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 - Tarran

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21
286
General Discussion / Re: other games like starfarer
« on: February 28, 2012, 03:04:04 AM »
PS. Remembered one more game: Transcendence. But it is not actively developed anymore...
What? Unless I'm missing something, there is no Announcement or anything saying that development stopped.

And indeed, in December last year, there was a release; 1.07. A small one, yes, but a release nonetheless.

In fact, there's even a thread made in January titled "The Future Of Transcendence" which did not talk about ending it, but building even more support for mods.

Did I miss something? It seems like the game is still alive. ???

And Transcendence is not all that similar to Starfarer; it's too based on one ship. Similar with space combat and refitting, no doubt, but a majority of the game is still far different from Starfarer.

287
General Discussion / Re: LEAST Favorite Ship
« on: February 27, 2012, 02:44:51 PM »
Aren't Warthogs fighter wings?

288
General Discussion / Re: LEAST Favorite Ship
« on: February 27, 2012, 01:11:00 PM »
But it's still a Battleship. The Sunder is a Destroyer. It costs much less to get it on the battlefield, and it's much faster. And it's a much smaller target.

289
General Discussion / Re: LEAST Favorite Ship
« on: February 27, 2012, 01:01:50 PM »
The Sunder with the Tachyon Lance actually works alright-- if you assign it to a fire support waypoint with other LRM platforms like Buffalos, Condors, whatnot. My main issue with using it in campaign is wasting a 30,000 credit weapon on the SUNDER, and risking it in combat. It literally costs more than the ship.
But consider what it does for you: It allows you to effectively have a hand of god, without having to bring up a big, slow battleship. It allows you to take out or damage whoever you want, whenever you want. And the speed of the destroyer lets you keep up or stay away from the enemies.

Think of it as a sniper with extremely expensive equipment looking over a giant plain: He's fragile, and losing him would be a serious loss, but until then no enemy is safe.

290
General Discussion / Re: LEAST Favorite Ship
« on: February 27, 2012, 11:47:33 AM »
The Brawler is just terrible, but there is one other ship that just outright irritates me: the Sunder-class. Not so much because it's bad, but because it feels as though it should be so much better. The large energy mount seems like something that would be genuinely valuable, but the complete lack of any fighter defence leaves it so vulnerable that it just can't be relied upon to stay alive even, with an escort.
If you ever get your hands on a Tachyon lance, the Sunder becomes absurdly powerful for it's class in my experience as long as you pilot it (as the AI is an idiot and gets all up and close to the enemy). Not that it will be easy without mods, but if you ever get the chance...

291
General Discussion / Re: LEAST Favorite Ship
« on: February 26, 2012, 11:12:19 PM »
How can the Onslaught have suckish firepower? It can mount some of the heaviest guns around; 5 Large and 9 medium slots, beating a Paragon, which is only outdone by a Conquest. And even then it has more Ordnance Points. The only shortage it has is large missile slots and small ballistic slots. There is no way that is suckish firepower.

292
General Discussion / Re: LEAST Favorite Ship
« on: February 26, 2012, 09:18:51 PM »
To be fair to the Hound, one use I found for the hound is softening up fighter wings: Shoot at the enemy fighter wings, but don't care about destroying them. Your own fighters should take less time to wipe them out. And you can dodge missiles pretty well, allowing you to drain the enemy of their missiles. Otherwise, it's bloody useless against anything with a shield.

Anyway, thanks for the advice Iscariot. I'll try it if I ever get the chance to fly one outside of The Last Hurrah.

293
General Discussion / Re: LEAST Favorite Ship
« on: February 26, 2012, 07:13:19 PM »
With recent playing of The Last Hurrah, I must say that the Conquest is now my least favorite ship.

I mean, I can see what it's trying to do, but it just doesn't do it. And that's why it's my least favorite. It's not that the ship is crappy, it's that it's not doing what it's designed to do.

Let's start with it's problems compared to the Onslaught and in general:

The flux capacity is less than the Onslaught. This is offset by dissipation, but it means that the Conquest cannot take sudden attacks as well.
The shield is too small and too slow to turn. Meaning that any surrounding enemy is going to have a field day. This is especially dangerous if you fail to pay attention to that one bomber wing that comes from the other side for even a few seconds. Oh, and it costs more to maintain than the Onslaught's shield which is DOUBLE the size even if it isn't Omni.
The main guns, while much more powerful, are all to the sides! Meaning facing your enemy means no main guns! But your torpedoes are to your front; meaning you cannot turn to the sides if you want to use your torpedoes! Main guns to the sides also means that the only way to get the most out of your ship is to be surrounded; which is not what your shield is designed for!
While it's faster than the Onslaught, it's not even nearly fast enough to make up for it's weaknesses! It also cannot turn fast enough to really choose which guns you use on your enemies.
It's armor is thinner than the Onslaught and it's hull integrity is much worse than the Onslaught. When overloaded, the Conquest would go down much faster, and in general even without overloading it can't take the fire coming it's way.
While you're a smaller target when facing the enemy to the front, when facing the enemy to the side--the only way to use your main guns--you're a VERY large target.

Someone, give me some help here on how I should be piloting this thing. It just seems like piloting a Conquest requires two or more people controlling it to even stand a few seconds in an actual fight. And even then it just doesn't seem like it can face against even two cruisers with a few missile racks. It's just plain silly how it feels like a Hammerhead--a destroyer--has a longer lifespan in the different combat situations they're supposed to be in.

294
What is up with this community and pirace....
Wait, what? I didn't think that this community was specifically against piracy.

and mentioning pirating isnt against the law anywhere... specially if your talking about not pirating...  (and specially if someone not mentioned has piratebay tab open 24/7 incase need something thats not easier to buy...  ;))
I know, I was just saying it's unnecessary and some may look down on it. And some more serious moderators may be upset. I was in no way saying that mentioning it is against the law.

295
You probably shouldn't mention pirating so blatantly. Just saying, it's unneeded and it might make people look down on you or get you in trouble.

Anyway, Open Office works fine from what I can tell. Go ahead and try it, it is free after all. :)

296
Modding / Re: New sprite, feedback wanted
« on: February 23, 2012, 04:14:15 PM »
Changed it around a bit. Better?


Yes, looks more metallic now. Still a bit red for my tastes, but it's just me.

I'm loving the paint flaking effect. Have you any experience in making impact craters too ;D?

A little. Why?
I assume it's because he wants you to put craters on the ship. Or he wants you to put impact craters on another person's ship. One of the two.

297
Modding / Re: New sprite, feedback wanted
« on: February 23, 2012, 02:33:57 PM »
A little too red for me unless you're going for a cartoonish look or the people who pilot the ship constantly paint it bright red. I'd say desaturate the red and possibly the yellow until they have a more metalic look. About 60-30% of the current saturation is about right in my opinion.

Regardless, the detail of the ship is pretty darn fine but the shape I'm not excited for.

It's always good to have more ships, regardless.

298
General Discussion / Re: Fleet size affecting Speed
« on: February 23, 2012, 10:02:52 AM »
Space is big, asteroids/space debris aren't everywhere, or at least common enough to warrant such a reduction in speed. 
That's what they WANT you to think! They're always watching you, secretly plotting to take your ships by surprise and ram into your engines when you least expect it! :P

299
General Discussion / Re: What's your favorite ship?
« on: February 23, 2012, 08:22:25 AM »
Yeah, the Aurora is... very ugly in my opinion. I personally don't think I'll ever fly that asymmetrical mess willingly. It's got lots of guns, but it's got no style.

Same with a large section of the ships. Too asymmetrical for me.

I hope someone will make a symmetrical version of most of the ships some day.

300
General Discussion / Re: My thoughts on Starfarer (As a new-comer)
« on: February 22, 2012, 08:25:55 PM »
Oh, really! Well, in that case, now that I've got your attention, if possible, also make it so the AI also shows it's armored sides to the enemy rather than it's exposed sides. Or make it a higher priority if it already shows it's exposed sides. I had an AI ship that might have survived a missile wave if it had turned right and showed it's armored left side to the missiles rather than the right side with no more armor. Instead it turned left and left it's exposed side directly towards the missiles. The result was not surprising. I didn't expect it to survive, no, but I did expect it to try to survive.

Pages: 1 ... 18 19 [20] 21