Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => Announcements => Topic started by: Alex on April 04, 2014, 12:00:22 PM

Title: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 04, 2014, 12:00:22 PM
Changes as of October 20, 2014

Campaign:

Combat:

Fighters:

Bugfixing

Modding:

Spoiler
  • API additions:
  • BattleObjectiveAPI
    • SpriteAPI getSprite();
    • void setSprite(SpriteAPI sprite);
  • BeamAPI
    • void setHitGlow(SpriteAPI sprite);
    • SpriteAPI getHitGlow();
    • float getHitGlowBrightness();
    • float getWidth();
    • void setWidth(float width);
    • float getPixelsPerTexel();
    • void setPixelsPerTexel(float pixelsPerTexel);
    • Color getCoreColor();
    • void setCoreColor(Color coreColor);
    • Color getFringeColor();
    • void setFringeColor(Color fringeColor);
  • CombatEngineAPI
    • void endCombat(float delay, FleetSide winner);
    • boolean isSimulation()
    • boolean isMission();
    • String getMissionId();
    • void setPlayerShipExternal(ShipAPI ship);
    • boolean isUIShowingDialog();
    • boolean isUIShowingHUD();
    • boolean isUIAutopilotOn()
  • CombatEntityAPI
    • void setCollisionRadius(float radius);
  • CombatFleetManagerAPI
    • void addToReserves(FleetMemberAPI member);
    • void removeFromReserves(FleetMemberAPI member);
  • FighterWingAPI
    • String getWingId();
  • ShieldAPI
    • void setArc(float arc);
    • void setInnerColor(Color color);
    • void setRingColor(Color ringColor);
    • Color getInnerColor();
    • Color getRingColor();
    • float getUpkeep();
    • void forceFacing(float facing);
    • void setRadius(float radius);
    • void setRadius(float radius, String textureInner, String textureRing);
  • DamagingProjectileAPI
    • getElapsed()
    • DamageAPI getDamage()
  • DamageAPI
    • float computeFluxDealt(float amount);
    • float computeDamageDealt(float amount);
    • boolean isMissile();
    • void setMissile(boolean isMissile);
    • void setStats(MutableShipStatsAPI stats);
    • MutableShipStatsAPI getStats();
    • float getDamage();
    • void setDamage(float amount);
    • boolean isDps();
    • float getMultiplier();
    • void setMultiplier(float multiplier);
    • DamageType getType();
    • void setType(DamageType type);
    • float getFluxComponent();
    • void setFluxComponent(float fluxComponent);
  • MissileAPI
    • float getMaxFlightTime();
  • ShipAPI
    • ShipwideAIFlags getAIFlags();
    • List<WeaponGroupAPI> getWeaponGroupsCopy();
  • boolean isHoldFire();
    • boolean isHoldFireOneFrame();
    • void setHoldFireOneFrame(boolean holdFireOneFrame);
    • void setJitter(Color color, float intensity, int copies, float range);
    • boolean isPhased();
  • WeaponGroupAPI
  • boolean isAutofiring();
    • void toggleOn();
    • void toggleOff();
    • List<WeaponAPI> getWeaponsCopy();
    • WeaponGroupType getType();
    • void setType(WeaponGroupType type);
    • ShipAPI getShip();
    • WeaponAPI getActiveWeapon();
  • List<AutofireAIPlugin> getAIPlugins();
  • ShipEngineAPI
    • boolean isPermanentlyDisabled();
    • void applyDamage(float damAmount, Object source);
    • float getMaxHitpoints();
    • float getHitpoints();
    • EngineSlotAPI getEngineSlot();
  • EngineSlotAPI
    • <nothing so far>
  • ShipSystemAPI
  • boolean isChargeup();
  • boolean isChargedown();
  • boolean isStateActive();
  • int getMaxAmmo();
  • void setAmmo(int ammo);
  • ViewportAPI
    • void set(float llx, float lly, float visibleWidth, float visibleHeight);
    • void setViewMult(float zoom);
    • (setCenter() can already be accomplished via getCenter().set())
  • WeaponAPI
    • DamageAPI getDamage();
  • SectorEntityToken
    • void setName(String name);
  • TextPanelAPI
    • clear()
  • AnimationAPI
    • float getFrameRate();
    • void setFrameRate(float frameRate);
[close]


Changes as of September 24, 2014

(Note: this batch of notes does not include some smaller items, in particular a large number of API enhancements.)

Campaign:

Music:

Combat:

Miscellaneous

Modding:



Changes as of June 11, 2014

(Note: this batch of notes is probably missing some items.)

Campaign:

Miscellaneous:

Combat:

Modding:


Bugfixing:



Changes as of April 04, 2014

Campaign:

Miscellaneous:

Modding:

Bugfixing:
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: jet36 on April 04, 2014, 12:16:11 PM
Hey neat, an update! Some nice things added, though not much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 04, 2014, 12:18:25 PM
:(

The first couple of items (everything under "campaign") are probably... 10x the work of everything else in the notes. But it doesn't read as such, and it's more preparation for more-obviously-interesting stuff to come.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on April 04, 2014, 12:23:53 PM
  • Updated graphics for Falcon, Eagle, and Ox
Lots of shiny stuff, but this is the one I'm most curious about; what changed, and why?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on April 04, 2014, 12:41:11 PM
  • Updated graphics for Falcon, Eagle, and Ox
Lots of shiny stuff, but this is the one I'm most curious about; what changed, and why?

The Ox looked underpowered for its in-game effect so I made it, whats the technical term? Yes: beefier.

As for the Falcon and Eagle, I feel they were overly greebled in a way that added visual noise rather than signal. So touched them up a bit to read more as overall designs rather than collections of meaningless details. They're still the same ships and look basically the same, mind you, it's just a "this was bugging me more and more as I kept seeing it so I just did it" thing.

I mean heck, it's been at least 2 years since I drew originals so you'd think I'd grow a bit as in artist in the time right?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on April 04, 2014, 01:08:33 PM
A lot of intriguing stuff here. I like the idea of more communication and interaction with NPCs both from a modding and gameplay standpoint. Also excited to see what David has whipped up using the custom sprite entity in the campaign layer if anything.

Wanna see dem sprites.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on April 04, 2014, 01:09:32 PM
That's looking awesome!  Great job getting the event system to that point, the channels / communication idea sounds really cool :)

Custom Station graphics, damage graphics and sounds, yay!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: th3boodlebot on April 04, 2014, 02:35:26 PM
Can someone tell me how the fighters going around ships works? Do they enter a separate field of sorts and hence avoid collision, or is collision merely disabled while the engines are active?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on April 04, 2014, 02:48:46 PM
Very cool!

Quote
...
Added LocationAPI.addCustomEntity()

    Entity with custom graphics (can be a sprite, but there's also a custom OpenGL rendering hook)
    Entities defined in data/config/custom_entities.json

Would this allow us to, say, make a custom graphic, add it to the location, then scan for interactions using an extension of BaseCampaignPlugin and handle them with InteractionDialogPlugin? Because the ability to add any sprite and have it interact any way we want is going to be absolutely fantastic for modding!

Thanks as always for the update :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 04, 2014, 02:55:04 PM
Would this allow us to, say, make a custom graphic, add it to the location, then scan for interactions using an extension of BaseCampaignPlugin and handle them with InteractionDialogPlugin? Because the ability to add any sprite and have it interact any way we want is going to be absolutely fantastic for modding!

Yeah, that's exactly the idea. Since the class is always going to be the same and you can't use instanceof to figure out which type of entity it is, you can base the interactions on whatever tags the entity has instead.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on April 04, 2014, 03:01:57 PM
Would this allow us to, say, make a custom graphic, add it to the location, then scan for interactions using an extension of BaseCampaignPlugin and handle them with InteractionDialogPlugin? Because the ability to add any sprite and have it interact any way we want is going to be absolutely fantastic for modding!

Yeah, that's exactly the idea. Since the class is always going to be the same and you can't use instanceof to figure out which type of entity it is, you can base the interactions on whatever tags the entity has instead.

Oh man thats going to be fun. I already know what I'm going to do with it too... muahahaha.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on April 04, 2014, 03:15:26 PM
I mean heck, it's been at least 2 years since I drew originals so you'd think I'd grow a bit as in artist in the time right?
Yay! The latest stuff you've put out is DEFINITELY awesome.  :D  Can't wait to see them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on April 04, 2014, 04:41:50 PM
:(

Don't worry, the rest of us appreciate everything you do! This is definitely a groundwork patch, but I have no issue with that at all; it's part of growing and I'm still super excited for everything in this patch!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 04, 2014, 04:50:57 PM
Oh, I didn't mean to imply that jet36 didn't, eh, "appreciate" it or anything of the sort; I think the rest of his post makes it clear it's rather the opposite :)

But, that aside, thank you!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaphide on April 04, 2014, 11:50:38 PM
SectorAPI.doHyperspaceTransition() no longer crashes when jumpLocation == null

Haha excellent, was going to post about this :)

What happened to 0.63 and 0.64? Or should I say 0.6.3 and 0.6.4...? :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on April 05, 2014, 12:27:25 AM
Added approximate total supply cost to recover from deployment to ship tooltip

Huzzah!

The first couple of items (everything under "campaign") are probably... 10x the work of everything else in the notes. But it doesn't read as such, and it's more preparation for more-obviously-interesting stuff to come.

I'm hoping for many more details about this in the next blogpost, so we all can "appreciate" (read: drool over) it properly :)  Got any teaser pics, maybe?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on April 05, 2014, 01:22:39 AM
Great patchnotes. Really looking forward to the trade system and see how you will incorporate it into the game.

As for the Falcon and Eagle, I feel they were overly greebled in a way that added visual noise rather than signal. So touched them up a bit to read more as overall designs rather than collections of meaningless details. They're still the same ships and look basically the same, mind you, it's just a "this was bugging me more and more as I kept seeing it so I just did it" thing.

Would be fun if we could see the sprites. I'm guessing the patch is going to take a while so you could atleast throw us a bone to chew on in the meantime.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 05, 2014, 10:00:09 AM
What happened to 0.63 and 0.64? Or should I say 0.6.3 and 0.6.4...? :P

They asked too many questions ;)


I'm hoping for many more details about this in the next blogpost, so we all can "appreciate" (read: drool over) it properly :)  Got any teaser pics, maybe?

Not quite yet on the pics - the trouble is that things become functional long before they become presentable. I do need to think a bit about what's going to be in the next blog post, though.


Would be fun if we could see the sprites. I'm guessing the patch is going to take a while so you could atleast throw us a bone to chew on in the meantime.

Fair enough - the new Eagle:
Spoiler
Click for full size
(https://s3.amazonaws.com/fractalsoftworks/screenshots/new_eagle.png) (https://s3.amazonaws.com/fractalsoftworks/screenshots/new_eagle.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on April 05, 2014, 10:44:14 AM
Hm, the eagle looks more 3D, as in more height and volume.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on April 05, 2014, 10:48:29 AM
The smoothness looks wonderful but my problem with the eagle has always been that the central part over the guns doesn't look like its part of the ship, its like its been bolted on or something for increased firepower, or perhaps the central part is sloped down while the pylons on the side are flat, because that would explain it. This new eagle more or less fixes that problem with the reworked middle section.


on the left is me trying to merge the pylons and the central section together. on the right is the current eagle in the game.
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/RCbEfCv.png)(http://i.imgur.com/JAJw9fX.png)
[close]

can't wait for the new update, and certainly cannot wait for the improved ship sprites. ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on April 05, 2014, 10:00:10 PM
YAY for new patch notes!
One slight concern though: I don't know that using the outposts button as the temporary intel button is a good idea as I think a few mods MIGHT use that button.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on April 06, 2014, 05:28:19 AM
The Outpost button isn't even usable right now, I think.  Otherwise We'd already be far ahead of Alex. XD
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Morrokain on April 06, 2014, 12:43:02 PM
My question is, are there plans to do the same thing to the Conquest? I love the new eagle graphic!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Msahn on April 07, 2014, 09:31:35 AM
Alex, just wanted to say that it's great to see some news about your great project Sir !!! =]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ArthropodOfDoom on April 09, 2014, 07:38:22 PM
Can haz Ox pics pl0x?

Srs bsns though, how does one make a what already looks like a brick with warning stripes on it look "beefier"?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TheHengeProphet on April 10, 2014, 03:12:00 AM
I really like the reworked center section on the Eagle, but I don't think it fits well with the rest of the ship.  It is comparatively quite smoothe, where the rest of the ship has this sort of "shingled" look about it.  I think either smoothing out the rest of the ship or roughing up the center a bit would fix it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: NCMagic on April 10, 2014, 07:24:44 AM
The Intel tab is going to be so useful, goodbye the times i lost a text message when tabbing into a character screen.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on April 10, 2014, 08:46:34 PM
The Intel tab is going to be so useful, goodbye the times i lost a text message when tabbing into a character screen.
I HOPE this is one of the functionalitys of the Intel tab
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: VaeliusNoctu on April 13, 2014, 10:58:07 AM
Hello,

im a new Member buyd the Game two days bevor. Very nice Game. But have the Game only 2 Sectors atm and 3 Stations?
Its a bit booring +i killed so "much" Pirates that not enough Enemys was in both Sectors for me. The Rest was small fleets and no challenge for me. Ok i can attack the orange, grey or blue Fleets but i wish not to lost my Support Stations.

Problem is now im Level 17 and see no Reson Play further. Nothing to Explore, no Enemys,  see all ships Weapons etc... and that all with 1 Capital Ship and a Frigatte both from the Technical Faction (blue).

How far was this Game from a Interesting upgrade? More Sectors, Factions, Stations, Missions, Diplomacy etc...?

btw i have a Suggestion add the Feature Exporting a Pilot (with or whithout fleet whatever...).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: arcibalde on April 13, 2014, 01:57:59 PM
Hello,

im a new Member buyd the Game two days bevor. Very nice Game. But have the Game only 2 Sectors atm and 3 Stations?
Its a bit booring +i killed so "much" Pirates that not enough Enemys was in both Sectors for me. The Rest was small fleets and no challenge for me. Ok i can attack the orange, grey or blue Fleets but i wish not to lost my Support Stations.

Problem is now im Level 17 and see no Reson Play further. Nothing to Explore, no Enemys,  see all ships Weapons etc... and that all with 1 Capital Ship and a Frigatte both from the Technical Faction (blue).

How far was this Game from a Interesting upgrade? More Sectors, Factions, Stations, Missions, Diplomacy etc...?

btw i have a Suggestion add the Feature Exporting a Pilot (with or whithout fleet whatever...).
Try MODS you got them under here:
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?board=8.0

and here is list of ALL mods:
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=177.0
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Richyread on April 13, 2014, 02:20:21 PM
Hello,

im a new Member buyd the Game two days bevor. Very nice Game. But have the Game only 2 Sectors atm and 3 Stations?
Its a bit booring +i killed so "much" Pirates that not enough Enemys was in both Sectors for me. The Rest was small fleets and no challenge for me. Ok i can attack the orange, grey or blue Fleets but i wish not to lost my Support Stations.

Problem is now im Level 17 and see no Reson Play further. Nothing to Explore, no Enemys,  see all ships Weapons etc... and that all with 1 Capital Ship and a Frigatte both from the Technical Faction (blue).

How far was this Game from a Interesting upgrade? More Sectors, Factions, Stations, Missions, Diplomacy etc...?

btw i have a Suggestion add the Feature Exporting a Pilot (with or whithout fleet whatever...).

Pedantic answer - read the homepage. The game is in Alpha(or are we in Beta now?) and as such does not represent a finished product.

Helpful answer - Alex and the team have provided a smashing framework to allow others to enhance with mods. If you take a look in the MODS TAB -> http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?board=8.0 (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?board=8.0) you will see a whole selection of diverse extras to expand the game.

There's well over 20 mods of truly excellent quality - both in AI, diversity and artwork that there's bound to be something to keep you busy. ;)

Richy.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 13, 2014, 02:45:24 PM
Yep! (Still "alpha", btw - "beta" to me means mostly feature-complete, which it's certainly not at this point.)

The next update will go a good ways towards making the Sector more alive, as well as adding a couple more star systems.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: VaeliusNoctu on April 14, 2014, 02:00:54 PM
Yep! (Still "alpha", btw - "beta" to me means mostly feature-complete, which it's certainly not at this point.)

The next update will go a good ways towards making the Sector more alive, as well as adding a couple more star systems.

Good to know thx. Do you have a Realese date for the Patch? April, Mai, June?

@All
Thx i was in the Mod Section but

1) i dont see a Mod adds Sectors
and
2) i dont wish to break my savegame (char) for Vanilla.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: arcibalde on April 14, 2014, 03:22:11 PM
Good to know thx. Do you have a Realese date for the Patch? April, Mai, June?
@All
Thx i was in the Mod Section but
1) i dont see a Mod adds Sectors
and
2) i dont wish to break my savegame (char) for Vanilla.
There are mods that adds systems (not sectors, sector is big piece of space where all* star systems are). Well, if you are bored with your current game and progress and don't want to play any more what is harm in breaking your current savegame? Then again you can make new game with mods on and play it and then you can disable all mods and play your old save game.

Anyway this ones adds additional systems or change entire game and adds additional systems:
[0.6.2a] Uomoz's Sector: Journey 1.2 (Mods Collection) [upd.22\01]
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=1799.0

Vacuum - Build a Stellar Empire. (0.62a ALPHA build 16) (TC Mod)
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4292.0

[0.6.2a] Starsector+ Vanilla Enhancement Mod 1.0.1 (Now with BRDY)
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=7679.0

Project Ironclads TC, version 7 with hotfix (0.6.2a)
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=431.0

etc.



*all like all star system that is in game :D not all star systems in space
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ArkAngel on April 14, 2014, 07:05:43 PM
I hope I'm not the only who noticed this because I am verrrryyy curious on what it may be.
Changes as of April 04, 2014

Campaign:
  • Added "Intel" tab to keep track  other stuff
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Nanao-kun on April 14, 2014, 07:35:40 PM
I hope I'm not the only who noticed this because I am verrrryyy curious on what it may be.
Changes as of April 04, 2014

Campaign:
  • Added "Intel" tab to keep track  other stuff
It keeps track of how many space burgers the crew has eaten. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on April 14, 2014, 09:28:33 PM
@Nanao_kun All meat in space is made out of fungus with "meat flavoring". Just tell 'em it's meat,  most of them never tasted the real thing in the first place.

Anyways, it would be cool if Intel had a feature where you could buy news services. The TriTachyon Times, Dictat Daily or Hegemony Post would be big Intel providers! Ha, JK, but hacking comm relays to get a snippet of Hegemony intel would be cool.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: VaeliusNoctu on April 15, 2014, 08:35:08 AM
I Installed Project Ironclad, looks interesting. Thx.^^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Luftwaffle on April 15, 2014, 08:30:50 PM
Will this update add more features to the contact fleet option (the open comm channels one, where the fleets just pretty much say the same thing over and over again)?  :)

I can see this as being a good way to gather information, hailing trade fleets from distant stars to talk about current events and possible future ones. You could even transfer some credits to get the best information possible, providing a way for profiteers to take advantage of events without having too many skill points put into the information-gathering skills. Or maybe the player could extort traders for the information. It could be a way for civilian ships to surrender and try to avoid player conflict rather than being blown to smithereens.  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Msahn on April 25, 2014, 08:03:56 AM
Just quick question, are there any chance I'll get my hands in this new updated for the Extra long weekend next week ? =]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on April 25, 2014, 09:50:00 AM
Just quick question, are there any chance I'll get my hands in this new updated for the Extra long weekend next week ? =]

That is almost certain not to happen, unfortunately.



I'll close the thread for now :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 11, 2014, 12:08:59 PM
Updated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on June 11, 2014, 12:11:48 PM
FOUR new star systems?

Spoiler
(http://zerowoes.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Anchorman-well-that-escalated-quickly19.jpg)
[close]

And our new ship retains the name Shepherd. :D

EDIT:
Oh, MIRV missile functionality changes!  I'm gonna have a ton of fun with that! :D Now I can get that to spawn actual bits of fragmentation without having to go into a lot of java coding.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on June 11, 2014, 12:12:01 PM
Whoo new ship!

I assume this is the one from the blog post?  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: JP161 on June 11, 2014, 01:31:26 PM
Everything is awesoooome!  8)

And I mean it!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: HELMUT on June 11, 2014, 01:56:08 PM
Hmm, modders will probably have to move some of their systems to avoid overlapping.

And a buff to EMP weaponry? Now that's interesting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on June 11, 2014, 01:59:08 PM
Nice! This is going to be great.

On a downer note is something I've been expecting for quite a while: all of the old mods are going to really break with this update. Such is the price of awesome progress I guess.

I see that you optimized the save file size in april, and got the zips properly working now; do you know how much this helps the problems that the various large mods have been having with loading save?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 11, 2014, 02:15:21 PM
Whoo new ship!

I assume this is the one from the blog post?  :)

Yep, that's the one.

And a buff to EMP weaponry? Now that's interesting.

It's exactly as effective as it is in 0.6.2a, but other weapons are half as effective in disabling weapons/engines, due to the hitpoint boost.

On a downer note is something I've been expecting for quite a while: all of the old mods are going to really break with this update. Such is the price of awesome progress I guess.

Pretty much no way around that. I'm trying to keep breaking changes to a minimum, but when you've got entirely new features, there's only so much you can do.

I see that you optimized the save file size in april, and got the zips properly working now; do you know how much this helps the problems that the various large mods have been having with loading save?

I don't know. You'd have to analyze the memory usage of those mods to see what was taking up the most space. There's always a chance it's something mod-specific, since mod scripts and such end up in the save file. I don't think it's specifically an issue with the loading, as much as the mod already operating close to the memory limit, and a perfectly normal memory use increase during the saving/loading process pushing it over the edge.

I did run some very brief tests on the memory use while saving normally and compressed - surprisingly, saving a compressed file seems to require less memory. So, that's good. File-size-wise, the compression reduces it by about a factor of 20.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 11, 2014, 03:11:15 PM
(Note: this batch of notes is probably missing some items.)

Were they harvested by organ smugglers?

It's starting to get a bit more sinister, how nice :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on June 11, 2014, 06:28:11 PM
Wait, there's Harvested Organs as a commodity?

o.O

Damn, the game is now a lot more ominous than I thought.  I best watch my back when I'm in the station now. ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Psigun on June 11, 2014, 06:31:56 PM
The trading system sounds really cool. Can't wait!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: MesoTroniK on June 11, 2014, 07:12:04 PM
Wait, there's Harvested Organs as a commodity?

o.O

Damn, the game is now a lot more ominous than I thought.  I best watch my back when I'm in the station now. ;)

Hmmmm, brains... :)

(http://i.imgur.com/Q7wnvhA.png)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on June 11, 2014, 07:13:25 PM
Donated organs are harvested too, so Harvested Organs aren't necessarily acquired through nefarious means. Still, it's a cool idea for a commodity either way.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 11, 2014, 09:20:40 PM
Were they harvested by organ smugglers?

Possibly :)

It's starting to get a bit more sinister, how nice :)
Damn, the game is now a lot more ominous than I thought.  I best watch my back when I'm in the station now. ;)
Donated organs are harvested too, so Harvested Organs aren't necessarily acquired through nefarious means. Still, it's a cool idea for a commodity either way.

Well, they are illegal to trade in. In most places.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 12, 2014, 01:58:36 AM
So, do you plan to add any more major features before release of the next version? Or is it "just" a question of finishing up, balancing and polishing what's on the list?

I'm eager to wrap my head around the economy system :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ahrenjb on June 12, 2014, 09:34:55 AM
Certainly looking forward to seeing the framework of the game expand, and glad to see options for gathering money besides chasing down and bullying fleets smaller than your own. The trade system looks just complex enough to be interesting, and while I'm not too sure of the way the interfaces display some of the information yet, I'm sure once I have a chance to play with them a bit they'll grow on me.

Harvested Organs is a good trade good, but won't fill the holds. Here's to hoping for Space Whiskey, Kebabs, and maybe some Industrial Algae to take up the space  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 12, 2014, 11:01:07 AM
So, do you plan to add any more major features before release of the next version? Or is it "just" a question of finishing up, balancing and polishing what's on the list?

A pedantic answer depends on how you define "features", but that aside, it feels more like "just" finishing up. However, that involves adding a lot of content, some UI work, and some work on game systems. For example, need to take a good look at smuggling, exactly how it works, what consequences it has, and what UI support it needs. That might also lead into adding a hullmod or two. Are these "features" or "finishing up" an aspect of the trade system? As another example, an initial UI for intel/news reports exists, but I suspect it'll need some major revamping in light of how events actually turn out gameplay-wise.

Content-wise, need to add and flesh out several events; this can involve altering existing systems to support how these need to work. Another big content task is populating the new star systems with fleets, which can take a bit of time. There is also new art and sounds that need to be created, and the possibility of something new on the music front.

Then there's playtesting and balancing, which, given the sheer number of changes and amount of new content, is likely to take longer than it usually does.

There are a few miscellaneous tasks, too, but I think the above covers most of what's left.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ValkyriaL on June 12, 2014, 11:03:45 AM
Yo Alex, when are you guys adding Decoratives to vanilla ships? us modders are way ahead of ya with blinking lights and glowing powercores. ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Tecrys on June 12, 2014, 11:31:31 AM
Yo Alex, when are you guys adding Decoratives to vanilla ships? us modders are way ahead of ya with blinking lights and glowing powercores. ;D

Well, it's not hard to make nice decoratives but time consuming.
Would you rather spend time coding new features or putting decoratives ingame without any game value apart from visuals?
I think the answer to that is clear, no offense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on June 12, 2014, 02:21:23 PM
...
Then there's playtesting and balancing, which, given the sheer number of changes and amount of new content, is likely to take longer than it usually does.
...

Well you could always release it with only minor playtesting and let the community decide what to do. I'm sure we'll reach a nice happy consensus very quickly, with no bickering at all. After all, designing games by committee always works out great!

Note: I couldn't resist. Please don't actually do this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 12, 2014, 03:44:54 PM
Re: decoratives - they're not something that's planned. Might end up adding a few at some point, but imo it's something to be approached carefully and with restraint, if at all.


...
Then there's playtesting and balancing, which, given the sheer number of changes and amount of new content, is likely to take longer than it usually does.
...

Well you could always release it with only minor playtesting and let the community decide what to do. I'm sure we'll reach a nice happy consensus very quickly, with no bickering at all. After all, designing games by committee always works out great!

Note: I couldn't resist. Please don't actually do this.

Got me good, thought you weren't joking for about two or three seconds. Well done.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BillyRueben on June 12, 2014, 07:05:24 PM
A few things that weren't answered (at least not directly) in the patch notes are:

Are the prices for current items in the game going to be adjusted to better fit the implementation of the economy (weapons, supplies, ect.)?

Are the credit values for ships going to be adjusted?

Is the distance between systems going to be great enough that fuel is actually a factor now?

Is there going to be an option to start off a new game as a "trader", with a ship better designed for freight and a small stockpile of goods?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 12, 2014, 07:11:34 PM
Are the prices for current items in the game going to be adjusted to better fit the implementation of the economy (weapons, supplies, ect.)?

Supplies, definitely yes, since they're a commodity. Weapons currently use the same prices as before; eventually they probably will fit into a supply/demand economy somehow, emphasis on probably. And on somehow :)

Are the credit values for ships going to be adjusted?

Is the distance between systems going to be great enough that fuel is actually a factor now?

Is there going to be an option to start off a new game as a "trader", with a ship better designed for freight and a small stockpile of goods?

TBD - that depends on how balancing/playtesting goes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bribe Guntails on June 12, 2014, 10:57:54 PM
Ok, now I'm extra jelly for the new update!
I'm looking forward to the economy system and the game universe coming to life.

On a different topic, will there be consideration regarding introducing fanmade factions to the vanilla game? (Blackrock, Neutrino)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bribe Guntails on June 12, 2014, 11:06:16 PM
Re: decoratives - they're not something that's planned. Might end up adding a few at some point, but imo it's something to be approached carefully and with restraint, if at all.


...
Then there's playtesting and balancing, which, given the sheer number of changes and amount of new content, is likely to take longer than it usually does.
...

Well you could always release it with only minor playtesting and let the community decide what to do. I'm sure we'll reach a nice happy consensus very quickly, with no bickering at all. After all, designing games by committee always works out great!

Note: I couldn't resist. Please don't actually do this.

Got me good, thought you weren't joking for about two or three seconds. Well done.


Why not have the community submit visual modifications of ships and QA them as they come in?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Nanao-kun on June 12, 2014, 11:37:15 PM
Ok, now I'm extra jelly for the new update!
I'm looking forward to the economy system and the game universe coming to life.

On a different topic, will there be consideration regarding introducing fanmade factions to the vanilla game? (Blackrock, Neutrino)
I don't really see that happening.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on June 13, 2014, 09:13:22 AM
On a different topic, will there be consideration regarding introducing fanmade factions to the vanilla game? (Blackrock, Neutrino)
I don't really see that happening.

Short answer, though I don't speak for Alex: no. Because:

We did this for Dredmor for a few mod skills for the free expansion pack. The logistics of it only just worked there because mod skills in Dredmor are small coherent packages that modders were willing to let go of forever - we had to officially purchase the work from them, with supporting paperwork and a cash transaction (of $1, for the sake of legality), structuring their contributions like that of contractors. Plus, the mod authors had to completely and necessarily give up creative control and the ability to ever change the mods. Plus I had to heavily rewrite text and redo art on everything to keep the official style consistent. Plus... making them an official part of the product, even if given away for free, froze them in amber kinda, because once it was official then we - the company - had to officially support them not crashing or glitching, work any changes into our patch schedule & test cycle, etc.

It's a lot of work on the official end and it would kill (though preserve) the mods. I think their creative energy is better served by staying mods. (Besides, I'd rather make up new stuff for the core game myself! :D)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 13, 2014, 12:15:35 PM
I was going to go with "no, because for starters, it'd be a legal, logistical, and inter-personal nightmare", but David beat me to it.

The other side of it is, why do it in the first place? Tying different creative endeavors together doesn't necessarily make them better than the sum of the parts. One of the things that makes mods great is the amount of freedom they have in doing things, compared to core game, which has to be Responsible. One of the benefits of vanilla being, well, vanilla, is that it's a more tightly controlled and cohesive experience. Mods are also able to have their own release schedule etc.

It's also quite an assumption that mod creators would want to do that in the first place, given what it means for their mod.

There's also me not wanting to do it, for similar "I'd rather make up new stuff for the core game myself" reasons :)


I'm sure the suggestion came from a good place, but all in all, it's just neither practical nor desirable.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on June 13, 2014, 03:29:53 PM
What's the real difference between having mods literally be part of the game, and having a mod that ensures it fits in with the game? I'd say there's hardly any difference. If a mod is truly vanilla balanced, and has good content, then you can view it as an optional "expansion pack" with its own release schedule.

If Alex and David want to make it easy for players to expand the game in the future by giving easy access to polished mods, there are a lot of better ways to do it than clap your hands together and go like - okay, now this stuff is part of the game, and then start the long and painful process that David mentioned above.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: GeometryPrime on June 13, 2014, 04:52:28 PM
On the subject of Mods being part of the game, I use Blackrock Shipyards... and on my Vanilla save, when loaded, I cannot access the Gneiss System from Hyperspace. Alex, Cycerin, any way to fix this? I really hate having the mod if I cannot use anything from it in my main game.

Probably the wrong place to be posting this, come to think of it. ::)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Blips on June 14, 2014, 02:16:28 PM
Supplies, definitely yes, since they're a commodity. Weapons currently use the same prices as before; eventually they probably will fit into a supply/demand economy somehow, emphasis on probably. And on somehow :)

Wasn't the plan to have everything (ships, weapons, etc) all tied into mining, manufacturing, researching and economics eventually?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 14, 2014, 09:04:35 PM
@GeometryPrime: You'll need to create a new game; in most cases, mods that add new star systems add them to the sector on new game creation.


Supplies, definitely yes, since they're a commodity. Weapons currently use the same prices as before; eventually they probably will fit into a supply/demand economy somehow, emphasis on probably. And on somehow :)

Wasn't the plan to have everything (ships, weapons, etc) all tied into mining, manufacturing, researching and economics eventually?

More or less, though I wouldn't go as far as calling that a "plan", that sounds far too definite and I generally want to stay away from making statements like that until I have some degree of certainty about how something is going to work out, which usually means trying it out first. I'm not sure why research keeps coming up, btw, it's not something that fits into the setting very well.

Anyway, that aside, I think what I said pretty much aligns with what you said, so I don't understand the question.

(Edit: I think it's probably a misunderstanding rooted in my penchant for hedging when talking about stuff that isn't done yet :))
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Blips on June 14, 2014, 09:46:28 PM
Just your emphasis on emphasizing the "probably" and "somehow" is what led to the question.

As for research, wasn't it one of the original features that was outlined when the game was still named Starfarer? I'm talking about 3 years ago or so.

I'm not up to date with the lore, but research seems like it would be right at home with factions and industry: expending resources to unlock better guns / tech / etc which leads to corporate espionage, piracy, economic changes and warfare. Aside from factions and industry, research was the feature I was looking forward to most which makes me a bit sad if it was never concept to begin with.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on June 15, 2014, 12:13:47 AM
Research to me is more like "research", i.e. a euphemism for tech mining.  It's not something you would do passively and wait on a progress bar for.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 15, 2014, 02:06:50 AM
Yeah, at least in Ivalyo's lore research is pretty much treasure hunting:

Research has a different meaning than the word as it is known to us today. Research, the one done by Tri-Tachyon and others, is a process that involves a couple of things. First, techmining, or retrieving Domain artifacts to locate blueprints or working components. Second, analysis deconstruction and\or integration. Lastly, potential blueprints extraction. That last step is extremely rare though.

Hope it stays that way, it fits the setting perfectly and sounds as if it could be a ton of fun. In that scenario I would imagine a top researcher to be some kind of space Indiana Jones :)


Research outside the time and resource scales of 4X games, as featured in many strategy games, is pretty much bogus anyway.





Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 15, 2014, 08:13:56 AM
Just your emphasis on emphasizing the "probably" and "somehow" is what led to the question.

Ah, gotcha. When I say something like that, it pretty much means "right now, I'm thinking of this in terms of trying to make it work, seeing how that goes, and making changes as necessary for the stated approach to fit the design goals". That is, the important part is tying ship/weapon production to the economy in an interesting way. Making weapons/ships work with the supply/demand structure in some way seems like a good way to go about that, but it might not turn out to be. I think it will, though. I just don't want to commit to specifics, you know? The larger design goals are what's more important, and you can get there in different ways, and might have to, since so many things need to fit together.

As for research, wasn't it one of the original features that was outlined when the game was still named Starfarer? I'm talking about 3 years ago or so.

Hmm. Now that you mention it, I remember thinking about it. I don't remember talking about it, though! Not something I'd ever want to call a feature, since it was so speculative at the time, and even at that point it was (iirc) clear that it was an awkward fit in some ways.

I'm not up to date with the lore, but research seems like it would be right at home with factions and industry: expending resources to unlock better guns / tech / etc which leads to corporate espionage, piracy, economic changes and warfare. Aside from factions and industry, research was the feature I was looking forward to most which makes me a bit sad if it was never concept to begin with.

Those things sound like fun. I think we're back to the same idea - design goals vs implementation paths. What you've outlined doesn't have to come from traditional research. Right now, I'm thinking about it in terms of gaining access to new blueprints/denying access to blueprints/etc. Doesn't mean that's exactly how it'll end up, but hopefully you see what I mean re: goal vs path.

Yeah, at least in Ivalyo's lore research is pretty much treasure hunting:

Research has a different meaning than the word as it is known to us today. Research, the one done by Tri-Tachyon and others, is a process that involves a couple of things. First, techmining, or retrieving Domain artifacts to locate blueprints or working components. Second, analysis deconstruction and\or integration. Lastly, potential blueprints extraction. That last step is extremely rare though.

Research to me is more like "research", i.e. a euphemism for tech mining.  It's not something you would do passively and wait on a progress bar for.

Right. Still thinking about it in those terms, but, as an example: we've had to change up how some aspects of production work in order for the economy to work out. There's the idea of "light industry", i.e. something that can be done without an autofactory, and includes basic stuff like making furniture, and more involved things like, say, plastics and such. It's also somewhat hazy how much of heavy industry requires blueprints/autofacs - some certainly does, but some (such as, say, refining metals or making basic components) does not.

(Anyway - I guess this is just a general reminder not to treat the lore as set in stone. Not that you were.)

Hope it stays that way, it fits the setting perfectly and sounds as if it could be a ton of fun. In that scenario I would imagine a top researcher to be some kind of space Indiana Jones :)

What I like about that conceptually is the opportunity for the player to be an active participant.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Pax_Empyrean on June 15, 2014, 08:20:44 AM
I wrote a big thing on designing a game economy, but put it in the suggestions forum so as not to ambush this thread with a giant wall of text that's basically just speculation and theory. Hopefully there is something in there you like: http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8070.0
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xXTallmanXx on June 20, 2014, 04:32:50 PM
Can't wait to play it! ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Msahn on June 22, 2014, 10:33:35 AM
Wow, that's a big updated right there, can't wait to get my hands on it =]
As always hats to you Sir Alex !!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: joe130794 on July 04, 2014, 07:22:45 AM
is there any idea when the update will be available and will current mods work with it or will they need updating.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on July 04, 2014, 08:54:42 AM
All your mods breaking is about the only thing we know for sure right now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on July 04, 2014, 04:22:13 PM
Yeah, mods will need an update. Other than that, we don't know.

I'll close the thread until that changes. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 24, 2014, 05:30:31 PM
Updated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hopelessnoob on September 24, 2014, 05:49:15 PM
Fleet AI will now consider enemy fleet presence around a jump point when deciding which ones to use

Does this mean we can see whats on the other side of a jump point? Can't tell you how many times I've ran into a templar fleet in starsector + after jumping through a point
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Decer304 on September 24, 2014, 05:49:55 PM
This update makes the patch look better and better. cant wait to play. look like it'll be worth the wait
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 24, 2014, 05:54:31 PM
Does this mean we can see whats on the other side of a jump point? Can't tell you how many times I've ran into a templar fleet in starsector + after jumping through a point

No, it just looks at what's on its side of it.

This update makes the patch look better and better. cant wait to play. look like it'll be worth the wait

:)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hopelessnoob on September 24, 2014, 06:00:52 PM
What does the internal comms mean? Do we have more conversation options?

How many other ships have a pirate version? are they entirely different hulls or can we swap out weapon mounts on ships now?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on September 24, 2014, 06:03:25 PM
Wow, wow, wow. This is amazing. Ship skins!

Did Annihilators really need a buff? They're already almost brokenly good. The rest is very interesting. Does the AI changes mean a swarm of Lashers toting Harpoons will now reliably murderize your overloaded ship instead of just spectating?

E: Also, I sort of disagree with the decision to turn Swarmer damage into HE. Doesn't it both contradict the stated purpose of frag damage, already rare within the game, and sort of make Swarmers less interesting, given they used to be safe to ignore while you had armor, but deceptively deadly if you didn't?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on September 24, 2014, 06:15:27 PM
Ship skins. Awesome. Was not expecting that  :)

void reportFleetDewspawned(CampaignFleetAPI fleet, FleetDespawnReason reason, Object param);
Typo? Or strange new feature?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 24, 2014, 06:27:26 PM
What does the internal comms mean? Do we have more conversation options?

Just more news channels to get intel on. They're fairly sparse at the moment, so this isn't a big deal.

How many other ships have a pirate version? are they entirely different hulls or can we swap out weapon mounts on ships now?


... some. Entirely different ships as far as the game is concerned, except they can share variants if they're compatible.


Wow, wow, wow. This is amazing. Ship skins!

I knew you'd zero in on that :)

Did Annihilators really need a buff? They're already almost brokenly good. The rest is very interesting. Does the AI changes mean a swarm of Lashers toting Harpoons will now reliably murderize your overloaded ship instead of just spectating?

The pod version seems rather insane right now, yeah. Might look at it again. One benefit of the higher speed, though, is that the AI can hit with them much more reliably now. A lot of the changes had that in mind, actually (with the other goal being "fun to use"). In particular, the AI is deadly with Reapers, too. There's still time to dodge on reaction if you're aware of it, but it's no longer a joke to see that mounted on an enemy ship. If you don't move or counter it in some other way, chances are it's hitting.

And yeah, anything armed with Harpoons will absolutely murder you if you overload or even come close to it. They're also aware of conserving ammo if other ships have fired missiles, so won't generally waste everything trying to kill a single ship.


E: Also, I sort of disagree with the decision to turn Swarmer damage into HE. Doesn't it both contradict the stated purpose of frag damage, already rare within the game, and sort of make Swarmers less interesting, given they used to be safe to ignore while you had armor, but deceptively deadly if you didn't?

Well - the issue is that some fighters have half-decent armor. Flak is essentially anti-missile, but Swarmers? I wanted to up the number of missiles fired, but lowering the damage would make them horrible vs fighters, which is a large part of their role. Really, their main role is "vs small things", which smaller amounts of HE damage accomplishes nicely. They should go from being a very niche weapon to something more universally useful. I mean, how many loadouts can afford to have 1) a shield-breaker, 2) an armor-breaker, and 3) Swarmers? I guess you can put them on as a support weapon for when other ships have broken the armor, but that demands a level of cooperation between ships that seems a tad unrealistic.

Frag damage is pretty much "need reliable damage vs missiles that isn't OP vs everything else". Initially that mission statement included fighters, but they ended up with decent armor. Maybe they shouldn't; that could be worth a closer look. (The Thumper is a bit of an odd case, where "bad vs everything" actually becomes "ok vs everything" due to its great other stats.)


Ship skins. Awesome. Was not expecting that  :)

void reportFleetDewspawned(CampaignFleetAPI fleet, FleetDespawnReason reason, Object param);
Typo? Or strange new feature?

Ooops, fixed. Thank you :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on September 24, 2014, 06:34:03 PM
This patchnote is the undoing of UsS. All I really wanted, as features, is now built in. I also love the first real balance passes. WELL DONE.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on September 24, 2014, 06:41:49 PM
Some questions: Why the change to the tugs? Why do you want to force a player to get Navigation in order not to slog along at a snails pace with any large ship? And why the removal of the burn speed from the UI mod?
And why make the pirates not trade with the layer at vengeful? To me, I think that the player should ALWAYS have a place to trade, otherwise you will end up creating something like a late game death spiral... Especially since from what you said, getting out of a Vengeful relationship will be almost impossible...
And what about increasing the cargo size across the board that you talked about?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaphide on September 24, 2014, 06:47:17 PM
Quote
Added FleetAssignment.ORBIT assignment

Is there a radius argument for this?

Quote
Added CampaignEventListener interface. Methods so far:
 - void reportPlayerMarketTransaction(PlayerMarketTransaction transaction);
etc.

Love this structure too :) and ship skins! Wow!

Sometimes I swear you save the (subjectively) best to last on purpose :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 24, 2014, 07:07:44 PM
This patchnote is the undoing of UsS. All I really wanted, as features, is now built in. I also love the first real balance passes. WELL DONE.

:) but also :(

Some questions: Why the change to the tugs? Why do you want to force a player to get Navigation in order not to slog along at a snails pace with any large ship?

I see it as more not forcing the player to invest into 4 tugs if they want a capital ship.

And why the removal of the burn speed from the UI mod?

It was too much of a no-brainer for freighters and the like.

And why make the pirates not trade with the layer at vengeful? To me, I think that the player should ALWAYS have a place to trade, otherwise you will end up creating something like a late game death spiral... Especially since from what you said, getting out of a Vengeful relationship will be almost impossible...

I don't think it's a death spiral if to enter it you have to literally make everyone in the Sector mad at you, and not just a little mad, but "we will not rest until you're gone from this world" mad.

In gameplay terms, it should add more tangible differences between different playstyles. Smuggler? You can trade with pirates. Bounty hunter? Maybe if you're careful to walk the line, but probably not.

And what about increasing the cargo size across the board that you talked about?

Erm - I'm pretty sure that if I did talk about it, it was in speculative terms, something like "I might/will take a look at it"... :)

Anyway, my recent playtesting has been focused on a more combat-oriented path through the game - i.e. bounty hunting and such, so I haven't done as much polishing related to trade. The cargo capacities feel ok so far, though.

Quote
Added FleetAssignment.ORBIT assignment

Is there a radius argument for this?

You know, there isn't. There wasn't a terribly convenient way to pass it in, so it just kinda got hardcoded to what was good for the current use cases.


Quote
Added CampaignEventListener interface. Methods so far:
 - void reportPlayerMarketTransaction(PlayerMarketTransaction transaction);
etc.

Love this structure too :) and ship skins! Wow!

Sometimes I swear you save the (subjectively) best to last on purpose :D

Oh, looking at that again, there are more callbacks for stuff getting reported than just that. Here's the bulk of the interface:

Spoiler
Code: java
public static enum FleetDespawnReason {
/**
* param is a SectorEntityToken
*/
REACHED_DESTINATION,

/**
* param is a CampaignFleetAPI
* Both fleets have had getFleetData().takeSnapshot() called right before the battle.
*/
DESTROYED_BY_FLEET,
NO_MEMBERS, // ??
OTHER,
NO_REASON_PROVIDED,
}

void reportPlayerOpenedMarket(MarketAPI market);
void reportPlayerMarketTransaction(PlayerMarketTransaction transaction);
void reportBattleOccurred(CampaignFleetAPI winner, CampaignFleetAPI loser);
/**
* Could be destroyed or simply reached a despawn location. Or had too many accidents
* and lost all of its ships. Or told by other code to despawn itself.
* @param fleet
* @param reason
* @param param
*/
void reportFleetDespawned(CampaignFleetAPI fleet, FleetDespawnReason reason, Object param);

/**
* Planets/stations/etc that are the target of a fleet's assignment.
* @param fleet
* @param entity
*/
void reportFleetReachedEntity(CampaignFleetAPI fleet, SectorEntityToken entity);

/**
* from is generally a JumpPointAPI, but doesn't *have* to be.
* @param fleet
* @param from
* @param to
*/
void reportFleetJumped(CampaignFleetAPI fleet, SectorEntityToken from, JumpDestination to);
void reportShownInteractionDialog(InteractionDialogAPI dialog);
}
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: MShadowy on September 24, 2014, 07:30:09 PM
eeeexcellet.  I am so looking forward to this next release.

I have nothing more to add... aside from being rather pleased that I'm in a good spot to take advantage of this "skins" business already.  *rubs hands together*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on September 24, 2014, 07:35:47 PM
I like the idea of faction relationships, though I would suggest the possibility to actually go beyond vengeful. You can in fact go further - suppressed relationship. That is you have brought down such wrath, destroyed all of their protection fleets, defence fleets, patrol fleets, attack fleets - etc. and they're all dead - then you enter a status of having 'suppressed' the faction to the point where they will trade with you if you have a significant and overwhelming fleet (or possibly performed a base station attack).

While the faction is suppressed they will sell you everything they have at cost price, but their economy will also be in ruin. The 'suppressed' status has a limited time span like an event, and when the event is over all of their fleets will respawn and your status will be back to 'vengeful' until you suppress them again.

While a faction is suppressed bounty hunter fleets are very likely to come after you, paid for by the suppressed faction. This makes suppressing a faction possible - but very expensive and impossible to maintain.

Equally speaking, one faction can suppress another, but there may be an open bounty to destroy the oppressing fleets - which is where you come in. Destroying an oppressing fleet raises would raise your status with the faction significantly.

Anyway...just one suggestion.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on September 24, 2014, 08:51:27 PM
I know you recognized missile pods are a bit "insane" a while back, Alex, but I just thought I'd mention that a single volley of harpoons can do 3000 damage. If you wanna nullify their massive alpha potential, maybe they could fire their missiles very slowly, as in one missile launched every 3/4 a second?

Other than that, that's a might fine patch-notes to go along with my chicken dinner. The sweetest dessert, hands down.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on September 24, 2014, 08:53:42 PM
Ooo, lotsa stuff. Seems mostly good, so I'll just address the specific stuff that I found particularly significant in some way:

Removed speed penalty after winning battle
Wasn't the point of the penalty so that you can't jump a small fleet next to a big one, pummel it, then get away scot-free?

Quote
Unstable injector: removed burn level bonus
Y u make Unstable Injector useless :(
I think it needs to have a lower OP cost now (especially if it still has the quad engine damage effect).

Quote
Ox-class tug: now limited to a maximum of one per ship
Hmm, Augmented Engines are probably mandatory for capitals now (well I always felt they already were...)

Quote
Missile overhaul:
  • Changed missile behavior to reduce clumping and slightly increase pressure on PD
  • Added nicer-looking continuous missile trails (rather than current particle effects)
  • Harpoon MRM: significantly improved maneuverability, increased hitpoints by 50%
    • Sabot SRM: fires 5 2nd stage projectiles instead of 1. Higher overall damage, much worse vs armor due to being distributed across 5 hits. Fired in a spread, less likely to miss completely.
    • Annihilator: increased speed to 400 (from 250), increased acceleration
    • Reaper torpedoes: faster, much higher acceleration
    • Atropos torpedoes: faster, higher acceleration, very poor tracking
    • Salamander MRM: improved maneuverability and top speed; much more reliable.
    • Swarmer SRM: doubled ammo, first 4 shots per burst, 75 points of HE damage per missile instead of 300 fragmentation
    • Pilum: improved top speed and acceleration. Can still be dodged effectively, just harder. Deadly vs non-omni-shield frigates w/o PD
    • All missile pods: increased burst size to 4 and doubled rate of fire
Oh God, 0.65 is gonna be known as "Revenge of the Missiles" now isn't it? (and now everyone is going to be absolutely terrified of Buffalo Mk.IIs :D)
Is low-level PD still viable? I'm thinking in particular of (LR) PD Laser and (Dual) Light Machine Gun here.

Hmm, I don't see the "doubled crew supply usage" change in there, did you decide not to implement it?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 24, 2014, 09:22:22 PM
I like the idea of faction relationships, though I would suggest the possibility to actually go beyond vengeful. You can in fact go further - suppressed relationship. That is you have brought down such wrath, destroyed all of their protection fleets, defence fleets, patrol fleets, attack fleets - etc. and they're all dead - then you enter a status of having 'suppressed' the faction to the point where they will trade with you if you have a significant and overwhelming fleet (or possibly performed a base station attack).

While the faction is suppressed they will sell you everything they have at cost price, but their economy will also be in ruin. The 'suppressed' status has a limited time span like an event, and when the event is over all of their fleets will respawn and your status will be back to 'vengeful' until you suppress them again.

While a faction is suppressed bounty hunter fleets are very likely to come after you, paid for by the suppressed faction. This makes suppressing a faction possible - but very expensive and impossible to maintain.

Equally speaking, one faction can suppress another, but there may be an open bounty to destroy the oppressing fleets - which is where you come in. Destroying an oppressing fleet raises would raise your status with the faction significantly.

Anyway...just one suggestion.

Hmm. I think that type of thing might fit in better along with more dedicated mechanics for, well, that type of thing. This feels a little tacked on, since your relationship level doesn't necessarily reflect how "beaten down" the faction is.



I know you recognized missile pods are a bit "insane" a while back, Alex, but I just thought I'd mention that a single volley of harpoons can do 3000 damage. If you wanna nullify their massive alpha potential, maybe they could fire their missiles very slowly, as in one missile launched every 3/4 a second?

Other than that, that's a might fine patch-notes to go along with my chicken dinner. The sweetest dessert, hands down.

Ah, I just meant the Annihilator Pod, with its flux-free continuous stream of HE pressure. The harpoons, well, their point is an alpha strike! Not to say that they're, ah, perfectly balanced, but at least their presence is something you're forced to respect. The Venture has some bite now.


Removed speed penalty after winning battle
Wasn't the point of the penalty so that you can't jump a small fleet next to a big one, pummel it, then get away scot-free?

Yes, it was. After some playtesting, I've made the executive decision that - at least for the time being - I'm ok with that being something you can do, as long as that mechanic is gone. It's an unfortunate combination of "initially unclear", "aggravating", and "likely to get you killed".


Quote
Unstable injector: removed burn level bonus
Y u make Unstable Injector useless :(
I think it needs to have a lower OP cost now (especially if it still has the quad engine damage effect).

Still useful in my experience so far. With the ship AI improvements, slapping it on allied ships doesn't seem suicidal anymore, either - it actually lets them do a better job of managing their fights and not getting hit in the first place.


Quote
Ox-class tug: now limited to a maximum of one per ship
Hmm, Augmented Engines are probably mandatory for capitals now (well I always felt they already were...)

Could be. Capital ships are going to be a bit of "solution without a problem" until there are proper stationary targets. On the other hand, trade fleets around planes *are* that, and they don't tend to run nearly as much while they're loading/unloading.

Oh God, 0.65 is gonna be known as "Revenge of the Missiles" now isn't it? (and now everyone is going to be absolutely terrified of Buffalo Mk.IIs :D)
Is low-level PD still viable? I'm thinking in particular of (LR) PD Laser and (Dual) Light Machine Gun here.

Muahahahha! I can see it now: "Revenge of the Space Pinatas". Especially with Lasher/Wolf having frontal shields now *and* the Salamander getting a huge buff.

It depends on what you mean by viable. Is it going to shoot down everything reliably? No. But if it stops even half the incoming missiles, that's already something, and for many ships, you couldn't really use those slots for meaningful offense due to flux issues, anyway. As far as better PD, Flak is still incredibly reliable.

Not to say that the various PD weapons might not need some tweaks; this is a pretty big balance change.

Hmm, I don't see the "doubled crew supply usage" change in there, did you decide not to implement it?

Sharp eye :) Yeah, at least for the moment.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ArkAngel on September 24, 2014, 09:26:42 PM
Kind of surprised the wolf no longer has an omni shield. Makes sense I suppose though. I am so excited for this update, the new music and new trading features will be awesome to use.  ;)
Also, the "skins" for ships confuse me. It's not like it's seperate paintjobs for each faction right? I distinctly remember somewhere that you said it would be a bit crazy to do that.

Edit: *cough* Found it http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=5422.0 *cough*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on September 24, 2014, 09:31:34 PM
Also, the "skins" for ships confuse me. It's not like it's seperate paintjobs for each faction right? I distinctly remember somewhere that you said it would be a bit crazy to do that.

(It turns out that we are, in fact, crazy.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on September 24, 2014, 09:38:27 PM
Some questions: Why the change to the tugs? Why do you want to force a player to get Navigation in order not to slog along at a snails pace with any large ship?

I see it as more not forcing the player to invest into 4 tugs if they want a capital ship.
I hate to sound like an a** but HOW the HELL does that make sense? "not forcing the player to invest in 4 tugs if they want a cap" How long would it take to accrue the 80K (if that) to buy a set of tugs for the cap? If you had offered something else to replace the lost speed, I wouldn't be saying this, but you haven't. Are you TRYING to force people into the wolf pack flotilla playstyle if they want to be combat oriented and want to get anywhere within the next cycle?

Also, have the wolf and lasher's shields been enlarged to make up for the fact that they are now front shields or are they still at 150 degrees?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on September 24, 2014, 10:49:47 PM
@Midnight Kitsune: The Tug change makes sense to me. The way I see it, the primary purpose of burn levels is to prevent battles that are too uneven. A large capital fleet should be able to take on any opponent, but it shouldn't be fast enough to engage fleets that are hopelessly outmatched. That encourages farming.
I think Alex was referring more to the long-term investment of tugs than the up-front cost. Lugging a bunch of tugs around reduces the number of 'real' ships you can have and increases upkeep costs. It also clutters the fleet screen.

Also, the "skins" for ships confuse me. It's not like it's seperate paintjobs for each faction right? I distinctly remember somewhere that you said it would be a bit crazy to do that.

(It turns out that we are, in fact, crazy.)
I'm not sure exactly what that means, but I like it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on September 24, 2014, 10:55:02 PM
Changes as of September 24, 2014
  • Wolf, Lasher frigates: now have frontal shields, to better work with their front-facing firepower

Quote from: Alex
  • Pilum: improved top speed and acceleration. Can still be dodged effectively, just harder. Deadly vs non-omni-shield frigates w/o PD


You are a terrible person.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on September 24, 2014, 11:41:34 PM
@Midnight Kitsune: The Tug change makes sense to me. The way I see it, the primary purpose of burn levels is to prevent battles that are too uneven. A large capital fleet should be able to take on any opponent, but it shouldn't be fast enough to engage fleets that are hopelessly outmatched. That encourages farming.
I think Alex was referring more to the long-term investment of tugs than the up-front cost. Lugging a bunch of tugs around reduces the number of 'real' ships you can have and increases upkeep costs. It also clutters the fleet screen.
The problem is this effects anything bigger than a frigate! This doesn't just effect Caps you know. This is going to drastically slow down trade fleets, making them 1: lose money because of expensive supplies. 2: Made a bigger, easier target to catch, especially with the removal of the "burn 1 after battle" part. 3: the prices could end up changing before the fleet gets there... And 4: This is going to bore the player! Do you REALLY think a player is wanna watch their burn three fleet plod along the campaign screen from point A to point B?
Why have them at all now if they lost most of their main purpose? How USEFUL is ONE more burn speed? Have you ever tried to catch up to a ship when you are one point faster? How long did that take in?  With how little burn speeds differ, you need about a +3 difference to reach your target in a reasonable amount of time...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on September 24, 2014, 11:50:19 PM
Why have them at all now if they lost most of their main purpose? How USEFUL is ONE more burn speed? Have you ever tried to catch up to a ship when you are one point faster? How long did that take in?  With how little burn speeds differ, you need about a +3 difference to reach your target in a reasonable amount of time...

I think better way to fix player getting bored, is allowing higher time multipliers. For example up to 1000% with gradual increase, X-series style...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: kazi on September 24, 2014, 11:57:26 PM
AAAGH I AM SO FREAKING EXCITED FOR THIS UPDATE!!!!!!!!!!!

The most exciting changes imo are the ship skins (given that every mod is making Buffalo style freighter conversions nowadays), beamFireOnlyOnFullCharge setting, planet night-time lights, and removal of the burn speed penalty after battles. From just looking at the patchnotes, I don't think there's a single change I disagree with.

Only thing I might suggest taking a look at before the update is the "Stabilized Shields" hullmod. The way it currently works, it sees automatic use on any ship where Stabilized Shields is cheaper than an equivalent amount of vents (like the Apogee or Sunder, for instance). Although it's not OP or anything, it seems a little too easy to get access to, requiring only a 1 point investment into Applied Physics. Maybe move it up a little bit in the skill tree to make it require a bit more dedication to get (like rank 3-5 or something)?

@Midnight Kitsune - The navigation skill is there for a reason. Also the practice of attaching 4 tugs to an atlas or paragon seems a little game breaking/silly. I never use tugs and I have no problem catching things.

@TaLaR - Yeah, a x4 multiplier would be fantastic!

@Uomoz - I still see the appeal in a mod like UsS. People will always want a good mod compilation to play, its a bit overwhelming to have to simply look through the entire list of mods in the forum. UsS was probably the first mod I downloaded when I started playing for that very reason. And your mod has increased difficulty and a sensible blueprints system. I like that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hopelessnoob on September 25, 2014, 12:26:05 AM
Anything that just adds an arbitrary amount of time till I get from point A to point B is just an annoyance so adding in faster acceleration would be great. Being unable to catch fleets is fine, taking 5 minutes to go from Corvus to Askondia is just annoying. More time acceleration would be great.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on September 25, 2014, 12:40:34 AM
@Midnight Kitsune - The navigation skill is there for a reason. Also the practice of attaching 4 tugs to an atlas or paragon seems a little game breaking/silly. I never use tugs and I have no problem catching things.
That still doesn't answer my question: What use are these things if they are only going to provide ONE burn speed MAX? Also, it has already been stated that Navigation is already a must buy skill
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on September 25, 2014, 12:48:20 AM

Modding:
  • Added ship "skins"
    • Way to define a slightly different hull based on an existing hull
    • Defined in data/hulls/skins
    • A skin can:
      • Set a new sprite/name/description
      • Remove and/or modify weapon slots
      • Remove engine slots
      • Add/remove built-in hullmods and weapons

I think this is my favorite item so far... I was about to try and make a dialog to change your ships built-in weapons, or add extra armor at the cost of speed, but this simplify it all! I hope we can change skin easily and add a price tag on it?

Because why have 4 ships (probably more with the new possibilities that are coming) when you can have 4 skins:
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/glAs4dl.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zudgemud on September 25, 2014, 12:50:16 AM
I read the patch notes but I didn't see anything about this, but will it be possible to specialize factions towards certain commodities (for example via average abundance or price)?

And will there be a way for haulers to be nerfed in terms of smuggling capacity in a similar way to how the new hullmod works, ie extra thin cargohold?

And could you make cargoholds discriminate specific items, such that for example my faction's hauler could only carry supplies and fuel but no commodities? Or maybe only supplies, fuel, an "energy cells" commodity and guns?

I'm so stoked about this patch, its gonna be awesome :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on September 25, 2014, 01:01:57 AM
Quote
Hmm. I think that type of thing might fit in better along with more dedicated mechanics for, well, that type of thing. This feels a little tacked on, since your relationship level doesn't necessarily reflect how "beaten down" the faction is.

I see what you mean, these mechanics would need to be expanded on, and yes include their own levels of faction suppression, and possibly other aspects of faction relationships. I suppose with different levels of suppression you get different mercenaries after you, different items you can buy and sell and different time before ships respawn. You could ultimately have the level of completely suppressed, that is the station/faction no longer fights back.

This could tie into a sort of mechanic for stations and planets you own that are under attack. An enemy fleet hovers/orbits around a station or planet with the status of 'attacking' or 'suppressing', and you get a notification of the event in progress, and your control over it measurably goes down over time until you fend off the attacker.

Anyway, youve probably got something even more elegant and grand in the pipeline, Hm, 0.67?
Hm, anyway I'm sure there are lots of mechanics planned or in the works
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: kazi on September 25, 2014, 01:07:13 AM
@Midnight Kitsune - The navigation skill is there for a reason. Also the practice of attaching 4 tugs to an atlas or paragon seems a little game breaking/silly. I never use tugs and I have no problem catching things.
That still doesn't answer my question: What use are these things if they are only going to provide ONE burn speed MAX? Also, it has already been stated that Navigation is already a must buy skill

+1 burn speed is a HUGE deal. I can catch anything if I'm +1 faster than them (just by taking a more direct route to its target, being clever about hyperspace use to travel across a system, or just straight-up running them down). The only way I can see this hurting players is if they were abusing tugs to make capitals catch literally anything they wanted. The navigation skill is nice only during the early game when you're attempting to catch really fast frigates with destroyers and things... its really not as essential as you make it out to be. Sometimes I don't even take it.

You shouldn't be able to intercept/chase anything with capitals. Period. Otherwise it turns into an effortless steamroll.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Okim on September 25, 2014, 01:12:59 AM
Quote
Modding:
 •Added ship "skins"?Way to define a slightly different hull based on an existing hull
   ?Defined in data/hulls/skins
   ?A skin can:?Set a new sprite/name/description
    ?Remove and/or modify weapon slots
    ?Remove engine slots
    ?Add/remove built-in hullmods and weapons

Alex, can you please elaborate how this one works? And probably post an example if you can :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: LazyWizard on September 25, 2014, 01:37:26 AM
Back when .6a was in development you released the WIP starfarer api (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=5813.msg108003#msg108003) a bit early so modders could get a head start on supporting the massive changes in that patch. Would you consider doing so again since it's looking like .65a will be an even bigger compatibility breaker than .6a?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: JohnDoe on September 25, 2014, 02:07:36 AM
...
Made fleet movement slightly less inertial (2x acceleration)
...
Hell yeah!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on September 25, 2014, 04:15:52 AM
Wow, that's a lot of bullet points  :D

Really glad to see that you're still polishing combat, the AI and missile changes should mix things up again. (I'm just afraid that the Cerberus is completely at the mercy of missiles now.)

But of course I'm most excited to see the campaign shifting away from battle grinding being the only way of progression. I can't wait to try out every trader playstile I can think of  ;D

Oh, and... did you really double weapon end engine health again, so it's now quadrupled? Or did you just forget that you already listed that change in the June update?



(And a rather late suggestion about this:
Quote
The pips on the weapon arc indicator will glow red when there's a danger of friendly fire
They could glow yellow when neutral objects (asteroids, wrecks) obstruct the fire path.)



Only thing I might suggest taking a look at before the update is the "Stabilized Shields" hullmod. The way it currently works, it sees automatic use on any ship where Stabilized Shields is cheaper than an equivalent amount of vents (like the Apogee or Sunder, for instance). Although it's not OP or anything, it seems a little too easy to get access to, requiring only a 1 point investment into Applied Physics. Maybe move it up a little bit in the skill tree to make it require a bit more dedication to get (like rank 3-5 or something)?

Yeah, at the moment you only have to do some math to know if its worth it, plus a rough estimate of how much time your shields will spend activated. Not an interesting choice.
Maybe if the upkeep cost reduction were much greater (99%, so the speed penalty is preserved?) but the shield activation speed would be severely reduced (to 20%?)? Then equipping this hullmod would force you to plan ahead further, make you stronger while you're in control but weaken you against surprises.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: mendonca on September 25, 2014, 04:29:21 AM
Sounds so great.

I am also salivating at the Lasher / Wolf frontal shield change and the impact pilums (pila?) are going to have on their rear ends.

Don't know why that stands out amongst all the other things, but it does :)

Adds interest to the choice of frigate, I guess. At the minute Lashers and Wolves are a safe option in so many ways.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Erick Doe on September 25, 2014, 05:29:20 AM
Quote
Removed speed penalty after winning battle

But... why?  :-[

That way you can just keep on farming smaller fleets, without fear of a bigger fleet catching you after battle. The way I see it, the hit to burnspeed after winning a battle means you have to carefully pick your targets. Which to me adds to the fun of the game. And from a roleplaying stand point, I think even a victorious fleet first has to get back into formation again, and prepare to fly off at full burn speed. It only stands to reason that such preparations take some time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on September 25, 2014, 05:34:39 AM
The shielded cargo hullmod makes me think: if the customs patrol doesn't trust you (maybe you've been caught smuggling before, or they've been swamped with illegal goods lately), they should insist on a boarding inspection. Obviously much harder to hide contraband from, and if you decide to fight after letting them on, you've got armed marines on your ship that could mess your crew/CR levels up or even take it over entirely.

Or is that too unfun a mechanic?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on September 25, 2014, 06:32:21 AM
Oh, the Shielded Cargo Holds hullmod - how does it work? Does it reduce detection chance per hullmod present in the fleet? Or is it dependent on the cargo space of the ship that has it equipped? Depending on the answer, there could be ways to exploit it, E.G. equipping a bunch of shuttles with it.

Quote
Removed speed penalty after winning battle

But... why?  :-[

That way you can just keep on farming smaller fleets, without fear of a bigger fleet catching you after battle. The way I see it, the hit to burnspeed after winning a battle means you have to carefully pick your targets. Which to me adds to the fun of the game. And from a roleplaying stand point, I think even a victorious fleet first has to get back into formation again, and prepare to fly off at full burn speed. It only stands to reason that such preparations take some time.

It's kinda compensated for by other changes.
- You'll have a harder time hunting down small fleets because of the tug/injector changes.
- You'll have less reason to hunt down smaller fleets because fighting doesn't yield much supplies anymore.
- You'll have much less reason to grind, since there are other ways of making money (trading).
- Carrying too much supplies/fuel you looted from a previous battle reduces your speed to 1. (Why is this not gradual, though?)



Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: nomadic_leader on September 25, 2014, 08:12:00 AM
  • Added chance for an investigation event to be triggered by player use of comm sniffers

Is this a completely random dice roll at each clock tick as soon as the sniffer is online? The problems with such mechanics are  1. Opaque to the player and 2. Utterly beyond their control. This combination may result in frustration. Randomness that you can either affect or predict is good, randomness you can neither affect nor predict is bad.

I suggest the sniffer have a period of time during which it cannot be caught, adjusted by some skill from the character screen. A progress bar somewhere on the intel screen could show how much time you have left on your sniffer(s). After that, if you don't uninstall it (remotely or in person as balance demands) THEN the dice rolls for investigations start.

This is my first forum post. I've got a few other suggestions about current gameplay as well, which I will post in the appropriate subforum.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on September 25, 2014, 08:21:01 AM
Quote
missile changes

This makes me incredibly excited. The two missile slots on a Lasher or Wolf just got much more deadly. And the missile pods! 4 Sabots or Harpoons per pod is... impressive.

Also, I might kiss you for the swarmer change. I already used them for anti-frigate work to help pressure and finish - now they are going to be truly deadly. Also: Broadsword's can handle frigate armor now. Muah hah hah.

Overall, this looks truly excellent.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bjørn_in_the_Sector on September 25, 2014, 10:59:40 AM
ship skins

yessssssssssss! this is such a cool addition.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on September 25, 2014, 11:36:25 AM
  • Tri-Tachyon no longer hostile to independents
Aww, there goes my justification for always declaring TT to be evil and worth attacking.

  • High Intensity Laser now fires on achieving full charge (instead of starting to fire at partial effectiveness immediately)
Any chance of pairing this with a damage increase?  Or maybe a slight increase in the armor penetration power of beams in general?  The change a version or two ago where armor could get a higher overall damage reduction was mostly good, but really hit beam usefulness pretty hard, especially the HIL (and phase beams).

  • Fixed bug in StatBonus that was applying the flat bonus after the mult bonus (the correct order is: percent, flat, mult)
Huh.  Can you give us an example of where this makes a difference?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 25, 2014, 01:00:11 PM
Skins:

These are just a shorthand for defining new hulls. The game takes the .skin file and creates a new hull based on that; for almost every purpose within the game, it's treated as an entirely separate hull. You can't change skins for a ship once you have it, for example. "Skin" might be slightly misleading as it encompasses more than just appearance. Skins can, for example change/remove weapon and engine slots, change the OP/deployment points/price, add/remove built in hull mods and weapons. Skins can not change the bounds or weapon slot locations, and also can't change the ship's system (the latter, at least for the moment).

The one exception to skin hulls being treated the same as other hulls is they can share variants via the "Manage Variants" dialog, provided the skins are inter-compatible - i.e. they didn't change ordnance points or weapon slots.

Here's an example skin for the pirate version of the Buffalo:

Spoiler
{
   "baseHullId":"buffalo",
   "skinHullId":"buffalo_pirates",
   "hullName":"Buffalo",
   "descriptionId":"buffalo",  # optional
   "fleetPoints":5,
   "spriteName":"graphics/ships/buffalo/buffalo_pirates.png",
   "removeWeaponSlots":[],       # ids
   "removeEngineSlots":[],       # indices, as engine slots have no id in the .ship file
   "removeBuiltInMods":[],       # hullmod ids
   "removeBuiltInWeapons":[],       # weapon slot ids
   "weaponSlotChanges":{
      "WS 001":{
         #"angle": 0,
            #"arc": 210,
            #"mount": "TURRET",
            #"size": "SMALL",
            "type": "BALLISTIC"
      }   
   },
   #"builtInMods":["comp_armor","comp_hull","degraded_engines","faulty_grid","destroyed_mounts"],
   "builtInMods":["shielded_holds"],
   "builtInWeapons":{
    },
}
[close]


Changes as of September 24, 2014
  • Wolf, Lasher frigates: now have frontal shields, to better work with their front-facing firepower

Quote from: Alex
  • Pilum: improved top speed and acceleration. Can still be dodged effectively, just harder. Deadly vs non-omni-shield frigates w/o PD


You are a terrible person.

Thank you! (In my defense, I've also improved the AI for dealing with missiles using front shields a *lot*.)


Only thing I might suggest taking a look at before the update is the "Stabilized Shields" hullmod. The way it currently works, it sees automatic use on any ship where Stabilized Shields is cheaper than an equivalent amount of vents (like the Apogee or Sunder, for instance). Although it's not OP or anything, it seems a little too easy to get access to, requiring only a 1 point investment into Applied Physics. Maybe move it up a little bit in the skill tree to make it require a bit more dedication to get (like rank 3-5 or something)?

Fair point, but in all honesty, I don't think this is high priority enough to where I'd want to look at it now.


I read the patch notes but I didn't see anything about this, but will it be possible to specialize factions towards certain commodities (for example via average abundance or price)?

The supply/demand is based on the market conditions your markets have, so yes.


And will there be a way for haulers to be nerfed in terms of smuggling capacity in a similar way to how the new hullmod works, ie extra thin cargohold?

And could you make cargoholds discriminate specific items, such that for example my faction's hauler could only carry supplies and fuel but no commodities? Or maybe only supplies, fuel, an "energy cells" commodity and guns?

No to all, though you could probably code around that if you really wanted to. As far as the player, though, cargo capacity is cargo capacity. I can't really imagine doing something like "X of your capacity can only be used on Ore", etc.


This could tie into a sort of mechanic for stations and planets you own that are under attack. An enemy fleet hovers/orbits around a station or planet with the status of 'attacking' or 'suppressing', and you get a notification of the event in progress, and your control over it measurably goes down over time until you fend off the attacker.

Yeah, without committing to any specifics, that's the sort of thing I'm talking about.


Back when .6a was in development you released the WIP starfarer api (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=5813.msg108003#msg108003) a bit early so modders could get a head start on supporting the massive changes in that patch. Would you consider doing so again since it's looking like .65a will be an even bigger compatibility breaker than .6a?

Definitely. Sort of want to hold off on it until I've had a chance to plow through some stuff in the API requests thread, though.



Really glad to see that you're still polishing combat, the AI and missile changes should mix things up again. (I'm just afraid that the Cerberus is completely at the mercy of missiles now.)

It was really driven by campaign playtesting, but yeah, it feels good to go back to that an polish thing up a bit. I have high hopes for the ship AI improvements; fixed some really nasty bugs that were responsible for a lot of the needless losses.

As far as the Cerberus, the Vulcans are surprisingly good PD. With a good loadout, it can solo a harpoon-armed Lasher or a Pilum-armed Condor under AI control, though it might take a hit or two in the process. But yeah, a missile-rich environment is generally unhealthy for it, though this is also the case for other ships.

Oh, and... did you really double weapon end engine health again, so it's now quadrupled? Or did you just forget that you already listed that change in the June update?

Just for engines this time around. Might play with it some more, though.



Sounds so great.

I am also salivating at the Lasher / Wolf frontal shield change and the impact pilums (pila?) are going to have on their rear ends.

Don't know why that stands out amongst all the other things, but it does :)

Adds interest to the choice of frigate, I guess. At the minute Lashers and Wolves are a safe option in so many ways.

You know, even if this is technically a nerf, it makes the Wolf so much more fun to play. The reasoning behind the change was to remove the control conflict that having omni shields on a ship with a significant portion of its firepower on front-facing hardpoints, which is especially an issue for frigates (and other ships that turn quickly).


Quote
Removed speed penalty after winning battle

But... why?  :-[

That way you can just keep on farming smaller fleets, without fear of a bigger fleet catching you after battle. The way I see it, the hit to burnspeed after winning a battle means you have to carefully pick your targets. Which to me adds to the fun of the game. And from a roleplaying stand point, I think even a victorious fleet first has to get back into formation again, and prepare to fly off at full burn speed. It only stands to reason that such preparations take some time.

Yeah, that's still a concern, but as I mentioned earlier, I don't think the tradeoff is worth it right now. In the future, I think some other mechanics (that I'm not prepared to discuss!) might take care of this neatly, so this isn't something I'm punting on long-term.



The shielded cargo hullmod makes me think: if the customs patrol doesn't trust you (maybe you've been caught smuggling before, or they've been swamped with illegal goods lately), they should insist on a boarding inspection. Obviously much harder to hide contraband from, and if you decide to fight after letting them on, you've got armed marines on your ship that could mess your crew/CR levels up or even take it over entirely.

Or is that too unfun a mechanic?

Actually thought about it; decided it was too complex in many ways. The chance for contraband to be found is higher if they're suspicious btw.



Oh, the Shielded Cargo Holds hullmod - how does it work? Does it reduce detection chance per hullmod present in the fleet? Or is it dependent on the cargo space of the ship that has it equipped? Depending on the answer, there could be ways to exploit it, E.G. equipping a bunch of shuttles with it.

It's based on the cargo capacity of the ship that has it. Also, you can't equip anything with it, it's only available as a built-in on certain hulls and skins.




  • Added chance for an investigation event to be triggered by player use of comm sniffers

Is this a completely random dice roll at each clock tick as soon as the sniffer is online? The problems with such mechanics are  1. Opaque to the player and 2. Utterly beyond their control. This combination may result in frustration. Randomness that you can either affect or predict is good, randomness you can neither affect nor predict is bad.

I suggest the sniffer have a period of time during which it cannot be caught, adjusted by some skill from the character screen. A progress bar somewhere on the intel screen could show how much time you have left on your sniffer(s). After that, if you don't uninstall it (remotely or in person as balance demands) THEN the dice rolls for investigations start.

This is my first forum post. I've got a few other suggestions about current gameplay as well, which I will post in the appropriate subforum.

I get what you're saying, but I think the magnitude of the event is a large component here. The consequences of a "guilty" result are minor - a slight reputation hit. On a more general note, even if something is purely random, if you have the choice of which gambles to engage in, and can make enough of them, then the outcome is essentially not random. What I mean is, if you have one 75% chance to win and 25% chance to lose, that could be bad (it could also be ok, if this was the culmination of a set of bad choices/lost gambles). But if you make 100 smaller bets with similar odds, then the outcome is fairly predictable despite being technically random.

Also: hi, and welcome to the forum!



  • High Intensity Laser now fires on achieving full charge (instead of starting to fire at partial effectiveness immediately)
Any chance of pairing this with a damage increase?  Or maybe a slight increase in the armor penetration power of beams in general?  The change a version or two ago where armor could get a higher overall damage reduction was mostly good, but really hit beam usefulness pretty hard, especially the HIL (and phase beams).

Hesitant to mess with this, to be honest. So far in playtesting beams seem to be doing quite well, though I haven't done too much with larger ships yet.

  • Fixed bug in StatBonus that was applying the flat bonus after the mult bonus (the correct order is: percent, flat, mult)
Huh.  Can you give us an example of where this makes a difference?

Not anywhere in the current version. Came up when I was adding something, don't exactly remember what.


Why have them at all now if they lost most of their main purpose? How USEFUL is ONE more burn speed? Have you ever tried to catch up to a ship when you are one point faster? How long did that take in?

Many times in the last few days; somewhere around 10 seconds or so. As a side note, it kind of feels like you're taking one change, looking at it, and then assuming everything else will be done in the worst possible way so that this change is horrible. I assure you, that's not the dev process :) Not to say that occasional mistakes won't be made, but still. I'd also invite you to read what I wrote (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=6710.msg140622#msg140622) in response to your similar question in another thread.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on September 25, 2014, 02:37:08 PM
Looks solid :)

Really like the changes to the way CR / supply works; I think that sounds like a good balance between some realism and good gameplay. 

Would like to second the call for a bit of buff for the HIL; it's just not useful enough as a pressure weapon at its current DPS and it's completely out-classed as an offensive weapon by many other things, even in the relatively-rare position of large Energy / Universal turret.

The missile changes sound great.  Would be cool to have a missile PD with AOE in the mix to counter with :)

On prices; I'd slope the Cruisers up to 3X and the Capitals even higher, maybe 5X.  In Vacuum, a Frigate's roughly 1:20 vs. a capital, when weapon prices are considered; that feels like a real progression and a huge loss if you lose one.  That said, if you're slowing progression via getting a Faction to be happy enough with the player to allow for purchase, like EV Nova did, that's another way to skin that cat.

Lastly, now that there are patrols... what about some dynamic military events?  When I think of "patrols", I don't think if a large task force on a mission to interdict or destroy another faction's base; that kind of event is something I'd really like to see happen in the sandbox, so that things don't stay static over a game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cosmitz on September 25, 2014, 03:34:00 PM
I absolutely love and also am scared of the retooling done but scraping down a feature and remaking/redesigning requires serious commitment to the vision and i trust Alex's vision on the game. Most of the changes do make sense, even if some seem drastic, (full removal of speed penalty after a fight).

- CR/supplies/repairs was always complicated, and we merely got used to it in the patched up form. Uomoz's managed to make the system work and an economy on it, even through the roundabout way it was used as. Will have to see it in play, but a return to the 'arcade' no-penalty flying around seems a bit like a step backwards. If we will have integrated hullmods on ships that make it suck actual supplies when moving around, why not just stick to making it a game element as it is now? Either way, may just have to see it in play.

- Pursuit changes make sense, but a huge issue was always with Burn Drive ships or fighters. You need something that can overcome those, and with the changes, overcome those /now/ before the get off the board, which may prove impossible.

- "Made fleet movement slightly less inertial (2x acceleration)". I was always bugged with the sector map movement.. slingshotting around and such. Glad to see this is getting a look over.

Overall, these changes are massive, and done most likely to fit in with the new parts of the game. Will love to play when it's out, and mod makers have a huge reworking in front of them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Okim on September 25, 2014, 11:23:54 PM
Quote
These are just a shorthand for defining new hulls. The game takes the .skin file and creates a new hull based on that; for almost every purpose within the game, it's treated as an entirely separate hull. You can't change skins for a ship once you have it, for example. "Skin" might be slightly misleading as it encompasses more than just appearance. Skins can, for example change/remove weapon and engine slots, change the OP/deployment points/price, add/remove built in hull mods and weapons. Skins can not change the bounds or weapon slot locations, and also can't change the ship's system (the latter, at least for the moment).

Can I delete/create a ship with specific skin or change the current skin for a ship using API? For example via dialogue options (like conversions are achieved in Ironclads now)?

One more question - I suppose that I don`t have to create a new entry for each skin in ship_data.csv file or specific .ship file for it? If so - how do I define the new OP or price for it - I haven`t noticed any such lines in your example? I currently can`t see the difference between creating a new .ship file + entry in .cvs and making a new skin.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Okim on September 26, 2014, 12:10:39 AM
Quote
Quote from: Zudgemud on September 25, 2014, 12:50:16 AM

I read the patch notes but I didn't see anything about this, but will it be possible to specialize factions towards certain commodities (for example via average abundance or price)?


The supply/demand is based on the market conditions your markets have, so yes.

So technically you can specify via supply/demand that a particular market is specialized in producing stuff out of some raw materials (in other words - has higher demands for raws and no demand in produced stuff at all as well as other non-participating in production goods)?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on September 26, 2014, 04:27:13 AM
You can't change skins for a ship once you have it, for example.
Awww  :(
Well I suppose it still simplify the custom dialog option I was going for. Uomoz's mod already allow to modify ships and I was going for something similar. Skins will probably help getting the possible modifications.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: LazyWizard on September 26, 2014, 07:24:31 AM
  • Revamped new game creation dialog
    • More unified UI feel
    • More interesting/impactful choices

Is this new dialog easier for multiple mods to hook into? I feel that was the major flaw with the old CharacterCreationPlugin system.


Quote
  • Markets will generate mercenary fleets when stability is lower. Some of these may actually turn out to be pirates.

Does this mean they will appear to be Independents and reveal themselves once you encounter them, or is it just a random chance that a spawned fleet will be pirates?


Quote
  • Missile overhaul

I'm excited about these missile changes. I look forward to dying many, many times due to outdated muscle memory. ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 26, 2014, 12:22:10 PM
Lastly, now that there are patrols... what about some dynamic military events?  When I think of "patrols", I don't think if a large task force on a mission to interdict or destroy another faction's base; that kind of event is something I'd really like to see happen in the sandbox, so that things don't stay static over a game.

Right, patrols are in-or-near system stuff, so there's not a whole lot of miltiary activity going on unless hostile factions share a system or, say, send trade fleets to a neutral market that's in a hostile system. Any kind of higher-level military dynamics are well outside the scope for this release.


- CR/supplies/repairs was always complicated, and we merely got used to it in the patched up form. Uomoz's managed to make the system work and an economy on it, even through the roundabout way it was used as. Will have to see it in play, but a return to the 'arcade' no-penalty flying around seems a bit like a step backwards. If we will have integrated hullmods on ships that make it suck actual supplies when moving around, why not just stick to making it a game element as it is now? Either way, may just have to see it in play.

I touched on this earlier, but basically: I think having an exception is simpler than having a rule. (Also, it's not no-penalty as crew consumes supplies, and hyperspace travel consumes fuel.)

- Pursuit changes make sense, but a huge issue was always with Burn Drive ships or fighters. You need something that can overcome those, and with the changes, overcome those /now/ before the get off the board, which may prove impossible.

I'm ok with certain types of ships being very hard to chase down. It actually seems like a good way to add some diversity into the gameplay and add more reasons to go with different types of ships.


Can I delete/create a ship with specific skin or change the current skin for a ship using API? For example via dialogue options (like conversions are achieved in Ironclads now)?

By removing and adding a new fleet member, I'd imagine.

One more question - I suppose that I don`t have to create a new entry for each skin in ship_data.csv file or specific .ship file for it? If so - how do I define the new OP or price for it - I haven`t noticed any such lines in your example? I currently can`t see the difference between creating a new .ship file + entry in .cvs and making a new skin.

Right, no new entry in ship_data.csv. There are fields for OP and price in the .skin file; didn't realize that the example I picked didn't include them. Most of the fields are optional.

There's very little functional difference between creating a skin and a new .ship file plus entry in .csv. The main point is that a skin takes maybe a minute or two to add, and is much easier to maintain if the base stats of the ship, bounds, nodes, etc need to change.


So technically you can specify via supply/demand that a particular market is specialized in producing stuff out of some raw materials (in other words - has higher demands for raws and no demand in produced stuff at all as well as other non-participating in production goods)?

Right. There's a good chance you'd be able to use existing market conditions to create whatever you want, actually. Here's what the economy config for a simple ore mining outpost looks like:
Spoiler
      {
         "entities":["corvus_IIIb"], # Barad B
         "faction":"pirates",
         "size":2,
         "startingConditions":[
            "ore_complex",
            "free_market",
            "outpost",
            "uninhabitable",
            "population_2",
         ],
      },
[close]
      
      
Each of the conditions has associated supply/demand. For example, ore_complex will add ore/rare ore supply and requires crew and heavy machinery.


Is this new dialog easier for multiple mods to hook into? I feel that was the major flaw with the old CharacterCreationPlugin system.

In theory, yeah, since it's done using the rules.csv system. In practice, it's a bit limited because the number of options you can present at a time is limited by the dialog layout. I might have to add scrolling to the options element, if I can figure out how to make that look nice.

Quote
  • Markets will generate mercenary fleets when stability is lower. Some of these may actually turn out to be pirates.

Does this mean they will appear to be Independents and reveal themselves once you encounter them, or is it just a random chance that a spawned fleet will be pirates?

The pirates spawn independent, go off somewhere, fly the Jolly Roger, and then head to a pirate base. After that, they'll raid using their selected base as a... base. And eventually return to their market of origin with any plunder.

I'm excited about these missile changes. I look forward to dying many, many times due to outdated muscle memory. ;)

I've been on the wrong end of this a couple of times. Usually it's, "oh, I've won this, can relax now" then BAM.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on September 26, 2014, 01:31:30 PM
I've been on the wrong end of this a couple of times. Usually it's, "oh, I've won this, can relax now" then BAM.

Say, do you enjoy playing this Starsector game as much as I do? Because sometimes, in situations like those, I can't help thinking to myself: "This... is really damn fun."  ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 26, 2014, 01:34:41 PM
Quite possibly :) In this particular case, there's also a healthy dose of "being happy with the AI" thrown in - when it dispatches me in a manner that can only be described as "clinical".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on September 26, 2014, 02:07:11 PM
Various assorted comments:

Doubled XP gain sounds fun, although I guess this was done because player cannot fight as much as before due to various reasons.  I hope killing everything that moves remains a viable playstyle - that is fun.

Economy only a means to an end; that is, to get the ships, weapons, and food needed to fight and wage war for the power gained from leveling, which leads to superior performance in action-filled arcade-y combat - the real point of the game (for me, at least).


Only one tug per ship.  That means Atlas will not be so great anymore, at least until Navigation 10 and Augmented Engines are available.

I agree with Midnight Kitsune's concerns.  Navigation 10 (and Mechanical Engineering 7 for Augmented Engines) feels required, at least for those who want to use ships bigger than frigates.  Any fleet moving slower than burn 6 is too slow.  Being unable to catch and destroy common scouts and raiders cuts off a valuable source of experience and income.  Yes, such fleets are not worth much individually, but there are a lot of them, and they add up.

I have relied Oxen to keep my speed up to 6 or 7.  Without them, I will stick to frigate swarms until endgame, when I can afford Navigation 10 and more Leadership.


No more burn speed on Unstable Injectors sounds painful for Easy start, if the Mule remains.  Burn speed 5 is not fast enough - I will sell the Mule (but keep the Medusa) for something faster.

Unstable Injector will still be highly desired by most ships for the speed boost in combat, if Augmented Engines is not available.


Doubled prices for ships could make boarding desirable ships more rewarding and/or useful.

Smaller pursuit sounds good.  I almost always keep Hyperion in my fleet solely for pursuit battles.  Anything else felt too long before something took damage - so much that I auto-resolved all pursuits if survivors were not a problem.


Quote
You know, even if this is technically a nerf, it makes the Wolf so much more fun to play. The reasoning behind the change was to remove the control conflict that having omni shields on a ship with a significant portion of its firepower on front-facing hardpoints, which is especially an issue for frigates (and other ships that turn quickly).
I can agree that this is a nerf.  I got used to omni-shields with frigates (that lack 360 shields).  It is easier to defend against missiles with omni-shields when PD is weak or not enough.


Quote
I don't think it's a death spiral if to enter it you have to literally make everyone in the Sector mad at you, and not just a little mad, but "we will not rest until you're gone from this world" mad.

In gameplay terms, it should add more tangible differences between different playstyles. Smuggler? You can trade with pirates. Bounty hunter? Maybe if you're careful to walk the line, but probably not.
What about "Eliminator" or "Overlord", that is one who wants to fight everyone until their factions are eliminated and the whole sector becomes his, like in Risk?  I would like to make my own faction (or hijack an existing faction and make it mine if creating my new faction is impossible) and destroy the rest.  After all, one cannot rule the sector with competition (i.e., Hegemony/Tri-Tachyon getting in the way).  I am sure all factions would view such an upstart, after revealing himself, as an existential threat.


Re: High Intensity Laser
I think high-intensity laser needs more damage.  For the same OP, autopulse laser outperforms it in every way except range, due to initial spike damage and hard flux.  Aside from theme configurations (such as all-beam Paragon), I cannot think of any time I want to use high-intensity laser over autopulse laser.

Re: Missiles
Do medium pods still have twelve missiles, or were they doubled to twenty-four?  Four shot salvos will burn through twelve missiles very fast, and the idea of blowing 10 OP for a three-shot feels like a waste.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 26, 2014, 02:30:22 PM
On a general note, the specifics of what burn level is required to catch what types of fleets have changed considerably. One of the (as-yet-unmentioned) changes is that most pirate fleets are made up of larger numbers of inferior ships (i.e. a skin with some negative hullmods, such as "compromised armor" or "degraded engines" - conceptually, ships decommissioned due to irreparable battle damage, or simply defective autofactory output). Many of these ships have a penalty to burn level. So, any balance concerns based on relative burn levels - well, I wouldn't call all of them invalid, but basing them on current values certainly is.

Smaller pursuit sounds good.  I almost always keep Hyperion in my fleet solely for pursuit battles.  Anything else felt too long before something took damage - so much that I auto-resolved all pursuits if survivors were not a problem.

Yeah, it feels a lot better now. If you're pursuing with decently fast ships (i.e. a Wolf), it doesn't take long at all until ships are in firing range of each other.


What about "Eliminator" or "Overlord", that is one who wants to fight everyone until their factions are eliminated and the whole sector becomes his, like in Risk?  I would like to make my own faction (or hijack an existing faction and make it mine if creating my new faction is impossible) and destroy the rest.  After all, one cannot rule the sector with competition (i.e., Hegemony/Tri-Tachyon getting in the way).  I am sure all factions would view such an upstart, after revealing himself, as an existential threat.

Well, since you can't create outposts or control a faction at this point...


Re: Missiles
Do medium pods still have twelve missiles, or were they doubled to twenty-four?  Four shot salvos will burn through twelve missiles very fast, and the idea of blowing 10 OP for a three-shot feels like a waste.

Oh, but what a three-shot.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Aeson on September 26, 2014, 10:51:09 PM
Sounds so great.

I am also salivating at the Lasher / Wolf frontal shield change and the impact pilums (pila?) are going to have on their rear ends.

Don't know why that stands out amongst all the other things, but it does :)

Adds interest to the choice of frigate, I guess. At the minute Lashers and Wolves are a safe option in so many ways.

You know, even if this is technically a nerf, it makes the Wolf so much more fun to play. The reasoning behind the change was to remove the control conflict that having omni shields on a ship with a significant portion of its firepower on front-facing hardpoints, which is especially an issue for frigates (and other ships that turn quickly).
Personally, I feel that omni shields have the least issues when the guns you're trying to aim are fixed. Yes, paying attention to where the omni shield is takes your attention away from where exactly the fixed forward firing guns are pointing, but on the other hand, dragging the omni shield to the other side of the ship to intercept some missiles or absorb fire from a cruiser while you finish off something that overloaded doesn't screw up the aim of a fixed gun all that much. It's the player-controlled turreted guns that have major control conflicts with omni shields, as both the turrets and the shield projector aim at the mouse cursor, and I not infrequently want my shield facing somewhere other than at my current preferred target. Missiles, whether fixed or turreted, can avoid the aiming/shield coverage conflict relatively easily if you remember to set a target, although it's still a bit annoying to have the turret facing the wrong way, but direct-fire turreted weapons cannot.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on September 27, 2014, 09:12:55 AM
Do you still get the speed penalty for harrying a fleet without engaging it?
If you enter a pursuit battle with an enemy fleet and some/all of them get away, do you get slowed down?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 27, 2014, 09:27:12 AM
Personally, I feel that omni shields have the least issues when the guns you're trying to aim are fixed. Yes, paying attention to where the omni shield is takes your attention away from where exactly the fixed forward firing guns are pointing, but on the other hand, dragging the omni shield to the other side of the ship to intercept some missiles or absorb fire from a cruiser while you finish off something that overloaded doesn't screw up the aim of a fixed gun all that much. It's the player-controlled turreted guns that have major control conflicts with omni shields, as both the turrets and the shield projector aim at the mouse cursor, and I not infrequently want my shield facing somewhere other than at my current preferred target. Missiles, whether fixed or turreted, can avoid the aiming/shield coverage conflict relatively easily if you remember to set a target, although it's still a bit annoying to have the turret facing the wrong way, but direct-fire turreted weapons cannot.

Hmm, I see what you're saying, at least partially. I think for me, it's different as I tend to keep most weapons on autofire and manage that instead of manually firing, so with a ship like the Enforcer, the mouse is mostly free for shield use. If you prefer manual control, you can still keep the manual group on autofire and quickly switch to another group if you need to shield elsewhere but want to keep firing.

As far as "not screwing up the aim of a fixed gun", I think that's only true for larger ships firing on larger targets. If you're in a frigate - or firing at one - moving the mouse away to shield vs something is pretty much going to make you miss.

Do you still get the speed penalty for harrying a fleet without engaging it?
If you enter a pursuit battle with an enemy fleet and some/all of them get away, do you get slowed down?

No and no. They still get a speedup, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on September 27, 2014, 09:50:58 AM
Quote
If you're in a frigate - or firing at one - moving the mouse away to shield vs something is pretty much going to make you miss.
Not necessarily; because skilled frigate (and Medusa) flagships are fast, player can approach a target via strafing (instead of head-on) and be mostly assured that most incoming attacks from that target will miss (because enemy cannot lead shots at all).  While the player drifts laterally and shoots, he can use the mouse to control the shield to block shots coming from elsewhere.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zibywan on September 27, 2014, 02:22:51 PM
I'm surprised the idea of gaining XP for trading enterprises hasn't been thrown around yet. A trade captain can be experience, but may not have been in even a tenth of the battles a combat cruiser's captain would have been in.

If I built a fleet around trading I would expect my character to gain quiet a bit of knowledge about how to properly load my ships, interact with patrols, barter, spot new and more profitable routes, and maintain optimal ship conditions for travel.

Any chance we will be able to gain character XP for buying/selling goods, bringing supplies to a planet/station/colony in peril (having an event), or for some other trade actions?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Aeson on September 27, 2014, 02:27:52 PM
I think for me, it's different as I tend to keep most weapons on autofire and manage that instead of manually firing, so with a ship like the Enforcer, the mouse is mostly free for shield use. If you prefer manual control, you can still keep the manual group on autofire and quickly switch to another group if you need to shield elsewhere but want to keep firing.
The only weapons that I normally keep control over are missiles and high-flux weapons like antimatter blasters. Mostly because I'd rather control the omni shield than aim and fire the weapons, especially since the computer cannot do the former and does well enough with the latter. For similar reasons, I don't bother with mouse strafing. I find that I can maneuver the ship well enough with the keyboard that giving up the ability to redirect the omni shield to aim the ship at the cursor isn't worthwhile. If the mouse strafing control conflict is what you're worried about, maybe it'd be good to make the Q and E strafing act similarly to cursor strafing if you have a target selected.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on September 27, 2014, 03:48:22 PM
Quote
If the mouse strafing control conflict is what you're worried about, maybe it'd be good to make the Q and E strafing act similarly to cursor strafing if you have a target selected.
No!  I rely on the current implementation of Q and E for my superior combat performance.  Q and E work just like strafing in a classic FPS like Doom.

The weapons I keep on manual control vary by ship for me.  For some, anything that is not PD or anti-fighter gets put on manual.  For others, I let computer do the work unless I need to attack beyond weapon range.  In case of Enforcer, I load all five medium ballistic mounts with maulers and needlers, and put them all on manual so I can focus-fire all of them for maximum damage, when I want.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on September 27, 2014, 04:38:34 PM
I'm surprised the idea of gaining XP for trading enterprises hasn't been thrown around yet.

It kinda has been, but maybe the answer has changed by now :) :

Question: how is experience gain going to be handled with trading? I feel like you need some experience to keep it balanced against a pure combat style, but at the same time that does lead to suddenly knowing how to mount extra guns on all your ships because you made mad moolah selling supplies. Some skills make sense (yeah if you spend a lot of time flying around you should be able to increase your burn drive) but others (mah macrosse missile massacre just got even better!) definitely don't. Curious to see how you balance it

Good question. I don't have a good answer quite yet. I will say that I don't feel strange about XP being used to improve areas the XP wasn't gained through though, that's just how this sort of system works. Systems that force you to use skills (or at least areas of skills) to improve them have their own problems.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hopelessnoob on September 27, 2014, 05:51:14 PM
Because I'm now worried Gothars will close this thread :P

Are there any questions you expected us to ask about these patch notes that hasn't been asked?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabotsas on September 27, 2014, 10:53:45 PM
Would there be a way of making the shield being AI-controlled (like setting it to AI, same as auto-fire for guns)? As a result you could focus on aiming. Maybe the shield AI could be improved or even the whole function could be unlocked via skill points.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on September 28, 2014, 08:23:55 AM
Would there be a way of making the shield being AI-controlled (like setting it to AI, same as auto-fire for guns)? As a result you could focus on aiming. Maybe the shield AI could be improved or even the whole function could be unlocked via skill points.
Sadly no. This and variations of it have been asked many  time and the answer has always been no
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 28, 2014, 08:42:46 AM
I'm surprised the idea of gaining XP for trading enterprises hasn't been thrown around yet.

It kinda has been, but maybe the answer has changed by now :) :

Question: how is experience gain going to be handled with trading? I feel like you need some experience to keep it balanced against a pure combat style, but at the same time that does lead to suddenly knowing how to mount extra guns on all your ships because you made mad moolah selling supplies. Some skills make sense (yeah if you spend a lot of time flying around you should be able to increase your burn drive) but others (mah macrosse missile massacre just got even better!) definitely don't. Curious to see how you balance it

Good question. I don't have a good answer quite yet. I will say that I don't feel strange about XP being used to improve areas the XP wasn't gained through though, that's just how this sort of system works. Systems that force you to use skills (or at least areas of skills) to improve them have their own problems.

Right now, there's XP gain for trading profitably (i.e. not for just selling salvage etc), but I haven't had much of a chance to test how well this works out.


Are there any questions you expected us to ask about these patch notes that hasn't been asked?

Nothing comes to mind. There were one or two things at first but then they came up :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hopelessnoob on September 28, 2014, 09:24:22 AM
So if i'm trading profitably but I also pick up an atlas kill and a lot of loot from that Do I gain XP for the stuff I had originally or do i gain XP for the stuff and the salvage? Can the game differentiate if its all in the same stack?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 28, 2014, 09:26:55 AM
It knows all. ALLLLLL.

Ahem.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on September 28, 2014, 09:33:21 AM
Alex is going mad. It's the release hype.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on September 28, 2014, 09:58:19 AM
It knows all. ALLLLLL.
Ahem.
Dude, you can't contain it all! Release it man, release the update! Release it before it kills you!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucax on September 28, 2014, 01:30:16 PM
I've never been fond of trading in space sims, until I saw this update. This is something else. XP for trading is genius, why is there so few games with this?

But then, shouldn't there be a couple of skills that improve trading in some way? Sure, any skill would help, since it would improve security. Especially +logistics skills, they would allow to have more freighters, but I'm thinking something really oriented towards trading.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ZweiZeichen on September 28, 2014, 01:35:38 PM
Sorry, im new to this, but can i download this patch anywhere or is it not released yet?  ??? ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 28, 2014, 01:38:33 PM
It knows all. ALLLLLL.
Ahem.
Dude, you can't contain it all! Release it man, release the update! Release it before it kills you!

Sounds like some kind of "release by exorcism" dev methodology.

But then, shouldn't there be a couple of skills that improve trading in some way? Sure, any skill would help, since it would improve security. Especially +logistics skills, they would allow to have more freighters, but I'm thinking something really oriented towards trading.

Eventually, yeah. Just too much to cram into this update, along with everything else.

Sorry, im new to this, but can i download this patch anywhere or isn´t it released yet?  ??? ;D

It's not out yet :) When it is, you'll be able to download it here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/preorder/).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: silalus on September 28, 2014, 03:33:17 PM
So if i'm trading profitably but I also pick up an atlas kill and a lot of loot from that Do I gain XP for the stuff I had originally or do i gain XP for the stuff and the salvage? Can the game differentiate if its all in the same stack?

If I understand correctly the idea is that you get XP for profit not for the sale.

I would imagine this works the same as it does for taxes- cost basis. If that's right, then each discreet item you buy has a cost basis attached to it, and you get xp for selling it based on how much higher than that cost basis you can price it. Salvage could either be flagged as an undefined cost basis and handled separately or assigned a high cost basis.

Now if the game made you pick an accounting method (FIFO vs LIFO, etc), that would make me chuckle. ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Okim on September 28, 2014, 11:44:19 PM
Nice news on profit XP gain. Kinda what I was always trying to achieve in Ironclads.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Mattk50 on September 29, 2014, 07:48:38 AM
Will this release before you have to live with not having released an update for a full year?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 29, 2014, 08:45:41 AM
So if i'm trading profitably but I also pick up an atlas kill and a lot of loot from that Do I gain XP for the stuff I had originally or do i gain XP for the stuff and the salvage? Can the game differentiate if its all in the same stack?

If I understand correctly the idea is that you get XP for profit not for the sale.

I would imagine this works the same as it does for taxes- cost basis. If that's right, then each discreet item you buy has a cost basis attached to it, and you get xp for selling it based on how much higher than that cost basis you can price it. Salvage could either be flagged as an undefined cost basis and handled separately or assigned a high cost basis.

Now if the game made you pick an accounting method (FIFO vs LIFO, etc), that would make me chuckle. ;D

Something like that, but a bit simpler :)

Will this release before you have to live with not having released an update for a full year?

Yes! I'm definitely counting 0.6.2a as a release, though - but I wouldn't expect it to get too close to that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on September 29, 2014, 08:54:17 AM
I would count 0.6.2a too.  Anyhow, I get why this part has taken awhile; good part is that it's largely downhill from here :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 29, 2014, 09:12:50 AM
I appreciate the sentiment, but I'd prefer "smooth sailing" over "downhill" as the metaphor ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Erick Doe on September 29, 2014, 10:16:29 AM
I appreciate the sentiment, but I'd prefer "smooth sailing" over "downhill" as the metaphor ;)

That cracked me up!  :D

I'm sure Xenoargh meant the former!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: JT on September 29, 2014, 02:59:18 PM
  • Removed speed penalty after winning battle

My immediate reaction to this was an indignant "What?!"  As others have mentioned, this promotes kiting, which as I understand it was actively being targetted as an undesirable gameplay style -- and the nerf to tugs (I'll get to that in a minute...) clearly indicates that kiting (with heavy singletons, at least) is considered an undesired gameplay element.

If you're not going to go back on this, then may I suggest a Mount & Blade style reinforcement (in a later version, obviously), where in any scenario that you attack an enemy fleet within shooting distance of another fleet, the other fleet can join on the side they want as reinforcements (to arrive at a later point in the battle, rather than as initial deployments)?

Quote
  • Reduced amount of cargo space taken by ship weapons, now 2/4/8 (was: 5/10/20)
If we're going this route, it might be worthwhile just to make them take up the same amount of space as their OP.

Quote
  • Removed XP gain from losing your own ships

Hrm. "Failure is a great teacher, and I think when you make mistakes and you recover from them and you treat them as valuable learning experiences, then you've got something to share."

Quote
  • Doubled the prices for all ships
  • Balancing:
    • Greatly reduced amount of salvage from battle
    • Fighting combat fleets unlikely to result in high profit unless a bounty is also involved
    • Best opportunity is to attack trade fleets carrying expensive goods
    • Adjusted fuel use and capacity of ships across the board

So we're increasing the value of ships and cargo even more, but we're still sticking with the principle of "we'd rather blow them up than board them and take them intact"...? =)

Quote
  • Ox-class tug: now limited to a maximum of one per ship

From a realism perspective (for whatever good that serves in an environment where Handwavium is perfectly justifiable), I figure this should be based on hull size (hit points) instead.  The larger the ship's actual hull, the more tugs it can accept to boost burn.  The weaker the ship's hull, even in a particularly large ship (e.g., a high-tech glass cannon instead of a low-tech brute), the fewer tugs it can use to augment its speed.

A single tug per ship smacks of arbitrary things done in the name of balance, which may be acceptable in quick-and-dirty RTSes but aren't as readily accepted in games that have a more rigid simulation bent.

Quote
  • Removed "send out salvage teams" from post-engagement options; choices are now "maintain contact with the enemy" (functions as "harry" did) and "stand down"

Is this because "stand down" is redundant, or is this further nerfing of being able to partially recoup your losses in a battle?  I hope the former, because as much as trade is going to be "fun" subjectively, combat still needs to be a viable means of income to justify the vast amount of development time that went into perfecting it.

Quote
  • Made fleet movement slightly less inertial (2x acceleration)

I suppose I like and dislike this simultaneously, since I was usually able to coax ordinarily faster ships into action, Honor Harrington style, by fooling them into navigating the wrong way toward a larger fleet, which they would flee from and then subsequently choose an evasion path which would force them into contact with me.  I like this because the AI should have been smart enough to avoid being boxed in, but dislike this because it makes it even harder to catch meaningful prizes in combat gameplay.

-----

The rest I'll reserve judgement on until I actually see it, but every other tweak of existing features seems to be right on the money!  (I'm a pessimist at heart so I focus on negative feedback rather than positive feedback, although at least I think it's constructive criticism. =))
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on September 29, 2014, 03:53:51 PM
Quote
Hrm. "Failure is a great teacher, and I think when you make mistakes and you recover from them and you treat them as valuable learning experiences, then you've got something to share."
I think this was done to prevent the exploit of purposefully destroying your ships (or sending them against the enemy to die) for more experience.  I have been guilty of sacrificing ships for faster experience gain.  Hopefully, the double XP gain will more than compensate for that.

Most memorable for me is when made my Odyssey flagship fire its plasma cannons to destroy a couple of my destroyers, just for experience.  Runner up is sending disposable ships to board.  If I succeed, I get another ship to send against the enemy to die.  If I fail and the ship explodes and destroys out my ships, I get more XP.  It is a win-win!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on September 29, 2014, 04:50:25 PM
If you're not going to go back on this, then may I suggest a Mount & Blade style reinforcement (in a later version, obviously), where in any scenario that you attack an enemy fleet within shooting distance of another fleet, the other fleet can join on the side they want as reinforcements (to arrive at a later point in the battle, rather than as initial deployments)?

I really hope the planned mechanic that "might take care of this neatly" but Alex is "not prepared to discuss!" turns out to be something along those lines. :)



Most memorable for me is when made my Odyssey flagship fire its plasma cannons to destroy a couple of my destroyers, just for experience. 

Yeah, I did that too, and destroying your damaged ships had the added benefit that you don't have to pay for their repairs. I really don't think the "XP for losses" mechanic can work without a bunch of new rules (crew morale?), so it's probably for the best that it got scrapped.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on September 29, 2014, 05:21:06 PM
Quote
  • Reduced amount of cargo space taken by ship weapons, now 2/4/8 (was: 5/10/20)
If we're going this route, it might be worthwhile just to make them take up the same amount of space as their OP.

Eh, no, because then we'd be right back in the 5/10/20 territory :)


From a realism perspective (for whatever good that serves in an environment where Handwavium is perfectly justifiable), I figure this should be based on hull size (hit points) instead.  The larger the ship's actual hull, the more tugs it can accept to boost burn.  The weaker the ship's hull, even in a particularly large ship (e.g., a high-tech glass cannon instead of a low-tech brute), the fewer tugs it can use to augment its speed.

A single tug per ship smacks of arbitrary things done in the name of balance, which may be acceptable in quick-and-dirty RTSes but aren't as readily accepted in games that have a more rigid simulation bent.

I don't know that any specific limit is inherently more "realistic". It's all down to assumptions about a technology so advanced that it might as well be magic.

On a side note, I think basing something like that on hitpoints would be a really bad idea, design wise. You'd be tying together design considerations (combat survivability vs campaign speed) that don't need to go together and may need to change independently. You'd also end up with fun boundary conditions (2000 hull? 1 tug. 2001 hull? 2).


Quote
  • Removed "send out salvage teams" from post-engagement options; choices are now "maintain contact with the enemy" (functions as "harry" did) and "stand down"

Is this because "stand down" is redundant, or is this further nerfing of being able to partially recoup your losses in a battle?  I hope the former, because as much as trade is going to be "fun" subjectively, combat still needs to be a viable means of income to justify the vast amount of development time that went into perfecting it.

It's just a simplification of a mechanic I feel was unnecessarily complex. Incidentally, it makes balancing post-combat salvage quantity easier, since you don't have to make assumptions about what choices the player made.


The rest I'll reserve judgement on until I actually see it, but every other tweak of existing features seems to be right on the money!  (I'm a pessimist at heart so I focus on negative feedback rather than positive feedback, although at least I think it's constructive criticism. =))

Fair enough :) I know I tend to do that myself, sometimes.



If you're not going to go back on this, then may I suggest a Mount & Blade style reinforcement (in a later version, obviously), where in any scenario that you attack an enemy fleet within shooting distance of another fleet, the other fleet can join on the side they want as reinforcements (to arrive at a later point in the battle, rather than as initial deployments)?

I really hope the planned mechanic that "might take care of this neatly" but Alex is "not prepared to discuss!" turns out to be something along those lines. :)

:-X


Most memorable for me is when made my Odyssey flagship fire its plasma cannons to destroy a couple of my destroyers, just for experience. 

Yeah, I did that too, and destroying your damaged ships had the added benefit that you don't have to pay for their repairs. I really don't think the "XP for losses" mechanic can work without a bunch of new rules (crew morale?), so it's probably for the best that it got scrapped.

Yeah, it's just one of those things that sounded good on paper but didn't pan out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SQW on September 29, 2014, 10:42:57 PM
Just curious what the number of the upcoming version?

0.8? 0.7? 0.69a?

I just want an idea how close to Alex's idea of completion this is. Will there be another significant module left now we've basically got combat and trade going?

The reason I'm asking is most of detractors from the recent Gemini 2 is that the world seemed bland, robotic or just uninteresting - especially paired with your bog-standard kill/fetch quest. Since Gemini 2 sounds awfully similar to Starsector's sandbox elements (trade, pirate, bounty etc), what's Alex's plan on avoiding his game from having the same pitfalls?

Would there be a Quest Module to formulate multi-layered missions/quests based on random elements of the current condition to make things more alive?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on September 29, 2014, 10:47:17 PM
*cough* I'd guess .65a, since that's....you know....the title of the thread: ".65a (in development)"
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SQW on September 29, 2014, 10:51:04 PM
lol, good point. I thought Alex might have just put it there as a placeholder when he started this thread. I can't imagine the entire trade module only warrants a 0.01 increase. =P

Come back HL3, all is forgiven!!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on September 30, 2014, 12:36:27 AM
This is tangential but I just want to point out that Honor Harrington was, at best, a sensationally uninspired piece of milwank with some unsettling undertones that the author probably didn't notice because he was too busy faffing himself off about how the military is correct about everything.

I only read Basilisk Station, the first book in the series, based on name recognition for the main character.  I am told it only gets worse from there.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on September 30, 2014, 05:57:46 AM
lol, good point. I thought Alex might have just put it there as a placeholder when he started this thread. I can't imagine the entire trade module only warrants a 0.01 increase. =P

Come back HL3, all is forgiven!!!

No worries, it's a .03 increase :-D WAAAAAAY different ;-)

This is tangential but I just want to point out that Honor Harrington was, at best, a sensationally uninspired piece of milwank with some unsettling undertones that the author probably didn't notice because he was too busy faffing himself off about how the military is correct about everything.

I only read Basilisk Station, the first book in the series, based on name recognition for the main character.  I am told it only gets worse from there.

I must have missed where this tangent started lol
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on September 30, 2014, 10:07:49 AM
Quote
Would there be a Quest Module to formulate multi-layered missions/quests based on random elements of the current condition to make things more alive?
Well, that's kind of the nitty-gritty of the trade system; depending on what the player wants to do, they can:

1.  Trade for a profit, taking advantage of the market opportunities opened up by good / bad events.

2.  Trade in black-market goods, undermining their relationship with a Faction but increasing their profit margins per run.  I really would like to see that mechanically fleshed-out personally; instead of being an automatic debit, have a chance to get caught, pay bribes, have to fight your way free of a starport if you've been doing something really awful, etc.

3.  Do something helpful about the violent activities that may be underpinning market instability, whether that means escort missions <shudder> or intercepting pirates or accepting something like a Letter of Marque (totally want to do that).

4.  Do something harmful to the Faction's traffic, and then take advantage of the disruption to make a killing in side-markets that are also affected whilst also gaining some joy from piracy (or acting under a Letter of Marque, heh).

That's a fair amount of layered, event-driven opportunities to use real agency to interact with the game world; the problem's going to be presenting it in a good fashion, UI-wise, and making it relevant to the flow of play.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: JT on September 30, 2014, 04:43:40 PM
This is tangential but I just want to point out that Honor Harrington was, at best, a sensationally uninspired piece of milwank with some unsettling undertones that the author probably didn't notice because he was too busy faffing himself off about how the military is correct about everything.

I only read Basilisk Station, the first book in the series, based on name recognition for the main character.  I am told it only gets worse from there.

It's good that we live in societies where everyone is entitled to share their opinions. =)

I'll admit that David Weber has it through his head that flat taxes are pure genius, and his lack of subtlety can sometimes make me cringe (Rob S. Pierre? seriously?), but the beauty of the series is that it's "age of sail... in space!"  It's an incredible enmeshment of genres.  Once you look at it from that perspective, you start to appreciate it as being an interesting "self-consistent" piece, rather than having any external validity.  Which, really, is what being a "story" is all about -- if I wanted to learn true politics, I'd get into politics. ;-)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on October 01, 2014, 10:23:58 AM
Are you going to adjust Fast Missile Racks now that all pods are buffed? Could get ugly out there with mass LRM spam/mixed pods.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 01, 2014, 02:51:06 PM
The reason I'm asking is most of detractors from the recent Gemini 2 is that the world seemed bland, robotic or just uninteresting - especially paired with your bog-standard kill/fetch quest. Since Gemini 2 sounds awfully similar to Starsector's sandbox elements (trade, pirate, bounty etc), what's Alex's plan on avoiding his game from having the same pitfalls?

Would there be a Quest Module to formulate multi-layered missions/quests based on random elements of the current condition to make things more alive?

It's a good question, and it's something I'm very much aware of. I don't think the next release will fully resolve it, but it's definitely a step in that direction, and other steps will follow. I don't really want to get into the details, because so much is speculative. Part of the challenge is that the game started with combat, and so it's much more polished and complete than the campaign.

Are you going to adjust Fast Missile Racks now that all pods are buffed? Could get ugly out there with mass LRM spam/mixed pods.

They seem alright so far, so probably not. I mean, eating two sets of Harpoon Pod missiles hurts, but no more than it hurts a frigate to eat 4+ Harpoons. Missiles are just more of a threat across ship sizes now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 01, 2014, 04:58:34 PM
Posted an updated version of the javadoc here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/starfarer.api/index.html?overview-summary.html). It includes most of the API requests, with a few notable exceptions (SettingsAPI changes, EngineSlotAPI, MuzzleFlashAPI, some other stuff). Doesn't mean it won't get added, I'll most likely take another look at it - was just doing a "quick" pass over it today, and it's in good enough shape where I'd like to publish the new API now.

Standard disclaimer: any part of the API could change prior to the actual release.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hopelessnoob on October 01, 2014, 07:07:23 PM
Don't use the word Update without giving us the real update you monster!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on October 01, 2014, 09:18:28 PM
Posted an updated version of the javadoc here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/starfarer.api/index.html?overview-summary.html). It includes most of the API requests, with a few notable exceptions (SettingsAPI changes, EngineSlotAPI, MuzzleFlashAPI, some other stuff). Doesn't mean it won't get added, I'll most likely take another look at it - was just doing a "quick" pass over it today, and it's in good enough shape where I'd like to publish the new API now.

Standard disclaimer: any part of the API could change prior to the actual release.

I couldn't help but wonder what the heck ShipVariantAPI.get/setQuality is for.

Nice changes, by the way.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on October 01, 2014, 09:21:34 PM
Don't use the word Update without giving us the real update you monster!
For modders it's the next best thing! Thanks a lot Alex, lot's of good things have appeared (and we are already dissecting the update potential)  ::)
I'm now very curious to see how the new everyFrameWeaponEffects will be used on vanilla ships ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 02, 2014, 08:43:48 AM
Don't use the word Update without giving us the real update you monster!

How else am I supposed to generate hype?

I couldn't help but wonder what the heck ShipVariantAPI.get/setQuality is for.

It's for figuring out which variants to pick when creating a fleet from a market. Higher market stability means higher quality variants are more likely to be picked.

Nice changes, by the way.

:)

For modders it's the next best thing! Thanks a lot Alex, lot's of good things have appeared (and we are already dissecting the update potential)  ::)
I'm now very curious to see how the new everyFrameWeaponEffects will be used on vanilla ships ;)

Some of those were experiments that didn't pan out, so I wouldn't read too much into them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TheBawkHawk on October 02, 2014, 09:04:32 AM
How else am I supposed to generate hype?

The Hype-Train is already at mach 6, and will be arriving at Release Station at approximately SoonTM O'clock.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on October 03, 2014, 12:57:54 AM
Accurate description of the current situation:
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/CCUp1kX.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lakis on October 04, 2014, 02:11:44 AM
Popping in to say this.

It's going to be scarey learning how to make the faction compatible with the 0.65a release...

Reading through the API documentation would probably help with that now that I think about it... though just waiting for others to update their mods and then looking at what they did is another way to do it.

Meh, we'll cross that bridge when it happens! So eager, can't wait!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on October 04, 2014, 07:14:36 AM
I haven't played the game in a long time now, and I've noticed quite a few mods have popped up. I seriously want to try these mods, but at the same time, I know that the update is around the corner and will make them incompatible.

WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO ME, ALEX.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: OOZ662 on October 04, 2014, 01:19:45 PM
I haven't played the game in a long time now, and I've noticed quite a few mods have popped up. I seriously want to try these mods, but at the same time, I know that the update is around the corner and will make them incompatible.

WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS TO ME, ALEX.

As it stands, the update will essentially be a new game using "old" ships and combat mechanics. I fully plan of keeping a 0.6.2a Ironclads install alongside my vanilla 0.65x install for a while.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: senor on October 05, 2014, 04:59:02 AM
These changes and additions sound great, I can't wait to play the new release.

I'm particularly interested in the changes to Combat Readiness, as I always felt that CR was (both generally, and specifically for me/my playstyle of Tri-Tachyon medium-large ship fleets) too heavy of a burden and in a way, felt sort of arbitrary.  I felt there was too much pressure in terms of time and cost to either quickly find more combat to get more supplies or run back to a station to sell off loot, while my supplies are ticking away.  Too many times I would get low on supplies, start flying to a station, and as I run out of supplies, my ships start disintegrating right before my eyes.  I don't mean to take these changes as a "buff" or "nerf", I just mean that I like the sound of them and I'm eager to see how these tweaks feel for both balance and fun.

And will there be a way for haulers to be nerfed in terms of smuggling capacity in a similar way to how the new hullmod works, ie extra thin cargohold?

And could you make cargoholds discriminate specific items, such that for example my faction's hauler could only carry supplies and fuel but no commodities? Or maybe only supplies, fuel, an "energy cells" commodity and guns?

No to all, though you could probably code around that if you really wanted to. As far as the player, though, cargo capacity is cargo capacity. I can't really imagine doing something like "X of your capacity can only be used on Ore", etc.

Secondly, after reading the above quotes by Zudgemud and yourself it occurred to me that there could be certain cargo ships that were naturally (i.e. permanent hull-mod) better equipped to handle certain types of cargo.  Not in a cut-and-dry manner as freighters, fuel tankers and personnel transports are currently.  Instead certain ship hulls may reduce the cargo space per unit of a given item, Supplies for instance, by a percentage, and increase the space cost of another item(s) by a percentage.  Though, after giving it a few more minutes thought I can't really fit the idea into the game thematically, and I don't see a need for it for gameplay reasons.  I thought I would mention it anyway in case it sparked an idea for someone else.

That said, I like the idea of mixed-use as well as dedicated transport types.  Tankers, cargo freighters and personnel transports are all great, but just for variety it'd be cool to see freighters that look and function as half built for one purpose and half built for another.  For instance a ship that looks half tanker (with the signature orange color and bulbous tanker style) and half cargo freighter (styled like the Atlas or other freighters) with stats to reflect this.  No urgency for this addition, of course.

I love the game, keep up the great work.

Edit: Specifically for long and narrow ships, the perfectly circular shield shape ends up taking up a lot of unnecessary space, and the larger the ship the goofier it seems.  What're your thoughts on the idea of allowing some ships to have more oval-shaped shields in order to better fit the hull shape?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 05, 2014, 10:00:02 AM
Secondly, after reading the above quotes by Zudgemud and yourself it occurred to me that there could be certain cargo ships that were naturally (i.e. permanent hull-mod) better equipped to handle certain types of cargo.  Not in a cut-and-dry manner as freighters, fuel tankers and personnel transports are currently.  Instead certain ship hulls may reduce the cargo space per unit of a given item, Supplies for instance, by a percentage, and increase the space cost of another item(s) by a percentage.  Though, after giving it a few more minutes thought I can't really fit the idea into the game thematically, and I don't see a need for it for gameplay reasons.  I thought I would mention it anyway in case it sparked an idea for someone else.

Consider also that cargo isn't explicitly assigned to ships - this sort of thing would get very troublesome.

That said, I like the idea of mixed-use as well as dedicated transport types.  Tankers, cargo freighters and personnel transports are all great, but just for variety it'd be cool to see freighters that look and function as half built for one purpose and half built for another.  For instance a ship that looks half tanker (with the signature orange color and bulbous tanker style) and half cargo freighter (styled like the Atlas or other freighters) with stats to reflect this.  No urgency for this addition, of course.

Hmm, yeah, I could see that. Depends on whether it's necessary/makes sense backstory-wise, but no mechanical issues :)

Edit: Specifically for long and narrow ships, the perfectly circular shield shape ends up taking up a lot of unnecessary space, and the larger the ship the goofier it seems.  What're your thoughts on the idea of allowing some ships to have more oval-shaped shields in order to better fit the hull shape?

I don't see doing that. Too much complication for too little gain.

Long, narrow ships are indeed problematic, but that's just an engine limitation to work with (probably by avoiding long, narrow ships with standard shields, or accepting that they won't quite feel right). They cause other issues, too, mostly with the AI.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on October 05, 2014, 10:13:41 AM
@Senor
Regarding narrow ships, to get a 'shield-like' effect, modders sometimes use what we call 'contour' shields, see the 'The Knights Templar' for an example if that's the something you like.

I'm also working on something else to get around the collision radius issues as well with TWIG Tech. So if you want to make your thin ships in mods you can, however one thing I have noticed about thin ships in particular is that they are able to avoid more weapons fire than their wider counterparts by virtue of simply having a small cross sectional area exposed that makes it harder for weapons to hit in the first place.

So in terms of game balancing, longer ships in head on battles with another ship in a one on one situation, the thin ship will have a distinct advantage. I noticed this when using one of the Diable Avionics ships.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: senor on October 05, 2014, 01:24:38 PM
Secondly, after reading the above quotes by Zudgemud and yourself it occurred to me that there could be certain cargo ships that were naturally (i.e. permanent hull-mod) better equipped to handle certain types of cargo.  Not in a cut-and-dry manner as freighters, fuel tankers and personnel transports are currently.  Instead certain ship hulls may reduce the cargo space per unit of a given item, Supplies for instance, by a percentage, and increase the space cost of another item(s) by a percentage.  Though, after giving it a few more minutes thought I can't really fit the idea into the game thematically, and I don't see a need for it for gameplay reasons.  I thought I would mention it anyway in case it sparked an idea for someone else.

Consider also that cargo isn't explicitly assigned to ships - this sort of thing would get very troublesome.

Oh, right.  I haven't played very recently, I forgot about that.

Bummer about the oval shields issue.  It's really a pretty minor thing for me, but it would be the cherry on top if it one day made it into the game.  AI issues aside, would it be more workable if a given faction was styled around longer / narrower ships with 360 degree front shields with an oval shape?  Just curious, really.

Thanks Alex and Debido for the replies.  Looking forward to the 6.5 update, Alex!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 05, 2014, 06:23:32 PM
Today, I tried (a max Combat/Technology) Wolf with Frontal Shields, and the change seems negligible overall.  Defending against Salamanders is slightly harder; but for overall fighting, Wolf with frontal shields is slightly easier to use.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on October 05, 2014, 08:01:03 PM
Today, I tried (a max Combat/Technology) Wolf with Frontal Shields, and the change seems negligible overall.  Defending against Salamanders is slightly harder; but for overall fighting, Wolf with frontal shields is slightly easier to use.
Did you double the shield arc?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Callabaddie on October 06, 2014, 01:15:25 AM
Alex been busy. :^)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 06, 2014, 06:16:18 AM
Shield arc was doubled - I added the Front Shield hullmod (and removed a few points from capacitors) to test it.

If shield arc is not doubled, it would hurt the Wolf badly.

I imagine it would be like the shield change on the Aurora, where it used to have 360 frontal shields, but now has 180 omni shields - that made it worse.  Why would I want to trade 360 shields for 180 omni?  That just gives the Aurora an OP tax to get its 360 shields back (and less OP for missiles).

I did not play the Lasher enough to see if frontal shields helps or hurts it because my preferred Lasher configuration has no anti-missile PD, and is already OP starved even with all of the OP bonuses, including Optimized Assembly perk.  I would need to try to find a new Lasher configuration that would work with frontal shields.

EDIT:  With frontal shields, Wolf will probably want some form of PD lasers more than ever.  Those who prefer weapons that are bad at PD, such as ion cannon or antimatter blaster, on their Wolf will probably be hurt by the frontal shield change, at least against enemies that use missiles.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on October 06, 2014, 08:49:22 AM
  • Ships that are not performing repairs or recovering CR do not consume supplies (previously: consumed 10% of the supply/day value)
  • Hyperion: now has "High Maintenance" built-in hullmod that makes it consume extra supplies per day

Explain.

If the hullmod just increases supply usage while repairing or recovering CR, why not just increase the values on the ship instead of tying it to a hullmod?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on October 06, 2014, 08:59:06 AM
  • Ships that are not performing repairs or recovering CR do not consume supplies (previously: consumed 10% of the supply/day value)
  • Hyperion: now has "High Maintenance" built-in hullmod that makes it consume extra supplies per day

Explain.

If the hullmod just increases supply usage while repairing or recovering CR, why not just increase the values on the ship instead of tying it to a hullmod?

Because

Quote
Ships consume their supplies cost while 1) recovering CR or 2) performing repairs
...
Ships that are not performing repairs or recovering CR do not consume supplies (previously: consumed 10% of the supply/day value)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 08, 2014, 02:54:26 PM
Seeing that no PD on a Lasher with no omni shield is a bad idea, I looked for another configuration that could work, and did so.  I can still destroy a Hegemony defense fleet with four Lashers.

Lasher
Weapons:  Light Needler, Light Assault Gun x2, Light Machine Gun x2, Harpoon SRM (Single) x2
Hullmods:  Augmented Engines, Expanded Magazines, Front Shield Emitter, Hardened Subsystems, Integrated Targeting Unit, Resistant Flux Conduits
Capacitors:  11
Vents:  10

Light Assault Guns in hardpoints for anti-armor, Light Needler at the front for anti-shield or general purpose assault, and Light Machine Guns at the rear for either point defense or melee attacks.  Vulcan is better than Light Machine Gun for missile defense or finishing off unarmored ships, but it spews ammo too quickly and wastes some, and cannot break shields like machine guns.  Vulcans also have less range than Machine Guns.

Against the defense fleet, Light Assault Guns stripped armor.  Afterwards, if my machine gun ammo was high, I would approach a target and fire machine guns to damage exposed hull.

Compared to my earlier Railgun x2 and Light Assault Gun x3 configuration, I did not waste as much ammo or overload as much.  However, with machine guns, I needed to get close to targets at times to hit them with machine gun fire.  Better to use machine guns when possible and save longer ranged ammo when it is too dangerous to stay close to an enemy.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on October 09, 2014, 07:15:07 AM
What's the reasoning behind skins being able to remove, but not add, weapon slots?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 09, 2014, 10:02:26 AM
What's the reasoning behind skins being able to remove, but not add, weapon slots?

The idea is that skins are something you can add quickly and can be hand-edited. So, anything that changes coordinates is out - can't adjust the bounds, weapon slot locations, etc.

You could still effectively "add" weapon slots by having all of them in the base .ship, never using it directly, and removing whatever you don't want in each particular skin.


(One might argue that a more comprehensive way of doing skins would have been to have them be essentially alternate .ship files for the same ship. It'd certainly be more flexible, but the current way is simpler, both coding-wise and content-creation-wise.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on October 09, 2014, 02:19:02 PM
Yeah, that makes sense. Guess it still pays to use entirely separate ships for some things.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 09, 2014, 04:32:44 PM
Per LazyWizard's suggestion, for modders: here's an advance version of the starfarer.api jar to compile against.

http://www.fractalsoftworks.com/starfarer.api/starfarer.api.jar

Warning: it's not final, different aspects of the API could change without notice, etc etc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SQW on October 13, 2014, 08:57:44 PM
Er...just to let Alex know I purchased Divinity: OS last weekend and boy is it sucking up all my free time.

So, no rush, take all the time you need for 0.65a.  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 14, 2014, 12:57:17 AM
I'll close here until news arrive  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 01:10:10 PM
And it's out!

Get it here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2014/10/20/starsector-0-65a-release/).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Chronosfear on October 20, 2014, 01:16:15 PM
Omg Omg Omg , grabbing it now !!  ;D

Edit : Oh first one who noticed .. or at least posting .. the others are already playing and don´t have time to reply !

thank you Alex.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on October 20, 2014, 01:18:37 PM
I cry.

At long last an update. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TheDTYP on October 20, 2014, 01:19:46 PM
I just SCREAMED in delight when I logged on, everyone on my floor is probably saying "wtf is wrong with  that guy?"
Thanks, Alex, You just saved me from copious amounts of boredom today, you're the man
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 20, 2014, 01:21:23 PM
Alrighty, everyone can be happy.  Now shush, the lot of you, while I play the guts out of this game. :D

And oh, the price went up to $15.  Hm, didn't see that coming.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 01:24:17 PM
:D

(Also, uploading the updated API javadoc now.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: silentstormpt on October 20, 2014, 01:27:54 PM
Major Update on the games framework and added massive changes to the campaign

0.62 -> 0.65
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: MShadowy on October 20, 2014, 01:30:11 PM
And it's out!

Get it here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2014/10/20/starsector-0-65a-release/).

Huzzah!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: mendonca on October 20, 2014, 01:32:20 PM
Yay!  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tartiflette on October 20, 2014, 01:33:29 PM
Savegames are corrupted, mods are shattered, but today we celebrate!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 20, 2014, 01:42:38 PM
 ;D

Congratulations on the release! And on the very justified price increase!

Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: c plus one on October 20, 2014, 01:49:39 PM

(http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tech/Propulsion/Con0.jpg)

"THE UPDATE HAS CLEARED THE PLANET!"

"You may download when ready."

See, even Tarkin can't wait to play 0.65a..... 8)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 01:52:01 PM
Major Update on the games framework and added massive changes to the campaign

0.62 -> 0.65

Let's just say that version numbering, like progress bars, is an inexact science :)

Congratulations on the release!

Thank you! Kind of in holding-my-breath mode over here, waiting to see if a hotfix is going to be necessary. There *was* a lot more playtesting than for the average release, but it's one of those things where you often follow certain paths without even thinking about it and stuff elsewhere can slip through...

And oh, the price went up to $15.  Hm, didn't see that coming.
... And on the very justified price increase!

Yeah, just seems like it's time, with the campaign being in a more respectable state.


@c plus one: Nice :) (Highly off-topic, but I kind of wonder why they didn't just shoot through the planet. Or shoot the planet and then the moon, assuming anything was left of the moon after the planet chunks bombarded it.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: WK on October 20, 2014, 01:52:57 PM
Wow, congrats on the update!  :D

Just took it out for a very brief test run and boy it really is a massive update  :o Can't wait until I have more time to play this!

One thing puzzled me, I get the updates about price information for different locales, but where do I actually see the price information?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 01:56:35 PM
One thing puzzled me, I get the updates about price information for different locales, but where do I actually see the price information?

You mean when you go to buy something? The per-unit price is in the tooltip, but it also varies depending on how many units you buy, going up slightly with each unit bought. Likewise, when selling, it goes down a bit with each unit sold. Or more than a bit, if the amount you're selling vastly exceeds demand, or if there's no demand for something to begin with.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: WK on October 20, 2014, 02:03:44 PM
I'm sorry for being imprecise. I meant if there is a place to compare the collected price (at different markets) information for each commodity?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Emailformygames on October 20, 2014, 02:06:43 PM
A new update :D

Can't wait to get working on the wiki!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 02:10:07 PM
I'm sorry for being imprecise. I meant if there is a place to compare the collected price (at different markets) information for each commodity?

Ahh, I think I see. Intel tab -> prices -> select the commodity. That shows you all the prices you have reports for.

Can't wait to get working on the wiki!

Going to be a lot of work :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 20, 2014, 02:15:27 PM
Oh my! You just made my sick day quite a bit better! I only wish I'd checked earlier!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 02:24:11 PM
Aw, hope you feel better soon!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: arcibalde on October 20, 2014, 02:50:55 PM
Well... Excellent  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 20, 2014, 02:52:54 PM
A few little bugs:
During character creation (which seems far improved)
- The helmet portrait is shown twice
- "Got your hands >on< some high-value cargo"
- While the loading bar is visible, ships flying in the background appear to jitter back and forth by a few pixel

I have to go to sleep now, didn't even scratch the surface yet :-[    Tomorrow!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on October 20, 2014, 02:54:39 PM
The Cerberus base hull does not seem to use the new sprite; it's still pointing to the old ships/superhound.png.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: arcibalde on October 20, 2014, 03:10:24 PM
Aleeex! Give poor pirates a decent flag man :D

Wait... Umm X is just a placeholder right?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 03:17:34 PM
During character creation (which seems far improved)
- The helmet portrait is shown twice

One is male, one is female! Ahem.

- "Got your hands >on< some high-value cargo"

Thanks, fixed.

- While the loading bar is visible, ships flying in the background appear to jitter back and forth by a few pixel

Hmm, yeah, I need to fix that. Has to do with buffering (it's toggling between the last frame and the next to last), thought I'd fixed this a while ago, though.

The Cerberus base hull does not seem to use the new sprite; it's still pointing to the old ships/superhound.png.

Thanks - fixed.

Aleeex! Give poor pirates a decent flag man :D

Wait... Umm X is just a placeholder right?

It's not a placeholder, no.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nanao-kun on October 20, 2014, 03:18:22 PM
Yayifications!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lord0Trade on October 20, 2014, 03:43:55 PM
(http://store.mentalfloss.com/SCHEESE_375_1.jpg)

ALL MY YES!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 20, 2014, 03:48:54 PM
Quote
Also, with this release, the new preorder price is $15. Starsector has come a long way since its initial release – I’d been hesitant to change the price until the set of features had expanded significantly, and we’re finally here.
This is why I got Starfarer years ago.

With that said, I will play the update when I can and give feedback.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Chronosfear on October 20, 2014, 03:51:32 PM
After playing a bit i must say :

-Now i really love the sabot missiles :) . the are great and usefull now ! :)
   !great job!
-also I like the different "painting" on the ships based on the faction
-I also love the "redone" wolf frigate with basic load out .. haven't flown another one yet .. but I currently take a buffalo with 2 frigs without a hit thanks to the skimmer :)
-probably everything new , trade , bounty´s , still need to grow stronger the make my influence count :) ... probably Try Tachion will die from starvation or something like that .. ^^


another bug ? : found a station importing/requesting weapons , my relationship is high enough to buy it elsewhere from the same faction but i they don't buy it ( greyed out )
( was Hegemony Corvus --> Hegemony Ragnar )


Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 04:10:57 PM
-probably everything new , trade , bounty´s , still need to grow stronger the make my influence count :) ... probably Try Tachion will die from starvation or something like that .. ^^

Yeah, for sure.

another bug ? : found a station importing/requesting weapons , my relationship is high enough to buy it elsewhere from the same faction but i they don't buy it ( greyed out )
( was Hegemony Corvus --> Hegemony Ragnar )

Were you trying to sell on the open market? Trading in hand weapons is illegal in the Hegemony, unless you're trading directly w/ their military, which requires a high enough relationship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Chronosfear on October 20, 2014, 04:12:51 PM
-probably everything new , trade , bounty´s , still need to grow stronger the make my influence count :) ... probably Try Tachion will die from starvation or something like that .. ^^

Yeah, for sure.

another bug ? : found a station importing/requesting weapons , my relationship is high enough to buy it elsewhere from the same faction but i they don't buy it ( greyed out )
( was Hegemony Corvus --> Hegemony Ragnar )

Were you trying to sell on the open market? Trading in hand weapons is illegal in the Hegemony, unless you're trading directly w/ their military, which requires a high enough relationship.

tried both , as i said i had high enough relationship to buy/sell ( access to military ). could only sell them on the blackmarket on Ragnar.

Edit : Says : Illegal to trade hand weapons here even when military is marked ( on corvus , too )

Spoiler
(http://i58.tinypic.com/nwjyhz.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Piemanlives on October 20, 2014, 04:31:10 PM
Alex I love you.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foxer360 on October 20, 2014, 04:33:04 PM
Whoops, just found 6 Thermal Pulse Cannons in Sindria!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 20, 2014, 04:35:13 PM
tried both , as i said i had high enough relationship to buy/sell ( access to military ). could only sell them on the blackmarket on Ragnar.

Edit : Says : Illegal to trade hand weapons here even when military is marked ( on corvus , too )

Spoiler
(http://i58.tinypic.com/nwjyhz.png)
[close]

Some need more relationship than others - for example, you need "Welcoming" with the Hegemony to get access to weapons in the Military section.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Chronosfear on October 20, 2014, 04:37:46 PM
tried both , as i said i had high enough relationship to buy/sell ( access to military ). could only sell them on the blackmarket on Ragnar.

Edit : Says : Illegal to trade hand weapons here even when military is marked ( on corvus , too )

Spoiler
(http://i58.tinypic.com/nwjyhz.png)
[close]

Some need more relationship than others - for example, you need "Welcoming" with the Hegemony to get access to weapons in the Military section.

I bought them on the same station i'm trying to sell them to. As you can see on the screen , military is marked.

Edit : Relationship , is 40 btw.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 04:55:17 PM
Ahh, got it. Definitely a bug, now fixed. The idea was that you can sell regardless of if you have enough reputation to buy, but it was working exactly the opposite of what was intended.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceRiceBowl on October 20, 2014, 04:56:46 PM
Is this the real life, or is this just fantasy?

On a side note holy crap its been too long, gj Alex for epic update.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 20, 2014, 04:58:07 PM
Aw, hope you feel better soon!

:) Thanks! So far I'm having a blast playing the opportunistic trader. I've had a few in system "milk runs" pop up as profitable, but I only did one of them because it was between opposing factions and my rep plummeted... (Who, me? A war profiteer? Never...)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Kommodore Krieg on October 20, 2014, 05:10:24 PM
Engage download immediately, maximum speed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on October 20, 2014, 05:18:44 PM
So far all I can say is that things are.. way, way, WAY more immersive. Wow.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on October 20, 2014, 06:06:41 PM
Engines seem to have no health.  Even a couple stray pulse laser bolts are able to flame out an Onslaught with Heavy Armor.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on October 20, 2014, 06:14:31 PM
The new sabots and swarmers are great!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 06:16:17 PM
Engines seem to have no health.  Even a couple stray pulse laser bolts are able to flame out an Onslaught with Heavy Armor.

You didn't put an unstable injector on it, did you?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 20, 2014, 06:20:30 PM
I'm loving the missile changes so far. I haven't had a chance to use them on a ship I'm piloting, but enemy Harpoons and LRM's are scary. And I bought a Condor and put LRM's on it... man are they devastating support weapons now!

[Edit] Btw - it seems almost all fleets are entirely green crew?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on October 20, 2014, 06:36:56 PM
Engines seem to have no health.  Even a couple stray pulse laser bolts are able to flame out an Onslaught with Heavy Armor.

You didn't put an unstable injector on it, did you?

No.  It's the default outdated Onslaught in Sinking the Bismarck.

Also, on a somewhat related note:

(http://i.imgur.com/r6QmhUm.png)

What the hell?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: harperrb on October 20, 2014, 06:44:49 PM
Alex.

You are my god.

Seriously though. 15 minutes in, and blown away. 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 06:44:54 PM
Engines seem to have no health.  Even a couple stray pulse laser bolts are able to flame out an Onslaught with Heavy Armor.

You didn't put an unstable injector on it, did you?

No.  It's the default outdated Onslaught in Sinking the Bismarck.

Hmm, weird. Engines have 4x the hp they used to. They still feel pretty fragile, though, you're right. Going to triple the current engine HP and see how it feels.

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/r6QmhUm.png)
[close]
What the hell?

That's not anywhere in-game, is it? Other than "edit variants"? Was using this for taking a missile-heavy screenshot just for fun. I guess it's in the codex, too...

[Edit] Btw - it seems almost all fleets are entirely green crew?

Bug! Will look into it.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on October 20, 2014, 06:52:24 PM
whyyyyyyyy I have to studyyyyyy :-( ten days til a Starsector marathon is too long :-(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 20, 2014, 07:01:45 PM
Related to engines: Salamanders are now scary strong and almost always give a full flameout. Its nearly impossible in a Hammerhead (what I was flying) to stop them, even with 4x lrpd lasers. On the other hand they are finally a weapon to be reckoned with, so maybe its not a bad thing...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Emailformygames on October 20, 2014, 07:04:40 PM
Is there a minimum amount of time between Hegemony scans because I approached a station, got scanned, docked, bought some supplies, undocked, started to fly away and then got scanned again.  Kind of annoying that I've had to pay ~1,800 credits to tolls when I only bought some supplies.

Edit: First scan cost me ~800 and the second ~1000
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 20, 2014, 07:08:07 PM
Is there a minimum amount of time between Hegemony scans because I approached a station, got scanned, docked, bought some supplies, undocked, started to fly away and then got scanned again.  Kind of annoying that I've had to pay ~1,800 credits to tolls when I only bought some supplies.

Edit: First scan cost me ~800 and the second ~1000

There's a timeout, but if there's a large change in the cargo you're carrying, they may decide to scan you again.


Related to engines: Salamanders are now scary strong and almost always give a full flameout. Its nearly impossible in a Hammerhead (what I was flying) to stop them, even with 4x lrpd lasers. On the other hand they are finally a weapon to be reckoned with, so maybe its not a bad thing...

Hmm, really? Turning into it to help the lasers aim seemed to work for me, but I haven't tried it in a while.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 20, 2014, 08:06:51 PM
Did not play much yet but so far...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ahrenjb on October 20, 2014, 08:17:47 PM
You removed my favorite character avatar, what gives!? This will not do one bit.

Bring back faceless blue visor man immediately.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on October 20, 2014, 08:50:25 PM
You have faceless green visor man to compensate!

Also, on a somewhat related note:

(http://i.imgur.com/r6QmhUm.png)

What the hell?

It's the Achilles coming back to haunt you.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ArkAngel on October 20, 2014, 08:57:29 PM
I loved the new character avatars, and the whole sector feels so much more.... alive! Truly incredible compared to what we had to play with before. T'was well worth the wait in my opinion.  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: xenoargh on October 20, 2014, 09:27:59 PM
Omg! This had to drop on a week where I'm doing stuff on the road, lol.  Anyhow, congrats everybody and I'll play it when I have a lappy and free time :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: boogada on October 20, 2014, 11:04:50 PM
Damn, I was just about to go to sleep and I decided to check here.

So much for that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on October 20, 2014, 11:18:59 PM
Having a blast so far Alex  :)
These are a few of my favorite things:
 -The progression curve is slower, but somehow much more fulfilling. The high tier weapons and ships are a great incentive to buddy up to the factions, but the black market is extremely tempting. In spite of the tier system preventing me from splurging on large ships, I still find myself low on cash fairly often thanks to misadventures, miscalculations, or simple attrition.
 -The ambiance is great. Paint jobs, orbiting fleets, intel, fleet variety, and customs all make the sector immersive and alive.
 -Fuel is useful! Traveling is necessary, risky, and fun.
 -Best of all - No more lugging piles and piles of supplies home after each fight!

Related to engines: Salamanders are now scary strong and almost always give a full flameout. Its nearly impossible in a Hammerhead (what I was flying) to stop them, even with 4x lrpd lasers. On the other hand they are finally a weapon to be reckoned with, so maybe its not a bad thing...

Hmm, really? Turning into it to help the lasers aim seemed to work for me, but I haven't tried it in a while.
It's been working for me too, but that's with unstable injector and 5 points in helmsmanship.

You removed my favorite character avatar, what gives!? This will not do one bit.
I really liked the first version of the old hegemony admiral (portrait_hegemony05), but the new, cranky version is good too. Still, I don't see why he had to be replaced. He was one of the best portraits in my opinion.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Soren on October 21, 2014, 12:15:55 AM
Just what I wanted on my birthday. Thanks!

Immediately a much richer experience. There's a depth and complexity to the new mechanics and universe that is immediately compelling.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on October 21, 2014, 12:33:03 AM
Two of the Hound skins have the "defective" paragraph in their description despite not actually being defective.

A few skins don't have descriptions (of their base hull).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on October 21, 2014, 01:04:27 AM
Alright Alex, we give up. What do these mean in the ship_data.csv?

c   c/fp   c/l
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: kazi on October 21, 2014, 01:16:39 AM
Pretty fun so far! This is quite a good update!

A few things I've noticed on my first playthrough (these are intended to be helpful criticism  ;))
-It's reallllly hard to be a a smuggler. Trading with the pirates at all sends your reputation through the ground REALLY quickly! It seems absolutely impossible to become friendly with almost any of the factions (enough to buy a ship that doesn't suck) if you are smuggling at all!
-I think the pirate flag could be embellished a bit!
-For some strange reason, "pirate" is lowercase for everything. Probably something to do with the .faction.
-Doing bounties on pirates sends the game into easy mode very quickly. Everyone quickly decides they like you, and you start rolling in the bounty money. Speaking of bounties, there are no bounties for anyone besides pirates.
-I get scanned 2-3 times per system. Often once before I dock somewhere and once immediately after by the same faction (even if they are neutral/favorable!). If I tell them I don't want to pay, they'll simply wait a few seconds then try to scan me again! I mean, yeah it's fine to get scanned every once in awhile, but this is INSANE!!!
-Jump gates and planets often become completely hidden under the sheer number of fleets sitting around. Fleets seem to accumulate quickly in the more peaceful systems like Sindria and Eos.
-It's often completely possible to destabilize a smaller planet with a very small amount of illicit goods. On my first trade in the new update, I accidentally permanently destabilized Asharu by giving them all of my drugs.  :-X

My one wish for any future versions of this is to have a "pirate" start at the character selection screen. Right now it takes absolutely forever to make them friendly with you and they'll often try to attack you while you're doing that (which makes it even harder!).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on October 21, 2014, 01:55:07 AM
It seems to me, and most people here and on the chat, that the engine's health is WAY too low! You so much as LOOK an an Onslaughts backside funny and he will flameout! And this isn't with Injectors on either! I think you might had inverted their health boost

Alright Alex, we give up. What do these mean in the ship_data.csv?

c   c/fp   c/l

And while you are answering this: what is the "8/6/5/4%" stat mean?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on October 21, 2014, 02:09:38 AM
Been holding out for the campaign updates, finally my monthly check shows the big update is here.
The changelog looks very promising, now I only have to get through the workday before getting my hands on it :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on October 21, 2014, 02:32:27 AM
MissileRenderDataAPI does not seem to offer any way to grab the location of the loaded missiles, which is rather crucial for my purposes.  It would also save a huge amount of databasing legwork if it could also return the getProjectileSpecId of the loaded missiles, so I don't have to make yet another csv to cross-reference turrets to missiles.

Also, weapon.getBarrelSpriteAPI() creates a NPE, presumably when used on a weapon that lacks a barrel.  It should return null instead.

By the way, the main menu battle does not run renderInXCoords.  I don't know if this is by design or not.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on October 21, 2014, 03:39:06 AM
AH HA! I'm not going crazy. Pirate ships are flipping between 'acting as independents' or 'pirates' indentity tags. Alex!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on October 21, 2014, 03:42:46 AM
Wait what?! I then went and killed the pirate which I knew was acting as 'independent' then I get a big loss in my relationship with indies!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: mendonca on October 21, 2014, 04:30:42 AM

And while you are answering this: what is the "8/6/5/4%" stat mean?

That is unused, was kept in as a reference set of values - something to do with keeping track of flux dissipation rates for different hull types - or something. I forget the detail but it is not used.

In fact:

http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=858.0
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: XpanD on October 21, 2014, 05:02:24 AM
Oh man, so glad this is out now. Great timing, too -- was just looking for something new to suck me in for a good while, and this definitely fits the bill! This is going to be a blast.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabotsas on October 21, 2014, 05:05:50 AM
There is some inconstant information on the page about the pricing:

http://fractalsoftworks.com/faq/

How much will it cost?

$19.95. However, if you pre-order early (and often) during the coming beta you get 50% off!  If you give us $10 dollars before the official launch you get the game 100% free!!!  Wait a minute….

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

http://fractalsoftworks.com/preorder/

If you preorder now, you pay $15 – 25% off the final price.

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


Also thanks for this release, will check it out now :-)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: icepick37 on October 21, 2014, 05:08:55 AM
Yay new release!  :D  Being absurdly busy with school has it's perks (as in forgetting the agony of waiting, haha). Now hopefully I'll get a chance to check it out someday.  ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 21, 2014, 05:52:43 AM
Hurrah, new version! Happy (early) Diwali to all our Hindu players! :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HighAsASlothPie on October 21, 2014, 06:48:47 AM
I finally felt the need to post after lurking for longer than I care to remember, this update is just that awesome.

So I'm loving the smuggler/pirate play so far, goal is to systematically bring each pirate base in to control over its system whilst sabotaging the capital planets. Primarily I'm doing this via trading but I've had a small hitch. It's mentioned that it's possible to trade with a station even when inhospitable if your fleet is about 3 frigates big. Well as soon as I hit inhospitable I get the message about patrols breathing down my neck when trying to trade at all hegemony stations (my fleet was just a hound). Kinda put me at a hiccup as I was carrying 60 harvested organs intended for trade with them. Further tested this by doing the same with sindria and the same result.

Is this a bug or did I misread the patch notes? Guess I can work around it by just intercepting trade fleets and dropping the loot at pirate bases but using the new smuggling mechanic to achieve my goals would be far more entertaining.

Which also brings another question, anyone know the relationship caps for various actions? (smuggling, bounty hunting, trading etc)

Edit: So you can still smuggle with inhospitable factions BUT there can be no patrols nearby AND your fleet size needs to be around 3 frigates big or 1 destroyer, haven't tested enough for the exact limit as long as you aren't using high-tech ships it should be fine. Guess I did misread the patch notes lol.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Trylobot on October 21, 2014, 07:22:49 AM
oh craaaaappppppp
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HighAsASlothPie on October 21, 2014, 07:27:58 AM

-Doing bounties on pirates sends the game into easy mode very quickly. Everyone quickly decides they like you, and you start rolling in the bounty money. Speaking of bounties, there are no bounties for anyone besides pirates.


Yeah super easy mode, was making 15000 credits per pirate frigate for a couple days pretty much a week after the game start, needless to say my wolf tore up 145k worth of buffalo, cerbs and hounds in a single fleet fight. But the bounties apply to all enemies of the faction not just pirates, they are just a common enemy of everyone so killing pirates triggers every available bounty.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on October 21, 2014, 07:33:53 AM
I finally have time to test it! Don't DISTURB me for the next 4-5 hours!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 21, 2014, 08:01:30 AM
Is a tug from Asharu supposed to cost nearly 25,000 credits now?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nanao-kun on October 21, 2014, 08:36:55 AM
150k from Bounties may seem like a lot but it's amazing just how quickly it disappears.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HighAsASlothPie on October 21, 2014, 08:51:37 AM
150k from Bounties may seem like a lot but it's amazing just how quickly it disappears.


This was just within about 10 mins of play and level 1. I owned 3 outfitted (not well outfitted but at least the right size guns lol) hammerheads with cash to spare. Yeah I agree it disappears quickly but it's the snowball effect, those 3 hammers will let me take on most pirate fleets without a cruiser in them which in turn will generate an even larger bounty. Buy more ships and well you get the picture. I know this is obviously an intended way for things to go but it just feels like the snowball can happen too quickly vs other early game careers.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Exodee on October 21, 2014, 09:10:05 AM
  • BUG: I found Thermal Pulse Cannons, the Onslaught builtin weapon, for sale.  Worth 120,000, but with 0 OP cost plus its other stats, it would be a dream weapon for Sunder, Apogee, and Paragon.
You're not the only one; I found a whole bunch of these for sale on Tartassus. Quite overpowered if you can afford them, though this makes me wish there was a balanced variant thats equippable for all ships.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: pyg on October 21, 2014, 09:36:03 AM
Pretty awesome so far but haven't had much time yet.  Several minor bugs it seems but haven't found anything others haven't reported already and nothing major.  Some tuning probably required.  Still, totally worth $30 and a steal at $15.  For me this game has always been fun in much of the way Elite (C64) and Privateer (PC) were. This update brings much much more of that.  IMO it's the closest successor to date to those two although different in some obviously significant ways.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 21, 2014, 09:52:31 AM
AH HA! I'm not going crazy. Pirate ships are flipping between 'acting as independents' or 'pirates' indentity tags. Alex!

Yeah, I've noticed that happening quite a bit - usually to smugglers.
I thought that was an intended mechanic.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Aklyon on October 21, 2014, 09:55:01 AM
Agh, I can't decide if I should play the new update now or wait for a hotfix if there is one. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Blips on October 21, 2014, 10:13:31 AM
I'm going to wait a couple of days for the inevitable patch, but I'm pretty excited to get my hands on the new version  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 21, 2014, 10:13:58 AM
Agh, I can't decide if I should play the new update now or wait for a hotfix if there is one. :)

I'd say go for it now - nothing is all that broken, though you can buy a few weapons you shouldn't be able to. No campaign crashes yet, though there was a mission problem.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ahrenjb on October 21, 2014, 10:29:04 AM
You have faceless green visor man to compensate!

It's not the same, man. It's just not the same.

Anyway, now that I've had a few hours to play around int the new version, I'm really happy with what I'm seeing. This update has added a lot of depth to the game, the universe feels much more alive, and it's clear that a framework has been laid out for much larger things to come. I haven't really figured out how to make money on trading yet, the tariffs seem to really hit hard. 30% on both ends? I haven't explored it all that thoroughly yet, but it doesn't seem easy.

From here, what major features have yet to be added? Will features be the focus of the next update, or can we start looking forward to new content and short mission chains?


NOTE: On the TPC being buyable bug, you can buy them, but they don't show up as equip-able in the refit screen. They should probably be removed from market, sure, but it's not a huge problem if you can't actually fit them to a ship.

On a personal note, I would like to see some small customization options for ships. Ability to change between skins depending on faction relationship is something I think would add a nice touch to the game, and could be handled in the ship refitting screen. You would only be able to apply skins for factions that you have a positive enough reputation with. Ship-specific upgrades is something else I'd like to see. Project Ironclads is one example of this in action, though that's a little extreme. We've got the precedent for this in place already with the (D) variants, but this could be expanded on. Soft and hard stats, mount types, even sizes could be a part of this. It would allow for a little extra depth without the creation of a whole new ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: j01 on October 21, 2014, 10:30:34 AM
I'd just like to comment about something that might be a bit old news to some, but new news to me, as of this version.

It's a lot of text that looks negative at first glance, so I'll just preface by mentioning that the end result of what I'm about to say is 100% praise, and the wall that follows is to put it all into perspective.

I haven't played this game since before the CR stuff went in, and I've put it off since I heard about it because I absolutely did not like the idea behind the mechanic. I've always been the type of person who most enjoys getting stuck into a game, immersing myself, and going very, very slowly, deliberately, and doing my best to cheat or circumvent the system in order to prolong my gameplay experience in every way possible. That might not make sense, but I'll put it this way- in Starsector, I really, really loved extremely long battles. A lot of times this meant getting the fastest ships and kiting around enemies that were way too big and tough, and that I shouldn't have normally been able to take on. Other times it meant investing everything in a fleet of the most durable and defensive ships possible with weapons that don't rely on ammo, and outlasting the enemies, often with the goal of defeating them in very long engagements where, as a result, I ended up winning without taking any hull or even armor damage. I'm the kind of person who doesn't use consumables in games where it's at all possible to win without them, even (especially) if it means extra grinding to make up or even far surpass the difference, which I greatly enjoy. I always go for unlimited attack methods and resources, even if it means they'd be far weaker than limited alternatives. My greatest joy in gaming is almost always the ability to play indefinitely without stopping, or with as few stops and extra steps of maintenance as possible. I hate item durability. I hate time limits. I hate escort quests where my success hinges on an uncontrollable factor that I can't grind to make up for.

As of this most recent update, I've finally tried the game again, fully expecting to be disappointed by all the new limiting factors both in combat and out.

I was very pleasantly surprised.

The CR system and the way supplies are required and used seems to work just exactly right. It's not even just that I don't mind them. I actually enjoy their inclusion in the game. It almost feels like some kind of rare balance has been struck, where those factors are implemented so smoothly with the gameplay that even I can't help but feel motivated by them, rather than bogged down.

CR drop during combat, especially after prior recent battles, and all that it entails, seems to only serve to make each new fight more tense. The handicaps and risks of rapidly dropping CR are gradual enough that it really just feels like a longer battle has all the more at stake, which is exhilarating. Suddenly, a grueling battle against already overwhelming odds (granted, I've only played as one or two frigates going up against bigger and deadlier forces so far) becomes all the more desperate when that CR timer ticks down and the alarm sounds.

It's difficult to describe, but if someone with my extreme preferences for non-limited gaming mechanics finds them compelling, then you guys must have done something very, very right, or at least are on the right track.

Also, The sound effects seem to have largely changed since the last time I played. I liked them fine before, but they're better by leaps and bounds now. Kudos all around.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 21, 2014, 10:34:55 AM
Right, the sounds! I forgot the sounds! They totally rock, and I'm digging the new menu screen music.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on October 21, 2014, 10:53:07 AM
The new menu music is so fracking amazing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on October 21, 2014, 11:14:09 AM
AH HA! I'm not going crazy. Pirate ships are flipping between 'acting as independents' or 'pirates' indentity tags. Alex!

Yeah, I've noticed that happening quite a bit - usually to smugglers.
I thought that was an intended mechanic.

I forget where the quote is, but I believe it's something to do with low stability meaning the independants are becoming pirates to make a little extra money or something. I definitely was not surprised when it happened in game, something had prepared me for it. now if only I could remember where I saw it mentioned. probably somewhere back like ten pages ago in this thread tbh
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: pyg on October 21, 2014, 11:41:37 AM
AH HA! I'm not going crazy. Pirate ships are flipping between 'acting as independents' or 'pirates' indentity tags. Alex!

Yeah, I've noticed that happening quite a bit - usually to smugglers.
I thought that was an intended mechanic.

I forget where the quote is, but I believe it's something to do with low stability meaning the independants are becoming pirates to make a little extra money or something. I definitely was not surprised when it happened in game, something had prepared me for it. now if only I could remember where I saw it mentioned. probably somewhere back like ten pages ago in this thread tbh

It's not a bug, its a feature!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ahrenjb on October 21, 2014, 12:41:09 PM
I also wanted to say, I really, REALLY like the new missile trails and behaviors. Winding missile paths and streams make them a pleasure to use, and I find myself using missile weaponry often now where before I usually forgot I even had them mounted.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 21, 2014, 12:56:31 PM
Those trails make missiles seem a lot more intimidating - I remember myself seeing some Swarmers come at me (at the time, I hadn't remembered that they'd been switched to HE from Frag damage) and I almost crapped myself at it - seeing 4 missiles converge on me like a Hurricane MIRV was downright terrifying in my Frigate.

As a site note, the Frag Bomb Bays are still available in the campaign.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CopperCoyote on October 21, 2014, 02:04:29 PM
Small little codex detail: the piranha description still says they use swarmers instead of LMG.

The hit you take to your standing from trading with the pirate station is really large. I wouldn't have noticed if i hadn't been about to starve, and the friendly bases were on the other side of the star.

The pirate targets seem to dry up pretty fast too. I don't know what the others are doing differently, but i'm having a hard time as a bounty hunter. Buying combat ships is tough due to the standing hit i took. Also hurray on marines being useful finally. Those stupid fees and tariffs also make it hard to turn a profit. For every scan i'm subject to it ends up negating the profit from at least one combat victory. Sometimes more.

The (D) ships' negative hull mods seem to be mostly -3 burnspeed. Is this intentional, or have i just gotten bad rolls? I had one at -1 and another that had flux problems (a cerebrus so it didn't matter too much). The loss of burnspeed renders them useless to me because i have to be able to catch the non penalized pirate ships. If i can't i'd starve for sure.

I love the missile trails. Makes it easier for me to predict their path, and try to dodge them. Also looks cool.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 21, 2014, 02:10:53 PM
Those trails make missiles seem a lot more intimidating - I remember myself seeing some Swarmers come at me (at the time, I hadn't remembered that they'd been switched to HE from Frag damage) and I almost crapped myself at it - seeing 4 missiles converge on me like a Hurricane MIRV was downright terrifying in my Frigate.

As a site note, the Frag Bomb Bays are still available in the campaign.

4x75 HE dmg! That's 4 homing mortar shots :o
If you're behind anything less than ~500 fully intact armour, you've got good cause to fear swarmers!!
IMO they're one of the candidates for the best frigate killer weapon in the game.

The flavour text certainly needs updating.

On a side-side-note, Cluster Bomb Bays are in the campaign too.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on October 21, 2014, 02:25:10 PM
looks like ppl are trying to keep great standing with all factions (except pirates)

haven't played much into it yet, but I wonder if siding with one faction at the cost of others might be something worth considering
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 21, 2014, 02:27:41 PM
Going to try to respond to as much as I can, but if you said something nice and I don't respond to it specifically: thank you!

Two of the Hound skins have the "defective" paragraph in their description despite not actually being defective.

Fixed.

A few skins don't have descriptions (of their base hull).

Not sure what you mean.



Alright Alex, we give up. What do these mean in the ship_data.csv?

c   c/fp   c/l

You can ignore these, sort of like the 4/6/8% thing. Just some derived stats for credit costs of deployments, not used by the game.


-It's reallllly hard to be a a smuggler. Trading with the pirates at all sends your reputation through the ground REALLY quickly! It seems absolutely impossible to become friendly with almost any of the factions (enough to buy a ship that doesn't suck) if you are smuggling at all!

One note: if you destabilize other markets, you'll see better hardware (of that faction) on the black market. Not sure how viable that is to force to happen where you want it, but at least, if you want decent ships on the black market, go to somewhere unstable.

-For some strange reason, "pirate" is lowercase for everything. Probably something to do with the .faction.

Yeah, it's a bit awkward. Not sure exactly how to sort it out; uppercasing "pirate" is even more weird.

-I get scanned 2-3 times per system. Often once before I dock somewhere and once immediately after by the same faction (even if they are neutral/favorable!). If I tell them I don't want to pay, they'll simply wait a few seconds then try to scan me again! I mean, yeah it's fine to get scanned every once in awhile, but this is INSANE!!!

Noted.

My one wish for any future versions of this is to have a "pirate" start at the character selection screen. Right now it takes absolutely forever to make them friendly with you and they'll often try to attack you while you're doing that (which makes it even harder!).

Also noted.


It seems to me, and most people here and on the chat, that the engine's health is WAY too low! You so much as LOOK an an Onslaughts backside funny and he will flameout! And this isn't with Injectors on either! I think you might had inverted their health boost

Not sure what happened, exactly, but I've just tripled engine health, so that's around how it'll be in the bugfix release.


MissileRenderDataAPI does not seem to offer any way to grab the location of the loaded missiles, which is rather crucial for my purposes.  It would also save a huge amount of databasing legwork if it could also return the getProjectileSpecId of the loaded missiles, so I don't have to make yet another csv to cross-reference turrets to missiles.

Also, weapon.getBarrelSpriteAPI() creates a NPE, presumably when used on a weapon that lacks a barrel.  It should return null instead.

By the way, the main menu battle does not run renderInXCoords.  I don't know if this is by design or not.

All fixed.


There is some inconstant information on the page about the pricing:

Thank you - fixed (by removing said question from the FAQ).


Which also brings another question, anyone know the relationship caps for various actions? (smuggling, bounty hunting, trading etc)

There's an additional consideration here - for example, you can get to "cooperative" from bounty hunting, but only for taking down large fleets.


Is a tug from Asharu supposed to cost nearly 25,000 credits now?

Yes.



Spoiler
I'd just like to comment about something that might be a bit old news to some, but new news to me, as of this version.

It's a lot of text that looks negative at first glance, so I'll just preface by mentioning that the end result of what I'm about to say is 100% praise, and the wall that follows is to put it all into perspective.

I haven't played this game since before the CR stuff went in, and I've put it off since I heard about it because I absolutely did not like the idea behind the mechanic. I've always been the type of person who most enjoys getting stuck into a game, immersing myself, and going very, very slowly, deliberately, and doing my best to cheat or circumvent the system in order to prolong my gameplay experience in every way possible. That might not make sense, but I'll put it this way- in Starsector, I really, really loved extremely long battles. A lot of times this meant getting the fastest ships and kiting around enemies that were way too big and tough, and that I shouldn't have normally been able to take on. Other times it meant investing everything in a fleet of the most durable and defensive ships possible with weapons that don't rely on ammo, and outlasting the enemies, often with the goal of defeating them in very long engagements where, as a result, I ended up winning without taking any hull or even armor damage. I'm the kind of person who doesn't use consumables in games where it's at all possible to win without them, even (especially) if it means extra grinding to make up or even far surpass the difference, which I greatly enjoy. I always go for unlimited attack methods and resources, even if it means they'd be far weaker than limited alternatives. My greatest joy in gaming is almost always the ability to play indefinitely without stopping, or with as few stops and extra steps of maintenance as possible. I hate item durability. I hate time limits. I hate escort quests where my success hinges on an uncontrollable factor that I can't grind to make up for.

As of this most recent update, I've finally tried the game again, fully expecting to be disappointed by all the new limiting factors both in combat and out.

I was very pleasantly surprised.

The CR system and the way supplies are required and used seems to work just exactly right. It's not even just that I don't mind them. I actually enjoy their inclusion in the game. It almost feels like some kind of rare balance has been struck, where those factors are implemented so smoothly with the gameplay that even I can't help but feel motivated by them, rather than bogged down.

CR drop during combat, especially after prior recent battles, and all that it entails, seems to only serve to make each new fight more tense. The handicaps and risks of rapidly dropping CR are gradual enough that it really just feels like a longer battle has all the more at stake, which is exhilarating. Suddenly, a grueling battle against already overwhelming odds (granted, I've only played as one or two frigates going up against bigger and deadlier forces so far) becomes all the more desperate when that CR timer ticks down and the alarm sounds.

It's difficult to describe, but if someone with my extreme preferences for non-limited gaming mechanics finds them compelling, then you guys must have done something very, very right, or at least are on the right track.

Also, The sound effects seem to have largely changed since the last time I played. I liked them fine before, but they're better by leaps and bounds now. Kudos all around.
[close]

Thank you - glad that it managed to work out counter to your expectations :)


AH HA! I'm not going crazy. Pirate ships are flipping between 'acting as independents' or 'pirates' indentity tags. Alex!

Yeah, I've noticed that happening quite a bit - usually to smugglers.
I thought that was an intended mechanic.

I forget where the quote is, but I believe it's something to do with low stability meaning the independants are becoming pirates to make a little extra money or something. I definitely was not surprised when it happened in game, something had prepared me for it. now if only I could remember where I saw it mentioned. probably somewhere back like ten pages ago in this thread tbh

It's not a bug, its a feature!

Yeah, it's a feature. All pirates start as independents and eventually (if they're lucky enough) return to their home world with plunder. I mean, legally acquired goods. Pirate bases don't actually spawn any pirate fleets aside from the occasional smuggler.


The pirate targets seem to dry up pretty fast too. I don't know what the others are doing differently, but i'm having a hard time as a bounty hunter. Buying combat ships is tough due to the standing hit i took. Also hurray on marines being useful finally. Those stupid fees and tariffs also make it hard to turn a profit. For every scan i'm subject to it ends up negating the profit from at least one combat victory. Sometimes more.

Some of it is down to luck, but generally, you want to head for a system that 1) has a sizeable bounty and 2) has 20+ days left on that bounty. That way you can take full advantage. Oh, also, you want to make sure the bounty is triggered by pirates - for example, going to Valhalla to bounty-hunt when the targets are actually Tri-Tachyon patrols may not be advisable early on. You can tell who the main targets are from the bounty notice. (Taking out pirates will always work, but they might not actually *be* there.)

The (D) ships' negative hull mods seem to be mostly -3 burnspeed. Is this intentional, or have i just gotten bad rolls? I had one at -1 and another that had flux problems (a cerebrus so it didn't matter too much). The loss of burnspeed renders them useless to me because i have to be able to catch the non penalized pirate ships. If i can't i'd starve for sure.

The (D) ships are not random. The -3 is for frigates; the -1 is for larger ships. I'd say the only (D) ships that are player-useful, especially at the start, are ones that don't have degraded engines - but most of them do. They aren't meant to be something the player uses much - rather, they're there to make up the bulk of pirate fleets. It "makes sense" backstory-wise, and gameplay-wise, makes pirates better early-game targets.

On a side-side-note, Cluster Bomb Bays are in the campaign too.

Noted.


haven't played much into it yet, but I wonder if siding with one faction at the cost of others might be something worth considering

I'd say you have to, if you want to sustain a larger fleet by fighting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 21, 2014, 02:28:25 PM
@gunnyfreak
It's certainly worth doing if you actually want a challenge other than Pirates - Might go after the Sindrian Diktat or the Ludd for some added difficulty.  Also, going after the Ludd will probably destabilize the ENTIRE SECTOR due to the freaking huge amounts of food they produce - very few stations out there are capable of meeting those demands.  Sindria, the capital of the Sindrian Diktat, is VERY much a hub of trade in the sector (I consistently see ~20 fleets loading and unloading cargo in Sindria), so attacking that might also disrupt a lot of trade.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: sdmike1 on October 21, 2014, 02:50:52 PM
Your attention please! Your attention please! Your attention please! Your attention please! Your attention please! Your attention please!
DUCK YA!
That is all.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: j01 on October 21, 2014, 03:24:21 PM
Dunno if it was already mentioned, but you can get pinged for scans after you've already put in the command to enter a warp gate, causing you to lose faction standing without being able to take any action to prevent it. People should be able to tell when the irreversible process of starting up the warp drive has begun, and know better than to expect you to sit still for a scan when it is impossible. Better that than making it possbile but only a tiny window of split-second-reflex-game-pausing to interrupt your warp jump so you can get scanned, if you ask me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 21, 2014, 03:30:09 PM
Are you sure? There's code specifically to abort the inspection if the player jumps out before they get the notification about the scan, and as far as I can see, it seems to work. Can you describe exactly the sequence of events?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Blips on October 21, 2014, 03:32:38 PM
Am I missing something?

In the intel screen, a bounty was posted on December 8th. 10,000 if the target was killed (presumably?) within 60 days. I found the target in the system and destroyed the enemy fleet on Feb 2nd. I haven't gotten paid. How do I get paid?

Also, I think I must be missing something else too: my intel reports about prices list several items, but I can't find the actual values anywhere.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 21, 2014, 03:32:43 PM
Dunno if it was already mentioned, but you can get pinged for scans after you've already put in the command to enter a warp gate, causing you to lose faction standing without being able to take any action to prevent it. People should be able to tell when the irreversible process of starting up the warp drive has begun, and know better than to expect you to sit still for a scan when it is impossible. Better that than making it possbile but only a tiny window of split-second-reflex-game-pausing to interrupt your warp jump so you can get scanned, if you ask me.

Tbh I don't think there should be an opinion penalty at all for evading patrols.
The opinion hit should be reserved for if you get caught, and then escape during battle.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 21, 2014, 03:34:44 PM
Am I missing something?

In the intel screen, a bounty was posted on December 8th. 10,000 if the target was killed (presumably?) within 60 days. I found the target in the system and destroyed the enemy fleet on Feb 2nd. I haven't gotten paid. How do I get paid?

Also, I think I must be missing something else too: my intel reports about prices list several items, but I can't find the actual values anywhere.

It can take several days to receive payment. (I believe, based upon how far away you are from the sponsor of the bounty)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: harperrb on October 21, 2014, 04:18:41 PM
Is there a post explaining Destabilization? How to do it/how it works?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 21, 2014, 04:41:43 PM
Is there a post explaining Destabilization? How to do it/how it works?

You can destabilize pretty much any location by restricting one of the major necessities of life - generally Food.  If you happen to see a location is starving for food, jump on the opportunity to destroy and fleet bringing in those commodities (you'll receive a message saying that a fleet that's carrying said commodity to the starving station) and you'll slowly destabilize the station.

At least, in theory.  I've yet to try it out yet - need to pick out a suitable target. :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Frozen on October 21, 2014, 05:13:54 PM
I felt i had to chuck in my 2 cents worth about the new release.


YAAAAAAAAAAAYYY!!!!!!!!!! :o :o :o :o  ;D ;D ;D ;D


That is all.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Rushyo on October 21, 2014, 05:15:51 PM
Both excited and worried by the new character creation stuff. I'm unsure whether the new scripting language in rules.csv is capable of doing all the things CharacterCreationPlugin can do (mostly basic arithmetic!) and also how you'd go about over-riding just the creation rules (for a total conversion) and not the others. If either of those aren't possible, it would be nice to be able to fall back to the old plugins.

PS. Custom Sector Entities = Godsend.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 21, 2014, 05:39:40 PM
Also, I think I must be missing something else too: my intel reports about prices list several items, but I can't find the actual values anywhere.

Select a specific commodity, and the prices will show up on the map.


Both excited and worried by the new character creation stuff. I'm unsure whether the new scripting language in rules.csv is capable of doing all the things CharacterCreationPlugin can do (mostly basic arithmetic!) and also how you'd go about over-riding just the creation rules (for a total conversion) and not the others. If either of those aren't possible, it would be nice to be able to fall back to the old plugins.

Both should be just fine. What you'll want to do is add new "commands" (that can be called from rules.csv); the commands are written in Java and so can do anything. As far as overriding, it's the same as usual - you can provide a file with a partial set of things, and it'll add to/override core stuff as needed. A more detailed discussion of this doesn't belong in this thread, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ArkAngel on October 21, 2014, 06:11:16 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/r6QmhUm.png)

What the hell?

Even better, You see a very expensive battlecruiser, *cough* large picture warning. *cough*
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/jCYSpz8.png)
[close]

and now you don't.
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/e5r2HO8.png)
[close]

On another note, I was playing around with trade routes and such, and found out that trade disruption, can REALLY impact the amount of money you earn. I bought 5 units recreational drugs for 250 each, and sold them at a trade disrupted station for 1,250 credits each.

I did notice however, that if you run out of fuel in hyper space while using a hound, and get followed by a pirate fleet larger then you, the pirate fleet won't force an engagement. It only seemed to want to harrass my retreat despite the fact that I had 0 CR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ErKeL on October 21, 2014, 07:19:06 PM
I did notice however, that if you run out of fuel in hyper space while using a hound, and get followed by a pirate fleet larger then you, the pirate fleet won't force an engagement. It only seemed to want to harrass my retreat despite the fact that I had 0 CR.
I had the same happen and I think it was because my burn would have been fast enough to easily outrun them.. if I had fuel.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: j01 on October 21, 2014, 10:46:30 PM
Are you sure? There's code specifically to abort the inspection if the player jumps out before they get the notification about the scan, and as far as I can see, it seems to work. Can you describe exactly the sequence of events?

Yes, I'm positive of what I saw.

I was near a Hegemony patrol when I arrived at the warp thingy, clicked the text option to enter warp, and afterwards while my fleet was just kind of fading out while on top of the gate, the hegemony patrol emitted its pinging pulse thing, and then I appeared in warp in time to see the "you lost faction!" message.


I also recently chased down a single pirate ship, some kind of smuggler, engaged it, used the "pursue" option, ran it down, destroyed it, and when I came out of combat I saw a notice of losing -156 faction with independents, and since the game was paused, I got to see that the now empty pirate fleet (of one ship) I had just killed had turned independent after I engaged it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 22, 2014, 12:39:47 AM
Is there a better way to handle the ship skin system (especially the D models)? Currently they tend to clutter the codex with lots of largely redundant entries, and the damaged versions are all the same.

It'd be nice if the damage hullmods were randomly assigned to a ship marked as defective, so you could have one Hammerhead (D) with broken engines, another with missing weapon mounts, etc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on October 22, 2014, 03:26:30 AM
Is there a better way to handle the ship skin system (especially the D models)? Currently they tend to clutter the codex with lots of largely redundant entries, and the damaged versions are all the same.

It'd be nice if the damage hullmods were randomly assigned to a ship marked as defective, so you could have one Hammerhead (D) with broken engines, another with missing weapon mounts, etc.

How about a tab system? Each ship gets one entry in the codex but inside the entry there are tabs for each variant. It can have stuff like damaged/civilian/military/prototype/etc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 22, 2014, 04:37:05 AM

I also recently chased down a single pirate ship, some kind of smuggler, engaged it, used the "pursue" option, ran it down, destroyed it, and when I came out of combat I saw a notice of losing -156 faction with independents, and since the game was paused, I got to see that the now empty pirate fleet (of one ship) I had just killed had turned independent after I engaged it.

On a related note, I think I've experienced a bounty expiring during the short period that it takes for the empty fleet to disappear after it's destruction.
Not absolutely sure though, needs confirmation before I report if as a bug.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 22, 2014, 08:06:29 AM
Toll ping response may be too short sometimes.

One time, when leaving an Independent station with my frigate swarm, an Independent pinged me while very close to me.  It took me about a second or two to realize what happened, and I turned back to chat.  The moment before our fleets met, I heard the relation down sound, and when I chatted, I read the stock friendly response (i.e, was too late to pay the toll).

I felt like I played a game of Hogan's Alley or other light-gun arcade game where I failed to zap the bad guy in time.


As experienced by others, I too had times where toll trolls ping me after I start warping to hyperspace, and suffer an unavoidable relations penalty.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 22, 2014, 09:55:26 AM
Oooh, update. I only played a bit today but one piece of feedback I have is this: The Intel screen is completely missing any kind of info on which factions control which systems. I looked at that screen thinking to myself, "I wanna get in bed with Tri-Tachyon, let's see which system I need to go." Eventually I just had to fly around and find them the old-fashioned way.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on October 22, 2014, 10:37:13 AM
Oooh, update. I only played a bit today but one piece of feedback I have is this: The Intel screen is completely missing any kind of info on which factions control which systems. I looked at that screen thinking to myself, "I wanna get in bed with Tri-Tachyon, let's see which system I need to go." Eventually I just had to fly around and find them the old-fashioned way.

Seconding this, a list of stations/planets of each faction in the intel screen would be much appreciated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: JohnDoe on October 22, 2014, 11:04:20 AM
HELL YEAH!!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 22, 2014, 11:07:04 AM
Modders: just posted documentation (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8355.0) for rule scripting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: MShadowy on October 22, 2014, 11:21:32 AM
Good... goood...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HighAsASlothPie on October 22, 2014, 12:15:25 PM
Not sure if this is working as intended or not but trading with pirates affects relations with factions only in that system (e.g. trading with umbra only hits sindrian relations). Also trading with umbra (only open market) triggers smuggling investigation events very frequently, of course I'm found guilty every time despite the amnesty towards using their black market.

On a side note, is umbra supposed to be missing free port? 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 22, 2014, 04:26:28 PM
Finally got the opportunity to delve into the game a bit deeper today, and I am very happy with what I found there.  Especially the atmospheric density is impressive, the game world feels so alive and dynamic. Trading is actually really quite entertaining (which is no something I'd say about many games that have it), though not yet quite as convenient as it could be. Combat is much more fun too, mainly due to the missile changes. Looking forward to spending more time in the Sector in the coming weeks.

There's one lovely detail I want to mention because, I think, nobody else did yet: The individual, fitting sound each commodity item makes when dropped is just perfect. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dratai on October 22, 2014, 04:38:06 PM
Seeing as I couldn't sleep last night I spent that time playing this update. Here are some observations on things that've become rather obviously different between versions, nothing glaringly problematic but a little worrisome nevertheless.

Would just like to note that for mid-size fleets, despite having plenty of cash, there's nearly no supplies to get for said fleet at times unless in very specific systems. (medium as in 2 destroyers, 3 frigates, usage about 0.8 per day and I find myself, at least right after hitting this point, a little strapped for places to buy supplies)

Another issue I'm having is the lack of available hulls in general.
There's a bucketload of tugs, repair rigs and shuttles, but there's at most one or two available ships of a kind concerning other classes. black market is almost all damaged frigates and even the faction military tabs do not appear to refresh stock like it used to. (back before trading was implemented, new ships would occationally refill with the supply convoys, now they don't).

Which leads me to another point, While the diktat now sells onslaughts. Conquests do not appear in any port and odyssey has only appeared once in any market, on my end.
Is it restricted what they keep in stock, and if so, what is the refresh rate?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on October 22, 2014, 04:57:58 PM
There's a bucketload of tugs, repair rigs and shuttles, but there's at most one or two available ships of a kind concerning other classes. black market is almost all damaged frigates and even the faction military tabs do not appear to refresh stock like it used to. (back before trading was implemented, new ships would occationally refill with the supply convoys, now they don't).

Which leads me to another point, While the diktat now sells onslaughts. Conquests do not appear in any port and odyssey has only appeared once in any market, on my end.
Is it restricted what they keep in stock, and if so, what is the refresh rate?
I too have noticed this. High and even some med tech ships, especially larger ones are very hard to find, along with high tech weapons. I think this is mainly because we have several low tech factions (Heg, pirates, Ludd) but only one mid and one high faction. And what is worse is that the pirates rarely ever get any high tech ships, which means you have to buddy up with the TT in order to get your odyssey, paragon or hyperion
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 22, 2014, 05:07:09 PM
Yeah, the general tech level feels much lower than before. The rarity of high tech ships and  the "D-hulls" contribute a lot to that. I think it's great for the whole post-apocalyptic setting thing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 22, 2014, 05:23:16 PM
Fortunately high tech ship's reliance upon energy weapons means they all suck anyway, so nothing lost ;D

Seriously though, energy weapons have been lackluster for so long, I can only conclude that there's a mechanic yet to go into the game that'll offset their poor range and pathetic flux efficiency.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 22, 2014, 05:32:52 PM
Fortunately high tech ship's reliance upon energy weapons means they all suck anyway, so nothing lost ;D

Seriously though, energy weapons have been lackluster for so long, I can only conclude that there's a mechanic yet to go into the game that'll offset their poor range and pathetic flux efficiency.

I disagree - the energy weapons have high damage output. The medium energy weapons are short ranged yes, but the pulse laser goes from roughly the same DPS to 50% more (and 1-1 flux efficiency) at max flux. Meanwhile a single heavy blaster has the damage output of 2-3 ballistic guns (seriously, put 1 of those on a Heron or Venture and those suckers are mean). A heavy blaster outdamages most large ballistic slots! Thats compensated by range and flux inefficiency. You also can't 'hide' from energy weapons by taking HE(kinetic) rounds on the shield (armor).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on October 22, 2014, 05:35:59 PM
Energy weapons also tend to be equipped on ships with great speed and flux dissipation (wolf, medusa, eagle) and don't use any ammo.

EDIT: Energy weapons generally don't have limited (non-regenerating) ammo.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: c plus one on October 22, 2014, 05:44:02 PM
Energy weapons also tend to be equipped on ships with great speed and flux dissipation (wolf, medusa, eagle) and don't use any ammo.

The nontrivial exceptions of the antimatter blaster - plus all burst-style energy weapons - politely disagrees with your last phrase.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dark.Revenant on October 22, 2014, 06:29:07 PM
Energy weapons also tend to be equipped on ships with great speed and flux dissipation (wolf, medusa, eagle) and don't use any ammo.

The nontrivial exceptions of the antimatter blaster - plus all burst-style energy weapons - politely disagrees with your last phrase.

The antimatter blaster has so much ammo as to be effectively limitless; a battle must be very long indeed for it to run dry.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 22, 2014, 06:47:47 PM
Energy weapons also tend to be equipped on ships with great speed and flux dissipation (wolf, medusa, eagle) and don't use any ammo.

The nontrivial exceptions of the antimatter blaster - plus all burst-style energy weapons - politely disagrees with your last phrase.

The antimatter blaster has so much ammo as to be effectively limitless; a battle must be very long indeed for it to run dry.

Same can be said for almost all ballistic weapons too, so the infinite ammo of energy weapons really isn't much of a selling point.

By far the most important characteristics of weapons are; range and DPS/flux.

In that regard missiles are obviously King, with ballistics a distant 2nd. Energy weapons aren't even in the same ball park.

If DPS/OP is the *only* concern, then I'll concede energy weapons are marginally better than ballistics.... however, DPS/OP is almost never more important than range or DPS/flux.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 22, 2014, 06:58:48 PM
I agree that ammo isn't a very important consideration.

I think your point on DPS/OP is wrong because it does not consider the types of ships that mount energy weapons. They tend to be more mobile than their ballistic counterparts - capable of hit and run tactics where alpha strikes, overwhelming an enemy, and raw damage output are most important. These are ships that can control the pace and range of engagement. Yes longer range weapons will shoot them a bit on the approach (maybe!), but in general they can get in, overwhelm, and get out to vent. IMO the only real failure in this role is the Aurora, though with the missile tweaks it may re-emerge as the premier missile ship (if only large mount missiles were better!). Of course if an Aurora with 3 Heavy Blasters actually catches something, it tears them to shreds...

Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: LazyWizard on October 22, 2014, 07:13:45 PM
Loving the update so far. There are a few minor improvements I'd like to see to the UI, though:
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ArthropodOfDoom on October 22, 2014, 07:17:35 PM
So I guess we can't get Odysseys or Apogees anymore? Haven't found any over the whole sector, checking both Tri-Tach and Independent markets.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 22, 2014, 07:27:11 PM
Finally got the opportunity to delve into the game a bit deeper today, and I am very happy with what I found there.  Especially the atmospheric density is impressive, the game world feels so alive and dynamic. Trading is actually really quite entertaining (which is no something I'd say about many games that have it), though not yet quite as convenient as it could be. Combat is much more fun too, mainly due to the missile changes. Looking forward to spending more time in the Sector in the coming weeks.

There's one lovely detail I want to mention because, I think, nobody else did yet: The individual, fitting sound each commodity item makes when dropped is just perfect. :)

Glad someone noticed those sounds, that was something Stian put a lot of work into :)

  • The ship/weapon information tooltips could use a 'tier' entry. This would make it easier to judge what's available to you while browsing through the Codex.
  • When you can't fit a weapon in the market refit screen it's always black. A lot of the time you'll go to this screen to shop for upgrades while already at max OP, so perhaps it should retain a bit of the red tinge if it's black market?
  • When you're stopped for a toll and they tell you the price, it should probably also display how many credits you currently have. ;)

Noted! Not entirely sure on exposing "tier" as a player-facing property, though.

So I guess we can't get Odysseys or Apogees anymore? Haven't found any over the whole sector, checking both Tri-Tach and Independent markets.

Your best legal bet is Tibicena in the Magec system - it's the only Tri Tachyon military base. Also, any unstable Tri-Tachyon markets have a chance to have military craft on the black market, so they might be worth a check. It's not super likely, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 22, 2014, 07:28:38 PM
I agree that ammo isn't a very important consideration.

I think your point on DPS/OP is wrong because it does not consider the types of ships that mount energy weapons. They tend to be more mobile than their ballistic counterparts - capable of hit and run tactics where alpha strikes, overwhelming an enemy, and raw damage output are most important. These are ships that can control the pace and range of engagement. Yes longer range weapons will shoot them a bit on the approach (maybe!), but in general they can get in, overwhelm, and get out to vent. IMO the only real failure in this role is the Aurora, though with the missile tweaks it may re-emerge as the premier missile ship (if only large mount missiles were better!). Of course if an Aurora with 3 Heavy Blasters actually catches something, it tears them to shreds...



Ok, I was obviously setting myself up for a fall by making a sweeping statement regarding *all* energy weapons being bad; this is of course false, everything has a niche.

There do exist energy weapons that fulfill the alpha strike niche (AM Blaster, Mining Blaster, Heavy Blaster, Plasma Cannon), where no comparable ballistic weapons exist.

However:
1) Missiles fill the alpha strike roll *so much better* than Energy weapons; they do more damage, and free up more of your flux for shielding yourself during your hit&run maneuver.
2) What about all the mid-line energy weapons that compete directly with their ballistic counterparts? Pulse Laser, IR Pulse Laser, Autopulse, Mjolnir? They're all terrible by comparison.
3) What about PD? Energy based PD options are all* laughably bad compared to flak & vulcans.

*Burst PD used to be passably good before it was inexplicably nerfed a few versions ago (and oddly, vulcans buffed to the god-tier weapon we have today)

Anyhow, this is going way off topic. That's enough from me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: LazyWizard on October 22, 2014, 07:36:45 PM
  • The ship/weapon information tooltips could use a 'tier' entry. This would make it easier to judge what's available to you while browsing through the Codex.
  • When you can't fit a weapon in the market refit screen it's always black. A lot of the time you'll go to this screen to shop for upgrades while already at max OP, so perhaps it should retain a bit of the red tinge if it's black market?
  • When you're stopped for a toll and they tell you the price, it should probably also display how many credits you currently have. ;)

Noted! Not entirely sure on exposing "tier" as a player-facing property, though.

You could put words to the numbers; "common", "licensed", "restricted", "forbidden" for example. Although how that'd make sense across all factions is a problem.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nanao-kun on October 22, 2014, 07:37:50 PM
Yeah, the Commodity sounds are great.

Also, is it just me, or do Salamander Pods and Sabot Pods seemingly never show up? I've never seen one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ArthropodOfDoom on October 22, 2014, 07:49:23 PM
Also, can't find any Conquests. Not sure if this is because I can't trade with Pirates (I'm already at -100 rep, oh well), or if I just can't find it anymore.
Super close to just destabilizing the whole place by buying up huge warships and raiding Eos for giggles.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: kazi on October 22, 2014, 09:49:10 PM
So I guess we can't get Odysseys or Apogees anymore? Haven't found any over the whole sector, checking both Tri-Tach and Independent markets.

Your best legal bet is Tibicena in the Magec system - it's the only Tri Tachyon military base. Also, any unstable Tri-Tachyon markets have a chance to have military craft on the black market, so they might be worth a check. It's not super likely, though.
Hmmmmm... I'm getting tons of Odysseys at Tibicena. No Apogees though, which is just as well because I always feel forced to buy it if its available (seriously, best cruiser in the game...).

On playing around with 0.65 a bit more, looking at prices on the intel map feels a little weird sometimes. The current implementation is great for small numbers of pricing events, but if there's too many, it can be difficult to figure out whats going on. It will mention stuff like "Event X at Asharu." This can be a little confusing until you learn all the market names, might help if you saw a picture of where Asharu was on a system map with the name of the system map at the top (if you clicked on an individual event). Or something. Anyhow minor gripe, the system as it stands is quite good!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on October 22, 2014, 10:10:24 PM
So I guess we can't get Odysseys or Apogees anymore? Haven't found any over the whole sector, checking both Tri-Tach and Independent markets.
Your best legal bet is Tibicena in the Magec system - it's the only Tri Tachyon military base. Also, any unstable Tri-Tachyon markets have a chance to have military craft on the black market, so they might be worth a check. It's not super likely, though.
I have yet to see any non pirate cruiser or larger ship hull in the BM
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Madao on October 23, 2014, 06:16:26 AM

Dear Alex,

I love you. In a very manly kind of way  :-\

From me.

Seriously though, I have been checking the blog every day for many a month now, this is the update I have been waiting for. I couldn't even play after I downloaded it till now, just too excited. Its good to know there is a dev out there that does things right. I am loving the new music, also everything else about it. Going back to playing now..
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dratai on October 23, 2014, 08:01:36 AM
More stuff!
Though less so worries than compliments, this time.

The sounds are great, the events are interesting (seeing as not all of possible food shortages, etc, result in actual shortages). The new systems look -beautiful- and I am not entirely sure but I think the little drone frigate skiff was added this patch?
The one that spawns mining drones.
I love those things.

The sound choices are great, the music too, and I hope we get more like this in the future.
This update also hooked some of my friends... xD
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mattk50 on October 23, 2014, 08:31:43 AM
Not quite sure on the "Shielded cargo holds" mechanic. Does having this one ship in my fleet mean all illegal cargo will be counted as shielded? Hows this work.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 23, 2014, 10:13:57 AM
Also, can't find any Conquests. Not sure if this is because I can't trade with Pirates (I'm already at -100 rep, oh well), or if I just can't find it anymore.
Super close to just destabilizing the whole place by buying up huge warships and raiding Eos for giggles.

For a Conquest, I think your best (and possibly only) bet is the black market on an unstable independent world.



Dear Alex,

I love you. In a very manly kind of way  :-\

From me.

Seriously though, I have been checking the blog every day for many a month now, this is the update I have been waiting for. I couldn't even play after I downloaded it till now, just too excited. Its good to know there is a dev out there that does things right. I am loving the new music, also everything else about it. Going back to playing now..
More stuff!
Though less so worries than compliments, this time.

The sounds are great, the events are interesting (seeing as not all of possible food shortages, etc, result in actual shortages). The new systems look -beautiful- and I am not entirely sure but I think the little drone frigate skiff was added this patch?
The one that spawns mining drones.
I love those things.

The sound choices are great, the music too, and I hope we get more like this in the future.
This update also hooked some of my friends... xD

Thank you!!!

Not quite sure on the "Shielded cargo holds" mechanic. Does having this one ship in my fleet mean all illegal cargo will be counted as shielded? Hows this work.

It depends on the cargo capacity of the ship(s) with the mod. That's matched up against the amount of illegal cargo you have, and that ratio factors into the odds of stuff being detected.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: silalus on October 23, 2014, 03:08:12 PM
You could put words to the numbers; "common", "licensed", "restricted", "forbidden" for example. Although how that'd make sense across all factions is a problem.

What about defining that list of words by faction? That might be a good compromise between flavor and practicality. You'd still need to learn about each faction to meaningfully interpret tier, but well educated min/maxers could spot them at a glance.

(And personally I'd like to see those words in the usual white/blue/green/purple/yellow colors... but perhaps that's too ordinary.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ahrenjb on October 23, 2014, 04:08:57 PM
For a Conquest, I think your best (and possibly only) bet is the black market on an unstable independent world.

Would it not make more sense for higher tier ships used by independents to be available in their market with a high enough reputation? I know "independent military" might not make a ton of sense, but then again neither does pirate military.

Also; I didn't want to make a new thread for it, and I know it's been mentioned already, but I felt like I had to add my voice to the fray and say what is with engine damage? I swear I get twice as many or more flameouts than I used to. It feels like if anything so much as gives the engines on my Falcon a moist glance they go out. I never remember having this issue in previous versions.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 23, 2014, 04:12:43 PM
I didn't want to make a new thread for it, and I know it's been mentioned already, but I felt like I had to add my voice to the fray and say what is with engine damage?

I swear I get twice as many or more flameouts than I used to. It feels like if anything so much as gives the engines on my Falcon a moist glance they go out. I never remember having this issue in previous versions.

Bug; fixed for upcoming bugfix release.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Trylobot on October 23, 2014, 04:14:09 PM
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ArthropodOfDoom on October 23, 2014, 04:23:52 PM
http://puu.sh/cnZLC/7e1f059e97.png

You have a bug where the regular expression/parser/whatever that is supposed to light up the duration of the bounty is lighting up the reward instead. I think it's just a tiny text handling error, but I thought you should know anyway.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 23, 2014, 04:36:36 PM
Thanks - yep, was reported here the other day :)
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8349.0


  • love the new main menu music
  • love the new character creation dialog system
  • love the new missile trails
  • feels like there's more activity in the universe / feels more alive
  • intel screen feels initially complex, but later feels just right

Eeeexcellent.

Glad the intel screen is... learnable, I guess is the word. It's a lot of information for the UI to try and present.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fed993 on October 23, 2014, 04:52:43 PM
After playing for about two hours, I'm still hooked. The new campaign adds a lot to the startup, whereas in previous games I could simply grab a mercury, refit it with some reapers, and take out a buffalo to get money quick. Amazing work, probably won't sleep tonight to try master this new version :D

Keep up the good work, Starsector is, and probably always will be, my favorite game ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Flunky on October 23, 2014, 06:07:27 PM
I've barely played the new version, but I just had to take a moment to say:

An algorithmic, self-modifying corporate charter? Brilliant(ly evil). The faction descriptions do help hammer home the current state of the region.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mattk50 on October 23, 2014, 07:18:58 PM
i get the feeling a lot of ships and items have vanished from the world. I have 100 reputation with hegemony, tritach, and independent and access to the other 2 factions military markets and have yet to see an omen, an apogee, conquest, odyssey, hyperion, astral, venture, tempest, an aurora, affliction, or a doom. I stumbled onto a shade at the black market of a tritach non military planet, not a clue why it was there, doesn't seem to be any reasoning to it. Why have all these ships if you cant find and use so many of them, if you do manage to find one and it dies your fleet composition is screwed too, because you won't see another. Judging by the general discussion threads everyone's using mostly the same ships because they're the main things available.

Anyways my progress feels hindered more by lack of ship availability than by lack of money, jobs or exp. omg alex why do you do this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 23, 2014, 07:29:10 PM
Not just ships, but weapons too.  The starter heavy blaster I got for my starter Wolf has been FAR more valuable than the meager extra cash or superior crew.  I found my first (non-starter) heavy blaster in a black market after I surpassed level 30.  Even if I found a blaster earlier, I probably could not have bought it until I reach cooperative with a faction that sold it.

Protip:  If your starter options include better weapon, always take it!  Money and crew experience will come quickly enough, but that quality weapon you can get may not.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 23, 2014, 07:44:55 PM
Not just ships, but weapons too.  The starter heavy blaster I got for my starter Wolf has been FAR more valuable than the meager extra cash or superior crew.  I found my first (non-starter) heavy blaster in a black market after I surpassed level 30.  Even if I found a blaster earlier, I probably could not have bought it until I reach cooperative with a faction that sold it.

Protip:  If your starter options include better weapon, always take it!  Money and crew experience will come quickly enough, but that quality weapon you can get may not.

I agree with this! The Wolf it started in has been shot out from under me, but that Heavy Blaster is the main firepower on my only ship - a lucky Heron find. To be fair I have seen 1 other blaster (and immediately snatched it up!).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ionise on October 23, 2014, 07:50:42 PM
Game is great right now. The only thing missing is the ability to take stations and found your own faction. No doubt we'll have mods for such soon enough.

Great work, Alex. There are so few games that I play year on year and Starsector never fails to recapture my imagination with each patch!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 23, 2014, 09:00:36 PM
i get the feeling a lot of ships and items have vanished from the world. I have 100 reputation with hegemony, tritach, and independent and access to the other 2 factions military markets and have yet to see an omen, an apogee, conquest, odyssey, hyperion, astral, venture, tempest, an aurora, affliction, or a doom. I stumbled onto a shade at the black market of a tritach non military planet, not a clue why it was there, doesn't seem to be any reasoning to it. Why have all these ships if you cant find and use so many of them, if you do manage to find one and it dies your fleet composition is screwed too, because you won't see another. Judging by the general discussion threads everyone's using mostly the same ships because they're the main things available.

Anyways my progress feels hindered more by lack of ship availability than by lack of money, jobs or exp. omg alex why do you do this.

I get what you're saying, especially about feeling hindered. Making specific ships reliably accessible without making it too easy is a tricky proposition, though, and being forced to make do with stuff that isn't the best or what you'd want to have in an ideal world is a very large component of the fun. I think all in all, the game would be worse off if every faction reliably had their best stuff for sale. On the other hand, I'm not saying the current situation is ideal, either. Just that I don't see a simple solution. I'll definitely keep this in mind, though... it was already something I was aware of before the release. I think maybe more pieces need to be in place before this can be satisfactorily resolved - perhaps production (i.e. market X has the Tempest blueprint, and so is much more likely to have it for sale), perhaps people you can talk to that can procure the stuff you really want, but at a premium. There are possibilities.

For now, your best bet is probably starting trouble with the factions that has the stuff you want, and then getting it that way - especially for weapons, though boarding is of course an option too.


Game is great right now. The only thing missing is the ability to take stations and found your own faction. No doubt we'll have mods for such soon enough.

Great work, Alex. There are so few games that I play year on year and Starsector never fails to recapture my imagination with each patch!

Thank you!

After playing for about two hours, I'm still hooked. The new campaign adds a lot to the startup, whereas in previous games I could simply grab a mercury, refit it with some reapers, and take out a buffalo to get money quick. Amazing work, probably won't sleep tonight to try master this new version :D

Keep up the good work, Starsector is, and probably always will be, my favorite game ;D

That's quite a hefty compliment :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Clockwork Owl on October 24, 2014, 12:50:01 AM
I have 100 reputation with hegemony, tritach, and independent and access to the other 2 factions military markets and have yet to see an omen, an apogee, conquest, odyssey, hyperion, astral, venture, tempest, an aurora, affliction, or a doom.
Tri-tachyon guys have none of them?! Wonder what happened to their blueprints...

This update made quite a lot of changes, so I`ll have to get used to them... Anyway it is great now.
Hard to get along well with both Hegemony and Tri-tach guys though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaphide on October 24, 2014, 12:54:19 AM
Very nice work Alex :)

Funnily enough, I think my favorite thing has been all the new faction and place descriptions. Absolutely loved all the tid-bits in Sindria, the refugees etc. First thing I did was get enough money for fuel to fly around and visit everything to read the descriptions :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Olix on October 24, 2014, 03:09:42 AM
I'm enjoying the new patch. I'm being a pirate, and everyone else is Vengeful towards me. I think it would be nice if the player had more options after they *** everyone off, as it's kind of annoying that there are only 4 stations that I can dock at. Perhaps it could interact with the stability system - if a station gets to 0 stability, you can dock there and interact with the markets (open and black) whatever your reputation with the owning faction. I think it's a bit weird that I can't find anyone to trade with me on Maxios (a government-less independent wilderness) despite all the freighters I have blown up.

It would also be fun if bringing lots of booty back to a pirate station to sell (on the open market) increased that station's stability, and perhaps resulted in more ships and weapons on the market there.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: XpanD on October 24, 2014, 04:07:16 AM
i get the feeling a lot of ships and items have vanished from the world. I have 100 reputation with hegemony, tritach, and independent and access to the other 2 factions military markets and have yet to see an omen, an apogee, conquest, odyssey, hyperion, astral, venture, tempest, an aurora, affliction, or a doom. I stumbled onto a shade at the black market of a tritach non military planet, not a clue why it was there, doesn't seem to be any reasoning to it. Why have all these ships if you cant find and use so many of them, if you do manage to find one and it dies your fleet composition is screwed too, because you won't see another. Judging by the general discussion threads everyone's using mostly the same ships because they're the main things available.

Anyways my progress feels hindered more by lack of ship availability than by lack of money, jobs or exp. omg alex why do you do this.

I get what you're saying, especially about feeling hindered. Making specific ships reliably accessible without making it too easy is a tricky proposition, though, and being forced to make do with stuff that isn't the best or what you'd want to have in an ideal world is a very large component of the fun. I think all in all, the game would be worse off if every faction reliably had their best stuff for sale. On the other hand, I'm not saying the current situation is ideal, either. Just that I don't see a simple solution. I'll definitely keep this in mind, though... it was already something I was aware of before the release. I think maybe more pieces need to be in place before this can be satisfactorily resolved - perhaps production (i.e. market X has the Tempest blueprint, and so is much more likely to have it for sale), perhaps people you can talk to that can procure the stuff you really want, but at a premium. There are possibilities.

For now, your best bet is probably starting trouble with the factions that has the stuff you want, and then getting it that way - especially for weapons, though boarding is of course an option too.

This, this entirely. I'm definitely digging the new mechanics in the new update (not to mention the great sound/music design, Stian knocked it out of the park there yet again!), but the game did lose a fair bit of the "look at my awesome fleet built out of the ships I love most stomping everything" that the older versions had. I strongly feel that once more mechanics (and maybe more options for ships, weapons and the like) start rolling around that that will become less and less of an issue. I'd imagine you still wouldn't be able to reliably get every ship in the game (which is good!), but I can see more seriously fun (and unique to a specific playthrough) fleet compositions being a thing then.

On a related note, maybe having more stations per system could be a thing? Combine that with a few more active fleets running around and you've already got more options, both in potential engagements and possible merchandise. I'm not sure exactly how this would work out, but I could personally see more shops with less overall stuff to sell (due to trade fleet counts not being increased by the same amount) working out pretty well. Might also allow the player to set up certain stations from one faction to be very stable, while others are overrun with crime complete with all the benefits and detriments to be found there. Then again, maybe I'm just superimposing my own gameplay style here. :P

EDIT: Wow, just found out a lot of planets themselves can also trade you stuff. That changes the situation a bit, though that really wasn't all that easy to find out. O.o"
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 24, 2014, 04:15:19 AM
I'm enjoying the new patch. I'm being a pirate, and everyone else is Vengeful towards me. I think it would be nice if the player had more options after they *** everyone off, as it's kind of annoying that there are only 4 stations that I can dock at. Perhaps it could interact with the stability system - if a station gets to 0 stability, you can dock there and interact with the markets (open and black) whatever your reputation with the owning faction. I think it's a bit weird that I can't find anyone to trade with me on Maxios (a government-less independent wilderness) despite all the freighters I have blown up.

It would also be fun if bringing lots of booty back to a pirate station to sell (on the open market) increased that station's stability, and perhaps resulted in more ships and weapons on the market there.


There are pirate planets out there, so the stations aren't the only place to trade.  I think there's one in Askonia, for example.  There's usually at least one pirate place to trade with in each system, so explore them a bit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabaton on October 24, 2014, 05:07:03 AM
 The skin system is very interesting, lots of potential for development in the future, especially for mods.

 So here are my questions: Will there be any reason for the player to use D ships? Because as of right now there's no reason to pour the same amount of supplies in an inferior ship.
 Or are they just for lore/content purposes?

 Will there be upgraded/modified versions of ships?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: XpanD on October 24, 2014, 05:35:49 AM
So here are my questions: Will there be any reason for the player to use D ships? Because as of right now there's no reason to pour the same amount of supplies in an inferior ship.
 Or are they just for lore/content purposes?

 Will there be upgraded/modified versions of ships?

I flew a decommissioned ship before as that was the best I could get at the time. It had a few flux issues, but it was capable enough otherwise and lasted me until I got a proper cruiser and a bunch of destroyers. Don't forget you might also be able to loot a higher-up ship that's decommissioned if you get lucky in combat, which would make it an interesting candidate for actual use too.

As for upgraded/modified versions of ships, there's already a few that fit the bill when it comes to lore. Think Tarsus > Condor and Buffalo > Buffalo Mk.II as some of the more obvious examples. There's also the "Convert..." option when in the Refit interface, so maybe that's going to be something as well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Olix on October 24, 2014, 05:50:24 AM
There are pirate planets out there, so the stations aren't the only place to trade.  I think there's one in Askonia, for example.  There's usually at least one pirate place to trade with in each system, so explore them a bit.

There's one place to dock in Askonia, two in Corvus and one in Magec. There's no where in Valhalla, Eos or Arcadia.

I don't think that's a problem, really. I just think it would be fun if it were still possible to access the forbidden stations/planets in some circumstances.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Msahn on October 24, 2014, 06:40:33 AM
Hello guys, now this is great =] we had a really good combat game which now received a nice world to populate it. As always Hats off to you Sir Alex
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 24, 2014, 07:24:46 AM
If the player has mid to high Technology, some of the (D)s are usable, at least as cheap freighters.  So far, I have boarded and captured Cerberus, Wolf, and Mule ships.  The main deterrent of boarding (D)s is abysmally slow burn speed, which high Navigation may fix.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Chronosfear on October 24, 2014, 08:27:28 AM
Oh my.
Alex i just noticed some new level of detail ..

I've been flying to magec to check one of the new systems.
Found this pirate station ( description : "... protected by a cloud of stealth-mines and crude firebases ..." )
well you can't see the mines since they are stealthed .. but the firebases .. you can see them !!  ::)

Hell , i've to look more into the details you're putting into the game!
some are barely visible. Gotta catch em all  ;D

Edit : They are around other stations , too . But still didn't notice before !
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on October 24, 2014, 08:29:19 AM
Ooh, I didn't catch that. Now I want to try and launch a raid on the base, dodging mines and fixed emplacements...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on October 24, 2014, 09:05:04 AM
Funnily enough, I think my favorite thing has been all the new faction and place descriptions. Absolutely loved all the tid-bits in Sindria, the refugees etc. First thing I did was get enough money for fuel to fly around and visit everything to read the descriptions :D

:)  (Coming up with this stuff and tying it all together is super fun. Glad you're enjoying it! I'm looking forward to putting in all sorts of new cool stuff, some entirely new, and some that gives different perspectives and additional depth to the existing setting.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on October 24, 2014, 10:41:58 AM
Will the Buffalo Mk.II get a new look to match the Buffalo's new sprite?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 24, 2014, 11:43:44 AM
So I've been playing this new update a lot and I've noticed something a bit weird. I'm not sure if this was the same in previous versions or not, but it seems the enemy deploys his ships based on the ships that you yourself deploy, which can change the difficulty of a battle in really strange and counter-intuitive ways.

This is what happened: I had two destroyers against a pirate force of several frigates, destroyers, and a cruiser. I kept reloading the game over and over trying to defeat this superior force, but no matter what I did I never managed to defeat the pirates without losing the AI-controlled destroyer. There were just too many enemies, despite my best efforts they always managed to overwhelm and disable the other destroyer. Finally I grew frustrated and thought to myself, screw you, stupid AI Hammerhead, you're just a liability, I'll do this on my own! And so I went in alone and to my utter surprise and bewilderment managed to handily defeat the entire enemy force right away.

I went back again to figure out what had happened and it turns out that I was getting beaten because the pirates were deploying their entire force against my two destroyers, which enabled them to easily overwhelm me. But when I only deployed one, they sent out only a smaller force that I was able to easily kill with my high-level character and very powerful flagship. The first wave of enemies was dead before the reinforcements made it to the fight, and the first wave of reinforcements was dead before the second one arrived, etc. Where the entire enemy force was able to easily overwhelm and kill my two ships, when I only deployed one I was able to defeat them piecemeal.

The point is this: I was at a disadvantage, outnumbered and outgunned. I find it very strange that putting myself at even more of a disadvantage by only deploying half of my force made the battle easier.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gorn on October 24, 2014, 11:48:22 AM
where is tri-tachyon main base?
and how to increase the reputation?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 24, 2014, 12:10:05 PM
Spoiler
So I've been playing this new update a lot and I've noticed something a bit weird. I'm not sure if this was the same in previous versions or not, but it seems the enemy deploys his ships based on the ships that you yourself deploy, which can change the difficulty of a battle in really strange and counter-intuitive ways.

This is what happened: I had two destroyers against a pirate force of several frigates, destroyers, and a cruiser. I kept reloading the game over and over trying to defeat this superior force, but no matter what I did I never managed to defeat the pirates without losing the AI-controlled destroyer. There were just too many enemies, despite my best efforts they always managed to overwhelm and disable the other destroyer. Finally I grew frustrated and thought to myself, screw you, stupid AI Hammerhead, you're just a liability, I'll do this on my own! And so I went in alone and to my utter surprise and bewilderment managed to handily defeat the entire enemy force right away.

I went back again to figure out what had happened and it turns out that I was getting beaten because the pirates were deploying their entire force against my two destroyers, which enabled them to easily overwhelm me. But when I only deployed one, they sent out only a smaller force that I was able to easily kill with my high-level character and very powerful flagship. The first wave of enemies was dead before the reinforcements made it to the fight, and the first wave of reinforcements was dead before the second one arrived, etc. Where the entire enemy force was able to easily overwhelm and kill my two ships, when I only deployed one I was able to defeat them piecemeal.

The point is this: I was at a disadvantage, outnumbered and outgunned. I find it very strange that putting myself at even more of a disadvantage by only deploying half of my force made the battle easier.
[close]

The AI tries to avoid over-deploying due to CR concerns, though it'll ramp up *very* quickly once it starts taking losses. For medium sized fleets, though, I suppose "very quickly" still isn't quick enough, if it basically needed the entire fleet to overwhelm you, and has now lost some of it before realizing it.

While this isn't intuitive at first glance, I think the behavior does make sense given the how the rules work (and given that the AI is playing by them).

where is tri-tachyon main base?
and how to increase the reputation?

Tibicena in the Magec system has the only Tri-Tachyon military base at the moment. Doing their bounties and trading with Tri-Tachyon are both good ways to improve your reputation with them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 24, 2014, 12:21:16 PM
Spoiler
So I've been playing this new update a lot and I've noticed something a bit weird. I'm not sure if this was the same in previous versions or not, but it seems the enemy deploys his ships based on the ships that you yourself deploy, which can change the difficulty of a battle in really strange and counter-intuitive ways.

This is what happened: I had two destroyers against a pirate force of several frigates, destroyers, and a cruiser. I kept reloading the game over and over trying to defeat this superior force, but no matter what I did I never managed to defeat the pirates without losing the AI-controlled destroyer. There were just too many enemies, despite my best efforts they always managed to overwhelm and disable the other destroyer. Finally I grew frustrated and thought to myself, screw you, stupid AI Hammerhead, you're just a liability, I'll do this on my own! And so I went in alone and to my utter surprise and bewilderment managed to handily defeat the entire enemy force right away.

I went back again to figure out what had happened and it turns out that I was getting beaten because the pirates were deploying their entire force against my two destroyers, which enabled them to easily overwhelm me. But when I only deployed one, they sent out only a smaller force that I was able to easily kill with my high-level character and very powerful flagship. The first wave of enemies was dead before the reinforcements made it to the fight, and the first wave of reinforcements was dead before the second one arrived, etc. Where the entire enemy force was able to easily overwhelm and kill my two ships, when I only deployed one I was able to defeat them piecemeal.

The point is this: I was at a disadvantage, outnumbered and outgunned. I find it very strange that putting myself at even more of a disadvantage by only deploying half of my force made the battle easier.
[close]

The AI tries to avoid over-deploying due to CR concerns, though it'll ramp up *very* quickly once it starts taking losses. For medium sized fleets, though, I suppose "very quickly" still isn't quick enough, if it basically needed the entire fleet to overwhelm you, and has now lost some of it before realizing it.

While this isn't intuitive at first glance, I think the behavior does make sense given the how the rules work (and given that the AI is playing by them).

Well you say that, but the way the rules work is that you can't see what the other side is deploying. The AI can see what I'm deploying, so that means the AI is outright cheating, which aside from being a bad thing in and of itself also creates this weird dynamic where putting myself at even more of a disadvantage made the battle significantly easier. If anything, the AI should have no reason to think I'd deploy only one of my ships instead of both. I'm outnumbered and outgunned after all. The logical thing for me to do is to deploy everything I can to maximize my slim chances of victory. Deploying only one ship is a really counter-intuitive thing to do in that situation, and the result is equally strange. Surely putting myself at even more of a disadvantage should result in the battle being even more difficult.

This would all be solved by just making the AI not cheat. Then it would have to operate based on the above assumption that the weaker side will deploy everything precisely because it's weaker, and the exploit of deploying only one ship wouldn't work anymore.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 24, 2014, 12:30:31 PM
Yes, the all-seeing AI cheats!  I cannot see what the AI deploys, neither should it.  For now, I take advantage of this by soloing everything with a single frigate or destroyer.

Once player gets Combat 10 and Technology 7, a single Wolf with a heavy blaster can solo almost any pirate fleet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on October 24, 2014, 12:34:48 PM
Spoiler
So I've been playing this new update a lot and I've noticed something a bit weird. I'm not sure if this was the same in previous versions or not, but it seems the enemy deploys his ships based on the ships that you yourself deploy, which can change the difficulty of a battle in really strange and counter-intuitive ways.

This is what happened: I had two destroyers against a pirate force of several frigates, destroyers, and a cruiser. I kept reloading the game over and over trying to defeat this superior force, but no matter what I did I never managed to defeat the pirates without losing the AI-controlled destroyer. There were just too many enemies, despite my best efforts they always managed to overwhelm and disable the other destroyer. Finally I grew frustrated and thought to myself, screw you, stupid AI Hammerhead, you're just a liability, I'll do this on my own! And so I went in alone and to my utter surprise and bewilderment managed to handily defeat the entire enemy force right away.

I went back again to figure out what had happened and it turns out that I was getting beaten because the pirates were deploying their entire force against my two destroyers, which enabled them to easily overwhelm me. But when I only deployed one, they sent out only a smaller force that I was able to easily kill with my high-level character and very powerful flagship. The first wave of enemies was dead before the reinforcements made it to the fight, and the first wave of reinforcements was dead before the second one arrived, etc. Where the entire enemy force was able to easily overwhelm and kill my two ships, when I only deployed one I was able to defeat them piecemeal.

The point is this: I was at a disadvantage, outnumbered and outgunned. I find it very strange that putting myself at even more of a disadvantage by only deploying half of my force made the battle easier.
[close]
I too ran into this with my AI Apogee! No matter what I gave him as weapons or orders, he would ALWAYS end up with 3K+ hull damage or flat out destroyed in "fair" fights!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 24, 2014, 12:43:32 PM
Spoiler
So I've been playing this new update a lot and I've noticed something a bit weird. I'm not sure if this was the same in previous versions or not, but it seems the enemy deploys his ships based on the ships that you yourself deploy, which can change the difficulty of a battle in really strange and counter-intuitive ways.

This is what happened: I had two destroyers against a pirate force of several frigates, destroyers, and a cruiser. I kept reloading the game over and over trying to defeat this superior force, but no matter what I did I never managed to defeat the pirates without losing the AI-controlled destroyer. There were just too many enemies, despite my best efforts they always managed to overwhelm and disable the other destroyer. Finally I grew frustrated and thought to myself, screw you, stupid AI Hammerhead, you're just a liability, I'll do this on my own! And so I went in alone and to my utter surprise and bewilderment managed to handily defeat the entire enemy force right away.

I went back again to figure out what had happened and it turns out that I was getting beaten because the pirates were deploying their entire force against my two destroyers, which enabled them to easily overwhelm me. But when I only deployed one, they sent out only a smaller force that I was able to easily kill with my high-level character and very powerful flagship. The first wave of enemies was dead before the reinforcements made it to the fight, and the first wave of reinforcements was dead before the second one arrived, etc. Where the entire enemy force was able to easily overwhelm and kill my two ships, when I only deployed one I was able to defeat them piecemeal.

The point is this: I was at a disadvantage, outnumbered and outgunned. I find it very strange that putting myself at even more of a disadvantage by only deploying half of my force made the battle easier.
[close]

I too ran into this with my AI Apogee! No matter what I gave him as weapons or orders, he would ALWAYS end up with 3K+ hull damage or flat out destroyed in "fair" fights!

Yeah, I'm really missing a command along the lines of "maintain formation, fire on enemy ships to raise their flux and make them back off but don't pursue, and whatever you do don't cross in front of me with your unshielded engines facing me while I'm firing everything".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ahrenjb on October 24, 2014, 12:57:09 PM
Yes, the all-seeing AI cheats!  I cannot see what the AI deploys, neither should it.  For now, I take advantage of this by soloing everything with a single frigate or destroyer.

Once player gets Combat 10 and Technology 7, a single Wolf with a heavy blaster can solo almost any pirate fleet.

Time for fleets to start leveling somewhat with the player? I think something like this will probably happen when officers are in, and you might end up facing a fleet with 10/10 Combat and Tech, which would certainly be tough!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 24, 2014, 01:02:07 PM
Well you say that, but the way the rules work is that you can't see what the other side is deploying. The AI can see what I'm deploying, so that means the AI is outright cheating, which aside from being a bad thing in and of itself also creates this weird dynamic where putting myself at even more of a disadvantage made the battle significantly easier. If anything, the AI should have no reason to think I'd deploy only one of my ships instead of both. I'm outnumbered and outgunned after all. The logical thing for me to do is to deploy everything I can to maximize my slim chances of victory. Deploying only one ship is a really counter-intuitive thing to do in that situation, and the result is equally strange. Surely putting myself at even more of a disadvantage should result in the battle being even more difficult.

This would all be solved by just making the AI not cheat. Then it would have to operate based on the above assumption that the weaker side will deploy everything precisely because it's weaker, and the exploit of deploying only one ship wouldn't work anymore.

Oh yeah, forgot about that part of it. I suppose it's technically cheating, but if it didn't do that, the optimal thing to do would probably be to send out a single small ship as a scout, run away with it (not retreat, just run away/not engage), and deploy "for real" based on what it saw. To avoid that (boring and complicated) mess, it knows what you've deployed, but doesn't take advantage of it in any way aside from basing how much to deploy itself.

Deploying everything at the start would be a bad idea; what you could do then is deploy a frigate, retreat, force the AI to stand down to avoid a huge CR loss, and then disengage because it would be unable to pursue after standing down.

While I generally agree that the AI shouldn't cheat as a matter of course, I don't think that's a hard and fast rule. Cheating by, say, increasing weapon range or damage artificially would be a bad thing. This? Not so much; it's not doing this to manage difficulty, but to smooth out the flow of the game. Even if it didn't do this, the same scenario you describe would play out (deploying a single ship making the fight easier by forcing the AI to deploy less), it'd just be more awkward with a scouting phase.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ghoti on October 24, 2014, 01:32:48 PM
Quote
Removed XP gain from losing your own ships

I am very sad to see this go. This game has very little in the way of narrative, but the experience gain from the combat losses served to be turning points for my characters, and gave me an incentive to not just say "Well that's 4 hours down the drain, reload."

Now combats gonna go back to "Well that's 4 hours down the drain, reload."

sad to see that go.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 24, 2014, 02:21:40 PM
Oh yeah, forgot about that part of it. I suppose it's technically cheating, but if it didn't do that, the optimal thing to do would probably be to send out a single small ship as a scout, run away with it (not retreat, just run away/not engage), and deploy "for real" based on what it saw. To avoid that (boring and complicated) mess, it knows what you've deployed, but doesn't take advantage of it in any way aside from basing how much to deploy itself.

Deploying everything at the start would be a bad idea; what you could do then is deploy a frigate, retreat, force the AI to stand down to avoid a huge CR loss, and then disengage because it would be unable to pursue after standing down.

While I generally agree that the AI shouldn't cheat as a matter of course, I don't think that's a hard and fast rule. Cheating by, say, increasing weapon range or damage artificially would be a bad thing. This? Not so much; it's not doing this to manage difficulty, but to smooth out the flow of the game. Even if it didn't do this, the same scenario you describe would play out (deploying a single ship making the fight easier by forcing the AI to deploy less), it'd just be more awkward with a scouting phase.

Yeah, I had a feeling addressing this exploit would just create more exploits. Still, if the AI did start using the single ship scouting method you described, the player's response to that would probably be to bring up one ship, wait for it to be scouted, then bring up the rest when the scout ship leaves, which would effectively make the AI just as blind as if it wasn't cheating or scouting.

I've been thinking about this some more and I'm not really sure how to address this exploit, at least not if the solution involves making the AI cheat less. Any ideas I come up with involve radically overhauling the core systems of the game (i.e. how deploying works, fight phases, CR, all that sort of thing). So I think you should simply make the AI cheat more. Don't just look at the type and number of ships the player deploys but also at their actual strength. The AI would then look at my one destroyer and go "okay, it's just one ship, but it's commanded by a high-level captain and upgraded to ridiculous levels, we gotta deploy tons of stuff to take it down". On reflection, that's really where this exploit comes from. The AI sees one destroyer and deploys accordingly, but it doesn't take into account that it's a heavily upgraded destroyer that can disable any other destroyer in like five seconds and go toe-to-toe with cruisers.

Then again, I do love playing this game as more of a space shooter than a strategy, so maybe don't go overboard on the fix? ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 24, 2014, 02:33:44 PM
Quote
Removed XP gain from losing your own ships

I am very sad to see this go. This game has very little in the way of narrative, but the experience gain from the combat losses served to be turning points for my characters, and gave me an incentive to not just say "Well that's 4 hours down the drain, reload."

Now combats gonna go back to "Well that's 4 hours down the drain, reload."

sad to see that go.

Unfortunately, it was just very exploitable and led to weird ways of playing the game being very effective.

Yeah, I had a feeling addressing this exploit would just create more exploits. Still, if the AI did start using the single ship scouting method you described, the player's response to that would probably be to bring up one ship, wait for it to be scouted, then bring up the rest when the scout ship leaves, which would effectively make the AI just as blind as if it wasn't cheating or scouting.

Hmm. The counter to that sort of thing might be the AI deciding to retreat altogether (perhaps randomly, or if it only sees a lone frigate), leaving your larger force in need of a stand down. But that wouldn't be fun at all.


I've been thinking about this some more and I'm not really sure how to address this exploit, at least not if the solution involves making the AI cheat less. Any ideas I come up with involve radically overhauling the core systems of the game (i.e. how deploying works, fight phases, CR, all that sort of thing). So I think you should simply make the AI cheat more. Don't just look at the type and number of ships the player deploys but also at their actual strength. The AI would then look at my one destroyer and go "okay, it's just one ship, but it's commanded by a high-level captain and upgraded to ridiculous levels, we gotta deploy tons of stuff to take it down". On reflection, that's really where this exploit comes from. The AI sees one destroyer and deploys accordingly, but it doesn't take into account that it's a heavily upgraded destroyer that can disable any other destroyer in like five seconds and go toe-to-toe with cruisers.

Hmm, yeah. That makes sense.

Then again, I do love playing this game as more of a space shooter than a strategy, so maybe don't go overboard on the fix? ;)

:)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 24, 2014, 04:26:07 PM
Quote
The AI would then look at my one destroyer and go "okay, it's just one ship, but it's commanded by a high-level captain and upgraded to ridiculous levels, we gotta deploy tons of stuff to take it down". On reflection, that's really where this exploit comes from. The AI sees one destroyer and deploys accordingly, but it doesn't take into account that it's a heavily upgraded destroyer that can disable any other destroyer in like five seconds and go toe-to-toe with cruisers.
With maximum Combat and Technology, a Medusa flagship can single-handedly take out any standard fleet in previous versions of the game.  Medusa was good enough to slaughter defense fleet equivalents of Gedune and IFed in Exerelin too.  AI needs to throw everything it has against a fully upgraded destroyer.  If frigates did not have peak performance, I suspect the lowly Wolf can solo fleets.

Quote
Then again, I do love playing this game as more of a space shooter than a strategy
Same here.  What interested me in Starfarer in the first place was the shmup action.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TheHengeProphet on October 24, 2014, 04:35:05 PM
Another possibility to help solve the deployment issue is to "roll" for brashness of the fleet commanders.  Some may send in a scout, while some may send in partial or full deployments.  This could add a good scope of randomness and personality to combat.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 24, 2014, 06:40:23 PM
Another possibility to help solve the deployment issue is to "roll" for brashness of the fleet commanders.  Some may send in a scout, while some may send in partial or full deployments.  This could add a good scope of randomness and personality to combat.

That sounds like an interesting idea. As Ahrenjb said, this will be less of a problem once AI fleets start making use of their own commanders and their skills. Perhaps this could be tied into that? Commanders with more combat aptitude would be more likely to correctly assess the situation, whereas inexperienced commanders would be prone to over- or underestimating the strength of their enemy and deploying an inappropriate number of ships as a result.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 24, 2014, 06:43:20 PM
Could, yeah. The danger there is the player completely missing what's going on (because it's pretty much hidden) and it looking random. The other question is whether this would make the game more fun or not. The scouting thing seems like it could get tedious.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on October 24, 2014, 07:49:41 PM
You know, there's an alternative: instead of changing the AI's behavior to make it "stop cheating", what happens if we change the rules so that what it's doing isn't cheating?  A simple "XYZ hull detected approaching the battlefield" message to the player would provide the same information the AI has, and thus stop the "cheat".  So the next question is, is there any way for the player to exploit that information (that they couldn't already do by just zipping in with a fast frigate and scouting)?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on October 24, 2014, 08:04:08 PM
Yeah, that's exploitable. The catch is that whoever deploys last would have the advantage of knowing what they're up against.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on October 24, 2014, 08:07:00 PM
Yeah, that's exploitable. The catch is that whoever deploys last would have the advantage of knowing what they're up against.
Explain how that's exploitable, please?  Whoever deployed first could, y'know, just deploy more ships if they needed to.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on October 24, 2014, 08:57:59 PM
Hmm. Yeah, I guess I should have elaborated to begin with.

I think it's exploitable only because most ships have pretty solid counters. If it were only a matter of scaling up power until both sides are happy the only issue would be the tedium of deploying one or two ships at a time, but there are circumstances in which weak ships can easily defeat vastly more powerful ships. As an extreme example, a player-piloted Hound fitted with a heavy mauler can reliably beat an Onslaught. The AI can't be expected to understand counters like that, so it will always think an Onslaught trumps a Hound. With a varied fleet and decent knowledge of the ships involved a player would frequently be able to counter the AI's first wave of ships with a wave that seems much weaker, but actually has major advantages.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Darloth on October 25, 2014, 01:37:17 AM
Don't tell players the hull then, just the size.

"Frigate size contact approaching"

"Multiple Frigates, 2x Cruiser approaching "
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 25, 2014, 05:42:34 AM
Previous versions told us incoming enemy ships, but not anymore.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NONOCE on October 25, 2014, 06:07:09 AM
Here is a battle I recorded that show me taking advantage of the AI deployment strategy. I clearly shouldn't have won, at least not without any loss.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=I1yUIZIhcXI
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 25, 2014, 06:20:57 AM
I fought a few named fleets with skilled captains and... they are barely any harder than non-skilled fleets.  The only one I noticed was an Onslaught with high Missile Specialization (Annihilators were much faster than normal), and my max Combat/Technology Wolf still had no trouble killing it.

@ NONOCE:  That is how most of my combats are like once I gain enough skills - a single champion that slaughters everyone.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on October 25, 2014, 06:30:12 AM
I think some of the problem might be that every fleet is composed of green crew atm.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 25, 2014, 07:33:23 AM
I might be able to tell what effect enemy admiral skills have if I knew what skills they had to begin with...

Are there/will there be any technologically advanced AI fleets with things like +20% OP and all the cool hullmod bells and whistles like ITU and Expanded Missile Racks? (hint: implement this old idea (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4746.msg81755#msg81755) for dynamic AI ship variants)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 25, 2014, 07:40:14 AM
I fought a few named fleets with skilled captains and... they are barely any harder than non-skilled fleets.  The only one I noticed was an Onslaught with high Missile Specialization (Annihilators were much faster than normal), and my max Combat/Technology Wolf still had no trouble killing it.

Wait, what? Named captains have skills? I thought that wasn't in the game yet! I never noticed it, that's how little impact it makes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on October 25, 2014, 10:23:01 AM
I for one am having fun with the named bounties but I'd like to ask/say a few things.

1. Do they get harder the more you kill them/level up? I have a feeling that after I've done a few 60-90k ones those above 100k and all the way until 200k started showing up a lot more often, some even having more than one Onslaught.
2. Are they capped at 3-4? haven't seen more offers than that.
3. As much as they are a nice addition, it does get tiring after a while, the exp you get from them is redundant once you hit lvl35 or so and you might as well just abandon bounty hunting all together and just buy 3-4 Atlas and cash in on the mad XP and Gold from trading. For reference a 200k gold bounty is giving me around 50k XP while a multi-million trade earns me almost 10 times that amount with much less effort, just traveling with my 5 Atlas around with minimal escort. Maybe bounties should have an XP bonus too just like trades have?
4. Another improvement I suggest from the bounties is for us to be able to hunt stuff that isn't just pirates. What I mean by this is that once you get friendly with one faction maybe you start getting offers for more specific targets? Let's say I get friendly with the Tri-Tachyon corp, once I get to that level the game may start spawning criminals from that faction as bounties for us to kill them, that way we have an opportunity to face something that isn't pirates for 90% of the game, since acquiring ships you want in this version is almost impossible due to scarcity, forcing you to want to be friendly with everyone in order to have more options/opportunities.
5. Bounty targets are usually named fleets and not just a military detachment from somewhere or some random pirates, so in that regard is it possible we could find some ships to face that are only found on bounty battles? We have the skin system now so this seems feasible. Not only this would add some nice variety but it could also present a great opportunity to capture some variants with unique built in augments, which would make it for a great prize and challenge. If my first question is an affirmative and there is a progression system going on I think the game could also greatly benefit from some endgame bounties, having fleets that will only show up once you are cooperative with some factions and having unique hulls as well not found elsewhere.

About the current AI deployment system, honestly I think it's perfect. Most of us are facing pirates here with ships much weaker than ours so it's no wonder we can solo a fleet we shouldn't with a single Wolf, but once the game is better balanced for endgame and we start facing huge fleets with ships as good as ours then this system will shine well. At most I suggest changing the Pirates AI or having different types of AI for different fleets, but otherwise I'd say keep the current system, even if it is technically cheating.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SQW on October 25, 2014, 12:26:55 PM
It's the fleet composition and all those D-state pirate ships atm that's giving us human players a huge edge when running as a bounty hunter.

Throw in a few non-talon fighter wings and the lone wolf tactic would hit a brick wall immediately. I expect a patch out soon to address this and/or make it beneficial to go after other faction's fleet.
 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 25, 2014, 12:32:05 PM
I think it's due mainly to the fact that every AI fleet has nothing but Green crew, who actually have a negative modifier with target leading, if I remember correctly.

In any case, every ship has green crew, so it's not going to be as effective compared a Regular or Veteran crewed ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on October 25, 2014, 02:13:45 PM
I think it's due mainly to the fact that every AI fleet has nothing but Green crew, who actually have a negative modifier with target leading, if I remember correctly.

In any case, every ship has green crew, so it's not going to be as effective compared a Regular or Veteran crewed ship.
That was before CR. Now they just set the limit to 50%
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: mike on October 25, 2014, 02:47:35 PM
There seems to be a glitch of some kind the number of ships in the variety of them is much more limited than it was last version.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on October 25, 2014, 03:10:52 PM
pretty sure that's intentional
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on October 25, 2014, 06:49:26 PM
There seems to be a glitch of some kind the number of ships in the variety of them is much more limited than it was last version.

At least there are plenty of tugs now!

I really like what the patch has done to the general tone of the player's financial progression.  With the end of the Buffalo Supply Pinata, combat for its own sake is no longer profitable.  You will probably need to buy supplies at least some of the time just to keep your combat ships running, and the addition of significant fuel expenditures and hefty extortions tolls means you now have substantial operating costs just running a fleet.  It's not at all hard to keep yourself in the black, which is probably a good thing, but it means the game is now requires you to actively look for sources of income instead of parking on top of the pirate homeworld and grinding through plunder fleets.  Having some kind of pressure to keep moving and earning does a lot to contribute to the game's survival atmosphere.

The limited availability of necessities in underdeveloped areas also helps with that, especially when it means you're periodically forced to make unscrupulous decisions because oops, you ran short of fuel and supplies in some backwater system and it turns out Bumfuck A is suffering from severe shortage and the only way you can leave is by cleaning out the black market, with a side effect of making the situation worse.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thana on October 26, 2014, 01:28:01 AM
Trading seems kind of limited at the moment, since outside of the black market, it appears that only food and organics for to planets suffering from famine seems to offer the potential for profit. I mean, obviously you can get money from metal or industrial equipment capture from dead pirates, but so far my impression is that, say, rare ore will not sell anywhere at a profit, at any time. Granted, the trading system here is a first pass at the system, and the adding of the industry system some time in the future may well diversify the way things work and what can be used profitably, but that's my interpretation of the way things currently stand. Also, I think buying of commodities should probably scale with the number of items bought compared to the stock, so that you can't buy off huge stores at once at a cheap price because that's one of the things that seems to feed into the current #1 trading strategy of buying of all the food from a starving-prone planet and then simply waiting until it goes into famine, then selling it all back at a massive profit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: LarvaLounge on October 26, 2014, 01:37:07 AM

Deploying everything at the start would be a bad idea; what you could do then is deploy a frigate, retreat, force the AI to stand down to avoid a huge CR loss, and then disengage because it would be unable to pursue after standing down.


I thought that the 'Harry Enemy Reserves' option solved the problem of enemy fleets under-deploying and retreating, for both the player and the AI.
Deploying a full force should not be a risk, due to mechanics already in the game, namely 'Harry Enemy Reserves'.

I'm still playing the previous version... maybe something changed.  Or maybe I misunderstand the problem.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 26, 2014, 02:36:38 AM
Deploying everything at the start would be a bad idea; what you could do then is deploy a frigate, retreat, force the AI to stand down to avoid a huge CR loss, and then disengage because it would be unable to pursue after standing down.
Now that you mention it, what happened to the "can still pursue after stand down if recovery rate was 100%" thing?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 26, 2014, 08:29:14 AM
Quote
I really like what the patch has done to the general tone of the player's financial progression.  With the end of the Buffalo Supply Pinata, combat for its own sake is no longer profitable.  You will probably need to buy supplies at least some of the time just to keep your combat ships running, and the addition of significant fuel expenditures and hefty extortions tolls means you now have substantial operating costs just running a fleet.  It's not at all hard to keep yourself in the black, which is probably a good thing, but it means the game is now requires you to actively look for sources of income instead of parking on top of the pirate homeworld and grinding through plunder fleets.  Having some kind of pressure to keep moving and earning does a lot to contribute to the game's survival atmosphere.
Later in the game, after a combat focused character gets high Combat and Technology, it is possible for a small fleet of frigates with the best equipment to kill nearly any pirate fleet and use less supplies (and fuel) than what is dropped by said pirates.  Until then, what Voyager I wrote is true.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Darloth on October 26, 2014, 10:45:26 AM
At that point it's probably good that a really skilled player can do that - doing amazing things is what high skills are for, right?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gorn on October 26, 2014, 11:09:08 AM
why you removed ships like tempests and apogee class??? cant find them
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TheBawkHawk on October 26, 2014, 11:14:17 AM
why you removed ships like tempests and apogee class??? cant find them

They aren't removed, they're just a lot harder to find in the new update. Try looking at the Tri-Tachyon military station.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 26, 2014, 11:16:54 AM
Trading seems kind of limited at the moment, since outside of the black market, it appears that only food and organics for to planets suffering from famine seems to offer the potential for profit.

Other stuff that's hit with a trade disruption can also be profitable, and depending on luck (and what trade fleets don't make it to their destinations) that could be anything.

(The price of commodities does scale, btw. It's just that not everything is on the market to begin with - you won't be able to clean a planet out of food completely, past a certain point, there just isn't any that's for sale, but it's still there.)


Deploying everything at the start would be a bad idea; what you could do then is deploy a frigate, retreat, force the AI to stand down to avoid a huge CR loss, and then disengage because it would be unable to pursue after standing down.
Now that you mention it, what happened to the "can still pursue after stand down if recovery rate was 100%" thing?

Deploying everything at the start would be a bad idea; what you could do then is deploy a frigate, retreat, force the AI to stand down to avoid a huge CR loss, and then disengage because it would be unable to pursue after standing down.

I thought that the 'Harry Enemy Reserves' option solved the problem of enemy fleets under-deploying and retreating, for both the player and the AI.
Deploying a full force should not be a risk, due to mechanics already in the game, namely 'Harry Enemy Reserves'.

I'm still playing the previous version... maybe something changed.  Or maybe I misunderstand the problem.

Those... are really good points, actually. Forgot about that tweak to "stand down". Added some custom text when it happens, and also made the AI deploy more at the start.


why you removed ships like tempests and apogee class??? cant find them

Your best bet is either the black market on the Tri-Tachyon worlds, or a protracted war with Tri-Tachyon (which will lead to bigger Tri-Tachyon fleets) and boarding. Getting some specific ships, especially the higher-quality ones, is definitely harder in this update, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gorn on October 26, 2014, 12:58:42 PM
am at tri world and from 1-20lvl ships in shipyard all the time were the same, I think there is something is broken
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: mike on October 26, 2014, 02:33:31 PM
Sadly I feel the same all the ships I been fighting for last 8 hours no matter the race was hegemony ships or Pirate ships. I'm vary sad. Hope you get some mods updated soon so I can get some variety in my fighting. And please fix your memory leaks
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 26, 2014, 04:43:16 PM
"Yeah, so we're having a little food shortage here. About 100 units should do the trick. Halp, anyone?"
"HERE, HAVE 5,000!"
"Wow, thanks, good buddy! We'll totally buy fifty times more than we need at five times the normal price!"
Five minutes later...
"Hang on a minute, we're drowning in food here and we don't have any money left! It's totally that guy's fault, even though we knew how much we needed, how much he was selling, and the price he was asking, and we agreed to the terms. We should totally incriminate him for this!"
"IT'S NOT MY FAULT YOUR FOOD SHORTAGES ARE TOO SMALL FOR MY FLEET, DAMMIT!"
"Let's also add insult to injury by referring to him as a "her" in the report. That'll learn 'em!"

On a related note, anyone else found the best late-game trading strategy to be to simply ferry food from the Luddites to storage on Sindria while waiting for Sindria to have its its inevitable recurring food shortage, and once it hits just take the food out of storage and dump it on the market for massive profit?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 26, 2014, 05:16:37 PM
I'd imagine that you're selling to the open market, i.e. to many different intermediary distributors. Which all jump at the opportunity to buy scarce goods, unaware that you're secretly selling to their competition at the same time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 26, 2014, 05:26:26 PM
Okay, that does actually make sense. Though I'm fairly sure it would work the same if I sold to the military. Plus the reports mention "officials" being embarrassed about the whole thing, so there seems to be some level of governmental involvement.

Edit: Yep, works the same. Just sold 40K food to Sindrian military when they only needed 10K.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: GhloaTrooper on October 26, 2014, 06:09:28 PM
Yeah Sordid im basically in the same boat. Im even destroying Ludd relief fleets to make sure the food shortage goes for long so i can sell every piece of food in the sector, considering they usually need around 13k the market never gets overflooded.
My whole end game consists of running circles around the sector, loading two atlas freighters full of food, wait for the food shortage on sindria, sell food start another cirlcle, i have almost two milion in my bank and i have ran out of places to spend my money.
Basically right now im just collecting ships from different factions and store them on orbital stations, i have 2 fully equipped Onslaughts sitting in Corvus gathering dust, not to mention multiple Paragons and Auroras in Tibicena.

I really think Volturn should have a higher food output so the food shortages on Sindria dont become an endless money pit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Debido on October 26, 2014, 06:26:56 PM
One way I could possibly see the whole...over supplying an event issue is:
Have price scaling per unit with a special script for events (erksome)
Make it so that the player has to click on a event sub-market tab, and an event submarket enforces strict maximum limitations on the quantity of the commodity that can be sold, and the sell button will not working/the price will be read with a warning etc. Though this creates more coding issues as well...also the UI barely has space for another submarket tab. Also it may not be intuitive to the player to use an event submarket.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 26, 2014, 07:04:30 PM
Quite a few games with dynamic prices have this kind of exploit where the game doesn't take into account that the player is selling a large quantity of items. IIRC Fable: TLC had it, as well as other games. A vendor has a lot of a particular item, so he's offering them cheap. You buy the whole stack, and every item in it costs the same (whereas if you bought one at a time, the price would ramp up). The vendor now has none, so he's willing to buy for a lot. You sell the whole stack back to him for a profit. Repeat until you have enough cash that you can buy everything there is to buy in the game. It's not quite as bad in Starsector but it's still very exploitable.

It's a combination of factors. Food shortages occur regularly on Sindria, which is relatively close to the Luddites, who produce tons of food. Both the producing planet and the receiving planet have a jump point right next to them, so the run is very fast and efficient. You can store an infinite amount of food for an infinite period of time for zero cost (aside from a tiny one-time fee). The receiving planet will buy an unlimited amount of goods for shortage prices during a shortage. The punishment for flooding a market is tiny.

I have 5 superfreighters right now hauling food from the Luddites to a warehouse on Sindria. That's 10K at once, enough to end a food shortage in one trip. But I'm putting it in a warehouse because Sindria will buy as much as I have when the shortage hits. Right now I have 50K there and more is on the way. I'll make millions of credits and tons of XP when the shortage inevitably hits, and what will it cost me? 5 reputation with Sindria? Yeah, okay, so I'll go from 98 to 93, whoop whoop.

IMO at the very least the market should only buy as much as is needed to relieve the shortage for shortage prices, any goods in excess should sell for post-shortage prices. Additional measures could include limiting storage space and/or enforcing a storage fee, making food perishable, and making the severity of the penalty for flooding a market dependent on how much you flood it. Ideally it would be a combination of all of these. I quite like Starsector's 'soft cap' approach to things like cargo capacity, IMO the same should be the case here. It would be nice to see the change from shortage to post-shortage prices be gradual rather than sharp and immediate, etc.

Also, given that the Sindrian Dictat is, y'know, a dictatorship, I was quite surprised that the Sindrian authorities didn't just go "damn, we have people starving to death in the streets and there's a giant warehouse full of food right here, so fuk it, we're taking it". That could be another method of countering this kind of exploit. And also a neat way of giving the factions different personalities, come to think of it. Maybe some factions are willing to confiscate your goods in an emergency and others aren't? Eh, I'm rambling at this point.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ArthropodOfDoom on October 26, 2014, 07:09:27 PM
This isn't totally relevant to the current discussion thread, but I feel like sharing it here anyway.

(http://puu.sh/csaM3/e29cb19e94.png)

Take no prisoners. Also Apogee w/ 2 AM Blasters, Autopulse, and Atropos is stupidly fun/OP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 27, 2014, 07:54:40 AM
So yeah...

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/eZvLT5c.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/SjHJ6pn.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 27, 2014, 07:59:36 AM
So, uh... how long till hotfix release? :3
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Uomoz on October 27, 2014, 08:08:35 AM
Damn, that's broken xD
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 27, 2014, 09:11:54 AM
So yeah...

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/eZvLT5c.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/SjHJ6pn.png)
[close]

Missing from this picture is the part where the Diktat wants to nail you to the wall for causing the shortage. The only way you'd get the shortage amount to be that high is by buying up tons and tons of food on Sindria, don't think that went unnoticed! You shameless profiteer, you.

... actually, wait. They'll just be mildly upset. I need to fix *that* :)


So, uh... how long till hotfix release? :3

(Technically, we're well out of "hotfix" territory - those are the releases within a day or so of the original when, say, a common crash bug slipped by. The next release is the "bugfix" release.)

Anyway, to answer what was most likely a rhetorical question: usually, it's 1-2 weeks from the original release, but given that 1) there aren't as many pressing issues this time around and 2) there are more less pressing issues that are still important, it looks like it's going to take a bit longer.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 27, 2014, 09:42:00 AM
Missing from this picture is the part where the Diktat wants to nail you to the wall for causing the shortage. The only way you'd get the shortage amount to be that high is by buying up tons and tons of food on Sindria, don't think that went unnoticed! You shameless profiteer, you.

... actually, wait. They'll just be mildly upset. I need to fix *that* :)

Yeah, the penalty is 5 relation points, which is nothing. And yes, I did in fact buy like 40K food from the Sindrian military, which likely triggered the shortage. No idea why they had so much and why they were exporting it very cheaply off-world when their own market stats said that like 40% of domestic demand was not being met, but hey, free money. But even without that Sindria seems to be experiencing food shortages on a regular basis. Granted, they usually only need 10K or so and the price goes up 200 credits instead of 300, but I don't need to go around causing humanitarian crises for this exploit to work. Though I do get blamed for those as well even when I hadn't caused them. :( The amount needed is irrelevant, they'll buy as much as I have in any case. They'd buy those 180K units of food for full shortage price even if they only needed 100.

Oh the other hand, buy 1K food from the black market in Eos? -80 to relation with the Luddites. Holy stepdancing Jesus! :o
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 27, 2014, 10:08:43 AM
it looks like it's going to take a bit longer.

Um, the mission crash bug happens about every three missions... I was hoping for that to be fixed soon :-\


Concerning the "sell more during shortage than is needed" issue, maybe it should be communicated to the player more clearly? The first few times I did it was simply because I did not pay attention to the "amount of x needed to end shortage" info. Since the player character is surely informed about what he or she is doing (probably actively plotting and deceiving), the player should be, too. Especially if the reputation penalty is increased. A pop-up warning when you sell over demand, maybe?




Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 27, 2014, 10:49:08 AM
Yeah, sometimes the relevant info isn't presented quite as well as it could be. The first time I got framed for causing a shortage was when I received one of those "there's a shortage, a relief fleet has been sent" messages while in Eos. When the message is just about the shortage, it tells you how much is needed. When it also says that a relief fleet is underway, it doesn't. I didn't know where else to look for this information yet, so I just loaded as much food as I could and raced the relief fleet to the destination. Turned out I brought way too much and I got incriminated for causing the shortage (even though I hadn't been anywhere near that place for months).

I agree that it would be nice to have some kind of "hey, you're flooding the market" warning, but I don't think a pop-up is a good idea. There's plenty of room on the screen where such a warning can be displayed without requiring a click to dismiss it. Like so:

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/hfBTZpi.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 27, 2014, 11:15:49 AM
Uh, yeah, I wasn't thinking about a clickable pop-up, that would be annoying.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: pigreko on October 27, 2014, 11:44:25 AM
ok my feedback on this:
I like all the tiny bits of informations on stations and planets. Also the upgraded lore for the various factions is cool. All these new panels, the intel and various market menus, they feel very well integrated with the game.
The trade mechanics is cool even if I read about a lot of exploits, but that is something easy to fix or balance once more and more feedbacks are picked up AND an actual story settles in.
The "trade or hire personnel" and "buy and sell ships" are an an understatement now as a title name of what you get from accessing those station panels. They are of course a legacy of the past releases, nevertheless when you have so many good stuff around, nitpicking is allowed.

GG!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 27, 2014, 12:19:52 PM
The "trade or hire personnel" and "buy and sell ships" are an an understatement now as a title name of what you get from accessing those station panels.

How so? The names seem like a accurate descriptions of those panels' function to me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 27, 2014, 02:21:11 PM
Just block market flooding transactions (with a message explaining why), much like blocking crew spacing.

EDIT:  On second thought, flooding a market of a faction the player planned to attack anyway would be a great way to declare war to the faction before blasting their ships.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zibywan on October 27, 2014, 02:46:29 PM
One small nuisance I've noticed, and not seen mentioned by anyone else, is a refitting issue.

When I try to load a variant and have the needed parts in my supply pile the game elects to buy the parts from the market rather than use the ones I have in storage. Having to manually build every ship to use my collected weapons is only a minor inconvenience, but it is annoying.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 27, 2014, 03:11:22 PM
I think I finally made it to the endgame, and difficulty of skilled captains (with max Combat) spikes dramatically.  It is like a game with eight stages, stages 1-7 are easy to medium, but the final stage spikes to harder than the previous stages combined.  Some of the max level perks make captains very dangerous and difficult to kill (with a single small ship, at least).

EDIT:  Also, named pirate fleets at endgame are often renegade deserter fleets of other factions and only pirates in name.  They do not use (D) ships like real pirates, but other factions' ships, including capitals.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 27, 2014, 03:31:04 PM
Question:  Do enemy ships with skilled captains give more experience than the same ship without its captain?

Once they have Combat 10, their fleets are often no easier than defense fleets.  I only get about 60,000 XP, less than what the old Hegemony defense fleet would be worth today (50,000 * 2).  I feel like I need to exploit food shortages to power level to the 50s.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 27, 2014, 05:28:51 PM
I agree that it would be nice to have some kind of "hey, you're flooding the market" warning, but I don't think a pop-up is a good idea. There's plenty of room on the screen where such a warning can be displayed without requiring a click to dismiss it. Like so:

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/hfBTZpi.png)
[close]

I like the idea, and how that looks in the UI. Unfortunately, it's a bit involved (structurally, the food shortage event would have to have a way to control the UI like that; what if multiple events want to do this for different commodities; that particular area in the UI isn't empty in smaller resolutions; etc). I'll keep it in mind for the future, though.


When I try to load a variant and have the needed parts in my supply pile the game elects to buy the parts from the market rather than use the ones I have in storage. Having to manually build every ship to use my collected weapons is only a minor inconvenience, but it is annoying.

Oh? It's supposed to take from cargo, then from storage, and then anything paid. If it's not doing this, it's a bug - noted and will take a look.


Question:  Do enemy ships with skilled captains give more experience than the same ship without its captain?

Same XP at the moment.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: DeMatt on October 27, 2014, 06:46:16 PM
I agree that it would be nice to have some kind of "hey, you're flooding the market" warning, but I don't think a pop-up is a good idea. There's plenty of room on the screen where such a warning can be displayed without requiring a click to dismiss it. Like so:

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/hfBTZpi.png)
[close]

I like the idea, and how that looks in the UI. Unfortunately, it's a bit involved (structurally, the food shortage event would have to have a way to control the UI like that; what if multiple events want to do this for different commodities; that particular area in the UI isn't empty in smaller resolutions; etc). I'll keep it in mind for the future, though.
Maybe not tie it to the event at all?  Just relate "quantity of cargo" versus "size of market", and if the ratio is too large, pop up the warning "That amount of <cargo> you are <buying/selling> is enough to distort the market.  The authorities may look unkindly upon such activities... click here to dismiss."  Then the warning can apply to the possibility of provoking a glut (or a shortage) too.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 27, 2014, 06:48:43 PM
I like the idea, and how that looks in the UI. Unfortunately, it's a bit involved (structurally, the food shortage event would have to have a way to control the UI like that; what if multiple events want to do this for different commodities; that particular area in the UI isn't empty in smaller resolutions; etc). I'll keep it in mind for the future, though.

Oh, right. I forgot 4:3 is still a thing. Well I can't help you with any of the back-end stuff, but if that placement isn't suitable you could replace the faction logo with the warning instead, like so:

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/Xenctfu.png)
[close]

You have a smaller faction logo right above that area and another one in between the inventory grids, so nothing is lost if the warning does pop up (which presumably won't be often anyway). As for multiple commodities, there already is a handy list of commodities that you're selling right below the warning. Simply highlight the commodities the warning applies to in the same color as the warning, that should make it obvious to the player that that's what the warning is about.

Maybe not tie it to the event at all?  Just relate "quantity of cargo" versus "size of market", and if the ratio is too large, pop up the warning "That amount of <cargo> you are <buying/selling> is enough to distort the market.  The authorities may look unkindly upon such activities... click here to dismiss."  Then the warning can apply to the possibility of provoking a glut (or a shortage) too.

That's a cool idea. You could even have different levels of warnings, like a yellow one along the lines of "this may destabilize the market and draw the attention of the authorities" and a red one for "this will severely destabilize the market and draw the ire of the authorities".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 27, 2014, 07:11:27 PM
Hmm, yeah, this is interesting. It would also be a good place to put warnings such as "selling hand weapons on the black market will severely destabilize the market", which is a thing but I'm willing to bet not many people know about it, because it's not explained anywhere, really.

For bonus points: where would multiple warnings coexist if they needed to? :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PCCL on October 27, 2014, 07:25:36 PM
hmm, maybe a small triangle with exclamation mark in the grid itself? and when hovering over it'll display a short popup that says "selling too much of this will destablize the market" or "selling too much of this will catch the attention of authorities"

mockup below:
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/fT45Xlh.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 27, 2014, 07:51:45 PM
Hmm, yeah, this is interesting. It would also be a good place to put warnings such as "selling hand weapons on the black market will severely destabilize the market", which is a thing but I'm willing to bet not many people know about it, because it's not explained anywhere, really.

Oh that's cool, I didn't know about that! I'm totally going to do that just for fun. Is it possible to get a full-blown revolution going if you supply enough guns, with the government getting overturned and the planet joining another faction or going independent? That'd be really cool. Politics through gun-running. Hell yes.

Quote
For bonus points: where would multiple warnings coexist if they needed to? :)

I'd say the same place, really. You can have multiple warnings at once but you can only trigger one at a time (because you're moving goods one at a time between the inventory grids), so you can also display them one at a time as they come up. You do a destabilizing transaction, a sound plays and a warning pops up. You do another one, the sound plays again and the warning box flashes two or three times to let you know its contents have changed. Then you can cycle through the warnings with buttons.

Highlight items in the transaction list. Bright red for items related to the currently displayed warning, dull red for items related to the other warnings. Also add gunnyfreak's exclamation mark signs, bright and dull as with the list highlights, to allow the player to easily find the offending items in the inventory grid. Switch the warning box to the relevant warning when the player mouses over these items.

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/jaORnhQ.png)
[close]

Edit: I'm starting to think my solution is a bit overengineered. Gunnyfreak's approach is much simpler and more elegant.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 27, 2014, 08:26:43 PM
This is good: I like the idea of changing warnings in the flag area (relevant to last change in the transaction), and then adding more info to the tooltip makes sense. I'm not sure an exclamation mark on the icon is even necessary, unless perhaps the info is market-dependent and not specific to the commodity.

(Not saying I'll necessarily be able to get to this right off the bat, but still, good stuff. Thank you!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 27, 2014, 09:26:52 PM
I may have missed it, but is there a reason units sold over the shortage amount can't just be dropped to the stable market price?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on October 28, 2014, 07:00:23 AM
This is good: I like the idea of changing warnings in the flag area (relevant to last change in the transaction), and then adding more info to the tooltip makes sense. I'm not sure an exclamation mark on the icon is even necessary, unless perhaps the info is market-dependent and not specific to the commodity.

(Not saying I'll necessarily be able to get to this right off the bat, but still, good stuff. Thank you!)

Well the flag area isn't actually a flag area, as far as I can tell. In the screenshot Gunnyfreak posted it's a piece of artwork. I'm guessing you put that big Diktat logo there as a placeholder because there is no artwork for Sindria yet. It did seem a bit weird that you had the same logo plastered three times on the same screen but I didn't realize why it was that way until now. But it's still something that can be occasionally and temporarily replaced by a warning, I think.

As for the exclamation marks, it's just a small QoL thing. It would be a bit inconvenient to be told by the list on the left that there's a problem with a commodity and then having to hunt through the inventory grid to find the commodity in question. The exclamation mark would let you find it very easily. Plus if you're going to include extra info in tooltips for certain commodities, it would be good to let the player know this or that commodity has some extra info they can view.

There's one other thing I wanted to mention in relation to this whole warning system. See, when I was learning the ropes of how shortages work and (accidentally) flooded a market that was suffering from a tiny shortage with a huge amount of goods and made an absolute killing, I thought to myself, cool, I've found an exploit that I can use to make massive profits. And then the investigation message popped up in my intel feed, basically a way for the game to say "oh no you didn't", and my thoughts immediately turned more along the lines of "oh crap, the dev had thought of this, I'm going to prison". Which was so cool! The warning system will make life easier for the player in the long run but it will also remove this jawdroppingly awesome moment when you think you've found a way to exploit the system and get away with it, and then thirty seconds later the game goes "nope, I know what you did, and there will be consequences". Just something to think about.

I may have missed it, but is there a reason units sold over the shortage amount can't just be dropped to the stable market price?

Gothars did address that:

I'd imagine that you're selling to the open market, i.e. to many different intermediary distributors. Which all jump at the opportunity to buy scarce goods, unaware that you're secretly selling to their competition at the same time.

Which, as I said, makes sense when selling to the open market, which is composed of many small entities that don't know what each other is doing. Not so much when selling to the military, which really shouldn't fall for this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: bills6693 on October 28, 2014, 06:07:20 PM
I agree that it would be nice to have some kind of "hey, you're flooding the market" warning, but I don't think a pop-up is a good idea. There's plenty of room on the screen where such a warning can be displayed without requiring a click to dismiss it. Like so:

Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/hfBTZpi.png)
[close]

I like the idea, and how that looks in the UI. Unfortunately, it's a bit involved (structurally, the food shortage event would have to have a way to control the UI like that; what if multiple events want to do this for different commodities; that particular area in the UI isn't empty in smaller resolutions; etc). I'll keep it in mind for the future, though.
What about if you just had a red box saying 'Warning' where the whole message is displayed now. On mouse-over, it would list all warnings being issued.

Hopefully in this way you would:

-Make sure there was always space no matter the resolution (as its only one box)
-Be able to have competing messages from different events (because they'd just appear one after the other, with one line break between each message)

I'd show you what I mean but I have no photo-editing ability. But it would be the same as you see an explanation when hovering over any other icon (such as the event icons at the top of that screen). You could even also have the F1 for more info, so it just displays a basic 'you're flooding the market, it won't go unnoticed' message and with F1 it explains exactly what that means (i.e. there is only the need for x amount of food to solve shortage, overselling will be noticed and investigated or whatever)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 28, 2014, 06:57:21 PM
I hope ships with skilled captains give bonus XP (in a later release).  I have fought plenty more max Combat (hencefore super) flagships and most of them are very vicious, much more powerful than even max-minus-one Combat flagships.  Some of these super ships are harder to solo than the rest of their fleet combined (or even entire defense fleets in 0.62).  Against super cruisers and capitals, it becomes a game of rock-paper-scissors (if trying to use the least resources).  Sometimes, Medusa is still the best option, other times it is a capital that can outgun it, or a fleet of many ships.  In case of using a fleet, try to solo the rest of super flagship's fleet, then bring in your fleet.

Super ships I fought so far...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 29, 2014, 04:07:50 PM
I played as a bounty hunter a bit longer now, and I've got one major gripe.
It is quite disappointing to go after a 70 000 credit fleet and find but a handful of surviving, badly damaged frigates, at best. The time I need from the jump point to the target fleet is enough for local patrols to tear it to shreds (I'm under the impression they only act when I'm in the system). What should have been a glorious battle becomes little more than a fetch quest. And that happens more often than not. That I still get the full bounty should maybe be a consolation, but it only makes me wonder why I'm running a battle fleet in the first place when a hunter-killer frigate would suffice.

I don't see an obvious solution to this. I would hope for the whole bounty hunter mechanic to be expanded, so that information gathering and actually finding the target becomes part of the challenge. Then targets, as should be expected, could be only found far off from normal patrols and faction fleets.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: The Soldier on October 29, 2014, 04:56:47 PM
Actually, most of the bounty fleets are centered around Gas Giants (minus Mors in the Covus system, which has always been a pain in the butt to get to), so you can just jump to the Gas Giant's gravity well from Hyperspace and destroy the fleet from there.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 29, 2014, 05:11:42 PM
If the campaign is intent on continuing on its current trajectory*, I'm hoping bounties become dynamic; placed on naturally occurring fleets that have managed to grow to a point where they overpower the local factions and are freely feeding off trade fleets/sieging worlds. (And the bounty itself paid for by money within the economy)

The larger picture being that everything becomes driven by the economy; raw resources fuel industry, industry creates goods, goods fuel population growth and ship construction, which is all required before fleets can spawn.
Basically the economic prosperity will directly influence the numerousness and availability of ships to the player and the AI fleet spawning logic.

*though I feel this direction is an error; the aspect of starsector that I fell in love with the combat engine, all this effort directed at the campaign isn't improving this aspect of the game at all - in some ways it detracts from it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on October 29, 2014, 05:42:45 PM
*though I feel this direction is an error; the aspect of starsector that I fell in love with the combat engine, all this effort directed at the campaign isn't improving this aspect of the game at all - in some ways it detracts from it.

This should probably go in a general discussion thread, but how exactly do you feel the combat engine still needs improved?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TJJ on October 29, 2014, 06:11:34 PM
*though I feel this direction is an error; the aspect of starsector that I fell in love with the combat engine, all this effort directed at the campaign isn't improving this aspect of the game at all - in some ways it detracts from it.

This should probably go in a general discussion thread, but how exactly do you feel the combat engine still needs improved?

More ships, weapons, more diverse engagement scenarios, scripted objectives, terrain, etc.
Basically more depth within the combat engine itself; at the moment it's little more than a small arena where 'two fleets enter, one fleet leaves'.

Imagine the complexity of an RTS campaign mission from the likes of StarCraft, but played out in starsector's combat engine.
Complex objectives, multiple failure states, meaningful tactical choices.

In fact anyone who has experience of the SFC games (Starfleet Command) will know the sort of depth I'm hoping for.

Just yesterday I was imagining the viability of bringing classic RTS elements into Starsector's combat engine.
The type focused purely on tactical combat though, no base building, and the only resource being deployment points (rewarded for territorial control); a la wargame red dragon.
Pre-battle designing of your fleet, then in game you battle for territorial control, constantly pulling in new ships from your reserve to counter your opponent's current composition.

I can imagine it being immense fun, and with enormous strategic depth (both in the fleet design & combat phases).

Though It'd all be rather pointless without first having a functional MP mod....must get back onto that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 29, 2014, 08:11:58 PM
I try to keep my fleet at 40 DP or less so I do not need to play with the objective system.  When I am forced to go more than 40 DP, I want a big gigantic fleet.  The worst case scenario is a big fleet filled mostly of civilians and one or two fighting ships, ensuring the enemy gets unchecked access to objectives.  I know I can edit a file to change it, but that feels like cheating, more than using half damage setting.

I recently got a Hyperion, and it is stronger than earlier 0.6x releases because CR degrades slower, allowing it to spend more time in combat.  Hyperion that begins with 100% CR can probably solo all but the largest of fleets.  Hyperion is the ideal ship to eliminate obnoxious max Combat flagships because it is the only ship that can reliably flank them.

A few moments ago, I fought a max Combat Paragon, and it is a real monster.  I tried to fight it with a Medusa, but it got wasted.  Medusa is outgunned and outranged by the Paragon.  Thanks to max Combat perks, the Paragon is fast, hits very hard, and very tough to damage or kill.  If I did not have Hyperion, I probably would have needed an Onslaught or a Paragon of my own.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: maximusprime1010 on October 29, 2014, 08:27:36 PM
First great work on the update, I'm really enjoying the game and it had just been sitting there for a while before this made me play it and love it again.

Second some minor problems. This doesn't happen often but my game seems to crash when I save especially if I achieve a lot or leave it along time between saves. There also seems to be a lack of ships available in campaign I can only find about 3 different variants.

Finally some ideas for markets and relationships. Instead of three markets per location general/military/black could there be several? Depending on the planet different guilds, corporations and markets will be available (mining guild, robocorp, military etc). Another idea could be service markets like mercenaries to help you take on a difficult threat or banks to give you loans or insurance. Major markets will be visible to all players from the get go but there will also be smaller markets than cannot buy or sell in bulk but offer other advantages. (low tariff and unique items).  among these small markets will be the black markets. Finding these small markets should be a challenge. Rather than simple faction relation there should also be planet relation which if high enough is rewarded with revealing these small markets. They could also be revealed through com-sniffers, interrogating traders from those planets and other means.  It might also be interesting if the markets on the planet can be part of a different faction to the planet (as long as they're not enemies) and as well as factions there are multi system corporations but that may be too complex.

Again great work, thanks for the update and keep it up :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on October 29, 2014, 08:38:42 PM
As for the exclamation marks, it's just a small QoL thing. It would be a bit inconvenient to be told by the list on the left that there's a problem with a commodity and then having to hunt through the inventory grid to find the commodity in question. The exclamation mark would let you find it very easily. Plus if you're going to include extra info in tooltips for certain commodities, it would be good to let the player know this or that commodity has some extra info they can view.

Ah, I see. Wasn't thinking of it this way, but yeah, that makes sense.

There's one other thing I wanted to mention in relation to this whole warning system. See, when I was learning the ropes of how shortages work and (accidentally) flooded a market that was suffering from a tiny shortage with a huge amount of goods and made an absolute killing, I thought to myself, cool, I've found an exploit that I can use to make massive profits. And then the investigation message popped up in my intel feed, basically a way for the game to say "oh no you didn't", and my thoughts immediately turned more along the lines of "oh crap, the dev had thought of this, I'm going to prison". Which was so cool! The warning system will make life easier for the player in the long run but it will also remove this jawdroppingly awesome moment when you think you've found a way to exploit the system and get away with it, and then thirty seconds later the game goes "nope, I know what you did, and there will be consequences". Just something to think about.

I have to say, that's really neat :) It's totally what I was going for with that, and it's *so cool* that it worked how it was supposed to. And yeah... there's this larger conflict(?) between "provide all the information on everything" and "the player needs to play the game to find out what happens".


I played as a bounty hunter a bit longer now, and I've got one major gripe.
It is quite disappointing to go after a 70 000 credit fleet and find but a handful of surviving, badly damaged frigates, at best. The time I need from the jump point to the target fleet is enough for local patrols to tear it to shreds (I'm under the impression they only act when I'm in the system). What should have been a glorious battle becomes little more than a fetch quest. And that happens more often than not. That I still get the full bounty should maybe be a consolation, but it only makes me wonder why I'm running a battle fleet in the first place when a hunter-killer frigate would suffice.

I don't see an obvious solution to this. I would hope for the whole bounty hunter mechanic to be expanded, so that information gathering and actually finding the target becomes part of the challenge. Then targets, as should be expected, could be only found far off from normal patrols and faction fleets.

Yeah, this is definitely a problem, and one I was aware of but also didn't see a quick/easy solution to (these were a very last-minute addition). I'd say the "proper" solution is either smarter AI for these fleets, or more unpopulated star systems to hide in.

Second some minor problems. This doesn't happen often but my game seems to crash when I save especially if I achieve a lot or leave it along time between saves. There also seems to be a lack of ships available in campaign I can only find about 3 different variants.

If you edit the vmparams file in the installation directory and change both places where it says "512" to "1024", that should fix it. The next release will include this tweak (which increases the memory allocated to for the game to use).

Again great work, thanks for the update and keep it up :)

Thank you :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SQW on October 29, 2014, 11:12:28 PM
Hi Alex,

Will you be implementing scanning, exploration, mining mechanics like how the Elite Beta 3.0 fleshed out its previous iteration?

As the above posts have touched on, current bounty hunting (and trading tbh) is more like a fetch quest then anything memorable. Is it practical to implement a 'scanner' equipment slot where you have to scan neutral fleet in order to find that 'mark' which doesn't have to be a pirate? Heck, maybe the pirate put a bounty on an official travelling from X to Y. Give occasional financial penalties to bounty hunters that destroy too many non-mark ships during combat so players will need to play smart even with a huge overwhelming fleet at disposal. Maybe do a Boba Fett where you have to transfer small but high-value cargo while other agents try to stop you thus forcing combat instead of letting you initiate all the time. I just feel we need to break up the current monotony of travel to X and kill Y.

Thanks to ED and SC, I really see Starfarer as a 2D alternative to this big interest in space sandbox. However, the success and failure of ED this year would also shape what people expect from a space sandbox more than probably what yourself envisioned for this game all those years ago. Hopefully, Starfarer will able to learn from ED's success/failure in game design.    
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: bills6693 on October 30, 2014, 08:57:27 AM
I played as a bounty hunter a bit longer now, and I've got one major gripe.
It is quite disappointing to go after a 70 000 credit fleet and find but a handful of surviving, badly damaged frigates, at best. ...

Yeah, this is definitely a problem, and one I was aware of but also didn't see a quick/easy solution to (these were a very last-minute addition). I'd say the "proper" solution is either smarter AI for these fleets, or more unpopulated star systems to hide in.

How central is the idea of the universe going on without you? As bounty fleets are time-limited and outside the scope of normal fleet generation anyway (i.e. bounty pops up, fleet appears. Bounty expires, fleet dissapears) could it be that they become player-only interactions?

What I'm thinking is that a bounty fleet, in coding, technically belongs to bounty-only factions. Basically a bounty on a pirate would genrate a pirate fleet. To the player it would 'appear' the same. HOWEVER in the code, the fleet actually belongs to Pirate_bounty which is a fleet which is neutral to all other factions. But killing it DOES have the same reputation and bounty penalties on the player. In practice this just means that the fleet is immune to attack from other factions.

Spoiler
So for example if there is also a general bounty on the enemies of, say, tri-tachyon, then the bounty applies to if you kill ships belonging to factions - Pirate, pirate_bounty, hemegony, hemegony_bounty etc

Similarly killing a fleet of pirate_bounty reduces your popularity with faction pirate, and hostile relationship with faction pirate means faction pirate_bounty also hates your guts.
[close]

Overall the effect is simply a mirror faction for each existing faction that the bounty fleets belong to. Thus the only person that kills bounty fleets is the player. Others ignore them. Don't know if this fits well with the living universe, plus it may make the game seem weird (no pirate left in this system as they are hunted down by local forces, apart from this one fleet that is left totally alone).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on October 30, 2014, 10:28:40 AM
My take on the bounty hunting mechanic here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8520.msg144714#new).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on November 03, 2014, 02:29:27 AM
The market condition "Headquarters" increases market power. What is market power, though?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Creepin on November 03, 2014, 03:16:03 AM
Hey all! I've just started playing vanilla 0.65 (great so far btw!), and saw a weirdest thing happening. I was after a pirate smuggler fleet (consisting of a single Hound, so not exactly a fleet per se), when it suddenly changed it's allegiance from "pirate" to "neutral", changing both title and fleet circle. This got me baffled: it was clearly pirate when i set course to intercept, but what will happen if I attack now anyway: will I drop my standing towards neutrals or pirates? Are NPC fleets ever allowed to do this at all? I have seen nothing on the matter in changelog, so any insight on the matter would be welcome :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on November 03, 2014, 05:17:19 AM
Hey all! I've just started playing vanilla 0.65 (great so far btw!), and saw a weirdest thing happening. I was after a pirate smuggler fleet (consisting of a single Hound, so not exactly a fleet per se), when it suddenly changed it's allegiance from "pirate" to "neutral", changing both title and fleet circle. This got me baffled: it was clearly pirate when i set course to intercept, but what will happen if I attack now anyway: will I drop my stnding towards neutrals or pirates? Are NPC fleets ever allowed to do this at all? I have senn nothing on the matter in changelog, so any insight on the matter would be welcome :)

Yeah, I've been wondering about that too. Is that a bug or is that meant to represent pirates broadcasting fake ID codes and posing as legit traders? IIRC they usually change from pirates into smugglers, which doesn't really make a whole lot of sense in that respect. Surely if you're going to use a fake identity to avoid being harassed by the law, you'd pick one that wouldn't also get harassed by the law?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on November 03, 2014, 11:53:59 AM
My take on the bounty hunting mechanic here (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8520.msg144714#new).

Yeah, this kind of thing makes sense. I just feel like more mechanics need to be in place to support it (like actual people that are a bit more meaningful).

The market condition "Headquarters" increases market power. What is market power, though?

It should say "stability". It was called "market power" for a bit earlier in the dev cycle, and stability was a separate thing.

Hey all! I've just started playing vanilla 0.65 (great so far btw!), and saw a weirdest thing happening. I was after a pirate smuggler fleet (consisting of a single Hound, so not exactly a fleet per se), when it suddenly changed it's allegiance from "pirate" to "neutral", changing both title and fleet circle. This got me baffled: it was clearly pirate when i set course to intercept, but what will happen if I attack now anyway: will I drop my stnding towards neutrals or pirates? Are NPC fleets ever allowed to do this at all? I have senn nothing on the matter in changelog, so any insight on the matter would be welcome :)

Yeah, I've been wondering about that too. Is that a bug or is that meant to represent pirates broadcasting fake ID codes and posing as legit traders? IIRC they usually change from pirates into smugglers, which doesn't really make a whole lot of sense in that respect. Surely if you're going to use a fake identity to avoid being harassed by the law, you'd pick one that wouldn't also get harassed by the law?

Right, smugglers transmit different identification codes when they're about to dock with pirate bases. In large part this is just necessary so that smugglers *can* make their runs without getting killed on either end of the route. As far as a "fake identity", the "smuggler" label represents more what you think they are than what they're actively broadcasting. I mean, surely, no smuggler would say they're a smuggler, but if all the fleets said "trade fleet" or "trader", that might not communicate what's going on.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on November 03, 2014, 03:01:43 PM
Hey all! I've just started playing vanilla 0.65 (great so far btw!), and saw a weirdest thing happening. I was after a pirate smuggler fleet (consisting of a single Hound, so not exactly a fleet per se), when it suddenly changed it's allegiance from "pirate" to "neutral", changing both title and fleet circle. This got me baffled: it was clearly pirate when i set course to intercept, but what will happen if I attack now anyway: will I drop my stnding towards neutrals or pirates? Are NPC fleets ever allowed to do this at all? I have senn nothing on the matter in changelog, so any insight on the matter would be welcome :)

Yeah, I've been wondering about that too. Is that a bug or is that meant to represent pirates broadcasting fake ID codes and posing as legit traders? IIRC they usually change from pirates into smugglers, which doesn't really make a whole lot of sense in that respect. Surely if you're going to use a fake identity to avoid being harassed by the law, you'd pick one that wouldn't also get harassed by the law?

Right, smugglers transmit different identification codes when they're about to dock with pirate bases. In large part this is just necessary so that smugglers *can* make their runs without getting killed on either end of the route. As far as a "fake identity", the "smuggler" label represents more what you think they are than what they're actively broadcasting. I mean, surely, no smuggler would say they're a smuggler, but if all the fleets said "trade fleet" or "trader", that might not communicate what's going on.

So your character is able to somehow identify that another ship is smuggling just by looking at it? That doesn't really make a lot of sense either, and it raises the question of why exactly we're privateering instead of selling our services to one of the factions, who would surely pay highly for such an amazing talent and could then dispense with all this tedious customs scanning. ;)

I'd say this should be done pretty much the same way Gothars suggested for bounties, i.e. you should totally just label them as traders. Yes, it would not communicate what's going on, but not communicating what's going on is kinda the whole point of smuggling, isn't it? Let the player himself discover that "hang on, this 'trader' is making runs between factions that are hostile to each other, he's a bloody smuggler!". This kind of hidden depth is something I absolutely love in games, it gives a wonderful feeling that the world is alive, that NPCs have their own lives, and that everything doesn't just revolve around you. Why should the player be in on the smuggling when his character's not involved in the deal?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on November 03, 2014, 03:16:13 PM

So your character is able to somehow identify that another ship is smuggling just by looking at it? That doesn't really make a lot of sense either, and it raises the question of why exactly we're privateering instead of selling our services to one of the factions, who would surely pay highly for such an amazing talent and could then dispense with all this tedious customs scanning. ;)

I'd assumed that the player character, or rather fleet intelligence, is inferring the nature of different fleets based on available data. And, since there is no legal responsibility, he can do so more indiscriminate than faction patrols. As in, just labeling every lone, over-conscientiously in-suspicious ship as a smuggler. Same with pirates.

You got a point about letting players discover these things for himself though, that would be more interesting. Especially if it becomes relevant for gameplay in any way.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on November 03, 2014, 03:37:54 PM
Right, smugglers transmit different identification codes when they're about to dock with pirate bases. In large part this is just necessary so that smugglers *can* make their runs without getting killed on either end of the route.

A new sub-faction could solve that:
Code
id:"independent_smugglers",
"color":[150,150,150,255],
"displayName":"independent",
Smugglers look just like independents, but aren't hostile to pirates. This way blowing up smugglers wouldn't decrease relations with independents... as long as they're actually smugglers.

This could also open up the possibility of giving the black market a more appropriate faction than pirates. Black market trading could increase standing with smugglers, and black markets could refuse to trade with you if you get a reputation for smuggler killin'
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ciago92 on November 04, 2014, 05:41:14 AM
Right, smugglers transmit different identification codes when they're about to dock with pirate bases. In large part this is just necessary so that smugglers *can* make their runs without getting killed on either end of the route.

A new sub-faction could solve that:
Code
id:"independent_smugglers",
"color":[150,150,150,255],
"displayName":"independent",
Smugglers look just like independents, but aren't hostile to pirates. This way blowing up smugglers wouldn't decrease relations with independents... as long as they're actually smugglers.

This could also open up the possibility of giving the black market a more appropriate faction than pirates. Black market trading could increase standing with smugglers, and black markets could refuse to trade with you if you get a reputation for smuggler killin'

Please go put that in a suggestion, I absolutely love the idea. You could only tell the difference based on watching where they actually go, at least at first. I think it might be abusable in that once they're hostile you can tell the difference, but it probably doesn't make a difference at that point anyways
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sordid on November 04, 2014, 06:43:06 AM
I'd assumed that the player character, or rather fleet intelligence, is inferring the nature of different fleets based on available data. And, since there is no legal responsibility, he can do so more indiscriminate than faction patrols. As in, just labeling every lone, over-conscientiously in-suspicious ship as a smuggler. Same with pirates.

Fair point, but then you'd expect such a system to misidentify some ships some of the time, whereas the labels as they currently exist in the game are 100% accurate. It pretty much comes down to what these labels are supposed to represent, either objective reality or the player character's perception. I think there's a bit of incongruity in how the game presents information. Prices, for instance, aren't given to you as objective information. You get them through intel reports, and as a result your price map of the sector is incomplete and gradually becomes outdated over time until new reports come in. Yet the fleet labels are always accurate? Seems a bit strange to me, is all.

I think there should totally be fleets that broadcast a fake identity and that you have to identify yourself either through scanning them or just by observing their behavior (i.e. an 'independent trader' going to and from a pirate base without getting attacked by the pirates around it is probably a smuggler or a pirate). Which brings up the possibility of the player himself being able to disguise his fleet's identity and conducting clandestine missions on forest moons using a small Hegemony shuttle with a code clearance that's older but still checks out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: kingster101 on December 08, 2014, 07:28:11 PM
Can someone please tell me how to find an activation code.I've tried almost every number I've got from this website in my e-mail and none of them worked
Title: Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on December 08, 2014, 08:07:42 PM
Hi - please take a look here:
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=8317.0