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); Updated the Forum Rules and Guidelines (02/29/20); Blog post: GIF Roundup (04/11/20)

Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 117

Author Topic: Starsector 0.8a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 452258 times)

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2684
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #315 on: March 24, 2017, 01:02:40 AM »

Quote
Added "Distress Call" player ability; may result in friendly fleet arriving with some fuel or supplies

I had a good chuckle, got the feeling there might be pirates answering it as well?
Yeah I can see this being used by someone *coughmegascough* to draw in fleets to make a big(ger) fight
Logged
Stop trying to balance the game around a few minmaxers...
Programming is like sex:
One mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life.

Tired of having your game crash because of out of date mods? Then click here!
Spoiler
Get Version Checker today! Now with 90% less hassle! Simply toss it into your mod folder, activate the mod like a normal one and BINGO you will now be informed of any and all updates when you start SS campaign up!
[close]

sycspysycspy

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 157
  • Translator of the Council of AL
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #316 on: March 24, 2017, 01:11:32 AM »

Are there any skills which give your ships bonus OP, or effective bonus OP a la the old Ordinance Expertise?

Yeah, there's one skill in Technology that gives +10% OP alongside modest increases to max vents/capacitors.

If modspecs can be dropped from ships which have that hullmod installed, can you potentially get a Heavy Ballistics Integration hullmod from killing lots of Conquests?

Negative - built-in hullmods can't drop.

So for conquest Heavy Ballistics Integration hullmod would bring 40 effecitve OP if the player choose to have 4 large ballistic weapons installed. And you reduced its OP by 30 so overall the conquest class would get 10 more OP in the event of having 4 large ballistic weaspons installed. I kinda feel bad for it.
Logged
Please report any translation error to me with PM.
- I just went over to my bank account and figured out I can live comfortably without working for the rest of my life as long as I die on next Tuesday.

AxleMC131

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1676
  • Amateur World-Builder
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #317 on: March 24, 2017, 02:09:49 AM »

Am I the only person who feels carrier distribution between tech levels is backwards? Low-tech now has 3. Midline has 2. High-tech has 1. This is of course discounting not-real-carriers like Gemini and Odyssey.

On the other hand, 6 out of 14 strike craft are high-tech, and it is also the only tech level that fields shielded strike craft.

Just curious, how are you defining "strike craft" here? I presume not just fighters, because I'm looking at Starsector's current fighters, and those numbers don't add up. Are you including things like the Hyperion and Tempest?

EDIT: On a personal note and for the sake of discussion, I treat the Dagger as a midline fighter, so I'm not convinced high-tech has a monopoly on shielded fighters.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2017, 02:11:34 AM by AxleMC131 »
Logged

MesoTroniK

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1533
  • I am going to destroy your ships
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #318 on: March 24, 2017, 02:31:02 AM »

It is high tech, the hull and engine styles don't lie.

Embolism

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #319 on: March 24, 2017, 03:39:22 AM »

Am I the only person who feels carrier distribution between tech levels is backwards? Low-tech now has 3. Midline has 2. High-tech has 1. This is of course discounting not-real-carriers like Gemini and Odyssey.

On the other hand, 6 out of 14 strike craft are high-tech, and it is also the only tech level that fields shielded strike craft.

Just curious, how are you defining "strike craft" here? I presume not just fighters, because I'm looking at Starsector's current fighters, and those numbers don't add up. Are you including things like the Hyperion and Tempest?

EDIT: On a personal note and for the sake of discussion, I treat the Dagger as a midline fighter, so I'm not convinced high-tech has a monopoly on shielded fighters.

The next patch will include two more strike craft (Claw and Khopesh, the former is high-tech and the latter is midline).

And yeah the Dagger's definitely high-tech based on aesthetics. Khopesh will be the midline bomber.
Logged

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4158
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #320 on: March 24, 2017, 03:50:40 AM »

Very interesting changes again, many more then I expected to see before the update.

Quote
Target fleets now hide out outside the core worlds area and tend to favor star systems that are also otherwise interesting

That's good. Recently I've been thinking that a key to good open-world game design is not to plaster the place with stuff to do and mark it all on a map, but do lay loose threads between points of interest. If you finish one thing and "naturally" stumble upon the next interesting thing, it feels much more like exploration and as if you have real agency.

Quote
Can click minimap in intel message detail to switch to map tab showing location that was on miniamp

I appreciate this kind of UI polish!


Logged

TJJ

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1853
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #321 on: March 24, 2017, 04:35:53 AM »

That's good. Recently I've been thinking that a key to good open-world game design is not to plaster the place with stuff to do and mark it all on a map, but do lay loose threads between points of interest. If you finish one thing and "naturally" stumble upon the next interesting thing, it feels much more like exploration and as if you have real agency.

Yeah, the Elder Scrolls games do this excellently.
I also like the approach that Freelancer and the various Evochron games took; making exploration be about the journey as much as the destination, and have it be time consuming and dangerous.

Horizon Zero Dawn, and Mass Effect Andromeda on the other hand.... They both suffer from what i call Assassin's Creed syndrome.
The player doesn't explore the world, they just move from quest marker to quest marker like a preprogrammed robot, there's no journey, no incidental discovery, no surprise, just a load of copy/pasted content dumps.
It's especially damning for ME:A, as it was heralded as having exploration components.
Logged

Faiter119

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1394
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #322 on: March 24, 2017, 04:42:29 AM »

Gotten back into the game lately and I must say you have come a long way :) I've really enjoyed playing and the world feels very alive.

This patch seems dope Alex keep it up!
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1204
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #323 on: March 24, 2017, 06:11:40 AM »

(or god help me, a station)

Haha, but I thought stations would end up fairly symmetrical! You can't just do one quarter of it and then clone/reorient the rest of it into place? But even so, I guess it's possible that just a quarter of a station is rocking more pixels than anything elseā€”can't wait to see the beasts in action!
Logged

Orikson

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 280
  • Always Seen on Discord
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #324 on: March 24, 2017, 07:57:25 AM »

Just asking, what is difference between 'Integrated Targeting Unit' and 'Dedicated Targeting Core' hull mod (both present and future)?

I get that ITU can be installed on any ship, and DTC is exclusive to cruisers and capitals.

But the current patch has the same range buff for cruisers and capitals when using either ITU or DTC, whereby players usually take ITU since it's cheaper.

Based on the notes written, there's more range being give to cruisers and capitals from ITU coming in 0.8.

So what is the relevancy of getting DTC?

Do players have access to it from the get go? Is either ITU or DTC locked behind a skill?
Logged
"A story teller and a trader. Tell me your tales and I'll tell you no lies."

Come join the Starsector Fan Chat! It's decently active.

Link: https://discord.gg/eb5UC

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7977
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #325 on: March 24, 2017, 08:26:06 AM »

Re: Hellbore
I consider it the second-best heavy ballistic, bested only by Mjolnir.  Near top-tier performance for obscenely low OP cost.  So cheap that I will use medium kinetics instead of Mauler (though it I really want Mauler, there is no substitute for Mjolnir as a companion).  Generally better than HAG, and very cheap too.  Great for outfitting Dominator and Onslaught and still have OP to spare.  The only time HAG is useful for all-purpose configuration is if my kinetics are HVDs and I do not have enough Mjolnir to go around.  Although... Hellbore and Arbalest/HVD gives the Conquest that quaint sailing pirate ship feel.

As for the coming Hellbore changes, that sounds like something a flux-starved ship can use.  Without skills, I find heavy weapons too flux hungry and too OP costly (less OP for vents).  Often better to use Mauler and some medium kinetic so unskilled ships can fire and vent spam (although the latter should be gone soon enough).  If ships want old Hellbore-like performance, they will need to go to HAG.


Re: Tempest
I consider Extended Shields almost mandatory on Tempest because it is narrow enough that AI often gets clipped by attacks.  My Tempests last longer with a bigger shield.  Bigger default shield will be nice.


@ Midnight Kitsune:  Somehow, I doubt it will reliably call more hostile reinforcements to make enemy fleets bigger.  If it does not call an enemy defense fleet, it probably will not be useful as a call-to-arms.  Until Starsector features a kill-em-all-conquest mode like Nexerelin, I rarely have incentives to kill random friendlies.  Being locked out of markets due to bad relations kind of hurts.


P.S.
I like the ship limit raise to 30.  Combined with fighters are weapons instead of clogging ship slots, that should help at least level the playing field against endgame AI fleets and maybe enable more fleet action.

Now that fighters can only be fielded with carriers, it would be a damn shame if smaller high-tech fleets either can't field strike craft or must use lower tech carriers (granted the Heron fulfills high-tech's mobility doctrine pretty well, here's hoping the Drover does too).
Do not forget there will be a hullmod that can install a flight deck on non-frigate ships that do not have a deck into an improvised carrier.

One idea I may consider if missiles are still mostly limited, is to give the big ships with OP to burn the flight deck mod as an alternative to Pilum or Salamander missile spam.
« Last Edit: March 24, 2017, 08:38:10 AM by Megas »
Logged

Embolism

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 349
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #326 on: March 24, 2017, 08:49:46 AM »

Do not forget there will be a hullmod that can install a flight deck on non-frigate ships that do not have a deck into an improvised carrier.

You're right, but I put that in the same basket as Gemini and Odyssey (i.e. even worse than not-real-carriers). If fighter composition is going to be as important as Alex says then one-deck carriers would likely be very limited offensively (especially since converted hangars has a huge penalty for bombers).
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7977
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #327 on: March 24, 2017, 09:13:39 AM »

Do not forget there will be a hullmod that can install a flight deck on non-frigate ships that do not have a deck into an improvised carrier.

You're right, but I put that in the same basket as Gemini and Odyssey (i.e. even worse than not-real-carriers). If fighter composition is going to be as important as Alex says then one-deck carriers would likely be very limited offensively (especially since converted hangars has a huge penalty for bombers).
No argument there.  Given the changes, I have no idea if adding a deck as a workaround for infinite missiles will be effective.  If it is, you can be sure I will exploit it left-and-right.  If not, I will quickly abandon it.  I probably would not use the deck for bombers, but for interceptors or heavy fighters.
Logged

cjuicy

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Missiles and Mecha, my boys. Missiles and Mecha
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #328 on: March 24, 2017, 10:11:44 AM »

No argument there.  Given the changes, I have no idea if adding a deck as a workaround for infinite missiles will be effective.  If it is, you can be sure I will exploit it left-and-right.  If not, I will quickly abandon it.  I probably would not use the deck for bombers, but for interceptors or heavy fighters.

It would be useful to carry your own escorts. Almost reminds me of the Buffalo Mk.2 fleets with a wing of Talons from the old days.
Logged
"Light the Stars with your Incendiary Rounds!"
"They thought I was insane for thinking I could push Jangala into the sun! Boy, were they wrong."

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 16481
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #329 on: March 24, 2017, 10:19:46 AM »

this worries me, especially if we're gonna be flying around the sector under SB and seeing everyone else in normal burn drive
I think it is to prevent ganks from the AI like with E burn now. And also to prevent bounties from just "NOPE"ing out
[/quote]

It's more not having the time to mess with it - I think it could be quite fun if the AI did use it, but there'd need to be some counter-play abilities, and ironing all that out, along with writing the actual AI for it, doesn't quite have enough bang-for-buck ratio at the moment.


Am I the only person who feels carrier distribution between tech levels is backwards? Low-tech now has 3. Midline has 2. High-tech has 1. This is of course discounting not-real-carriers like Gemini and Odyssey.

On the other hand, 6 out of 14 strike craft are high-tech, and it is also the only tech level that fields shielded strike craft.

Yes, the Astral is the pinnacle of carrier design, but high-tech has nothing for fleets smaller than an armada; whereas both low-tech and midline have carriers for most fleet sizes. Unless there are smaller high-tech carriers still under wraps?

Now that fighters can only be fielded with carriers, it would be a damn shame if smaller high-tech fleets either can't field strike craft or must use lower tech carriers (granted the Heron fulfills high-tech's mobility doctrine pretty well, here's hoping the Drover does too).

Hmm - I feel like if one is expecting each tech level to provide complete fleets compositions and ship progressions, one is always going to be disappointed. They're meant to be complementary rather than self sufficient. To put another way, avoiding too much overlap between what niches the ships fill is a design goal, where providing comprehensive ship sets for each tech level is not.


I had a good chuckle, got the feeling there might be pirates answering it as well?

:-X


And yeah the Dagger's definitely high-tech based on aesthetics. Khopesh will be the midline bomber.

Khopesh is low-tech.



Quote
Target fleets now hide out outside the core worlds area and tend to favor star systems that are also otherwise interesting

That's good. Recently I've been thinking that a key to good open-world game design is not to plaster the place with stuff to do and mark it all on a map, but do lay loose threads between points of interest. If you finish one thing and "naturally" stumble upon the next interesting thing, it feels much more like exploration and as if you have real agency.

Yeah, 100% on the same page here. Some things you discover during your travels are all about pointing you in a particular direction, and missions do this as well. Can always do more here, but I think the current set will be enough to jump-start the exploration aspects.


I also like the approach that Freelancer and the various Evochron games took; making exploration be about the journey as much as the destination, and have it be time consuming and dangerous.

Yep, on the same page here as well. More about having interesting interactions while finding something than after finding it, since the former is going to comprise much more of the gameplay than the latter.

Just asking, what is difference between 'Integrated Targeting Unit' and 'Dedicated Targeting Core' hull mod (both present and future)?

In 0.8a:
The DTC is available at the start, while the ITU needs to be unlocked. They have the same OP costs, and the ITU is a straight upgrade in that it's both installable on frigates and destroyers, and has a slightly higher bonus for the larger ships.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 20 21 [22] 23 24 ... 117