Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

121

General Discussion / Re: Your .65 failures and successes?

« on: October 27, 2014, 09:34:52 PM »

As for AIs... I don't think I'll see a PD specialist cruiser and capital classes that renders sizes up to frigates useless.

A dedicated PD variant for the Falcon is quite fun on occasion.
The full benefit of this is not fully realized until cruiser availability is somewhat less starvation-scarce than it is right now, though.

122

General Discussion / Re: Your .65 failures and successes?

« on: October 27, 2014, 09:29:42 PM »

I've chosen to mod my own Starsector install by personally creating new anti-missile, anti-fighter, assault, strike and support variants that fill numerous gaps in the game. This makes the various factions less of a push-over, which is especially welcome after I have levelled-up well above 30. Sure, it often makes the early game too tough at times, but perhaps that will ease somewhat after the inevitable follow-up patch to 0.65a arrives.

The thing which first motivated me to do this was the overall scarcity of Point Defense variants, or effectiveness of same for those which did exist. That hole in pre-made ship variant choices is easily exploitable by the human player. It bothered me because that's a substantial vulnerability and it prevents a more nuanced battle experience for my satisfaction. And somewhat like our renowned comrade Megas, satisfaction is important to me.

123

Discussions / Re: Beyond Earth Advertised Great Mod Support: Is actually sickeningly terrible

« on: October 26, 2014, 05:53:12 PM »

Yeah, the scenario here is an endless freight-train of paid additional content. They do not benefit ($$$$$) from making it easy for you to significantly tinker with the core game.
I'm sorry that you got caught in that trap.

124

Suggestions / Re: Ship Roles StarSector Still Lacks

« on: October 26, 2014, 04:24:06 AM »

question are there any good missile carrier cruisers/destroyers? something i could stack with Pilum LRM's for long range support?

You're really limited in hull choices for this purpose, on account of the Pilum launcher needing a medium missile slot instead of a small one.
Hulls within your desired size range include (but are not limited to):

Venture - two Pilums.
Dominator - three Pilums.
Gemini and Condor - one Pilum.
Vigilance FF - one Pilum.

125

General Discussion / Re: CR/supply usage spreadsheet [0.65a] (v1.05 2014-10-25)

« on: October 25, 2014, 02:41:48 PM »

Histidine, the spreadsheet available at the link provided is still labelled as version 1.04 instead of 1.05. Are you certain that the old spreadsheet has indeed been replaced with a new one?

126

Suggestions / Re: Core Epoch combat frigate.

« on: October 23, 2014, 06:33:23 PM »

I agree though; a capital class 'ship of the line' that followed the design philosophy of the eagle & falcon would be interesting (though not necessarily very good!)

I would very much like to see an official midline battleship hull without having to resort to various mods to build one. It wouldn't necessarily have to mimic an "enlarged Eagle" in every last detail, as long as it was still clearly in the midline-tech ballpark. The Conquest is an intriguing example of a midline battlecruiser, but I still hold out hopes for a true m-l battleship to act as a foil to both the Onslaught and the Paragon.

127

General Discussion / Re: My 0.65 RC-1 Fleet

« on: October 22, 2014, 07:19:30 PM »

I admit to the same bafflement concerning this subject. How is the fleet described above anything more than a collective gang of hangar queens in 0.65a? 

128

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes

« on: October 22, 2014, 05:44:02 PM »

Energy weapons also tend to be equipped on ships with great speed and flux dissipation (wolf, medusa, eagle) and don't use any ammo.

The nontrivial exceptions of the antimatter blaster - plus all burst-style energy weapons - politely disagrees with your last phrase.

129

Suggestions / Re: Merged storage list? Location?

« on: October 22, 2014, 03:55:44 AM »

Insightful idea; you've got my attention.

130

Mods / Re: (0.6.2a) Shadowyards Heavy Industries v0.4.7b

« on: October 21, 2014, 11:27:54 AM »

Well, crap.

Now in addition to all the other stuff I need to do in relation to getting SHI compatible with 0.65a, I now also need to rewrite the factions backstory, at least somewhat.

I don't really know where to start.  Except maybe curse you David Baauuummgaaaaaaaaaaaaaart! *shakes fist*

I confess to being very confused by this (though not unsympathetic).

Why do you feel your faction background needs a rewrite? Where, precisely, did you find data that appears to invalidate what you have previously written? What is the source?

131

General Discussion / Re: My reaction when i got home and the 0.65 release was up

« on: October 20, 2014, 07:20:41 PM »

My first reaction is here.
On the outside, it's somewhat more restrained than yours. At least Alex got a kick out of it.

Internally, not quite so restrained.

132

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes

« on: October 20, 2014, 01:49:39 PM »

"THE UPDATE HAS CLEARED THE PLANET!"

"You may download when ready."

See, even Tarkin can't wait to play 0.65a.....

133

General Discussion / Re: I'm sorry, but this is getting ridiculous.

« on: October 16, 2014, 11:08:22 PM »

Thank you - excellent insight there. I have become aware of this prior to your post, and previously adjusted my personal feelings to the extent possible. If I created an opposite impression about said awareness in my previous post, I apologize; such was not my intent.

The 2014 update-drought causes a wide spectrum of emotional responses in players. Rather than deplore that further, I want to say that I really do feel for the dev team. I'm confident they want the game creation to advance faster just as much as we customers do; I don't envy them. They do have my best wishes for a giant triumph of a future 1.0 release, and the latest upcoming version is another stepping-stone to that happy goal.

134

Suggestions / Re: In-Battle EMP Storms

« on: October 16, 2014, 10:41:59 PM »

I regret to say that I cannot support the EMP proposal. To me, it sounds too unrealistic; like a solution in search of a problem, rather than vice versa.

the real questions here:

-Are the battle maps so uninteresting that they require more "landscape" features? (We have nebulae, asteroids, and beacons so far).

To me, yes.
The existing battle maps are quite bland and offer much too little of a "handle" to allow (or force) the player to take the interactions in a different creative direction.
I won't say that I've given-up waiting for such a thing to be officially added to the game, but if it isn't already in the game by now, then i'm nervous that we may very well never see it. I hope I am wrong about that.

-If so, what are the best landscape features that could be implemented with the least amount of trouble for devs and modders?

See below.

Some cool ideas for things on the battlefield could be hazardous and/or benign debris from destroyed ships and the like, when things break in space they don't just fade away and a system with a lot of conflict would have a lot of it, and even something beneficial, flying through space coming across random supplies or fuel, even whole scrapped ships that were left behind, I like the concept of space being messy filled with debri and danger.

Sweeeeeet. The above proposal strikes my fancy, because:

• It's plausible, needing no hand-waving about natural bodies in space with astronomically-dubious properties.
• It allows for a stronger Player-vs.-Environment element concurrent with the P-vs.-AI combat.
• There is no shortage of conflict in the sector, so "former battlezones" are anything but rare.
• For simplicity's sake, faction/hull/variant selection of ruined threat ships can be procedurally generated.
• The imminent changes to the game's economic aspects should mean that this sort of "looting" becomes fairly normal.

...and...

there's the debris field from the recent skirmish between the TriTachyon Security Detachment and the Hegemony System Defense Fleet scattering its shattered hulks and derelict warships across your battlefield and maybe having a wreck or two explode due to reactors finally destabilizing or launching its few remaining operational drones or taking potshots at passing missiles, fighters, and ships with a barely-functional automated defense system.

Oh my----
I would be VERY interested to see that type of navigational hazard implemented in Starsector.
Makes me think of the first three minutes of the movie Revenge of the Sith.
What a battlefield -- so many collision hazards to be avoided,
and several of them are able to fire back at you (using rather more than just a single Taclaser, too)!


Also, please ponder the potentially big in-game economic salvage opportunities here, too...

" Your sensors have detected a badly crippled warship.
It is an Aurora-class cruiser in Tri-Tachyon service.
Lifesigns are minimal.
Prolonged scanning reveals substantial salvage possibilities. "

" ADD TO SHOPPING CART Y/N? "

(mashes keyboard madly)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y

OK, I played that facetiously, but the point is still quite valid.
I would be most happy of all if Aeson's and Uncle1sstvan's specific proposals were merged and implemented.

135

Modding Resources / Re: SPIRAL ARMS: Sprite Dump, Free to use, No Sprite requests, Free Puppies

« on: October 16, 2014, 04:17:26 PM »

Putin approves.

That 'tundra camouflage' is especially awesome.
Not so great for jungle or urban ops, though.