for guided missles.
3)I see...I assume then that flares can be shot down fairly easily with other weapons then? Will PDs Target flares? Will flares target Flares?
PD targets flares, yeah. Flares don't target other flares :)
Are you seriously telling me you're not happy with it because the kind of ships it shares this ability with are not alike enough?1)Yes, in a sense(If by "not happy" you mean curious, and by "not alike enough" you mean "So drastically different and antiquated when compared to the Tempest it's strange")
The Astral, the Gemini and the Apogee are nothing alike either, yet they all share a drone system, is that not right either?
The Sunder, Aurora, and Odyssey are also quite different ships with the same system, is that not weird to you?
PD targets flares, yeah. Flares don't target other flares :)Ah, seems I phrased that incorrectly - actually, it might be better if I asked it like this: Will Flares act like Asteroids and bump off(Or 'explode' on) each other and ships, or will they act like Fighters and fly through each other and ships?
To celebrate this birth of this grand nation how about updated patch notes?
Amusing how you can come up with all these reasons for all these ships having the systems they do yet you do not extent this to the tempest.
You can clearly see that it is the utility of the system that matters, not the similarities between ships its mounted on.
The Tempest is a very advanced dog-fighter frigate, however it simply does not have the weapon package to deal with missiles, therefor, the flare system.
Whoo Hoo!!
*throws confetty*
I almost got through to someone. ;D
Missiles can be difficult to utilize by are rather powerful. You should try out the Aurora ship, it got lots of missile slots right up front, see for yourself how powerful missiles can be. Just use them in the way they are intended to be used. Read their description, see what kind of damage they do, how fast they fly, wither they have a tracking capability or not.
Harpoons are always a good idea.
For me it really depends on the ship. I would never take the missiles off a wolf or lasher, but I don't use them on Hammerheads, Medusae, Eagles, or Falcons.You should try the single harpoon missiles on those ships. A single harpoon is totally worth a single OP point.
Can a missile have a 0 OP cost?No, but I think a single Harpoon missile gives move flexibility than a single vent or capacitor.
hey, I were thinking about a thing: since there are so many changes to the gameplay, with the explosive introduction of a completely new mechanics, I think it deserves the 0.6a name ;)http://fractalsoftworks.com/2012/03/07/starfarer-0-51a-release/
There's no need to make things more complicated than they need to be.
My question (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=3140.msg46387#msg46387) to Alex was buried under great amount of posts in this topic and left unanswered, I will just repeat it :)
1) Will I be able to put more then one system per ship?
2) Will I be able to make hull mods to add another system on ship per installation?
3) Do you intend to add cloaking, stealth and other cover ops related stuff?
4) Do you intend to add drive, engines, teleportation inhibition stuff?
5) Do you intend to add weapon jamming and missile jammers/redirectors?
Alex, could you tell us how far the Skimmer teleports your ship? To the edge of your screen or what?
Interesting, does the Phase Teleporter have a similar mechanic?Alex, could you tell us how far the Skimmer teleports your ship? To the edge of your screen or what?
300 pixels (at default zoom) in the direction that the ship is going. Or, if it's not moving, in the direction that it's facing. It'll also come out of the skim facing the closest enemy ship (or the targeted enemy ship), if it's nearby.
1) Will I be able to put more then one system per ship?
2) Will I be able to make hull mods to add another system on ship per installation?
3) Do you intend to add cloaking, stealth and other cover ops related stuff?
4) Do you intend to add drive, engines, teleportation inhibition stuff?
5) Do you intend to add weapon jamming and missile jammers/redirectors?
1 & 2: no.This is bad news :(
3: Cloaking, technically yes, but it might not be quite what you'd expect. As for non-combat stealth, that's TBD.Well, I spoke about combat one, like in SPAZ.
4: Not at this point - in general, I think you have to be careful about adding things that directly affect another ship. Remember, chances are the player will be on the receiving end of it at some point, too - so it has to be very clear visually and have ways to be countered. In some sense, this is already in the game - you shoot up another ship, and its weapons/engines can go offline. You overload it, its systems go offline. I'm not sold on the benefits of having a parallel system to do this, though don't take it as a 100% no.You need to play an EVE Online for little bit to understand benefits of parallel systems, actually CCP done great job on Electronic Warfare section, it's really good example for all space games, who want to implement EWAR. The more possibilities you will give to ships, the more interesting and tactical Starfarer will be.
5: Refer to #4 to a degree. Flares act like much like missile jammers, btw, and so does the EMP system - so that'll be in the game, though perhaps not quite like you were envisioning.Well there is great difference between flare, missile jammer/redirector. Flares just make missile follow them, Missile Jammer/Redirector alternates missile destination with beam/wave.
You need to play an EVE Online for little bit to understand benefits of parallel systems, actually CCP done great job on Electronic Warfare section, it's really good example for all space games, who want to implement EWAR.
The more possibilities you will give to ships, the more interesting and tactical Starfarer will be.
Hey Alex, since you are so kindly answering questions. Any ETA on the patch?
And "SoonTm is not a proper answer.
so Alex, whats the progress in % ?He won't, trust me i played a doctor on TV ;D
common man , give us HOPE or something, don't run on bahamas or North Pole with our money
From the AI testing files: "Let's see how badly this phase cruiser gets slaughtered by the Dominator! ... Oh, it won."Interesting. ;D
ALEX! This is very patchnoteworthy! Grant me patchnotes!He's still testing it, so nothing patchnoteworthy just yet.
This could also be BLOG worthy... A whole new topic to discuss at length.
Is it time for Assassin's Creed: Corvus?/\
/photoshops a silly cloak onto a ship
Alex, will you fix the combat music looping forever in this upcoming version?
This could also be BLOG worthy... A whole new topic to discuss at length.
Hey, i might be late to the party but:
"Removed key binding for raising flux on purpose"
Why? I actually really used that. :(
Hey, i might be late to the party but:
"Removed key binding for raising flux on purpose"
Why? I actually really used that. :(
But the functionality remains, just reassigned to another key right?No. He completely removed it.
Which you can do anyway by just firing off a few of your energy weapons before you are in range.Not necessarily; I much prefer to have flux dissipation at least equal to maximum flux generation. It's not always possible, especially if you're using heavy blasters - but, for an example, my standard Apogee design can fire its plasma cannon indefinitely without cumulative flux build-up.
Besides, my trouble with energy weapons is trying to dissipate flux, not generate it.
Which you can do anyway by just firing off a few of your energy weapons before you are in range.
Besides, my trouble with energy weapons is trying to dissipate flux, not generate it.
you try building flux in a tempest with 2 energy weapons see how long it takes youHalf a second. Take one hit to your shields.
And really if its allready built into the game why not just leave it as an unassigned key?I don't know. Maybe it was a game mechanic that a developer thought was unnecessary, or maybe they thought it was unbalanced for whatever reason.
Not necessarily; I much prefer to have flux dissipation at least equal to maximum flux generation.With that much flux dissipation, I wouldn't think manually increasing your flux levels would be a part of your strategy, but I could see how manually raising your flux levels would be safer and easier that way.
I never found a use for the flux buildup key - if I'm in an energy weapon ship and want more flux, I stick around longer. Hits to the shield and my own weapon fire do a fine job raising flux, and by sticking around longer I do more damage.
just wondering... how big a role will the systems play in combat?
For example the omen's main armament seems to be its EMP (since it takes up the whole middle of the sprite)
Are wolves and medusae going to become the ships that just skim around? Or are they still gonna spend most of their time going around conventionally and going pew-pew at the enemy?
Basically, about how often can systems be used and how much would it effect what a ship is doing on the battlefield most of the time
Oh? The Phase Skimmer has charges? does that mean you have an infinite number of uses, if you let them charge up like burst weapons?
Oh yeah, one question, while its impossible to have 2 ship systems on a player ship, can we add 2 or more on a variant for AI ships only, for example, adding a custom made Cloak and High Energy Focus so i could place them on a Bird or Prey on my Star Trek mod, when he comes out of cloak he (the AI) can use the High Energy Focus to burn out an enemy target?
I realize that this is sometimes useful, and so removing it as an option is, strictly speaking, a slight nerf to energy-weapon-using ships. I just think it's an awkward mechanic, and it is pretty useless most of the time - so simplifying things a bit by removing it is worthwhile.It is pretty much useless for all shot-based weapons.
I realize that this is sometimes useful, and so removing it as an option is, strictly speaking, a slight nerf to energy-weapon-using ships. I just think it's an awkward mechanic, and it is pretty useless most of the time - so simplifying things a bit by removing it is worthwhile.
To be fair, if that facility is removed, i'd say remove the bonus while high-fluxed and just blanket the energy weapons with +5% damage. Since it's a passive gameplay feature that you just 'have there' without any serious direct control. This forces you do to random stuff like shooting wildly to raise flux and just doesn't feel right.Or, why don't you shoot at an enemy to raise your flux? Crazy, I know.
To be fair, if that facility is removed, i'd say remove the bonus while high-fluxed and just blanket the energy weapons with +5% damage. Since it's a passive gameplay feature that you just 'have there' without any serious direct control. This forces you do to random stuff like shooting wildly to raise flux and just doesn't feel right.Or, why don't you shoot at an enemy to raise your flux? Crazy, I know.
A 5% increase in energy weapon damage while taking out the flux bonus would be an even larger nerf to energy weapons.
However, it can be EXTREMELY (I cannot stress it enough) useful to beam weapons - just because you need that few points of damage to break enemy ship's flux dissipation and start building up his flux. Best example? High Intensity Laser - some may say it's not worth anything, but it has low OP cost, very good range, and low flux. You can stay out of Dominator's range all the time, and slowly build up his flux, thanks to increasing your damage via F key (provided you have two HILs of course - one is still not enough).
Regardless of ship attacked, ability to increase your damage output is very valuable when used with beam weapons - it essentialy helps overcome their biggest problem which is soft flux buildup. It doesn't make a tactical laser an anti-capital weapon, but it gets you the edge needed. While exposing you to an overload, of course.
That is my opinion on the subject, and while I understand this decision, I do not agree with it.
Well, there's a topic over in the suggestions forum about redesigning the High-Energy Focus that's somewhat related to this. It's meant to solve a different issue, but part of the re-design is basically giving the active part of the system the same flux-raising functionality that the 'F' key currently gives.
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=3387.0
Also doesn't change the fact that the way the 'f' key works now is a pretty awkward way to go about it.
The fact that firing at nothing can accomplish the same thing isn't good, though.
This is really the biggest reason I can see for changing things. Hm. One possibly interesting thought: what if you increased energy weapon damage & flux generation by, say, 25% across the board - and then had high flux levels reduce flux cost of energy weapons instead of increasing damage? That would give some of the same feel of high flux = more firepower, keep the pretty glowing energy graphics for all ships, and totally remove any possible advantage to be had from artificially boosting your own flux levels.
I think that would combine fairly well with my HEF notion that naufrago linked to. But it'd need a fair bit of balance testing. On the other hand, just adding ship systems at all necessitates balance testing, so maybe now would be a good time to experiment?
I'm not sure increasing the damage and flux costs is even necessaryYou may be right, now that I think about it. Worth testing, at least.
One potential issue is it'll be harder to tell if you've got enough flux to fire certain weapons - like the Plasma Cannon or the AM Blaster... hmm.It should be easy enough to add an extra tic mark on the flux meter for "flux that will be generated if the player clicks to fire"... at least for things other than the plasma cannon; that three shot burst is neat, but does complicate the "do I have enough flux capacity to fire?" question.
Hm. Those are some very good points. Still... I wouldn't be too worried about beam kiting at the moment. To take Neonesis' Dominator versus HIL example, you need 2x HIL. Which means, at a minimum, 2x Sunder, or maybe 1x Odyssey - and, well, if I can't beat a single Dominator with that kind of force advantage, something is wrong, beam kiting or no beam kiting.
For me, at least, the damage boost from high flux just means that energy based ships get more dangerous as they take damage; it gives me an incentive to push the attack when my ship is getting high on flux, rather than playing safe and backing off to vent. And it just looks neat to have the guns glowing as you gain flux.Also doesn't change the fact that the way the 'f' key works now is a pretty awkward way to go about it.
The fact that firing at nothing can accomplish the same thing isn't good, though.
This is really the biggest reason I can see for changing things. Hm. One possibly interesting thought: what if you increased energy weapon damage & flux generation by, say, 25% across the board - and then had high flux levels reduce flux cost of energy weapons instead of increasing damage? That would give some of the same feel of high flux = more firepower, keep the pretty glowing energy graphics for all ships, and totally remove any possible advantage to be had from artificially boosting your own flux levels.
I think that would combine fairly well with my HEF notion that naufrago linked to. But it'd need a fair bit of balance testing. On the other hand, just adding ship systems at all necessitates balance testing, so maybe now would be a good time to experiment?
Honestly, to me that's more of an argument for remove the feature. If it's most useful to facilitate the kind of kiting that beam weapons aren't supposed to be able to do, then it really needs to go.
The soft flux is there precisely so you have a much harder time punching through shields with what's an efficient and long-ranged weapon typically mounted on a faster (given same ship size) hulls. Otherwise, it'd be a "clear best" setup - best range, enough speed to stay out of the way, can deliver enough damage to kill. Not a good thing.
Also doesn't change the fact that the way the 'f' key works now is a pretty awkward way to go about it.
The fact that firing at nothing can accomplish the same thing isn't good, though. Bears a bit more thought - I am considering removing that mechanic altogether and giving energy weapons a slight boost across the board, but not settled on it either way.
so Alex, why just change the Flux button insted of remove that option ?
so Alex, why just change the Flux button insted of remove that option ?
Well, it's discussed in more detail above, but the really short version is "it's awkward, very situational, and potentially bad". Mostly awkward, though. Stay tuned for further developments - may not happen immediately, but I don't expect just removing the button to be the end of it.
This is really the biggest reason I can see for changing things. Hm. One possibly interesting thought: what if you increased energy weapon damage & flux generation by, say, 25% across the board - and then had high flux levels reduce flux cost of energy weapons instead of increasing damage? That would give some of the same feel of high flux = more firepower, keep the pretty glowing energy graphics for all ships, and totally remove any possible advantage to be had from artificially boosting your own flux levels.
I think that would combine fairly well with my HEF notion that naufrago linked to. But it'd need a fair bit of balance testing. On the other hand, just adding ship systems at all necessitates balance testing, so maybe now would be a good time to experiment?
At first blush, that seems like a very good idea. I'm not sure increasing the damage and flux costs is even necessary - just replacing the damage boost with a flux cost reduction might be enough.
One potential issue is it'll be harder to tell if you've got enough flux to fire certain weapons - like the Plasma Cannon or the AM Blaster... hmm.
I'm not sure changing the damage bonus to reducing the flux cost would be a good idea - a lot of the considerations of ship design revolve around flux balance and dissipation. Also the small energy weapons are fairly
light on damage - the boost to PD and tactical laser damage from flux is really essential as the current balance lies. Its a very large change and I don't really see the benefit from it. :-\
One potential issue is it'll be harder to tell if you've got enough flux to fire certain weapons - like the Plasma Cannon or the AM Blaster... hmm.
I'm not sure changing the damage bonus to reducing the flux cost would be a good idea - a lot of the considerations of ship design revolve around flux balance and dissipation. Also the small energy weapons are fairly
light on damage - the boost to PD and tactical laser damage from flux is really essential as the current balance lies. Its a very large change and I don't really see the benefit from it. :-\
That's why my original post suggested increasing damage & flux generation across the board to start with - essentially trying to sort of average in the existing damage bonus. At low flux levels the guns would be deal more damage (at the cost of more flux); at medium flux, it'd be exactly the same as currently at medium flux, and at high flux they'd do less damage, but be cheaper to fire.
The benefit is that there'd no longer be any possible value to "gaming" your flux levels - assuming it was tuned right, there'd never be a situation in which it was cheaper to artificially boost flux and then fire, instead of just firing to start with.
Why is that a benefit? See the entire previous discussion full of complaints about the raise-your-flux button going away.
Phase Beam: increased range by 100 units
This version is not out yet - this is just a list of changes made/new features implemented so far in the development build.
Changes as of July 14, 2012
Ship AI:
- Adjusted strafing/pursuit algorithm to help avoid a situation where two ships will circle each other ineffectively for a long time. This result in a significant AI quality improvement overall:
- Better aim with forward-facing weapons
- Better aim with guided *and* unguided missiles - in particular, AI frigates can now use Reaper torpedoes effectively
- More aggresive engagements when appropriate
- Improved tactical response to being kited
- No longer tries to flee from frigates or fighters, since that generally doesn't ends well
- Improved collision avoidance - ships should more reliably go around each other when their destinations cause them to cross paths
Yay, this will help fleet formation a lot.
Added Phase Cloaking:
- Replaces shields on phase ships (right click to phase in/out)
- Phased ships can be seen, but not hit
- No flux dissipation, builds a percentage of base flux per second - can't stay phased indefinitely
- Costs a percentage of base flux to activate
- Ship overloads if the phase cloak maxes out the flux level
- Can't unphase inside a solid object (but will overload)
- Can't fire while phased
- Three new phase ships: one cruiser and two frigates
- See blog post for more details: http://fractalsoftworks.com/2012/07/09/the-evolution-of-phase-cloaking/
So basically this is an invulnerability shield? Can Phase weapons damage ships phasing or can phase weapons fire while phased? IS hardflux built up when phasing, and can soft flux be vented possibly?
Weapon/balance changes:
- Phase Beam: increased range by 100 units
- Phase Charge Launcher: renamed to "Proximity Charge Launcher", increased ammo to 30, increased launch speed, reduced rate of fire from 1/second to 1/3 seconds, reduced damage
- Tachyon Lance: reduced range and damage by 50%. Increased EMP damage by 50%. No longer goes through fighters.
The charge launcher probably needs to work more like mines and to have a cheaper cost associated with it. Second, does the lance really need to be nerfed? It already costs 32 OP which is a lot and it cannot penetrate the shields of larger ships due to the soft flux, I rarely if ever use it anymore and this change won't help that.
Ship Systems:
- Changed Fast Missile Racks to generate flux per use, drastically reduced cooldown
Miscellaneous:
- Added per-system icons to in-combat ship status display
- Missile engine glow will now gradually diminish a couple of seconds before it flames out, giving some warning that it's about to happen
Bugfixes:
- Ship AI no longer tries to avoid an (impossible) collision with the transfer command shuttle pod
- Fixed potential game freeze if two fleets with ships with no attack capacity whatsoever engaged in an autoresolved battle
- Fixed bug where autofiring missile weapons didn't properly recognize when friendly fire is NOT a danger
- Fixed bug where switching weapon groups quickly would sometimes cause the weapon arcs for the wrong group to be displayed
- Fixed potential game freeze if two fleets with ships with no attack capacity whatsoever engaged in an autoresolved battle
QuotePhase Beam: increased range by 100 units
Yes! My beautiful Phase Beam is even better!
- Fixed potential game freeze if two fleets with ships with no attack capacity whatsoever engaged in an autoresolved battle
So how do you handle it now? Do you just end combat with no damage, or do you try to simulate who's the better rammer?
Interesting on the Tachyon lance - still long ranged and decent burst, but a switch from killing to knocking out every weapon/engine at once...
Will the AI know to 'spray' the beam over the whole exposed surface of a ship to knock out as many systems at once as possible or will it still try to find a hole in the armor, like other weapons? I should go check if the ion cannon sprays to knock out systems, I've never actually used it...
If I'm understanding the current phase ship under solid object rule, then technically it's a feasible tactic as a non-phase ship to just move through a phase ship to overload it, right?
It'll be a good update. Mix things up a bit. Can you imagine a hound with a flare launcher? Things gonna be dodging and weaving and even salamanders won't be able to take it out of the action. Those things are gonna tear into ships like ravening hyenas.That'll (hopefully) be balanced out by the update to AI that makes them more tactical when dealing with being kited.
hmmm whats YaHo? :)
i use burst PDs on my Paragon they can be quite nasty thats true
Can a phased ship pass through another phased ship? I mean, they are both using the same technology right? Aren't they also going into the same "phase space" thing?
I am concerned though if a lone skirmish frigate like the hound or wolf no longer runs from other frigates, they'll be surrounded and crushed. Will this not be the case?
I figured any phase ship would almost certainally have a strike loadout, and since ships use strike tactics rely heavily on speed, a cruiser class phase ship is surprising to me.
- Three new phase ships: one cruiser and two frigates
Weapon/balance changes:Bummer. I was hopping that the phase weapons would increase the flux of a ship in phase. Oh well.
- Phase Beam: increased range by 100 units
- Phase Charge Launcher: renamed to "Proximity Charge Launcher", increased ammo to 30, increased launch speed, reduced rate of fire from 1/second to 1/3 seconds, reduced damage
I figured any phase ship would almost certainally have a strike loadout, and since ships use strike tactics rely heavily on speed, a cruiser class phase ship is surprising to me.
- Three new phase ships: one cruiser and two frigates
Weapon/balance changes:Bummer. I was hopping that the phase weapons would increase the flux of a ship in phase. Oh well.
- Phase Beam: increased range by 100 units
- Phase Charge Launcher: renamed to "Proximity Charge Launcher", increased ammo to 30, increased launch speed, reduced rate of fire from 1/second to 1/3 seconds, reduced damage
This just puts an end to the "turn around and try to run" behavior, which is ok vs slower ships - but vs frigates and fighters just gets it shot up, with the "bonus" of not being able to fire back because it's turned away.
Weapon/balance changes:Bummer. I was hopping that the phase weapons would increase the flux of a ship in phase. Oh well.
- Phase Beam: increased range by 100 units
- Phase Charge Launcher: renamed to "Proximity Charge Launcher", increased ammo to 30, increased launch speed, reduced rate of fire from 1/second to 1/3 seconds, reduced damage
Weapon/balance changes:Bummer. I was hopping that the phase weapons would increase the flux of a ship in phase. Oh well.
- Phase Beam: increased range by 100 units
- Phase Charge Launcher: renamed to "Proximity Charge Launcher", increased ammo to 30, increased launch speed, reduced rate of fire from 1/second to 1/3 seconds, reduced damage
Yeah... we actually considered something like that, and it's also come up as a suggestion a few times. My current thinking on it is it would bring the mechanics of phasing closer to the mechanics of shields (anti-phase would be analogous to kinetic), and I don't think that's desirable. My preference is to keep phase mechanics more unique.
If you can close the distance from a targets maximum range to your strike range, whilst remaining totally invulnerable, you do not need to rely upon speed, as long as your invulnerability lasts long enough to close the gap.Speed doesn't just help you get in to range, it also helps you get away after you've dealt your damage. I imagine that just like shields, it will take a moment for your ship to entirely enter phase space.
Alex, regarding Phase Cloaking, you've could create Predator-like (or Starcraft 1 like) Space Disruption Effect instead of Phase Coils, that would be more awesome and realistic. But its yours decision and I respect it :)
If we're talking about the visuals, I really like how the phase coils came out. Haven't seen anything similar, either - where the "spatial distortion" thing has been done, ahem, once or twice. But, of course, it's a matter of taste, and there's no arguing about taste :)From looks of screen shots Phase Coils reveal too much of ships location (well if it will have 10% opacity it will be hardly detectable too), while if it will be "spatial distortion", player must be careful and watch background in order to detect invisible ship. Well it's Innovation (Phase Cloak) vs Classics (Optical Cloak), I will be glad if both of them will be implemented :)
the blog says it's supposed to be visible....
ya, I know.the blog says it's supposed to be visible....
They are!
Ah, lances were completly overpowered.hmmm not really they were overpowered against small ships and anything without shields....but cruisers and bigger will just laugh at your feeble attempts to break their shields and just went the flux before you fire again
Ah, lances were completly overpowered.hmmm not really they were overpowered against small ships and anything without shields....but cruisers and bigger will just laugh at your feeble attempts to break their shields and just went the flux before you fire again
Im not so sure about the tachyon lance nerf, i would have made it either 50% range or 50% damage, but both im not sure about. I haven't really though this through like alex must have (and like i usually do with my suggestions) so i guess i'll just wait and see how they play in the patch. I like all the other changes, maybe the "new" Proximity Charge Launcher could have a frigate sized explosion radius or something to make it usefull.
If we're talking about the visuals, I really like how the phase coils came out. Haven't seen anything similar, either - where the "spatial distortion" thing has been done, ahem, once or twice. But, of course, it's a matter of taste, and there's no arguing about taste :)From looks of screen shots Phase Coils reveal too much of ships location (well if it will have 10% opacity it will be hardly detectable too), while if it will be "spatial distortion", player must be careful and watch background in order to detect invisible ship. Well it's Innovation (Phase Cloak) vs Classics (Optical Cloak), I will be glad if both of them will be implemented :)
The problem with the lance is that in sufficient numbers - say, 2-4 capital ships equipped with it - it could snipe capital ships from across the map, shields or no shields. A few wings Wasps worked great for spotting and capturing, and could not be countered by fighters or frigates - even if seriously outnumbered - due to lance support. Even early in the battle, when only one capital ship was deployed.yeah i agree with the range reduction 5k was just ridiculous...
With the range reduction, it's no longer an overpowering support weapon in the early stages - you need to take a sensor array or two - crucially, without lance support - before it really comes into its own. The damage reduction is to prevent it from being overpowering when it does get the range boost - it's intended as a support for ships fighting in the front lines, not something that can take ships out straight up.
Even with the changes, the lance still seems a bit too good in testing. I don't think this'll be the final incarnation of it - perhaps not even for 0.53a - but we'll see.
Well, to be fair, you're not *supposed* to have any trouble seeing a phased ship :)I think we started to misunderstand science fiction terminology. Originally:
I hear what you're saying, though. More neat stuff (such as an optical cloak) is always niceSure, C&C: Tiberium Dawn & Predator Movie showed us how cool should look effect of cloaking device :)
but have to draw the line somewhere, or things will never get finished. That's probably the hardest part - deciding what not to do - and also one of the most important.Oh come on! You have all time in universe, and it's about 6 billion years, and within next 40 years there will be possibility for anybody to become immortal :D
Oh come on! You have all time in universe, and it's about 6 billion years, and within next 40 years there will be possibility for anybody to become immortal :D
No, he's right. Look at how far we've gone in ten years. By next year it's supposed we'll have octo core Graphite processor based phones with self healing screens. It's hard for anyone to say where we'll be but I'm damn sure the people who are about as old as me and you may never die.Oh come on! You have all time in universe, and it's about 6 billion years, and within next 40 years there will be possibility for anybody to become immortal :D
Yeah, as if -_-
The problem with the lance is that in sufficient numbers - say, 2-4 capital ships equipped with it - it could snipe capital ships from across the map, shields or no shields. A few wings Wasps worked great for spotting and capturing, and could not be countered by fighters or frigates - even if seriously outnumbered - due to lance support. Even early in the battle, when only one capital ship was deployed.
With the range reduction, it's no longer an overpowering support weapon in the early stages - you need to take a sensor array or two - crucially, without lance support - before it really comes into its own. The damage reduction is to prevent it from being overpowering when it does get the range boost - it's intended as a support for ships fighting in the front lines, not something that can take ships out straight up.
Even with the changes, the lance still seems a bit too good in testing. I don't think this'll be the final incarnation of it - perhaps not even for 0.53a - but we'll see.
I have always viewed the Lance as a support weapon due to it's range, I think you should keep the range but instead of doing any damage it should be straight up EM damage. This would give the Lance a distinct role, a long range laser meant for helping front line fighters by disabling ship systems, This would also make the Lance useless against shields, but very handy when hitting heavily armed targets. Oh and it shouldn't be capable of hitting fighters.
I like how nobody seems to notice my diagnostic post about Phase Charge Launcher and it's massive power :) JK.
I have now started to build an entire fleet based on this
That sorta contradicts the whole idea that the flux is the limiting factor for ships in phase.
I remember the fun i and my brother had when one of us was flying an Ilwrathi dragon in star control... Especially when you both can`t see that cloaked vessel.
Prediction fire based on asteroids changing their trajectory, incidental collisions with planets, fire breath fired on deduction based on zoom level - oh man, it was so damn cool! :)
I didn't quite understand: does the phase ability replace shield and a ship system; or if a ship can phase can it have a ship system as well, e.g. ship can phase and have drones or ship can phase and has burn drive
What happens if a ship with launch bays phases with fighters on-board?
- I know this has been mentioned but will there be a way for you to tell fighters to say on board until released (This could be done with ship systems, but then you lose a different ship system)
I'm guessing ships with phase tech don't have flight decks or drones.
The problem with the lance is that in sufficient numbers - say, 2-4 capital ships equipped with it - it could snipe capital ships from across the map, shields or no shields.
The problem with the lance is that in sufficient numbers - say, 2-4 capital ships equipped with it - it could snipe capital ships from across the map, shields or no shields.
Isn't this more an AI problem, IE that they don't know to arm their shields versus threats with longer ranged weapons?
Also Alex, you need to understand it costs 32 OP, that's a LOT and it's really only useful AS support. It's an awful close-range weapon because it cannot penetrate shields on larger ships. If you're testing only versus how the AI responds or how quickly it kills smaller ships than I think it needs testing in other areas as even with 4 lances I couldn't really get past an onslaught's shielding.
I have always viewed the Lance as a support weapon due to it's range, I think you should keep the range but instead of doing any damage it should be straight up EM damage. This would give the Lance a distinct role, a long range laser meant for helping front line fighters by disabling ship systems, This would also make the Lance useless against shields, but very handy when hitting heavily armed targets. Oh and it shouldn't be capable of hitting fighters.
You know, I actually considered these very two ideas :) Pure EMP damage for the lance could work - just not sure that it *feels* right for it to do no lasting damage at all. Still, the damage changes move it towards that, and it may move further in that direction still.
As far as not hitting fighters: Balance-wise, it might be a workable solution - but it's one more thing to explain, and one more thing to be confused by as a new player (and the AI would be confused by it too). I'd rather look for solutions that don't create exceptions to rules, first.
Lore-wise, you could say that a phase carrier has the tech to pull fighters into phase with it as they come in for a landing, or some such.Why then they can not push out of phase Big Fat Torpedo? 8)))
EW package aboard the torpedo scrambling its signature?Lore-wise, you could say that a phase carrier has the tech to pull fighters into phase with it as they come in for a landing, or some such.Why then they can not push out of phase Big Fat Torpedo? 8)))
could make up an interesting hull mod enabling your torpedoes to phase out for a limited time though but forcing them to phase back in certain distance from enemy targetIt is a system, not hull mod 8) Torpedo, that cannot be DP'ed, I like it 8)
Isn't this more an AI problem, IE that they don't know to arm their shields versus threats with longer ranged weapons?
Yeah if the Lance keeps its 32 OP and gets this big nerf, im never going to use it again.
Lore-wise, you could say that a phase carrier has the tech to pull fighters into phase with it as they come in for a landing, or some such.Why then they can not push out of phase Big Fat Torpedo? 8)))
Wouldn't it be up to the modders to come up with some rationalization?Hah! Good point there. Well, I was just making up a rationalization for a mod that might do this - as of now, as I mentioned, these aren't in the base game. If they show up there, I'm sure I'll come up with something more solid to rationalize this away :)Lore-wise, you could say that a phase carrier has the tech to pull fighters into phase with it as they come in for a landing, or some such.Why then they can not push out of phase Big Fat Torpedo? 8)))
Wouldn't it be up to the modders to come up with some rationalization?Srsly.
Technical definitions and explanation:Aw, but being mind !@#$ed by physics is the best part
[:) censored for you safety :)]
I'm not sure why weapon buffs/nerfs are even under debate. If you don't like it a certain way, go into weapon_data.csv and change them to whatever you want.The base game should always have a modicum of balance. I mean, otherwise we might as well just be given a blank csv or one where every value is set to 1 to fill in whatever we want.
Let's not be dramatic here, we're talking one weapon getting a range and damage nerf. Playtest the change, report back. These changes shouldn't be contested prior to being made in an alpha build. And we can do without snotty, "Fine, then I just won't use it!" remarks.I second this motion.
Again, this is alpha. The game may change drastically between patches and testers are expected to cope with it professionally. If something is nerfed or buffed too severely, it will certainly be reflected in playtesting and fixed. What's especially nice about the .csv file is that if you personally don't like a change, you can simply change it back.
Let's not be dramatic here, we're talking one weapon getting a range and damage nerf. Playtest the change, report back. These changes shouldn't be contested prior to being made in an alpha build. And we can do without snotty, "Fine, then I just won't use it!" remarks.I second this motion.
Again, this is alpha. The game may change drastically between patches and testers are expected to cope with it professionally. If something is nerfed or buffed too severely, it will certainly be reflected in playtesting and fixed. What's especially nice about the .csv file is that if you personally don't like a change, you can simply change it back.
Again, this is alpha. The game may change drastically between patches and testers are expected to cope with it professionally. If something is nerfed or buffed too severely, it will certainly be reflected in playtesting and fixed. What's especially nice about the .csv file is that if you personally don't like a change, you can simply change it back.and that can be a problem you shouldnt do any drastic changes if it doesnt include adding new stuff....many devs take the change too far so instead of making it balanced they break it again the other way round
Disagree. Any change to the game doesn't need to come with added features. And, weapon balance should absolutely be contested while in alpha. A game's alpha and beta phases are the time to be arguing over those stats. While I do agree with the upcoming Tachyon Lance nerf, if I didn't I would totally be arguing right now. Of course, the keyword there is arguing, not whining. If you disagree with the change, give your reasons and suggest other possible changes or compromises.Again, this is alpha. The game may change drastically between patches and testers are expected to cope with it professionally. If something is nerfed or buffed too severely, it will certainly be reflected in playtesting and fixed. What's especially nice about the .csv file is that if you personally don't like a change, you can simply change it back.and that can be a problem you shouldnt do any drastic changes if it doesnt include adding new stuff
you shouldnt do any drastic changes if it doesnt include adding new stuff
you shouldnt do any drastic changes if it doesnt include adding new stuff
What? ??? It's almost like you have no idea what an alpha build is. ANYTHING, even entire gameplay features, can be completely overhauled or cut at any time. This is common.
well overhauling isnt really balancing thats not what i mean is that sometimes you need to be careful when balancing because even seemingly decent change cant totally destroy balance or create a different problemThe point of being in Alpha, since you appear to genuinely not know, is to make massive game-changing fixes. Sometimes those fixes break the game. Sometimes they improve things. They're all steps on the path to a complete game, so don't whine. Refusing to make balance fixes 'in case they cause more problems' is completely irrational.
thats one thing i hate about World of tanks....they cant balance stuff properly so every time they add new stuff they usually make it OP and then nerf it to hell in the next
I'm not sure why weapon buffs/nerfs are even under debate. If you don't like it a certain way, go into weapon_data.csv and change them to whatever you want.The base game should always have a modicum of balance. I mean, otherwise we might as well just be given a blank csv or one where every value is set to 1 to fill in whatever we want.
It's a great idea, just don't know if it's necessary. Phasing is already pretty crazy powerful.
can we have/hope for an estimate as to when this patch will hit ?
im really eager to mess with the ship sub-system feature (especially the one on the wolf and the medusa)
The date has been leaked but im not supposed to tell anyone, but I will do it anyways, the truth must come out!SpoilerSoonTM[close]
Yeah, in my opinion, the tach lance meant instant death for frigates, fighters, and destroyers, it also meant 3-4 hit kills for some cruisers.
It kinda needed a nerf of some sort because it was the best thing to put on a large energy slot for almost any role.
Yeah, in my opinion, the tach lance meant instant death for frigates, fighters, and destroyers, it also meant 3-4 hit kills for some cruisers.
It kinda needed a nerf of some sort because it was the best thing to put on a large energy slot for almost any role.
but the same can be said for the plasma cannon no ?
you just lead your target a little and any ship you mentionned will get wrecked
The lance is only a good sniper weapon because ships wouldn't arm shields when too far away from a lance turret, with that fix it should resolve some issues.
hey alex, have you thought about limiting or even stopping the turn rate of the tachyon lance when it's been fired? this way it shall have a hard to tracking fighters or frigates, while can still be devastating if it actually hits. with this, it's still possible to adjust slightly while firing by turning the whole ship, but will not allow precise tracking. this may be a big nerf, but with the presence of the tachyon lance, it forces all hostiles to keep their shield up or be horribly EMP'd.
hey alex, have you thought about limiting or even stopping the turn rate of the tachyon lance when it's been fired? this way it shall have a hard to tracking fighters or frigates, while can still be devastating if it actually hits. with this, it's still possible to adjust slightly while firing by turning the whole ship, but will not allow precise tracking. this may be a big nerf, but with the presence of the tachyon lance, it forces all hostiles to keep their shield up or be horribly EMP'd.
Already the case >_>
By release time the lore behind it won't mean sh*t
hey alex, have you thought about limiting or even stopping the turn rate of the tachyon lance when it's been fired? this way it shall have a hard to tracking fighters or frigates, while can still be devastating if it actually hits. with this, it's still possible to adjust slightly while firing by turning the whole ship, but will not allow precise tracking. this may be a big nerf, but with the presence of the tachyon lance, it forces all hostiles to keep their shield up or be horribly EMP'd.
Already the case >_>
By release time the lore behind it won't mean sh*t
The lance is only a good sniper weapon because ships wouldn't arm shields when too far away from a lance turret, with that fix it should resolve some issues.
Not to mention being absolute mayhem if it hits armour and enemy ships run away if they see themselves in rangeThe lance is only a good sniper weapon because ships wouldn't arm shields when too far away from a lance turret, with that fix it should resolve some issues.
Wrong again. The Lance's enormous burst damage currently overloads the shields of all fighters and most (if not all) mid- and low-tech frigates.
Is the Tachyon Lance getting a cost/OP cost reduction too? I'd never want to use that weapon if it had the same OP cost yet is around two thirds to half as effective as it is now.
The lance is only a good sniper weapon because ships wouldn't arm shields when too far away from a lance turret, with that fix it should resolve some issues.
Wrong again. The Lance's enormous burst damage currently overloads the shields of all fighters and most (if not all) mid- and low-tech frigates.
The lance is only a good sniper weapon because ships wouldn't arm shields when too far away from a lance turret, with that fix it should resolve some issues.
Wrong again. The Lance's enormous burst damage currently overloads the shields of all fighters and most (if not all) mid- and low-tech frigates.
Let's see:
Lance Burst Damage: 1500 + 750 EMP
Total Damage to shields: 1500
Fighters:
Dagger Flux Capacity: 600 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 1000
Longbow Flux Capacity: 600 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 1000
Trident Flux Capacity: 1000 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 1666.6
Xyphos Flux Capacity: 1000 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 1666.6
Frigates:
Brawler Flux Capacity: 2750 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 3437.5 Total Damage Absorption.
Dram Flux Capacity: 1500 ( Efficiency 1.2 ) = 1250 Total Damage Absorption.
Hyperion Flux Capacity: 3300 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 5500 Total Damage Absorption.
Lasher Flux Capacity: 2100 ( Efficiency 1.0 ) = 2100 Total Damage Absorption.
Omen Flux Capacity: 2200 ( Efficiency .4 ) = 5500
Shuttle Flux Capacity: 1600 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 2000
Tempest Flux Capacity: 2500 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 3125
Vigilance Flux Capacity: 1900 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 2375
Wolf Flux Capacity: 2250 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 2812.5
I believe you are quite wrong.
Also to consider: the Lance combines perfectly with other lances either on the same ship or different. Two lances on one ship will pierce the shields on every frigate except the omen or hyperion in 2 volleys with no possible retaliation. A 4 lance Paragon will punch through every single frigate and in multiple shots any destroyer.
well uf you use more then 1 lance then of course it will be a good wepon, like many more large wepon type,
lances are good only on far range, on cqc its almost suicide ( pint def + lancec + shield = overfux in no time)
Lances are Lances, they will poke a giant hole in your ship without mercy. Overpowered as they are, they're balanced out by the long time in between bursts.
Just a random question about the phase system in general: How customisable is the whole thing? Like in terms of the phasing in/out effects on individual ships? Will that be moddable at all or is it hardcoded?
So how will phasing be applicable to fighters? If at all?
I'm more interested in the phase-in/out effects. Having low tech phase ships shred their way through crudely, while the high tech ones gracefully slide into phase would be a magnificent sight
won't be invisible to the AI if you just make it invisible through an effect (@upgradecap)Well, that's true. But it'd be neat also if the Ai could be programmed to to react to ships according to their visibility :D
I'm curious: since apparently the mechanics of phasing are editable like other ship systems, is it possible to change the key bindings for its (or any other system's, for that matter) activation? If so, I'm assuming the choices would only be the F key or right mouse button, but that's all I'm interested in.
Also, if it the above is possible, then would this allow for a ship to have two systems, with one system bound to the right mouse button, and the other bound to the F key?
A ship can't have two systems unless one of them is phase-cloak-instead-of-shields, though. The way it's specified is there's a "system" field in ship_data.csv that has the proper system, and you set the shieldType field to PHASE for phase ships. Really, shieldType ought to be renamed to "defenseType".Ah, I see. I was under the assumption that the ship's shieldType field on phase ships would be set to "NONE", and that the phase ability was simply a ship system that was activated by the right mouse button, rather than the F key. Anyway, thanks, that answers my question.
The lance is only a good sniper weapon because ships wouldn't arm shields when too far away from a lance turret, with that fix it should resolve some issues.
Wrong again. The Lance's enormous burst damage currently overloads the shields of all fighters and most (if not all) mid- and low-tech frigates.
Let's see:
Lance Burst Damage: 1500 + 750 EMP
Total Damage to shields: 1500
Fighters:
Dagger Flux Capacity: 600 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 1000
Longbow Flux Capacity: 600 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 1000
Trident Flux Capacity: 1000 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 1666.6
Xyphos Flux Capacity: 1000 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 1666.6
Frigates:
Brawler Flux Capacity: 2750 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 3437.5 Total Damage Absorption.
Dram Flux Capacity: 1500 ( Efficiency 1.2 ) = 1250 Total Damage Absorption.
Hyperion Flux Capacity: 3300 ( Efficiency .6 ) = 5500 Total Damage Absorption.
Lasher Flux Capacity: 2100 ( Efficiency 1.0 ) = 2100 Total Damage Absorption.
Omen Flux Capacity: 2200 ( Efficiency .4 ) = 5500
Shuttle Flux Capacity: 1600 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 2000
Tempest Flux Capacity: 2500 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 3125
Vigilance Flux Capacity: 1900 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 2375
Wolf Flux Capacity: 2250 ( Efficiency .8 ) = 2812.5
I believe you are quite wrong.
I didn't say it did it in one shot. Typically it's two shots, since the refire rate is sufficient that most frigates cannot dissipate enough soft flux in time for the second shot to force the shields down. The fighters will all almost certainly die in two shots. Once the shields go down on frigates, it's game over, as the massive EMP will knock everything out and shot number three is the finisher.
Keep in mind that this is done at a range where absolutely nothing short of Pilums or another Lance has any hope of firing back. Taking out ships in two or three perfectly accurate shots from halfway across the map is hilariously broken... and unshielded fighter wings (the vast majority) suffer even more, losing one or two members per lance shot.
@JamesRaynor: It kind of feels like you're picking away at technicalities in Temjin's post without addressing the larger point.
I can't help but wonder if you've tried the lance in earnest in terms of building a fleet around it - otherwise, I seriously doubt you'd call it "modestly overpowered". Whether it takes 2 or 3 or even 4 shots to take out a frigate is academic. The point is that a lance-heavy fleet with a few spotters dominates absolutely anything else right now - generally, with no losses. If you feel that this is fine, we'll just have to agree to disagree :)
I'd say - based on some playtesting - that it's "modestly overpowered" after these changes.
Wait, is it possible then to create a phase ship that has an optical cloak aswell? (To make the ship more invisible :))
I never got my question answered, so let me re-quote it :)Wait, is it possible then to create a phase ship that has an optical cloak aswell? (To make the ship more invisible :))
Bear in mind that I'd like offical answer on this :)
I never got my question answered, so let me re-quote it :)Wait, is it possible then to create a phase ship that has an optical cloak aswell? (To make the ship more invisible :))
Bear in mind that I'd like offical answer on this :)
Ships colored in blue can survive two shots, you also forget that lances require a spotter to be effective. I see the lance as an energy artillery gun, weak in short range or against prepared, good otherwise. What I don't quite like is that people are complaining that an artillery weapon does too much damage when it's very weak up close and relies on other ships to operate effectively. I also don't believe that the correct solution to a modestly overpowered weapon is to nerf it to the point where no one will want to use it. It sounds a little too close to TF2 and their tendency to nerf good weapons into the ground because people whine and moan, like the tomislav from tf2 was nerfed into yet another gimp gun for the heavy, like the other 2 it already has. I seriously want a weapon that's worth using next to the auto-pulse. Right now there's not any good energy weapon besides for the lance that can compete with the autopulse. I don't believe the solution is to make everything equally as impotent to induce some semblance of 'balance'. What irks me the most is people complaining about a gun being really good at what it's supposed to be good at. Back to the Tomislav again, people complained that a gun who penalizes damage and increases deployment speed was too powerful because it increases deployment speed. Frankly I see the lance going down the same path already. Incredibly flux inefficient, subpar damage, soft flux, horrendous OP cost, with these changes it'll be just another HIL, flashy but ultimately useless and impractical.
Right, no optical cloaking as far as the AI is concerned. Which is part of the reason of why there isn't any, so it's not the kind thing you could just "throw in".
I've really got to take a look at making the AI itself moddable, though. It's going to be a fair bit of work, but that's something I'd really like to do at some point. Hopefully no hitherto-unseen barrier presents itself.
Yes, the transparency level on the phase cloak is configurable.
No, that's not currently possible. Well... unless you get very creative with weapon and make a system that fires an invisible torpedo into your own hull. You actually *could* do that, I'm pretty sure.
No, that's not currently possible. Well... unless you get very creative with weapon and make a system that fires an invisible torpedo into your own hull. You actually *could* do that, I'm pretty sure.
:'(
Oh well, atleast it can be done somehow XD
Oh, and yeah, can the systems eventually be made so that modders can mod the systems beyond recognition? (AKA custom, built-from-scratch system :))
Actually, I'm pretty sure Alex was talking about K-64's question, not yours.I am pretty sure of this also, haha.
So, it is possible to set it to near invisible? (like transparency set to 90-95%?) :D
Ooh, a combat freighter, interesting. Any chance we could get a screenshot?
And, what sort of new things did you add to the CampaignFleetAPI and FleetMemberAPI files? I'd love to know.
void setLocation(float x, float y);
boolean isAlive();
void addAssignment(FleetAssignment assignment, SectorEntityToken target, float maxDurationInDays);
void addAssignment(FleetAssignment assignment, SectorEntityToken target, float maxDurationInDays, Script onCompletion);
void clearAssignments();
void setPreferredResupplyLocation(SectorEntityToken token);
FactionAPI getFaction();
Vector2f getVelocity();
Vector2f getLocation();
PersonAPI getCommander();
List<FleetMemberAPI> getMembersListCopy();
List<FleetMemberAPI> getCombatReadyMembersListCopy();
FleetMemberAPI getFlagship();
int getFleetPoints();
boolean isPlayerFleet();
void addFleetMember(FleetMemberAPI member);
void removeFleetMember(FleetMemberAPI member);
void setName(String name);
float getTotalSupplyCostPerDay();
int getNumCapitals();
int getNumCruisers();
int getNumDestroyers();
int getNumFrigates();
int getNumFighters();
float getTravelSpeed();
PersonAPI getCaptain();
void setCrewXPLevel(CargoAPI.CrewXPLevel crewXP);
String getShipName();
void setShipName(String name);
String getSpecId();
FleetMemberType getType();
boolean isFlagship();
int getNumFlightDecks();
boolean isCarrier();
boolean isCivilian();
void setFlagship(boolean isFlagship);
int getFleetPointCost();
boolean isFighterWing();
boolean isFrigate();
boolean isDestroyer();
boolean isCruiser();
boolean isCapital();
CargoAPI.CrewXPLevel getCrewXPLevel();
float getFuelCapacity();
float getCargoCapacity();
float getMinCrew();
float getNeededCrew();
float getMaxCrew();
float getFuelUse();
float getHangarSpace();
float getBaseValue();
One day soon, I'll log on and in the corner of the forum page there'll be... News: Starferer 0.53.0a is out!
...and I'll smile.
This version is not out yet - this is just a list of changes made/new features implemented so far in the development build.
Changes as of July 24, 2012
...
Ship Systems:
- Fortress Shield: generates hard flux but allows soft flux dissipation while it's on, allowing ship to take a "breather" in combat when its flux is high from weapons fire
- Maneuvering Jets: removed cooldown, added flux cost
...
Any requests?Actually, yes, I do have one: would it be possible to make the value for the player's credits accessible? I'd love to be able to add or subtract from them, and create events based on a player's monetary worth.
Admiral AI:
Knows to engage enemy fire support ships when they become a significant danger
Requests on coding or general gameplay? :)
Another!...combat freighter? Sounds like more pirates. ;D
But then again, it has that midline feel and look to it. Can't want to test it out. :)
EDIT:
That rear light MG sticks out A LOT in the exhaust light. Can something be done about that?
And a "few" things to sort out? I say it's released withing a week from now. ;D
I'm quite liking the look of the Mule there. From what I can see there, it appears to be able to take a fair beating, especially for a freighter, be it combat or no.
As an aside point, are thrusters ever going to be truly directional? I was testing earlier on with having a rear pointing thruster to see if it would only activate if I put the ship in reverse, unfortunately it didn't work. Such a feature would be one of the small details that'd make the combat that bit more flavoursome than it already is
Okay, I am going to draw attention to what K-64 said. I also really want to see directional thrusters. I don't think it would be that hard to visually have the thrusters activate when logically needed, but I do recognize that it might be a pain to deal with flameouts of odd-angle thrusters and how it affects the steering. :P
Also, I have a more tricky request. I would love it if we could set an "engine mount" sprite, and have gimbaling on engines. Kerbal Space Program has made me realize that having engines that vector thrust is an actual thing, a viable thing, and something that shouldn't be ignored. It would look awesome to have our ships swish their engines around as we mash the keys, and it wouldn't add any extra visual clutter to the battles.
Hmm, that changes my thoughts on the fortress shield quite a bit! How much hard flux is generated, or is that just the flux from incoming fire?
Also that sounds like a really good call on the maneuvering jets - I was happy when you made the same call with the missile launchers.
Requests on coding or general gameplay? :)
Actually, yes, I do have one: would it be possible to make the value for the player's credits accessible? I'd love to be able to add or subtract from them, and create events based on a player's monetary worth.
I'd also love to be able to create simple text-only pop-up boxes that could be used for notifications (something similar to accident report pop-ups), as the current notification system in the campaign screen is a bit too subtle, and makes it easy for players to miss important notifications. Though, I understand that's a fairly large addition--perhaps for the next version of the game?
Finally, the Mule looks pretty nice--it scared me for a second though, when I saw the scaled-down image, it appeared as some sort of Venture kitbash. :P
So, will this ship be replacing a lot of the Buffalos in the pirate fleets? They could use the extra firepower.
Added SectorAPI.getPlayerFleet() and CampaignFleetAPI.getCargo() methods - that should let you get a hold of the player fleet and then work with the credits using its CargoAPI.getCredits() method (which returns a MutableValue). Haven't tested it, though - advance apologies if something there doesn't work.Awesome, thank you! Now I'll be able to code all sorts of lovely things, like station defense contracts, preferred customer contracts, buying out small mercenary groups to work for you, creating a virtual stock market to invest in... this will be fun.
About messages - I think it's a good idea, but you're right, it's not exactly something I could just hack in.Of course; I figured it probably wouldn't be a simple hackjob. Oh well, there's always the future.
Awesome, thank you! Now I'll be able to code all sorts of lovely things, like station defense contracts, preferred customer contracts, buying out small mercenary groups to work for you, creating a virtual stock market to invest in... this will be fun.
Added SectorAPI.getPlayerFleet() and CampaignFleetAPI.getCargo() methods - that should let you get a hold of the player fleet and then work with the credits using its CargoAPI.getCredits() method (which returns a MutableValue). Haven't tested it, though - advance apologies if something there doesn't work.Awesome, thank you! Now I'll be able to code all sorts of lovely things, like station defense contracts, preferred customer contracts, buying out small mercenary groups to work for you, creating a virtual stock market to invest in... this will be fun.
Hmm - you know, I just realized - getCargo() was already there, in SectorEntityToken (which CampaignFleetAPI is derived from). The only tricky part is getting the player fleet object - you can do it using getEntityByName with... I don't remember what, actually - something like "Player Fleet" or just "Fleet". In any case, SectorAPI.getPlayerFleet() makes this much nicer.Huh, you're right. It's been a little while :P I was always under the impression, though, that getCredits() simply returned the player's credit value, and didn't allow for it to be edited.
So, forgive my lack of experience when it comes to programming, but how exactly would I modify a player's credits with getCredits()? I always guessed that I would have needed a setCredits(float quantity) to do that with.
Combat Freighters:
Condor, Buffalo Mk. II, Hound, and now the Mule
Combat Freighters:
Condor, Buffalo Mk. II, Hound, and now the Mule
Condor: not a freighter, a former freighter converted to a carrier - no longer fills freighter role.
Buffalo Mk. II: poor cargo capacity, no longer a freighter
Hound: Fair enough, but it's a frigate :)
The Mule retains significant cargo capacity and combines it with respectable firepower and strong defenses - that's what I mean when I say "Combat Freighter".
getCredits() returns a MutableValue (which is a SF-specific class, not a general Java one). MutableValue has a few methods: get(), add(), subtract(), and set().Yes, it makes perfect sense; thanks for explaining. And honestly I don't see much of a difference between the two ways of handling the modification of credits, either one would work just as well in my eyes. But then again, I'm used to complicated and unintuitive processes from modding other games, so I guess I'm hardened against that sort of thing :P
So you could do:
getCredits().get() to get the actual number
getCredits().set(1000) to set it to 1000
getCredits().add(500) to add 500 credits. That's actually a convenience method, equivalent to getCredits().set(getCredits().get() + 500).
Does that make sense?
It would probably be more intuitive to just have getCredits(), setCredits(), addCredits(), etc in CargoAPI. I ended up doing it this way to avoid having to code up all these extra methods (and instead expose MutableValues) but in retrospect it may have been a mistake. It certainly complicates things a bit.
If it's like a Venture-lite, I am going to like it!Lol @ that name. Damn, now I'm going to mentally call it that from now on.
another vulture? oh god the balancing issues are multiplying :P
the vulture is already crazy FP efficient in terms of cargo and it packs plenty of firepower and armor on top of it, also has a flight deck and is pretty cheap for what it is, not sure if its such a good idea to have another one like it. There has to be some trade off eh, or you make the normal freighters useless. I suggest giving the normal freighters much more cargo, with the exception of the atlas. they are just so fragile to hold so little for so much FP, and the destroyer sized ones dont really get the whole high speed thing that a frigate would to make the fp worth it.
Ps. forgot i was talking about starfarer mid post when i noticed both the mad dog and the atlas lurking around my thoughts. Too much mechwarrior living legends, i suppose.
another vulture? oh god the balancing issues are multiplying :P
the vulture is already crazy FP efficient in terms of cargo and it packs plenty of firepower and armor on top of it, also has a flight deck and is pretty cheap for what it is, not sure if its such a good idea to have another one like it. There has to be some trade off eh, or you make the normal freighters useless. I suggest giving the normal freighters much more cargo, with the exception of the atlas. they are just so fragile to hold so little for so much FP, and the destroyer sized ones dont really get the whole high speed thing that a frigate would to make the fp worth it.
Ps. forgot i was talking about starfarer mid post when i noticed both the mad dog and the atlas lurking around my thoughts. Too much mechwarrior living legends, i suppose.
There is no ship called the Vulture :p
Yes, it makes perfect sense; thanks for explaining. And honestly I don't see much of a difference between the two ways of handling the modification of credits, either one would work just as well in my eyes. But then again, I'm used to complicated and unintuitive processes from modding other games, so I guess I'm hardened against that sort of thing :P
So will the Ox Frigate Freighter be in the game Alex, or the larger fuel ships? I can't imagine that it would take as much time since they're all civilian and they already have sprites made for them. Also what is the status on the weird ship with the purple cosmic armor?
(http://i.imgur.com/hQYoG.png)
Is it another phase ship, or does it belong to another faction or what?
Also, will any of the new weapon systems still in the game's graphics files make it in? Gorgon, Hydra, VLRM, etc. Same goes with the other ships that have graphics but no data such as the 'Heavy Escort' fighter.
@Alex: I have a question/request. Can phase ships retreat while phased? And I know this sounds silly, but can you make sure that doesn't cause a crash/error? My playtester-senses are tingling. :P
The Mule is a destroyer, right? 5500 hull puts it at the very top, even above the Enforcer. Course, it doesn't have near the weapon systems but its still pretty neat to have a freighter rocking such defense - in other space games the freighters usually have paper-thin defense.
another vulture? oh god the balancing issues are multiplying :P
the vulture is already crazy FP efficient in terms of cargo and it packs plenty of firepower and armor on top of it, also has a flight deck and is pretty cheap for what it is, not sure if its such a good idea to have another one like it. There has to be some trade off eh, or you make the normal freighters useless. I suggest giving the normal freighters much more cargo, with the exception of the atlas. they are just so fragile to hold so little for so much FP, and the destroyer sized ones dont really get the whole high speed thing that a frigate would to make the fp worth it.
Ps. forgot i was talking about starfarer mid post when i noticed both the mad dog and the atlas lurking around my thoughts. Too much mechwarrior living legends, i suppose.
Vulture? I'd like to have seen that, but oh well. :)It can save your hide having enough spare crew to replace losses instantly - you could lose to a hound if suddenly your capital or something got uncrewed
Anyways, I find that crew tends to be a game changer. More crew means more battles before you have to go and restock them.
Hm. Does this work if it's the player ship and you retreat by manually piloting to the map edge? I know shielded ships will just about always drop their shields when they transition to autopilot as they go off the map - lost at least one Hyperion to that, when it couldn't get shields back up fast enough to deal with incoming missiles. So I wouldn't be surprised if phase ships did a similar thing of being momentarily vulnerable when the autopilot turns on.@Alex: I have a question/request. Can phase ships retreat while phased? And I know this sounds silly, but can you make sure that doesn't cause a crash/error? My playtester-senses are tingling. :P
Yeah, that works fine. Tested just to be sure, because I'm paranoid :)
The Ox - maybe. Have to see how the concept for it fits (it was originally meant as a tug). It may just become a freighter, but we'll see.
Hm. Does this work if it's the player ship and you retreat by manually piloting to the map edge? I know shielded ships will just about always drop their shields when they transition to autopilot as they go off the map - lost at least one Hyperion to that, when it couldn't get shields back up fast enough to deal with incoming missiles. So I wouldn't be surprised if phase ships did a similar thing of being momentarily vulnerable when the autopilot turns on.
Hm. Does this work if it's the player ship and you retreat by manually piloting to the map edge? I know shielded ships will just about always drop their shields when they transition to autopilot as they go off the map - lost at least one Hyperion to that, when it couldn't get shields back up fast enough to deal with incoming missiles. So I wouldn't be surprised if phase ships did a similar thing of being momentarily vulnerable when the autopilot turns on.
Just tried that, works fine - was retreating under heavy fire and didn't turn off the cloak.
Looked at the shield AI for this and fixed that up, too - also made a couple of other shield AI enhancements.
So what ship system does the Mule have, if any?
The rear MG... I don't know, I think it kind of works - also, this is with the maneuvering jets on, so there's a lot more glow than usual. The ideal solution would be to add some glow bleed here ("bloom" effect) but that's not in the cards.
So what ship system does the Mule have, if any?
Seems to be shaping up to be quite the capable combat ship, possibly with the ability to stand toe-to-toe with the dedicated combat hulls?
From the sounds of that, is the flux capacity rather pathetic on it? Because I was taking my guessing from the agility the jets would provide (granted for a short time, but still something to be considered) and the exceptional hull (for a destroyer sized ship), seemed like a good combination for a rather dangerous vesselMaybe so, but look with me now on this
Good guess :) Yeah, the flux capacity is poor. The weapons package also isn't great - a bit less than a combat frigate. It's got a lot of hull and armor, though.
Oh, and that medium slot is actually universal at the moment. Flexibility over specialization is the general mantra of that ship.
More like 'Salamander Pod!'Good guess :) Yeah, the flux capacity is poor. The weapons package also isn't great - a bit less than a combat frigate. It's got a lot of hull and armor, though.
Oh, and that medium slot is actually universal at the moment. Flexibility over specialization is the general mantra of that ship.
Ooh, more pilums!
Oh, and that medium slot is actually universal at the moment. Flexibility over specialization is the general mantra of that ship.Cooooooooooooooool. :D Can't wait to play with it.
So will the Ox Frigate Freighter be in the game Alex, or the larger fuel ships? I can't imagine that it would take as much time since they're all civilian and they already have sprites made for them. Also what is the status on the weird ship with the purple cosmic armor?
The large fuel ship sprites aren't actually done - what you see on that armada screenshot is scaled-down concept art, even though it looks more sprite-y than you'd expect. Actually... this reminds me, the medium tanker is done. Not much incentive to put it in because fuel isn't used yet, but I ought to do it now so I don't forget again :)
The Ox - maybe. Have to see how the concept for it fits (it was originally meant as a tug). It may just become a freighter, but we'll see.
What is the purpose of a tug anyway? Does it help salvage/repair ships? Also possibly it could do both, albeit not as much as a dedicated one.Also, will any of the new weapon systems still in the game's graphics files make it in? Gorgon, Hydra, VLRM, etc. Same goes with the other ships that have graphics but no data such as the 'Heavy Escort' fighter.
These are on the long-term-when/if-I-get-a-chance TODO list. So, no promises either way, but I haven't forgotten about these - and might take a crack at one or two if time permits before the next release.
I always thought VLRM stood for "Very Long Range Missile". Guess I was wrong. ;D
I always thought VLRM stood for "Very Long Range Missile". Guess I was wrong. ;D
And Gorgon looks like a multi-stage MIRV for some reason.
Ooh, a combat freighter, interesting. Any chance we could get a screenshot?
And, what sort of new things did you add to the CampaignFleetAPI and FleetMemberAPI files? I'd love to know.
Working on the screenshot - reinstalling Photoshop as we speak so I can make it into a jpeg :)
CampaignFleetAPI:Spoiler
void setLocation(float x, float y);
boolean isAlive();
void addAssignment(FleetAssignment assignment, SectorEntityToken target, float maxDurationInDays);
void addAssignment(FleetAssignment assignment, SectorEntityToken target, float maxDurationInDays, Script onCompletion);
void clearAssignments();
void setPreferredResupplyLocation(SectorEntityToken token);
FactionAPI getFaction();
Vector2f getVelocity();
Vector2f getLocation();
PersonAPI getCommander();
List<FleetMemberAPI> getMembersListCopy();
List<FleetMemberAPI> getCombatReadyMembersListCopy();
FleetMemberAPI getFlagship();
int getFleetPoints();
boolean isPlayerFleet();
void addFleetMember(FleetMemberAPI member);
void removeFleetMember(FleetMemberAPI member);
void setName(String name);
float getTotalSupplyCostPerDay();
int getNumCapitals();
int getNumCruisers();
int getNumDestroyers();
int getNumFrigates();
int getNumFighters();
float getTravelSpeed();[close]
FleetMemberAPI:Spoiler
PersonAPI getCaptain();
void setCrewXPLevel(CargoAPI.CrewXPLevel crewXP);
String getShipName();
void setShipName(String name);
String getSpecId();
FleetMemberType getType();
boolean isFlagship();
int getNumFlightDecks();
boolean isCarrier();
boolean isCivilian();
void setFlagship(boolean isFlagship);
int getFleetPointCost();
boolean isFighterWing();
boolean isFrigate();
boolean isDestroyer();
boolean isCruiser();
boolean isCapital();
CargoAPI.CrewXPLevel getCrewXPLevel();
float getFuelCapacity();
float getCargoCapacity();
float getMinCrew();
float getNeededCrew();
float getMaxCrew();
float getFuelUse();
float getHangarSpace();
float getBaseValue();[close]
Any requests?
Could we have a removeMothballedShip method for the cargo API? It would let us have modded AI fleets purchase ships from stations or otherwise regulate their inventories.I second this; it would certainly be useful in some situations.
List<FleetMemberAPI> getMembersListCopy();
List<FleetMemberAPI> getCombatReadyMembersListCopy();
int getFleetPoints();
void addFleetMember(FleetMemberAPI member);
void removeFleetMember(FleetMemberAPI member);
FleetDataAPI CargoAPI.getMothballedShips()
FleetDataAPI CampaignFleetAPI.getFleetData()
Were you planning on disclosing the phase hull's names before release?
Mostly wondering because I have no idea if I want to know yet or not. Knowing now is awesome b/c I want to know. But waiting is like a Christmas present. :)
EDIT:SpoilerWait, I just noticed the cruiser is called the Doom class according to the screenie in the blog post. I really dig that. :D[close]
I didn't see and you didn't quote it, so I don't believe you. :p
I have to ask - will phase weapons ever be able to hit phase ships? Or can we modders make custom weapons that hit them? That'd be cool :D
And as for phase flux buildup, is it possible to limit the flux generated? :D
Doom, Shade, and Afflictor.
Doom, Shade, and Afflictor.
I have to ask - will phase weapons ever be able to hit phase ships? Or can we modders make custom weapons that hit them? That'd be cool :D
Phase weapons? What's that? (Before you interpret this as a literal question: What I'm saying is anti-phase weapons, as a class, don't exist in the game.)
Doom, Shade, and Afflictor.Coooooooooooooooool. :D
They are being renamed & re-purposed to be normal weapons.I have to ask - will phase weapons ever be able to hit phase ships? Or can we modders make custom weapons that hit them? That'd be cool :D
Phase weapons? What's that? (Before you interpret this as a literal question: What I'm saying is anti-phase weapons, as a class, don't exist in the game.)
Well, that's the purple weapons in the game, like the phase beam. But what i meant to ask was if there was way to make anti-phase ship weapons? :D
They are being renamed & re-purposed to be normal weapons.I have to ask - will phase weapons ever be able to hit phase ships? Or can we modders make custom weapons that hit them? That'd be cool :D
Phase weapons? What's that? (Before you interpret this as a literal question: What I'm saying is anti-phase weapons, as a class, don't exist in the game.)
Well, that's the purple weapons in the game, like the phase beam. But what i meant to ask was if there was way to make anti-phase ship weapons? :D
I doubt it unless Alex is pestered enough to code in that functionality, since he had already decided to not implemented in mainline.
So if you are fighting a Phase Cruiser with a frigate. you can just park on top of it and there is nothing it can do? It will just overload and you are free to attack it?
Well, hmm. Seems like a good idea, but it will probably bounce out of the frigate before that happens.
The only name I have a problem with is Doom. For some reason I just can't take that name seriously.
Im not much of a fan of the name either. What about wraith?
Can't wait to see how the force mechanic is affected by mass, or how a modded small, tough shielded rammer ship with lots-of-mass tries it...So if you are fighting a Phase Cruiser with a frigate. you can just park on top of it and there is nothing it can do? It will just overload and you are free to attack it?Well, hmm. Seems like a good idea, but it will probably bounce out of the frigate before that happens.
Yes, that - there's a constant force acting to push away the smaller ship in this case. You might force an overload by a well-timed fly-by, but you won't (or at least, shouldn't!) be able to just stay on top of a larger ship while it's phased.
Direct fire would work admirably on midlines.
:3Direct fire would work admirably on midlines.
Given the ships involved, it'd probably just lead to these mounts being used for ballistics.
[?]
{
"angle": "0",
"arc": "90",
"id": "WS 012",
"locations": [
73,
0
],
"mount": "TURRET",
"size": "SMALL",
>>"type": "BALLISTIC, ENERGY"<<
}
[?]Drones can be modified via the .ship file for it. New drones can even be made.
SpoilerHmmm... maybe don't implement it into vanilla ships, so it doesn't cost development time, but make it so that modders can make mounts which can only use ballistics and missiles or only energy and ballistic, so let the code look like this:Code[?]
{
"angle": "0",
"arc": "90",
"id": "WS 012",
"locations": [
73,
0
],
"mount": "TURRET",
"size": "SMALL",
>>"type": "BALLISTIC, ENERGY"<<
}
[?]
Hope you understand what I'm trying to say.[close]
Then it sounds as if some form of this ambitious old hope (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=2013.0) might finally come true. [austinpowers] Yeah, baby! [/austinpowers] ;D
Mirco-managing id left to your "subordinates," the AI. it determines the best ship for the job.
Direct Fire? What's that? Haven't been around here enough to know that. :)
one thing i would like to be able to do is to specify a ship for escort.
i like flying the Hyperion and have a Tempest as escort.
but i can not if i have fighter wings because the game will assign me a fighter wing instead of the Tempest.
which means i don't use fighters.
Mirco-managing id left to your "subordinates," the AI. it determines the best ship for the job.
well,
me and the AI have a difference of opinions on this. ;)
Direct Fire? What's that? Haven't been around here enough to know that. :)
Direct Fire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_fire)one thing i would like to be able to do is to specify a ship for escort.
i like flying the Hyperion and have a Tempest as escort.
but i can not if i have fighter wings because the game will assign me a fighter wing instead of the Tempest.
which means i don't use fighters.Mirco-managing id left to your "subordinates," the AI. it determines the best ship for the job.
well,
me and the AI have a difference of opinions on this. ;)
Fair enough :) Without going into too much detail, this is something I'd like to handle better. I think the concern you bring up is a valid one (and comes up in some other situations). I've got some thoughts on how to address it - but nothing that's definite enough that I can really talk about.
Also: hi, and welcome to the forum!
Having Hidden missile mounts on some of my ships it's kind of disappointing how some regular missile weapons will display the missiles even if the mount is hidden, I get that this is for fighters where the weapon mount is not needed but the missile is, but a MRM Pod is Extremely unlikely to be mounted on a Fighter, so possibly some of the missile weapons could have RENDER_LOADED_MISSILES_UNLESS_HIDDEN rather than RENDER_LOADED_MISSILES, to allow for such mountings to be viable.
tnx Alex!
congratulations on this jewel of a game.
at my age, i have played lots of games.
Starfarer is one of the very best i have played so far.
even at this Alpha stage.
just bloody amazing! :)
Six is the fighter wing size limit. I don't see changing that, honestly - seems plenty high for most purposes, and would be quite a pain to change.
I think that's a good idea, because if you "rectify" that then it won't go for the rear normally, which would be a bad move.Six is the fighter wing size limit. I don't see changing that, honestly - seems plenty high for most purposes, and would be quite a pain to change.i find it's just a tad too easy to lure a ship (Hound and Piranha are good example) to attack you by showing your flank/rear to them for a short wile.
I think that's a good idea, because if you "rectify" that then it won't go for the rear normally, which would be a bad move.Six is the fighter wing size limit. I don't see changing that, honestly - seems plenty high for most purposes, and would be quite a pain to change.i find it's just a tad too easy to lure a ship (Hound and Piranha are good example) to attack you by showing your flank/rear to them for a short wile.
if i might be allowed one suggestion:
i find it's just a tad too easy to lure a ship (Hound and Piranha are good example) to attack you by showing your flank/rear to them for a short wile.
of course, this doesn't matter much in a multi-ships engagement, as you are surrounded anyway.
it's more noticeable in a fight versus 1 or 2 ships.
other than that, the AI is remarkable.
i think it's the best AI i have seen in an 'action' game so far.
Bonuses that I have been mulling over:
- Ballistic: 10% range bonus, 20% max spread reduction, and 20% spread reset speed increase (from having a longer and more sturdily mounted barrel)
- Missile: 15% reload time reduction and 30% launch speed bonus (from having a more optimized reloading mechanism, and a longer/heavier launch tube)
- Energy, non-beam: 15% range bonus and 15% damage bonus (having wires that don't need to move allows for higher efficiency)
- Energy, beam: 25% range bonus and 25% damage bonus (a non-moving mount can have MUCH more precise optics)
Can now specify custom engine glow color and contrail data (see data/shipsystems/proj/flare_standard.proj for example)Out of curiosity will this be defined with the .ship or will the .ship reference a hypothetical lowtech_fighter.engine?
Bonuses that I have been mulling over:
- Ballistic: 10% range bonus, 20% max spread reduction, and 20% spread reset speed increase (from having a longer and more sturdily mounted barrel)
- Missile: 15% reload time reduction and 30% launch speed bonus (from having a more optimized reloading mechanism, and a longer/heavier launch tube)
- Energy, non-beam: 15% range bonus and 15% damage bonus (having wires that don't need to move allows for higher efficiency)
- Energy, beam: 25% range bonus and 25% damage bonus (a non-moving mount can have MUCH more precise optics)
I would rather give missiles just few extra ammo (say, +20-25%). Since you don`t need a complex reload system that has to be adopted for rotating launcher - you can have some extra space for missiles. This won`t have a powerful impact of 3-ammo launchers, but would benefit annihilator-type rocket launchers and other launchers with lots of ammo.
SpoilerHey Alex, I wanted to revive discussion on the bonuses granted by hardpoints. I know you said you didn't have a strong idea on what to do with it just yet, and I think this would be a great place/time to get some ideas flowing. Personally, I think a placeholder bonus could be a 15% range bonus and a 15% max spread reduction. That being said, I think it should be different for each of the three weapon types. They would realistically benefit from the fixed positioning differently.
Bonuses that I have been mulling over:
- Ballistic: 10% range bonus, 20% max spread reduction, and 20% spread reset speed increase (from having a longer and more sturdily mounted barrel)
- Missile: 15% reload time reduction and 30% launch speed bonus (from having a more optimized reloading mechanism, and a longer/heavier launch tube)
- Energy, non-beam: 15% range bonus and 15% damage bonus (having wires that don't need to move allows for higher efficiency)
- Energy, beam: 25% range bonus and 25% damage bonus (a non-moving mount can have MUCH more precise optics)
Now, my intent is to give missile weapons the least bonuses, as they are generally expected to use hardpoints, and this would give the incentive to use non-missile weapons in universal hardpoints (my attempt at balance). Realistically, I feel that beam weapons (and energy weapons in general) would benefit most from this, as ballistic weapons are built with recoil in mind, which is similar to forces from turning a weapon. Laser systems don't have to deal with recoil (as they are not firing shots with significant mass), and would have to make a larger trade-off.
For in-game terms, the high bonuses to beam weapons somewhat counteract the awkwardness of having several beam hardpoints. Some ships accomplish it well, when it is their main weapon, but beam weapons are still (even after the bonuses) not better than non-beam weapons. All this aside, I don't consider my suggestions fully fleshed-out or balanced, but a stepping stone to start discussion.[close]
I have one final question, unconnected with hardpoints. I want to know, what was the reason to not have weapons' spread return to normal while they are reloading? It seems to me that larger, slow-firing weapons (the Heavy Mauler comes to mind) should be quite accurate because they have a lot of time between each shot. But, the spread grows and grows while they are firing, until they are very inaccurate. Finally, if I let off firing for under one second, the spread returns to default. It just somewhat breaks immersion to see the spread stay at full spread while it is reloading, but shrink fully in the blink of an eye once it is finished reloading.
i had an idea come to me when you said 6 was the fighter wing size limit Alex.
what if when you get around to making the skill tree for your avatar in the game one of the skills would be a way to increase the number of fighters in fighter wings that have 2, 3 or 4 fighters. by say 1 or 2 fighters. i think this could be a novel way for the aspiring carrier captain to help his fighters become greater force multipliers, of course i would also imagine these skills to be at the end of a skill tree and not something you could get easy.
I would love to have hullmods that specifically enhanced hardpoints, even if only for modding: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=1864.0
An expensive rate of fire or range bonus would be interesting to give the player for the Onslaught and Dominator. Those two frontal hardpoints could be made really killer at the expense of other systems.
QuoteCan now specify custom engine glow color and contrail data (see data/shipsystems/proj/flare_standard.proj for example)Out of curiosity will this be defined with the .ship or will the .ship reference a hypothetical lowtech_fighter.engine?
The thing I would most like to see for missiles would be [RENDER_BELOW_TURRET] and [RENDER_BELOW_HULL] tags. Those would be really useful in general but would make hidden missile mounts a lot better, especially on fighters. It would be nice to make missile launchers which hun their missiles under arms and poking out from launch mechanisms. Fighters it could have the most dramatic impact upon, since you can then have missiles poking out from under wings and such, rather then lying clumsily on top.
Well, as it stands now, hardpoints are twice as tough to disable (this is in 0.52.1a).I didn't know that. That's pretty awesome actually.
You actually said the problem would be if it passed through a friendly ship it would look like it was just going through it. It was in a topic relating to multiple layers. I may have a solution?The thing I would most like to see for missiles would be [RENDER_BELOW_TURRET] and [RENDER_BELOW_HULL] tags. Those would be really useful in general but would make hidden missile mounts a lot better, especially on fighters. It would be nice to make missile launchers which hun their missiles under arms and poking out from launch mechanisms. Fighters it could have the most dramatic impact upon, since you can then have missiles poking out from under wings and such, rather then lying clumsily on top.
This comes up now and again, and unfortunately I can't quick track down my previous (rather extensive) answer. Basically: rendering weapons below hulls leads to some nasty layered rendering contradictions. For example, a missile launcher is rendered under a hull, and then it fires - the missiles have to suddenly jump to the "above ships" layer, leading to visual artifacts. Similar issues for weapon glows, disabled effects, muzzle flash, smoke, etc.
That wouldn't work because where the missile is spawned depends on the weapon, not on the weapon slot. (Deja vu - I've definitely said this before at some point. Ah, well, at least I'm consistent!)Ah, that makes sense.
- Missiles can no longer hit the launching ship if they fizzle out, UNLESS they've left the ship's bounds at some point
That wouldn't work because where the missile is spawned depends on the weapon, not on the weapon slot. (Deja vu - I've definitely said this before at some point. Ah, well, at least I'm consistent!)Ah, that makes sense.
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=2844.0 and there's your topic, you have said this before... I think
Actually - don't you already track the information you'd need to make a mostly-seamless transition?
- Missiles can no longer hit the launching ship if they fizzle out, UNLESS they've left the ship's bounds at some point
You'd still get a bit of a pop as the missile's engine glow goes from below to above, but I'd think that'd actually look right. Smoke trails might still be an issue, though.
Well, as it stands now, hardpoints are twice as tough to disable (this is in 0.52.1a). I'm not entirely sold on going beyond that - that's a lot of extra complexity/rules the game has to explain to the player.Yeah, it seems like it'd make sense to add more abilities if hardpoints were competing with turrets, but they're not- they're competing with 'Not filling that slot'. The Medusa is the only ship I can think of where you might actually have hardpoints & turrets competing in some situations (the small universal & front 2 small energy for things like AM Blasters if you're using lots of high-OP gear like burst PD and can't afford to fill both).
So, since the release candidate is apparently working well, is there any chance for some last-minute additions to the patch notes? I'm sure the people who don't frequent the modding section would love to know about that new shield-adding hullmod :P
Now that 0.53's released, what're you planning for 0.54(or whatever number it will be), Alex? :PCampaign functionality I believe
Now that 0.53's released, what're you planning for 0.54(or whatever number it will be), Alex? :P
Alex, did I ever mention that I loved you?So, since the release candidate is apparently working well, is there any chance for some last-minute additions to the patch notes? I'm sure the people who don't frequent the modding section would love to know about that new shield-adding hullmod :P
I'll do one better - update the patch notes and release the new version :)
Yeah... that just caught me. Nothing like fighting a Close Support Lasher, getting really close to killing it, then eating five harpoons.
- Adjusted missile panic fire to occur earlier for shieldless (and cloakless) ships. Mostly affects the Buffalo Mk.2 - it's more likely to get rid of all its missiles before exploding.
Yeah... that just caught me. Nothing like fighting a Close Support Lasher, getting really close to killing it, then eating five harpoons.
- Adjusted missile panic fire to occur earlier for shieldless (and cloakless) ships. Mostly affects the Buffalo Mk.2 - it's more likely to get rid of all its missiles before exploding.
just a forewarning for those of us that use Norton anti virus.
the installer is seen as a medium threat. and it will automatically remove it from your system when you download it.. so just be ready for that.
Toned down? Are you sure? Because every Buffalo MKII I've killed since the update has lit up my monitor like a Christmas tree.
- Toned down ship explosion whiteout, fixed case where it would stay washed out for too long
Same here. Really white for about half a second, then goes out quickly. Did you happen to reduce the time for it to go away or did you reduce the glare from it?Toned down? Are you sure? Because every Buffalo MKII I've killed since the update has lit up my monitor like a Christmas tree.
- Toned down ship explosion whiteout, fixed case where it would stay washed out for too long
Edit: Immediately noticeable problem I found in the simulator: AI uses Burn Drive a little too much. In a hammerhead, I just stayed in front of a Dominator and backed off, waiting for it to hit it's burn drive. Then, I just moved to the side, all while pounding the AI's now exposed front with Maulers, taking little damage myself. The Dominator was often too slow to face me after it stopped using it's Burn Drive before I got out of range.
Suggestion: AI will only use burn drive when the enemy is in a bad shape (flux and/or armor wise) and the enemy has roughly the same or less speed and/or maneuverability. Or when the enemy's back is turned.
Alex, I think the AI for Phase ships might have some problems. I saw a Doom overload itself by phasing when all that was coming at it was a periodic Pilum wave. There was absolutely nothing else around it. It had more than enough PD to defend itself from a single Pilum launcher. And I'm not even sure if the missiles were even targeting the Doom. Yet it overloaded itself.
And Ambush seems really hard for medium difficulty due to all the fighters. Is there some trick to it that I'm missing?
Also, just in case you missed my edit:Edit: Immediately noticeable problem I found in the simulator: AI uses Burn Drive a little too much. In a hammerhead, I just stayed in front of a Dominator and backed off, waiting for it to hit it's burn drive. Then, I just moved to the side, all while pounding the AI's now exposed front with Maulers, taking little damage myself. The Dominator was often too slow to face me after it stopped using it's Burn Drive before I got out of range.
Suggestion: AI will only use burn drive when the enemy is in a bad shape (flux and/or armor wise) and the enemy has roughly the same or less speed and/or maneuverability. Or when the enemy's back is turned.
The two frigates can generally stay alive effectively, buying you a lot of time.For me, it always seems like the frigates stay alive for a very short amount time. :(
Also, another thing: The Reset button for missions doesn't appear to work.
Odd - seems to work fine here. Any chance that the permissions on C:\Program Files\Fractal Softworks\Starfarer\saves are messed up?What should I look for being wrong?
Alex, did I ever mention that I loved you?So, since the release candidate is apparently working well, is there any chance for some last-minute additions to the patch notes? I'm sure the people who don't frequent the modding section would love to know about that new shield-adding hullmod :P
I'll do one better - update the patch notes and release the new version :)
But I'm the admin. I'm the only user on this computer. Surely I wouldn't have problems with administrator rights if I am the administrator.
You'd think, but Windows can be funny about that. Speaking of that, what version of Windows are you on?Vista, still. Never jumped on the free Win7 train when it came.
Can you try temporarily turning off UAC to see if that changes anything?I'm pretty sure I've never had UAC on for years.
- Phase cloak overall is pretty nice, but actually, not so much fun to play.
Few issues with it though - right now, I'm never going to give a phase ship to AI, it's just so risky.
You'd think, but Windows can be funny about that. Speaking of that, what version of Windows are you on?Vista, still. Never jumped on the free Win7 train when it came.Can you try temporarily turning off UAC to see if that changes anything?I'm pretty sure I've never had UAC on for years.
Comments about Doom, and it's current state, solutions, etc. much appreciated!
These systems really are incredibly fun to use, not to mention changes the combat up quite a bit
Thanks for the info. Not sure there's much I can do at this point - all the game tries to do is delete some files, and apparently in a narrow set of circumstances that doesn't work. Are you able to delete save games, btw?Yes, I can delete save games. Maybe the problem can be fixed if they both save and/or delete the same way?
Does anyone have any good tips for the Ambush mission? It just seems too hard: The fighters can just continually harass you and return to their carriers. The Enforcer is nigh unbeatable by even the Doom unless the Doom spends a majority of it's slots on and fires buttloads of missiles, or the Afflictor fires 12 Albatross missiles and an Antimatter all at once point blank. The Condor and Buffalo fire so many Pilums. The frigates prevent your frigates from making any moves. And the AI for the Phase ships does not know how to handle phasing. I'm completely stumped as to how to beat the mission.
I apparently can't read -_-'
Oh, and when will we see (if ever) your ship editor that you use, alex? Provided you'll ever release it, that is ;)
So for those of us with norton, can anyone who has gotten past this help out? is there a way to disable to the norton for a while to let it go through? Thank you
So for those of us with norton, can anyone who has gotten past this help out? is there a way to disable to the norton for a while to let it go through? Thank you
So for those of us with norton, can anyone who has gotten past this help out? is there a way to disable to the norton for a while to let it go through? Thank you
Wasnt the Sensor Drones supposed to have Ion Cannons? Sadface, they dont.
Wasnt the Sensor Drones supposed to have Ion Cannons? Sadface, they dont.
I haven't heard any whining about the Tachyon Lance yet. I haven't had a chance to play the new patch, but something tells me the Lance is going to be in a much better place.
I mounted one Lance on AI controlled Apogee. Man, it sucked. When Apogee actually managed to hit something (it's a hardpoint after all but still) it usually hit shields. So I took the controls, and tried it myself - Hound was my first enemy on tactical screen, locked on, turned to shot, activated Lance... BAM, its engines went down. Aaaaaaaaand that's about it. Really, with such EMP damage I expected all its systems to just go nuts, but instead, it was still spraying its AC and hitting my fighters while slowly turning with no thrust.QuoteI haven't heard any whining about the Tachyon Lance yet. I haven't had a chance to play the new patch, but something tells me the Lance is going to be in a much better place.
Yeah the lance is pretty crappy now, dont think ima be using it anymore. It does a good deal of EMP damage and stuff, but there are way better options now.
Guys, remember
sunder with tachyon lance
engage HEF and you (should?) go back to prepatch damage
stick three on an odyssey and repeat for a lot of damage
Guys, rememberSorry Xareh, but that's a basic math error :D
sunder with tachyon lance
engage HEF and you (should?) go back to prepatch damage
stick three on an odyssey and repeat for a lot of damage
Guys, remember
sunder with tachyon lance
engage HEF and you (should?) go back to prepatch damage
stick three on an odyssey and repeat for a lot of damage
Whoo I made a build based on this, and you are right. It is maximum ownage. That and reaper spam are amazing. :D EDIT: And that's only with two small reaper pods. :DSpoilerI have to say, I've really changed my mind about phase ships now that I've spent some time using the Doom cruiser. It has decent cargo space, and more armour than you'd expect. But what really makes it work wonderfully is its performance when equipped with an all-Annihilator front set of missiles. It can take down just about anything without worrying about running low on ammo, missing shots, building up flux or having shots diverted by flare launchers. The large number of missiles also discourages ships from approaching into weapons range, allowing you to lose flux without taking hits. Effectively, it turns a strike craft into something more like an assault craft. Phase ships also have plenty of advantages I didn't think of - for example, whilst a few squadrons of Piranhas mean trouble for even an Aurora's shield, a phase ship can just avoid the damage completely.[close]
EDIT AGAIN: Also try putting 6 linked amblasters on there. Just for fun. :D
We've had 4 pages up overnight....
Methinks we've got a nerdception going on...
Anywho here's me thinking that all thats really left to implement in the campaign is
-Actual missions to earn your moola
-System travel
-RPG elements such as captain leveling up and officers and all that crap...
-Faction creation capacities ?
(I.E. create your own faction in space and empire creation/management)
I make it sound like its not a lot but its actually pretty good chunk of mostly coding right there....
Do correct me if there's more I forgot ?
a goal? Does mount and blade campaign need a goal?Yes, rule the WORLD MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ;D
a goal? Does mount and blade campaign need a goal?
Okay SO....It only counters shieldless ships, EMP systems do very little damage to shields. The Hound suffers because it's fast, shieldless and relies on mobility to stay alive- it's effectively an overweight fighter, and the EMP system's designed to take them down.
I can see the shade or whatever its name is
(the phase frigate with the two phase "pools" in its sprite)
getting a pretty heavy nerf to its EMP function, that thing can make the hound into an absolutely useless chunk of floating metal
Poor thing can't even get a shot off before getting EMP-locked to death
Either that or EMP capable ships are made out to be the end-game tier of frigates that can make even cruisers look like pushovers should you get too close for them to run from your almighty EMP that completely hardcounters every weapon system...
Plus the Hound's rather pathetic already, it's not a good basis on whether a ship is overpowered :P
a goal? Does mount and blade campaign need a goal?Yes, rule the WORLD MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ;D
you could go visit triangle mana goal? Does mount and blade campaign need a goal?Yes, rule the WORLD MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ;D
but brain what are we going to do tomorrow night.
a goal? Does mount and blade campaign need a goal?Yes, rule the WORLD MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ;D
but brain what are we going to do tomorrow night.
you could go visit triangle mana goal? Does mount and blade campaign need a goal?Yes, rule the WORLD MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ;D
but brain what are we going to do tomorrow night.
So, what's the next patch going to be? 0.54a? .6a? I wanna know so I can determine how much is going ot be added. ;DThe next patch is most probably going to be a 0.53.1a, then we'll see a patch to .6A! YAAY
So, what's the next patch going to be? 0.54a? .6a? I wanna know so I can determine how much is going ot be added. ;DThe next patch is most probably going to be a 0.53.1a, then we'll see a patch to .6A! YAAY
First off – let’s talk about version numbers. The previous release was technically a “preview” of the 0.5a build “proper”, whatever that means. That was until I started thinking about how to version this “bugfixes & improvements” release, which still wouldn’t have all the features slated for 0.5a. 0.5a2? 0.5a-preview2?
I’ve had to sit through a few meetings with people arguing about version numbers at my various former jobs (seems like everyone doesn’t want to waste time with it, but also can’t stand doing it any way but theirs), and I don’t want to be that guy, especially not to myself. Down with the version number sophistry! This release will be known henceforth as 0.51a, and the next one will be… wait for it… 0.52a. I’ll just have to avoid specifying a version number when talking about planned feature sets, as I did with version 0.5a.
I’m sure everyone is quite sick of talking about version numbers by now (see what I mean? I didn’t want to waste time on this, and look what happened!), so let’s dive into what’s new in this version.
whatever is next patch going to be....i for one cant wait.... too bad my damned HDD drive died and i cant even try the 0.53...how is it?It's...
oh i have pretty wild imagination ;)whatever is next patch going to be....i for one cant wait.... too bad my damned HDD drive died and i cant even try the 0.53...how is it?It's...
wonderful...
like nothing you can imagine
whatever is next patch going to be....i for one cant wait.... too bad my damned HDD drive died and i cant even try the 0.53...how is it?It's a pretty good combat overhaul. And there's without a doubt some subtle and not-so-subtle balance issues scattered about as a result. And the AI doesn't handle the systems perfectly. But still, very good regardless.
well i dunno if this is right , but my phase criuser ...well... its stop phaseing, ok ok hes got fast missile relise or something like that
::)
Great patch with lot of cool stuff Alex!
But I just want to say, I think combat side of the game received enough development time for now. Sure, it can get better with more effort put into it, but I think the game could use more meta-game related contents to put this excellent combat system in context. Not saying that combat is perfect nor it doesn't need any tweaks, since anything can be improved... rather, I think the meta game aspect of economy/systems needs more attention now that combat has been refined far ahead of the game's overall status.
It's like we have this awesome sports car (the combat system) but just an empty parking lot (the single bare bone system we have now) to drive it around in! ;)
Great patch with lot of cool stuff Alex!
But I just want to say, I think combat side of the game received enough development time for now. Sure, it can get better with more effort put into it, but I think the game could use more meta-game related contents to put this excellent combat system in context. Not saying that combat is perfect nor it doesn't need any tweaks, since anything can be improved... rather, I think the meta game aspect of economy/systems needs more attention now that combat has been refined far ahead of the game's overall status.
It's like we have this awesome sports car (the combat system) but just an empty parking lot (the single bare bone system we have now) to drive it around in! ;)
Great patch with lot of cool stuff Alex!
But I just want to say, I think combat side of the game received enough development time for now. Sure, it can get better with more effort put into it, but I think the game could use more meta-game related contents to put this excellent combat system in context. Not saying that combat is perfect nor it doesn't need any tweaks, since anything can be improved... rather, I think the meta game aspect of economy/systems needs more attention now that combat has been refined far ahead of the game's overall status.
It's like we have this awesome sports car (the combat system) but just an empty parking lot (the single bare bone system we have now) to drive it around in! ;)
Thanks for the feedback - I'm in general agreement :)
My plan is to make a few tweaks and bugfixes based on your guys' feedback and reports - without taking too long at it - and then move on to campaign stuff.
Great patch with lot of cool stuff Alex!
But I just want to say, I think combat side of the game received enough development time for now. Sure, it can get better with more effort put into it, but I think the game could use more meta-game related contents to put this excellent combat system in context. Not saying that combat is perfect nor it doesn't need any tweaks, since anything can be improved... rather, I think the meta game aspect of economy/systems needs more attention now that combat has been refined far ahead of the game's overall status.
It's like we have this awesome sports car (the combat system) but just an empty parking lot (the single bare bone system we have now) to drive it around in! ;)
Now that 0.53's released, what're you planning for 0.54(or whatever number it will be), Alex? :P
Things and stuff. Of the campaign variety. (Yes, that's as specific as I'm going to get right now.)
At the moment, I'm waiting for something to break horribly so that I have to fix it, and hoping against all hope that it won't happen :)
Things and stuff. Of the campaign variety. (Yes, that's as specific as I'm going to get right now.)His answer. ;D
There are other things in the works, but nothing I can talk about just yet.Well, in a few weeks I'll remind you that I'm entitled to a blog post. You HAVE to talk about something.
Blargh, one last question, for the maneuvering jets, how does it actually specify which engines are turned on when the system is activatged? I'm lost on that one little detail xP
Well where do you specify the extra jets that turn on? I assume that's what he's asking. Those jets look awesome, btw, Alex.
Still won't work even after clearing my cache (Firefox and Chrome) :(
Any chance of an alternative download link? lol
Still won't work even after clearing my cache (Firefox and Chrome) :(
Any chance of an alternative download link? lol
Try this (http://fractalsoftworks.com/starfarer/release/starfarer_install-0.53a-RC4.exe). Again, where are you located? That would help to know if this comes up again. (If you don't want to share that information, feel free to say so.)
The Philippines.
Alex, do you have any ideas on how to assign the system AI for a mod system that's essentially a weapon. For example, I have a system that fires lasers from the ship, but the AI has no idea how to use it. My aiType is set to "Flare", but is that for the enemy AI?
hull-specific weapons
(let's be kind to me and call it a "creative use of an existing, unused field for binary flags" - rather than an "awful hack")Hell, I would. At least you're not increasing bloat by adding in yet another data member, right?
(let's be kind to me and call it a "creative use of an existing, unused field for binary flags" - rather than an "awful hack")Hell, I would. At least you're not increasing bloat by adding in yet another data member, right?
(...he says, as though an additional boolean would be particularly bloatsome in a PC game.)
-- Griffinhart
Touch interface for Starfarer would be atrocious. I would know; I tried it!That's because the interface isn't built for touch...
(It works... slightly better with a stylus, but only if your touch interface is capacitive and you have a capacitive stylus to accompany it.)
-- Griffinhart