Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

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 - Embolism

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 24
1
Suggestions / Re: Burst PD Changes
« on: March 21, 2020, 07:24:47 AM »
Regarding ships to mount Paladin PD on, I feel like the Apogee thematically is the perfect fit (an exploration cruiser should be more interested in defence), but mechanically is of course limited by its Large Energy being a hardpoint. If it's Large Energy is instead a turret in the centre of its saucer then it can mount a Paladin PD and would also be more similar to Star Trek's Federation vessels (which the Apogee already pays homage to).

2
Bug Reports & Support / Re: The Typo Thread
« on: December 14, 2019, 08:21:45 AM »
Missed typo from the last round.

Description for Eventide when docking: "The prevailing ethos of Eventide (or the local inheritence laws, depending on who you ask) lends itself to..." should be 'inheritance'.

The star Arcadia doesn't have a description.

3
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Gates Awakened (2019-11-30)
« on: December 13, 2019, 08:35:48 AM »
Minor bug. Active gates don't have icons on the Intel map, it just shows as a white circle.

4
Bug Reports & Support / Re: The Typo Thread
« on: December 13, 2019, 07:55:28 AM »
The description for the Cryo sleeper encounter after you defeat the Guardian...

"The long-haul cryosystems were built to last for centuries of intersteller travel..." should be 'interstellar'.

5
Bug Reports & Support / Re: The Typo Thread
« on: November 29, 2019, 07:53:46 PM »
The description of the Ion Storm anomaly (found @ Aka Mainyu) says "<ost ships..." seems to be an extra non-word there.

6
General Discussion / Re: Colossus Mk.III best ship ???
« on: November 26, 2019, 02:04:19 AM »
I feel Colossus Mk. III should have 3 flight decks, mainly because pirates can also field the Condor. Feels weird that pirates have a unique freighter-converted carrier that's worse than the generic freighter-converted carrier that they also have access to. Justifiable in saying Condors are rarer or something, but just doesn't feel right.

7
General Discussion / Re: Make the Core Worlds Larger
« on: October 18, 2019, 06:17:40 AM »
I think the Core Worlds are fine as it is, but there needs to be more of a buffer between the Core Worlds and the "Rim Worlds" as currently it pretty much goes straight from one to the other. There should be some randomly generated 'outposts' belonging to the primary factions/independents surrounding the Core Worlds before it becomes the Wild Persean Sector.

Otherwise it's rather jarring when absolutely marvelous planets are generated right next to the Core Worlds... you wonder why the major factions bother holding on to their mediocre high hazard planets when there's a second Gilead or Ultrarich minerals right next door.

On a similar note there should be restrictions on what planets can be randomly generated within the Core Worlds. Having a super duper rich planet in the same system as a colonised planet with mediocre deposits is even more jarring than the above problem.

8
Suggestions / Re: Pirate deathballs - allow them (albiet....)
« on: October 18, 2019, 12:14:04 AM »
Currently StarSector feels like it's following the plot of Vatta's War where pirates form an empire strong enough to threaten every single civilised human polity combined. If the player doesn't intervene the Sector will eventually decivilise into anarchy.

It wouldn't actually be a bad idea to make that an official plot line... everyone's expecting a third AI war, but the real threat is the mysterious faction funding all these gigantic pirate fleets and fortresses in the rimworlds.

9
its a good thing that Starsector seems to be at a tech level ships have infinite delta v in system!

That's probably the salient point here. In-system travel is not only FTL but virtually free.

My guess is that 'drive fields' are basically warp bubbles. Tri-Tachyon's faction description mentions 'warp drives', assuming it's not a mistake (i.e. meant to be 'hyperdrives').

Perhaps there are still very ancient ships out there that are warp-capable but not hyperspace-capable, still slowly making their way to the Persean sector...

10
Suggestions / Re: Please add high-tech freighters and tankers
« on: October 15, 2019, 01:27:59 AM »
Phase freighter is already planned, assuming Alex hasn't changed his mind.

Phase carriers were actually in the game previously. There's a reason why Converted Hangar got a "no Phase ships" clause: it didn't have one when it was first introduced...

11
Bug Reports & Support / Re: The Typo Thread
« on: October 14, 2019, 10:00:10 PM »
When paying back a loan to a Tri-Tach loan shark:

"... and recognizes you immediatly." Should be 'immediately'.

There's also cases where punctuation marks are placed behind quotations instead of before (e.g. "how dare you"!), IIRC there's quite a few in the Red Planet quest line's dialogue.

12
Suggestions / Re: Please add high-tech freighters and tankers
« on: October 14, 2019, 09:02:43 PM »
cruiser carrier that’s super fast

The Heron is already approaching the "too fast" mark. We don't need more fast carriers...

But a larger terminator drone-carrier sounds alright. While we're at it, give the Venture 2 or 3 Mining Drone wings. It's weird that the Venture has less drone firepower than the lowly Shepherd.

13
Fan Media & Fiction / Re: The Lore Corner
« on: October 14, 2019, 08:58:43 PM »
I'm a little curious what level of Technology you give your universe

Some of the older discussions say the level of technology is most similar with that of Warhammer 40k.

***

Question : How can stations have a battle support range, and how can one station cover a whole planet with no blind spots? I have a theory that "stations" are actually have reaction engines that lets them move around quite a bit, and reposition for defense, but they are set apart from "ships" by the virtue of not having a "drive field" that lets them move at a significant fraction of light speed.

Given that stations also act as civilian space ports... I highly doubt they'd be whizzing out of orbit to join battles. But all stations require thrusters for station-keeping, so moving to a different orbit shouldn't be difficult.

Ground operations require you to park your fleet in a geostationary orbit. Assuming stations are not, catching to a no-good geostationary fleet is easy with some station-keeping: the ISS orbits the Earth every 90 minutes or so. Presumably stations have long enough range to strike at anything that isn't on the 'dark' side of the planet, and even if they are an orbital kinetic/missle strike on another orbital fleet is not out of the question.

14
Suggestions / Re: Please add high-tech freighters and tankers
« on: October 14, 2019, 08:48:08 PM »
Domain ship design and doctrine is cyclical. With each cycle some new toys are introduced (e.g. High Tech ships), but the following cycle sees a return to the Old Ways. Hence why the ancient Onslaught remains a mainstay of Domain fleets (the 14th, while not up-to-date with the latest Domain fad, probably represents the cycle prior).

Different tech levels are more indicative of doctrinal shift rather than a straight upgrade. Yes there are new techs, but they're not necessarily better than the old in practice; and while Low Tech designs probably aren't being innovated on anymore (other than updating them with essential new techs), Midline designs were still being created at the same time as High Tech designs.

15
If Recall Device was on a ship with 2 or maaaybe 3 flight decks then I'd say that's not too crazy, but as it is now, it pigeonholes Astral into one and only build which is a shame for a capital. If its system gets replaced with something weak, I'd like to see an OP increase so you can actually do something else rather than put best fighters on it and chill in the back.

I'd say remove the built-in Advanced Optics and refund the Astral 25 OP (or more) to spend as it pleases.

A 2-deck carrier with Recall Device sounds good actually. Finally fill the High Tech non-capital carrier niche, and with only 2 decks it's not that jarring to only use a single fighter type.

That's a huge nerf to Astral - replacing a powerful system with very situational convenience (best case, in practice it would probably hurt AI more than help).  If this was implemented, I'd just use Herons instead of Astral for strike carrier role.

If a hypothetical ship had a system which instantly wins the battle when pressed, removing it would also be a 'huge nerf'. The bottom line is the Recall Device encourages a very boring way to outfit Astrals that's antithetical to how Alex wants Carriers to operate.

Fix the underlying problem, the number-crunching (i.e. how does it compare to the Heron) is easy to tweak.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 24