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)

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 39

Author Topic: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 291521 times)

Raion

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #60 on: December 01, 2015, 09:37:29 AM »


  • Fleet compositions: reduced number of fighters in carrier groups, improved algorithm to more closely match intended ship distributions

Finally,I will not find a bounty fleet with 4 heron carrier and a annoying number of thunder fighter squads easily
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #61 on: December 01, 2015, 11:19:15 AM »

    @Unfolder: Thanks for your feedback! For the future, a lot of these should probably go in suggestions.


Say i take a commission with the hegemony, immediately dropping my relations with the tri-tachyon to hostile. later, a faction hostility event breaks out between the hegemony and the Sindrian Diktat. My relations to them drop straight to hostile as expected. but when the event is over, what happens to my relations with them? does  it go back to neutral or stay at hostile?

Pretty sure that you don't become automatically hostile if your commission-faction declared war to it after you joined. Otherwise this would not be there:

Still, that would mean you have to get hostile with them on you own and then quickly get neutral with them again on your own, otherwise you would get hit with a rep loss for your commission-faction. Seems as if at least some help here would be in order. I wouldn't be much fun if the "right" way to play were to get barely hostile and then don't attack anymore, so you can become neutral again quickly.
Maybe you should get no (or minimal) negative reputation automatically (it's easy to get on your own) upon declaration of war, but a huge reputation boost when your commission-faction ends the hostilities (if you are hostile yourself).

Right, it doesn't auto-drop. But, yeah, this could get annoying, being stuck with slow gradual rep loss for becoming hostile during hostilities and not becoming non-hostile after.

I think I'll just make it so that you get up to suspicious when hostilities end, if you're below.


Oh, and please don't forget the bug where pirate raiders attack you while you are friendly with pirates :)

On my list for .2!

Gryphon changes sound good, but maybe the system still could use a bit of a delay? Maybe as long as a typical overload. Seems as if the double Reaper/Harpoon barrage would be a very viable option for every battle now, and still OP.

That sounds reasonable, but I find that kind of bursty missile spam just too much fun.

(Still, I've got a TODO item to set the one-shot Reaper cooldown to 5 seconds, if I can bring myself to do it.)


Come on! (D) hulls are bad enough without the sensor profile increase! I can't believe I'm the only one that is yet to be (succesfully) ambushed by a pirate fleet!

Kind of why they exist, "being bad enough" :)


Sounds to me like a doubling of ammunition at best, almost nothing at worst (read: to early, AI).

Sort of, but it does cost a lot of flux, so there's an element of risk to doing it in the thick of things. The AI handles it fairly well imo.


Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?

Like:
75% Hard Flux generation
50% Missiles Refilled
10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented

This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds

(Why does this always end with)[/list]

One big reason is the AI would not  be able to handle this well.



It is almost starved for OP if you want Safety Override on it.

Sounds about right :)

Actually, that could be one more nerf for Gryphon:  Disable Safety Override for it because missiles do not get the range penalty, and the ballistics will probably be filled with short-ranged Vulcans and Flak.

Seems like a meaningful tradeoff to use SO or not. More speed and less peak time, or more flux capacity for defense and use of system? Or more of something else, I suppose.


Why remove rep decay? This seems like a good way to forgive/encourage experimentation by the player. Unless you read the forums religiously, you won't know all the rules about factions and relationships; neither do I think that the game should explicitly tell you all these things. Leaving it opaque is fine, but the decay is a mechanic to make sure it isn't too punishing.

I don't think it was actually doing that, though. So in my view it's more cleanup of stuff that's in there but, if we're being honest, that I've completely forgotten even existed. Not opposed to possibly bringing this back in some other form eventually, though.


Pirates have a military market at Umbra, or will that be ripped out in 0.7.1?
There is a Pirate market on Umbra as someone mentioned. Pirates deserve to have their special market so the faction maintains some kind of viability. Getting accepted by the pirates should be hard, and it is, but there should still be rewards for it. Commissions don't fit them, but leave some other way to get into the market by rep alone?

As I mentioned earlier, pirate military markets don't require commissions.


Does this hold true for your site, too? Wouldn't want my timid carrier to charge the enemy, just because I have no other officers deployed.

Quote
•Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployed
Does the player count as an officer for this purpose?  If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?

The player counts as "steady".


Quote
?Small monthly reputation penalties for being hostile with neutral factions, and for not being hostile to faction enemies
One more question:  Hostile includes Vengeful too?  It would be silly if I lose reputation with my faction enemies if they hate me too much.

Yeah, it'd be weird if it didn't. I see how the phrasing is confusing, though. In this case just using hostile to mean "will shoot you".

One more question:  Do non-combat ships piloted by Aggressive officers count as combat ships for the purpose of toggling Cautious for Timid officers?

They do count. Basically, timid will only become cautious when noone else in the fleet will be their meatshield.


Maybe, devs should reconsider chances of boarding?  ::) Current 5% chance is too low and makes boarding feature (marines) in game totally useless. I've changed chances to 20% and it makes sense now.

I think the main issue is the "lose 1/3rd of marines" bug. Once you start fighting bigger fleets, boarding kicks in fairly often at 5% already, and if you're fighting small pirates, well, (D) ships aren't exactly worth boarding in the first place. But hey, if you prefer 20%, go for it!
Logged

Twogs

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #62 on: December 01, 2015, 11:23:23 AM »

    Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?

    Like:
    75% Hard Flux generation
    50% Missiles Refilled
    10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented

    This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds

    (Why does this always end with)[/list]

    One big reason is the AI would not  be able to handle this well.


    The question is how well will the AI use the system you will implement in the next version.

    And as stated above in the one shot form it's little more than an increased missile rack size, as you can in the best case "only" double the rack size
    « Last Edit: December 01, 2015, 11:24:58 AM by Twogs »
    Logged

    Grievous69

    • Admiral
    • *****
    • Posts: 2975
      • View Profile
    Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
    « Reply #63 on: December 01, 2015, 11:28:10 AM »

      Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?

      Like:
      75% Hard Flux generation
      50% Missiles Refilled
      10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented

      This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds

      (Why does this always end with)[/list]

      One big reason is the AI would not  be able to handle this well.


      The question is how well will the AI use the system you will implement in the next version.

      And as stated above in the one shot form it's little more than an increased missile rack size, as you can in the best case "only" double the rack size

      Quote from Alex:

      Quote
      The AI handles it fairly well imo.
      Logged
      Please don't take me too seriously.

      Alex

      • Administrator
      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 23986
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #64 on: December 01, 2015, 11:29:55 AM »

      The way it is now, it's hard for the AI to mess it up *too* badly.

      And as stated above in the one shot form it's little more than an increased missile rack size, as you can in the best case "only" double the rack size

      That's huge, though. And the flux cost gives it some tactical considerations to work around, i.e. you can't always just unload everything. Hmm - I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say here. I mean, I understand what you're saying, but it seems like you're thinking of some implications of what you've said that I'm not thinking of, if that makes sense.
      Logged

      Twogs

      • Lieutenant
      • **
      • Posts: 76
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #65 on: December 01, 2015, 11:34:15 AM »

      That this is a bit sad, considering you designed this wonderful ship and system just to make it a one shot one in the end. As far as I know no other system is a one shot system.
      This system you could almost fit into a hullmod (but like you said, the flux is missing then). Which kinda makes it a sad case
      Logged

      Alex

      • Administrator
      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 23986
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #66 on: December 01, 2015, 11:57:30 AM »

      Yeah, you could make a 2x missile ammo hullmod that stacked with expanded missile racks, this is true. That hullmod would be ridiculously overpowered, though. My point is that there's lots of room for the system to be powerful even if it's best-case is equal to this hypothetical hullmod.

      I do see what you're saying now, though. A one-shot system doesn't offer as many opportunities to make a decision about its use. On the other hand, the decision is more important, so there's that. Kind of need to see how it plays out, I think.
      Logged

      Gothars

      • Global Moderator
      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 4403
      • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #67 on: December 01, 2015, 12:48:17 PM »

      Expanded missile rack is a extremely, mh, economical hullmod for what it does on ships with many missile mounts. Maybe its relative low cost skew how people see the worth of the (in effect similar) auto reloader?


      On my list for .2!

      How are the chances that the pirate way of life in general will see some love in that update? Maybe even a pirate start option?
      Logged
      The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

      Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

      Alex

      • Administrator
      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 23986
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #68 on: December 01, 2015, 12:54:16 PM »

      Expanded missile rack is a extremely, mh, economical hullmod for what it does on ships with many missile mounts. Maybe its relative low cost skew how people see the worth of the (in effect similar) auto reloader?

      That makes sense, but since they stack, that's a big difference.

      How are the chances that the pirate way of life in general will see some love in that update? Maybe even a pirate start option?

      I've got an item to look at the various starting options. For one, two of them are kind of traps right now. For a pirate start specifically, I don't know. The game doesn't really have a good way to build up pirate standing right now.

      Hmm. Maybe attacking someone with your transponder off could give you a point or two of pirate standing :) Yeah, going to look at it.
      Logged

      Megas

      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 12117
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #69 on: December 01, 2015, 01:39:46 PM »

      @ Alex: At least my Timids will remain Timid as long as my ship is on the field.  It seems the toggle will mostly apply to the enemy, to stop their taunting.
      Logged

      Alex

      • Administrator
      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 23986
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #70 on: December 01, 2015, 01:42:11 PM »

      That's the idea, yes. "Cautious" aren't exactly going to be in a rush to close distance, but at least they will now and again.
      Logged

      Aeson

      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 501
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #71 on: December 01, 2015, 01:48:19 PM »

      Quote
      Removed half damage option from global settings
      Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but would you mind explaining why? The easier you make Easy relative to Normal, the harder it'll be to transition from one to the other, and folding the only other difficulty-customization option we had into the Easy start isn't going to help that at all. Plus, while I might want to play Easy for the additional loot, easier economy, etc, half damage to my own ship and half again to my ship's damage output isn't exactly appealing to me (and yes, I realize that this will be something I can change in one of the settings files if I really want the easier economy but not the better flagship).
      Logged

      Alex

      • Administrator
      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 23986
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #72 on: December 01, 2015, 02:00:22 PM »

      Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but would you mind explaining why? The easier you make Easy relative to Normal, the harder it'll be to transition from one to the other, and folding the only other difficulty-customization option we had into the Easy start isn't going to help that at all. Plus, while I might want to play Easy for the additional loot, easier economy, etc, half damage to my own ship and half again to my ship's damage output isn't exactly appealing to me (and yes, I realize that this will be something I can change in one of the settings files if I really want the easier economy but not the better flagship).

      It's just confusing to have multiple options doing the same thing.

      I did think about putting all the "easy" settings into the gameplay settings tab instead, but that's hidden away from someone that needs it most, i.e. a new player. Could do it and have it all default to "easy", I suppose - but some aren't ones you can toggle after the game starts (i.e. half-level enemy officers), and it's not exactly great if a new player is playing on easy and doesn't know that, either.

      All in all, this isn't very straightforward design-wise. Different approaches have different benefits and downsides. This way, it seems friendlier for new players, and as you say, a more experienced played does have the option to fine-tune it if they like. Not set on this being the final version of how difficulty levels are going to work, though - want to see how this plays out.
      Logged

      nomadic_leader

      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 725
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #73 on: December 01, 2015, 02:20:42 PM »

      The game doesn't really have a good way to build up pirate standing right now.

      Hmm. Maybe attacking someone with your transponder off could give you a point or two of pirate standing :) Yeah, going to look at it.

      I suppose you'll nerf this after I tell you about it, but there is a kinda good way to build up pirate standing-- as a smuggler. You can either trade with them at a fairly high volume, smuggle stuff into their enemies markets (in a system where there's a pirate world), and most importantly, do missions. I went to that irish planets system and did tonnes of small drug run missions to operators on the independent worlds, or heavy equipment to Donne, etc. Each mission for them gives me a point of rep, and I just have to make sure an independent patrol doesn't catch me with the dope and my transponder off.

      The normal trading often seems to give me more negatives with the pirate enemies than it gives positives with pirates itself, that's why I prefer the missions.

      It takes a lot of time and its a grind, but earning the trust of organized criminals has never been easy. They can't just let anyone in you know.
      Logged

      Megas

      • Admiral
      • *****
      • Posts: 12117
        • View Profile
      Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
      « Reply #74 on: December 01, 2015, 02:27:33 PM »

      I did not bother checking settings when I first got the game, and did not realize why I kept getting 50% for mission score despite perfect play at first.

      Settings are easy to overlook, if you assume how things work instead of checking every last detail.

      I think checking Easy during a new game is best for campaign game, though it does not help mission games.
      Logged
      Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 39