Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

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 - Hari Seldon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
System requirements:
OS: Windows, Mac (OS X 10.7 or higher), or Linux
Memory: 3GB system RAM
Graphics: Minimum 1280×768 resolution, 512 MB video memory
Processor: Hard to say exactly, but nothing fancy
https://fractalsoftworks.com/preorder/

A 32-bit system can access 232 different memory addresses, i.e 4 GB of RAM or physical memory ideally, it can access more than 4 GB of RAM also.
A 64-bit system can access 264 different memory addresses, i.e actually 18-Quintillion bytes of RAM. In short, any amount of memory greater than 4 GB can be easily handled by it.
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/difference-32-bit-64-bit-operating-systems/

So yeah my guess is Starsector is 32-bit because 3GB is recommended and if it is 32-bit it can't use more than 4 GB.

Please consider changing Starsector to 64-bit so mods can do crazy stuff.  Don't require more RAM just have that available if you want to use it.

I remember Sins of a Solar Empire was 32-bit and by the end of all of the DLC it ran slowly and really needed more than 4 GB RAM.  I hope Starsector or its mods don't run into that problem.

2
Blog Posts / Re: Economy & Outposts
« on: November 08, 2017, 07:21:41 PM »
Wait does this mean you could decrease a planet's stability by out-competing their markets with your own?  I don't want the Sector to spiral into ruin because I built some outposts.  Or maybe it could.  I would love choking the Luddic Church by out-competing their food market.

3
Suggestions / Re: A new role for combat readiness and hull points
« on: May 08, 2015, 11:37:05 AM »
But not losing a whole ship is a big deal if it is rare.

4
General Discussion / Re: Fantastic just fantastic.
« on: May 07, 2015, 11:55:22 PM »
When I tell other people about this game I say it is the second best top-down space combat ever (the best being Star Control 2) ;D

5
General Discussion / Re: Why are fighters manned?
« on: May 07, 2015, 11:49:40 PM »
Maybe the pilot that is piloting both fighters has his brain cut in half.  The right lobe is a brain in a jar commanding one strike craft and the left lobe is another brain in a jar commanding the other strike craft. (Joking)

6
1. Turn all of your Dominator's weapons on to autofire except your torpedoes.  Only use your Dominator's shields to block enemy torpedoes (and try to see the torpedo bomber wing coming so you have time to ensure you have spare flux to absorb their torpedoes), because with your shields off you cannot overload.  The Dominator has enough armor.
2. Order your entire fleet to focus fire on the enemy's torpedo bomber wing.  You have to kill all of the bombers on the first pass so they do not retreat and regenerate (try to get lucky shots with your Large Ballistic weapons).
3. Ignore everything and rush towards the Astral carrier, release your torpedoes and kill it.

Note: The enemy Omen is literally impossible to kill because your Dominator turns too slowly to bring its forward-firing weapons to bear and all of your other ships are too weak.

Figuring this out was really fun and satisfying (it does not feel like an exploit it feels like real tactics :)).

7
Suggestions / Re: A new role for combat readiness and hull points
« on: May 07, 2015, 03:52:54 PM »
A way of avoiding the issue wherein retreating becomes more complicated with crippled ships: at 33% or 50% hull away from death, the engines would completely fail and the ship would be dead in the water.  Then if any super-crippled ships remain, they count as dead for victory purposes.

CR loss, malfunctions, engine failure etc. starting at 50% or less hull sounds easy to implement.  Maybe we should figure out how complicated/hard we want to make this.

8
Suggestions / Re: A new role for combat readiness and hull points
« on: May 07, 2015, 12:19:48 PM »
Downward spirals are not fun, but people should not "rage" that they have to retreat battle after receiving critical damage because if they had taken better care of their armor and shields then the damage would never have reached the structural integrity and caused the malfunctions from the critical damage.

Hitpoints totally could be merged with Armor and "Structural Integrity" could be what Hitpoints used to be.  Seriously, if you increase the armor and/or shields enough that makes up for the lack of hitpoints (so yes ships would have to be re-balanced but it could totally work).

In real life armor can be much more important than the structural integrity underneath it (eg. if an armor-penetrating round gets through a tank's armor ... then shrapnel or plasma kills the crew or blows up the ammunition inside BOOM dead ... less so for things larger than tanks but you get the idea).

This idea would also make those repair gantries actually useful.  Even tugs would get a lot more helpful because they could drag damaged ships out of combat if the damaged ship cannot fly away on its own engine power.  And this idea would make it much easier for the enemy to surrender because you can disable their ships instead of blowing them up every time.  And I love that it would be harder to permanently lose ships to accidents because they do not blow up as easily.

I think a change like this is like the controversial changes that just happened CR: it is more realistic and makes things more difficult but improves gameplay because it adds depth (eg., before the changes to CR, bounty hunting was a grind).  I fervently hope that you guys spend some time trying this idea out because it could be awesome.

9
Blog Posts / Re: Transponder
« on: May 01, 2015, 04:26:36 AM »
I am not sure how could you earn bounties with your transponder off.  They are not sure who you are.

10
Blog Posts / Re: Transponder
« on: April 30, 2015, 09:29:36 PM »
I hope there will be some sort of warning that pops up such as
If you activate your transponder now your relationship with the Hegemony will be hostile are you sure you want to do this?

It'd really suck to raid a food convoy think you got off and reactivate the transponder only to discover now you're hostile to the hegemony because there was a hound you didn't detect.

Umm isn't the transponder double the radius than your sensors?  So if there are unidentified sensor blips at the edge of your sensor range, they are well within your transponder range but you don't know who they are so you cannot know if it is safe to turn on your transponder.

Even worse, even if you turn your transponder where no one sees you and go to a destination that saw your unidentified fleet with no transponder in the past few weeks, they will go "I remember that guy" and you will lose those points for what they now know you did with your transponder off.

11
Suggestions / Re: Want more ships specializing in missiles
« on: April 25, 2015, 06:25:37 AM »
I think that the game could handle a missile ship.  For example, the missile ship could have lots of missiles and good PD but pretty much no other weapons or weak shields/armor, so if you get in close range to it you can kill it no problem.  So long as you dodge or shoot down its missiles you could get into close range.  But what if they have lots of missile ships so they have too many missiles to handle?  Maybe bombers could kill them because missiles do not target strike craft.

12
Blog Posts / Re: Abilities
« on: April 21, 2015, 12:38:12 PM »
I just thought about the "visceral" WASD vs the "strategic" click to move.

I think click to move already does both extremes of visceral and strategic.  Click your destination and forget for strategic things.  And click and hold down the mouse and move the mouse around to act like WASD visceral dodging enemy fleets, etc.

I think you're right in that once the mouse button is held down it gets closer to WASD-style. I'm just not sure that "mouse held down movement in an inertial environment" would work out well if it's meant to be visceral. Plus, moving the mouse in that mode of control just feels less like you're "in" the game than when you've got direct keyboard control... but that's probably subjective.

(I'm not even sure "visceral" is a good word to use here. Maybe just "responsive"? But that's a good thing always.)

I agree that WASD has less of a learning curve than "mouse held down movement in an inertial environment", but I think mouse held down works if you get used to it because I use it right now.  I use it to dodge better and catch fast pirate fleets more easily than just clicking on them.  I hope that you try out mouse held down and see how you like it :)

13
Blog Posts / Re: Abilities
« on: April 21, 2015, 12:09:31 PM »
I just thought about the "visceral" WASD vs the "strategic" click to move.

I think click to move already does both extremes of visceral and strategic.  Click your destination and forget for strategic things.  And click and hold down the mouse and move the mouse around to act like WASD visceral dodging enemy fleets, etc.  I still like the pause button even though it disrupts that visceral dodging a bit.

14
Blog Posts / Re: Abilities
« on: April 21, 2015, 11:58:05 AM »
Really exciting to make travelling fun!

The only thing I do not like is if you use Active Sensor Burst to explore for derelict fleets, secret bases, artifacts, etc. over a very large area (eg. an asteroid belt) it would get annoying to have to start and stop over and over again.  I don't know how to fix it.  Probes?  That could mess up fleet cat and mouse unless the probes are very vulnerable to attack or countermeasures.  Coasting with your engines off?  Maybe.  A player skill that takes the tedium out of exploration?  That sounds like the best.

Also I totally want a stealth armor hull mod to decrease my sensor profile.

15
Suggestions / Allied ships having dialogue
« on: February 04, 2015, 08:10:07 PM »
When ship Officers are added to the game I hope that they have dialogue during combat, most importantly stuff like "Suffering critical Damage!" or even stuff like "Thanks for letting us retreat, almost died out there."

The best example I can think of this is Starcraft's unit quotes.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9