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.

46

General Discussion / Re: What starsector could have been

« on: August 29, 2022, 07:13:48 PM »

Someone hasn't been reading the blog posts! So much story is coming.

Then we shall delegate that task to mod makers then, someone should just pick up VNsector or model their faction to that of united aurora federation, something unique that isn't just ships, weapons and strike craft, but also include commodities, special artifacts, special captain and commanders etc.

Oh man do I not want this to become an unpaid job. I promise I've had missions in mind since forever (and I have the design docs to prove it), but I'm only doing this for my own enjoyment, not in any sense for the parasocial adoration of a bunch of kids on the internet.

Let mods be mods and be patient with the time it takes to make the base game. Alex and David usually blow us out of the water.

47

Bug Reports & Support (modded) / Re: Memory Leak (modded game)

« on: August 18, 2022, 03:45:15 PM »

It seems i spoke to soon.. the issue is not fixed with removing the faction mods.. cycle 217 and i am *** again.

I'd be willing to bet you it's DIY Planets.

48

Mods / Re: [0.9.1a] Yuri Expedition v.2.2.1 || Faction Pack || Patch 06/16 [YRXP]

« on: August 16, 2022, 01:40:59 PM »

You could always throw a CC-BY-NC-SA license on there to clarify:

 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Which just means 'credit me, don't sell my work, and share the results with others in turn'.

49

Mods / Re: [0.95.1a] Substance.Abuse 1.0.k - Consumable Alcohol

« on: August 16, 2022, 11:29:05 AM »

i don't think harmful mechanic would like that

Hartley and I have discussed it - only reason they aren't in yet is how much other stuff I'm doing.

since he's pretty anal about nothing made by him being modified

My issue is with people grabbing stuff out of my mods, or creating confusion by integrating my content with other mods in ways I have no knowledge of or control over. Absolutely none of this is or ever has been a problem for polite people who asked first.

50

General Discussion / Re: Is it time to get rid of Blast Doors?

« on: August 15, 2022, 01:26:06 PM »

The simplest solution, given that the core function of the hullmod is just not that important anymore, might be to stop offering Blast Doors as a modular hullmod and instead make it a built-in on particularly old low-tech ships with unusually bad shields; the Onslaught, Enforcer, and Condor are obvious choices.

51

General Discussion / Re: Is it time to get rid of Blast Doors?

« on: August 14, 2022, 12:57:15 PM »

I think it's fine to have more/less useful hullmods, as long as they're costed appropriately; now that crew experience isn't a thing, Blast Doors could probably stand to cost a little less and do a little more to reduce your casualties.

52

Mods / Re: [0.95.1a] Terraforming and Station Construction (v8.1.5)

« on: August 08, 2022, 08:38:16 AM »

TASC's analytics meet the legal standard of malware in many jurisdictions. I'm pretty sure the mod as implemented violates privacy laws in multiple EU states.

I'm not seeing 'a personal attack' here. I see a massive legal liability and breach of trust introduced by a modder who feels he has a right to collect player analytics without telling them about it. If describing the likely knock-on effects of this behavior is 'a personal attack', then; yeah, I'm unrepentantly making a personal attack, because this is actually a bridge too far for me.

I've never added crashcode for other mods I didn't like; I've only ever made sure that dependencies would cause a crash if they were missing when that was the only way to ensure dependencies were marked properly. Not because there's not stuff out there I think shouldn't exist, or is junk; some of it's using my assets, and there's a whole self-valorizing subculture out there that prides itself on keeping that stuff going once it gets canned from the forum, and sure it ticks me off, but because it violates the social contract of free and open software.

Modding your game entails a certain degree of trust in that social contract; and this just shattered it. What you do, or don't do, to repair that trust determines whether or not it's worth continuing to mod your game for a lot of us. I can't make you do anything, and I know exactly how little my opinion on the subject matters.

But I'd just like to register (not the least because saying so is a way to head off further harassment) that this is really, really bad for anybody who, unlike you, has no financial stake in this project and is (at least notionally) here modding Starsector for fun.

53

Mods / Re: [0.95.1a] Terraforming and Station Construction (v8.1.5)

« on: August 08, 2022, 08:03:57 AM »

I thought the idea of mods containing malware was entirely ridiculous, and I certainly wouldn't do anything like that... but I guess you would, wouldn't you, which means it's only a matter of time before someone else does, so; pour one out for Starsector modding, we had a good run.

Thanks.

The matter is already addressed, and coming in with a personal attack is uncalled for.

No, it's actually not.

I just got done rebutting a paranoid accusation that there's malware in my mods. Now that's plausible, and any modder anybody doesn't like is going to be accused of bundling malware or analytics tools without a shred of evidence.

This destroys so much trust that it's probably not worth continuing to mod Starsector for me; so, it's actually a big deal, yeah. This just hands a huge win to the 'harass modders you dislike out of the community' side of things, and if you're fine with that, great, but I'm not.

And Boggled is the one who made that happen. Good job! Well done.

54

Mods / Re: [0.95.1a] Terraforming and Station Construction (v8.1.5)

« on: August 08, 2022, 07:55:04 AM »

I thought the idea of mods containing malware was entirely ridiculous, and I certainly wouldn't do anything like that... but I guess you would, wouldn't you, which means it's only a matter of time before someone else does, so; pour one out for Starsector modding, we had a good run.

Thanks.

55

General Discussion / Re: Should there be more Large missiles that don't shoot Large missiles?

« on: August 06, 2022, 09:43:25 AM »

The answer to a lot of these questions is to make test versions of them as minimods, and test them. Then you're talking about an actually-existing thing with definite, measurable qualities vs. theorycrafting in circles.

56

Modding / Re: [0.95.1a] Domain Historical Society

« on: August 06, 2022, 08:39:58 AM »

Congratulations on getting this out the door - I'm looking forward to playing it this weekend.

57

Mods / Re: [0.95a-RC12] Missing ships mod

« on: August 02, 2022, 07:32:48 AM »

To be completely fair, there's no compiled code anywhere in the mod, so if you want to change something, it's as easy as grabbing the Ship Editor, loading up the ship file, and making whatever changes you want.

Even for someone new to modding, it wouldn't take more than an evening to figure out, most likely. The editor is a simple GUI tool.

58

Modding / Re: This needs addressing.

« on: July 29, 2022, 02:58:36 AM »

I'm actually a pretty big opponent of adding hostile code to mods.

A good example is Harmful Mechanic, why is he even allowed to publish mods on here anymore after he deliberately put malware in his mods? Because you're scared of losing his talent?

...what? Malware? That's the first I'm hearing of this. The versions of my mods available on the forum and Nexus, the only ones I personally control, are free of anything I would recognize as malware. If someone else remixed my work without permission and put it up somewhere, I can't answer for what's in that.

One of the reasons I include a complete source code folder in both of my faction mods is so players can investigate the code for themselves. Even for those mods that, inexplicably, *don't* bundle a source code folder, you can use a utility like JD-GUI to look inside the mod and identify any suspicious files.

If you have a copy of any mod purporting to be mine that contains actual malware, please, absolutely send it to Alex. If I am doing this, then yes, absolutely, I should be banned from the forum, but I have absolutely no idea what feature in any of my mods counts as 'malware' to you.

59

General Discussion / Re: Vigilance is bad

« on: July 29, 2022, 12:24:57 AM »

Given the trendline of the ship's design (the turret change to a Hybrid slot especially), it seems to me like the best solution here is making the Vigilance low tech.

So, making the turret a Ballistic, and giving it Canister Flak wouldn't be out of line for that, along with a sprite refresh in low-tech brown and red. Then it would be a handy-dandy frigate counterpart to the Manticore, and midline could get a different med-slot frigate; something with a med Hybrid and a bunch of smalls, perhaps.

60

General Discussion / Re: Vigilance is bad

« on: July 28, 2022, 10:51:46 PM »

The Vigilance is not half-bad in a couple of niche roles;
- slap Safety Overrides, a Typhoon Reaper, and an HMG on it and it's a pretty decent suicide torpedo boat,
- slap an Ion Beam or HVD and a Sabot Pod into it and it's a good support ship,
- various boring Grav Beam/HVD and Harpoon/Breach fits that serve unremarkably in a frigate cloud.

I think it could probably use a different ship system, possibly Canister Flak or a similar PD substitute, but it's not a bad ship; just an ordinary one.

EDIT: Really, I think the ur-issue is that the progression curve of the game leaves you with almost no time running a large frigate cloud, which is where Vigilances are the most useful. And even then, a lot of other frigates are better picks simply because they can do what the Vigilance does *and* do other things. The Fleet Size By DP mod does help a bit with making 'wide' fleets of smaller, less high-end ships more viable, but not quite.

So, probably chalk this one up to needing a bunch of the issues around the ship fixed, too.