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); Blog post: Skills and Story Points (07/08/19)

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 - Thana

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19
1
General Discussion / Re: New favorite ship, the Monitor
« on: December 12, 2018, 08:44:16 PM »
That image is amazing.  :o

2
General Discussion / Re: Colony Expeditions are Unfair and Unfun
« on: November 26, 2018, 06:06:52 AM »
What determines fleet str?  Is it just how much money you're making in the market?  Both my colonies do not have freeport on and run 0 AI cores, but it still makes me about 200k per cycle (depending on pather junk, which is a different issue).

You can mouseover the fleet size percentage on your colony screen to see what goes into it, but in short, stability, fleet buildings and colony size are all very important factors when determining fleet sizes. Ship quality is improved by stability (making it a double-dipping factor, so very important!) and by improving heavy industry and adding a nanoforge to it.

3
General Discussion / Re: Disengage Rules?
« on: November 20, 2018, 10:03:54 AM »
Personally i wish that instead of the retreat where all your slow ships die (or you use it as a way to split the enemy up into 3 groups and fight them one by one legend of the galactic heroes EP1 style) instead i wish that when engaged by a much bigger enemy blob (so you have no chance at all of surviving) you would be offered to dedicate some (minimum) fraction of your total fleet to a "rearguarding" battle, where the goal is only to survive and hold the enemy for a bit (say have an objective in the players deploy zone as the "lose" condition) before those rearguard ships can retreat off the map, if you hold for a bit of time then the ones who retreat off the map and the rest of your fleet get to evade the fight, if your rearguard is completely wiped out, then the other ships still get to evade the fight, its just rly frustrating for me how "safe" you have to manuver in the overworld at all times, because running into a fleet twice your size is an instant full wipe of all but your frigates and similar fast ships, it also rly makes me want to stay with only fast ships in my fleet since i know if i start playing with ships with say 60 tac speed its doomed if i ever need to retreat.

Something in that general vein sounds like a pretty good idea to me. The particulars might need some ironing out, of course, but the principle of it sounds reasonable at first glance, at least.

4
Blog Posts / Re: Population Growth
« on: November 24, 2017, 06:15:24 AM »
I have this idea bouncing in my head of a mission-based CRPG whose missions would be constructed of modules (recruitment, planning/preparation, entry, execution, exit, getting paid) and each would have random variables. It was for Shadowrun originally I guess, so you might find that when you go execute your mission, your target location might be surrounded by a crowd of protestors, or your run might be interrupted by another group coming in to do the same or some other objective at your location, that sort of things. It'd be really tough to balance right, but conceptually not outlandishly difficult to execute, I believe.

(Sorry for the tangent.)

No worries, it's fun stuff to think about :)

Hmm. I wonder how it would feel - with a fairly rigid structure like that, it might end up more obviously "X things can happen at these particular points", so not so much emergent stories but randomized content. I mean, if the approach is to implement a set of variations for the specific piece of the sequence, that's at odds with what "emergent" means, right? Which if I had to define quickly would be something like "unexpected but compelling results from the interaction of different rules".

But say the variations in the different pieces were based on some prior events in other missions, all operating based on some set of rules... then it gets more interesting. Yeah, it's fun stuff to think about.


A issue I see is that the connection points between modules have to be  rigid to allow exchanging modules. So while what happens during a module can vary, the start and end conditions would always be the same, right?  Like in the boardgame Tsuro, you have varied tiles but the connections are all the same.
Spoiler
[close]

That does seem like it come become predictable and boring pretty fast.

Yes and no. Things like entry and exit could be incorporated on the same map as generation parameters. (Inside of target building would have its own parameters, as would inside, and entry/exit randomisations might be present on the map from the start or only come into play at a later date. You might see someone already fighting there when you go in, or there might be a power outage during your run, whatever.)

But you are right that giving a sufficient amount of material for the system to create enough variety and still keep the system from becoming too messy to debug would be the biggest problem. If it was just preset modules (entry map A3, entry scenario B3, interior map A5, interior scenario A5, exit scenario A2...), it would be too rigid and become predictable. They'd have to be more along the lines of this:

The target is a city-based research site for a wealthy corp, so there are exterior map modules wealthy_neighbourhood, isolated_zone and high_tech_zone as possibilities. They give modifiers to the map generation algorithm, activity (civilian, police, criminal, miscellaneous, all separate functions that should affect one another) randomisers, entry point generation (you won't find "broken down wall" in a wealthy downtown district unless you've rolled for a heavy attack to be underway when you go in, for example) and so on. Add in chances for effects from past entanglements (you've done a noisy job in this area recently, so any security forces get a bonus to alertness, numbers and equipment, plus there's a chance that AI you *** off may try to trip you up by feeding your opposition damaging info)...

That's the sort of thing I was thinking of. Like I said, it would be a far from trivial coding exercise, but I don't believe it'd be impossible to pull off successfully. But it's not an "oh yeah, maybe add this in too" feature, it'd have to be a central focus.

5
Blog Posts / Re: Population Growth
« on: November 22, 2017, 08:22:51 PM »
(The developer who manages to create an engine that creates good emergent storytelling and quest design will have my undying adoration!)

Same! Not entirely sure it's possible, though supposedly CK2 is pretty darn good in this regard.

Yeah, it's definitely among the best games for that.

I have this idea bouncing in my head of a mission-based CRPG whose missions would be constructed of modules (recruitment, planning/preparation, entry, execution, exit, getting paid) and each would have random variables. It was for Shadowrun originally I guess, so you might find that when you go execute your mission, your target location might be surrounded by a crowd of protestors, or your run might be interrupted by another group coming in to do the same or some other objective at your location, that sort of things. It'd be really tough to balance right, but conceptually not outlandishly difficult to execute, I believe.

(Sorry for the tangent.)

6
Blog Posts / Re: Population Growth
« on: November 22, 2017, 07:27:08 AM »
I'm a bit sad to see a more detailed sandbox simulation go, but I guess it would be too expensive and hard to control for in practice. I'm just personally a big fan of emergent stuff (The developer who manages to create an engine that creates good emergent storytelling and quest design will have my undying adoration!) and that would play into it, making the world seem that much more alive and interconnected.

But it's not a deal-breaker or anything.

7
Blog Posts / Re: Economy & Outposts
« on: September 20, 2017, 09:54:31 AM »
Ooh, very nice! This is just the sort of thing I've been looking forward to since campaign mode was originally added in!

A question: are there plans for secondary, automated offensive (or active) fleets for the player? I mean, you say there'll be patrol fleets to defend outposts, but can you also buy an AI-controlled fleet to, for example, raid a certain system?

8
Bug Reports & Support / Re: Cursor bug
« on: May 06, 2017, 08:43:04 PM »
Doesn't seem like the options in the taskbar settings view have an effect on this.

Oh, well, it's not a fatal problem - I don't think it happens in combat mode and there's rarely a need to click anything that far left on the other screens, and I'm usually paused doing stuff so it shouldn't be a huge issue if I drop to Windows for a moment. And I played the game for a fair while before this ever came up.

9
Bug Reports & Support / Re: Cursor bug
« on: May 06, 2017, 11:54:41 AM »
It was fullscreen mode.

I tried borderless window mode, and the symptoms were slightly different: rather than minimising the game, I just got the taskbar appearing over the game instead.

10
Bug Reports & Support / Cursor bug
« on: May 06, 2017, 09:19:52 AM »
I noticed a bug with Starsector today. I'm unusual in that I use my Windows taskbar on the left side of the screen, not the bottom as is usual. (I find that vertical screenspace is more valuable than horizontal, and then widescreens have less of the former in the first place.) So, when I bring the mouse cursor to the left edge of the screen, it turns into the Windows cursor and if I click something there, it brings me to Windows and minimises the game. I have to take it pretty far to the left (like, within a few centimetres of the edge) of the screen before it happens and bringing the cursor back towards the centre of the screen will reset it, but afterwards it will happen several times further away from the edge until I change the view (say, by opening up the Intel view for instance) whereupon the cursor resets to the Starsector cursor and the range in which it turns back to the Windows cursor becomes just a few centimetres again.

I have a GeForce 970 with drivers only a few days old and am using Windows 10.

11
This is just a theory, but have you (and the OP) modified your page file size? perhaps even disabled it?

Doing this might cause problems for Java's rather unique use-case of its heap needing to be 1 contiguous memory allocation.

The logic being, that a system with little or no page file space, will be more prone to having its physical memory highly fragmented, and thus less able to achieve large contiguous memory allocations.

I haven't touched it, no. That said, I've never had a problem with Starsector - or Starfarer, way back then - before.

have you tried [0.8a RC19]?

Yep. It began with 0.8a.


@Alex: Okay, good to know! I'll try that.

Edited to add: Yep, that did it, the game starts again! :)

12
They shouldn't be defined at all, as they override the settings specified by SS. (and thus cause problems)

Well, that's not the problem, then.

I'm leery of installing Java because
a) I understand it's not very safe anymore
and
b) I don't need it for anything else
as well as
c) If the game faces potential incompatibility issues from using a different version, it'd seem like just putting off the point of trouble, since the game comes with an integrated JRE.

13
Sorry about the trouble! Do you happen to have JAVA_OPTS or _JAVA_OPTS in your environment variables? That's a likely cause of this problem - this variable being set could tell the game to allocate more memory than it can with a 32-bit JRE.

0.8a doesn't work for me, either, and with the same symptoms as the original poster.

What values would be good to set if I add those environment variables manually? (I'm on an 8GB machine.)

14
General Discussion / Re: 4 years....
« on: September 24, 2016, 10:18:34 AM »
I bought Starsector, nay Starfarer, way back in... 2012, I think it would have been. Maybe even 2011. I figure I got more than my money's worth in the first month alone, and at that point the game had nothing but single missions and it would be years before the campaign mode - the very first one, with only the Corvus system and no trading - would be released.

Yes, Starsector development cycle is long. Yes, I wish it were completed faster.

No, I'm not angry. The progress is slow but it's sure. New updates, when they land, tend to be very polished. So I simply accept that things are as they are and keep my eye on the forums, play the game some after each new update, then go away to wait for the next one. I have time, and good things come to those who wait.

15
Blog Posts / Re: Orbital Stations in Combat
« on: September 23, 2016, 10:18:26 PM »
"Now, witness the firepower of this halfway decent but not entirely operational battlestation..? Hell, I don't know, just roll with it, okay?"

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 19