Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[AxleMC131]

Oh, okay, I misunderstood.

[DatonKallandor]

It's messed up that it's easier and less risky to earn money by killing people than by trading. Wouldn't everyone in society become murderers? This is why the starsector has always seemed nihilistic and cruel-hearted to me.

You're generalizing too much. For people owning a single, or small amout of starships who are not in a big trade corporation, making money with bounty hunting and mercenary work is easier than bulk trading.

Trading is plenty profitable if you're a giant trading corp who can afford to bribe the governments to be tax exempt. Owning a spaceship is also a pretty big pre-requisite to the whole "bounty hunting" thing that most people in the sector probably don't meet.

[FooF]

I think the point-of-view you have to have when you start a game in SS, no matter what profession you choose, is that you're a bottom-feeder picking off the scraps of everything else. This is a universe that is completely indifferent towards you. You'll eventually make a name for yourself but at the start, you're just one of a million tiny fish swimming in an ocean of sharks.

Being a Trader in that kind of environment really sets you up for failure because as mentioned, you're getting the worst deals and the harshest tariffs on everything while also being able to haul the smallest amount of cargo. It's like setting up a mom n' pop general store with no business connections right next to a Walmart. You just can't compete.

On the other hand, bounty hunting will always have a role for the "small fish" because there will always be targets not valuable enough for the "big fish" to care about. Scavenging and salvaging will also be something little guys can do because there's a lot of space and even the large government and corporations can't be everywhere at once. Likewise, there will be salvage beneath their notice.

However, in the current game, you still never get big enough (even with a maxed fleet) to ever enter into "big time" territory. You might have a large independent fleet but you're still not able to topple regimes or factions by yourself. You can't set your own prices or settle your own worlds and even if you can defeat planetary defense fleets on your own, you'd lose a war of attrition. Part of me likes this because you forever remain a secondary character in the ups and downs of the universe and another part wishes I could be a bit more influential and have a hand in shaping the sector. But don't go too far: for a guy to go from owning a single Hound to ruling the sector within a few cycles is completely far-fetched. The rags-to-riches tale is good...but only to a point.

[Megas]

Never being big enough is what is truly missing from endgame.  Things never change in the big picture; my guy is and will always be just a low-level thug sent to kill things even when his lone fleet is overpowered enough to topple the entire sector singlehandedly.

Ruling the sector in a few cycles?  I doubt that can be ruled out entirely.  It would be quite the upheaval in any case.

And if ruling the sector is not an option, there is always total destruction.  If my fleet can effortlessly smash defense fleets like nothing, it may be fun to attack the market directly and destroy it with a big boom, or at least the idea of it.

[FooF]

The other part of the endgame (which we're getting a bit off topic here) that needs filling out, IMO, is something as basic as purpose. As mentioned earlier, the sector is falling apart but doesn't feel like it and even if I were to somehow topple the sector and place myself at the top, what am I the king of? A crumbling empire destined to splinter and devolve into anarchy? It would seem the sector is still going to march on for awhile without a lot of change because resources don't seem that scarce. As the sector is getting bigger in 0.8 due to the expansion of RNG worlds, the notion of scarcity seems more and more implausible.

For the end, it seems like there ought to be a higher goal perhaps reconnecting with the Domain, a danger from outside the Sector, an impending cataclysm...I dunno but something that is explicit in saying "things in the sector can't go on like this forever." The Factions are all vying to consolidate their power and war with each other because they know something is going to happen in the near future and they want their way of life to survive. Surviving for survival's sake is fine but it's hard to convey any emotional gravitas to it using the limited, non-character view we have in SS. (On the other hand, the tropes for "impending doom" are all well-used at this point so I can understand any hesitation in using such a plot device).

It's one of the reasons I like the Knights Templar mod so much from a lore standpoint (and they're a fun faction too!): they're an existential threat to the status quo of the sector. The Templar will absolutely wreck everything if given the time and opportunity and if there was an endgame, the other Factions would undoubtedly have to come up with a permanent solution to deal with them or face annihilation. Perhaps defeating the Templar would give the Factions the the technology to restart the Gates, or lead to a new renaissance/flourishing, or it could just lead to more infighting and bickering with bigger guns to kill each other with!

[Megas]

Ultimately, I would like my character's final profession to be "ruler (or destroyer) of the universe".  He does not care if there is nothing left to rule after reaching that goal.  Ruling everything is ideal, but personally destroying everything is an acceptable victory outcome (because it is a combat-focused game).

[TJJ]

Better to rule in hell, than serve in heaven 

[Serenitis]

The initial game setup for SS is one of the few things I really dislike.
It is essentially opaque, as the options you are given are vague and there are not even any tooltips to tell you what each option does. You are required to select an option in order to see what it does, which is a problem since you can't undo a selection without going right back to the first step.
Trial and error is not (imo) something that should be built into a UI.
I think the problem is that the whole start game process is trying to be "in character" for the sector, but in doing so it is getting in the way of the player making an informed choice.

I would much prefer something far more straightforward:

Probably the one thing I would like to see the most is the ability for the player to select the ship they start with.
The start list of available ships need not be exhaustive, but it would be nice if it were broken down into categories so the player would have as little confusion as possible as to which ships make for a hard game, and which are more forgiving.
It would be great if you could populate this list from mods as well, but not a big deal if it's vanilla only ships.

Selecting a starting faction alignment is something that would also be nice to give people the option, but I personally don't see the point as the entire game is about being "a tiny insignificant fish surrounded by huge sharks full of teeth". At least at first.
A set of checkboxes would work fine in any case.

Overall difficulty selection. Again, checkboxes.


If none of this fluff is in any way attractive or useful, please at least add some tooltips to the menu selection or some other means of telling the player what each selection does.

[nomadic_leader]

It's messed up that it's easier and less risky to earn money by killing people than by trading. Wouldn't everyone in society become murderers? This is why the starsector has always seemed nihilistic and cruel-hearted to me.

You're generalizing too much. For people owning a single, or small amout of starships who are not in a big trade corporation, making money with bounty hunting and mercenary work is easier than bulk trading.

Exactly, and that's totally messed up with the reality of the sector the game gives us (feudal stability on the political front). It might make sense for the lore (utter chaos! war!), but we don't play the lore. The lore is supposed to fill out what we already see in the game, not contradict it.

We see merchants flying around delivering goods, so it should be profitable, or people wouldn't be doing it.

And then for the bounties are just too plentiful. If they were that renumerative, there'd be more bounty hunters .... and then price of the bounties would go down due to competition between bounty hunters. But the designers just want to immediately players into bloodthirsty killing, so the game throws out these bounties that have no reality in the economy, and basically make the entire simulated economy pointless.

[AxleMC131]

I think the point-of-view you have to have when you start a game in SS, no matter what profession you choose, is that you're a bottom-feeder picking off the scraps of everything else. This is a universe that is completely indifferent towards you. You'll eventually make a name for yourself but at the start, you're just one of a million tiny fish swimming in an ocean of sharks.

Being a Trader in that kind of environment really sets you up for failure because as mentioned, you're getting the worst deals and the harshest tariffs on everything while also being able to haul the smallest amount of cargo. It's like setting up a mom n' pop general store with no business connections right next to a Walmart. You just can't compete.

On the other hand, bounty hunting will always have a role for the "small fish" because there will always be targets not valuable enough for the "big fish" to care about. Scavenging and salvaging will also be something little guys can do because there's a lot of space and even the large government and corporations can't be everywhere at once. Likewise, there will be salvage beneath their notice.

However, in the current game, you still never get big enough (even with a maxed fleet) to ever enter into "big time" territory. You might have a large independent fleet but you're still not able to topple regimes or factions by yourself. You can't set your own prices or settle your own worlds and even if you can defeat planetary defense fleets on your own, you'd lose a war of attrition. Part of me likes this because you forever remain a secondary character in the ups and downs of the universe and another part wishes I could be a bit more influential and have a hand in shaping the sector. But don't go too far: for a guy to go from owning a single Hound to ruling the sector within a few cycles is completely far-fetched. The rags-to-riches tale is good...but only to a point.

The other part of the endgame (which we're getting a bit off topic here) that needs filling out, IMO, is something as basic as purpose. As mentioned earlier, the sector is falling apart but doesn't feel like it and even if I were to somehow topple the sector and place myself at the top, what am I the king of? A crumbling empire destined to splinter and devolve into anarchy? It would seem the sector is still going to march on for awhile without a lot of change because resources don't seem that scarce. As the sector is getting bigger in 0.8 due to the expansion of RNG worlds, the notion of scarcity seems more and more implausible.

For the end, it seems like there ought to be a higher goal perhaps reconnecting with the Domain, a danger from outside the Sector, an impending cataclysm...I dunno but something that is explicit in saying "things in the sector can't go on like this forever." The Factions are all vying to consolidate their power and war with each other because they know something is going to happen in the near future and they want their way of life to survive. Surviving for survival's sake is fine but it's hard to convey any emotional gravitas to it using the limited, non-character view we have in SS. (On the other hand, the tropes for "impending doom" are all well-used at this point so I can understand any hesitation in using such a plot device).

It's one of the reasons I like the Knights Templar mod so much from a lore standpoint (and they're a fun faction too!): they're an existential threat to the status quo of the sector. The Templar will absolutely wreck everything if given the time and opportunity and if there was an endgame, the other Factions would undoubtedly have to come up with a permanent solution to deal with them or face annihilation. Perhaps defeating the Templar would give the Factions the the technology to restart the Gates, or lead to a new renaissance/flourishing, or it could just lead to more infighting and bickering with bigger guns to kill each other with!

... I love everything about these comments. It kinda explains Starsector's setting in exactly the way I would try to describe it, but would take me several days to figure out all the words. XD

[FooF]

Ultimately, I would like my character's final profession to be "ruler (or destroyer) of the universe".  He does not care if there is nothing left to rule after reaching that goal.  Ruling everything is ideal, but personally destroying everything is an acceptable victory outcome (because it is a combat-focused game).

Some people aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some people just want to watch the sector burn.  

@ AxleMC131

What I think SS has done completely right since I've been playing is to not romanticize the start of the game. You are not destined to save the sector, overthrow some horrible government, or make a scientific breakthrough that will reshape everything. You're literally just a guy/gal trying to scrape by and you're so generic that you're beneath the notice of everyone in power. Without having a story, per se, you (as the player) create your own with every battle and every ship you buy/steal/salvage. That's why talk of professions and the start of the game interest me so much because if we mess with the current start too much, the magic of discovery and self story-making gets watered down. But that's also why I point to the endgame as the impetus to draw us towards exploration, trade, battle, etc.

If I had it my way, I think the most I would want from an endgame is to have enough "capital" (ships, resources, planets, stations, etc.) to start my own faction that could compete with the others. I have no idea how that would work from a technical standpoint but from a story standpoint, "my" faction would take on goals/purpose I would want for the sector. If you're like Megas and want to conquer everything, that would be possible, but if I wanted to explore and figure out a way to get out of the sector, that would be possible too. It almost reminds me of the victory conditions of the Civilization series: military, science, cultural, or political. I'd be curious what is in Alex's design goals for the endgame but of course, that will remain REDACTED for the foreseeable future.

[AxleMC131]

@ AxleMC131

What I think SS has done completely right since I've been playing is to not romanticize the start of the game. You are not destined to save the sector, overthrow some horrible government, or make a scientific breakthrough that will reshape everything. You're literally just a guy/gal trying to scrape by and you're so generic that you're beneath the notice of everyone in power. Without having a story, per se, you (as the player) create your own with every battle and every ship you buy/steal/salvage. That's why talk of professions and the start of the game interest me so much because if we mess with the current start too much, the magic of discovery and self story-making gets watered down. But that's also why I point to the endgame as the impetus to draw us towards exploration, trade, battle, etc.

If I had it my way, I think the most I would want from an endgame is to have enough "capital" (ships, resources, planets, stations, etc.) to start my own faction that could compete with the others. I have no idea how that would work from a technical standpoint but from a story standpoint, "my" faction would take on goals/purpose I would want for the sector. If you're like Megas and want to conquer everything, that would be possible, but if I wanted to explore and figure out a way to get out of the sector, that would be possible too. It almost reminds me of the victory conditions of the Civilization series: military, science, cultural, or political. I'd be curious what is in Alex's design goals for the endgame but of course, that will remain REDACTED for the foreseeable future.

I totally agree. The story of Starsector isn't the one you follow. It's the one you make. And starting from nothing, from being a nobody in a spaceship flying around trying not to die from starvation while avoiding taxes where possible, really gets me.

It's strange but I really like the early game for that reason: it's where I feel I can make the most difference. Not on the sector, or any form of "story", but it's where I can make the most difference on my character, and how they survive in the hostile realm of the sector. It's kinda the same as my opinion on Survival Minecraft - I often falter after playing the same world for a few days, because the progression slows down. At the start, it's literally a new world fresh to explore and make a difference in, and come up with cool ideas for what you want to do today! Starsector's early-game really does the same thing for me.

On the subject of end-game situations and "creating a faction", I'm kinda excited for the Outposts mechanics when they get implemented. I have little idea what they will entail other than setting up your own stations where you can store stuff, but I'm hoping that there will be some form of manufacturing and production mechanics where you can produce resources/materials and build weapons, maybe even ships. That would be awesome for me.

[Megas]

Some people aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some people just want to watch the sector burn. 

It is hard to bargain with a physical god when he literally wants everything, including lives.  What he wants is logical enough, just something no one is willing to give (e.g., fall on their sword for Ming).  He is a greedy maniac drunk on power.

[Megas]

One more thing about the game lore.  After one of the 0.7 updates, the lore (found in missions) feels more like the Cold War between USA and Soviet Union instead of a post-apocalyptic setting.  It seems the major powers mostly if not fully recovered from whatever post-Collapse anxieties they had.  In other words, current lore feels like a partial retcon of the older lore.

But regardless of lore, the current game is a generic arcade-like... game.  Just keeping killing the never-ending fleets until you get bored.

[FooF]

It is hard to bargain with a physical god when he literally wants everything, including lives.  What he wants is logical enough, just something no one is willing to give (e.g., fall on their sword for Ming).  He is a greedy maniac drunk on power.

You must be the avatar of Khorne. Blood for the blood god! Skulls for the skull throne!

As far as the current lore, I agree: there is a cold war between the factions and all battles between them are mostly proxy wars rather than all-out scorched earth tactics. Honestly, I think that's all placeholder because we don't have a mechanic to capture planets, stations, etc. rather than in-game lore. Once planets can begin changing hands, I think the cold war/stagnation stuff will give way to a more dynamic sector.