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 - TaLaR

Pages: 1 ... 136 137 [138] 139 140 ... 187
2056
Blog Posts / Re: Blueprints, Doctrine, and Production
« on: February 14, 2018, 08:22:26 AM »
For example:
Warships > Phase ships > Carriers > Warships.
Officer quality > Ship quality > More ships > Ship size > Officer quality.
Low tech > Midline > High tech > Low tech.

When 2 fleets auto resolve, it would tune the results to favor that relations graph above based upon ships present in fleet. (This could also be used in deciding war results between factions by simply comparing doctrines and tech type +possible modifiers players may or may not have ability to affect).

I'd rather have them auto-resolved as closely as possible to what actually fighting it out would produce. Last thing we need is auto-resolve that is wrong-by-design.
Disconnect between auto and happens when you join a fight would be totally immersion breaking. Like potential situation where your patrol is wiped by auto, but can easily win same fight if you just join and sit in the corner.

Would also lead to outfitting fleets in all kinds of weird ways (as long as I max out abstract bars that win over competition it does not matter that resulting fleet can't do anything in a real fight). So it becomes a question of how to get bars into position at minimum cost (if costs are involved at all).

2057
Blog Posts / Re: Blueprints, Doctrine, and Production
« on: February 12, 2018, 08:13:18 PM »
Being able to customize my faction fleets is interesting and matters when I'm fighting along them, but isn't finer detail mostly lost on auto-resolved battles between AI fleets?
Are there any plans to make more complex/precise auto-resolve to make these things matter more?

Also on topic of player faction AI fleets - how interactive are they going to be?
I mean it's one thing when they just spawn randomly and you do not care what happens to them as long as colony does not get destroyed and you do not need them to support you locally right now. It's quite different if they have costs, maintenance, supplies, bring spoils, interact with local events, etc. That is something approaching 4x.


2058
Suggestions / Re: Separate combat and campaign skill points
« on: February 12, 2018, 06:20:06 PM »
Now that I think of it, if we had separate combat and campaign(and fleetwide) skill points, having respec for combat part only wouldn't even be a problem. There are no remaining effects like ships with more OP than possible skill-less, etc that are typical for campaign skills.

2059
Suggestions / Re: Separate combat and campaign skill points
« on: February 12, 2018, 02:57:04 AM »
I've been solving the problem with judicious cheating but an in-game alternative would be cool. Re-spec at the cost of dropping down to level 1? (Old-school MUD "remort" system? Heavy combat maxes out the player at 40 quite quickly.)

This makes transition from leveling build (focus on money-gen and fast payoff skills like personal combat) to final build (maxed fleet power) obvious must. As you said yourself, re-leveling won't even take much time.
If you can be sure (through save-loading) to never lose a ship, you can even outfit a stockpile of ships and then reset +OP/Max vents skills in tech.

Of course current situation is also problematic: either you specialize in carriers exclusively or can't reasonably pilot them. To lesser extent similar choice is present between high-tech (can ignore armor skills to some extent) and low-tech (armor skills are more important). So you are locked into piloting certain kind of ships for whole campaign (you want to be effective at it, right?).
You are also locked in terms of overall fleet composition - it depends on fleet-wide skill choices and officers (temperaments and skills).

2060
Suggestions / Re: Ill-Advised Modifications - Less Extreme
« on: February 11, 2018, 08:02:34 PM »
Between 80% and 100% shorter Peak Performance Time
+100-200% CR degredation.

Most ships with IAM also have SO. Combined with already heavy CR penalty from SO, these changes will drop CR to 0 near instantly.

On another note, while I agree that IAM are crippling while they are in, fixing LP ships to remove it is quite cheap (~15k for a Lasher). And fixed LP Lasher is strictly better than vanilla one (15 free OP points in form of built-in SO is a huge bonus, and no other Lasher variant comes close to SO in terms of power anyway).

2061
Blog Posts / Re: Colony Management
« on: February 08, 2018, 04:41:35 AM »
This has probably been explored already, but what if...

What if officers could gain all skills, and not just the combat ones? This way, a combat player could settle with slightly less powerful officers that take care of the "macro" buffs. One could even keep non-combat officers, for the salvage skills and such, at the trade-off of other officer skills.

Unless single non-combat skill on officer costs like 10 or more combat ones, offloading your non-combat skills to officers is a no-brainer.
Since you can get 2 extra officers per player skill point, officers have to be truly abysmal at non-combat skills to make me consider having them on main character under such system.

2062
General Discussion / Re: Your opinion for best ballistic weapon
« on: January 28, 2018, 07:36:59 AM »
Does anyone even use the Hephaestus Assault Gun?

HAG tries to combine the opposites (low damage per shot + HE damage type) and ends up mediocre as result. Why bother when Hellbore is cheaper, more common and better at actually breaking armor?

2063
General Discussion / Re: Opinions on Khopesh bombers?
« on: January 25, 2018, 11:14:28 AM »
P.S. Kraits (BRDY) + Vortex-Class Carrier (Ships/Weapons pack) is probably the most broken thing in the world :D. I'm not joking you, I watched my Vortex with two Krait wings absolutely execute an Eagle in about 20 seconds. With maybe a little help from a Khopesh wing ;).

Yes, this combo is evil. Kills a sim Onslaught in less than a minute on autopilot.

2064
General Discussion / Re: why was sensor drones removed from Apogee
« on: January 24, 2018, 06:53:25 AM »
I'm not sure why you're rating the Shade so highly when the Afflictor can do the same thing if the player simply chooses not to engage QD. What QD does, in fact, is enable options when approaching the enemy in cases which the right angle isn't feasible due to other ships covering it, and also giving options vs. those with 360 shields.

Moreover, I don't remember the stats right now out of the top of my head but isn't the Afflictor just superior in most ways there too?

I'm not saying Shade is better than Afflictor:

I would not say that Shade is that horrible. Sure, it's straight downgrade from Afflictor, but being a phase frigate still makes it second/third most powerful vanilla frigate for player piloting (that nobody wants to pilot, because Afflictor exists).

2065
Discussions / Re: Wayward Terran Frontier
« on: January 23, 2018, 08:47:02 PM »
From what I've seen on videos actually piloting a ship looks nowhere near as fun as it is in SS. Just collision-less jousting and pixel-hunter style shooting.

2066
General Discussion / Re: why was sensor drones removed from Apogee
« on: January 20, 2018, 08:46:55 AM »
@ TaLaR:  I am aware of that.  I qualified my statement easily.  I know Shade (and other phase ships) can ghost through an enemy and bypass shields as shown in your video.  Afflictor, I push a button, enemy gets paralyzed and loses shields, then it eats either Reapers or AM Blasters.  Shade simply takes advantage of existing openings as fighters do (only Shade risks dying, while fighters are disposable).  Similarly, those with skimmers can jump behind smaller enemies and bypass non-360 shields (at greater risk of error and dying).  Afflictor is good because it can create an opening when there is none.

Yeah, but QD reduces energy damage by 50%. That is good enough for finishing blow (which is the most risky part with bypassing shield like that) or for launching Reapers, but otherwise straight bypass is better even for Afflictor(faster kill = less CR spent). Plus it gets easier on character with skills.

Either way, i think Hyperion is the only other frigate that can kill a Medusa comparably fast without relying on missiles. Which is why Shade is 2nd/3rd power-wise.

2067
General Discussion / Re: why was sensor drones removed from Apogee
« on: January 19, 2018, 10:23:57 PM »
... because using Quantum Disruptor halves energy damage output...

Pretty sure it's more than halved; it drops it down to 10% in my experience.

Did you test against Paragon/Onslaught? 50% pre-armor can lead to much less post-armor.
Just tested against a full hp Medusa, synced shot with 3 AM blasters (4200 raw damage):
1)Bypassed as on video: 3199 hull, 619 armor, dead Medusa.
2)Used QD: 1195 hull, 585 armor. Of course it's effectively less than 50%, but Medusa did have at least some armor.

2068
General Discussion / Re: why was sensor drones removed from Apogee
« on: January 19, 2018, 08:10:56 PM »
I do not see how Shade is that great.  It cannot bypass shields easily like Afflictor can.  It cannot alpha-strike as hard.  It cannot kite-and-tank.  It costs a lot to deploy (but does not destroy stuff like Afflictor or Hyperion can).  With old Phase Cloak, it could hang back, snipe with beams and needles.  It was a great ghost tank.  New phase cloak has pigeonholed the ships into alpha strikers.  Its ship system is a liability.  Shade turns on EMP, and cannot fire its weapons.  EMP lasts longer than it needs to zap a ship.  I can cancel with phase cloak, but then if I uncloak, I cannot cloak again for a few seconds.  This was not a problem with old phase cloak.  Shade could be okay as support, except AI is too cloak happy and runs out of CR too fast.  I do not fear enemy Shades.  They are an annoyance, but not a serious threat.  Afflictor, on the other, is a true demonic spider.

That's the thing. Shade can bypass shields. Here is a topic with 2 attached videos (video quality is crappy, but enough to get the idea) of how I do it:
http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=12773.0

As you can see, even a lowly Shade can delete a Medusa pretty much instantly, if it does everything exactly right.
The above manner is also preferable for Afflictor, unless you specifically want to launch Reapers, because using Quantum Disruptor halves energy damage output.

Of course AI can't do stuff like this, so there is nothing to be afraid of, as far enemy phase ships are concerned.

2069
General Discussion / Re: why was sensor drones removed from Apogee
« on: January 19, 2018, 08:58:16 AM »
It is not only the drone, but also being able to vent-spam dual heavy blasters with the old skills.  Tempest was a monster for its size, when Hyperion was not an option.  Today, it is decent as a mini-carrier like the Borer is.  Tempest's best use today is burn speed to enable pursuit (and auto-resolve) against any enemy fleet.

Afflictor became overpowered when it got new-style Phase Cloak and Quantum Disruptor, the same time Tempest's Terminator took a big hit (since it could not ghost tank anymore).  With old-style Phase Cloak and Active Flares, Afflictor was, at best, roughly on par with Tempest, except it was almost helpless against fighters, while Tempest could kill everything.  Afflictor and Tempest were decent at trying to solo Hegemony Defense Fleets.

With old-style phase cloak, Shade was good as a tank, tanking better than Monitor.  Now, Shade is an overpriced dud.

If I am not limited to frigates, I prefer to pilot a capital for sheer power, probably Paragon (or a carrier if I get too annoyed with cowardly enemies).

Soloing fleets with frigates was reeaally long ago... Before CR put an end to it.

I would not say that Shade is that horrible. Sure, it's straight downgrade from Afflictor, but being a phase frigate still makes it second/third most powerful vanilla frigate for player piloting (that nobody wants to pilot, because Afflictor exists).

I brought up Medusa/Afflictor because they are roughly in same price/availability category as Tempest (which is too hard to get for what it does as player ship). Ultimately I also prefer a Capital, though my vanilla choice is Onslaught - weaker than Paragon, but has more proactive role on battlefield, thus more fun.

2070
General Discussion / Re: why was sensor drones removed from Apogee
« on: January 18, 2018, 04:06:30 PM »
I agree with duplicating fighter functionality.  Boring... only if the system is weak, which Terminator with old phase cloak was not (but stuff like Astral's old laser drones were).  During the days of old-style phase cloak, I liked Terminator more than Phase Skimmer because it was more powerful - it distracted AI and zapped missiles.  (Phase Skimmer is still good though.)

Power is all that matters.  Even better when it is passive - less fiddly bits to deal with.

Terminator was (and to some degree is) powerful, but that alone does not make me want to pilot a Tempest. I can get a Medusa at about the same cost anyway, which is more powerful and fun to pilot. Or the incredibly OP Afflictor, which is in a category of it's own.

Tempest is the best frigate for AI piloting though, since AI is just not good at using fiddly systems/phase cloak and raw stats are good. Also, sometimes it's worth to fiddle with Terminator too - to sync up it's attack and yours against enemies that can kill it quickly otherwise, for example.

Pages: 1 ... 136 137 [138] 139 140 ... 187