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.

Messages - ClosetGoth

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 14
16
Suggestions / Re: New midline capture order
« on: September 18, 2012, 07:27:04 PM »
I say this is not a closed case! The "raid" command would be very useful, because I don't want to waste a million CP assigning my ships exactly where they are supposed to go, and I don't want it to be either one ship or all of them going to the point. The only time assault is appropriate is when there are enough points that it is fine to split the forces between them.

Icepick, it is just not convenient enough to force more than one ship to cap a point. Besides, then I have a talon wing and another random ship going there, instead of two tougher wings or a single tougher ship. I would like raid to prioritize slightly stronger ships, rather than sending a swarm of bees (talons everywhere)

17
Two more ships AND a hint at a demo? It must be Christmas!

18
Mods / Re: Space Pixels 1000 - "Invasion of the Quirky Aliens"
« on: September 18, 2012, 02:59:26 PM »
Wait, am I wrong in thinking that a post has to have a download link to be in the Mods child board?

EDIT: And if not, should we have a WIP mods board as well?

19
Suggestions / Re: Changing Proximity Fuses
« on: September 17, 2012, 02:45:40 PM »
Flash is not asking if you can currently get a mine to do that. Remember, this is the suggestions thread. Now, I personally think this is an awesome suggestion (mainly because I have been forgetting to get around to posting the same thing). I like the extra touch with the half-hp detonation, but I wonder how this would be implemented, lore-wise. If we are talking about some form of breach detection, I think it would be reasonable to have a chance for it to go off at 50% hp, and another chance at 25%, or something like that. This is how to intelligently implement proximity weapons, and I thank you for suggesting it.

20
Mods / Re: Iron Legion (In Development - Needs support!)
« on: September 17, 2012, 11:00:30 AM »
This mod is very fun! I like mods with fighter emphasis. Fighters are often sorely ignored in favor of big, mega, wumbo capital ships.
(Hush, spell-checker, "wumbo" is totally a word!)

21
Suggestions / Re: "Only tab number key to fire"-idea
« on: August 05, 2012, 08:30:54 PM »
First of all, thank you Naufrago for reminding me that I can do that (and it works with any mac). Second of all, I side with those who think it should be an option in the weapon groups themselves. Weapon group options: Linked, Alternating, or Quick-fire.

As for the name, what should it be called? Does "Insta-fire" sound better than "Quick-fire"?

22
Mods / Re: MrDavidoff´s Ship Addon (demo mission out, v0.1a)
« on: August 04, 2012, 05:19:44 AM »
Those ships look AMAZING. I can't wait to use them! They are satisfying a craving I have for decent battleships in SF, a craving that the conquest just can't fill. That being said, I think there is a slight blooper in one of your ships. The third ship on the bottom row has the little "edge lights" on the rear port side, but not rear starboard. Just pointing out this tiny asymmetry.

Keep up the hard work!

23
Suggestions / Re: Battlefield Aesthetic: Starlight
« on: July 30, 2012, 10:05:33 PM »
I think it would fare in an absolutely stellar manner!

... I think I'll just show myself out now.

24
Suggestions / Re: Battlefield Aesthetic: Starlight
« on: July 30, 2012, 09:19:34 PM »
And JamesRaynor hits the nail on the head once again. I have a not-exactly-top-of-the-line mac mini, and I appreciate every effort to keep games from being very intensive. So far, Starfarer has done an amazing job of this. That being said, I would love to see this feature. Even if I personally can't use it, I know that others would love it, and it would look awesome in Youtube videos of it.

25
General Discussion / Re: Underpowered Ships
« on: July 30, 2012, 08:50:32 PM »
Alex, one thing I want to know about the Conquest is whether it will straddle a pair of say, frigates, to use both broadsides at once.

26
Announcements / Re: Starfarer 0.53a (In Development) Patch Notes
« on: July 30, 2012, 08:22:11 PM »
Hey Alex, I wanted to revive discussion on the bonuses granted by hardpoints. I know you said you didn't have a strong idea on what to do with it just yet, and I think this would be a great place/time to get some ideas flowing. Personally, I think a placeholder bonus could be a 15% range bonus and a 15% max spread reduction. That being said, I think it should be different for each of the three weapon types. They would realistically benefit from the fixed positioning differently.

Bonuses that I have been mulling over:
- Ballistic: 10% range bonus, 20% max spread reduction, and 20% spread reset speed increase (from having a longer and more sturdily mounted barrel)
- Missile: 15% reload time reduction and 30% launch speed bonus (from having a more optimized reloading mechanism, and a longer/heavier launch tube)
- Energy, non-beam: 15% range bonus and 15% damage bonus (having wires that don't need to move allows for higher efficiency)
- Energy, beam: 25% range bonus and 25% damage bonus (a non-moving mount can have MUCH more precise optics)

Now, my intent is to give missile weapons the least bonuses, as they are generally expected to use hardpoints, and this would give the incentive to use non-missile weapons in universal hardpoints (my attempt at balance). Realistically, I feel that beam weapons (and energy weapons in general) would benefit most from this, as ballistic weapons are built with recoil in mind, which is similar to forces from turning a weapon. Laser systems don't have to deal with recoil (as they are not firing shots with significant mass), and would have to make a larger trade-off.

For in-game terms, the high bonuses to beam weapons somewhat counteract the awkwardness of having several beam hardpoints. Some ships accomplish it well, when it is their main weapon, but beam weapons are still (even after the bonuses) not better than non-beam weapons. All this aside, I don't consider my suggestions fully fleshed-out or balanced, but a stepping stone to start discussion.

I have one final question, unconnected with hardpoints. I want to know, what was the reason to not have weapons' spread return to normal while they are reloading? It seems to me that larger, slow-firing weapons (the Heavy Mauler comes to mind) should be quite accurate because they have a lot of time between each shot. But, the spread grows and grows while they are firing, until they are very inaccurate. Finally, if I let off firing for under one second, the spread returns to default. It just somewhat breaks immersion to see the spread stay at full spread while it is reloading, but shrink fully in the blink of an eye once it is finished reloading.

27
I am just gonna step in and drag this back on-topic, m'kay?

Now, I just loved the idea of the repair drones, and wanted to share my interpretation. I think the repair drones should be for repairing the armor, but NOT the hull. They would be finite in number, and could be deployed and retracted as often as needed. But, there would be a delay between you calling them to be released/recalled and them actually doing just that, making them more vulnerable.

Now, the repair drones would start at the middle of the craft and work outward. This means that your most valuable armor squares (the ones at the edge, where they can be most effective) are fixed last. This is more realistic, and removes their usefulness as a super-quick-fix method. Lastly, while they won't be terribly slow, they won't be able to repair any armor square above 50%.

28
Suggestions / Re: Improved Tactical Screen
« on: July 25, 2012, 04:51:53 AM »
1: I agree that it would be useful.=, but I don't want it to cause clutter

2: I HAVE ALWAYS WANTED A MINIMAP.

3: A feed of EVERYTHING is quite a bit too much. Way to much clutter there.

4,5,6,7: Yes, yes, yes, and yes, respectively.

8: Yeah, it feels more than a little silly to be able to use your command points all at once, let alone having that prevent you from issuing any other orders until points are captured.

9: Yes, I totally agree that the fighter wing icon should only show how many fighters are alive.

10: Well, it would be interesting to have ship & fighter hulks show up on the screen, but only as asteroids.

11: This would be very interesting. I definitely want the option to overlay the grid on the main battle screen.

29
Suggestions / Re: Ship variety:a question for the devs
« on: July 25, 2012, 03:59:38 AM »
@Wyvern, what you propose is exactly what we need!

@Alex, do you think we could have a thread where we submit Suggestions for ships and variants? Like, a "Ship Suggestions" thread, specifically for things like if someone feels a role isn't covered by a variant that could be. It would be NOT to submit ideas for the "best" variant, because that is something that this game nicely leaves up to the player.

EDIT: Heck, while I'm at it, I have a request. I know this might be messy/tricky coding, but do you think you could add the functionality to add a variant in the variant editor in dev mode. Like, you select a ship, and click add variant, and it adds a blank variant of the ship you had selected.

EDIT2: Also, I am 99% sure that no variant of any ship in vanilla Starfarer fields the Heavy Mauler.

30
Announcements / Re: Starfarer 0.53a (In Development) Patch Notes
« on: July 25, 2012, 03:53:18 AM »
@Hydremajor: Y'know what, it just about does!

@Faiter119: I think he meant Venture. It fits the description.

@Alex: I have a question/request. Can phase ships retreat while phased? And I know this sounds silly, but can you make sure that doesn't cause a crash/error? My playtester-senses are tingling. :P

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 14