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 - StahnAileron

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12]
General Discussion / Re: is the buffalo usable?
« on: May 10, 2012, 09:34:31 PM »
I "use" the Buffalo mk2 as targets for Reaper torpedo; that count?  ::)

In all honesty, at this point in the game, the Buffalo is mainly a nuisance/distraction. It seems to currently be a simple, easy-to-kill target to help build up a player in the early phases of the game. No shield, weak armor, low hull integrity. Weapon selection is reasonable, but the missile hardpoint makes for limited usage. If it had one or two front-mounted missile hardpoints, it would increase its utility a bit more (though probably not by much.) In particular, if the Med. Missile mpount was forward facing, it would open up the ship for use as a torpedo/rocket support vessel.

In packs of 2 or more with support, they can be a threat against low- and mid-tech frigate (anything with relative weak shields) with Pilum spamming. You have to juggle defense against the incoming missiles and fire from the supporting units. I got my Lasher's butt handed to me against 2 Buffalo mk2's, a Lasher, a Hound, and I think a fighter wing or two. I normally rush the Buffalo's, but the current AI is better at fleet cohesion compared to 0.51a. Though it was partly my fault since my ship config wasn't meant for mass fighting. I think I was set up for quick strikes. I would normally rush the Buffalos and kill them immediately, but they stuck togethr, covering on another, while the support units chased and surrounded me. I lasted for a while, but go overloaded and ate several missiles.

But yeah. Haven't found a use on my side for the Buffalo mk2's other than for selling.

Suggestions / Re: Flux Bomb
« on: May 10, 2012, 03:59:19 AM »
If you want some sort of flux-based weapon, I think the following:

  • The weapon has a charge time before firing (graphically visible charging as well as an indicative of imminent use.)
  • While charging, the flux on your ship is brought to full or near-full. (It is a flux-based weapon, after all.) Perhap ship speed is reduced as well.
  • Once charge is complete and it fires, it overloads your ship (like a standard flux overload), but the actual flux on your ship is fully drained. As a penalty for using it, though, your time in overload is maxed. I do believe the amount of time you spend in an overloaded state is based on how far over your ship's flux cap the enemy forced you past.

While the weapon could be quite powerful, the above gives the opposing side some countermeasures against it:

  • Charge time - Time to evade/clear the area or target the vessel for immediate attack and destruction. The visual cue (maybe audio as well) will act as a warning.
  • Flux load - If the opponent is gutsy, can try to overload the charging ship to prevent fire (assuming the shields are up. This combined with the above forces a choice on the weapon user to actively defend with the shield, risking an overload, or eating the gunfire, possibly being destroyed outright.)
  • Overload state - If you screw up and don't kill what you needed/wanted to, they can counter attack. (This would conuteract the full venting of flux effect.)

Lastly, you can add a few other criteria for it's use, like being above/below a certain flux percentage, ship damage state, single use per battle ("The weapon burns out its core after use, necessitating replacement each time"), etc. I can also imagine it damaging the ship as well, so if you use it at full health, you just helped cripple your ship. If it fires while your ship is below a given threshold, it essential becomes a self-destruct device. (Perhaps at what threshold also determines is you ship is obliterated/destroyed outright, or simply disabled; salvage chances for the latter state would be lowers as a consequence though.) All the above conditions during use I outline helps prevent it from becoming a suicide bombing weapon.

Well, just my thoughts on the topic. *shrug* I'll leave the weapon effects for another time (range, any AoE, damage, blast radius, shot speed, shot coverage, shot type, etc.)

General Discussion / Re: Question about supplies
« on: May 10, 2012, 03:29:13 AM »
In-battle fighter repair uses supplies. Crew use supply (Looks like 0.01 supply per crew/marine.) Over fleet limits use supply (not sure o fthe formula here though, but it's definitely not linear). Ship repair uses supply (over time during the reapirs). If you have fighters and a ship with a flight deck, the fighters get repaired immediate after combat using supplies (on top of any used during combat.)

The way I see it, your use of fighters is chewing through your supplies. I run a large fleet (100FP) of high-tech frigates with minimal crew and only use up 3 supply/day (I keep a stock of marines onboard). That's not including repairs post-battle. If you regularly use fighters, you're gonna need a decent cargo limit to feed them supplies during active usage.

About the Steam Stats:

If someone has Steam installed, they most likely have some semblance of a "gaming rig" for a system. So a large percentage having >5GB of RAM isn't too unusual (especially given that in most cases, a RAM upgrade is the cheapest and simplest way to increase system-wide performance.)

As for 1920x1080 res, that res is so bloody common now it's no surprise (especially in recent years with cheaper TN-based panels being sold en masse.) Even more so for anyone who both games and works on their primary system. I am disappointed in the current general darth of 1920x1200 monitors though >:( I miss my extra 120 vertical pixels. If anything, it was better compatible with the older 4:3 AR screens of 1600x1200 res. Great for older games that supported hi resolutions but not widescreen.

Lastly: Keep in mind Steam installations are only on a very small subset of the total PCs worldwide. From the way you guys were arguing/debating the issue, one would think Steam is on EVERY single PC in the world. It's not. (I know for a fact it ain't on mine.) Steam's sample group isn't all that inclusive. Not by a long shot. It mostly represents the stats within the context of typical PC gamers, not general PC users.

General Discussion / Re: Tachyon Lance vs. High Intensity Laser
« on: May 07, 2012, 07:49:37 PM »
[...]I guess I should tell it to hold fire when its target is surrounded by five constantly orbiting tempests.[...]

THIS is the kinda of problem I run into often (though I currently only have 4 Tempests). I know the Tempest are orbiting the target to help avoid fire, but there are times when I REALLY wish they would stay out of my field of fire so I can actually FIRE. (It was REALLY horrible with the Auto-Pulse Laser behavior in 0.51a).

I understand accounting for EXTREME range gun fire like the TL is a problem (that's a real life issue with artillery fire). My concern about friendly fire avoidance is in the sub-1000 weapon range. (Or really, the sub-600 range). Really, if a two capital ships are THAT close to one another, frigates shouldn't be trying to fly BETWEEN them. That's just suicide. (I've toasted one of my own Tempests a couple of time because of that.) It'd be nice of the frigates moved BEHIND the friendly capital ship as it circles: it gets the frigate out of the firing line AND gives it a reprieve to vent flux.

Still, I have learned that for sniping, a fully TL-equipped Paragon is mostly better off on the hands of the AI. Doing it myself is tedious and time consuming (requires liberal use of the CC mode to ID amd acquire targets). The trade off is less concentrated TL fire (It's rare for my Paragon to fire all four TLs at the same target if there's more than one to shoot at.)

Actually, anyone know if the Sunder makes a good single TL turret? Not exactly FP efficient (9 FP for a single TL), but it's an easier way to get a TL or two out on the field for long range fire support early on, no?

Couldn't you do a version where the station is already there, but the stock inventory is very low to start with? That way, the convoys to the station matter a bit more in the long term. Even more so if you make them hostile to all but one of the other factions. This would give the player incentive to either defend the convoys (so the station/depot can get its stock) or to also attack the convoys (plundering them before they get killed). Just a thought though.

Just curious: where are you thinking of planting the station now? Corvus IV or one of the Corvus III area planets? You seem to have a knack for predicting which planets get additions officially added to them later on ^_~ Isn't this like the second time you needed to move the Gunrunner station location?

General Discussion / Re: Community list of random tips and tricks!
« on: May 07, 2012, 03:40:26 AM »
A use for the Hounds: Cargo Pods with heavy engines ^_~ 3 FP, 10 Crew, ~180 Fleet/Combat Speed (w/o Augmented Engines), 75 Cargo Space. Great for keeping your fleet speed up while expanding your cargo space a bit.

I recently switched to a fast attack fleet. It's currently a Hyperion, 4x Tempests, and 3 Hounds. (I got tired of floating around in my Paragon fleet going 100 speed on the map and 33 during active fighting.)

With my current fleet, I have a fleet speed of 150, low crewing requirements (95 skeleton crew), low FP usage (40), yet still plenty of space for supplies and cargo (300-something cargo space). With 100 crew and 150 marines, I use only 1.5 supplies a day. I can catch up to/outrun most fleets (the exception being mainly lone/small Tempest- and Hound-only fleets). I have enough cargo space for about 3-5 fleet fights before I need to unload. The fights are more exciting/dynamic. And when in doubt, I can EASILY run the hell away ^_~

I currently do have some problems against heavy Destroyers and bigger ships (taking on anything with more than a single cruiser or a couple of heavy Destroyers will hurt), but it's MUCH easier and faster when hunting small-medium Pirate fleets. This is a nice fleet for those time when you need/want speed on the map.

NOTE: I just got my copy of the Gunrunners mod mostly working, so if I start a new game, the Helioses from that mod will help rectify the larger ship problem I currently have. ^_^

General Discussion / Re: Lashers
« on: May 07, 2012, 02:54:05 AM »
To the amount of Lashers, i havent really noticed a difference. The difference i am noticing is the different armement of pirate lashers. I only used to see them with Harpoon MRM, now i suddenly notice Salamander pods and stuff on them. Never seen that before.

Really? I recall going up against both basic types of Lashers in 0.51a with Pirates Fleets fairly regularly, though I do think it was weighed more towards one config over the other. I believe the config with Augmented Engines was a bit more common for me. Still, I distinctly recall going up against Light Assault Gun, Light AC, Salamander, and Harpoon (maybe Sabot as well; I might be mixing up a bit of 0.52a into this), equipped Lashers in 0.51a. Perhaps not all were Pirate faction Lashers though. I did attack everyone eventually in 0.51a, so it could've been Hegemony Lashers I'm thinking of.

General Discussion / Re: Tachyon Lance vs. High Intensity Laser
« on: May 07, 2012, 02:44:03 AM »
I notice the AI tends to swing the lances around when fired. I have a 4 Lance Paragon for fire support and when I see the lance fire, it tends to waver a bit instead of just being in a straight line. Also, friendlies may stop firing when an ally travels into their line of fire, but that doesn't affect the ally from recklessly flying through the fire in the first place, I've notice.

There's been countless times when I'm firing off with my personal Paragon (4 Auto-Pulses) and a one or more of my Tempest decide to cut across THROUGH my firing line while strafing the ship we're both attacking. Since it's focused on attacking and avoiding ENEMY fire, I'll wind up cutting off its rear side if I don't stop firing in time. So I think part of the problem there is the fact your own ship don't try to avoid fire FROM friendly when manuveuring. I think the extreme range and burst-y nature of the Tachyons compounds the problem. You can easily have a clear line of fire, shoot, and while the shot is traveling/alive, a friendly decides to cut across the firing line of the Lance(s). I've seen that as well. THe firendly fire avoidance in the ship AI works well enought with just AI ships (Cease fire when Friendly approaches), but it doesn't quite work as well when it's the Player-controlled fire and an AI ship approaching (or significantly delayed/slow shots from another AI vessel).

As for the TL vs HIL discussion: I find the HIL can be used for keeping constant pressure on fighters. I have an Oddy with 3 HIL's and it used to keep fighters at bay quite well. (I've stopped using it once I got my second Paragon, though I'm currently using a 8-frigate fast attack fleet.) TL's have a long reload/refire time. If you miss, you just lost a lot of potential damage. Granted, if it does hit, it HURTS, but still. Misses with the TL's (if somewhat rare) can cost you quite a bit of time waiting for the next shot. While the HIL's are practically useless against larger vessels, I find it useful for constant pressuring of the smaller enemy forces like frigates and fighter wings at long range.

That said, I still love having my Quad TL Paragon snipe suckers from the other side of the map ^_~ It's so fulfilling when you see an enemy frigate pop out of the FoW into the LoS of a one of your own frigates on the far side of the map during opening capture runs and 2 seconds later, it's dead from a TL slavo while your own friagte is on its merry way to the capture point the enemy frigate was heading for ^_^

Ah, I see. So in theory, if I mod the mod to spawn the station immediately, it should work, no?

Oddly enough, I considered trying that, but I wasn't familiar enough with the scripting/code to know what I needed to edit. Guess I'll hunt down the variable I need to edit. I did find it mildly annoying waiting 30 days before the Gunrunners showed up when I was doing testing. ^_^

EDIT: Okay... So after some futzing with Trial & Error(tm), I was able to get the station to spawn on sector creation (set to Corvus IV) as well as setting the initial spawn point for GR raider and Def fleets. I essentially copied and edited the one-time only part (the section that actually spawns the station) of over to Only problem is I can't figure out how to get the station to spawn with initial cargo. (It spawns with ships and the pardons though.) I can't get a port of the addCargo function to work in GRModGen:

Quote from:
private void addCargo(CargoAPI cargo, int count) {
      List weaponIds = getSector().getAllWeaponIds();
    for (int i = 0; i < weaponIds.size(); i++) {
      String weaponId = (String) weaponIds.get((int) i);
      cargo.addWeapons(weaponId, count);
    cargo.addCrew(CrewXPLevel.ELITE, 25);
    cargo.addCrew(CrewXPLevel.VETERAN, 200);

I get an error regarding "getSector()" being undefined:

Quote from: starfarer.log
A method named "getSector" is not declared in any enclosing class nor any supertype, nor through a static import

I have no clue how to properly define it >_< Well, at least I have access to the mod and its features now; better than nothing. I just have to wait on the Gunrunner convoys to stock the station before I can buy weapons, supplies, and personnel is all. I guess I can consider it a compromise. The original mod had you wait 30 days to begin with before even having the Gunrunners in the sector at all.

There is a bug in the game engin [...]

Oh? Just out of curiosity, what is the bug? If you happen to know.

Is there any plan to update this for 0.52a? I'm getting a NULL error/CTD when the initial convoy disappears and the station is supposed to spawn. I tried rudimentary editing of the mod to change the spawn planet to Corvus IV, but that didn't work (same NULL error.) I'm guessing something is incompatible with the station spawn part of the script and 0.52a? (The inital fleet/convoy spawn seems to work fine.)

Just curious as I loved using the Helios in 0.51a and it would be wonderful to have it again in 0.52a with the lower Fleet Point cap in place now.

Modding / Re: Shield Type Conversion
« on: May 05, 2012, 09:05:44 PM »
I'm not a modder by any means, but from my internal logic, wouldn't you still need to at least define the base shield arc for the hullmod rather than just giving it a shield? Does the game even have a basic default shield value? All the other shield hullmods use the already existing shield statistics for the given ship.

Would it be easier to just use the Extended Shield hullmod as a basis instead of the Omni-shield hullmod? (Or maybe combine the two to get a basis for the effect you want?)

I do apologize if I make no sense. As I said, I'm no modder. These are just my thoughts considering what little I know of the game and how programming seems to be at times.

EDIT: Geh, nevermind. The "dummy value" statement you made just clicked for me...

Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12]