Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.9.1a is out! (05/10/19); Blog post: Personal Contacts (08/13/20)

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 39

Author Topic: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 213369 times)

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8254
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #255 on: December 05, 2015, 04:15:40 PM »

Question:  I noticed Black Market trade at a "Free Port" (e.g., Port Tse Franchise #3 and Tibicena) does not raise suspicion, meaning it stays at "none".  Does this mean no smuggling investigations if I trade at a Black Market with a Free Port?  If so, this is nice!  I can eat an immediate minor reputation penalty for too much trade, but I do not want an investigation that sends cooperative rep crashing down to inhospitable.
Logged

TJJ

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1866
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #256 on: December 05, 2015, 04:28:10 PM »

Ugh, sorry :( I'll try to remember to mention OS X/Linux in the future when talking about save compatibility. Just didn't occur to me; was only thinking about whether old saves would be compatible, not what you'd need to do to transfer them over on OS X.

Would it be possible to move the saves folder into a library/application support/fractalsoftworks folder?

This is the industry standard way of placing saves on OSX and would prevent this from happening in the future.

The same with Windows tbh; saving in the game's installation folder is really bad practice. (completely ignores user access rights, and multi-user environments)
Likewise, mods shouldn't be where they are either.

Though what's considered 'good practice' depends upon who you ask.
Many games write save game data to "%UserProfile%\Documents\My Games".
Yet typical application data should be placed in "%AppData%".
Then there's "%UserProfile%\Saved Games", which seems the most appropriately named folder, yet very few games actually use this location.

The only constant, is that there's no convention for name-spacing your game's folder.
Some games use \Publish\Full Game Name".
Some use just "\Full Game Name"
Others use "\AbbreviatedGameNameInCamelCase".
A right royal f**king mess if you ask me.

Steam's \SteamApps\ folder is equally slapdash & lacking any kind of convention, though at least that's all governed by a central authority. (Valve)


It all makes the simplicity & durability of Java's name spacing convention (reversedCompanyDomain.package.Class) look positively idyllic.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2015, 04:34:33 PM by TJJ »
Logged

Blips

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 216
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #257 on: December 05, 2015, 04:30:09 PM »

just check the Intel/Map and hover the cursor over a star

Ah thanks, that helped. :D
Logged

Serenitis

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #258 on: December 05, 2015, 05:08:28 PM »

Yes, Independents shouldn't be getting into wars with other factions, even if they offer commissions. Like Megas said, it makes them feel like a singular unified entity, rather than a number of small factions.

Seconding this.
Also not having the Indies join in the faction soap opera allows the player to remain unbound if they feel so inclined.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2015, 05:11:05 PM by Serenitis »
Logged

behrooz

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #259 on: December 05, 2015, 05:30:07 PM »

I think of hostilities involving the independent faction as a result of the other faction authorizing attacks against neutrals from their side.

Something like "Unrestricted Hegemony attacks on neutral shipping have resulted in a state of hostility between most independent groups and the Hegemony navy."

Independents don't have to be a unified faction to have a de-facto state of war with a faction that is, whether that is ranging from "Hegemony forces have banned neutral shipping in the Corvus system." to "Tri-tachyon is reacting to recent attacks from disguised Luddic Path forces by treating all unaffiliated ships in the sector as hostile."

Gameplay wise, it should be rarer, and hostilities should be initiated only by organized factions who have some reason to do so.
Logged

theSONY

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 673
  • Not a single Flux given
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #260 on: December 05, 2015, 05:31:08 PM »

I think independents & smugglers  shouldn't been an faction, i mean they should be everyone for himself
like you attack one independent/smuggler & there should be no reputation drop
Logged
-the ABOMINATION - in progress

Voyager I

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #261 on: December 05, 2015, 06:58:32 PM »

I think independents & smugglers  shouldn't been an faction, i mean they should be everyone for himself
like you attack one independent/smuggler & there should be no reputation drop

Unaffiliated traders probably have very strong opinions about people who habitually attack unaffiliated traders

The usual term for them is 'Pirates'.
Logged

Vlitzen

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #262 on: December 05, 2015, 07:37:40 PM »

Yeah I like that independents can actually defend themselves if the hegemony goes after them, and it makes lore sense that the hegemony and other factions would at least sometimes be annoyed with unaffiliated individuals. I do think it should be mildly rare though, since independents mostly mind their own business and don't associate with any one faction anyway.
Logged
"Your ship seems a little wobbly."
"Wobbly?"
"Yes, wobbly. It can't hit the broadside of an Onslaught, and the engine is missing so much armor plating I feel like it's mooning me every time you leave port."

swicked

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #263 on: December 05, 2015, 08:49:42 PM »

  • Fixed issue where if a bounty fleet lost its commander, but wasn't entirely destroyed, the player would still get a bounty for them
...uh, what?
But the bounties are for the commanders. They read that "[faction] authorities on [planet] have posted a bounty for bringing [commander's name], [crime], to justice."
You shouldn't need to destroy the fleet. Only the commander.
Should the bounty notifications be re-written to specify they are for the commander and everyone in their present company?

In any case, how do bounties work, now?
Every time I hunt one down, even one for the faction I've accepted a commission for, I seem to get "Reports indicate that [enemy] was killed in an incident unrelated to the bounty posting."
I tried going to the planet the bounty was first posted by but there's no option I can see to accept it.
Am I not allowed to bounty hunt under commission?
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 16916
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #264 on: December 05, 2015, 08:55:34 PM »

Question:  I noticed Black Market trade at a "Free Port" (e.g., Port Tse Franchise #3 and Tibicena) does not raise suspicion, meaning it stays at "none".  Does this mean no smuggling investigations if I trade at a Black Market with a Free Port?  If so, this is nice!  I can eat an immediate minor reputation penalty for too much trade, but I do not want an investigation that sends cooperative rep crashing down to inhospitable.

That's right, no smuggling investigations at free ports.


  • Fixed issue where if a bounty fleet lost its commander, but wasn't entirely destroyed, the player would still get a bounty for them
...uh, what?
But the bounties are for the commanders. They read that "[faction] authorities on [planet] have posted a bounty for bringing [commander's name], [crime], to justice."
You shouldn't need to destroy the fleet. Only the commander.
Should the bounty notifications be re-written to specify they are for the commander and everyone in their present company?

In any case, how do bounties work, now?
Every time I hunt one down, even one for the faction I've accepted a commission for, I seem to get "Reports indicate that [enemy] was killed in an incident unrelated to the bounty posting."
I tried going to the planet the bounty was first posted by but there's no option I can see to accept it.
Am I not allowed to bounty hunt under commission?

Sorry that wasn't clear - you'd still get a bounty is *someone else* killed the commander, and then you mopped up the now commander-less fleet.

As for not getting any bounties: yeah, that's a bug. The hotfix for it (0.7.1a-RC5) is up.
Logged

Voyager I

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #265 on: December 05, 2015, 09:07:55 PM »

Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments?  Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.
Logged

swicked

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #266 on: December 05, 2015, 09:09:29 PM »

Sorry that wasn't clear - you'd still get a bounty is *someone else* killed the commander, and then you mopped up the now commander-less fleet.

As for not getting any bounties: yeah, that's a bug. The hotfix for it (0.7.1a-RC5) is up.
Oooooh, okay.
Thank you!
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3738
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #267 on: December 05, 2015, 09:10:05 PM »

Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments?  Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.
You can check that before the battle actually starts, when you first engage the fleet (spot out the star).  I had to fight a level 20 Tri-Tachyon Deserter Officer in a Hyperion without any Hyperion of my own, and I destroyed him, so it's not impossible.
Logged
Quote from: Trylobot
I am officially an epoch.
Quote from: Thaago
Note: please sacrifice your goats responsibly, look up the proper pronunciation of Alex's name. We wouldn't want some other project receiving mystic power.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 16916
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #268 on: December 05, 2015, 09:14:08 PM »

possible bug
50000 credit bounty posted is listed as 75000C on my intel screen...

Varda Lim by the tri-tachyon.

Bug?  am am neutral with tri-tachyon.

I can click the 75000 bounty and it reads 50000 credit at the top.

It's a bug - fixed, thank you. The actual bounty amount is the higher one.


Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments?  Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.

I've run into similar stuff in playtesting and the solution has been to make sure you take them out early on in the battle before they run. It's harder, but also mixes up the things you actually need to do in battle. So I'm not entirely sure this is something that needs to be sanity-checked or fixed - just something that requires an adjustment in tactics to deal with.

If that gets to a pursuit scenario, that's basically a loss condition... well, not quite, even then. You could harry them instead (to avoid a long and pointless pursuit) and if you catch them enough times and harry their CR down, they should stand and fight eventually. Or crash-mothball when they flee and become easily catchable. Or not crash-mothball and explode from critical malfunctions. This would get more expensive with all the emergency burns and such, but if it's a big bounty, it's probably still worth it.

So you've got an initial tactic, and then a fallback if that doesn't work out. Seems reasonable to me; thoughts?
Logged

nomadic_leader

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 725
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7.1a (Released) Patch Notes
« Reply #269 on: December 05, 2015, 09:46:22 PM »

So you've got an initial tactic, and then a fallback if that doesn't work out. Seems reasonable to me; thoughts?

Agreed. Anyway if being in a fast phase ship makes the admiral so hard to catch, of course they'd always choose to be in such a ship.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 39