Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Starsector 0.9.1a is out! (05/10/19); Updated the Forum Rules and Guidelines (02/29/20); Blog post: GIF Roundup (04/11/20)

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Morrokain

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 94
Got another misaligned pair of weapons on:

On the Onslaught XIV and original the second row of small ballistics slots from the bottom-up.
On the Eagle XIV and original (I also suspect that the Eagle (SCI) has the same problem) the first small hybrid slots from the top-down. (not the medium ones)

Thanks! Fixed on all accounts hopefully - though the Eagle ones were less a clear case than the Onslaught. I *think* I got what you meant though and moved it back a pixel. In that vein I also moved the rear weapons back a pixel to be more center on the mount's central circular portion.

Suggestions / Re: Research
« on: August 02, 2020, 04:07:38 PM »
I like the idea of research in general. Even just having an interface for it would be very useful for mods like Nex that are going for the 4x style of game. I also really like it from the flavor perspective - I'll say that upfront. Part of the suggestions reminds me a lot of Sins of a Solar Empire and Endless Space.

I do think that the suggestions above need further tweaking or additions, though. Let me explain:

1) Little of real value is brought to the game by these (at least from what I can tell - feel free to explain/counter argue.)

2) Powercreep of any kind needs a counter-balancing difficulty factor or it trivializes the game.

3) Adding gates for the sake of gates is generally not a good idea. I'm not against progression gating as a principle, but I feel there needs to be a good reason for it and it can't be overdone.

Adding D-mods that must be removed from blueprints for them to work is complexity that doubles down on the blueprint mechanic. Instead of find/use/sell a blueprint it is now find/unlock/use/sell blueprint. The tie-in to skills creates some value, but other than that? Unless the way to unlock blueprints is found through hard-to-find or limited resource mechanics, it just creates more... errr.. "tedium" is probably the wrong word but essentially it creates more steps for the player to achieve the same result without meaningful choices in between. If it does require things like quests/story points/rare resource, etc, then the only thing that it really accomplishes from a design standpoint is allowing blueprints to be found more easily while unlocking them requires more difficulty. We then have to ask ourselves "Why is that desirable from a game design perspective?" For instance, why then would you not simply just have the blueprint itself as the reward for these things? - if that makes sense.

Similarly, stat improvements through research is very 4x-like as a design choice, but could potentially cause problems for Starsector without much gained from the perspective of design. Skills already cause stat improvements either directly or indirectly, and this system just adds on to that with the notable caveat that it applies to player faction allied fleets.

Some potential problems:
- What counter-balances this power creep? What added difficulty makes this desirable or necessary to the player? Without one it will have undesirable effects on the game's inverted difficulty curve (early game hard - late game easy).
- Assuming the above is solved, why not just have skills do the same thing? (The choose A and lock out B mechanic is already there in the next update.) A new feature that performs the same thing just for credits instead of experience seems more redundant than is probably prudent for a whole new game feature. An entirely new resource and new interesting ways to obtain it would help solve this, but see next point:
- At some point, players are going to want AI factions to also research this way - which opens up a whole other can of worms and design considerations. So Research as a feature ideally needs to be something that other factions are assumed to be "already doing" by their normal behavior. So the effects need to be something other factions already generally have (such as unique hulls or weapons) and not be something unique only to the player.

Personally, I've always liked the idea of research allowing the acquisition of completely new things. Whether that being new weapons, hullmods or ships otherwise unobtainable or very hard to obtain (like XIV battlegroup ships) or new industries/structures, etc. There is also the idea of research slightly changing the functionality or enhancing the functionality of certain things (such as adding emp to a weapon or making a weapon with emp now arc or increasing the rate at which emp arcs, etc). That also runs into the above problems, though, and makes balance more difficult.

I think at the end of the day research is going to have to be something entirely unique and meaningful to the campaign progression if it ever becomes a feature. Just my thoughts, though, I'm open to discussion of those opinions.

Currently my fighter force consists of majority Banshees and Broadswords, I may have 1 spectre in there somewhere. Even in something like the simulator the moment i activate the ability with the malevolence class, there is a definite performance hit, and the game does slow down. i can have fairly large battle with little to no slowdown, but as soon as that ability goes off, it tanks pretty hard for as long as it's active.

Ok, thanks! That helps. I'll try and troubleshoot tomorrow. It must be specific to that system, then. Hopefully looking at the code will tell me more about what could be going wrong or otherwise cause this.

I *think* I understand what is going on, but part of your description differs from what I am seeing when testing this. The script iterates through every combat ship upon activation and deactivation looking for fighters to apply/unapply the effect. It works the same way for the Targeting Feed ship system and I definitely do notice similar performance drops when replacing the Phase Shell system with that one.

That you are experiencing drops in performance for the whole duration is a little weird, though, so maybe there is more to it. I only noticed spikes during activation and deactivation - and it wasn't enough to cause a huge slowdown during a max battle (default battle size settings in the simulator). The lowest it got was 4% cpu remaining and that was deploying 50% of the DP with Herons and Vigilance-class light carriers (who also have Targeting Feed currently and now from this test likely won't in the near future. :) ) and it stayed around 40% using the Phase Shell system and "idled" at 60% during the rest of the battle.

I didn't notice any drops in FPS at all in any of the tests. It was always 60 iirc. *Maybe* one spike to 30 very briefly in the vigilance test but I'm not 100% sure because I was paying more attention to cpu % since that was being affected way more.

In your version, I think the Executor may still have Targeting Feed as its ship system so that could be a test to see if there is something different between the two for you. It could potentially be the visual effect's color blending with the red glow engines of the banshees causing stress to the gpu or something, but my experience with such things is very close to 0.

System specs will matter, of course, but one thing to try would be to update your graphics card drivers in case the issue lies there. Another thing that would help me troubleshoot- are you having drops in cpu or fps? (Putting Starsector in dev mode lets you view this during a battle at the bottom of the screen)

Currently my fighter force consists of majority Banshees and Broadswords, I may have 1 spectre in there somewhere. Even in something like the simulator the moment i activate the ability with the malevolence class, there is a definite performance hit, and the game does slow down. i can have fairly large battle with little to no slowdown, but as soon as that ability goes off, it tanks pretty hard for as long as it's active.

Ok, thanks! That helps. I'll try and troubleshoot tomorrow. It must be specific to that system, then. Hopefully looking at the code will tell me more about what could be going wrong or otherwise cause this.

Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Commissioned Crews 1.9
« on: August 01, 2020, 06:24:38 PM »
So, apparently Shadowyards is having some weird issues with it's commissioned crew; the guide for getting it set up is pretty straightforward and everything is in place appropriately (hullmod script, hullmods.csv entry, and the TechpriestCommission.csv entry,) however, it's functioning... oddly.

Specifically the crew is being oddly clunky to apply. Like, it'll show up, eventually, but you need to land at a planet, manually apply the hullmod, leave the planet, and land again at which point the crew hullmod gets applied e: at least if the ship is default variant. Also if you click on the commissioned crew thing for a ship that already has the commissioned crew it'll just remove the hullmod and you'll have to do the "gimme a crew dance" described above. I didn't realize this wasn't functioning normally when first setting it up because I hadn't run with the mod before. Any idea what's up?

I've noticed similar behavior as well, but I haven't had a chance to confirm why. For me, it doesn't apply upon docking, but will immediately apply when I manually add the hullmod using the refit screen. I thought it had to do with trying to limit the hullmod to the player flagship, but if it is elsewhere it might be a larger issue in general. I'll try to help a little later on assuming the source is available. Have to finish the compatibility edits first so I don't lose track of what I'm actually editing.

Hey, I'm really enjoying this mod, and i've been trying out the different factions with it. Currently, I'm using the Consortium, and I've been having a game slow-down problem whenever the carrier uses its phase fighter ability or whatever, the one that makes the fighters more resilient to damage. I haven't had lag anywhere else besides this, and I was wondering if there's a way to disable just those effects, the purple/pink tint around the fighters when the ability is active. I'm not 100% sure if the effect itself is the problem, or the ability entirely, regardless, anything helps.


Hmm I'll have to take a look at the code and see if anything stands out. Not sure why it would cause slowdown that drastically other than a lot of the effects being on screen. Out of curiosity, did you encounter slowdown when you deployed a bunch of wings that phase in and out - like the spectre?

It could be something unique to how the system's glow works though. I'll see what I can find out about it.

well I thought about giving it to myself plus removing like 500k to give myself abit of a setback but problem is I couldnt find the tyrant Blueprint ID, can you please mention it or at least tell me where it is located?

Ahh, turns out that since it is not an explicitly defined blueprint and instead is created during blueprint salvage you cannot get it using AddItem. So use this command instead:

RunCode Global.getSector().getPlayerFaction().getKnownShips().add("archean_tyrant");

I tested it out and that works just fine.

Some ships (Mora, Legion) will also no longer do the auto-escort behavior - not 100% sure if that's already the case of if it's just an in-dev thing.
That's an in-dev thing.  On live, ships flagged as combat carriers will still hide behind allied vessels whenever they can.  (This causes me to go and edit a bunch of ships to remove the carrier flags; good to hear it's fixed in dev.)

Do the ones you are talking about have:


- as their AI hints? If so, that means NO_AUTO_ESCORT is bugged in the current release.

are the raiding results always constant or can I just keep loading till i get it,also is it affected by the scavenging skill?

It is not affected by the skill - that only applies to generic salvage of supplies/fuel/metals etc.

Quote from Alex regarding raiding results:

Not really a modding question but someone asked about it on my mod thread:

Is raiding a market to get a blueprint seeded? So that save scumming doesn't give you the same results?
IIRC yes but the seed changes after... some time period. Now that I think about it, actually, it might've also been bugged and not actually seeded; if that's the case this is fixed for the next release.

So either it won't change between saves now or it's bugged and will but only for this version of Starsector. Either way, it would probably be better to spend time doing something else between each attempt or just come back and raid the market again without save scumming.

To my knowledge I know that the Malevolent bp has been found, and that's rarer than the Tyrant (this was after a full sector sweep, however). So it should be possible but likely it will take a lot of time/effort.

Because I get that RNG can be frustrating, I will eventually add quests for these things. I just don't want them to be easy to acquire.

If it gets too crazy to find, you can always give it to yourself with Console Commands.  :P

Not really a modding question but someone asked about it on my mod thread:

Is raiding a market to get a blueprint seeded? So that save scumming doesn't give you the same results?

Is there any way to get the tyrant's blueprint?

Yes, but the drop rate is extremely low. It can possibly not spawn in the sector at all- so the best way to get it would be to raid the Adamantine Consortium's military worlds. I'd say Galar is probably the easiest.

I assume this is where you post bugs, if not please tell me where.
I saw some weapons mounts where misaligned from my point of view this is unintentional.

On the Paragon the middle row of medium synergy mounts.( one points more to the outside then the other )
On the Nightreaver the small frontal small missile slots.( they point to the right )

I wanted to attach some screenshots but they are to big.

Yes this is the place to post bugs, and thanks for the report I'll take a look.  :)


Yeah I saw what you are talking about. Fixed both of those, thanks!

The order of entries in the .wpn file shouldn't matter, btw. Thank you for chiming in, though; good point about the sounds.

Ah yeah that makes sense I'm sure it is just called by key. Sometimes I kind of forget those files are just JSON files and so should work like any other JSONObject. lol  8)

Trying to create a big old beam cannon but I'm getting an NullPointerException whenever I try to fire it.

.wpn file:
    "turretOffsets":[30, 0],
    "hardpointOffsets":[65, 0],

weapon_data.csv entry:
Eldos Energy Furnace,diableavionics_eldos,3,0.01,32500,1400,950,,,75,4,40,,,,ENERGY,,950,1,2,,,,,,,6000,,,,,,"beam12, energy11, diable_adv_bp, rare_bp",,Diable Avionics,,Siege Artillery,,,,,,,,,,

And the NPE I get every time:
46372 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.void0000Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.void.createBeam(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.class.o00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.O0OO.o00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.O0OO.o00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.class.o00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.void.advance(Unknown Source)
    at Source)
    at Source)
    at Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.Ship.advance(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advanceInner(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.traverse(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$ Source)
    at Source)

Checked all the usual suspects, names match, offsets look good, nothing was saved in the Ship & Weapon Editor. Sprites and sound files (ogg) all look fine. Kind of out of ideas, anything jump out to anyone or run into something similar?

Are the sounds registered in sounds.JSON? (Essentially a link to your sounds directory ogg files with some volume/pitch settings.)

The other thing is either put animationType above glowColor or remove it altogether and see if that solves the problem. That's the only thing that stands out to me.

Personally, I've had more success with using the LabelAPI returned from addParagraph() than I have with setting highlights during the addPara() just in general. It's been too long since I wrote that code to quite remember why though.

I think part of it is that I wanted to use an array of both highlights and highlight colors.

Hi! First to say, the mod looks really interesting and well done! I wanted to give it a try, but I have an error that pops ups in any of the new markets of the mod.

For example, I get this:

619541 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.RuntimeException: Hullmod CHM_scicorps not found!
java.lang.RuntimeException: Hullmod CHM_scicorps not found!
   at com.fs.starfarer.loading.specs.HullVariantSpec.getAllMods(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMember.updateStats(Unknown Source)
   at data.scripts.plugins.CommissionCheck$NexCommissionCheckMarket.reportPlayerOpenedMarket(
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.reportPlayerOpenedMarket(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.startEncounterInvolvingPlayerFleet(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$ Source)
   at Source)

I run the recommended mods + Industrial evolution. I tried with deactivating the latter and I still get the same error.

Thanks you for the mod ^^ I hope I can get an answer.

Sorry about this! It's a known bug from running this mod with Commissioned Crews. It is being fixed for the next release. Deactivating that mod should help until I can get the fix out.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 94