Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

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 - Eji1700

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 14
16
Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« on: June 24, 2020, 01:14:27 PM »
I think it would be exceptionally cruel to have a progress bar that on any given day is just an RNG number but any time Alex wanted to, he could input his best guess as to where he really thinks he is. On the one hand, you absolutely can't trust it. On the other,  it might be absolutely true. "Schrödinger's Progress Bar."

It would also make a great social experiment since whether or not we trust the progress bar is more indicative of our perception of how far along the game is, independent of reality. For example, most people would dismiss a bar rating of "12%" as too low, and ignore it. A greater number might feel "62%" is about right and tacitly agree, whereas something like "96%" would cause some to believe in immanent release while others adamantly argue against anything so soon. The carnage would be exquisite! (Some people just want to watch the world burn!) :D
See what you do is randomly tie it to his source control and have it display based on number of commits.

17
...
Non-Paragon chat:

What ship do you think has the most longevity in your fleet? As in, if you picked it up early game, you might still reasonably use it late game?

...

This is completely by accident, and not what I wanted to happen, it just happened: The Centurion.

Yes, the little dinky frigate thats not anywhere near anyone's top of the tier list has stayed with me from the very start of a campaign all the way through multi ordo fights. I bought it for being cheap tough gun frigates to help me in early game and then it just refused. To. Die. I've used Omens and Tempests in the same fleet, and while they have that sweet system/offense they both have a tendency to... pop. Meanwhile I watched my Centurion about to get hit by a reaper with shields down and high flux, began to say F in my head, and then was shocked when it slapped on its system and tanked the hit. (Granted it was damaged enough that I retreated it, but still!)

I don't feel any need to really bump against the 30 ship limit in order to kill everything, so this little frigate just hangs out in my fleet. I deploy it whenever there is room (its only 4 DP) and it putters around as an escort/killing fighters/distracting the enemy. I've got a kinetic, an HE, an ion cannon on it, and a reaper, so it is a pretty reasonable little combatant that can help against larger enemies by disabling, shoots down fighters and missiles pretty well when they come nearby, and I cheer every time it sinks its reaper into a cruiser or battlecruiser. It basically became the fleet mascot.

So... while I still wouldn't put the Centurion at the top of the tier list, I have a great fondness for them and consider them useful at every stage.

Any ship with a damper filed is amazing in AI hands, and almost always worth having in your fleet.  The AI gets crazy level usage out of the damper field and is one of the few shining points of sticking to low tech.

18
Everyone has different definitions of broken which often muddles things.

For all intents and purposes a paragon basically ends the game currently.  If you get one it's trivial to load it up with an even half decent loadout and steamroll almost all the remaining content.  Is that "broken?"...i dunno...probably not.  There's obviously supposed to be an average player path through the game, and it ends with something like a paragon taking down stations and fleets.  Does it have flaws?  Sure...but the amount they actually matter in vanilla is pretty minor given that nothing in the base game actually exploits them.

That said, is it too good?  I think so, but i'm also highly in favor of stretching out the early and middle game as they have some really interesting choices that don't get emphasized because of how easy it is to skip them, especially once you know what you're doing.  I also have to fight the urge to just mass produce them the moment I get a colony that can because...well why not?  Same issue with other ships that appear to be above curve (drover being an obvious outlier because it's clearly not supposed to be that game warping).
So wait you're telling me the most expensive ship in the game is better than everything else the player can get? Why that's preposterous!! It's 60 goddamn DP, basically a battleship and a half if you look at other examples. If hypothetically speaking, we had a capital that's maybe 70 DP or even more, would you call that thing broken because it's stronger than other ships? Hopefully this Paragon circlejerk will stop once we'll be able to get Radiants in our fleets.

@Daynen
It was hard putting both Mk II capitals on my list because they're both good for their DP but the campaign stats absolutely kill them and make them unwanted. Atlas Mk II just dies to a sneeze while being awfully slow so that's another reason why some people put it so low. It's like a glass cannon but one that has been tied to a tree like a pinata.
If money were actually a real limitation the fact that it's the most expensive ship might matter, but I can't even remember the last time I bought a paragon from a shipyard, and if you're capable of building one at a colony you're capable of affording it. 

If you want to i'd guess that you can have a kitted out paragon in a couple of hours of gameplay max, with a lot of that just being travel time.

DP is a much more significant limitation and part of why i don't think it's broken, and had you bothered actually reading what I wrote it's why I think it would be better to find ways to stretch out the early and mid game, so other ships get a chance to shine, rather than nerf the paragon in any way shape or form.

19
People tend to often forget downsides when something seems very strong to them. Like people see a 4 Tach lance Paragon (which isn't even that great always) and immediately call it broken despite its flaws. There are very few truly broken ships in the game. This is why I have lots of ships in A tier. With the right build, most of the ships can be really really useful in battles, but that doesn't mean they're perfect.
Everyone has different definitions of broken which often muddles things.

For all intents and purposes a paragon basically ends the game currently.  If you get one it's trivial to load it up with an even half decent loadout and steamroll almost all the remaining content.  Is that "broken?"...i dunno...probably not.  There's obviously supposed to be an average player path through the game, and it ends with something like a paragon taking down stations and fleets.  Does it have flaws?  Sure...but the amount they actually matter in vanilla is pretty minor given that nothing in the base game actually exploits them.

That said, is it too good?  I think so, but i'm also highly in favor of stretching out the early and middle game as they have some really interesting choices that don't get emphasized because of how easy it is to skip them, especially once you know what you're doing.  I also have to fight the urge to just mass produce them the moment I get a colony that can because...well why not?  Same issue with other ships that appear to be above curve (drover being an obvious outlier because it's clearly not supposed to be that game warping).

 

20
https://imgur.com/a/3FfvWzG

To me-

S tier- basically game breaking.  Clearly too good/designed to end the game.
A tier- never ever sad to have in my fleet
B tier- more than happy to have at any point, but might drop for an A tier if i feel like trying harder.
C tier- serviceable but probably not in a late game fleet.
D tier- the only ship i have in here is an afflictor that I don't recognize...so if i did have one i'd say "ship that could use some work"
E tier- Stuff that seems meant to be in a player fleet that probably should never be in the player fleet.
F tier- Arguably a waste of asset work/target practice only.

I should add than anything down to C tier i'll usually play with in a themed run where i try to impose rules on myself to make things more interesting.

In general i think people sleep on a lot of the hulls because there really isn't any in game reason to experiment with them, but things like the venture/condor pull a lot more weight than given credit.
I've seen some changes I can understand, some up or down for one tier or two, but. What about Mora? It's tanky, but it's not that carrier should have. Atlas mk.2 with a burn 6? It is good for a DP cost, but campaign-wise absolutely not.
I see people likes Lashers, but anyway, it's only for early game.
Legion S tier, Onslaught A tier — burn 7, both slow AF, has many weaknesses. I do must say, my Onslaught well helped me destroy couple T3 stations, but I would not take it to ordinary battle.
Mule, Venture, Gemini — at some point they are necessary or given at start, but honestly, I try to get rid of them asap. From my pov they can win in a battle only if they outtime their opponents since that types of ships has great peak operating time.

Also I put monitor in S tier because with some perks it can indefinitely tank stations most heavy fire which helped me a lot. It is really game-breaking.

Mora's stats/slots make it flexible as hell, and it's a ship I don't mind piloting and throwing in AI hands.  You can load it up as a backline, shoving all the OP into high cost fighters/bombers, or you can give it some basic fighters (vulture/khopesh sort of thing), a few half decent guns, and let it brawl like a god on the front lines.  The AI is stupid good with damper fields, so you can also make them walking PD platforms that will just not die.  They're obviously slow so they're not great at escorting faster ships, but I will ALWAYS take more mora's.  Easily one of my favorite ships in the game in that it feels very powerful but not absurdly so.

Atlas- I modify my fleet depending on my mission.People worry about burn rate too much.  If you're going pirate base/bounty hunting and need some damage the Atlas is more than fine.  It's not something I want to be lugging around all the time (and sometimes i'll spend OP to get the burn rate up or get a tug) but it has uses.  Once i start getting better capitals it rotates out of use usually, but even then as an artillery platform there's very few options that compare.

Lasher- Totally disagree they're early game only.  Having a small squad of 4ish lashers/wolfs is crazy useful for the mobility alone.  Group them up and send them to harass on the flanks and keep the AI worried about letting them behind. You lose them, oh well, they aren't tempests, and as the enemy fleet stretches you can send them in and snipe off carriers.  People vastly underrate mobility becuase it's not as useful in AI hands as it could be, but with just a little effort you can get pretty big rewards out of them.  Granted you don't NEED to because you can also faceroll everything flying only destroyers and up, but I always like having frigates in my end game fleet, especially disposable ones (i don't like risking tempests given they're so insanely good).

Legion- again people overhype burn speed.  It's not that hard to get around, and for a legion it's 100% worth it.  It's like a bigger mora.  Throw whatever the hell you want on it and watch it wreck shop.

Onslaught- more burnspeed being whatever.  Onslaught is hindered by its flux/op issues, but I'd still rather have it than a lot of the ships mentioned.  Burn drive in player hands can get you quick kills on critical targets, and while arming one is not easy, it can still fit a multitude of roles and be a constant threat. I usually throw missile racks on it and just load it to the brim with missiles and then whatever supporting weaponry fits.

Venture- Super slept on.  It's a missile platform, plain and simple.  Treat it as if it was a destroyer sized gryphon with cruiser armor.  I generally have one or two in the early/mid game as support missile platforms to help lob sabot's/harpoons wherever is needed, and the salvage bonus doesn't hurt at all.  I think ships like this should matter more, and for longer (cargo and money should really be more limiting than they are imo), because as is everyone overlooks how powerful something like this can be when kitted out properly.

Gemini- Yeah you'll rotate this out eventually, but like the condor I think this doesn't get a fair shake.  It's insanely outclassed because your other mobile carrier option is one of the best ships in the game, but I'll cart 2-5 gemini's around well into mid game, usually kitted out with PD + salamander + whatever wing I want to support with.  Mule actually winds up fitting a similar role because I almost always put converted hanger on it(making it much better imo).

Buffalo MK2- someone else mentioned it, but i'd probably but this in C-.  They're a bit hard to use right at first, but the amount of burst these can bring to a fight for their Deploy/Cost is nuts.  You do need to retreat them when they run dry (wish there was an auto order for that on missile ships) but having a few of these with different loadouts escort a venture is a common thing for me in the early game.

21
https://imgur.com/a/3FfvWzG

To me-

S tier- basically game breaking.  Clearly too good/designed to end the game.
A tier- never ever sad to have in my fleet
B tier- more than happy to have at any point, but might drop for an A tier if i feel like trying harder.
C tier- serviceable but probably not in a late game fleet.
D tier- the only ship i have in here is an afflictor that I don't recognize...so if i did have one i'd say "ship that could use some work"
E tier- Stuff that seems meant to be in a player fleet that probably should never be in the player fleet.
F tier- Arguably a waste of asset work/target practice only.

I should add than anything down to C tier i'll usually play with in a themed run where i try to impose rules on myself to make things more interesting.

In general i think people sleep on a lot of the hulls because there really isn't any in game reason to experiment with them, but things like the venture/condor pull a lot more weight than given credit.


22
General Discussion / Re: Yet another fighter balance post
« on: June 10, 2020, 07:54:35 AM »
PD not being able to shoot over friendlies and having generally very short ranges means dedicated PD escorts isn't really a thing. The most effect way to use them is wild weasel-esque, on a fast ship that runs upfront and attracts all the missile fire. That's not really the classic PD escort though.
I don't know what to say.  I do it all the time and it works fine.  Yes you generally need two pd escorts so they'll cover both sides, but the AI does quite a good job and defends well.

23
General Discussion / Re: Yet another fighter balance post
« on: June 09, 2020, 07:07:48 PM »
I would prefer dedicated PD slots since the concept of not building PD in a fighter/missile dense environment is too far fetched. Even coked-out raiders would strap something on when their self-preservation instincts kicked in.

Honestly, sometimes OP limits design. It encourages heavy offense but rarely offers a meaningful trend to defense especially during your first playthrough. Would it make sense to have PD use its own OP system as a hard nudge to teach people the glories of not dying to one reaper volley?
I'm heavily against this simply because I think one of the cool "ah ha" moments of star-sector is when you kit out one ship to the gills with weaponry and then kit out one or two more with a bunch of defensive stuff and have it escort the first ship.  That's arguably more realistic, but it should be demonstrated better (tutorial/skirmish thing?).

24
Suggestions / Re: NPCs should salvage/recover derelicts
« on: June 09, 2020, 07:02:00 PM »
I think there's a lot of worse case scenario thinking here.

Again, i don't know how hard some of this is to code, so it really depends on what they have setup/feels i the effort, but you could do things like "placebo" salvaging for wrecks that are over a certain "value" (basically anything unique).  I just think it'd be nice if they were out and active cleaning up the corpses of pirate invasion 55. That's hardly some huge value issue. 

Have them "placebo" salvage anything that was prespawned (stations and the like), and maybe even let that reflect by them having cargo that you would normally find there.  Let them actually salvage fleet wrecks post fight after X seconds maybe?  And even then have the results of that salvage in their hold if possible?

So you explore a system with a mostly full hold, see a research station that you plan on coming back for.  Notice a salvage fleet hit it.  It doesn't affect the research station at all (still there any everything) but if you're feeling nasty you can now attack the salvagers and expect to find a small amount of whatever you could've gotten on the station (so it's easier to fit in your hold).  You probably want a "nice" option to interact as well (but that strikes me as more of a hailing thing and that's a separate subject) but I think something like that adds a ton of life to the game and some neat emergent behavior.

25
Suggestions / Re: NPCs should salvage/recover derelicts
« on: June 06, 2020, 08:16:05 PM »
so, is this feather exist yet?
Yes but it only happens outside the core sector with pre-generated derelicts.
I lost severals promising derelicts to scavenger fleets while exploring

Wait what. :o This was added?

Yeah i've never seen it either.  But if it is in they should absolutely be salvaging lower tier junk at a higher frequency.  It very quickly becomes not worth the players time to even look at them and it'd add some much needed life to the sectors if after a huge battle you saw all the scavengers looting the corpses.  Maybe a small line to make sure there's always one wreck left just in case the player is low on fuel/supplies, but seeing ships salvage adds a lot of "life" to a system (since you've only really got going to planet, orbiting, leaving, partrolling, and combat otherwise).

26
General Discussion / Re: Yet another fighter balance post
« on: June 01, 2020, 04:24:31 PM »
I agree that Warthogs are undertuned. IIRC, there was a bug that somehow tripled their damage output when skills were applied. I suspect that was more responsible for their feeling OP, and nerfing them from 9 light mortars per wing to 4 light mortars per wing was a bit much.

For warthogs, I can see 3 approaches to fixing them:
1) Bring them up to Broadsword speed, reduce OP to 8, and have them be HE heavy fighters. This is a rather boring approach, but at that speed they would be fine 2/wing IMO, because they would be easy to pair with a kinetic source.

2) Bring wing size to 3, lower HP/armor a small amount.

3) Increase damage output of each Warthog by adding back the third light mortar.

I mean I know how crazy this sounds but an assault chaingun gives thematic sense given the name.  Maybe just balance around very short bursts (also thematic).

As for the rest-

It seems silly if fighters can't do decent damage to something like a destroyer.  There's no obvious reason that should be the case an it makes sense that they're not large enough that weapons shouldn't be able to damage them.

27
General Discussion / Re: Yet another fighter balance post
« on: May 29, 2020, 10:19:34 AM »
My only thought is i've always felt it was somewhat weird that any ship with a hanger can run any fighter/bomber.

I get that on some level that's intended so you don't just wind up with small/medium/large hangers and have it be identical to weaponry, but at the same time I can't help but wonder if some limitation should be used.

Maybe do S/M/L hangers, or some sort of definition, but have it be more flexible.  You can still put almost any ship in any hanger, but your wing sizes/replen rate might be smaller...maybe call it logistical capability or tech level or something.  Just something to push across the idea that mass producing sparks takes more than just OP when compared to talons.

Maybe that's not the answer, but some sort of handle/limitation would really help balance the entire weapon type, and probably help promote more varied builds as well.

28
Suggestions / Re: Antimatter Blaster rant
« on: May 26, 2020, 09:11:13 AM »
Make it deal hard flux by default, that's all it needs.
I could get behind this.  I don't think the weapon is weak at all as is, more just the small energy slot in general(as has been discussed many times).  For what is, essentially, a torpedo with double digit shots and immunity to PD, i think a lot of people in this topic are just underrating them.

29
General Discussion / Re: T3 Orbital stations
« on: May 25, 2020, 11:57:40 PM »
Of note I found the midlines somewhat easier to defend with a smaller fleet, assuming i'm actually present at the battle.  My general strat for any station defense is to position my fleet on the left and right side of the station, preventing the enemy from surrounding it and giving the various modules time to drop flux before coming back around and blasting.

The midlines focus on overwhelming, if brief, firepower tended to mean that it'd just nuke a few ships each pass, thus making the battle easier, and then cooldown, while the other stations generally were a more sustained barrage.

That said the low techs insane PD tended to support larger fleets well which was kinda nice in the end game, but this is all just looking for flavor in what's otherwise a pretty meaningless distinction.  They'll all murder anything but the strongest fleets, and do even more with fleet backup.

30
Suggestions / Re: Niggles/Annoyances from a playthrough
« on: May 25, 2020, 03:44:38 PM »
No mods, 0.91a-RC8

Great job on this. I originally bought it when it was Starfarer, played it for an hour or two in 2016 (0.7.2!), but now it's much more playable in a campaigny sense.
I just did a playthrough and have some niggles/annoyances. I.e. things that were detrimental to enjoying the game.


* UI Consistency - Some maps left click is set destination. On others it's right. This is really confusing and even after 10+hrs playing it still gets me. A core tenet of any good UI is consistency. Free-look should be a keyboard thing, not a mouse-interface-changing thing. This was still getting me occasionally after 20+hrs of play.
I always forget to mention this when changes are discussed but YES.  Especially given that I personally always want free look on, I really dislike that it's on right click.

* Two Galaxy maps. I find it confusing flitting between them. One good map would be so much better. Merge them.
I've been mostly ok with this, but it is odd that there's differences between how you interact with an use the bounty map (E) and the normal map (tab).  Could probably use some cleanup/standardization. 

* I'm playing on "easy" and I've been playing spacey games for decades (and am not too shabby at them as a general rule), but I still keep losing whatever ship I'm piloting with great ease, even if it's a cruiser and the rest of my ships are destroyers (against destroyers/frigates). I transfer into another ship in the fleet and shortly thereafter I'm dead again while the rest of my fleet goes on with no loses. I'm not that aggressive either. Now, for one thing this is a testament to the great AI, and obviously I'm doing lots of things wrong, but apart from this balance issue, I *have* to participate in the battles otherwise I'm just spending 10 minutes watching a (admittedly pretty) space combat happen. I can't micro my fleet (which I'd be more than happy to do) because I have a piddly amount of command points. So what am I /meant/ to do during the combat? I can't micro my shields/weapons like the AI does, I'm more of a strategist than a tactician but the game design decisions means that the space combat portion can be quite not-fun against anything except an inferior force.
I grew up on things like EV and this game beat the hell out of me.  You're meant to pilot your ship and shoot stuff down because you're generally better than the AI, but at the same time you really need to understand the combat to not be dead weight.  Feels like there should be a dedicated combat tutorial, and that easy should start you in a better ship (maybe just give the head start ship options) because flying something smaller while learning the game is punishing.

Heck thinking about it this strikes me as a great game for one of "customized start" systems, where you can pick from some presets or just toggle individual factors (starting cash/income/rep/ship).  Would need to be done carefully to not get too finicky, but could help with roleplay aspects (start out with a specfic kind of fleet or with a certain faction) and difficulty.

* Further to this, in big fleet battles there simply aren't enough command points in the first place, even without microing. Reinforcements eat them all up alone, if I were to bother retreating that'd eat a bunch more. Didn't get the command-point upgrades because spent my levels on non-combat stuff (not that +3 points would have done much).
I believe a stated goal of the creator is that this is NOT an RTS game and by extension that's intentional.  I could be wrong, and I know you can spend skill points to buff that playstyle, but it's been awhile since i tried it.  That said I suspect there's already a mod to fix this, and if not it shouldn't be too hard to make/do so that those who want that kind of playstyle can get it.  Again though, a better tutorial for these systems (seperate of the main game) would help a lot.  They're deep and complicated so it's never going to be easy to teach them in some scripted main campaign thing.

* I "resisted" an AI inspection and took a -50 hit to rep! Ok, I get that they *really* don't like that, but it should have told me that the consequences would be so bad then I would have simply bribed instead. That's a *huge* rep hit with no warning; no way I'm going to bother grinding that back. If I click on the event after the fact it actually says "relationship reduced by 59". :-/
Yeah stuff related to colonies in general is in a very "alpha" state only having been recently added, and it's missing some core interactions.  I think this sort of thing is known but it never hurts to have another data point.  As it stands the end game colony management is fun, but a little flat.

* Forced manual combat against tiny fleets when I'm orders of magnitude more powerful.
Another one I always forget to bring up. More pre combat options in general would help.  Being able to "let my second in command handle it" just like any cleanup op when you're vastly stronger should be a thing, but i'm also hoping we get things like "ambush" or "flank" one day that allow different engagements depending on the conditions when you bumped into them (thus giving more reason to go dark and the like).

* Chasing the last frigate or two down (and it's not decided I've "won" yet). Gah! Especially when they have that jumping ability.
Yeah i forgot how annoying this was when i was learning.  Putting your fleet on eliminate helps a lot, but I absolutely build fleets now with this sort of thing in mind.  Carriers in general are great at this but i tend to always have some fast attackers.  Not sure what the goal should be here because there's absolutely a state, especially early game, where the AI shouldn't just give up, but also has 0 reason to rush you down, so you wind up playing tag all day.

* Given that (again) I can't micro my fleet, it would be nice if there was a "keep away from all other ships" option for my carriers. I've tried various things (assigning escorts, placing them "behind" where I think the combat will be, assigning them as escorts, etc) but they're glass cannons. I don't have enough command points to keep repositioning them away from the combat (which is always moving fluidly).
They should mostly do this by default and I believe there's a dedicated option for it.  I generally just group my carriers into one blob and let them have at it.

* I managed to miss a delivery mission for independents. It was the only mission I failed. I got -5 rep. Fine, I deserve that. Several cycles later I'm hit by a ginourmous fleet (battlecruiser, 6*superfreighters, 4*assault carriers, 15+ cruisers...) which the comms is telling me is in retribution for failing the delivery. Can you say: Disproportionate. (That was about 6* more powerful than my fleet. Lvl 46)
Yeah....Disproportionate might be one off the key words to summarize areas where star sector still needs polish.

* Some listed missile ammo's cover the multiples they split into, others do not. This can be confusing when trying to work out what to equip. I get that this is because of the different types (some missles launch as one and split, some launch as many), but maybe it should say "limited volleys" with the number being how many times you can fire? (With the damage still showing the multiples as applicable).
Yeah # of volleys is probably a needed metric.

* If you use the starmap to set a destination by clicking on a star, it should navigate to a jump point for the star if there is one, not the star itself. I ended up in a blackhole that way! :-/
I'm still torn on this.  I like that, in theory, jumping right next to the star is possible.  In practice there's basically never any reason to do it, although I think several could be added.

* One of my colonies in particular keeps getting raided (by various factions). Eventually they took down the starbase, and now all the raids succeed because there is no starbase and they raid while it's still "disrupted". This has happened at least 5 times in a row now! Starfortress, heavy batteries, patrol, size 7, 270% fleet, me administrating with all 3 colony perks.
Basically a known issue.  Again colony related stuff just got added last patch and is still very much a work in progress.  There's some ways to mitigate this but it can absolutely get annoying.
 
* The pirates keep setting up next to one of my colonies in particular. Then I go there and destroy them, then a few months later they're at it again... :-/ Happened at least 4 times. Colony has patrol, surely they should, you know, patrol known pirate places. (Another colony has High Command).
Yeeeup.  Same as the previous one.  Very annoying, known issue, some ways to mitigate.

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