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] 2 3 4

Author Topic: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.  (Read 17818 times)

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« on: April 29, 2017, 01:57:44 PM »

The EXP gain you get through combat dwarfs any other means of getting it.  You basically level up after every major engagement. If you decide to do some random warzone fighting to grind rep points you can rapidly level your character, potentially shortening the game.

By comparison, the life of a more explorational/merchantile character who tries to avoid combat is very grindy, and you feel compelled to seek out combat just to level, even though you're not really specced to do it.

The game encourages specialization through the upkeep costs for inefficient fleets, so I assume the goal is to make a variety of different playstyles viable.  To those ends, the EXP payout for combat should be reduced --it probably needs to be reduced anyway just to keep the game from losing its appeal before a player achieves their goals--and there need to be better opportunities for XP gain outside of combat.

I personally believe that the bulk of any EXP should be gained through completing missions, not random pick up activities.  That way players of any preferred playstyle can be rewarded for the missions of the type they specialize in, and not feel compelled to do something their character isnt good at to get ahead.  In this, current EXP payouts for random salvaging/survey/trade could probably be left more or less the same, but the EXP gain for combat outside of missions should be greatly reduced.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2017, 02:00:12 PM by StarGibbon »
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #1 on: April 29, 2017, 02:10:45 PM »

I think that combat is the main hook of Starsector and that most things should lead to combat but, I do agree that other sources of experience are almost insultingly low! I mean, I just surveyed a super difficult gas giant (that cost 60-100 supplies) and I got like 6.5k exp? Great, I can get that much killing a few pirate frigates with a single frigate of my own...

Also, in the distant past you could trade thousands of food to starving worlds for good EXP but trading in massive bulk like that doesn't really seem viable anymore.
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #2 on: April 29, 2017, 02:28:56 PM »

I think that combat is the main hook of Starsector and that most things should lead to combat

No doubt most people will play it for the combat, and combat is a constant risk for any player. But sandbox games of this nature claim to be able to make different playstyles viable to increase replayability. The main page for the game implies a sandbox experience where there are many activities other than combat to engage in. The game gives you the option to start as a more commercial type character, and those ships can't kill anything--making the early game and leveling far easier for the combat ship.

Combat is simply a different experience when you're specced for trading. In that situation, combat consists of fleeing and protecting your freighters while they evacuate, rather than collecting the bounty on some massive Capital ship fleet. The thrill of conflict as a pirate smuggler is more about running from patrols, while possibly seeking out weaker convoys to pillage.  Not all combat *has* to be about collecting bounties.  Even dedicated combat fleets have to run away sometimes.

Indeed, unless you've specced you character and built your fleet to be good at combat, it is punitively unprofitable to engage in it. You have to field and deploy too many ships, pay too much maintenance and supply, and travel costs become exorbitant.

« Last Edit: April 29, 2017, 02:39:19 PM by StarGibbon »
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2017, 03:28:44 PM »

Working as intended, IMO.

This game has come a long way since its inception but I've always found, at its heart, this is an arcade combat sim and everything else has been really cool window-dressing. Something is always going to be the "best" for gaining XP and if it was anything other than combat, personally, I would start to doubt the vision for the game.

Now, you're not wrong about the title of this thread. That could be tweaked so that there's more parity but I don't think there ever will be parity due risk/reward. Surveying, exploring, trading, etc., at the end of the day the only think you risk losing is money and supplies/fuel. In combat, you risk losing substantial long-term investments that aren't always so easily replaced. I think the XP haul is one, of many, incentives to risk putting your fleet on the line and I think that's the correct course for a game like this. I think surveying planets with 150-200% risk ratings should net a lot of XP and so should huge trade deals but combat is always going to be where you want to go for gaining XP.
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #4 on: April 29, 2017, 03:48:28 PM »



This game has come a long way since its inception but I've always found, at its heart, this is an arcade combat sim and everything else has been really cool window-dressing.

I'm not sure Alex would enjoy hearing his hard work to diversify the game campaign features described as window dressing.  If all he wanted was to release a combat simulator, he could have done that years ago.

 
Now, you're not wrong about the title of this thread. That could be tweaked so that there's more parity but I don't think there ever will be parity due risk/reward.

Youre dead wrong here in my opinion. The risk of combat is MUCH greater as a non combat spec, because youre not set up to excel at it.  If youre cruising around in high end cruisers with combat spec, you dont sweat getting blind sided by an enemy fleet, because combat is trivial for you. You've designed your fleet to carry capable war machines, and you've specced your character to perform like superman in combat. With a mercantile focus, for instance,  you've traded combat ability for storage or industrial capacity. You live a life on the run in a hostile universe trying to make the next score without getting killed.

The basics for dedicated merchant or explorational playthroughs are already in the game, and it wouldn't take much attention to make them viable playstyles. It can only benefit the game by adding replayability. You can only build a killer fleet with mostly the same ships each time (because some are clearly better than others), and sometimes it's nice for a change of pace to solve the problems of the universe in a slightly different way. I'm putting together an AAR right now for a low combat salvage/trade/piracy playthrough.
Logged

Burlap

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #5 on: April 29, 2017, 04:01:09 PM »

I'm just pleased there is XP for doing basically anything notable. With my (temporarily much less effective) smuggler/trader, I often level up after every major deal as well. You just have to be doing as awesomely at exploration/trade as you apparently are at blowing up spaceships. To be fair, exploration involves a lot of blowing up spaceships as well.
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #6 on: April 29, 2017, 04:09:12 PM »

I'm just pleased there is XP for doing basically anything notable. With my (temporarily much less effective) smuggler/trader, I often level up after every major deal as well.

How, if you don't mind my asking? My wayfarer start was abysmal, and I was far behind the leveling curve from where I was starting with a Wolf (granted, I skipped the tutorial so didnt get the free fleet, but I was trying to avoid combat where possible anyway). I get decent EXP for missions, but salvage pays nothing in EXP gain.
Logged

BillyRueben

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #7 on: April 29, 2017, 05:55:02 PM »


This game has come a long way since its inception but I've always found, at its heart, this is an arcade combat sim and everything else has been really cool window-dressing.

I'm not sure Alex would enjoy hearing his hard work to diversify the game campaign features described as window dressing.  If all he wanted was to release a combat simulator, he could have done that years ago.

He DID release a combat simulator years ago. I think it was called Starsector or something like that. The combat is still the best part of this game by a wide margin, and I expect it to be that way forever. Everything in this game comes back to combat (the best finds when salvaging are rare ships, weapons, and hull mods). The combat is in a good place and it keeps getting better with every release, and I hope that continues until v1.0.

Now, you're not wrong about the title of this thread. That could be tweaked so that there's more parity but I don't think there ever will be parity due risk/reward.
Youre dead wrong here in my opinion. The risk of combat is MUCH greater as a non combat spec, because youre not set up to excel at it.  If youre cruising around in high end cruisers with combat spec, you dont sweat getting blind sided by an enemy fleet, because combat is trivial for you. You've designed your fleet to carry capable war machines, and you've specced your character to perform like superman in combat. With a mercantile focus, for instance,  you've traded combat ability for storage or industrial capacity. You live a life on the run in a hostile universe trying to make the next score without getting killed.

I would agree with you here if S-Burn didn't trivialize the non-combat portion of this game.
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #8 on: April 29, 2017, 06:03:06 PM »


This game has come a long way since its inception but I've always found, at its heart, this is an arcade combat sim and everything else has been really cool window-dressing.

I'm not sure Alex would enjoy hearing his hard work to diversify the game campaign features described as window dressing.  If all he wanted was to release a combat simulator, he could have done that years ago.

He DID release a combat simulator years ago. I think it was called Starsector or something like that.v1.0.

Release, as in out of development and on steam. Pretty sure you were smart enough to understand that distinction. Not sure why you were the only respondent that felt the need to be an ass.
Clearly he's developing the campaign aspect of the game to give gameplay value beyond the pew pew of the core combat engine.  The battles are great, but you need a campaign to tell stories, which is what sandbox games do.



I would agree with you here if S-Burn didn't trivialize the non-combat portion of this game.

Everyone takes an unwanted combat some time or another if theyre not save scumming. S-burn just means you hit them head on when theyve got a bead on you from offscreen because you cant turn in time. Sometimes, they've just got the angle.  Salvage specialists especially have to run without it at times, otherwise theyll just keep circling a target because the navigation can't hit it under S-burn.  Oh yeah, and sensor pulse, which you need for salvage, disables your S-burn leaving you vulnerable, so...
« Last Edit: April 29, 2017, 06:08:56 PM by StarGibbon »
Logged

FooF

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1378
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #9 on: April 29, 2017, 06:16:37 PM »

Youre dead wrong here in my opinion. The risk of combat is MUCH greater as a non combat spec, because youre not set up to excel at it.  If youre cruising around in high end cruisers with combat spec, you dont sweat getting blind sided by an enemy fleet, because combat is trivial for you. You've designed your fleet to carry capable war machines, and you've specced your character to perform like superman in combat. With a mercantile focus, for instance,  you've traded combat ability for storage or industrial capacity. You live a life on the run in a hostile universe trying to make the next score without getting killed.

It's more risk because you've created self-imposed limitations. If you're going to RP a trader, that's your prerogative (the games lets you do this), but by no means does it have to be high-risk. My first playthrough was quite salvage/exploration-oriented and I was still able to hold my own against Remnant fleets and even a damaged battlestation. By your admission, you were "trying to avoid combat," which in my opinion, is ice skating uphill for a game like this.

It's not like going combat-oriented doesn't have downsides: you end up being unable to exploit the vast majority of the proc-gen systems and earning money becomes an issue late game because of the ever-increasing logistical cost of traveling to get bounties. Yeah, you level up faster, but once you're capped, there's little else to do.

All that said, I do still agree with you: there should be more parity, however, with so much of the game built around combat, weapons, loadouts, etc., all the other systems and mechanics in place ("window dressings") should encourage you, in some form or another, to engage in combat. Its a dangerous sector and running all the time, even if its possible, is going against what I feel is the fundamental core of the game. To put it another way, exploring should be fun, trading should be fun, salvaging, doing missions, etc. should be fun but combat is great and is what brings you back. But different strokes for different folks, I guess.
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2017, 06:30:04 PM »


 To put it another way, exploring should be fun, trading should be fun, salvaging, doing missions, etc. should be fun but combat is great and is what brings you back. But different strokes for different folks, I guess.

 Im not advocating at all for an overall non combat focus for the game, or saying the combat isnt the best part, or saying that combat shouldnt be a part of every playthrough. But the character of combat can be easily varied, and in fairness, other games of this type which the game will be compared to, allow for it. Wouldnt it be better for the game to allow for playstyles which are already well within its reach? Wouldnt it be more fun to feel like you can take a break from the tedium of pursuing the same "superior" ships over and over to experience the game in a different way with different priorities?

The game gives you the option, right now, right off the bat to be a trader. You are at a distinct disadvantage in terms of EXP gain choosing the wayfarer over the wolf in the early game. If the game is already giving you this choice, shouldnt those choices be roughly equitable in opportunity for advancement, albeit in different ways?
Logged

StarGibbon

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 334
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #11 on: April 29, 2017, 06:35:54 PM »



It's not like going combat-oriented doesn't have downsides: you end up being unable to exploit the vast majority of the proc-gen systems and earning money becomes an issue late game because of the ever-increasing logistical cost of traveling to get bounties. Yeah, you level up faster, but once you're capped, there's little else to do.



Nah, I disagree with you here. In my first .8 playthrough I believed this, because I tried to be a "jack of all trades", and the bloat of my fleet eventually caused crippling upkeep. In my subsequent games, speccing for combat and only taking the ships in my fleet i needed to get to bounties, combat missions remained insanely profitable the whole game because i had to deploy/field fewer ships.

In terms of the level cap, though, I agree. I tend to lose interest in a playthrough after I hit the level cap, and a combat heavy playthrough skyrockets the rate at which you hit this.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2017, 06:47:16 PM by StarGibbon »
Logged

Soychi

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 73
  • Ad Rem
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2017, 01:11:07 AM »

He DID release a combat simulator years ago. I think it was called Starsector or something like that.
Correction, the combat simulator was called Starfarer. That is all.
Logged
ARE YOU A COWARD? This is not for you. We badly need a brave man. He must be 23 to 25 years old, in perfect health, at least six feet tall, weigh about 190 pounds, fluent English with some French, proficient with all weapons, some knowledge of engineering and mathematics essential, willing to travel, no family or emotional ties, indomitably courageous and handsome of face and figure. Permanent employment, very high pay, glorious adventure, great danger. -Glory Road, Heinlein

Bastion.Systems

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 412
  • Special Circumstances LCU
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #13 on: April 30, 2017, 02:21:31 AM »

Yeah, the combat experience gain is too fast, something is wrong if you level up 3 times from a single battle.
Logged

BillyRueben

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1406
    • View Profile
Re: Massive disparity between combat vs non-combat EXP gain.
« Reply #14 on: April 30, 2017, 04:59:09 AM »

He DID release a combat simulator years ago. I think it was called Starsector or something like that.
Correction, the combat simulator was called Starfarer. That is all.

We aren't legally allowed to call it that anymore, because reasons.

Yeah, the combat experience gain is too fast, something is wrong if you level up 3 times from a single battle.

Does this happen often? The only time I get this is when I win one of the good fights, where I'm piloting the starter Wolf with no skills and a few wingmen vs. like 4 destroyers with escorts. If I win that (and as low a level as I am), give me a couple of level ups.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4