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 - Wyvern

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 161
1
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Dassault-Mikoyan Engineering v.1.1
« on: November 07, 2019, 02:49:01 PM »
The new Bladewood looks a lot better!

I'm not convinced that those centrally-mounted small energy turrets are going to be very useful, though; they're too far from the front/back to make for a good PD solution...  maybe with tactical lasers for support / anti-fighter?  Might end up leaving them empty, whereas my use of the current Bladewood does keep the PD mounts in its five small energy turrets.

2
Modding / Re: The black magic behind "modules on modules"
« on: October 30, 2019, 01:58:40 PM »
Nice job!

(I've had something vaguely related to this in planning stages for a while - neat to see the proof that it's doable.  I'm still hoping we get a way to properly mirror decorative weapons, though...)

3
General Discussion / Re: Things that have no sense.
« on: October 24, 2019, 03:52:02 PM »
I don't see the contradiction in the first one - the Onslaught is "before the development of advanced [...] fighter craft", there's just a comma where an "and" might provide more clarity.  Similarly, that suggests that the Talon is not an advanced fighter craft, or a popular one, which, well, I think is honestly a pretty fair assessment.

For the second, well, huh.  I'm not sure the swarmer is intended to do what you think it's intended to do?  Admittedly, I don't use it much, but my general use-case for the things is supplemental HE damage on early-game frigates, intended for use against other frigates.  I don't use it as anti-fighter, and in particular, it doesn't seem like it'd be well-suited for shooting down piranhas, since their bomb launches tend to shield them a bit.  That said, a lot of this comes down to gameplay issues; from a "realism" perspective, you'd think that someone would take the salamander's auto-loader and develop something that could reload, say, hammer torpedos... but that'd be terrible for game balance, so it doesn't happen.

4
Modding / Re: Cruiser or Capital?
« on: October 14, 2019, 01:13:18 PM »
Hm, yeah, I'd say that looks to be in that annoying inbetween space - a little bit big for a cruiser, but a little bit small for a capital.  Kindof like the Shrike and the Falcon, for being inbetween sizes.

As such, I'd say it ought to be classified as a capital ship, but given stats that are closer to cruiser-level.  (I'd also suggest making it a functional combat freighter, but then, I suggest that about anything civilian; I'm not much a fan of ships that are just stat-sticks you'd never want to deploy.)

5
2.You have to be able to carry more DP than you can deploy,
because if you dont, then Combat readiness is void, and should be scraped/redesigned. Ergo skill nodes that upgrade it, should be scraped/redesigned, and ship mods, and even map movement, storms, emergency burn and much more. Since alot of strings are connected to combat readiness.

So, if 1 = true and 2 = true, then:
3.There has to be a mechanism that allocates DP,
because if there isnt, and DP's are simply split in half, then there is no advantage to having a bigger fleet, ergo, you could fly with nothing but 2 Onslaughts + maybe a gryphon(100DP whole fleet), and win with multiple ordos at once, since the game isnt capable of wining with a human 1:1, and after the first wave going down, you would just camp the spawn. And also, it would be pointless to be smart on the galaxy map, and pick off fleets 1 by 1, not just run at multiple opponents bunched up.

So at the end of the day, the only thing that you could potentially do, is to come up with a different way of making a split, but is there a different way? All i can think of, is a bunch of horrible ideas that would make it even worse, like making skills, or level of the main character affect it.
Hmm, maybe you could give the player something like a bonus DP's for deploying small ships, and not capitals? But then, its only fair, if bigger fleets have the upper hand...
Your point two doesn't follow, and isn't relevant.  CR matters even if your fleet is small enough that you can deploy the whole thing.

Your point three also doesn't follow.  The situation you suggest - battle size cranked down to the minimum, deploying a small fleet - is a situation that can happen anyway.  Splitting the battle size evenly, right now, simply requires that you cart around a few hundred DP of extra warships; making it split evenly by default removes that requirement, but doesn't otherwise change how such a battle would go.  And, well, if you fly with two Onslaughts and a Gryphon... no, that'd be a terrible idea.  Sure, you'd probably nuke the first two, maybe three or even four hundred deployment points of the enemy.  And then the Gryphon would be out of missiles and CR, and the Onslaughts would be out of CR and armor, and whatever was left of the enemy fleet would just kill you.  (And that's assuming that the enemy didn't lead off with a bunch of high mobility frigates that could just surround and kill those Onslaughts outright.)

6
As an example, I've seen late-game red-system ordos with three battleships, six cruisers, seven destroyers, and eight frigates.  That is on the larger end, but it's still a single fleet, and if you bring just the ships needed to beat it, you won't be able to deploy all of them.  You have to bring extras just to get enough of your fleet on the field.

For another example, I've recently encountered a bounty fleet with a total of 533 deployment points; my normal fleet was quite capable of killing it... when I brought enough un-deployed backup to get deployment point parity.  And then there are expedition fleets, that come in large hard-to-separate swarms.

In short, fighting ridiculous piles of enemies is not a "super specific and easily avoidable" situation in the current game, it's just what you end up dealing with late-game.

7
but you can kill 2 or 3 ordos while only deploying 1 or 2 paragons (I can consistently kill 2 ordos with only 1 paragon and no losses).
This does not match my experiences.  At all.  Please provide more details - what is that one paragon armed with, what are your character skills, what do those two ordos look like?  I, frankly, do not believe you here*; one paragon on its own, up against even just a pair of Radiant-class battleships is unlikely to win - and that's what you can find in a single remnant fleet, nevermind engaging more than one at once.

* Or, rather, I do not believe that you're talking about the same sort of remnant fleet that I am.  Here's the thing you're probably missing: fleet size in red-threat systems scales up as you kill more of their fleets.  I could buy a single paragon taking down the fleets such systems start with, where they'll only sometimes contain even a single Radiant.  I do not believe you're taking on the two-to-three Radiants such fleets end up fielding, nevermind the four-to-six Radiants you'd find if you were foolish enough to engage two such fleets at once.

8
At the end of the day, you can just assemble a fleet that can win while at a DP disadvantage which seems better in every way.
This depends heavily on what you're fighting.  I'm curious what you'd suggest as a "fleet that can win while at a DP disadvantage" when the opposition is, say, a remnant ordos with four or more Radiants, or a large Blade Breaker war-fleet (from the DME mod).

I mean you will have a DP disadvantage against tons of ordos, even if you bring 4 paragons (I think?). You're not bringing the paragons for the DP advantage, you're bringing them because you need a bunch of capital ships to win. I don't think you need to bring 15 paragons (which might give you a DP advantage) when you can just bring 4 and win the battle without a crazy DP advantage.
If you bring four paragons, you will not be able to deploy all four at once, and you will not win that fight*.  If you bring eight paragons, then you -can- deploy all of those original four, and that swings it back to win with no losses.*

* Note that this is in general.  If you run into an ordo where all the Radiants are armed with paladin PD lasers - and I've seen this happen - then you can easily win with the smaller fleet.  And on the flip side, if you run into an ordo that's full of autopulse lasers and harpoon pods boosted by missile spec, then even when you can deploy four paragons, you will probably still lose one or two of them.  Both of these extremes are rare, but they do mean that you can't get an accurate judgement of "is this fleet good enough to win reliably" off of just one or two battles.

9
At the end of the day, you can just assemble a fleet that can win while at a DP disadvantage which seems better in every way.
This depends heavily on what you're fighting.  I'm curious what you'd suggest as a "fleet that can win while at a DP disadvantage" when the opposition is, say, a remnant ordos with four or more Radiants, or a large Blade Breaker war-fleet (from the DME mod).

10
Well, I'd say having no way to easily invalidate numerical advantage is very much intentional.
Oh, sure, it makes sense from a "realism" perspective.  Does it make sense from a gameplay perspective, though?  Is it fun to lug around extra ships you don't expect to ever actually deploy?  I'd argue that, in fact, it is not fun.

That said, Alex has already said that next version should, in general, feature smaller fleets, and this is only really an issue when you're running up against the battle size limit.  As such, I'm inclined to wait and see how that plays out before saying this is something that needs to be fixed.

11
Luddic Path Interest is +1 per gamma core, +2 per beta core, and +4 per alpha core.  Some colonies will be able to make some use of AI cores without getting active pather cells.

Hegemony Inspection I'm not as certain on - it seems likely that inspections will be less frequent with fewer or lower-grade AI cores in place... but they will still happen even if the only AI installed is a single gamma core.

12
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Dassault-Mikoyan Engineering v.1.1
« on: October 02, 2019, 05:01:39 PM »
Huh.  Alright, curious - what exactly is your Tereshkova variant?  I've found them to be usable, but not great, and more useful in a support role than a main combatant role.

As for the Kormoran, you're almost certainly not outfitting it right; it shouldn't have any trouble ending a Falcon that has the audacity to approach it one-on-one; the Falcon has less firepower and less durability.  (That said, I'm not in front of the game right now, so maybe there's something here that I'm missing?  Will test later.)

Edit: for an example of a no-skills Kormoran variant that has no trouble taking out a Falcon, try: Autopulse Laser and 2x Light Rail Accelerator, Howler Cannon (frontmost medium turret), HVD (middle medium turret), 2x PD beamer (front turrets), flak cannon (aft medium turret), 30 vents, 18 capacitors, hardened shields, ITU, resistant flux conduits, stabilized shields.  It can take out an Eagle, too, even under AI control - though the AI takes a ton of extra damage because it's unwilling to back off and vent flux; under player control it's pretty easy to get a flawless victory in the same fight.

13
Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Dassault-Mikoyan Engineering v.1.1
« on: October 01, 2019, 09:10:03 AM »
Finally got to playing around with the Bladewood combat carrier, at least in the simulator - haven't taken it into an actual battle yet.  It is frustrating to outfit, though!  Not actually in need of buffs, as far as I can tell, just... frustrating, because there is simply no way to actually fit onto it everything you'd want.  Or even half of everything you'd want.  As a general rule, I put insulated engines and efficiency overhaul on all of my capital ships; I'm probably going to end up skipping both of those for the Bladewood in favor of just getting it a not-bad set of basic equipment.

Honestly, that makes it feel like a prototype in ways that most of the other deserter ships don't; setting up a Bladewood variant is all about picking out which things you're willing to compromise on.

That said, and in reference to earlier comments on deserter logistics ships, there is one thing I'd buff about it: its cargo capacity.  It just looks like the sort of bulky brick of a ship that would have plenty of internal room, and hey, it's a mess of compromises everywhere else, why wouldn't its designers have tried to make it also capable of supporting a fleet of high-maintenance warships?

14
Suggestions / Re: Bigger size Atropos launchers
« on: September 28, 2019, 09:24:50 AM »
Personally, I think a 10 OP medium Atropos launcher, with twelve ammo, that fires two missiles per salvo would definitely have a place - and I think that the small atropos launchers are definitely overpriced.  The single-shot one should be 1 OP, and the two-shot atropos should be 2 OP or -maybe- three; they're comparable to hammers or harpoons, not reapers.  Not anymore.  (Atropos used to be more damaging, but got nerfed when the fighter revamp came around.)

15
Bug Reports & Support (modded) / Re: Cant exit battle
« on: September 27, 2019, 01:53:49 PM »
This occurs, specifically, when you retreat a multi-module ship.  I believe it's been fixed in dev, though presumably Alex will drop by here to confirm.

Regardless, yes, the recommended workaround would be to use console commands' ability to end combat.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 161