Fractal Softworks Forum
February 17, 2018, 11:09:50 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: New blog post: Blueprints, Doctrine, and Production (02/12/18); Starsector 0.8.1a is out!
 
  Home Help Search Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
1  Starsector / Mods / Re: [0.8.1a] Nexerelin v0.8.2d "Pillage, then Burn" (update 2017-09-30) on: November 28, 2017, 03:23:06 AM
@The2nd: Are you using the newest release (RC8) of Starsector 0.8.1a?
(If not, you can get it from the same download page)
Faction placement does tend towards the mishmash. I don't have any big ideas for changing this, but a tweak or two I'll look into later might help.

I was on (RC7). Thank you for your quick and helpful reply  Cheesy

And since I'm here let me also thank you for your work in general! Looking forward to looting in Nexerelin.
2  Starsector / Mods / Re: [0.8.1a] Nexerelin v0.8.2d "Pillage, then Burn" (update 2017-09-30) on: November 27, 2017, 01:15:35 PM
Got this crash after starting a new game and interacting with a friendly fleet. Only Nexerelin and LazyLib enabled. I made sure to delete the old Nexerelin folder at the update.

Did I miss something basic?  Huh

Code:
java.lang.IllegalAccessError: tried to access field com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.ongoingBattle from class exerelin.campaign.NexFleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl
at exerelin.campaign.NexFleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.pullInNearbyFleets(NexFleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:352)
at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.init(FleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:272)
at exerelin.campaign.NexFleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.init(NexFleetInteractionDialogPluginImpl.java:306)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.OoOo.öØ0000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.OoOo.<init>(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.OoOo.<init>(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.startEncounterInvolvingPlayerFleet(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.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$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
3  Other / Discussions / Re: Space Music on: October 08, 2017, 07:36:48 AM
Awesome song about a ghost ship with a western vibe. Reminded me both of Starsector and Firefly.

4  Starsector / Mods / Re: [0.7.2a] Tiandong Heavy Industries v1.1.2 - Updated 1/10/17 on: September 22, 2017, 04:56:54 AM
While asking doesn't help I doubt that a friendly post every few months is harmful. People wanting to play with it only reflects the quality of the mod and I would take it as appreciation for the author.
5  Starsector / Mods / Re: [0.7.2a] Tiandong Heavy Industries v1.1.2 - Updated 1/10/17 on: July 18, 2017, 12:30:17 PM
Confucious say: Patient man receive all the 'dong he want.

I am a patient man waiting for the 'dong. Just posting to maybe get a very rough estimate when I can enjoy the new big Tiandong. Like "soon™"?
6  Starsector / Mods / Re: [0.81a][UTILITY] Starsector FX 3a (and example mods!) on: June 22, 2017, 12:31:02 PM
6.  The FX system comes with two example projects:
  A.  A system for dealing with muzzle flashes and explosions, reducing the particles running in the game engine while also looking better.
  B.  A system for dealing with Fighter and Missile Engines that substantially improves the performance of large battles by replacing Alex's EngineAPI graphical system with something simpler.

This may be a stupid question:
In most games lightning effects are gpu hungry and barely affect the cpu. I was under the impression that Starsector is rather cpu intensive. So what I want to ask is: does this mod still help performance if one is heavily cpu bound?


7  Other / Discussions / Re: EVERSPACE on: May 26, 2017, 10:49:33 AM
Game is out of early access now. Having my eye on it. Anyone tried the finished version?
8  Starsector / General Discussion / Re: Most effective fighter setup? on: May 08, 2017, 09:29:59 AM
Astral is special.  Because of its system, I use only bombers.  Daggers are too expensive.  Khopesh get the same job done for much less cost.  However, a few homing torpedoes is nice as insurance and to mix things up.  For Astral, I use one wing of Daggers, three Khopesh, and two Longbows.

That's the exact same load-out I settled on too. It's a mean one  Grin
After using it for a while I swapped one Khopesh with another Dagger for more cosistent damage vs frigates and destroyers.

When using an Astral for the first time I was surprised to find that the recall ability had neither charges nor a cooldown. Flux cost is negligible when you stay mostly out of enemy range so it's really spammable. Feels borderline OP in the players hands. 

9  Starsector / Mods / Re: [0.8a] Diable Avionics 1.82 (08/05/2017) on: May 08, 2017, 08:14:30 AM
Just started an Diable focused playthrough. Perfect timing!  Cheesy

Thank you for your quality work.
10  Starsector / General Discussion / Re: Most effective fighter setup? on: May 08, 2017, 12:18:29 AM
For an Astral you really want a only bomber setup. As soon as they have dropped their ordinance recall them for the next wave. You have a insane damage output this way.  
11  Starsector / General Discussion / Re: Independent suddenly go hostile? on: May 06, 2017, 11:49:51 PM
Gameplay > Concept > Realism.

Doesn't matter if it's realistic. Games are heavily abstracted, not a simulation of reality.  The gameplay requires that there be discrete factions, and that your actions with one influence standing with that faction directly, and possibly other factions as well. Too much granularity on this level would simply be noise.  The game wants to model complexity on the loadout screen and ship systems, not its fictional politics.

If one wants to diminish the impact of your actions through anonymity, the game provides the transponder mechanic for that.

I don't get what the problem with Independents is supposed to be. It's just a label. The only mechanic is the shared standing, and that makes total sense.
If the independents were a bunch of sub factions they'd still talk to each other, at least if someone is either hunting them down or helping them out a lot. So you'd have to implement the same shared-standing mechanic we have now, except maybe for a little 0.X multiplier to simulate mitigated impact of your actions on other independent sub-factions.

I agree with gameplay > realism but the independent faction system atm is just a copy paste from the rest of the factions.  It feels unfinished/like a placeholder. It's ok for now but I would expect something more for  the finished game. I mean the Persean league is what the Independents feel to be now, independent worlds allied into a single faction. A 0.X multiplier would be a good start to change that feeling.

Furthermore the transponder mechanic is fine for the core worlds but with the addition of the outer rim I think it isn't sufficient enough anymore. You are far off in a corner of the map and see a scavenger go pirate switching his transponder the way it's convenient. In one moment Pirate in the other Independent and vice versa. If you then attack an Independent, several tanker loads away from civilization, with transponder off no less you get an instant reputation loss with an "Independent faction". That just feels bad and destroys immersion.   

I'm not saying you should be able to attack everyone without repercussions but with the new additions in 0.8, in my opinion we should have a discussion about faction interaction and transponder mechanics in conjunction with the new systems.   
 



12  Starsector / Bug Reports & Support / Re: [0.8a] Restoring a ship at abandoned stations costs nothing! on: May 06, 2017, 11:38:37 AM
(Not sure if this has been mentioned before - I know a bunch of Autofit/Restore related stuff has - but just in case, here it is.)

Speaking of Autofit issues. Has weapon groups not saving with Autofit already been reported? I imagine it has but I didn't see it anywhere.
13  Starsector / Suggestions / Re: surrender to stations on: May 06, 2017, 06:40:35 AM
I like the idea of surrendering to a station.

I don't like the idea of a confirm dialogue every time you jump into a core world system without transponder on. That would get old very fast. A better idea would be some visual indicator (maybe something flashing at or near the transponder button, similar to "you will be identified if you turn it on now") that you are now in "transponder required" territory.


I think the idea is to have that option when you are jumping in, as in:
- Jump into system
- Jump into system and turn on transponder
- Leave

There is no extra clicks.

Yes disregard my post. It was late and I brainfarted. All for the additional option.
14  Starsector / Suggestions / Re: surrender to stations on: May 06, 2017, 01:08:54 AM
I like the idea of surrendering to a station.

I don't like the idea of a confirm dialogue every time you jump into a core world system without transponder on. That would get old very fast. A better idea would be some visual indicator (maybe something flashing at or near the transponder button, similar to "you will be identified if you turn it on now") that you are now in "transponder required" territory.
15  Starsector / Bug Reports & Support / Re: Giving away fuel for free when responding to distress calls on: May 05, 2017, 04:44:55 AM
I think this has already been reported and acknowledged.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!