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.

Topics - Wyvern

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 17
16
Suggestions / Improve Planetary Options listing
« on: January 30, 2024, 12:54:10 PM »
So, I'm at Jangala. My options are:
Quote from: Jangala
1. Open the comm directory
2. Take a shuttle to visit the Luddic shrine
3. Take a shuttle down to visit a dockside bar
4. Trade goods or hire crew [I], buy or sell ships [F], or refit [R]
5. Repair your ships at the Dockyard
6. Establish a new Settlement
7. Consider your military options
8. Special functions
9. Visit the D-MOD service center
null. Leave [Esc]
Options six through nine are various mod-added things.

Option "null" just doesn't quite look right, though.

I'd suggest allowing an option 0 (zero) for a tenth, then if options go to 11 total making "leave" be "Esc. Leave" instead of "null. Leave [Esc]", and then... well, okay, I'm not quite sure what should come after that if mods keep adding more things, but I don't think it should be "null".

Posted in suggestions because this isn't exactly a bug per se: the UI still works.

17
Suggestions / Add Shielded Cargo Holds to the Revenant & Phantom
« on: January 23, 2024, 11:22:09 AM »
Honestly? It just seems thematic.
Quote from: Shielded Cargo Holds description
Commonly found on ships that can't always rely on shields to protect their cargo from cosmic radiation.

18
As per subject.

Based on item descriptions, I'd expect pollution to be generated by installing a pristine or corrupted nanoforge in heavy industry on a habitable planet - these items explicitly note that they will cause pollution.

However, the heavy industry implementation simply checks for "is there any item installed at all", resulting in mod-added installable items generating pollution when they weren't supposed to.

19


Apparently (some?) deco weapons do get displayed in fleet encounter lists and when fleets are just flying around on the map, and in these contexts, WeaponEffectPluginWithInit.init() is not getting called, resulting in my mirroring code failing to do its job.

(For reference, I've also reported this issue in the relevant mod's thread.)

20
Code
4871882 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
at com.fs.starfarer.prototype.Utils.Ø00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.ai.while.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.ai.missile.MissileAI.<init>(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.ai.GuidedProximityFuseAI.<init>(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.loading.specs.ifsuper.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.loading.specs.ifsuper.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.J.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.J.fireProjectile(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.OoOO.Óo0000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.OoOO.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.OoOO.Ô00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.J.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.systems.oOoO.advanceLinked(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.systems.oOoO.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.Ship.fire(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.Ship.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advanceInner(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.traverse(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
My best guess at what happened here is that a missile was launched from a fighter, and that fighter immediately re-landed on the carrier, and this caused issues with the proximity fuse calculations? Somehow? Maybe?

If that's what happened, then the relevant fighter is the Carnifex Strike Bomber from Interstellar Imperium.


However, those were not the only source of missiles in the fight where this crashed, so it's entirely plausible that the actual culprit is something else entirely.
And the stack trace does look to be entirely vanilla code...

And no, I do not have a save that can replicate this. (I'm running too many mods for that to be really useful for anyone, anyway.)

Edit: Based on Alex's explanation of what causes this, it's definitely not II that's at fault.

21
Suggestions / Carrier Targeting Suggestion
« on: August 16, 2023, 10:24:06 AM »
A bomber-equipped carrier with no fighter strike order set should prioritize not sending its fighters past enemy ships. I see this all the time at the start of combat: the carrier picks some destroyer+ sized target, sends its fighters over the initial screen of enemy frigates, and loses half of them to entirely avoidable fire.

For at least the specific fighters I'm using on the ship I'm noticing this with (1x longbow, 2x dagger), the correct call would be to send the fighters against the nearest enemy, swapping targets if that 'nearest enemy' ends up behind some other enemy ship; this is a bomber setup that can be quite effective against frigates if the AI would just use it that way.

22
Bug Reports & Support / Weird forum bug: lists are smilies?
« on: August 09, 2023, 10:32:23 AM »
    [*]Make a post with a list.
    [*]Open up "Additional Options..." and check "Don't use smileys."
    [*]Hit preview or post, and observe that the list didn't process correctly.[/list]

    23
    Suggestions / Improve Explorarium Mothership Loot!
    « on: August 03, 2023, 06:26:53 PM »
    As per discussion over in general:
    Once upon a time, the Domain Explorarium Mothership was a nearly-guaranteed source for a Pristine Nanoforge. Which, given the time and effort involved in tracking clues across multiple systems, seemed fairly reasonable.

    ...Nowadays they tend to drop mere Corrupted Nanoforges. Or, occasionally, one of the other colony items (but this is annoyingly rare, and occasionally verisimilitude-breaking; why would an explorarium mothership have a dealmaker holosuite?)

    I feel like I should get a t-shirt with that: "I tracked down and salvaged an Explorarium Mothership and the most useful thing I got from it was this stupid t-shirt!"

     ;D I agree entirely, they should drop a guaranteed pristine nanoforge, even if it means they are the only two in the entire sector, it would make them feel important and like a real treasure hunt.

    In my dev mode experiments, out of around 8-10 motherships, 3 dropped things, a corrupted nanoforge, a holosuite and a biofactory embryo...yep. Again, might be incredibly unlucky, but that's the whole point of unique encounters, making luck unimportant.

    Having that treasure hunt would be more fun. If possible, item rarity and quantity would scale with distance from the core, to simulate salvaging frequency. But having at least one guaranteed salvaging instance that doesn't involve conjuring one through story points would still suffice, maybe through intel trails like the motherships have.
    I mean, I'd be happy if even just one of the two motherships had a pristine nanoforge. Give the other one a synchrotron core maybe?

    I find it particularly problematic that you're not even guaranteed to get any colony item from the things anymore.

    24
    Some of these may not be worth bothering with, but I figured I'd list them all here since I've got an easy tool for looking through and checking. (And, apologies in advance for my inconsistent capitalization of ship names.)

    List one: Shields or ship bounds extend noticeably outside collision radius
    • Sunder: as per my mention in the modding questions thread, just relisting it here for completeness
    • Gemini: shield & collision radii are equal, but the shield center is notably offset.
    • Defender
    • module_bastion_pd1 & module_bastion_pd1_lowtech
    • Picket
    • Ravelin: while I don't recall if these are actually shielded, their bounds polygon actually extends past the collision radius. (As does their shield radius, by a much more significant margin.)
    • remnant_armour3: bounds polygon extends past collision radius. (shield radius also equal to collision radius, though that probably doesn't matter.)
    • remnant_shield1: though I think this module isn't actually used? Still, collisionRadius 90, shieldRadius 200.
    • remnant_weapon_platform_2: shield radius larger than collision radius. Technically can't have a shield installed in vanilla, but I know of at least one mod where that doesn't remain true.
    • Sentry
    • Shrike: shield radius is slightly smaller than collision radius, but extends forwards several pixels past it.

    List two: Ships that technically have issues, but may not be worth bothering to fix. If there's no specific note, assume the ship's shields extend exactly one pixel outside the collision radius.
    ships
    • Astral
    • Claw
    • Salvage Rig: a 1.4 pixel offset; shield radius = collision radius, shield center at 1,1
    • Derelict Mothership: will never have shields, so the shield radius being a hair too big shouldn't matter. Also applies to some sub-modules:
      • pod_engine_left
      • pod_m_left
      • pod_s_right
    • Guardian
    • Hammerhead: About 1.4 pixels offset; shield radius 120, collision radius 130, shield center is 11,1.
    • Khopesh
    • Longbow
    • Lumen
    • Lux
    • Merlon: An unusual case of the shield being offset one pixel to the side. Do these even have shields? I don't recall.
    • mining_drone
    • module_armor1
    • module_armor2 through 5: shield radius is significantly smaller than the ship's bounds. Probably not an issue as these should never have shields, though.
    • module_blocker2, 2b, 2c: ~1.4 pixel offset
    • module_decor_midline1
    • module_hightech_armour
    • module_hightech_attack: shield is notably offset to the rear; given the use of this particular module, this is probably not an issue worth bothering with even though the shield circle extends noticeably past the collision circle.
    • module_hightech_decor
    • module_hightech_hangar: shield circle significantly smaller than ship's bounds polygon.
    • module_hightech_strut: shield radius greater than collision radius, and bounds polygon that technically extends past the collision radius too... but I'm pretty sure this one's set to not even collide with anything?
    • Omen: would be on list three if the shield center was 11,0 instead of 11,1; so that's ~0.4 pixels offset.
    • Ox: can you even put shields on one of these? And if so, why would you want to? Still, shield radius 55, collision radius 55, and shield center 1,0
    • Paragon
    • remnant_armor1, 2
    • remnant_hangar1
    • remnant_station1: shield radius larger than collision radius. Bounds are also a bit odd and don't really match the graphics. As this is a station core component, however, both of those issues are probably not worth addressing.
    • remnant_weapon_platform3
    • Shepherd
    • station1: I'm going to guess that this one isn't actually used. There's a one-pixel offset on the shield, but more seriously the image centerpoint is pretty clearly not set correctly.
    • station2 & 3: shield radius significantly smaller than bounds polygon. As a station core component, this is probably not a concern.
    • station2_midline, & 3: bounds polygon extends past collision radius. Slightly more serious than shield circle issues, but may still not be worth addressing.
    • talon: ~1.4 pixel offset
    • thunder
    • venture
    • wasp
    [close]

    List three: Ships whose shield and collision radius are equal, but have no offset on the shield center (or whose shield center offset makes the shield exactly meet up with the collision radius). This goes against the suggested ship design guidelines, but (probably?) isn't an actual bug.
    ships
    • Bastillon
    • Berserker
    • Brawler
    • Dominator - an example of shield forward offset being exactly equal to the difference between shield radius and collision radius.
    • drone_assault
    • drone_borer
    • drone_pd_midline
    • drone_sensor
    • flare (though I don't think this ship is used?)
    • flash
    • gladius
    • Lasher - like the Dominator, the shield circle exactly meets the collision circle to the front.
    • Medusa
    • Mercury - also has distinctly over-complicated bounds, though, given the improbability of fielding these in large numbers, that's probably also a non-issue.
    • module_blocker1
    • module_decor_midline2
    • nebula - shield exactly meets collision radius at the front
    • piranha
    • rampart
    • remnant_weapon_platform1
    • shade
    • spark
    • station1_hightech, also 2 & 3
    • station1_midtech
    • vigilance
    • warthog
    • xyphos
    • ziggurat
    [close]

    List four: Shielded station modules that I assume are deliberately breaking the normal rules for good reasons. (Some station modules on other lists may actually belong here, but if I wasn't certain, I put them in the appropriate 'potentially problematic' list.)
    ships
    • module_hightech_shield
    • module_large1_lowtech, & large2
    • module_midline_bastion, broadside, citadel, & support
    • remnant_shield2
    [close]

    25
    Suggestions / Bounty Difficulty should decrease over time
    « on: July 15, 2023, 09:52:15 AM »
    As per title. Currently it scales up with number of bounties defeated and time elapsed, with no way to go back down. For a veteran player, this is manageable (with some work), but for a new player, these fights will quickly scale to be unwinnable (or not winnable without pyrrhic casualties) - and then never come back into reach.

    Yes, I know, there's the 'one fight below level'. One bounty on its own - especially a low grade bounty (I've seen single-destroyer-level bounties when the rest are all fielding capital ships) isn't going to pay for the fuel and supplies to get out there; if you're running bounties, you want to head somewhere where you can hit two or three.
    And, well, does going and hunting that low-grade bounty bring the difficulty back down, or does it just make everything else scale up because that's one more defeated bounty fleet? (Genuine question here: I suspect it just makes everything scale up further, but it would make sense for it to have the opposite effect...)

    A mechanism that makes bounty difficulty decrease over time would balance against player ability - someone who can just burn through pirate/deserter fleets can keep things scaling up quickly, while someone who finds themselves overwhelmed and stops doing bounties for a time would find that the scaling reigns back to something they can handle.



    Alternatively, remove bounty scaling entirely, triple the number of active bounties, and just have all levels of bounty targets available at all times. This would (at least for me) feel more realistic. (Though it'd probably need some sort of improved location picking, so that it didn't drop a low-difficulty bounty right next to a high-difficulty bounty. Even with current bounty counts, you do see multiple pirate fleets around the same planet on occasion, or around nearby planets like a gas giant and its moons.)

    26
    Suggestions / Laser Missiles vs Star Bases
    « on: June 18, 2023, 03:01:36 PM »
    At the moment, these work quite poorly; I'd suggest improving their tracking and firing AI so that they don't try to shoot through the invulnerable bulk of the central station.

    27
    Specifically, I think this should be visible in the following places:
    • Directly on the map if you've got 'Exploration' toggled on, perhaps using the [?] notation to indicate a spob (space object) that hasn't been fully scanned & (if applicable) surveyed (or, on the hyperspace map, a system containing at least one spob that would be marked with a ?), whether that be a gas giant that hasn't had a sensor ping fired off in its vicinity, or a black hole or neutron star that hasn't been completely scanned at all ranges.
    • On the map, in the tooltip that's displayed if you hover the mouse over a specific space object.
    • In the intel screen, tab 2 "Planets", as both a searchable column data, and when you select a specific space object for more detailed information.

    28
    Welp, first up, fatal errors:
    Code
    111230 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
    java.lang.NullPointerException
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.ai.ProximityFuseAI.updateDamage(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.ai.ProximityFuseAI.<init>(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.loading.specs.ifsuper.super(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.loading.specs.ifsuper.super(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.J.o00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.J.fireProjectile(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.OoOO.Óo0000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.OoOO.o00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.D.o00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.trackers.OoOO.Ô00000(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.ship.A.J.advance(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.systems.oOoO.advanceLinked(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.systems.oOoO.advance(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.Ship.fire(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.entities.Ship.advance(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advanceInner(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.traverse(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher.super(Unknown Source)
    at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
    at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
    To replicate, put a Net Launcher or Heavy Net Launcher on a ship, load up the simulator, and fire it.
    Edit: Or, presumably, an Ultraheavy Net of Enrapture, though I didn't test that one this time.
    For me (running on macos), this crash replicates 100% of the time.
    At least one other person (running on windows) has reported that it doesn't happen at all for them.

    As far as I can tell, the mod doesn't have file-case-sensitivity issues; all the files are in lower case, and all the references to files that I've found are also in lower case.

    Since the crash is happening entirely in vanilla code, I figure it's reasonable to toss up a thread here and ask if anyone has any idea what's going wrong.

    29
    This would be quite nice for things ranging from extended trips through asteroid fields in inhabited systems (where you may not want to just turn on 'going dark' to get your persistent slow), to not getting instantly hit by asteroids or hyperspace storms when closing the map.

    (Yes, one can technically hold 's' down, and then hit escape, but that requires remembering that you needed to do so when you get around to closing the map.)

    Edit: For clarity, I'm not requesting a change to the default behavior, just the addition of an option to set it to toggle, similar to campaign speed up time or making turn keys strafe & ship turn to cursor.

    30
    Negative values do work, at least... but it would be nice if the tooltip filters to only show items where pather interest is not equal to zero, instead of filtering to show items where pather interest is greater than zero.

    Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 17