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); Blog post: Painting the Stars (02/07/20); Updated the Forum Rules and Guidelines (02/29/20)

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 - bobucles

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 29
Suggestions / Re: Small Paragon nerf
« on: February 26, 2020, 06:58:06 AM »
The tradeoff between crew costs and supply costs seems a bit off. High tech ships don't actually have inflated upkeep costs, in fact every ship has the exact same supply upkeep as its combat value (in a well balanced world). So you get 60 DP worth of paragon, which costs 60 supplies to deploy, and pay 60 monthly upkeep as well. An onslaught on the other hand is less ship total, deploy 40, cost 40, upkeep 40 so the same ratios. However the low tech ship must pay for extra crew AND they have worse fuel efficiency per value as well. Low tech ships definitely get shafted in the upkeep department.

I'm not a fan of high tech ships having better fuel economy. All ships generally operate on the same hyperspace system. Bigger ships need bigger drive bubbles, which uses more fuel, and the speed of the ship doesn't change fuel economy in hyperspace. So why would a Paragon burn 1/3 less fuel than an Onslaught? They both need the same gigantic size drive bubble, and antimatter generally doesn't shy away from 100% annihilation into energy. Is the paragon bubble more streamlined somehow? If anything, the Paragon is a bigger ship! I think that fuel economy is an advantage that high tech ships can live without.

General Discussion / Re: So let's try to find the worst weapon on vanilla
« on: February 26, 2020, 06:37:15 AM »
When it comes to SO hammerheads, the AI difference between railguns and needlers is pretty huge. The AI pilot tends to be pretty shy with the railguns, while they are much better about charging into kill range with needlers. It's all due to how the AI chooses range vs. opponent flux level.
The real elephant in the room is Hypervelocity Driver and Heavy Mauler. Range is important and those two weapons have the extraordinary range of 1000. Those two weapons in combination are generally favoured over every other non-PD medium ballistic weapons even with all their disadvantages.
Range is powerful because the AI is not terribly reliable at choosing good engagement ranges. Case in point, how many times has anyone seen a gauss Conquest charge in to secure a kill, usually against itself? Ugh. Or how many times have you seen a dozen kites all hover perfectly inside a Paragon's disco range? Long range weapons cause opponents to refuse getting in close where they would otherwise have the edge and the results aren't always pretty.

General Discussion / Re: So let's try to find the worst weapon on vanilla
« on: February 26, 2020, 05:09:17 AM »
I think the difference between light needler and railgun is far more significant in AI hands rather than in player hands. Ship behavior on both sides is altered by flux levels and the needler surges flux quickly. A needler burst can quickly bring a ship towards overload, so the attacker will push in harder than normal. Good for staying on the attack and ultimately scoring kills.

The burst behavior is great for rapidly pulling in and out of combat. Every fresh duel starts off at the needler's advantage, since cooling down out of battle still contributes to future damage. Needler is also hurt far less by turret motion than the railgun.

The downside is that needler is far more vulnerable to shield flicker (which the AI is generally bad at). Players are also generally better with choosing proper engagement ranges, so they won't notice as much between railgun and needler.

How would distance alter the success of a raid? Fleet don't really get dragged down by long distance travel. As long as they have enough fuel it's fine, and as long as they have a pile of supplies it's also fine. CR damage through storms isn't a huge factor except for the few ships which are still under repair.

General Discussion / Re: So let's try to find the worst weapon on vanilla
« on: February 25, 2020, 12:27:34 PM »
The railgun has a lag time of 0.6? Okay, I can add that in.
I doubled the burst speed to 0.75s. Close enough for a rough appraisal.

It's true that more DPS ultimately gives more, but if you haven't cracked the shields in 30 seconds chances are you aren't going to.

General Discussion / Re: So let's try to find the worst weapon on vanilla
« on: February 25, 2020, 10:34:16 AM »
I decided to write up a little chart of railgun damage vs. light needler damage. I don't have the exact needler parameters, so I did a 1.5sec burst (15 shots) with 3.5sec cooldown (150DPS). The railgun plinks away every 60/100 => 0.6s. Damage is counted when the shot gets fired, fite me 1v1 irl.

The needler definitely jumps out to an early lead, and for some fights that's all you really need. Once an enemy gets their flux overloaded, their AI starts panicking and pulling the ship away. After the shields are overloaded then needler damage doesn't really matter anymore, all kinetics are awful against armor.

General Discussion / Re: So let's try to find the worst weapon on vanilla
« on: February 25, 2020, 09:50:29 AM »
Light needler is plenty deadly as is. The burst-y nature of the weapon gives it a much higher front loaded DPS, and front loaded damage is the ideal solution for shield breaking. The light railgun might have more sheer DPS per OP point, but the needler more than compensates with its higher flux efficiency. Getting more bang for your flux will save OP in the long haul.

General Discussion / Re: So let's try to find the worst weapon on vanilla
« on: February 24, 2020, 06:23:19 PM »
Medium Ballistics:  Probably Thumper.  It is not so bad that it is useless or a liability, but all it is good for is finishing off enemies in the early game when I have junk.  I do not see a use for endgame loadouts when I have everything.
The thumper is definitely top pick for a tragic weapon. It has all the weaknesses of a fragmentation weapon, but isn't good as point defense. The 5% armor system deals a devastating blow to frag weapons, and impact Mitigation 1 also armor caps naked hull.

Suggestions / Re: Hypothetical Capital Phase-Ship
« on: February 24, 2020, 04:47:51 AM »
I don't like the idea of increasing time acceleration even more. Crawling across the map at 30 speed x 6 would be painful on the user end. Dragging other ships into phase space sounds crazy fun, but it's no good if they can't duke it out somehow. Simply dragging a ship into p space would likely mess up its shields and potentially mess up its flux. That's more than strong enough on its own.
It would be almost useless to a capital (and doesn't do that much for Doom either),
Phase cloak seems plenty effective in a DOOM's hands. The speed boost is good enough to close the distance against most ships, while the time acceleration gives superior flux power and weapon DPS against everything. Yes the Doom struggles to perform back attacks against most ships, but it has the up front power to punch through so whatever.

Suggestions / Re: Small Paragon nerf
« on: February 24, 2020, 04:37:56 AM »
For all the talk of how powerful it is, I almost never pilot it. Conquest and Odyssey allow better player skill leverage imo.
The AI is pretty efficient with flying a Paragon, that's the main reason it's so deadly. It's reasonably effective with its fortress shield and will toggle it fairly well in many situations. Sure there are a few AI exploits against it, but other ships have it far worse. Unfortunately the AI is so good that the player can't do too much to make it better. There are other ships that seriously suffer in AI hands such as phase ships and front line brawlers. The player does extremely good with those ships since they're over tuned to make up for AI weaknesses.

General Discussion / Re: What is everybody's favorite weapon
« on: February 21, 2020, 10:45:24 AM »
Small weapon: Reaper
Medium weapon: Typhoon Reaper
Large weapon: Cyclone Reaper

You're welcome.

Suggestions / Re: mesospheric combat
« on: February 21, 2020, 06:26:01 AM »
Fighting in the upper strata of a planet? That's probably a BIT too close for anyone's comfort. However there's nothing wrong with having a visible planet or star in the background. Don't corona hazard battles have something like that? Do asteroid field battles have anything like it? I don't think I ever really checked.

Suggestions / Re: Rebind keys
« on: February 21, 2020, 06:23:22 AM »
If a section of code is looking for a keyboard input, chances are it can look for a remapped keyboard input. There is one cute tale of an online streamer who was doing challenge runs on a game. The challenge mode prohibited pausing the game, however the middle mouse button paused the game. It was also the only button in the game that couldn't be rebound, for whatever reason. So he was stuck with altering the button configs through his system registry settings instead.  ::)

Suggestions / Re: Planetary Invasion - It's war, not a battle
« on: February 20, 2020, 06:35:59 PM »
I don't know if i understand you, trading doesn't make space battles more fun or satisfying either, but it's mechanics can drive conflict (read: space batles)
Sure it does. Trade introduces cargo ships and their less reputable variants. On the defense, trade ships slow your fleet down add valuable cargo adds extra risk to getting in fights. On the attack, random traders create juicy targets to hunt down. So trade does add to battles, both directly and indirectly.

Planet invasions are a bit different. The biggest aspect of battle is breaking down the defenses on the planet. After that point, the planet battle isn't terribly important, the big battle is already done. Of course, the extra loot and blueprints DO add into combat by opening up new options for your fleet. But there's no reason to gate it behind a spreadsheet.

The sneak peak of the next planet raiding system lets players choose either large or small objectives against worlds. On the small end it lets players run into trouble even sooner, which is great for space combat. I dunno if facing off against planetary defense fleets is the smartest of early game goals though. On the high end it will hopefully reduce some of the drag of farming blueprints, or at least more consistently link battles to rewards. That's pretty nice too.

Suggestions / Re: Planetary Invasion - It's war, not a battle
« on: February 20, 2020, 08:14:53 AM »
I can't say I'm fond of the idea of running a planet invasion spreadsheet simulator. The main meat of the game is always about the exciting space battles. If the gritty details of planet combat don't make space battles more fun and satisfying, then what's the point?

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 29