Fractal Softworks Forum
November 15, 2018, 05:34:18 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: In-dev patch notes for Starsector 0.9a (10/20/18); New blog post: Portrait Hegemonization (10/16/18);  Starsector 0.8.1a is out!
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32
  Print  
Author Topic: [0.8.1a] Dassault-Mikoyan Engineering v.0.9.9  (Read 148857 times)
Soren
Admiral
*****
Posts: 508


Totally Not Omega


View Profile
« Reply #435 on: May 25, 2018, 10:14:36 PM »

Maybe you should consider giving the "monobloc construction" hullmod some sort of defensive bonus? The hullmod reduces offensive power (at range), and flexibility of loadout (by discouraging ranged weapons), and even defense (by blocking heavy armor hullmods). What do they get in return? A pretty marginal 25% EMP resistance. (They also get overload reduction, but this bonus is largely useless to attentive players when piloting their own ship, or even for AI ships if you have the AI improvement mod installed, which makes AI ships excellent at avoiding overloads)

I'm guessing there's some intent behind reducing their ranges. If the goal is to make them closer range brawlers, shouldn't they get a corresponding speed or protection (armor/shield) bonus so to help them survive the punishment time needed to close to range? Or if the goal is to discourage combat, perhaps offer a sensor/stealth or fuel efficiency bonus instead.

The range penalty is actually to offset the combination of high speed and ballistic weaponry, which can become a kiting nightmare. I mentioned above that in the dev version the penalty scales, and is less severe on larger, slower ships. Stuff like EMP resistance and shorter overloads is there to make them better hit-and-run attack ships; some DME ships can brawl, and brawl pretty well (the Baikal is a real bruiser), but you generally want to disengage and come in for a second run.

That said, some top speeds have been boosted slightly, too. The ideal playstyle for DME ships is to focus on fighters, speed, shielding, and synergy between 'hammer' and 'anvil' elements - using tanky ships like the Wanderer or Baikal as anchors, and using fast ships like the Tunguska or Kormoran as flankers. Then you have your carriers and their combined fighter complements as the striking arm, delivering those heavy blows that crush ships in a few passes.

Digging through the files I found those red Universal Securities ships. If you're not using them, you should release them for use by pirates/neutrals. If only temporarily until you get around to finishing whatever subfaction you were planning for them. You put in all the work to write up their stats and even make skins for them, but they're just sitting there collecting dust!

I am using them! They show up in two missions right now, and the eventual plan is to have them available in campaign as hirable merc fleets.
Logged

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Regularity
Lieutenant
**
Posts: 81


View Profile
« Reply #436 on: May 26, 2018, 09:09:52 AM »

Thinking about it some more, I realized there a simple solution to the monobloc hull bonuses: add bonus to flux venting speed. As I mentioned, by making the largest bonus to overload reduction, it's only really useful for pilots with bad flux management (dumb AI). But by adding a flux venting speed bonus, you can also make the hullmod equally useful for pilots with good flux management (enhanced AI and player ships).

Also, concerning the UC ships, I'd would recommend making them available on the pirate/black markets (even if only very rarely), so you can obtain player feedback on balancing and combat. That, and I really want to try them! But I suppose I can just use the in-game console to spawn some, too, though that's not as fun.
Logged
Wyvern
Admiral
*****
Posts: 1892


View Profile
« Reply #437 on: May 26, 2018, 01:54:03 PM »

@Regularity: There -is- a bonus.  It's just one that's baked into the base ship stats.  Would you be happier if, say, Soren reduced the speed of all DME ships by 50, and added a "+50 speed" bonus to the hull mod?

...This reminds me of the old WoW 'rested xp' thing.
Devs implemented a 50% XP penalty for playing too long at a stretch.
Players: "This penalty is terrible!  Devs, remove it now!"
Devs cut all XP gains in half, implement a 2x XP rested bonus that accrues when you're logged out at an inn.
Players: "Yay, bonus XP!"
Logged

Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.
Soren
Admiral
*****
Posts: 508


Totally Not Omega


View Profile
« Reply #438 on: May 26, 2018, 04:33:27 PM »

...by making the largest bonus to overload reduction, it's only really useful for pilots with bad flux management (dumb AI).
I think you're underselling the utility of a bonus that AI ships benefit from. All the ships you're not currently piloting, after all, benefit from that. You also need to think of it in terms of player experience vs. DME ships; you can't count on extended periods of vulnerability after an overload.

But by adding a flux venting speed bonus, you can also make the hullmod equally useful for pilots with good flux management (enhanced AI and player ships).
If you look at the ships that are designed specifically as player flagships, you'll see they have a different hullmod that, indeed, boosts venting speed. I do actually play this game, and playtest my work, and I pay attention to feel. I also noticed that fast venting is fun.

Also, concerning the UC ships, I'd would recommend making them available on the pirate/black markets (even if only very rarely), so you can obtain player feedback on balancing and combat. That, and I really want to try them! But I suppose I can just use the in-game console to spawn some, too, though that's not as fun.
Players can already test them out in missions, which is functionally ideal for balance testing anyway (no skills to interfere). And yeah, just console them in and enjoy. That said, they're not designed or intended for player use; it's great if you enjoy them, but the intended campaign role is as AI support. If their designs change later, it'll be to make them better AI ships, not better player ships.

I like feedback, but if something doesn't make sense, ask a question instead of assuming you already understand it and that it should change until you've heard the rationale.
Logged

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Tartiflette
Admiral
*****
Posts: 2431


Kickstarter is NOT a magic spring of free money!


View Profile Email
« Reply #439 on: May 26, 2018, 11:33:55 PM »

I solved that issue by using my built-in hullmods to explain all the balance choices, not just describe their direct effects. I say "ship is faster, but has crappy flux dissipation" even if it's just an effect of the base hull stats.
Logged

 
Soren
Admiral
*****
Posts: 508


Totally Not Omega


View Profile
« Reply #440 on: May 27, 2018, 03:18:22 PM »

Get your update on >HERE<. Should not, but might, break saves.

0.9.8f - Balance, minor content.

Content:
- Made Hedgehog Pod purchasable, because why not. Enjoy taking a big, explosive dump on things.
- Added Frappeur Torpedo Launcher, a 20OP large missile.
- Added new Frappeur launch sound, fiddled with visuals.

Balance:
- Reduced Rafale II OP cost to 20.
- Borzoi PPT reduced to 180.
- Monobloc Construction range threshold is now graduated 600/700/800/900 by hull class. Less brutal for capitals and cruisers. Rewrote description.
- Zelenograd speed increased to 70 from 65.
- Jeanne d'Arc and Baikal speed increased to 45 from 40.
- Tunguska speed increased to 85 from 80.
- Removed Civilian-grade hullmod on Carabao, Sevastopol Mk.1 and Puddle Jumper Mk.1.
- Changed Goalkeeper AI type to SUPPORT.

Campaign:
- Added generous namegen list to spice up vanilla, because I can.
- Added tips, so you can not read my advice inside the game as well as on the forum and in changelogs.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2018, 09:02:55 PM by Soren » Logged

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Shuka
Ensign
*
Posts: 23


View Profile Email
« Reply #441 on: May 30, 2018, 02:54:23 PM »

I appreciate you making your information more universally ignorable.

More seriously, just started using DME and I really like the normandie and d'erlon carriers. They look cool and are great support ships which don't stray outside their roles which is nice.
Logged
Regularity
Lieutenant
**
Posts: 81


View Profile
« Reply #442 on: June 01, 2018, 10:30:38 AM »

More seriously, just started using DME and I really like the normandie and d'erlon carriers. They look cool and are great support ships which don't stray outside their roles which is nice.

The d'Elons are quite an unusual ship in terms of their role, aren't they?

Compared to other destroyers, they can both carry as much as a dedicated freighter (75% the average cargo of a Buffalo), and have a full complement of fighters for their size class (two fighter bays, which is usually the max for destroyers), making them probably one of the only ships that can be a dedicated carrier and a dedicated freighter at the same time and with the same configuration. They are also superior to other combat freighters since they can project their full firepower without use of conventional weapons, meaning they can engage at extreme range and do not put their cargo at risk. And if that wasn't enough, their engagement range means you can strip off all the shield and armor hull mods, and put those points towards much heavier fighters than a ship of that size normally field.

Some playthroughs I have large trading fleets composed almost entirely of d'Elons -- with only a few heavy ships as escorts, so they can block the enemy's advance and absorb fire while the d'Elon fighters do their thing. The only thing they can't really do is engage capital ships. I mean, they can destroy them, but the massive blast radius of reactors can wipe out entire fleets worth of fighters in an instant, so leave them pretty vulnerable against multiple capitals at once. Overall, they're ability to do almost everything at once makes them almost too good of a ship.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2018, 10:44:19 AM by Regularity » Logged
Soren
Admiral
*****
Posts: 508


Totally Not Omega


View Profile
« Reply #443 on: June 02, 2018, 02:38:59 PM »

Hmm. I've fixed that in dev, seems like an error on my part; if any combat ship is meant to have high cargo cap, it's the Tereshkova.

I think it's still a good light carrier, though, and extremely effective en masse.
Logged

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Shuka
Ensign
*
Posts: 23


View Profile Email
« Reply #444 on: June 06, 2018, 07:47:34 AM »

They were a godsend early on, fielding fighters and a low resupply cost. I eventually phased them put for for more combat oriented light carriers when I shifted to faction warfare.

I really liked that they offered cheap fighter support, and were vulnerable to strike forces. Just kinda seemed like the perfect balance. Sometimes when a ship can do everything well its a turn off
Logged
xenoargh
Admiral
*****
Posts: 4316

Not a super-villain in real life.


View Profile
« Reply #445 on: June 21, 2018, 02:29:38 AM »

Snrasha sent me a bug report saying there was some sort of crash-bug incompatibility with DME and one of my mods (I presume FX).  

Can't seem to find a report here and SS starts up just fine with this mod in the load order with all of my current mods... and I don't see anything super-obvious.

Can anybody explain what bug was observed?  I'll be happy to fix it if I know how to reproduce it.
Logged

Check out my SS projects Smiley
Soren
Admiral
*****
Posts: 508


Totally Not Omega


View Profile
« Reply #446 on: June 21, 2018, 06:54:35 AM »

I'd appreciate it if you could take that over to your own thread, then, unless you've definitely discovered a general incompatibility issue on my end that affects mods actually following best practices.

As I said in the FAQ, I don't test with your mods but I do follow best-practices for Starsector modding, so if there's an issue it'll be on your end, not mine. Keep it in your own lane.
Logged

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
xenoargh
Admiral
*****
Posts: 4316

Not a super-villain in real life.


View Profile
« Reply #447 on: June 21, 2018, 06:19:24 PM »

Hey, no problem, I got a completely vague report and was just following up  Smiley
Logged

Check out my SS projects Smiley
Jangala Fett
Ensign
*
Posts: 1


View Profile Email
« Reply #448 on: July 25, 2018, 07:21:26 PM »



Yup, that's a Starbridge. Hahahah.
Logged
Soren
Admiral
*****
Posts: 508


Totally Not Omega


View Profile
« Reply #449 on: July 25, 2018, 07:22:11 PM »

Yup. Had to do it.

In other news, I've been (among other alterations and tweaks) integrating Nicke535's quad-strip trail code and made a new 6OP drone to celebrate:
Say hello to the Sauterelle Rail Drone.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2018, 11:43:43 AM by Soren » Logged

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."
Pages: 1 ... 28 29 [30] 31 32
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!