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.

91

Mods / Re: Project Ironclads TC 7.2 (7/8/2014) [for 0.6.2a]

« on: September 09, 2014, 02:22:09 PM »

Could anybody better versed in Ironclads please clarify: do I need to actually activate Cargo Scanner before entering combat to increase loot drop, or having the scanner in cargo is enough for the increase?

92

Mods / Re: Project Ironclads TC 7.2 (7/8/2014) [for 0.6.2a]

« on: September 07, 2014, 12:11:28 PM »

Okim, thanks for the fast reply! Back to Ironclads finally!

93

Mods / Re: Project Ironclads TC 7.2 (7/8/2014) [for 0.6.2a]

« on: September 07, 2014, 10:19:10 AM »

Since I started playing 7.2, the game keep crashing on a regular basis. Error message is "Fatal:null Check starsector.log for more info", and starsector log, at least what I figured to be relevant, is as follows:

Spoiler

529686 [Thread-5] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.O0OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
   at data.scripts.world.TimeManager.runDaily(TimeManager.java:56)
   at data.scripts.world.TimeManager.doIntervalChecks(TimeManager.java:212)
   at data.scripts.world.TimeManager.advance(TimeManager.java:204)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.A.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.B.???000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.oOOO.A.?00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.O0OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$2.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

[close]

94

Mods / Re: Diable Avionics (v. 0.5f)

« on: September 01, 2014, 11:47:50 PM »

Whoa, your bigger ships resemble both Vaygr and Zentraedi. Neat stuff!

95

Mods / Re: [0.6.2a] Uomoz's Sector: Journey 1.3 [upd.17\05] *New video in the OP!*

« on: August 29, 2014, 02:56:43 PM »

where are all the Tugs in the mod?

They're around. Check the Independent stations, they often have them. Also, many of them have been distributed among the factions.

I have to admit I know nothing about modding Starsector, but I just checked ...\Starsector\mods\UomozSector\data\hulls\ship_data.csv file, which, it would seem, mentions all ships used in US and their special systems. I searched for "monofilament", "tow", "tug" and even "ox", and there was no tug in the file. Am I searching in the wrong place, or Tug is actually removed from US? If so, are there any alternatives?

96

Mods / Re: [0.6.2a] Uomoz's Sector: Journey 1.3 [upd.17\05] *New video in the OP!*

« on: August 26, 2014, 12:59:04 PM »

Good day folks! A quick question: where are all the Tugs in the mod? I've got to level 20 without encountering any either as ships for sale or blueprints. Then I've found a really old posts in this thread, suggesting that tugs are supposed to be sold/given out as BPs at Syndrian, so I checked their market for several times, tried to exchange 60+ frigate BPs with them, but still no tug! At this point I'm completely lost and might use some of your insightful help

97

Mods / Re: [0.6.2a] Uomoz's Sector: Journey 1.3 [upd.17\05] *TuP poll in the OP*

« on: May 27, 2014, 11:44:30 PM »

Also, Ive noticed that Okim recommends to change all 512s into 1024s in vparams in his mod thread, while your instruction is to change only one of two. At the same time, in another topic he recommends changing it to 512/2048 for Win7 64... guess I'm just gonna try all the options to see if any will work for me.

Just wanted to let you know that I tried Uomoz's Sector with 512/2048 instead of recommended 512/1024, and it seemed that f5/f9 speed and stability improved: f5 performs 10%-ish faster, f9 like 30% faster, and I haven't single case of savegame corrupted or even f9 stuck at all! Guess I'll try 1024/2048 this evening for, hopefully, even better performance

98

Mods / Re: [0.6.2a] Uomoz's Sector: Journey 1.3 [upd.17\05] *TuP poll in the OP*

« on: May 26, 2014, 11:58:40 PM »

Just to be sure, the content of your jre looks like this right? I didn't see my saves getting corrupted in a long time, it's pretty hard to know whats wrong when pcs behave in such a different way on the same build. My save time is constantly around 3-5 secs at most, never actually degrading over time. I don't even compress the save data to be perfectly sure there's no corruption. Are you sure you set the vparams adequately?

Hey Uomoz, thanks for your reply! Just checked and my "jre" folder looks exactly like yours, up to filesizes. As for vparams, I believe it's correctly altered, but I'll attach it here just in case:

Spoiler

Code

-server -XX:CompilerThreadPriority=1 -XX:+CompilerThreadHintNoPreempt -Djava.library.path=native\\windows -Xms512m -Xmx1024m -classpath janino.jar;commons-compiler.jar;commons-compiler-jdk.jar;starfarer.api.jar;starfarer_obf.jar;jogg-0.0.7.jar;jorbis-0.0.15.jar;json.jar;lwjgl.jar;jinput.jar;log4j-1.2.9.jar;lwjgl_util.jar;fs.sound_obf.jar;fs.common_obf.jar;xstream-1.4.2.jar -Dcom.fs.starfarer.settings.paths.saves=..\\saves -Dcom.fs.starfarer.settings.paths.screenshots=..\\screenshots -Dcom.fs.starfarer.settings.paths.mods=..\\mods -Dcom.fs.starfarer.settings.paths.logs=. com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher

[close]

Maybe I should have installed Java to Program Files and copy its folder to SS's "jre"? Also, Ive noticed that Okim recommends to change all 512s into 1024s in vparams in his mod thread, while your instruction is to change only one of two. At the same time, in another topic he recommends changing it to 512/2048 for Win7 64... guess I'm just gonna try all the options to see if any will work for me.

Anyways, I've come up with workaround so far: I'm trying to f5/f9 less as The Soldier suggested, and to made designated backup saves sometimes, so far - so good. Still I've got to divert my gameplay from how I wanted to play to how I'm allowed to play in order to not to corrupt the saves, so I would be really happy if this bug could be purged
P.S. I'm running SS on Win7 64 if that matters.

99

Mods / Re: [0.6.2a] Uomoz's Sector: Journey 1.3 [upd.17\05] *TuP poll in the OP*

« on: May 26, 2014, 02:18:18 AM »

Just got a clean install of SS, made all prep work suggested in an OP (hmm, am I right understanding that "put jre 64bit in the main Starsector folder" means "install Java 64 bit into "jre" folder of SS root erasing said folder's previous content beforehead"?), hoping for some "improved stability" and "optimised performance" I believe I read about some 10-20 pages ago.
Sadly, USJ still acts as weirdly as before: it took like 15 seconds to F5 or F9 (which might works as intended TBH), it tends to stuck dead on loading after 10-15 quickloads, which is easily wasted on 2 cases of making sure my fleet won't let enemy ship to run away on autocombat, forcing me to kill the game and relaunch it every 10 minutes, and ultimately it corrupts saves after 50-70 quicksaves or quickloads, don't know which one exactly to blame. I stopped playing USJ yesterday after finding out it not only corrupted quicksave but also backup quicksave, which is really sad as I was looking so much to the next release of USJ.

Is there anything I could do locally to improve the situation, or it's safe to conclude that my PC just isn't compatible with USJ and close the case?

100

General Discussion / Re: '3D' Starsector Ship - Does this look good or bad? Vote Now!

« on: May 26, 2014, 01:57:35 AM »

Does this look good or bad?
Discuss!

It looks very good in and of itself, but it is totally not Starsector.

To clarify: 2d pixel art is what makes Starsector feel unique and appealing. While 3d could be "more advanced", "more modern", "more trendy" and other crap like this, in case of Starsector it would be but a trifle crammed to where it doesn't belong. My appreciation for Starsector's visual aesthetics is large part of what makes me play it, and I'm already had to hand-pick mods that are true to vanilla's sharp pixel art style and weed out those built upon 3d (polygon) models. If vanilla to become 3d-ised, this will outright kill the game's appeal for me, so please don't!

101

Mods / Re: [0.6.2a] Uomoz's Sector: Journey 1.2 (Mods Collection) [upd.22\01]

« on: April 02, 2014, 02:42:50 AM »

Actually, I had to put aside Uomoz Journey for a time being due to the same problem as BlittzOff. I have tried two separate approaches, playing for Voidwalkers and Hegemony respectively, and in both cases I made pretty good money at start, but as soon as I get my first Onslaught, the profit from almost any combat falls below the expenses to repair after said combat. Now, supposedly I could stick with cruisers forever, having steady profit, but what fun is it? I believe that the endgame content of Starsector is to field 5 Onslaughts, to be afraid of absolutely no fleet, and to be able to erase any possible opposition from existence by the sheer power of mindless frontal assault. Is this not the case for Uomoz Journey, or am I missing something necessary to have such endgame content?

102

Suggestions / Re: Add "Deploy All" for auto-resolve.

« on: March 13, 2014, 12:48:46 AM »

Thaago, that was great hint, thank you! Now all is left for me is to join Megas wishing the same worked for auto-resolve too.

It makes me wonder though, if there's more cool things like this, that could be learned only by accidentally asking right question on forums Hmm, let me try: is there a hotkey for x2 & x4 time flow increase?

103

Suggestions / Re: Add "Deploy All" for auto-resolve.

« on: March 12, 2014, 07:09:24 AM »

Whoa, I never knew of this hotkey, thanks a lot Gothars!

104

Suggestions / Re: Add "Deploy All" for auto-resolve.

« on: March 12, 2014, 06:43:49 AM »

I have somewhat opposite suggestion, but figured it's not big enough to warrant a separate thread.

So, when we're picking ships from our fleet to participate in manual combat, there's a button "all" which, bluntly enough, picks all ships: this include hoard of defenseless tugs, tankers and freighters. This button works ok when all of your ships are combat ones, and it's not really needed when you have 3 or so ships you're going to field, but when I have, say, 2 cruisers,  6 destroyers, 1 freighter & 6 tugs, currently it's either 8 clicks to select ships I want to field or 8 clicks for chosing "all" and then deselecting non-combat ships. I believe players could really benefit from an option to select all combat ships for a cases like this. Perhaps it's possible to fit another button between "deploy" and "all", being "all combat" or somesuch?

105

General Discussion / Re: Newbie Guide Thread/ FAQ

« on: February 21, 2014, 05:13:59 AM »

Thanks a lot for the explanation folks!

I like manual control as a concept, being a fan of StarCon series and the like, but I prefer to have my cup of Starsector as rather strategic experience, to be enjoyed without tactical intertference. However, the more I play, the more I find myself claiming direct control because of totally weird unfathomable AI decisions based on reasons non-obvious for me