Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => Announcements => Topic started by: Alex on October 21, 2013, 06:22:05 PM

Title: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 21, 2013, 06:22:05 PM
This version is out - you can download it here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2014/01/17/starsector-0-6-2a-release/).

Changes as of January 17, 2014

Miscellaneous:

Modding:

Bugfixing:


Changes as of December 28, 2013

Miscellaneous:

Campaign


Modding

Bugfixing:




Changes as of December 01, 2013

Miscellaneous:

Modding:


Bugfixing:



Changes as of October 21, 2013

Miscellaneous:


Modding:

Bugfixing:
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: MesoTroniK on October 21, 2013, 06:48:07 PM
Alex, you sir are the boss!

And the flare thing, thank you so much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: NikolaiLev on October 21, 2013, 08:46:56 PM
Looks pretty solid!  Too bad no fighter wing changes happened, especially in terms of ship system usage or AI...  :(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on October 21, 2013, 08:49:41 PM
Umm... any change you know exactly what else is going to be added? Economy? Don't gotta answer if you don't know!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BillyRueben on October 21, 2013, 09:13:33 PM
  • Transferring command using the encounter dialog will result in the flagship reverting to the original one after the engagement

Sweet. I wanted that one.

  • Does not modify rate of fire, modifies damage dealt instead

Didn't see this one coming, but it makes a lot of sense. This way, it is purely a benefit, whereas the rate of fire would increase your flux consumption. Some of the other CR stuff looked pretty interesting. I'd really like to try it out.

  • Ships no longer have different repair rates; repair speed based entirely on "emergency repairs" stat and being below the logistics capacity

So ships no longer have a maximum amount of supplies they can use to repair per day? Does that mean that if I had a solo ship with a maxed out logistics capacity and maxed emergency repairs stat, that I could almost instantly repair a ship from near destruction to max hull/armor?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on October 21, 2013, 10:39:43 PM
Quote
So ships no longer have a maximum amount of supplies they can use to repair per day? Does that mean that if I had a solo ship with a maxed out logistics capacity and maxed emergency repairs stat, that I could almost instantly repair a ship from near destruction to max hull/armor?

yes, In practice though, about the best you could do is fully fix up a wrecked destroyer in a day or so, according to the blog post
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 22, 2013, 01:26:49 AM
  • Does not modify rate of fire, modifies damage dealt instead

Didn't see this one coming, but it makes a lot of sense. This way, it is purely a benefit, whereas the rate of fire would increase your flux consumption.

And it's a beam buff.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: DatonKallandor on October 22, 2013, 01:37:55 AM
And a missile buff.
Basically it should affect all weapon types equally, which is good.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on October 22, 2013, 02:18:19 AM
  • Frigates: "peak active time" will continue to count down while any enemy ship is within visual range of the frigate
  • Reduced peak active time for frigates (generally by about a minute, less/more at the low/high ends of the spectrum)
  • Halved deployment cost and CR recovery rate (i.e. supply cost and recovery time remain the same, more deployments are possible)

Not too fond of these changes, especially with the current supply system.

Edit: To clarify, I feel as if there is too much reliance on a single resource to do everything, and everything you do affect it. Instead of having crewmembers use a seperate resource called "provisions" or something, they also consume supplies.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: zakastra on October 22, 2013, 03:16:09 AM
It makes sense in universe however, given that everythign is more or less nanofactured in the same way, limited only by the scale of the autofac and the blueprints available. The same base elements make up everythign from rations to reactors, clothing to clusterbombs and are assembled on the fly from raw materials as required.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: NikolaiLev on October 22, 2013, 03:55:13 AM
  • Frigates: "peak active time" will continue to count down while any enemy ship is within visual range of the frigate
  • Reduced peak active time for frigates (generally by about a minute, less/more at the low/high ends of the spectrum)
  • Halved deployment cost and CR recovery rate (i.e. supply cost and recovery time remain the same, more deployments are possible)

Not too fond of these changes, especially with the current supply system.

Edit: To clarify, I feel as if there is too much reliance on a single resource to do everything, and everything you do affect it. Instead of having crewmembers use a separate resource called "provisions" or something, they also consume supplies.

This is a pretty valid concern.  However, I think it'll really come into play once industry is implemented; the player will be able to produce his own supplies, as well as other possible things like ores to trade away for cash, or perhaps to manufacture ships.  You'll also likely be able to ship supplies to places where it's needed more, and is thus more valuable/gains you reputation with whatever faction needed it.

I'm fine with resources being in a single form.  It simplifies things elegantly.  I think the best way to address your concern is to make supply need a more long term thing.  Make supply consumption lower, supply acquisition harder, and the punishment for low supplies more gradual.

For instance, you could make it so that you don't "run out" of supplies.  When you run too low on supplies (the number of which can be determined by a myriad of ways; percent of maximum cargo capacity, or more likely percent of daily/weekly/monthly supply consumption) the fleet begins to ration supplies, at which point logistical percent starts slowly ticking down.  Right now it's binary; when you run out of supplies, bam, that percentage just drops like a rock.

There needs to be more of a capacity to "make do" for at least a little while.  Best case scenario, this would be done in the form of the player making intelligent decisions, getting more gameplay out of the logistical side of the game.  However, I have no idea how to implement that, shy of an admittedly mediocre dialogue minigame where you try to decide where supplies should go.  "Should we use this portion of supplies to repair this ship's turret gyros or its maneuvering thrusters?"  And so on.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on October 22, 2013, 05:10:01 AM
However, I think it'll really come into play once industry is implemented; the player will be able to produce his own supplies, as well as other possible things like ores to trade away for cash, or perhaps to manufacture ships. 

That gives more uses for supplies, which is kind of the opposite to what I mean. It's fun with more features no doubt, but the reliance on a single item is too great.

Quote
I think the best way to address your concern is to make supply need a more long term thing.  Make supply consumption lower, supply acquisition harder, and the punishment for low supplies more gradual.

This would be a good alternative.

Quote
There needs to be more of a capacity to "make do" for at least a little while.  Best case scenario, this would be done in the form of the player making intelligent decisions, getting more gameplay out of the logistical side of the game.  However, I have no idea how to implement that, shy of an admittedly mediocre dialogue minigame where you try to decide where supplies should go.

I would split supplies into three different items: "rough" supplies which are used for repairs, "fine" supplies which are used for CR recovery and maintence, and provisions which are used for crew. If you run out of rough supplies you can no longer repair your ships and maximum CR will be reduced, but your fleet will still be able to function without any major accidents. Fine supplies are used for standard upkeep and for CR recovery and for going above a certain CR threshold. It's also fully possible to integrate this into the hull mod mechanic somehow. Provisions is for crew maintence only, since I don't really see how a human being can survive on a diet of durasteel and electronics.

Values can of course be tweaked but atleast you get the general idea.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: zakastra on October 22, 2013, 05:37:47 AM
Do also bear in mind that supplies as they stand are very probably placeholder until the actual economy happens, with great merchant shipping empires and all the resource variations required for proper trading.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 22, 2013, 05:57:46 AM
For instance, you could make it so that you don't "run out" of supplies.  When you run too low on supplies (the number of which can be determined by a myriad of ways; percent of maximum cargo capacity, or more likely percent of daily/weekly/monthly supply consumption) the fleet begins to ration supplies, at which point logistical percent starts slowly ticking down.  Right now it's binary; when you run out of supplies, bam, that percentage just drops like a rock.

I fully agree, some sort of automatic or manual rationing would be very welcome. The other side of hat idea would be to allow the distribution of extra supplies to boost CR for a short time.

Nevertheless, this is not the right place to discuss that idea further. Maybe make a suggestion in the appropriate subforum?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 22, 2013, 07:09:28 AM
Quote
•Engine malfunctions: now do not cause a flameout by themselves; need at least some of the engines to have been taken out by combat damage, unless the last active engine malfunctions
Does this mean that replacement fighters at low CR will not flameout spontaneously shortly after leaving the carrier?  Currently, once CR gets low enough, engine malfunctions makes fighters useless.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: goduranus on October 22, 2013, 07:53:32 AM
"CR: Does not modify rate of fire, modifies damage dealt instead"

This shouldn't be the case for projectile weapons. A bullet is a bullet regardless of how maintained is the gun, CR affecting their rate of fire makes more sense, like how you can push a well oiled machinegun harder without worrying about it's getting jammed. Less-well-maintained energy weapons doing less damage makes more sense though.

However, making it different for each case is too much abstraction to make sense. Rate of fire penalty, less-efficient shields, and less-efficient flux vents was already making a low CR ship do less damage, what's the reason for the change?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 22, 2013, 09:35:51 AM
And the flare thing, thank you so much.

It was an oversight not to have that in the first place, thanks for bringing it to my attention!


Looks pretty solid!  Too bad no fighter wing changes happened, especially in terms of ship system usage or AI...  :(

Well, these aren't the full notes. I expect to at least look at the fighter AI - improvements aside, there seems to be at least one legitimate bug with it.


Umm... any change you know exactly what else is going to be added? Economy? Don't gotta answer if you don't know!

:-X

I wouldn't expect anything earth-shaking or major for 0.6.2a, though. It's mostly a cleanup effort.



Quote
So ships no longer have a maximum amount of supplies they can use to repair per day? Does that mean that if I had a solo ship with a maxed out logistics capacity and maxed emergency repairs stat, that I could almost instantly repair a ship from near destruction to max hull/armor?

yes, In practice though, about the best you could do is fully fix up a wrecked destroyer in a day or so, according to the blog post

Right. If you've got, say, a lone Onslaught, and maxed out logistics and emergency repairs, then you're probably looking at about 8 days (and more supplies than it can reasonably carry alone) to repair it from 0 to full. And if you've got more supplies, then being over-capacity eats into the repair rate. So, in this case, it's a good deal faster than it used to be, but it's still not *that* fast.

It's one of those things where it seems to, at first glance, produce unreasonable results, but almost entirely doesn't. I'm sure it will in a *few* cases, but even then it's still marginally believable and more than worth the drastic reduction in needless complexity.


  • Frigates: "peak active time" will continue to count down while any enemy ship is within visual range of the frigate

Oops, that shouldn't be there. Was obviated by the line-of-sight change.

  • Frigates: "peak active time" will continue to count down while any enemy ship is within visual range of the frigate
  • Reduced peak active time for frigates (generally by about a minute, less/more at the low/high ends of the spectrum)
  • Halved deployment cost and CR recovery rate (i.e. supply cost and recovery time remain the same, more deployments are possible)

Not too fond of these changes, especially with the current supply system.

Edit: To clarify, I feel as if there is too much reliance on a single resource to do everything, and everything you do affect it. Instead of having crewmembers use a seperate resource called "provisions" or something, they also consume supplies.

I think you forgot the most important/interesting part: why do you think that? :)

As Gothars said, though, a more in-depth discussion probably belongs in the suggestions forum (or in general, depending).


Quote
•Engine malfunctions: now do not cause a flameout by themselves; need at least some of the engines to have been taken out by combat damage, unless the last active engine malfunctions
Does this mean that replacement fighters at low CR will not flameout spontaneously shortly after leaving the carrier?  Currently, once CR gets low enough, engine malfunctions makes fighters useless.

Oh, forgot to mention: malfunctions don't affect fighters anymore. They're only affected by the CR-related stats changes.


"CR: Does not modify rate of fire, modifies damage dealt instead"

This shouldn't be the case for projectile weapons. A bullet is a bullet regardless of how maintained is the gun, CR affecting their rate of fire makes more sense, like how you can push a well oiled machinegun harder without worrying about it's getting jammed. Less-well-maintained energy weapons doing less damage makes more sense though.

However, making it different for each case is too much abstraction to make sense. Rate of fire penalty, less-efficient shields, and less-efficient flux vents was already making a low CR ship do less damage, what's the reason for the change?

I think you might be looking at it too literally. There's no such thing as "too much abstraction to make sense", the more abstraction there is, the easier it is for it to make sense!

Case in point: the damage bonus could be due to, say, a better-maintained targeting system. Or, the damage bonus could simply represent different things for different weapon: a rate of fire for ballistics, better calibration for beams, etc.

Before you say that the rate-of-fire is already represented in game - yes, it is, but the rate of fire of the weapons doesn't directly translate to their in-fiction rate of fire. For example, something like the Vulcan fires 20 times per second in the game. Lore-wise, that number is probably closer to several thousand rounds per second, but that's highly impractical to try to represent, and also to model something that improves the Vulcan's RoF as an actual RoF increase.

So, everything you see is already highly abstracted, including relative ship/weapon scales, weapon stats, etc.

Mechanics-wise, the idea here is that CR should affect very core ship stats, such that it has an impact on everything. Changing the damage/dealt taken is about as core as it gets. (Also: it doesn't actually affect the flux dissipation rate.)[/list]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Trylobot on October 22, 2013, 10:27:49 AM
Once again, Alex, a highly thoughtful and responsive change list. It's why I continue to support Fractal Softworks.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cosmitz on October 22, 2013, 12:16:13 PM
I take pride in saying that Starsector is the best developed and managed indie game that i know of. Mentioned it a few times on the forum here. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on October 22, 2013, 12:44:40 PM
indeed it is, this is by far the best dev team and indie game i've encountered so far. i've taken a look at space engineers aswell, the game seems really awesome, but the dev of that game is a ******** that scams people big time and bans everybody that has a different opinion than he does or tries to reveal what he is doing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: NikolaiLev on October 22, 2013, 01:21:03 PM
Gimbal's a pretty awesome game!  Unfortunately, it lacks a playerbase.  The tragedy of multiplayer-based indie games...   :(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: DatonKallandor on October 22, 2013, 02:32:16 PM
I fully agree, some sort of automatic or manual rationing would be very welcome. The other side of hat idea would be to allow the distribution of extra supplies to boost CR for a short time.

Nevertheless, this is not the right place to discuss that idea further. Maybe make a suggestion in the appropriate subforum?

You maybe right. Maybe another button is needed in the fleet screen. Sort of the opposite of "logistics priority" - call the current rate of repair, CR recovery and supply drain something like "crash repairs" and give the option for a slower less supply intensive repair and recovery rate. So if you notice it's getting hairy you can stretch your supplies at the cost of recovery time - not something you'd do when there's still hostiles around, but hey. Tradeoffs. Plus it'd give an explanation for why we can repair huge ships, while flying, within a day or so.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gibbatron on October 22, 2013, 07:55:07 PM
I fully agree, some sort of automatic or manual rationing would be very welcome. The other side of hat idea would be to allow the distribution of extra supplies to boost CR for a short time.

Nevertheless, this is not the right place to discuss that idea further. Maybe make a suggestion in the appropriate subforum?

You maybe right. Maybe another button is needed in the fleet screen. Sort of the opposite of "logistics priority" - call the current rate of repair, CR recovery and supply drain something like "crash repairs" and give the option for a slower less supply intensive repair and recovery rate. So if you notice it's getting hairy you can stretch your supplies at the cost of recovery time - not something you'd do when there's still hostiles around, but hey. Tradeoffs. Plus it'd give an explanation for why we can repair huge ships, while flying, within a day or so.

I think a slider of some sort would be the most effective solution, giving you the option to set it to absolute minimum usage which might be just enough to keep the crew alive but not recvoer any CR or repair, maybe even slow the fleet down; or set it to absolute maximum usage which uses as much as possible to get everything up to working speed as quickly as possible (and the crew might get start getting fat).

Or anywhere in between. Depending on how micro intensive fleet management is meant to be you could have several sliders.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Frosty939 on October 24, 2013, 10:26:51 AM
Is there any estimate on when Officers/Industry/Outposts will be coming along?

I find myself randomly clicking those buttons in the hopes it'll do something lol. They have so many possibilities I can't wait :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: NanoMatter on October 24, 2013, 06:22:46 PM
I wonder, why does CR stop around the max of 50 to 70 Why not just double everything?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 25, 2013, 10:54:14 AM
It depends on Crew skill (Green - 50% to Elite - 70%, I think).  Character skills can allow the flagship to reach 100% CR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Darloth on October 26, 2013, 06:06:58 PM
It might make more sense to have what is currently 70% CR be 100% though, as that is indeed the maximum you can get 'normally'.

Then character skills could go up to 140% (or thereabouts) and it would emphasize the bonus you're getting from your personal combat skill - I'd certainly prefer that.

Of course, when we have officers, perhaps getting to 100% will be a regular thing?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: dmaiski on October 26, 2013, 06:26:20 PM
Quote
Added MissileAPI.isFlare()
Added GuidedMissileAI interface; a MissileAIPlugin implementation can implement it to be properly affected by flares

how dose that actualy work, because some of my missileAI need to track alot of diffrent things to work properly
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on October 28, 2013, 07:31:23 AM
Alex, I haven't seen anything about using the API code for changing CR values in the changelog yet.  I take it that this stage is awaiting further work on the core CR system? 

As a suggestion to perhaps make that easier:  since scaling CR downwards already works, perhaps the easiest fix is to start all spawned Ships or Wings at 100% CR (rather than zero, as now) and leave making it "correct" require further manipulation via the current API code?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Unfolder on October 29, 2013, 10:19:28 AM
Any idea when this patch will be realeased? No rush, but my mouth waters for halved CR deployment costs and automated repair unit CR recovery boost. Heh heh heh, my one ship super battler cruiser yamato strategy will be even MOAR overwhelming >:D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 29, 2013, 10:54:27 AM
Mh, I'll close the thread for now. No sense in rekindling false hope of an update with every post.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 01, 2013, 10:26:13 AM
Updated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on December 01, 2013, 10:33:30 AM
Heron carrier eh? i guess i inspired someone. =D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 01, 2013, 10:52:36 AM
You've made one named that? Had no idea! Hope its ID has a mod-specific prefix, or there are going to be compatibility issues :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 01, 2013, 10:54:12 AM
Ooooh. Hyped for the new ships. Teasers please?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Modest on December 01, 2013, 11:03:23 AM
Astral with 6 flight deck... Now we are talking! :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: leonvision on December 01, 2013, 11:12:09 AM
since new ships are getting sprinkled into the game, can i make a suggestion? one of my favourite ship to play with is the sunder, the reason being that is a reasonably maneuverable ship but has a large weapon mount. i would very much like a similar ship, but with a large ballistic mount instead of a energy mount.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 01, 2013, 11:16:26 AM
If the Cerberus is like a large Hound, I'm gonna be pretty happy. The bomber changes are great, too.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 01, 2013, 01:31:19 PM
So Alex, will you stick to the plan that has the next release as the second part of the polish-update, or are you already working on new features?

Ooooh. Hyped for the new ships. Teasers please?

*expectant look*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: MShadowy on December 01, 2013, 01:37:25 PM
Yes... I believe David shared a partial preview on his twitter but I'm definitely looking forward to seeing the complete ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on December 01, 2013, 01:45:20 PM
Bloody hell, SIX flight decks now?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 01, 2013, 04:55:47 PM
Ooooh. Hyped for the new ships. Teasers please?

Let's see, teasers:

You've seen the Hermes before. (Btw - one thing I forgot to mention, the Mercury-class and the Hermes-class have a total of 3 small weapon mounts each, which means the current shuttle - now the Mercury - got an extra one.)

The Cerberus - the name is a clue, though not necessarily how you might expect. Think association, not literal interpretation.

The Heron, as mentioned, there's a picture of it in-progress floating around on Twitter.

How's that? :)


since new ships are getting sprinkled into the game, can i make a suggestion? one of my favourite ship to play with is the sunder, the reason being that is a reasonably maneuverable ship but has a large weapon mount. i would very much like a similar ship, but with a large ballistic mount instead of a energy mount.

Yeah, that sounds like it could be fun. Will keep it in mind!


So Alex, will you stick to the plan that has the next release as the second part of the polish-update, or are you already working on new features?

Plan's the same. Yeah, the latest patch notes update is a bit on the small side given how long it's been since the previous one. I plead holidays and some other RL stuff getting in the way.


Bloody hell, SIX flight decks now?

Yeah - with the fast cruiser-sized carrier having 2 decks, a mere 3 for the Astral seemed underwhelming, given that it's also slow and expensive.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on December 01, 2013, 05:03:59 PM
If the astral now has 6...i guess mine..which is 3 times bigger should have 8 or 10? XD
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 01, 2013, 05:24:34 PM

Let's see, teasers:

 :)


You've seen the Hermes before.

Spoiler
(http://fractalsoftworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/sf_splash.jpg) ?
[close]


The Cerberus - the name is a clue, though not necessarily how you might expect. Think association, not literal interpretation.

Mh...
Cerberus has three heads - A trimaran hull configuration?
He's a watchdog - A defensive oriented class?
The Cerberus organization build Mass Effect's Normandy SR2 - A ship that shares some similarities?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 01, 2013, 05:31:26 PM
Hmmm, I figure the Hermes is the old mid-tech shuttle sprite that has been lying around. I always liked that one.

I wonder if the Cerberus is mastery, core or expansion epoch. Screenshotssssssssss!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 01, 2013, 05:35:24 PM
If the astral now has 6...i guess mine..which is 3 times bigger should have 8 or 10? XD

Probably; depends on the supply cost per day though. For reference, the Heron is 10/day, the Astral is 20/day.

The Cerberus - the name is a clue, though not necessarily how you might expect. Think association, not literal interpretation.

Mh...
Cerberus has three heads - A trimaran hull configuration?
He's a watchdog - A defensive oriented class?
The Cerberus organization build Mass Effect's Normandy SR2 - A ship that shares some similarities?

Guess #2 is the closest, though still not all that close. Oh, this is fun.

Hmmm, I figure the Hermes is the old mid-tech shuttle sprite that has been lying around. I always liked that one.

Got it in one.

I wonder if the Cerberus is mastery, core or expansion epoch. Screenshotssssssssss!

But then where would the fun be? Hint #2: it doesn't have a shield.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 01, 2013, 05:39:29 PM
You're twisted, man! I've always wanted more low-tech frigs though... the current mental image of "huge, nasty Hound" appeals to me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: firstattak1 on December 01, 2013, 05:44:48 PM
Is "Cerberus" a low tech defensive cruiser, with high armor low speed, and meant to have weapons that are meant to keep other ships away?

Your right this is fun :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on December 01, 2013, 05:58:34 PM
Hound -> Cerberus.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 01, 2013, 06:00:57 PM
The changes to Bomber / Torpedo AI is really exciting; those are two classes of fighter I want to use more often, but usually don't because of their tendency to self-immolate on a regular basis :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on December 01, 2013, 06:11:32 PM
I'm VERY excited for a fast carrier - this is going to be the first real military carrier other than the atral! Speaking of which, I think the change from 3-6 is great.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 01, 2013, 07:13:44 PM
No shield, eh? Then, just as the mythological Cerberus watches the gate between the mortal world and Hades, the Cerberus-class might watch the borders of normal and p-space. So, a phase ship?
Of course it could also just stem from its Hound heritage.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on December 01, 2013, 10:00:44 PM
Hmm... don't we already have a low tech multipurpose frigate? The lasher comes to mind, with its many variants.

@Gothars, I doubt that a low tech ship would have phase coils, its pretty lore breaking. I agree with the augmented hound theory.


@Alex, What will the small, previously unused midline frigate do? The midline epoch ships are already kinda weak compared to the mastery and expansion stuff. They can't take as much of a beating, and don't have a lot of offesnive capabilites. For example, the Eagle could actually have a large mount for its center medium hardpoint.

 I also think that the midline era could use a different frigate, one that isn't slow (brawler) or optimized for support and PD (viligence).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 02, 2013, 06:06:13 AM
@Gothars, I doubt that a low tech ship would have phase coils, its pretty lore breaking. I agree with the augmented hound theory.

Why do you think it's low-tech?


Then again, there are already a lot of high-tech/phase frigates, another epoch for the new frigate would make more sense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: momerathe on December 02, 2013, 07:22:38 AM
the long awaited* destroyer-class phase ship?


*by me :p
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabaton on December 02, 2013, 02:18:50 PM
 6 decked Astral? Hermes, Heron, Cerberus?
 What the hell, does this means the frame of the game is coming together up to the point when some content can be added?
 Anyway, while I can't wait to see the new ships, I do agree that a phase destroyer is necessary.
 All in due time I'm sure.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on December 02, 2013, 03:03:12 PM
So few words. So much hype, haha. Always glad to see more new ships in game.  :D

Cerberus has a tractor beam? Maybe? (traps peeps in hades from getting out?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 02, 2013, 04:08:42 PM
The Hound-related Cerberus guesses are correct.

@Alex, What will the small, previously unused midline frigate do?

No idea what ship you're talking about :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on December 02, 2013, 04:29:24 PM
The Cerberus better come stock with a hellbore.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 02, 2013, 05:51:08 PM
It's probably just 3 Hounds welded together. ;D

No idea what ship you're talking about :)

Ooh, I think he means the midline frig from the old ship overview image. I'm not the only one who noticed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 02, 2013, 06:11:04 PM
No idea what ship you're talking about :)

Ooh, I think he means the midline frig from the old ship overview image. I'm not the only one who noticed.

That was not pixelart though, just a sketch.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Piemanlives on December 02, 2013, 08:49:50 PM
Heron-class cruiser (fast carrier)

The amount of love I have for this statement.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on December 03, 2013, 09:12:47 AM
The Hound-related Cerberus guesses are correct.
:O   DAY MADE, haha. Awesome.

@Alex, What will the small, previously unused midline frigate do?

No idea what ship you're talking about :)
Lies! I believe they mean the little tiny (supposedly destined for scouting duty perhaps) frigate.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on December 03, 2013, 09:47:49 AM
Icepick is right, the one that valk has used in his mod as the Yousha gunship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 03, 2013, 10:23:19 AM
Ah, that one - it keeps coming up. I wouldn't assume it's going to be in the game (it might, it might not), as Gothars said, it was only a sketch. So, no comment!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on December 03, 2013, 10:39:41 AM
I HOPE it makes it in the game.  :)  But I do not assume it. It's a very small sprite for one thing, haha.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grug on December 03, 2013, 07:51:07 PM
>Astral flight decks increased to 6
haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bjørn_in_the_Sector on December 04, 2013, 12:44:24 AM
Welp, that means that I won't be assaulting any Tri-tach bases any time soon. :/ Pity, they were fun to fight.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: zakastra on December 04, 2013, 02:53:04 AM
The Astral, used for force projection. And if you mess with that astral projection, you'll have an out of body experience...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Linnis on December 05, 2013, 10:02:25 AM
astrals are a bit weak, they seem fancy and all but... not practical... maybe thats the point ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on December 05, 2013, 10:09:48 AM
The Astral is far from weak, you just haven't found its strength yet. =)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Piemanlives on December 05, 2013, 08:01:45 PM
Question, how is mod compatibility going to be affected, are modders going to have to work to make things compatible with the new game version like with the release of .6, or will it not matter.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 05, 2013, 08:56:46 PM
Question, how is mod compatibility going to be affected, are modders going to have to work to make things compatible with the new game version like with the release of .6, or will it not matter.

It shouldn't break any mods. Or savefiles, I *think*.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Unfolder on December 05, 2013, 10:04:08 PM
Hi Alex, question about Astral and carriers/fighters in general.

If you have an astral, with one wing in it (let's say talons), will that wing have approximately 60 spare fighter chassis? (10 for each fighter bay) And if so, will that affect CR loss? Cause as I understand it CR loss is flat for fighters, so you could end up in a situation where you have 10 talons killed, and 50 talons left, all spawning at 0% CR. If that's true, that seems strange, it almost seems like fighter CR loss should be fractionized over the number of bays, so that instead of losing 6% CR every time a fighter is destroyed, a wing only loses 1% because in effect six full fighter bays, the equivalent of a small starbase, is actively maintaining, reinforcing, repairing, readying a SINGLE wing with FIFTY spare chassis's lined up and ready to fly. Such enormous technical reserves would mean that the wing would be like tie-fighters, instantly replacing there losses and reentering the fight at minimal loss of efficiency.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Modest on December 05, 2013, 11:43:12 PM
Quote
If you have an astral, with one wing in it (let's say talons), will that wing have approximately 60 spare fighter chassis? (10 for each fighter bay) And if so, will that affect CR loss? Cause as I understand it CR loss is flat for fighters, so you could end up in a situation where you have 10 talons killed, and 50 talons left, all spawning at 0% CR. If that's true, that seems strange, it almost seems like fighter CR loss should be fractionized over the number of bays, so that instead of losing 6% CR every time a fighter is destroyed, a wing only loses 1% because in effect six full fighter bays, the equivalent of a small starbase, is actively maintaining, reinforcing, repairing, readying a SINGLE wing with FIFTY spare chassis's lined up and ready to fly. Such enormous technical reserves would mean that the wing would be like tie-fighters, instantly replacing there losses and reentering the fight at minimal loss of efficiency.

I am not Alex, but I think I can answer Your post :) You see, number of chasis aviliable is determined by amount of CR that fighter wing have. They run to 0%CR in the same moment that they loose last chasis. In other words, Talon wing (or any other) will never get 60 spare fighter chassis because that would exceded CR limit potential. Also as far as I know, there are plans to make fighter/bomber wings unaffected by CR in any other way than number of aviliable chassis.

Of course I may be wrong, or not know something - in that case feel free to correct me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: OOZ662 on December 06, 2013, 02:05:09 PM
From reading the old dev blog on it, flight decks affects the turnover of fighters, not how many there are. Essentially how many and how fast a carrier can churn out rearms and reinforcements, and thus how many fighters it can support on the field. If the last fighter on the map for a squadron dies and the carrier isn't in the process of preparing another for launch (being too busy with other squadrons), that wing behaves as if it has retreated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 06, 2013, 04:12:07 PM
The advantage the Astral will get will be an easy source of many flight decks per Logistics.  It may not beat the current Gemini, but acquiring six or more Gemini is too hard without luck, grinding, or resorting to shenanigans.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 09, 2013, 07:33:02 AM
You know, a blogpost featuring the new ships would be the perfect thing to ease the suffering of going through my finals. cough
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on December 09, 2013, 07:46:55 AM
I would love...a new launcher.. that features the main page of this forum with updates or perhaps a newsletter/daily updates or changes.

and something that checks if you have the latest update and so on, like all those fancy MMORPG launchers have. ::)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 12, 2013, 11:15:58 AM
It just occurred to me that if the Astral and fighters keep their current logistics cost, a Leadership (and Fleet Logistics) score of 3 or 4 will be required for the Astral and six wings of fighters.  30 for the Astral alone (20 for ship and 10 for full crew), and 3 or 4 per wing of fighters.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gibbatron on December 12, 2013, 01:55:54 PM
I don't think that's so bad. It IS a captial ship after all.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ryan390 on December 13, 2013, 01:58:49 AM
Are there actually going to be new features with the upcoming release, or just more "tweaking"?

Obviously different star sectors was one of the newest features to be introduced, are we going to see another addition/game play element being added?


-----

Personally I feel the combat system is fine as it is. However it seems like everyone is obsessed with all the small stuff and not really interested in what you can actually "do" in the game..

It's just frustrating seeing such an amazing product getting de-railed and generally taking the wrong direction..

I can understand all the small improvements/re factorings allow for a more stable/balanced foundation for which to build the game play on.
I really do, but it just feels like we are still "tweaking" the hell out of a game. IMO I don't really care about any of that, I want to see the core game play being implemented.

Game play is always the most important aspect for any game, mainstream or indie.. It doesn't have to be amazingly complex or graphically awesome!
(This game looks great and has a nice level of complexity anyway)

 


Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bjørn_in_the_Sector on December 13, 2013, 02:42:31 AM
very supportive and open first post, by the way. Love how you show just how much you like this game and support its development.
you could always, you know, help. Mods are a great way to get a different take on SS while it becomes more and more refined, and besides, this is ALPHA. If it looks, runs and feels this good in alpha, my opinion is hang in there - it's come a long way and - I have no doubt - will go much further.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ryan390 on December 13, 2013, 03:12:56 AM
I've supported Star Sector already by purchasing several copies of the game.
(Have it installed on my laptop, work laptop and home PC  :))

Also with regards to Mods - I've played a few of the top-ranked mods and indeed they are very good.

Some of the new ship design and weapons/effects are quite impressive.
There are even small game-play additions on some of the mods, however they only really provide a temporary distraction.

The only ''Mod" I'd be interested in developing is the actual game play mechanics.
There's enough people out there churning out some amazing ship designs, and adding plenty of fantastic content that way. I'm not really an artistic person, but I can code..

My point being, I'd be more interested in actually developing the core mechanics of the game. The place I work we try to use agile practises and principles, and release features early and often.
(Unless you work at a waterfall style culture!  :D) - We should be moving away from this mind set!
Usually we aim to release as soon as a feature is implemented, passed QA + signed off.. We then hit a button which kicks an automated build script and pushes the binary files out from Team City onto the live boxes..

Agile tries to focus on what's important first, and worry about sugar coating much later on.
The most prominent/risky bugs are usually from the main features/new features not from the tiny implementation details. I guess you could call that the "balancing" - which is important, but wouldn't be as important as say, having the ability to buy a ship, or, being able to initiate combat.

Using techniques such as TDD and continuous integration, you can get the core features of an application out to the customer quicker and with less defects.
In Star Sectors case it's monthly updates. A lot of places are still waterfall and a project can take months to implement from an idea into live software..
Ideally you would like to be pushing out changes early and often, perhaps on a weekly basis in this case.

It's challenging to get into that position where you can push weekly, but they don't have to be huge changes, bug fixing becomes part of a functional release, rather than an entire release on it's own. It's a shift in culture, practises and also remembering what's really important. What's important for your customer, what do they need?

I don't see why developing a game should be any different from the commercial software development we do day to day?
If anything there's less risk releasing early and often a game with a few "tweaking issues" than a commercial app which can potentially bring a call centre to it's knees and cost thousands of pounds of lost sales..

--------

I do really believe in this game. I'd just like to see a slight change in direction with regards to the focus on what's really important..
I'm sure it will come, but i just don't want to see Star Sector make the same mistakes as Cortex Command for example..  10+ years in development and not much to show for it  >:(

C'mon we are.. 3 years in now and still early alpha? Let's start nailing this!

Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 13, 2013, 05:53:49 AM
The problem is retaining direction and creative control while also reaching milestones within a comfortable time. Most app development and "commerical software development" you speak of is done by people who, well, to put it in one way, perhaps don't care that much about what they're developing, and whose tasks have been designed by people who do not understand the challenges of development.

Game development is also incredibly challenging because of the push-pull effect of actual development vs. planning, vision and feedback. So the fact that Starsector takes time to move out of alpha is pretty much just a given, seeing as the team creating it is so small and retains complete creative control and control over publishing, etc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 13, 2013, 08:45:58 AM
Quote
I don't think that's so bad. It IS a captial ship after all.
I think either capital ships are too expensive or we do not get enough base Logistics.  Before v0.6, the player had exactly enough base fleet points (25) for the biggest ship, the Paragon.  Of course, Astral plus fighters cost more.  Now, player needs Leadership and Fleet Logistics 2 to pilot the biggest ship with full crew.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 13, 2013, 11:17:20 AM
@Ryan390: First off, hi and welcome to the forum :) Also, thanks for your support!

About releases and tweaking vs adding new features - what I like to do is to have a release focused on new features, and then a smaller follow-up release focused on bugfixing and tweaks, mainly related to those features. In the case of 0.6a, there ended up being two of those follow-up releases (and 0.6.2a is taking longer than I'd like, but, well, that's the breaks.)

So, for example, I agree that combat is in pretty good shape as-is and any further work on it is low priority. The only changes being made here are related to CR, which is the main new feature from 0.6a. (Well, maybe not the only changes, but that's the driver for the vast majority of them.)

There's a balance to be found here. How much work do you put in to making something more polished, vs adding new features? You have to do some of the former if you want to have something enjoyable in the intermediate stages, but if you do too much, then some of that is wasted effort if (really, when) things change.

(A side note as far as TDD - I don't think it's a good fit for game development. The major reason is that you don't know where you're going until you get there, which makes coding tests in advance of features awkward :) There are other reasons as well - have fun writing tests for, for example, whether a particle system looks good, whether certain control mechanics feel right, etc. Agile, well... agile is basically doing what works instead of relying on a fixed process, so I'm on board with that! But as soon as agile tells me I have to make weekly releases, or some such, it's no longer agile.)


It's challenging to get into that position where you can push weekly, but they don't have to be huge changes, bug fixing becomes part of a functional release, rather than an entire release on it's own.

Most features (speaking for Starsector specifically) take a lot longer than a week to implement, test, and at least somewhat balance. If anything, I think a weekly release cycle would discourage working on larger features and would, instead, encourage overtweaking. Anyway, all I can really say is that this sort of cycle (feature -> bugfix/tweak -> feature -> etc) works for me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 13, 2013, 11:33:52 AM
@Ryan390, Cycerin:

There isn't a fundamental problem with "release early, release often" in games development per se; the big problem is that during certain periods, the game would not remotely pass QA if it tried to set overly-rigid deadlines.

That, and the more "done" a game like this gets, the more sprawling the problems get.  The game's roughly 75% feature-complete, under the hood, but now the scope is pretty huge.  

On the other hand, it's being done right; Alex isn't doing stupid stuff like, "I'll expose things for modding later", which is a very good thing.  But it's slower.  I'm expecting the game will be feature-complete and Beta by sometime in 2014, personally, which isn't too bad for something this big.

@Alex:  I agree: the map isn't the territory :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ryan390 on December 13, 2013, 12:51:32 PM
Good points both!

Feature -> Bug fix/Tweak should be fine, and is a pretty common pattern.

All I would say is Bug fix/Tweak -> Bug fix/Tweak -> Bug fix -> Feature  (or something along those lines, would indeed be quite wasteful)

You can often find, which I'm sure you have, Alex, that often the most obvious changes/tweaks we need to make to our code bases are often only apparent when we come to implement new features.

You talked a little about waste, which is really important, I'm really glad you mentioned it

The techniques/principles that are in the agile manifesto are really aimed at trying to alleviate some of these issues. Your might be right about TDD in terms of games development, but tests really should only be testing behavior, not implementation detail.

The main aim of that is really only to provide a quick feedback loop, and avoid introduced errors into the code base due to changes / new features ect..
Also it has the benefit of allowing you to make fearless re-factorings to your code base - So when you find you need to change things, you have that confidence/coverage..
You may change a line of code but not realize it broke something in the Inventory system.. Running the tests would show a failing test and you can zone in on that code immediately..

You can catch a lot of bugs with a good suite of tests before it even reaches QA, but it's all to easy to write useless tests which don't actually exercise the core behavior..
Often the mistake we made is testing method invocations and testing things like mappers/repositories, but they just end up being brittle tests, they don't test the actual behavior. I wouldn't bother writing UI tests, just the code that exercises the behavior that would effect the UI, for instance.

In any case usually with TDD it's an incremental process, it's more difficult to write tests around legacy code, then it is to write from scratch (no production code)
Your already quite well established, so like you said, probably not to bother now  ;D

----------------------

Do you use source control for SS? What language is it written in? LUA?
I wouldn't mind nosing around or even helping if you ever needed it..  :)

Also, I just want to be clear that I fully support Star Sector, I just wanted to see where your mind set is.
It's a fantastic game, one of it's kind, even in it's current Alpha state I still think it trumps even finished games such as S.P.A.Z, for instance.

I look forward to future updates and will be keeping my eye on progress, but if I can help please just holler.


 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 13, 2013, 01:09:29 PM
It's written in Java.  Check out the modding API sometime :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gibbatron on December 13, 2013, 05:27:40 PM
Quote
I don't think that's so bad. It IS a captial ship after all.
I think either capital ships are too expensive or we do not get enough base Logistics.  Before v0.6, the player had exactly enough base fleet points (25) for the biggest ship, the Paragon.  Of course, Astral plus fighters cost more.  Now, player needs Leadership and Fleet Logistics 2 to pilot the biggest ship with full crew.

It actually needs more, because running a solo paragon is hard now so you usually need a supporting fleet. I think it just seems like a problem at the moment because capital ships are so readily accessible. My understanding of the final vision of the game is that capitals will be extremely rare and uber expensive, most definitely end game ships, so logistics shouldn't be a problem then.

Which is a shame because personally I think they look a little underwhelming.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 14, 2013, 07:11:24 AM
Quote
It actually needs more, because running a solo paragon is hard now so you usually need a supporting fleet. I think it just seems like a problem at the moment because capital ships are so readily accessible. My understanding of the final vision of the game is that capitals will be extremely rare and uber expensive, most definitely end game ships, so logistics shouldn't be a problem then.
Yes, Leadership 2 is for the biggest capital only; player needs more Leadership for additional ships.  Logistics can only be increased by putting points in Leadership.  If Leadership is ignored, the player can never pilot a capital (except Conquest) without taking CR damage.  This hurts as long as the soft level cap is about 35-40, for roughly 20 AP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on December 14, 2013, 01:42:57 PM
Quote
It actually needs more, because running a solo paragon is hard now so you usually need a supporting fleet. I think it just seems like a problem at the moment because capital ships are so readily accessible. My understanding of the final vision of the game is that capitals will be extremely rare and uber expensive, most definitely end game ships, so logistics shouldn't be a problem then.
Yes, Leadership 2 is for the biggest capital only; player needs more Leadership for additional ships.  Logistics can only be increased by putting points in Leadership.  If Leadership is ignored, the player can never pilot a capital (except Conquest) without taking CR damage.  This hurts as long as the soft level cap is about 35-40, for roughly 20 AP.

I agree it hurts - but thats the whole point.  The system is designed so that you can't have it all - you have to choose what to be good at. Once leadership is filled out and we get anything in industry the choices are going to be a lot harder too :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 14, 2013, 07:22:23 PM
Quote
I agree it hurts - but thats the whole point.  The system is designed so that you can't have it all - you have to choose what to be good at. Once leadership is filled out and we get anything in industry the choices are going to be a lot harder too
All the more reason to let the player pilot any one ship without Leadership requirements like in v0.54.  I do not care how that gets done, either lower Logistics cost of capitals, raise base Logistics, or raise experience gains so that soft cap is ten levels higher than it is now.  Choices are already hard enough.  Combat and Technology have so much great stuff that I do not have enough skill points to get everything I want even if I totally ignore Leadership, and I need Leadership (specifically Fleet Logistics only) just to cope with CR.  With current gameplay, I anticipate Industry with dread.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Flare on December 14, 2013, 07:36:10 PM
I've never been a fan of plateauing the leveling at latter levels. I'd rather progress not slow or stop even at the cost of shrinking down the rewards to continue the sense of progression, and putting in elements that can give a high end player a run for their money or better yet some system where the top few powers in the game are constantly engaged in an arms race that the player can nudge into.
The last two is probably an impossible load of work though, and the first one is probably going to need a lot of rebalancing that might be too late for this stage of the game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Linnis on December 14, 2013, 10:28:18 PM
yup, the progression speed drops way too fast  :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: pigreko on December 17, 2013, 06:47:02 PM
I've never been a fan of plateauing the leveling at latter levels. I'd rather progress not slow or stop even at the cost of shrinking down the rewards to continue the sense of progression, and putting in elements that can give a high end player a run for their money or better yet some system where the top few powers in the game are constantly engaged in an arms race that the player can nudge into.
The last two is probably an impossible load of work though, and the first one is probably going to need a lot of rebalancing that might be too late for this stage of the game.

I do not agree with you that much on this point.  A slow progression rate with small improvements is just sad. It is like never accomplishing a thing. I hate those rpg games where you almost always get +% of something instead of new abilities, talents and stuff like that. when you get to use a cool subsystem, when you get to  be in zero flux mode even with some percentage of flux being already up, when you can finally put burst lasers everywhere cause you have lot of op... it is rewarding. To stop the sense of progression you really need to play many ours and cap every skill, I really do not see from where your observation is coming about the progression.

The last 2 are just elements that could easily be part of the game campaign. This combat sandbox is not just the whole starsector state of affair.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 18, 2013, 04:17:31 AM
There isn't really "plateauing" in the levelling system as much as there simply is no endgame content. If you want endgame content you'll have to go to mods for it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabaton on December 18, 2013, 10:35:07 PM
 The leveling system can be fixed: simply make leveling up require a constant amount of xp instead of always adding a few zeros.
 That way you can progress constantly instead of slowing down to a stop, and it isn't OP either since 90% of the skills only affect your flag ship, sure, it would be a slow start at first because you'd need a number not easily reachable but once you'd get some momentum you'd be fine.  
 I've played games like these and I liked it a hell of a lot more than the soul crushing MMORPG grinding, which, in SS, made me lose interest in campaign after level 40-ish.
 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Flare on December 18, 2013, 11:08:53 PM
I've never been a fan of plateauing the leveling at latter levels. I'd rather progress not slow or stop even at the cost of shrinking down the rewards to continue the sense of progression, and putting in elements that can give a high end player a run for their money or better yet some system where the top few powers in the game are constantly engaged in an arms race that the player can nudge into.
The last two is probably an impossible load of work though, and the first one is probably going to need a lot of rebalancing that might be too late for this stage of the game.

I do not agree with you that much on this point.  A slow progression rate with small improvements is just sad. It is like never accomplishing a thing. I hate those rpg games where you almost always get +% of something instead of new abilities, talents and stuff like that. when you get to use a cool subsystem, when you get to  be in zero flux mode even with some percentage of flux being already up, when you can finally put burst lasers everywhere cause you have lot of op... it is rewarding. To stop the sense of progression you really need to play many ours and cap every skill, I really do not see from where your observation is coming about the progression.

Well then it's a good thing I'm not suggesting that.

Progression need not be slower when each level and each skill is divided into smaller chunks. If anything progression would become much faster, especially during the early game and would continue for far longer instead of dwindling off instead of the quick plateauing that happens now.
It's like this: 10000 exp is given. In situation one the player gains 3 levels and gets 20% in a skill. In situation two, the player gains 9 levels and 20% in a skill. Or, you could lower that 20% down to 15%.

Never accomplishing anything is a valid issue, but this isn't synonymous with a slower progression. Slower =/= slow, the progression right now I feel is quite fast in terms of how quickly the bonuses stack up. That slow tree cutting and mining thing with the MM in Starbound is certainly this issue where it is quite correct to say that a lot doesn't happen and this problem would apply, but there would be something awarded if rewards were divided up into smaller bits. While the rewards would be much smaller, they would happen much more frequently. Right now, in the beginning it's all about getting credits to buy more/better ships, later in the game when leveling peters out, it's mostly about getting more credits and buying stuff, leveling and bettering your character's skills simply slows down in molasses and almost stops and progression simply comes down to gaining credits.

As for talents, abilities and stuff like that, I don't think I said anything about the bonuses at the middle and end of the skill tree.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CedricO on December 22, 2013, 02:01:44 PM
Im curious as to how this game is progressing.... Been a while. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 28, 2013, 11:52:17 AM
Updated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Psigun on December 28, 2013, 12:05:46 PM
Updated.

Thanks for the update Alex! Sounds good, and looking forward to the next release, whenever that may be. ;D

It feels like the basic game and mods are starting to come into their own.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on December 28, 2013, 12:12:59 PM
Thats a lot of stuff yeah, good job Alex, that difficulty stuff and added dialogs etc will hopefully stop the mountains of crying threads we have had here this past update. ;D

looking forward to the new frigate.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on December 28, 2013, 12:20:05 PM
This update is better than a glass of water on a hot day, on a desert planet with salt-grain winds in a distant solar system with a binary star with never-ending daytime.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on December 28, 2013, 12:24:33 PM
Quick, someone average the number of patch notes updates Alex does before releasing the patch! We're at what now, 3 updates? ;) Maybe for New Years?

Anways, looking like a lot of nice polish and some ship additions for new content. Pretty solid.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: frag971 on December 28, 2013, 12:40:09 PM
Quick, someone average the number of patch notes updates Alex does before releasing the patch! We're at what now, 3 updates? ;) Maybe for New Years?

Anways, looking like a lot of nice polish and some ship additions for new content. Pretty solid.
I actually don't see any content. A new easy mode - OK, buffed starting ships - OK, rebalanced some AI, fleet and CR - OK. Content - none to be had :D

I'm glad he's updating but i'm not really "excited" for anything in there tbh :P
(shields up for fanboi barrage)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BillyRueben on December 28, 2013, 12:43:29 PM
(shields up for fanboi barrage)

I've got your back.

There isn't anything that's very sexy in those patch notes, but those changes needed to happen at some point anyway. This game is difficult to recommend to newer players due to the difficulty in learning to play properly.

EDIT: Reread my post and the tone isn't quite where I wanted it. I'm glad the updates are coming and that things are being tweaked and fixed, but I don't understand the "OMG Alex best update evar!" posts.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 28, 2013, 12:50:24 PM
Thanks, guys!

Thats a lot of stuff yeah, good job Alex, that difficulty stuff and added dialogs etc will hopefully stop the mountains of crying threads we have had here this past update. ;D

Well, if the game fails to explain something, it's the ultimately game's fault, and I think a lot of the (very much valid) complaints are due to that. Yeah, it's mostly in the tooltips, but I'll be the first to admit they're pretty, ah, information-heavy, and it's unreasonable to expect everyone to just absorb all of that without any added guidance from the game.

Edit: I don't mean to imply that *all* complaints about CR are due to not understanding the mechanics, it just seems that a lot of them are. Even so, some good stuff came out of that - for example, I'm really happy about the dynamic where you can deploy ships at 0% CR, but you can also crash-mothball a ship to deploy it w/o activating combat systems and risking malfunctions. That way the player has the choice of giving up control or taking a gamble; much better than always taking away control at a certain point.

This update is better than a glass of water on a hot day, on a desert planet with salt-grain winds in a distant solar system with a binary star with never-ending daytime.

Niiice.


I actually don't see any content. A new easy mode - OK, buffed starting ships - OK, rebalanced some AI, fleet and CR - OK. Content - none to be had :D

I'm glad he's updating but i'm not really "excited" for anything in there tbh :P
(shields up for fanboi barrage)

There *is* that new frigate, but otherwise, right, not an awful lot of new "content". I suppose you could call changes to starting ships and some campaign fleets content, and technically it's certainly that, but it's still a bit of a stretch.

There isn't anything that's very sexy in those patch notes, but those changes needed to happen at some point anyway. This game is difficult to recommend to newer players due to the difficulty in learning to play properly.

One of the nice things is that now that there's a basic framework for campaign help in place, it'll be much much easier to explain any new features, too.

Speaking of that... the list in the patch notes is fairly comprehensive as far as the situations that trigger help dialogs. If you guys can think of something else that was a gotcha for you that isn't on the list, I'd love to hear what it is.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on December 28, 2013, 12:56:41 PM
Well, to hear about any progress is good. New ships are always great, too.

@Alex- Coud you perhaps make the easy mode starting fleet composition be moddable? For example, a mod could have a certain chance of inserting their own ships in there. Maybe I would get a Blackrock Locust, a lasher and the mule for one save. Alternatively, I could get a (insert mod title here)  frigate, a hound, and a (insert mod title here) freighter to replace the mule.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 28, 2013, 12:58:18 PM
It's moddable, but since it's in a script rather than a data file, it's harder for multiple mods to play nice.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: frag971 on December 28, 2013, 02:08:39 PM
It's moddable, but since it's in a script rather than a data file, it's harder for multiple mods to play nice.
Is it possible to let modders add more scripts along that and let players chose which one to select? Auto selects if only one. If i had 3 mods that each add their own starting fleets then i guess a dialog option to simply chose which one of them to use (right after difficulty choice).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 28, 2013, 02:15:50 PM
That gets too complicated fast. Also, if multiple mods attempt to override the same script, there's a very good chance they're incompatible in other ways, too.  I don't think it's a good idea to have these kinds of choices intrude directly into the game.

I guess it could be done specifically for new ship selection, but at that point, you might as well extract it into a data file and merge from whatever mods are enabled, but there are some complications there, too. It's nice to have the flexibility scripts provide.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 28, 2013, 04:08:58 PM
Quick question:  Are there any hidden penalties for starting on Easy, or hidden bonuses for starting on Normal?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 28, 2013, 04:47:52 PM
Quick question:  Are there any hidden penalties for starting on Easy, or hidden bonuses for starting on Normal?

None whatsoever, the game doesn't even keep track of that anywhere. It's a starting difficulty, nothing else.

Incidentally, the restart ships are better, but the same regardless of the starting difficulty chosen. (FYI: you randomly get a Lasher, a Vigilance, or a Cerberus on losing your entire fleet.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: NanoMatter on December 28, 2013, 04:51:34 PM
Can't wait to see the new ships coming out. I hope they are impressive, well in my taste.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ArkAngel on December 28, 2013, 05:50:07 PM
hmmm new ship; monitor class frigate? perhaps one gun 360 degree coverage as a referance to the "USS Monitor" American ironclad? This patch will be fun; it will be great to see all the new ships and fixes. Personally can't wait for the increased decks!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 28, 2013, 06:25:45 PM
Quote from: Alex
None whatsoever, the game doesn't even keep track of that anywhere. It's a starting difficulty, nothing else.
Good to know.  I played plenty of games (from the '80s and '90s) where playing easy either blocked endgame content (so you could not truly finish the game) or you played a crutch character that made early-game easy but endgame harder than those who started at "harder" difficulty.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 28, 2013, 06:42:23 PM
Quote
Added "campaign help", pops up informational dialogs in appropriate circumstances
Can be disabled when creating a new game
If enabled, each individual dialog can be set to not be shown again

Thank you for that :)

Speaking of that... the list in the patch notes is fairly comprehensive as far as the situations that trigger help dialogs. If you guys can think of something else that was a gotcha for you that isn't on the list, I'd love to hear what it is.


The speed penalty after winning a battle comes to mind.

Also, an explanation of the fighter/carrier dynamic when buying a fighter wing would be welcome.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 28, 2013, 07:24:05 PM
Can't wait to see the new ships coming out. I hope they are impressive, well in my taste.

Well, I like 'em :)

hmmm new ship; monitor class frigate? perhaps one gun 360 degree coverage as a referance to the "USS Monitor" American ironclad? This patch will be fun; it will be great to see all the new ships and fixes. Personally can't wait for the increased decks!

Yeah, The Monitor reference!

Quote from: Alex
None whatsoever, the game doesn't even keep track of that anywhere. It's a starting difficulty, nothing else.
Good to know.  I played plenty of games (from the '80s and '90s) where playing easy either blocked endgame content (so you could not truly finish the game) or you played a crutch character that made early-game easy but endgame harder than those who started at "harder" difficulty.

That'd just be mean.

The speed penalty after winning a battle comes to mind.

Also, an explanation of the fighter/carrier dynamic when buying a fighter wing would be welcome.

Thank you - wrote those two down, will see about them tomorrow. One thing I want to avoid is "oh god the dialogs", which is a distinct danger a couple of things go wrong at once. For example, after a battle, a dialog talking about the increased supply consumption pops up, but that's where the speed penalty/bonus one should pop up, too. Hmm. Probably better to have the dialogs than not, though I wonder at what point it becomes "too much information" and not something a player will reliably read because of that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 28, 2013, 07:52:45 PM
Wanna see dem ships
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hopelessnoob on December 28, 2013, 07:53:58 PM
So there is just Easy and Normal? No hard mode?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on December 28, 2013, 08:45:14 PM
normal mode is hard for a new player, as many have already discovered, reducing credits and giving less ships and stuff won't cut it as hard mode, for that i would demand a perfect play AI, at the very least.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 28, 2013, 08:55:08 PM
I'm glad to see the introduction of information pop ups in game to ease new players into the gameplay. Sometimes I think that older players who have been at the game for months or years lack the perspective of a fresh set of eyes.

Later on when polishing the help pop ups closer to the 1.0 release, I'd suggest having the pop ups presented with say...a graphic of stylish female female officer who is your "second in command" alerting you to the problem and with the information and recommendations on how to solve it. I'd leave the graphic of the officer in the top right hand side of the star map, and the border flashes and shows an exclamation mark when there is a potential problem.

Also at any time you can click on your second in command and they will give a report on your fleet health with suggestions. These are checks against CR, credits, fleet strength, fleet composition, supplies and usage that show green if it's all normal and orange if their is a suggestion or a problem. There could be good problems like unused fleet logistics points and credits that could be spent on new ships, to supply overuse or ships under a certain CR%. Certainly the first time the issue occurs hit the player with the pop up, but players (predominately male) won't become desensitized to a female first officer and will likely keep returning to check the fleet health.

Yes I know suggesting a female first officer is probably being a bit sexist, yet playing on well studied phenomena in young males I'm sure they'll pay more attention. On another note I think having a human like character giving tutorials and suggestions gives another level of engagement at a human level that new players will respond to and possibly keep utilizing further into the game to keep assured that their progress is going well enough up until the time their adept as a star sector pro. Kind of like the Civilization series advisors, they're useful up until later in the game at which point the "advisors" have done their job.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 28, 2013, 08:56:08 PM
I'm fairly sure hard mode is Iron Mode perma-death  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 28, 2013, 09:53:03 PM
Quote
I wonder at what point it becomes "too much information" and not something a player will reliably read because of that.
I really can't see that being a big problem so long as:

A.  They can just hit "Leave" / ESC and kill it fast, or turn it off entirely, I don't think you can ever really give players too much information that way.

B.  Make sure there's a way to turn it back on; probably needs a check box in the Options.


Oh, and... will mouse-steer as a checkbox ever happen?  I literally can't imagine playing this game any other way (the default makes my hand cramp after a while, amongst other things) and a lot of people find that easier.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on December 28, 2013, 10:03:54 PM
Nice to see whats up! New player friendliness is something thats been needing a workover for a little while.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 29, 2013, 05:04:12 AM
Thank you - wrote those two down, will see about them tomorrow. One thing I want to avoid is "oh god the dialogs", which is a distinct danger a couple of things go wrong at once. For example, after a battle, a dialog talking about the increased supply consumption pops up, but that's where the speed penalty/bonus one should pop up, too. Hmm. Probably better to have the dialogs than not, though I wonder at what point it becomes "too much information" and not something a player will reliably read because of that.

My reaction when too much explanatory text is forced upon me is usually: "Let me alone with this, give me at least a chance to find things out for myself!... uh, but stick around, in case I miss something, k?".

So, I would suggest to just introduce a "gameplay" category in the codex where all help texts can be re-read. And to say clearly that they can be found there at the beginning of a campaign and give them a clear title under which they can be found, so there are no inhibitions to click them away when they are annoying.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 29, 2013, 06:43:51 AM
There is always your robot buddy for exposition and tips.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on December 29, 2013, 07:12:52 AM
Wanna see dem ships

Yep, a teaser would be nice too.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 29, 2013, 10:23:10 AM
Wanna see dem ships

Yep, a teaser would be nice too.

Could happen. Will say no more. :-X

So there is just Easy and Normal? No hard mode?

Well, since the point of a lot of these additions was to ease the learning curve for new players, no :)

Also, it's really not a full-fledged mode, just the starting conditions.

a graphic of stylish female officer who is your "second in command"
...
Yes I know suggesting a female first officer is probably being a bit sexist, yet playing on well studied phenomena in young males I'm sure they'll pay more attention.

Just... no. One of the benefits of being independent is being able to ignore the practical aspects of an argument like this.

(I had been thinking about presenting this info through your actual officers, though. But as there are no officers at this point...)


A.  They can just hit "Leave" / ESC and kill it fast, or turn it off entirely, I don't think you can ever really give players too much information that way.

That's sort of the problem, right? If they cancel out of 3 dialogs because there are too many, but might have read if there was only 1, then 1>3.

B.  Make sure there's a way to turn it back on; probably needs a check box in the Options.
My reaction when too much explanatory text is forced upon me is usually: "Let me alone with this, give me at least a chance to find things out for myself!... uh, but stick around, in case I miss something, k?".

So, I would suggest to just introduce a "gameplay" category in the codex where all help texts can be re-read. And to say clearly that they can be found there at the beginning of a campaign and give them a clear title under which they can be found, so there are no inhibitions to click them away when they are annoying.

Hmm. Let me see how easy it is to dump it there. There's already a popup at the beginning of the campaign, too, so that'd be a good place to say all the stuff can be reviewed via the Codex.

I guess to some degree "dismiss without checking don't show this again" satisfies this, too.

Oh, and... will mouse-steer as a checkbox ever happen?  I literally can't imagine playing this game any other way (the default makes my hand cramp after a while, amongst other things) and a lot of people find that easier.

I'll take a quick look.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 29, 2013, 10:55:13 AM
Quote
Just... no. One of the benefits of being independent is being able to ignore the practical aspects of an argument like this.
Aww, man... I was sooo going to make a cheesecake Barbie Doll "officer" illustration for my Newbie Guide thing, just to have fun with that.  I may still do that  ;D

Quote
That's sort of the problem, right? If they cancel out of 3 dialogs because there are too many, but might have read if there was only 1, then 1>3.
Yeah, but they know 3 things happened

Yeah, there's a point where it's like, "quit showing me pop-ups and let me play" but that's what a timer and "don't show these any more" option is for.  I know that that probably feels like Too Much Information, but with this kind of stuff, Too Much > Too Little.  Nobody has ever, ever complained that a game gave them too much help, in terms of understanding the mechanics.

They may click "leave" immediately on them, but when they get into trouble again, that time, they may actually read the things. 

I think that the ability to re-read it in the Codex would be very powerful, too, especially for the more abstract concepts where you'd want to explain how it works, like how CR gets affected by Logistics which gets affected by having too much Cargo, Fuel and Crew.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on December 29, 2013, 11:16:55 AM
Nobody has ever, ever complained that a game gave them too much help, in terms of understanding the mechanics.

That's just not true, though. There are a lot of people who despise the hand-holding many modern games force upon the player. And consequently also a lot of people who rejoice about retro style games where discovering the game mechanics is already part of the game. Just google "games hand holding" or something like that to see what I mean.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on December 29, 2013, 11:23:55 AM
...
a graphic of stylish female officer who is your "second in command"
...
Yes I know suggesting a female first officer is probably being a bit sexist, yet playing on well studied phenomena in young males I'm sure they'll pay more attention.

Just... no. One of the benefits of being independent is being able to ignore the practical aspects of an argument like this.

(I had been thinking about presenting this info through your actual officers, though. But as there are no officers at this point...)
...

I don't know why, but its always annoyed the heck out of me when some cheesy 2d cutout comes on screen and had extraneous dialog distracting me from important information. Audio only, briefing style, is fine (ala X-Wing or original starcraft) as long as its concise, to the point, and doesn't splash a giant person on my HUD!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 29, 2013, 11:27:03 AM
Quote
There are a lot of people who despise the hand-holding many modern games force upon the player.
I'm going to have to disagree about this, because it's largely untrue.  Those old-skool games came with nice, printed manuals.  I think a lot of us old-skool players have pretty distorted memories of how things actually worked; we get nostalgic about games where we had manuals and we've ended up with the (false) image of "old-skool" being information-unfriendly.  

Player-unfriendly they may have been, with their crappy UIs and over-reliance on numbers-driven play in places and lack of modern physics and graphics technology.  Information-unfriendly, no; at least none of the ones I consider classics.

Master of Orion II presented its information to players in a way few modern games do- it had a detailed, piece-by-piece in-game manual, as well as a printed manual that covered the basics.

Anyhow, Space Barbie is, like, ready to help you, OMG!  I am totally going to do this when I get home, lol.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on December 29, 2013, 12:36:54 PM
The thing about old games, is they had limits.  Anyone remember flickering sprites, like in Adventure for the Atari 2600?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 29, 2013, 01:10:18 PM
Thanks Xenoargh  ;D I wouldn't mind clicking on her!

Nobody has ever, ever complained that a game gave them too much help, in terms of understanding the mechanics.

That's just not true, though. There are a lot of people who despise the hand-holding many modern games force upon the player. And consequently also a lot of people who rejoice about retro style games where discovering the game mechanics is already part of the game. Just google "games hand holding" or something like that to see what I mean.

I'd suggest these people are often people who have been playing games for long enough, however id still advocate training for first time players. It could be the first space game person plays for all we know. Catering to this audience is still as important because they paid for it.

If you really like you can even parody it, like in Far Cry 3: blood dragon....damn that was funny.

You're right though Xenoargh most games used to come with a manual, I remember the manual for B17 Flying Fortress for Atari 1024STE, now THAT was a manual nearly half an inch thick. That was quality documentation, though that was a rare case as only about 20-30 % of games came with a manual, and if they did it was filled with lots or pictures of enemies and such and didn't give you detailed game mechanics - you still had to learn that the hard way.

Anyway Alex, having help or suggestions presented by an officer would be good for reasons specified earlier.

Though one help tip would be the second in command resolving a conflict may not always be as favorable as if the player takes direct control, I think new players should be aware of the pros and cons of auto resolve. I personally almost never use auto resolve as it doesn't give any real benefit.

@thaago: I can see why you would like audio briefings, and that could be a possibility. However getting in voice actors is expensive, and we'd need to have the game finalized with all the mechanics finalized so that the audio help is accurate. To say nothing of greater expense if you want to release to a global audience and need to have it translated into multiple languages.

Text pop ups are cheap, easy to implement and let the player absorb the information at their own pace. Not everyone has an IQ of 100 to understand an audio prompt straight away, and not everyone has good hearing. On top or that translating text to other languages is as easy as dropping it into google translate, and getting a pro text translator for final presentation is less expensive as well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 29, 2013, 01:14:22 PM
The thing about old games, is they had limits.  Anyone remember flickering sprites, like in Adventure for the Atari 2600?

And text rendering was muddy on an old dilapidated TV screen, I often struggled to see menu and inventory items in Monkey Island.

 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 29, 2013, 01:48:27 PM
I went ahead and did it.  Here's your "Communications Officer", Barbi Gunz.

This is proof: the game totally needs Space Barbie / Plisskin / Terminators to give you "friendly reminders" every ten seconds.  Hey, listnin!

(http://www.wolfegames.com/TA_Section/space_barbie.png)
Sorry for the derail, Alex.  Going to go do serious stuff now :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 29, 2013, 03:27:11 PM
Alex can you please have Barbie Gunz as the first officer? if only as a placeholder and in game Easter egg/joke...until Mattel pick up on it anyway. The game could do with a little light hearted comedy.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 29, 2013, 03:47:24 PM
Being sued by Mattel is probably very un-fun (although this is almost certainly defensible as parody (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Copyright_Law#Parodies)) and I don't actually think Alex should risk that, since David could design an original character that was still fun, rather than use a simple paint-over. 

Heck, I always wonder what ol' Square Jaw McGraw (the default portrait, which practically everybody uses... btw, I think that should be randomized every new game and explained... I doubt a lot of newbies even know they can change their portrait) would be like as your annoying, bootlicking sidekick.

I don't think they'll bother suing if it's in a mod, though.
Spoiler
(http://www.wolfegames.com/TA_Section/space_barbi_lives.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hopelessnoob on December 29, 2013, 03:54:39 PM
Something similar to this is needed as an Officer. Hurry up and give us officers Officer Barbi Gunz is great.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BillyRueben on December 29, 2013, 04:44:29 PM
I really hope this is just "forum fun" and not something that's seriously being suggested. I love the serious and potentially dark tone of this game, and I'd hate for that to change.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 29, 2013, 04:58:10 PM
Well if there is a diverse selection of officers it won't hurt the seriousness of the game if there is an Easter egg character, even if she is only enabled in Dev mode or something. Otherwise keeping with the tone they will need to be a bit grittier artwork to keep in with the rest of the game tone.

Still it looks like she will be the default officer for Vacuum  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 29, 2013, 05:31:07 PM
I'm totally joking (although I did actually implement that, it's not like I care if Vacuum doesn't come across as grimdark).  

I'd like to see your fellow captains be able to talk to you, like Alex suggested, but in a much more serious vein.  Simply adding a picture next to the text is quite powerful; it puts a face and a sense of character on what's being said.  

That said, the lack of any real humanity and any interactivity other than bare-bones killing, looting and selling in the title continues to be a real problem.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 29, 2013, 06:23:55 PM
The only other new player aid that I would add would be the targeting assist pip that's been in fighter planes since Vietnam, and computer games since the 90's I think. Conditionally it would only if you had the same guns that were linked OR any group of guns set alternating. Either way telling new players to 'pew pew here in this pip' will help them get into the habbit of leading the target and predicting it's path a bit.

The pip is only to help them learn target leading, later on they'll realise the pip is only targeting the centre of the ship and doesn't take into account things like shield placement, strafing tactics or trying to hit the exact same angle on the ship repeatedly to pierce the armour and damage the hull.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: OOZ662 on December 29, 2013, 08:26:03 PM
The thing about old games, is they had limits.  Anyone remember flickering sprites, like in Adventure for the Atari 2600?

Funny you should say this about a game which has detailed and indepth mods that have to turn away 32bit riffraff users because the save files won't fit in RAM... ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Umbra Eterna on December 29, 2013, 09:47:39 PM
Does anyone have an idea of when this patch is going to be released?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on December 29, 2013, 10:02:47 PM
Hi Unpocalypse, welcome to the forums!

The patch is going to be released SoonTm - ie whenever Alex feels its in a polished, ready state. The wait can be pretty long when he's implementing new things. I'm personally rooting for another bugfix release before another feature, but thats for my own selfish (computer can't handle some mods I love) reasons :P.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on December 29, 2013, 10:42:09 PM
I'll admit, conventionally attractive tutorial babe probably beats talking paperclip as far as sources of ingame advice go.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 29, 2013, 10:51:15 PM
(The whole Barbi business: ... oh dear.)

I love the serious and potentially dark tone of this game, and I'd hate for that to change.

No need to worry on that account.


Does anyone have an idea of when this patch is going to be released?
Hi Unpocalypse, welcome to the forums!

The patch is going to be released SoonTm - ie whenever Alex feels its in a polished, ready state. The wait can be pretty long when he's implementing new things. I'm personally rooting for another bugfix release before another feature, but thats for my own selfish (computer can't handle some mods I love) reasons :P.

Hi! Just to elaborate a bit on that (which is, indeed, the general policy for release dates) - there's not too much else remaining for the 0.6.2a release, though there is some playtesting etc, and it needs a couple of visual and audio assets to complete some of the changes. I'd like to get this in your guys' hands as soon(tm) as possible, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 29, 2013, 11:01:42 PM
I'll admit, conventionally attractive tutorial babe probably beats talking paperclip as far as sources of ingame advice go.

(http://s5.postimg.org/nbhtshwmv/Clippy_SS.jpg) (http://postimage.org/)

Agreed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: MesoTroniK on December 29, 2013, 11:04:17 PM
Just replace Barbi Girl with something like this, problem solved 8)

Spoiler
(http://i492.photobucket.com/albums/rr285/darvus1/exigency_portrait02_zpsd3dfd881.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 29, 2013, 11:10:36 PM
Just replace Barbi Girl with something like this, problem solved 8)

Spoiler
(http://i492.photobucket.com/albums/rr285/darvus1/exigency_portrait02_zpsd3dfd881.png)
[close]

Hm...gotta say the anorexic, anemic female in the blue suit looks like she has lung cancer from sucking on that cigarette. The whole red demonic glow as well, looks like she'd rather toss you out the airlock and takeover command of your fleet rather than show you the ropes.  ;D

I'd like to get this in your guys' hands as soon(tm) as possible, though.

Just chill dude, sit back on a warm beach somewhere with a Corona. No rush.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: MesoTroniK on December 29, 2013, 11:12:43 PM
Hehehe, you are dark.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on December 29, 2013, 11:36:56 PM
It is so close... I can almost taste the metal of starship hulls...

Tastes like raspberries and burnt steak
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BHunterSEAL on December 30, 2013, 04:09:07 AM
I think it's safe to say we're all very excited for the upcoming patch. The recently-introduced supply / logistics / CR system is well thought-out and highly engaging, but definitely in need of continued adjustment and balancing. Based on the changelog, it seems 0.6.2 will go a long way towards refining these mechanics and improving the overall player experience. It's great to see we'll be getting some new ships, especially one which fills the very visible medium carrier void between the Gemini and the Astral. and the Easy mode should benefit both new players and veterans who want to 'fast forward' through the early game (which can be a bit grindy).

So, with this out of the way, I'm wondering what the next steps are. I assume balance changes, feature refinements and mechanical tweaks will be largely continuous throughout the remainder of development as you continue to receive feedback. Obviously, there's no such thing as too many ship designs (you've done a great job in making every class feel unique so they don't really run together in my mind), but I think the current selection is varied, well-balanced and comprehensive enough to be sufficient for development and testing of the campaign.*

With that in mind, I'm curious as to where you are in the process of fleshing-out the campaign, namely with respect to resources, trade, territory / planet control and construction. Less about where these mechanics are in development (focus has understandably been elsewhere) but I would be very interested in hearing your thoughts on approach to this next phase of the process. While I'm sure the NPC factions will undergo significant additions and expansion before release, do you feel the current fleets are in a state such that meaningful implementation of these features can proceed? Are you considering a "shell" approach where the main mechanics are built out in "draft" form with ongoing refinement and content addition, or is the plan to focus on one feature at a time?

*But please keep giving us new toys!! :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on December 30, 2013, 06:06:54 AM
soon(tm)

(http://i.minus.com/ibbaXPCwMAfUF4.gif)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Trylobot on December 30, 2013, 07:47:36 AM
Lol Cycerin. That is classic.

@Alex: I'm starting to salivate after reading your 12-28 update, man. Good work all 'round.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 30, 2013, 05:12:31 PM
normal mode is hard for a new player, as many have already discovered, reducing credits and giving less ships and stuff won't cut it as hard mode, for that i would demand a perfect play AI, at the very least.

I don't want to nitpick, but... oh, who am I kidding, I totally want to nitpick. The concept of "perfect play" doesn't apply to a game like Starsector; it applies to games like chess that are deterministic. Even if Starsector was fully deterministic (i.e. no randomness in places like recoil etc), it's still way too involved for perfect play to be achievable in practice. It'd be kind of hard to even define what that means.


@Alex: I'm starting to salivate after reading your 12-28 update, man. Good work all 'round.

Thank you sir :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on December 30, 2013, 05:19:29 PM
It means secretly give the AI a buff across all major stats and call it "hard mode"  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on December 30, 2013, 08:59:56 PM
I've been most often disappointed by allied fleet AI, and there are several forum threads on it. I guess I would rather see development of Industry/Outposts first.

Alex what are the key features you'd like to see completed and in the hands of players by the end of the new year? Promise I won't hold you to anything.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: JT on January 02, 2014, 04:34:00 PM
Actually, Debido has an interesting point.  We've focused on the combat AI so much that we've sort of left the campaign movement AI untouched. AI ships just sort of drift around without applying the same techniques of boxing and interception that player fleets do.  I'd be scared to death of trying to pick off stragglers if suddenly enemy fleets could use small patrols as decoys to lure my faster ship into an unavoidable drift into a larger enemy fleet (although with the more discrete burn-level mechanic this occurs less often).

I think Mount and Blade really suffered here, too; it was either rushing to the attack or fleeing with abject cowardice -- "Run away, run away! [banging coconuts]" -- with no middle ground of strategic positioning.

Probably more of a subject for a suggestions thread than a patch-notes thread, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on January 08, 2014, 07:04:25 AM
I say that today or tomorrow is update day.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 08, 2014, 09:30:58 AM
Any reason or just a hunch?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on January 08, 2014, 09:39:45 AM
Don't mind Uomoz, it's just a delusional brain-tic. He tends to mistake it for intuition. It's especially noticeable when he plays Dota 2.
Spoiler
Please patchday this week
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 08, 2014, 09:41:18 AM
I'm 'fraid not. Been doing singularly unexciting things in the last couple of days - updating the game to use Java 7 and the latest version of LWJGL. It's mostly a very smooth and simple process, except when it comes to OS X, which seems to derive enjoyment from not working in extremely arcane ways. The kind where you go to search for it and the top result is your own post on another forum from a year ago. And where an update to the OS was supposed to have fixed it in the meantime but actually hasn't.

I think I'll stop before this becomes a full-fledged rant.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on January 08, 2014, 10:10:02 AM
Totally understand; it's always "fun" when you hit stuff that obscure; I had a HLSL/DirectX thing like that last year (dealing with read-write access stuff that practically nobody used in the version of DirectX I was working with) that sent me into apoplectic nerd-rage for the better part of two days before I figured out how to sidestep it.

I suppose writing Apple directly about this is out of the question? 

Usually when I get to something that nasty, I play "directory tag" and figure out how to talk to the engineers.

Oh, and... I presume that with moving to Java 7, we're going to need to switch the compile settings in our IDEs again, if we're using them, or does 7 preserve backwards compatibility thoroughly enough that it's a non-issue unless we want to use 7's features?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 08, 2014, 10:18:01 AM
I suppose writing Apple directly about this is out of the question?  

Usually when I get to something that nasty, I play "directory tag" and figure out how to talk to the engineers.

I imagine the "right" answer is to upgrade to a newer version of the OS... which is what I'm trying now, but that involves the Apple AppStore, and that thing - in my experience so far - is buggy and broken.

Oh, and... I presume that with moving to Java 7, we're going to need to switch the compile settings in our IDEs again, if we're using them, or does 7 preserve backwards compatibility thoroughly enough that it's a non-issue unless we want to use 7's features?

Stuff compiled for 6 should run just fine in 99.9% of the cases. It's the other way around that you'll have problems - if you compile for 7 and try to run it on 6, that definitely won't work. There's a distinct possibility that - unless I can wrap this business up in a few days - we'll end up with 7 for Windows/Linux and 6 for Mac, which would mean you'd still need to compile for 6.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on January 08, 2014, 11:21:31 AM
Welp, at least I tried xD
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: frag971 on January 09, 2014, 09:43:07 AM
Is it really needed to focus on OSX while this early in development? Wouldn't it make more sense to update it later to work in OSX after proper support is given? Is it really worth it to delay development to add a 9%-pop unsupported platform?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on January 09, 2014, 09:46:32 AM
Is it really needed to focus on OSX while this early in development? Wouldn't it make more sense to update it later to work in OSX after proper support is given? Is it really worth it to delay development to add a 9%-pop unsupported platform?
As someone who writes code for a living that has to work on multiple platforms - yes, it is worth it; trying to port something later on is a far more difficult task than keeping it up to date on all platforms as you go.

I must admit I'm curious what sorts of OSX issues Alex is seeing; I probably can't help - the stuff I've worked with cross-platform didn't need to use LWJGL - but it's still a topic of some interest to me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 09, 2014, 11:09:10 AM
Is it really needed to focus on OSX while this early in development? Wouldn't it make more sense to update it later to work in OSX after proper support is given? Is it really worth it to delay development to add a 9%-pop unsupported platform?

I think you might be thinking that the game doesn't currently work on OS X. It does - there are 3 versions available for download, windows, linux, and OS X, and have been since the first release. I'm not adding anything new here, just making sure that the game continues to work on OS X.

Speaking of that, finally got everything working, though 10.6 (Snow Leopard) is now officially not supported. Hopefully that won't be a huge deal since the upgrade path to OS X Mavericks is available in the majority of cases and is also free.


I must admit I'm curious what sorts of OSX issues Alex is seeing; I probably can't help - the stuff I've worked with cross-platform didn't need to use LWJGL - but it's still a topic of some interest to me.

A couple of examples - first of all Java 7 doesn't want to run on 10.6.8. At least, not when you've also got AWT involved. And then it took a while to get the app package format all sorted out - it's different now that Java is actually bundled inside it. Then there were a couple of bugs in LWJGL 2.9.1 for OS X to be worked around - which is totally understandable, because they had to rewrite a lot of it to work with Java 7, since that does a lot of things differently than Apple's Java 6 did.

The most time-consuming thing, though, was upgrading to OS X Mavericks. You have to do it through the App Store, and it has a very rough time handling a file download that size. Just getting that to work right took most of a day.

Very glad to have this pretty much wrapped up :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: MShadowy on January 10, 2014, 08:22:28 PM
Well, glad to hear it seems to be resolved.  Sounds like it was a pretty vexing issue.

In any case, I'm getting all hype again, so I eagerly await the next release.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ArkAngel on January 10, 2014, 09:43:04 PM
Well, glad to hear it seems to be resolved.  Sounds like it was a pretty vexing issue.

In any case, I'm getting all hype again, so I eagerly await the next release.
Great you just jinxed it! Now Alex is going to run into another bug that sets it back a month. Wonderfull  :'(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Linnis on January 10, 2014, 09:52:03 PM
Well, glad to hear it seems to be resolved.  Sounds like it was a pretty vexing issue.

In any case, I'm getting all hype again, so I eagerly await the next release.
Great you just jinxed it! Now Alex is going to run into another bug that sets it back a month. Wonderfull  :'(

Untrue, Alex will hit many problem always when doing anything, everything will be indefinitely delayed and data will randomly vanish from his hd, followed by the mysterious gentlemen who donated millions suddently undergo instantaneous human combustion. Also, his future cat will get run over by a plane crash.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on January 10, 2014, 10:08:05 PM
Not sure if troll, or really crazy...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on January 11, 2014, 01:16:16 AM
Very glad to have this pretty much wrapped up :)

That calls for a celebration!

By posting pretty pictures of the new ships!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debirth on January 13, 2014, 05:45:01 PM
I really love this game, been playing it ever sense TB's "WTF is Starfarer". It's my go to game when my internet is down, and I've downloaded and played almost every popular mod. I've even had my friends buy it. I just wish Alex would put more time into this art piece  :( I'd be more then happy to throw my money at the screen if that was the problem.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on January 13, 2014, 06:14:40 PM
@Jonlissla Here are some new ones!

http://fractalsoftworks.com/2013/12/30/ships-stories/ (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2013/12/30/ships-stories/)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on January 14, 2014, 01:22:48 AM
I've even had my friends buy it. I just wish Alex would put more time into this art piece 

I'm pretty sure he's spending a fair amount of time on this game.

@Jonlissla Here are some new ones!

Thanks, I hadn't noticed a new blog post.

They look really solid. Will be fun to see what the Monitor does.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debirth on January 15, 2014, 08:26:04 PM

I'm pretty sure he's spending a fair amount of time on this game.


This game has been in development for over 3 years now  :-\
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 15, 2014, 08:43:16 PM
Well, it just takes a long time to do this, and Starsector is fairly expansive. I really appreciate your support along the way!

On the bright side, 0.6.2a should be out really soon :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: haloguy1 on January 15, 2014, 08:46:53 PM
On the bright side, 0.6.2a should be out really soon :)

Awesome cant wait till then.
what does really soon mean 1 day or 1 week?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on January 15, 2014, 08:48:17 PM
My guess is within the week!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: haloguy1 on January 15, 2014, 08:49:09 PM
Or is it  ;D.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SQW on January 16, 2014, 12:44:32 AM
Are we going to see any trading, exploring, sandbox aspect of the game in the next version? As much as enjoy the combat, I've spent enough hours on it by now that any tweaks and polish isn't really what I'm looking for.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 16, 2014, 02:00:22 AM
Are we going to see any trading, exploring, sandbox aspect of the game in the next version? As much as enjoy the combat, I've spent enough hours on it by now that any tweaks and polish isn't really what I'm looking for.

No, the next update is (supposed to be) polish and a few new ships. See changelist. Big new features are for the one after.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on January 16, 2014, 10:17:39 AM
Longest damn dev time on a "polish" patch I've ever heard of. :P

Though, it is adding early-game tutorials which is a somewhat larger feature.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on January 16, 2014, 10:21:04 AM
There was also the passage to a new java version though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 16, 2014, 10:37:38 AM
Also fairly extensive CR changes, and holidays right in the middle of all that; I have to admit I took a bit of time off. <ducks>

No argument, though, this definitely took a long time relative to stuff that's in the patch that the average player might look forward to. I see it as paying off some technical and design debt - sometimes there's just a lot of non-fun stuff that needs to be done.


what does really soon mean 1 day or 1 week?

You know about the soon(tm) thing, right? There's a (tm) after the "really soon", too. But let me put it this way: I'm planning to only do testing and fix bugs I run into from now until the release. I'll probably build the first release candidate today or tomorrow.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 16, 2014, 11:20:01 AM
Oh yeah, maybe something for the weekend then :D  I have to admit though, I'm already more exited about the reveal of the next big content update than about this release. Please Alex, when the time has come, do it in a blogpost, in detail, not as patchnotes :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on January 16, 2014, 11:24:23 AM
I'll second that.  :)

Though I am SUPER excited to play with new ships.  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: haloguy1 on January 17, 2014, 12:07:22 PM
Super excited for this update can not wait till its out.

Hope its out by sunday.  :)



so if you can read this what are you excited the most about this patch?

Robots ftw
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 17, 2014, 01:12:02 PM
so if you can read this what are you excited the most about this patch?
Alot of the Campaign changes. Well besides the CR stuff... THAT I'm actually worried about
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 02:06:25 PM
Please Alex, when the time has come, do it in a blogpost, in detail, not as patchnotes :)

Yeah, I haven't written an in-depth one in a while. Need to do that.


Also: 0.6.2a is now out! Blog post (with download links) here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2014/01/17/starsector-0-6-2a-release/).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on January 17, 2014, 02:10:14 PM
Yay!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on January 17, 2014, 02:32:40 PM
Squee!

Alas, it has been release just before finals... D:
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaphide on January 17, 2014, 02:39:31 PM
Also: 0.6.2a is now out! Blog post (with download links) here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2014/01/17/starsector-0-6-2a-release/).

Congrats on the release Alex :)
(Just in time for the weekend too!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 17, 2014, 02:52:02 PM
Question: will this break saves at all? I'm thinking yes but want to be sure.
Also, should mods be able to play with it even if they aren't updated?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SatchelCharge on January 17, 2014, 03:07:04 PM
Cheers!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 03:22:52 PM
Thanks, guys! Glad to finally get this version out.

Question: will this break saves at all? I'm thinking yes but want to be sure.
Also, should mods be able to play with it even if they aren't updated?

It shouldn't, I just loaded up some old saves and they worked ok. No guarantee, though.

As far as mods, it depends on what the mods are doing. I know of one issue already that'd require mods to be updated, but aside from that (which wouldn't affect *all* mods), I think many/most mods should work. Modded ships would have their CR values out of line with the new vanilla standard, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 03:29:17 PM
Updated the javadoc, btw (this is only of interest to modders):
http://fractalsoftworks.com/starfarer.api/index.html
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on January 17, 2014, 03:42:22 PM
This is really strange - it seems like FireSoundOne is now being played after the first shot is fired.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NikolaiLev on January 17, 2014, 03:47:09 PM
"Added "renderBelowAllWeapons" boolean to .wpn spec, will force the weapon to be rendered below all other weapon layers (mostly intended for decorative "weapons" that are meant to visually be part of the hull)"

:O  Is this the change I've wanted to see?  Does this make it render under the hull?  I'm not quite sure what it does elsewise.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 03:59:26 PM
This is really strange - it seems like FireSoundOne is now being played after the first shot is fired.

Bug, not sure why. Must've been thinking something when I made that change... hm. Will look into it ASAP.


:O  Is this the change I've wanted to see?  Does this make it render under the hull?  I'm not quite sure what it does elsewise.

No. This just makes sure it renders under all the other weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 17, 2014, 04:47:34 PM
Just discovered something cool: On the refit screen, if you have ships that have missiles and you set the CR slider to a really low amount, missiles will actually disappear from the racks until you set the slider higher.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on January 17, 2014, 04:48:31 PM
I love the help UI!  

Lots of work to get that done, but that's great for newbies, totally loving that!

...I don't suppose we can code up custom help popups?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Spectre on January 17, 2014, 04:58:42 PM
Thank you! I've been patiently waiting for this release  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 17, 2014, 05:14:29 PM
Yay for release! :)


A bit early feedback:


- The help messages are nicely written, but something has to be done about the way they (can) pop up. I had as much as 5 messages pop up after my very first battle (taking too much salvage, carrying too much cargo, low CR, supply consumption increase, LR drop).  And not simply in a row to click trough, but I got a message, flew for 2 seconds, got another messages and so on. All on the short trip to the station. Really annoying and, most importantly, not a good first impression for a new player. A minimum time delay between messages (~15sec) would be a first idea for a fix. That might give enough time to actually absorb the info, too.

Btw, did you give up on adding them to the codex?


- CR changes seem to work fine for me so far, I feel less inclined to cuddle up to a station all the time.

- The new pirate fleet compositions are nice and easy, a good change I think.  ...though, personally, I'm already hoping for a hard mode ;)


- The Cerberus seems very much overpriced/underpowered. If for example compared to a wolf, it costs more than twice as much, but is inferior in everything but cargo space and CR use. More practically, it seems extremely vulnerable to missiles, even for a shield-less ship. The hound can outrun missiles, the Buffalo Mk.2 has good PD + Flares. The Cerberus just dies in a missile rich environment. I actually have a hard time against a Buffalo Mk.2, much more than in a Hound. Such weaknesses are OK in principle, but seen together with the price, there's just not enough to balance it out. Mh, maybe a drone system would help?


- The Hermes seems nice and cute, will be fun to find a good role in the fleet for it. It's lore text is too long for it's box, though! (@1920x1080)

I have yet to try the two other new ships.






Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on January 17, 2014, 05:28:43 PM
wow, weren't kidding about the performance! Everything feels much smoother now!

I agree with Gothars on the cerberus, buffing armor by a factor of two right now, will see if that helps

other ships I haven't tried yet, guess I'll have to head to Askonia for the midline fleets?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 05:31:45 PM
Just discovered something cool: On the refit screen, if you have ships that have missiles and you set the CR slider to a really low amount, missiles will actually disappear from the racks until you set the slider higher.

One of those things that just happened naturally :)

I love the help UI! 

Lots of work to get that done, but that's great for newbies, totally loving that!

...I don't suppose we can code up custom help popups?

Cool, thank you!

Not just yet, but I've set it up with an eye towards that, and would like to make it available in a future release.

Thank you! I've been patiently waiting for this release  ;D

:)

- The help messages are nicely written, but something has to be done about the way they (can) pop up. I had as much as 5 messages pop up after my very first battle (taking too much salvage, carrying too much cargo, low CR, supply consumption increase, LR drop).  And not simply in a row to click trough, but I got a message, flew for 2 seconds, got another messages and so on. All on the short trip to the station. Really annoying and, most importantly, not a good first impression for a new player. A minimum time delay between messages (~15sec) would be a first idea for a fix. That might give enough time to actually absorb the info, too.

Was wondering about that myself. On the one hand, yeah, it's a lot of info there. On the other hand, a 15 second delay could result in some real bad stuff happening without the player being warned.

Btw, did you give up on adding them to the codex?

Half that, half not writing it down and forgetting about it. I mucked around with that a bit, but the way they're written isn't exactly suited for a more "manual" type setting, with the way it talks about your fleet being over capacity etc. So it might be awkward in the codex w/o being re-written.

- The new pirate fleet compositions are nice and easy, a good change I think.  ...though, personally, I'm already hoping for a hard mode ;)

Type in the character's name and press enter twice during new game creation. Presume the game lost when you lose your first fleet (i.e. no restarts). Voila, instant hard mode. (Yes, this is totally a bug.)

- The Cerberus seems very much overpriced/underpowered. If for example compared to a wolf, it costs more than twice as much, but is inferior in everything but cargo space and CR use. More practically, it seems extremely vulnerable to missiles, even for a shield-less ship. The hound can outrun missiles, the Buffalo Mk.2 has good PD + Flares. The Cerberus just dies in a missile rich environment. I actually have a hard time against a Buffalo Mk.2, much more than in a Hound. Such weaknesses are OK in principle, but seen together with the price, there's just not enough to balance it out. Mh, maybe a drone system would help?

Hmm, yeah. Will have to take another look at it. I do recommend Vulcans on it, btw - they're not quite good enough in those numbers to be reliable PD, but they do a decent enough job combined with maneuvering and saving burn drive for missile evasion. All in all, though, I can't disagree.

wow, weren't kidding about the performance! Everything feels much smoother now!

Cool, that's really good to hear! It was only supposed to be around a 10% increase or so from Java 7, but I haven't tested it extensively, and really, 10% could be enough if you were just outside "stable 60 fps" territory.

other ships I haven't tried yet, guess I'll have to head to Askonia for the midline fleets?

For some of the ships, yeah. You can find all of them on the various stations.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 05:47:19 PM
This is really strange - it seems like FireSoundOne is now being played after the first shot is fired.

Bug, not sure why. Must've been thinking something when I made that change... hm. Will look into it ASAP.

Fixed this one - introduced it while I was fixing the "pressing the LMB multiple times keeps playing the chargeup sound" issue. Going to hold off on a hotfix til tomorrow, just in case something else pops up, since this isn't exactly urgent. Also in the hotfix so far: fix for NPE when trying to access the CombatFleetManagerAPI during the transition from the title screen state to the campaign.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 17, 2014, 05:53:22 PM
Welp, I broke it...
Started a new game to test out the "Easy Mode" and got a "Fatal: null" Error with this stuff in the log:
Spoiler
35705 [Thread-5] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.loading.SpecStore  - Description with id flarelauncher_fighter_SHIP_SYSTEM not found
35706 [Thread-5] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.loading.SpecStore  - Description with id traveldrive_SHIP_SYSTEM not found
35706 [Thread-5] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.loading.SpecStore  - Description with id inferniuminjector_SHIP_SYSTEM not found
35706 [Thread-5] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.loading.SpecStore  - Description with id skimmer_drone_SHIP_SYSTEM not found
35708 [Thread-5] DEBUG com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Loading [graphics/particlealpha32sq.png] as texture with id [fs.common/graphics/particlealpha32sq.png]
35712 [Thread-5] DEBUG com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Loaded 157.22 MB of texture data so far
35712 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Cleaned buffer for texture graphics/particlealpha32sq.png (using cast)
35958 [Thread-5] DEBUG com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Loading [graphics/backgrounds/background4.jpg] as texture with id [graphics/backgrounds/background4.jpg]
58933 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.addFloatingText(Unknown Source)
   at data.scripts.console.Console.printMessage(Console.java:1066)
   at data.scripts.console.Console.showMessage(Console.java:910)
   at data.scripts.console.Console.showMessage(Console.java:920)
   at data.scripts.console.AddConsole.generate(AddConsole.java:24)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.title.B.dialogDismissed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.K.dismiss(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.I.dismiss(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.OooO.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.privatesuper.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.OOoO.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.T.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

[close]
What did I do?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 05:54:28 PM
Looks like it's related to the console mod - try turning it off for now.

Edit: the upcoming hotfix should resolve this. It crashed right after creating a new game, right? I just tried this in my dev version and it didn't crash, which would verify the fix.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 17, 2014, 06:03:55 PM
Looks like it's related to the console mod - try turning it off for now.

Edit: the upcoming hotfix should resolve this. It crashed right after creating a new game, right? I just tried this in my dev version and it didn't crash, which would verify the fix.
Yeah, it dies as soon as I hit "Start game" Forgot to mention that...
What is weird though is that my old save file with the same mod on it worked so that might give you some more info.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 06:04:47 PM
Thanks - yeah, this makes sense, as I think the console command mod does some things specifically on being added to a new game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ordanen on January 17, 2014, 06:38:52 PM
Instead of having help messages pop out even if the player is tired of them, could it be possible to add a small UI button that could flash/make itself noticable when a new help message has turned relevant, and clicking it would bring the next message up?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on January 17, 2014, 06:44:19 PM
Ah, found a behavior bug:

With my own Lashed I engaged a Buffalo Mk II and Lasher, both were heavily damaged and very low on CR. They repeatedly chose to engage rather than flee, and every time deployed no ships, immediately ending the battle. My only options were to disengage myself or to keep draining my own CR (there was no way for me to get their ships onto the battle screen).

Edit: They did end up losing CR, but the behavior continued even when they were at 0 CR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 17, 2014, 06:46:22 PM
The Monitor is absolutely great! Goddamn, I'm freaking invulnerable! Did not expect that. And nicely balanced with how squishy it is if the über-shields should break down. I see a great role for this ship as a damage tank in combination with fighter craft, and as ramming bock. And now I wish beams could pass allied ships more than ever.
Have yet to see how annoying it is as an opponent, though.

Heron seems to work fine, too. Nice defense, reasonably flexible, good logistic ship.



Oh, and I case you missed the edit: The Hermes' text is too long for it's box.



[Type in the character's name and press enter twice during new game creation. Presume the game lost when you lose your first fleet (i.e. no restarts). Voila, instant hard mode. (Yes, this is totally a bug.)

Ha! I'm so gonna take that challenge!  ;D



Before I forget it again, something I wanted to mention for a long time, about the attached text: It reads as if the credits came only from the just destroyed ship, while they are really from all the fighting (?). Maybe change the ambiguous "wreckage" to  "remnants of the battle" or something.

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 17, 2014, 07:15:21 PM
Ah, found a behavior bug:

With my own Lashed I engaged a Buffalo Mk II and Lasher, both were heavily damaged and very low on CR. They repeatedly chose to engage rather than flee, and every time deployed no ships, immediately ending the battle. My only options were to disengage myself or to keep draining my own CR (there was no way for me to get their ships onto the battle screen).

Edit: They did end up losing CR, but the behavior continued even when they were at 0 CR.
I too can confirm this bug and I found 2 others
First: Saw the bug above so I harried and fought a fleet until they died and I got the boarding pop up. I let it go and caught up with it, then fought it. It had 0 CR so they crash mothballed. Here is the bug though: They still died to a Crit malfunction causing hull damage and blowing them up. (They were also showing as mothballed on the Combat Fleet Screen (The tab screen)
Second: (this caused a crash) Traveled to Corvus so I could test the "crash mothball" bug with my own fleet after storing them. I exited hyperspace through a star's grav well (I have Navigation level 10) and about 2 to 3 seconds later, SS crashed to desktop with a "fatal 0" error and this stuff in the log:
Spoiler
2843997 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 0
java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 0
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus$ShipStatus.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus.updateFromAutoresolveData(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.AccidentManager.ôÒO000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.A.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)

[close]
Sorry I broke it again...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on January 17, 2014, 07:18:11 PM
I just got to play with the Heron. I am completely in love! I was wrong in my earlier conjecture - its not the same speed as the Falcon. Its faster! Its an absolute joy to fly as the center of a small fighter fleet. I haven't tested it in a big fleet setting, but between its speed and deployment point efficiency I see this being the go to carrier.

I currently have it outfitted with 6 lrpd lasers, a heavy mauler, and dedicated targeting core. If I set my fighters to escort, then the cruiser gives them complete pd coverage. Drones only come out to play in situations that need the firepower.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 07:35:50 PM
Thanks for the reports, guys - I'll see about fixing these tomorrow.

I exited hyperspace through a star's grav well (I have Navigation level 10) and about 2 to 3 seconds later, SS crashed to desktop with a "fatal 0" error and this stuff in the log:

Question: are you playing with any mods? If so, do these mods have any particularly small or narrow ships? Knowing that might help narrow this down...

Sorry I broke it again...

It's a good thing :)

Oh, and I case you missed the edit: The Hermes' text is too long for it's box.

I did miss it - thanks!

Not sure about the "wreckage" bit, I think it works fine as is.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on January 17, 2014, 08:00:56 PM
Have not a chance to try everything yet, but below are some quick comments on some of the new ships:

* Cerberus:  Have not played it yet, but been attacked by those under pirate control.  The Heavy Mauler hurts!  On the other hand, I now have an easy source to farm Maulers and Railguns from, which were rare prior to this release.

* Monitor:  With Fortress Shield, high vents, and Power Modulation 10, the Monitor can weaponize its shield, and destroy capitals simply by ramming them continously!  (Think Androsynth comet form.)  This is because the AI cannot deal with constant, gradual hard-flux buildup (as seen in someone's hard flux beams mod).  The Monitor can dissipate flux even while Fortress Shield is active.

* Heron:  Despite low OP, I like this ship.  With max Combat/Technology, it can be (barely) made into a viable fighting flagship.  With Augmented Engines, ITU, Heavy Blaster, 5x Burst PD, and flagship bonuses, it can kite and pick off ships like a frigate.  I have yet to send this and several wings of fighters against a defense fleet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 17, 2014, 08:04:47 PM
I exited hyperspace through a star's grav well (I have Navigation level 10) and about 2 to 3 seconds later, SS crashed to desktop with a "fatal 0" error and this stuff in the log:
Question: are you playing with any mods? If so, do these mods have any particularly small or narrow ships? Knowing that might help narrow this down...
Yes I am playing with mods. My fleet is as follows: 1 Sajuuk Khar (From the Hiigaran Decendents mod here and at the very bottom of the ship picture. It is the "longest" ship in my fleet. http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=6347.0 (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=6347.0) ) 1 wolf and 4 Dolphin class custom tugs from the Kadur Theocracy here http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=6649.0 although they aren't listed in the pic.

Also I tried to do this again and could not repeat it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaphide on January 17, 2014, 08:35:37 PM
This looks strange to me...

Is there a reason CampaignFleetAIAPI.performCrashMothballingPriorToEscape takes in a FleetEncounterContext object rather than a FleetEncounterContextPlugin object?

It is the only method of CampaignFleetAIAPI that takes in the implementation class rather than the interface, and I think it means that any usage of CampaignFleetAIAPI.performCrashMothballingPriorToEscape has to take in Vanilla StarSector FleetEncounterContext rather than one provided by a mod.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 17, 2014, 08:42:24 PM
Instead of having help messages pop out even if the player is tired of them, could it be possible to add a small UI button that could flash/make itself noticable when a new help message has turned relevant, and clicking it would bring the next message up?

Hmm, yeah, that might work. Had something similar in mind for other messages; will take a look at it then.

This looks strange to me...

Is there a reason CampaignFleetAIAPI.performCrashMothballingPriorToEscape takes in a FleetEncounterContext object rather than a FleetEncounterContextPlugin object?

It is the only method of CampaignFleetAIAPI that takes in the implementation class rather than the interface, and I think it means that any usage of CampaignFleetAIAPI.performCrashMothballingPriorToEscape has to take in Vanilla StarSector FleetEncounterContext rather than one provided by a mod.

Oops, mixup on my part - thanks for catching that. The good news is that method doesn't use the context parameter at all (and you could safely pass in null), but I'll fix it up for tomorrow's hotfix anyway.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaphide on January 17, 2014, 08:48:44 PM
This looks strange to me...

Is there a reason CampaignFleetAIAPI.performCrashMothballingPriorToEscape takes in a FleetEncounterContext object rather than a FleetEncounterContextPlugin object?

It is the only method of CampaignFleetAIAPI that takes in the implementation class rather than the interface, and I think it means that any usage of CampaignFleetAIAPI.performCrashMothballingPriorToEscape has to take in Vanilla StarSector FleetEncounterContext rather than one provided by a mod.

Oops, mixup on my part - thanks for catching that. The good news is that method doesn't use the context parameter at all (and you could safely pass in null), but I'll fix it up for tomorrow's hotfix anyway.

Haha really? Cool, null it is (till tomorrow). Thanks! :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Verrius on January 17, 2014, 09:07:12 PM
Running no mods. Constantly getting Fatal: # errors and I can't figure out why.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on January 17, 2014, 09:17:38 PM
Verrius: Post the last bunch of lines of the starsector.log file. It may be a reported bug or something different, but we can't tell without them. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Verrius on January 17, 2014, 09:29:56 PM
Yeah, I know better. Just moody as heck right now.

Code
869725 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Finished saving
889559 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 3
java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 3
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus$ShipStatus.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus.updateFromAutoresolveData(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.AccidentManager.ôÒO000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.A.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

This is it. Happens seemingly randomly. First save it happened after about 20 minutes, second one was within 5, shortly after buying my Heron. The number so far has been 0, 1, or 3 for the out of bounds exception.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 17, 2014, 10:00:49 PM
Yeah, I know better. Just moody as heck right now.

Code
869725 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Finished saving
889559 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 3
java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 3
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus$ShipStatus.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus.updateFromAutoresolveData(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.AccidentManager.ôÒO000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.A.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

This is it. Happens seemingly randomly. First save it happened after about 20 minutes, second one was within 5, shortly after buying my Heron. The number so far has been 0, 1, or 3 for the out of bounds exception.
Looks like you got something similar to mine
Oh and by the way Alex, Crash Mothball does NOT work for the most part. Controls are locked but it doesn't protect me from Crit Malfunctions, nor does it shut off my guns.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Okim on January 17, 2014, 11:08:10 PM
Just a wild guess, but i think that the current version might need to completelly remove the original folder before installation to avoid crashes.

IIRC previous updates did that automatically. This one does not. I may be wrong here...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on January 17, 2014, 11:26:45 PM
I think it would be nice if Starsector installed different versions in their own folder, allowing people to play previous versions with legacy mods. A nice to have, should really be placed in suggestions thread...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on January 18, 2014, 12:09:23 AM
Tried out Vanilla for a little bit.

1.  Agree that Cerebus lacks toughness; it has a halfway-decent bite, but it's just not cutting it; 200-300 more Armor is probably enough to make it vaguely viable.
2.  Racked up $400K in 2 hours, no Supply issues, on full damage.  Had nothing to spend it on, as there just wasn't much point until it was time to buy a serious fleet and end-game.  If people are still complaining that they can't make money, they are totally doing it wrong.
3.  Flux Shunt can't be obtained in the Campaign, which is too bad, since it would make a lot of smaller ships considerably more viable (and the Paragon a terrifying tank, but if you can afford a Paragon in the first place, the game is over anyhow).  
4.  The Heron is fun.
5.  Hermes would be a lot more fun with the rear mount on a 360; it can't do enough PD to be worth using atm and it's neither fast enough to be a valid interceptor (or just flat-out run away) nor is it quite potent enough to be a real combatant, even in player hands.  That other shuttle remains terrible; now it has three things that drain its very limited Flux, which is not an improvement, given that it neither has the speed to ever Vent safely nor the ability to take any damage at all.  At best it's a throw-away missile boat or storage box that could be thrown into battle by the truly desperate, but it's never worth buying.
6.  Level grind is sooooo sloooooooooooow.  I'd forgotten just how slow.  Meh, I got bored and rich before even capping one Aptitude.
7.  "The Ultimate challenge" test-thing is actually kind of fun (took me six tries to even get to battle with my lamed shuttle).
8.  The Monitor is cute, but it's almost like a tease; if we don't have double Vents, it's pretty useless... if we have that and the Combat capstone, it's a moderately useful ship, but by then, we won't want to bother with it.  It's cute but honestly, I'm not sure it's ever really worth it unless you're late-game and you just want a Frigate that's very nearly invulnerable... to a few other Frigates, or a Cruiser if you're one on one and it doesn't have quite enough firepower and you feel like slowly bashing it to death with your shield.  

It's kind of a solution in search of a problem, tbh, and the AI doesn't use it well.  Flux Shunts would make a great capstone for the Tech / Capacity upgrade path, though; I never ever take that otherwise, since Capacity just increases Vent time, and it'd be nice to have something so genuinely useful that it'd be tempting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on January 18, 2014, 12:31:44 AM
making money in the game was never hard, but for some people, everything is hard and they can't be helped anyway, what ship were you using to kill the cerberus? because the hound (starting variant) has major problems tackling this thing, the mauler completely shuts you down, you cannot get close to it, perhaps i haven't figured out the strategy yet, who knows?

Haven't had the chance to fly any of the new ships myself, looking forward to that, haven't had any crashes either, which is nice. =D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on January 18, 2014, 12:47:49 AM
Quote
what ship were you using to kill the cerberus?
Wolf with AMB.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CopperCoyote on January 18, 2014, 05:34:23 AM
Got a null error as well. I have no idea if it is from the same thing as the others. I have lazylib 1.7, radar, and Better shield control (mousewheel one).
Got the null on creating a new game.

Spoiler
69734 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Cleaned buffer for texture graphics/ships/buffalo_dd.png (using cast)
69734 [Thread-5] DEBUG com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Loading [graphics/ships/atlas_af.png] as texture with id [graphics/ships/atlas_af.png]
69750 [Thread-5] DEBUG com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Loaded 157.22 MB of texture data so far
69750 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Cleaned buffer for texture graphics/ships/atlas_af.png (using cast)
69843 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.loading.LoadingUtils  - Loading JSON from [data/config/combat_radar.json]
69843 [Thread-5] INFO  org.lazywizard.radar.CombatRadarPlugin  - Radar toggle key set to K (37)
69843 [Thread-5] INFO  org.lazywizard.radar.CombatRadarPlugin  - Radar range set to 2250.0 su
69843 [Thread-5] INFO  org.lazywizard.lazylib.LazyLib  - Running LazyLib v1.7 for Starsector 0.6.1a
69843 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.loading.LoadingUtils  - Loading JSON from [lazylib_settings.json]
69843 [Thread-5] INFO  org.lazywizard.lazylib.LazyLib  - Setting log level to ERROR
69875 [Thread-5] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.loading.SpecStore  - Description with id flarelauncher_fighter_SHIP_SYSTEM not found
69875 [Thread-5] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.loading.SpecStore  - Description with id traveldrive_SHIP_SYSTEM not found
69875 [Thread-5] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.loading.SpecStore  - Description with id inferniuminjector_SHIP_SYSTEM not found
69890 [Thread-5] WARN  com.fs.starfarer.loading.SpecStore  - Description with id skimmer_drone_SHIP_SYSTEM not found
69890 [Thread-5] DEBUG com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Loading [graphics/particlealpha32sq.png] as texture with id [fs.common/graphics/particlealpha32sq.png]
69890 [Thread-5] DEBUG com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Loaded 157.22 MB of texture data so far
69890 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Cleaned buffer for texture graphics/particlealpha32sq.png (using cast)
70218 [Thread-5] DEBUG com.fs.graphics.TextureLoader  - Loading [graphics/backgrounds/background4.jpg] as texture with id [graphics/backgrounds/background4.jpg]
191953 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Saving to ..\\saves/save_Wedge_8856606972333420659...
193968 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Finished saving
194047 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.isEntityInPlay(Unknown Source)
   at data.scripts.plugins.ShieldTogglePlugin.advance(ShieldTogglePlugin.java:25)
   at com.fs.starfarer.title.C.o0oO$Oo.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.A.OoOO.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.title.B.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
[close]

Edit: I forgot to mention i manually uninstalled the last version first.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: OOZ662 on January 18, 2014, 06:51:57 AM
I created a bug report topic (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=7607.0) (ya lazy gits) on the crash when it happened to me. Okim seems to be right in that I deleted the entire StarSector install folder, reinstalled, and haven't had issues since.

I didn't try to load my save from when the crash was happening, but whatever was causing the crash in the broken install was happening constantly a certain amount of time after reloading. Hopefully people's save files aren't dead.

EDIT: Nope. Crash came back.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on January 18, 2014, 08:29:58 AM
Has there always been two ways of getting front shield emitter?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Jazwana on January 18, 2014, 08:34:23 AM
I have also had the "1" Out of bounds crash error:

Code
1472470 [Thread-5] INFO  com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine  - FP1: 77, FP2: 50, maxFP1: 185, maxFP2: 126
2045754 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 1
java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 1
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus$ShipStatus.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus.updateFromAutoresolveData(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.AccidentManager.ôÒO000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.A.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thana on January 18, 2014, 08:50:09 AM
Well, the new version does seem a lot more friendly at the beginning of the campaign, with more small pirate detachments roaming about and the CR drops after battles not being as harsh.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 18, 2014, 08:51:04 AM
Has there always been two ways of getting front shield emitter?

No, you sure you're not mixing that up with the front shield generator?




I have no (unexplained) crashes so far by the way, did not delete the old version.




I just got to play with the Heron. I am completely in love! I was wrong in my earlier conjecture - its not the same speed as the Falcon. Its faster! Its an absolute joy to fly as the center of a small fighter fleet. I haven't tested it in a big fleet setting, but between its speed and deployment point efficiency I see this being the go to carrier.

I currently have it outfitted with 6 lrpd lasers, a heavy mauler, and dedicated targeting core. If I set my fighters to escort, then the cruiser gives them complete pd coverage. Drones only come out to play in situations that need the firepower.

I now discovered it for me too, great fun! I'm a big fan of putting a Ion Cannon on the extra mount on the port side.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 18, 2014, 09:06:48 AM
Thanks for the reports, guys - will get these fixed up for the hotfix.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Modest on January 18, 2014, 10:55:17 AM
Three hours. That much time Heron needed to become my personal favourite carrier. I am using two of them in my fighter oriented fleet and I must say, that they are great! Originaly I was going to get Astral but... Yea, two Herons are outstanding and not sure I should change anything :) At lest for now :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: LazyWizard on January 18, 2014, 11:04:57 AM
As someone who makes heavy use of escort orders, I'm greatly enjoying the new Monitor-class. The old low/mid-tech frigate lineup suffered at anti-missile escort duty, mostly due to small ballistic PD weapons having short range and not scaling well with large numbers of missiles. The Monitor's flak cannons combined with its speed and survivability make it an excellent escort even late-game. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 18, 2014, 11:16:45 AM
Crashed it again (got a fatal: 1 error this time), don't know what I did...
Log text:
Spoiler
5253610 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 1
java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 1
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus$ShipStatus.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus.updateFromAutoresolveData(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.AccidentManager.ôÒO000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.A.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

[close]
Also, Should we keep posting bugs here?
EDIT: Welp it seems that the save file that this happened on won't load. I DID save RIGHT before this happened and it took well felt like a longer time to save.
Log details concerning the broken save:
Spoiler
80907 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager  - Could not create instance of class sector : sector
---- Debugging information ----
message             : Could not create instance of class sector
cause-exception     : com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.CannotResolveClassException
cause-message       : sector
class               : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine
required-type       : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine
converter-type      : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.G
path                : /CampaignEngine/modAndPluginData/persistentData/entry[2]/map/entry[47]/FleetMember/fleetData/fleet/containingLocation/objects/lists/entry[2]/list/CampaignFleet[3]/ai/assignments/FleetAssignmentData[2]/target/where/objects/lists/entry[2]/list/JumpPoint/orbit/starSystem/scripts/data.scripts.world.systems.DiktatPatrolSpawnPoint/sector
line number         : 548103
class[1]            : data.scripts.world.systems.DiktatPatrolSpawnPoint
converter-type[1]   : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.ReflectionConverter
class[2]            : java.util.ArrayList
converter-type[2]   : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter
class[3]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem
class[4]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem$UpdateFromHyperspaceLocation
class[5]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.JumpPoint
class[6]            : java.util.HashMap
converter-type[3]   : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter
class[7]            : com.fs.util.container.repo.ObjectRepository
class[8]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.Hyperspace
class[9]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation$LocationToken
class[10]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.ai.CampaignFleetAI$FleetAssignmentData
class[11]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.ai.CampaignFleetAI
class[12]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet
class[13]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetData
class[14]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMember
class[15]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.ModAndPluginData
version             : null
-------------------------------
com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.ConversionException: Could not create instance of class sector : sector
---- Debugging information ----
message             : Could not create instance of class sector
cause-exception     : com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.CannotResolveClassException
cause-message       : sector
class               : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine
required-type       : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine
converter-type      : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.G
path                : /CampaignEngine/modAndPluginData/persistentData/entry[2]/map/entry[47]/FleetMember/fleetData/fleet/containingLocation/objects/lists/entry[2]/list/CampaignFleet[3]/ai/assignments/FleetAssignmentData[2]/target/where/objects/lists/entry[2]/list/JumpPoint/orbit/starSystem/scripts/data.scripts.world.systems.DiktatPatrolSpawnPoint/sector
line number         : 548103
class[1]            : data.scripts.world.systems.DiktatPatrolSpawnPoint
converter-type[1]   : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.ReflectionConverter
class[2]            : java.util.ArrayList
converter-type[2]   : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter
class[3]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem
class[4]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem$UpdateFromHyperspaceLocation
class[5]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.JumpPoint
class[6]            : java.util.HashMap
converter-type[3]   : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter
class[7]            : com.fs.util.container.repo.ObjectRepository
class[8]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.Hyperspace
class[9]            : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation$LocationToken
class[10]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.ai.CampaignFleetAI$FleetAssignmentData
class[11]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.ai.CampaignFleetAI
class[12]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet
class[13]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetData
class[14]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMember
class[15]           : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.ModAndPluginData
version             : null
-------------------------------
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.G.instantiateNewInstance(Unknown Source)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:233)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.addCurrentE lementToCollection(CollectionConverter.java:79)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.unmarshal(CollectionConverter.java:61)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.addCurrentE lementToCollection(CollectionConverter.java:79)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.unmarshal(CollectionConverter.java:61)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.putCurrentEntryInt oMap(MapConverter.java:89)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.populateMap(MapConverter.java:77)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.populateMap(MapConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.unmarshal(MapConverter.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.addCurrentE lementToCollection(CollectionConverter.java:79)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.unmarshal(CollectionConverter.java:61)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.addCurrentE lementToCollection(CollectionConverter.java:79)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.populateCol lection(CollectionConverter.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter.unmarshal(CollectionConverter.java:61)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.putCurrentEntryInt oMap(MapConverter.java:89)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.populateMap(MapConverter.java:77)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.populateMap(MapConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.unmarshal(MapConverter.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.putCurrentEntryInt oMap(MapConverter.java:85)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.populateMap(MapConverter.java:77)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.populateMap(MapConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.unmarshal(MapConverter.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.AbstractCollectionConverter.rea dItem(AbstractCollectionConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.putCurrentEntryInt oMap(MapConverter.java:89)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.populateMap(MapConverter.java:77)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.populateMap(MapConverter.java:71)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter.unmarshal(MapConverter.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshallField(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:355)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.doUn marshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:306)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.AbstractReflectionConverter.unma rshal(AbstractReflectionConverter.java:234)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convert(TreeUnmarshaller.java:72)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.convert(AbstractReferenceUnmarshaller.java:65)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:66)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.convertAnother(TreeUnmarshaller.java:50)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.TreeUnmarshaller.start(TreeUnmarshaller.java:134)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.core.AbstractTreeMarshallingStrategy.unmarshal(AbstractTreeMarshallingStrategy.java:32)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.XStream.unmarshal(XStream.java:1052)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.XStream.unmarshal(XStream.java:1036)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.XStream.fromXML(XStream.java:921)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.title.B.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.title.O0OO.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.privatesuper.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.OOoO.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.T.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
Caused by: com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.CannotResolveClassException: sector
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.DefaultMapper.realClass(DefaultMapper.java:56)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.DynamicProxyMapper.realClass(DynamicProxyMapper.java:55)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.PackageAliasingMapper.realClass(PackageAliasingMapper.java:88)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.ClassAliasingMapper.realClass(ClassAliasingMapper.java:79)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.ArrayMapper.realClass(ArrayMapper.java:74)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.MapperWrapper.realClass(MapperWrapper.java:30)
   at com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.CachingMapper.realClass(CachingMapper.java:45)
   ... 197 more

[close]
Going to try the game's auto backup save and see if it works
Edit 2: Backup was of the save before the corrupted one so it worked but I lost progress (No biggie though)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 18, 2014, 11:42:32 AM
Re: the first error (the "ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException") - fixed for the upcoming hotfix.

Re: the second one: do you still happen to have to corrupt savefile? It might help for me to take a look at it. This came up once a while ago, but I thought it was due to a memory leak that's now fixed. Also: are you running with any mods? It *could* be mod-related.

Also, Should we keep posting bugs here?

Probably better in the bug report forum, just so this thread doesn't get cluttered up too much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Trylobot on January 18, 2014, 01:31:36 PM
Congrats on the release, Alex. It's feeling nice and buttery now on my system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 18, 2014, 01:40:04 PM
Congrats on the release, Alex. It's feeling nice and buttery now on my system.

Thanks! Eeeeexcellent. Pleasantly surprised it made that much of a difference.


The hotfix is now up, btw. You can see the changes/download it here:
http://fractalsoftworks.com/2014/01/17/starsector-0-6-2a-release/
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on January 18, 2014, 03:32:13 PM
Cool, will let you know if I'm still seeing any NPEs, but I think my code's back to being relatively bullet-proof again :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on January 18, 2014, 04:17:24 PM
Thanks for the quick fixes!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HELMUT on January 18, 2014, 04:55:13 PM
I'm surprised by the price of the Cerberus and the Monitor, those things are damn expensive for frigates!

Also i noticed this on the Heron:

(http://i.imgur.com/rRJDHyG.png)

Anyway, thanks for the quick hotfix.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on January 18, 2014, 06:09:17 PM
Has there always been two ways of getting front shield emitter?

No, you sure you're not mixing that up with the front shield generator?

Epic face desk. This is why you don't game (or forum) tired.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on January 18, 2014, 06:47:46 PM
Apostrophes seem to be escaped improperly in the descriptions of the Monitor and Heron (maybe others?)
They show up as question marks for me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 18, 2014, 07:27:52 PM
Apostrophes seem to be escaped improperly in the descriptions of the Monitor and Heron (maybe others?)
They show up as question marks for me.

Ahh, thanks - fixed. (Man, I really hate smart quotes...)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on January 18, 2014, 08:17:46 PM
Smart quotes are SUPER evil.

Finally played a significant chunk. Heron is definitely the hightlight, haha. The monitor is like cheating, too.  :)  Of course the cerburus is awesome, and I even love the hermes, though it's tricky to fly without dying. (not that that ever stopped me before, hah!)

Overall: loving it. Frigate fleet still op  ;p  Actually everything seems pretty balanced. CR feels... more in my face? Can't honestly tell. Maybe I don't pay enough attention to it, haha. Just want to punch things in the face with tiny cheap ships.  :)   EDIT: figured it out. I was running all green crews (Which is bad for cr obvs). This is why you read things.

Nice work Alex! Can't wait for the next patch. They always hook me back in more than they probably should, haha.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Linnis on January 18, 2014, 10:59:38 PM
Much easier start even on normal difficulty, no more insane hound vs hound fights at start.
With the default half damage Cerberus vs Cerberus fights should be much better now.

Future newbies rejoice!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on January 19, 2014, 01:41:42 AM
Uuuuhmm..... why am i neutral to pirates? >.>

And i also seem to have missed that vanilla has a new starsystem! =D Didn't see Hades until now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 19, 2014, 04:47:20 AM
Hey Alex, any new thoughts regarding Operation Time (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=6712.msg109986#msg109986)?



Uuuuhmm..... why am i neutral to pirates? >.>

And i also seem to have missed that vanilla has a new starsystem! =D Didn't see Hades until now.

Not seeing anything like that, are you sure you don't have some mod active?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on January 19, 2014, 05:29:49 AM
it has a vanilla pirate station in it so i presume its vanilla. ???
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on January 19, 2014, 05:45:08 AM
Its a bushi system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 19, 2014, 10:48:59 AM
Hey Alex, any new thoughts regarding Operation Time (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=6712.msg109986#msg109986)?

Ah yes - yeah, I still like the idea. I didn't do it (yet) because, well, figuring it out accurately is kind of a pain. And it'd also require messing with the UI widget ("Pancakes") more. *And* the LR is now more meaningful than it was before. All in all, I'd like t revisit the idea at some point.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on January 19, 2014, 11:07:46 AM
Questions:

* Is Shade supposed to lose 16% CR per deploy, or is that a typo?  (Afflictor has 15%.)

* How much supply bonus does Salvage yield?  I seem to get more than before, about x2.5 to x3 now.  When I kill Hegemony defense fleets, I get almost 6000 supplies instead of 4000.  One Atlas is not enough for looting anymore, I need two now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 19, 2014, 11:20:18 AM
* Is Shade supposed to lose 16% CR per deploy, or is that a typo?  (Afflictor has 15%.)

Typo - thanks!

* How much supply bonus does Salvage yield?  I seem to get more than before, about x2.5 to x3 now.  When I kill Hegemony defense fleets, I get almost 6000 supplies instead of 4000.  One Atlas is not enough for looting anymore, I need two now.

Still 2x. IIRC the repair costs went up and that's what caused the amount of salvage in general to go up. That definitely needs tweaking (and I can see drastically lowering the amount of supplies you get from salvage at some point), but for right now, doesn't seem like something to fine-tune.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cosmitz on January 19, 2014, 01:22:41 PM
Apostrophes seem to be escaped improperly in the descriptions of the Monitor and Heron (maybe others?)
They show up as question marks for me.

Ahh, thanks - fixed. (Man, I really hate smart quotes...)

You can disable smart quotes from your keyboard layout if you're Windows. Some also have it default, like English UK afaik.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on January 19, 2014, 03:44:27 PM
Also i noticed this on the Heron:
(thing)
Anyway, thanks for the quick hotfix.

Oh, heck. We did a few shuffles of pieces on the Heron for balance right at the end of the process of drawing it and I must have forgotten to turn a layer off. Will fix!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NanoMatter on January 19, 2014, 03:49:34 PM
I just noticed this while playing. If you look at your credits or cargo, at the bottom left it says TRIPAD
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on January 19, 2014, 03:52:15 PM
Also i noticed this on the Heron:
(thing)
Anyway, thanks for the quick hotfix.

Oh, heck. We did a few shuffles of pieces on the Heron for balance right at the end of the process of drawing it and I must have forgotten to turn a layer off. Will fix!

Yeah..there are actually a few ships that have that layer.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NanoMatter on January 19, 2014, 04:06:47 PM
I have a bug, A mighty big one (I think)

[/s]

346218 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.D  - java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 1
java.lang.ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException: 1
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus$ShipStatus.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMemberStatus.updateFromAutoresolveData(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.oooO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.OoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.accidents.AccidentManager.ôÒO000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.A.super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.new.super.float$super(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.A.oOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 19, 2014, 09:53:53 PM
@Cosmitz: Thanks, that's good to know. But since the code will filter 'em out now, it's no longer necessary :)

@NanoMatter: The hotfix fixes this one - please update, if you haven't already.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 20, 2014, 03:42:59 AM
Did the ship statistics table get another update? I seem to have a better overview now. I'm really not sure what the six different colors stand for, though. Would you please explain, Alex?
Maybe they are not all correct? Cargo Capacity is the only white number, Fuel Capacity the only red one, Deployment Points the only cobalt-blue one. And why does the ship statistics table list skeleton crew twice? Once as "skeleton crew 150" and once as "crew complement x/150".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 20, 2014, 09:02:39 AM
Did the ship statistics table get another update? I seem to have a better overview now. I'm really not sure what the six different colors stand for, though.

Yeah, fairly sure I rearranged and recolored these a bit. Glad it helped make things more comprehensible.

Would you please explain, Alex?
Maybe they are not all correct? Cargo Capacity is the only white number, Fuel Capacity the only red one, Deployment Points the only cobalt-blue one. And why does the ship statistics table list skeleton crew twice? Once as "skeleton crew 150" and once as "crew complement x/150".

The colors of those match the bar colors in the lower left widget. The CR-related entires match the color of the CR bar, the hull related match the color of the hull bar, though not exactly because the exact color didn't work well for text there. I wonder if supplies/day shouldn't be blue, though, to match the color of the logistics bar... it's really both CR and logistics related. Deployment points matches the color of the bar in the deployment dialog.

For the skeleton crew, that's the minimum crew needed, while the crew complement is the actual crew that is present on that ship - there's also a breakdown by experience right below that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Blackoth on January 20, 2014, 10:54:56 AM
Very awesome news indeed! As with all updates to this game, I find myself racing home from work to download it and play. And with every update, it gets better and better. Starsector still has me more excited for updates then other whole games!

You are doing great work here Alex!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 20, 2014, 12:20:05 PM
The colors of those match the bar colors in the lower left widget. The CR-related entires match the color of the CR bar, the hull related match the color of the hull bar, though not exactly because the exact color didn't work well for text there. I wonder if supplies/day shouldn't be blue, though, to match the color of the logistics bar... it's really both CR and logistics related. Deployment points matches the color of the bar in the deployment dialog.

Oh, now I see! Following that logic, I'd definitely say supplies/day should be cobalt-blue, too. Its relative influence on LR far outweighs its relative influence on supply consumption. Uh, and what is the difference between yellow and light blue numbers?

For the skeleton crew, that's the minimum crew needed, while the crew complement is the actual crew that is present on that ship - there's also a breakdown by experience right below that.

Yeah, but the crew complement also contains the minimum crew needed, since it is written as e.g. 10/15. It's parallel to the new current/minimal crew display for the whole fleet, where the meaning is even explained by a tool tip.
So you could safe that space, use it for some not redundant info (like supplies/deployment or credits/deployment).





And by the way, so far the new CR performance degradation system feels much better than what we had before. The occasional malfunction of a weapon at as high as 39% CR is the perfect warning before worse consequences kick in, the transition is much smoother.  It is actually fun feeling your ship slowly fall apart around you.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 20, 2014, 12:46:23 PM
Very awesome news indeed! As with all updates to this game, I find myself racing home from work to download it and play. And with every update, it gets better and better. Starsector still has me more excited for updates then other whole games!

You are doing great work here Alex!

Thank you, I really appreciate it! Totally made my day :)

Oh, now I see! Following that logic, I'd definitely say supplies/day should be cobalt-blue, too. Its relative influence on LR far outweighs its relative influence on supply consumption.

Right, makes sense. Made that change.

Uh, and what is the difference between yellow and light blue numbers?

Which ones are light blue? Hull/armor? Those match the color of the hull bar. Yellow is more or less the default color.

Yeah, but the crew complement also contains the minimum crew needed, since it is written as e.g. 10/15. It's parallel to the new current/minimal crew display for the whole fleet, where the meaning is even explained by a tool tip.
So you could safe that space, use it for some not redundant info (like supplies/deployment or credits/deployment).

That's a good point. But on the other hand, it seems really important to call out the crew requirements, too, even if it's a bit redundant. Let me think about this a bit. Maybe something like, making "crew complement" the topmost in this set of lines, and then moving "effective crew level" below the actual complement breakdown... hmm.

It *would* be nice to have supplies/deployment somewhere, though it might be confusing unless it's framed as "supplies to recover from deployment" - otherwise it would look like a flat cost taken at the time of deployment, and that could do more harm then good to someone new. But how to phrase that so it can fit in the tooltip line?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 20, 2014, 02:16:31 PM


Which ones are light blue? Hull/armor? Those match the color of the hull bar. Yellow is more or less the default color.

Yeah, and all the CR related stats seem also light blue for me, but let me guess: they are the color of the CR bar? It's nor really distinguishable from the hull bar color with those tiny letters. But, oh well, it's only a nitpick, really.

"effective crew level" below the actual complement breakdown... hmm.

"Effective crew level" is also kinda redundant with the big badge on the sprite  ;D
...Especially since it is misleading (as anything more than a quick indicator) now that crew influence is actually gradual.
....Woo, more space!

It *would* be nice to have supplies/deployment somewhere, though it might be confusing unless it's framed as "supplies to recover from deployment" - otherwise it would look like a flat cost taken at the time of deployment, and that could do more harm then good to someone new. But how to phrase that so it can fit in the tooltip line?

Well, how many character do fit? Like 30?
supplies to recover from deployment 35 Char
supplies/deployment recovery  - 28 Char
supplies after deployment  -  25 Char
Deployment recovery cost - 24 Char

Or you could make it clear through context:
CR per deployment     12%
Supplies to recover     36
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 20, 2014, 02:28:22 PM
Yeah, and all the CR related stats seem also light blue for me, but let me guess: they are the color of the CR bar? It's nor really distinguishable from the hull bar color with those tiny letters.

Yeeeep :)

Or you could make it clear through context:
CR per deployment     12%
Supplies to recover     36

Oh, cool - I really like that!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: zakastra on January 21, 2014, 12:35:39 AM
Have to say that last suggestion form gothars, the supplies to recover, really shows plainly the actual *cost* financially of deploying a ship. Makes the decision between three hounds or a hyperion much plainer.

Edit: Almost forgot to say, Great stuff Alex, Loving your work.  The game feels so much smoother and crisper when playing, and the new mechanics just feel "right" comapred to the initial clunky implementation of the newer mechanics. I know you caught lots of flak from the community with CR recently, but your vision is shining through here.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 21, 2014, 01:46:04 AM
All I can say is that I hope that you continues to make SS more and more awesome.
*crosses fingers for a more "normal" release schedule instead of the last few releases*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on January 21, 2014, 04:22:37 AM
The update is great. You're doing a great job.

Cerberus is brutally expensive though, same thing with the Heron. I don't think the Cerb is worth more than a Enforcer you can get for a cheaper price. As for the Heron's price, I can kind of understand with the 2 flight decks and good stats. Its worth is determined primarily by the fightercraft you field, so in the end I guess the price is right.

Or you could make it clear through context:
CR per deployment     12%
Supplies to recover     36

This would be a godsend. It's very frustrating to see that your supply consumption is going -40 per day or something without knowing when it will stop. Would be great if you could see the total cost of current repairs and CR recovery in the tooltip, and the expected supply count after the repairs right next to your current anmount. Like this;

245  -43  =  197

It gives you clear information and a way to plan ahead.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on January 21, 2014, 07:57:49 AM
The standard Heron variant seems to have 10 unused Ordnance Points.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on January 21, 2014, 08:02:26 AM
Alex, I think Gunnyfreak's changes to the Cerebus (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=7641.msg126427#msg126427) work, perhaps with 100 less Armor, and different shuttle art.  

IDK whether you're thinking one more RC for this round or not, but if so, I'd definitely go for it- it's pretty competitive for costs and it's unique and interesting, rather than pretty underwhelming.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on January 21, 2014, 08:25:13 AM
I definitely would second looking at Gunnyfreak's changes, they make for a very interesting ship with some emergent gameplay the way the best role changes as the battle goes on
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 21, 2014, 09:40:03 AM
Thanks for the kind words, guys!

The game feels so much smoother and crisper when playing, and the new mechanics just feel "right" comapred to the initial clunky implementation of the newer mechanics. I know you caught lots of flak from the community with CR recently, but your vision is shining through here.

Glad to hear it's working better for you! I'm liking it much better too, but of course I'm biased :)

This really reminds me of the command system - that took a few iterations to get right, too. Is it perfect now? Absolutely not. It works, though, and it's much smoother than the initial version(s).


The standard Heron variant seems to have 10 unused Ordnance Points.

Oops - fixed. Must've raised the OP limit at some point and forgotten to update the variant, that's how this sort of thing tends to happen.


Or you could make it clear through context:
CR per deployment     12%
Supplies to recover     36

This would be a godsend. It's very frustrating to see that your supply consumption is going -40 per day or something without knowing when it will stop. Would be great if you could see the total cost of current repairs and CR recovery in the tooltip, and the expected supply count after the repairs right next to your current anmount. Like this;

245  -43  =  197

It gives you clear information and a way to plan ahead.

Hmm, right. Not the same as "supplies to recover", but also potentially useful. Also ties in to the "operating time" idea, which might actually provide the same information but more elegantly. Let me think about that - don't want to just throw more data on the screen.


Cerberus is brutally expensive though, same thing with the Heron. I don't think the Cerb is worth more than a Enforcer you can get for a cheaper price. As for the Heron's price, I can kind of understand with the 2 flight decks and good stats. Its worth is determined primarily by the fightercraft you field, so in the end I guess the price is right.
Alex, I think Gunnyfreak's changes to the Cerebus (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=7641.msg126427#msg126427) work, perhaps with 100 less Armor, and different shuttle art.  

IDK whether you're thinking one more RC for this round or not, but if so, I'd definitely go for it- it's pretty competitive for costs and it's unique and interesting, rather than pretty underwhelming.
I definitely would second looking at Gunnyfreak's changes, they make for a very interesting ship with some emergent gameplay the way the best role changes as the battle goes on

The Cerberus will probably see some changes, but I'd like to avoid a kneejerk reaction. One of the bigger issues is price, too. It just shouldn't be that expensive.

(Not planning on another RC, btw. That's only for critical bugs, generally crashes. Sometimes, a few miscellaneous fixes go along for the ride, but they're never the driving force.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on January 21, 2014, 10:25:41 AM
Quote
The Cerberus will probably see some changes, but I'd like to avoid a kneejerk reaction. One of the bigger issues is price, too. It just shouldn't be that expensive.

eh, I kinda like the Warhound to be that expensive (as long as she's powerful enough to match), more for diversity's sake than anything else

I mean, I think of the Warhound as a counterpart to tritach's Tempest - the premium frigate that projects firepower well above her size. Whereas the Tempest relies on efficient shields and maneuverability, as well as precision strike capability provided by her single missile slot (like a tri-tach ship surely should), the Warhound relies on sheer armor and firepower as befitting a member of the Hegemony fleet.

As it stands (vanilla), the Warhound is about half way between a hound and a lasher - a fast attack frigate that's not quite fast enough and a line escort without the endurance provided by shields. Even if the price is brought down and stats balanced a bit, she just doesn't quite fill a role that can't be filled by hounds or lashers.

IMHO, ofc, I'm sure alex will think of something good. And if I happen to disagree, well, refer to sig below
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 21, 2014, 10:48:03 AM
The thing is, it's meant to be a mostly civilian ship - just one capable of operating in a warzone. Think of it as a frigate-sized Mule equivalent. As the campaign develops, I'd expect those types of ships to have much more of a role than they do now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on January 21, 2014, 11:03:56 AM
well, there's my preconception of the warhound cerberus (sorry) out of the window

I just kinda saw it and thought "EPICHEGEMONYBEASTTANK"

meh, I'll keep it, I like the "firefly off to war" feel it's got right now
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on January 21, 2014, 12:16:30 PM
I don't think it's a knee-jerk reaction, though :) 

Note that nobody's complaining about the Heron and I'm pretty much out on a limb in my critique of the Monitor (although I stand by that and I think once the novelty has worn off, we'll see I'm right) :) 

We have been playing the game for a couple of years, after all.  Gunnyfreak pretty much nailed it and gave it a special role, which is something ships need, while being fairly priced- as it is, if the price dropped to $8000, it's irrelevant, because money is largely irrelevant, if you're even halfway competent.  If, in the future, money is much tighter and that extra $10K matters... I'm still not buying it, even if the price comes down to earth; if money matters, then buying a ship that may become a flying cinder if the LRM Gods decide it's time to die just won't make sense, unless there's literally nothing else to buy.

There are lots of better alternatives, if one is looking for a freighter, at or below that price point.  If it held another 50 Cargo, it might be vaguely competitive as a freighter that we'd drag into combat with the greatest reluctance (since it doesn't provide a flight deck or have drones), but as-is, no, not even with full OPs and the armor / hull buffs, since those make a lot of merely good ships great, whereas the Cerebus would just become vaguely competent against zero-level Admirals.  But once we have Admirals to compete against... well, that kind of pushes back the value of the buffs and all that, and the Cerebus becomes a weak link.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 21, 2014, 12:41:23 PM
I don't think it's a knee-jerk reaction, though :) 

I meant a knee-jerk reaction on *my* part :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 21, 2014, 12:51:30 PM
You see how much we all really want to love that little bugger?  ;)
If it's supposed to stay civilian, maybe increasing it's fuel capacity could open the niche of a combined fast freighter/tanker.  


Something I wanted to mention: The Media section on the main page still has a big 2012 date at the top. That might give new visitors on the side a wrong impression that no major updates have happened since then. To put a few new pictures up just to have a 2014 date there wouldn't be a bad idea, would it?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 21, 2014, 01:03:10 PM
If it's supposed to stay civilian, maybe increasing it's fuel capacity could open the niche of a combined fast freighter/tanker.  

I have a feeling that cargo capacities will need to be adjusted a lot, for most/all ships, before it's all said and done.

Something I wanted to mention: The Media section on the main page still has a big 2012 date at the top. That might give new visitors on the side a wrong impression that no major updates have happened since then. To put a few new pictures up just to have a 2014 date there wouldn't be a bad idea, would it?

Oh, thanks - yeah that page... yeah. I just put the trailer up at the top so it doesn't look so neglected.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on January 21, 2014, 01:50:37 PM
Quote from: Alex
I have a feeling that cargo capacities will need to be adjusted a lot, for most/all ships, before it's all said and done.
I completely agree with this!  It is so wrong that I need two Atlas superfreighters to salvage loot from one or two big fights without exceeding capacity.

I will post my experiences with the new update in more detail after I finish grinding.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: AllTogetherAndrews on January 21, 2014, 07:04:42 PM
I have a question related to the way that logistics is calculated. I was wondering if crew were supposed to take up logistics even when within the maximum crew capacity of the fleet. I wondered about this because fuel and supplies don't take up additional logistics unless you run over your fleet capacity.  Crew, on the other hand seems to take exactly 1 logistics per 100 crew regardless of whether that 100 is under capacity. This results in large capital ships requiring somewhat more logistics to field than the actual cost of the ship itself (Odyssey class for example actually takes 21 to field instead of the 15 listed). I was just wondering if this was intentional.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on January 21, 2014, 07:12:10 PM
You can throw my hat in there with the other people who were wondering why what is basically a Hound with an extended cab costs more than combat-grade Destroyer.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on January 23, 2014, 08:22:12 PM
Question for the wiki: Do fighters suffer any negative CR effects, other than running out of replacement chassis?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 23, 2014, 11:31:29 PM
Question for the wiki: Do fighters suffer any negative CR effects, other than running out of replacement chassis?
If you are talking about stuff like malfunctions, then yeah I'm pretty sure they do. I know that I have at least seen engine malfunctions
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on January 24, 2014, 02:25:17 AM
I have a question related to the way that logistics is calculated. I was wondering if crew were supposed to take up logistics even when within the maximum crew capacity of the fleet. I wondered about this because fuel and supplies don't take up additional logistics unless you run over your fleet capacity.  Crew, on the other hand seems to take exactly 1 logistics per 100 crew regardless of whether that 100 is under capacity. This results in large capital ships requiring somewhat more logistics to field than the actual cost of the ship itself (Odyssey class for example actually takes 21 to field instead of the 15 listed). I was just wondering if this was intentional.

Hi :)  Sorry for the late answer!

You are right, crew does consume supplies, as do marines. The Odyssey should only consume 19 supplies/day with skeleton crew, though. It's not listed because crew count can vary quite a bit, but I think you've got something here; It would be very helpful for new players if the supply consumption of the minimum crew would be listed.

Maybe like this:

Logistics (supplies/day)          15 (+4)

wherein the green is the color of the other crew related entries.



Question for the wiki: Do fighters suffer any negative CR effects, other than running out of replacement chassis?

With this update they should be free of malfunctions. Not sure about degraded performance, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on January 24, 2014, 02:49:28 AM
that would have to be

Logistics (supplies/day) 15(+4) = 19 (Supplies/day)

otherwise you would be confused, is 15 the supplies per day in total? or is it 19 with the +4?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: T_Mir on January 26, 2014, 07:06:20 AM
May I ask a question without opening a new thread? Thank you for the great new patch; is there any way to get the Monitor class without starting a new game? That ship is awesome (even without those flaks) and i really don't want a new game.
All the other ships have already been delivered, so, all what i am doing actually is waiting, travelling and looking for the ship, like a fanatic person...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on January 26, 2014, 07:24:08 AM
There are two Monitors for sale in Askonia, at first.  But if your game has progressed long enough, they may get replaced by other ships if you do not buy them in time.  The station in Askonia also has some other nice ships to buy such as two Heron and five Oxen.  Like the Monitors, they eventually get replaced by new stock.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on January 26, 2014, 07:30:23 AM
I think he means w/o starting a new game, meaning a save that's been around since 0.6.1a. I think. Though the answer is the same if it's that, or if you've just run out of Monitors in a new game:

It's going to be challenging. There's a chance of a Monitor being delivered to the station in Askonia, but it's small. If you keep taking out Diktat fleets, they'll respawn, and the respawns have a chance to have a Monitor in them. If you take *those* out, you might be able to board one. Again, though, that could really take a while.

(Also: hello, and welcome to the forum!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: T_Mir on January 26, 2014, 08:15:57 AM
Thanks for the fast reply, i will begin the invasion of Askonia!

An other point. Some players are quite unhappy with the "high costs" of some ships.
Honestly, i think all ships are cheap, too cheap, i mean, just take out a pirate plunder fleet and buy tons of new ships and weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 26, 2014, 01:37:30 PM
May I ask a question without opening a new thread? Thank you for the great new patch; is there any way to get the Monitor class without starting a new game? That ship is awesome (even without those flaks) and i really don't want a new game.
All the other ships have already been delivered, so, all what i am doing actually is waiting, travelling and looking for the ship, like a fanatic person...
Another way would be to install the mod "Console Commands" here: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4106.0 and use the code "addship monitor_hull" without the quotes
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: T_Mir on January 26, 2014, 03:32:17 PM
Thank you, it worked, it's a bit cheated but i will sacrifice 10 Paragons for that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on January 26, 2014, 04:44:11 PM
Thank you, it worked, it's a bit cheated but i will sacrifice 10 Paragons for that.
No problem!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on January 27, 2014, 03:55:34 PM
After playing the Heron more, and experimenting with various configurations, I like this ship.  Even though it is a dedicated carrier, with benefits from Combat and Technology, a Heron flagship is nimble and can fight on the front lines, or at least use its speed to dictate the terms of engagement.  It can go toe-to-toe with frigates and destroyers without any problems.  While it can go toe-to-toe with bigger ships, doing so without fighter support is tedious, but we choose the Heron for fighter use, right?

My favorite configuration as a Combat/Technology specialist:

Heron
Weapons:  Heavy Blaster, Burst PD Laser x4
Hullmods:  Augmented Engines, Integrated Targeting Unit
Capacitors: 5
Vents: 21

Two rearmost mounts left empty.  With this configuration, the Heron points its nose at its target, and blasts it with the Heavy Blaster.  Though not as efficient as dedicated warships that can fire two or three blasters at once, one blaster will get the job done.  Four burst PD lasers that aim forward should take care of most incoming threats, and pile a little more damage to whatever the Heron is blasting.  For the uncommon missile threat from behind, either turn the ship, raise the shield at the rear, or deploy drones.

My minor complaints/nitpicking?  Costs 9 Logistics to deploy instead of 8.  Limited OP (currently works, but it is rough nonetheless), and only 100 crew between minimum and maximum.  Not very many replacement pilots unless player has the Making Do perk or another ship with crew to spare.

EDIT - This Heron can solo a Hegemony defense fleet singlehandedly, without fighters.  Doing so is slow, but possible.  The Heron plays like a high-tech ship while disguised as a midline ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SQW on February 04, 2014, 06:11:49 PM

EDIT - This Heron can solo a Hegemony defense fleet singlehandedly, without fighters.  Doing so is slow, but possible.  The Heron plays like a high-tech ship while disguised as a midline ship.

How on earth does 1 heavy blaster break through even one Onslaught's shield???  :o 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Chaos Farseer on February 04, 2014, 07:23:19 PM
By going around it :P

I'm still fairly certain that no Vanilla ship can beat the Onslaught by attacking from the front, 1v1. Thing is scary.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on February 04, 2014, 09:22:21 PM
A properly set up paragon, or even conquest, might be able to. Moreso in the campaign, where your skill level improves your ship stats by allocating them in the right places.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SQW on February 04, 2014, 09:30:52 PM
At max range of the blaster, Onslaught can turn faster than a medium carrier can strafe. Heck, that Heron with probably run out of CR before it kills an Onslaught.

Ironically, what I do see is a Hound circling behind this particular Heron and giving it an embarrassing end for talking so much hot air.  :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on February 05, 2014, 01:23:50 AM
A properly-configured Conquest or Paragon can definitely kill an Onslaught :)  Heck, people have killed Onslaughts with Tempests.

The Heron, with player buffs to speed and maneuverability, can circle quite nicely, and if you can get the Onslaught to use its Burn Drive badly, you can get behind it just fine.  But with the Tech bonus to weapon range, you really don't need to; you can just kite from outside the Onslaught's effective range, taking minimal hits to the shield.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on February 05, 2014, 12:49:51 PM
Heck, people have killed Onslaughts with Tempests.
Make that Hounds. The Onslaught is a beast of a ship, but it needs a friend or two to watch it's back.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 05, 2014, 02:03:35 PM
Gothars managed it in a Buffalo Mk II. Seriously.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on February 05, 2014, 03:41:00 PM
O.o  But... how... what? That's impressive. Did it involve kiting until it was out of ammo or something?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on February 05, 2014, 03:45:37 PM
Heck, people have killed Onslaughts with Tempests.
Make that Hounds. The Onslaught is a beast of a ship, but it needs a friend or two to watch it's back.
Gothars managed it in a Buffalo Mk II. Seriously.
O.o  But... how... what? That's impressive. Did it involve kiting until it was out of ammo or something?

Apparently it involved luring the onslaught into burn driving into a nebulae, then torpedoing its engines while it was even less able to turn than normal... I don't recall the entire setup, but it was pretty crazy.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Chaos Farseer on February 05, 2014, 06:10:12 PM
Here's the topic if you're looking for it:

http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=6777.0
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on February 05, 2014, 08:10:38 PM
Frickin crazy. Props to Gothers. Thanks for the link. I'm gonna have to try that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 06, 2014, 08:34:15 AM
My, thank you. I hadn't thought that anyone would still remember that :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on February 06, 2014, 12:18:05 PM
My, thank you. I hadn't thought that anyone would still remember that :)

It will always be remembered, haha.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Msahn on February 07, 2014, 04:46:25 AM
Hi everybody,
just wanted to tell you that this game is awesome!
I played dozens of hours already, and I'm hoping for extra content coming soon to us, also congratulations for the people involved in the project and great modders doing superb job. I think that I'll buy another license just to show my support. The game is by far better then any official big titles - for example I spent 2 hours playing X rebirth before coming here.
Once again great job guys!!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 07, 2014, 12:42:57 PM
Thank you, guys! Really appreciate your support.

... and I'm hoping for extra content coming soon to us ...

Working on that :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ordanen on February 07, 2014, 12:45:13 PM
Just curious, but is there any way to donate money other than buying more licenses?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on February 07, 2014, 12:54:35 PM
Alex seems to be stoic with not having a donation button.  Trust me, we've all pestered him about it in the past. ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 07, 2014, 12:55:54 PM
In brief - no, there's no other way. I've thought about accepting donations in the past, and it just doesn't feel right to do that for something that's, in the end, a commercial product.

Thank you for even considering this!

(Aaaand, ninja'ed :))
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 07, 2014, 01:52:57 PM
Just buy lots of licenses and give them to your friends! Or give them away publicly in a promotional give away to give SS more exposure.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ordanen on February 07, 2014, 02:39:07 PM
Just buy lots of licenses and give them to your friends! Or give them away publicly in a promotional give away to give SS more exposure.

Already gave another license to a friend, and got another one to buy a license. Then made him a video about getting started. But yeah, I'll just buy more licenses at some point I guess.

Alex's point is fair, but if I compare how much I spent on SS compared to how much enjoyment I've gotten from it, it's staggering.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on February 07, 2014, 06:09:15 PM
In brief - no, there's no other way. I've thought about accepting donations in the past, and it just doesn't feel right to do that for something that's, in the end, a commercial product.

Just sell merchandise or something.  It's what everyone else does.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on February 07, 2014, 06:26:20 PM
3D plastic models of starsector ships would be pretty damn cool, or an artbook or something.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hyph_K31 on February 07, 2014, 06:53:03 PM
I still want that paragon plushy...

Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 07, 2014, 07:19:17 PM
3D plastic models of starsector ships would be pretty damn cool, or an artbook or something.

Love that idea, or an Admiral's cap with the embroided with the words 'U.S.S. Starsector' and the outline of a Paragon or something.

Like what these guys do. http://www.totalnavy.com/directhat.htm
 
Obviously all SERIOUS Starsector players will wear one of those while playing, except for Mesotronik. Mesotronik has to wear the same ornate Admiral hat from his sig :D like this Soviet one http://www.ebay.com/itm/Soviet-Naval-ADMIRAL-Visor-Hat-embroidery-cap-CCCP-/141185468809?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item20df4f4989&_uhb=1

Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: MesoTroniK on February 07, 2014, 08:46:52 PM
Debido, you are an odd one hehe...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 07, 2014, 09:04:59 PM
Debido, you are an odd one hehe...

That may be true. Though you know you want to buy one of those admiral caps whilst piloting your Exigency capital ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Roka on February 08, 2014, 02:21:45 PM
I don't know if this has been asked already, but will you add fighter/bomber squadron related skills? And maybe some hull mods relating to them? I love carriers a lot, and would love to have skills that make my fighters even more effective.

Maybe A hull mod that can add a makeshift flight deck to any ship?(maybe with half the repair/rebuilding speed of a normal flight deck?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on February 08, 2014, 03:05:24 PM
I don't know if this has been asked already, but will you add fighter/bomber squadron related skills? And maybe some hull mods relating to them? I love carriers a lot, and would love to have skills that make my fighters even more effective.

Maybe A hull mod that can add a makeshift flight deck to any ship?(maybe with half the repair/rebuilding speed of a normal flight deck?)

I would suggest adding your suggestion to the suggestion thread. I think you'll find your suggestion has been suggested several times prior.  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Blackoth on February 13, 2014, 07:28:05 AM
In brief - no, there's no other way. I've thought about accepting donations in the past, and it just doesn't feel right to do that for something that's, in the end, a commercial product.

Just sell merchandise or something.  It's what everyone else does.

I want magnetic cutouts of the ships of Starsector so that I can play on my refrigerator!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 13, 2014, 10:42:39 AM
I want magnetic cutouts of the ships of Starsector so that I can play on my refrigerator!
F*** YES! This would be freaking AWESOME!! *thinks about putting them on my car as well*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on February 14, 2014, 07:03:43 AM
Yeah, we're a tad off-topic. Closing here until further news.