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: Raiding for Fun and Profit (11/27/19)

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 35

Author Topic: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 181352 times)

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2429
    • View Profile
    • Bitbucket profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #105 on: May 25, 2017, 07:16:45 PM »

The terminology should be changed. Except for Warthog and classic Lux, none of the "heavy" fighters are actually heavy anything. (Well, okay, only Broadsword and new Lux are actually not-truly-heavy)
They're primarily flare-droppers; "support fighter" would be more accurate.

I think there might be room for a true "heavy fighter" wing, which acts like a frigate substitute that can be replaced in combat. Balancing factors could include being slow, large (big enough that anti-ship weapons are effective against them), having a short leash range, and/or having a long replacement time and large impact on replacement rate.
So we could have a scenario where a few wings of heavy fighters are a potent threat to medium-sized ships, but they won't last forever and once they die the carrier won't be doing anything useful for a while. It'd also take time for the wing to reach its target, and the carrier will have to get close enough that it risks counterattack by enemy frigates/fighters.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2017, 07:25:46 PM by Histidine »
Logged

2_Wycked

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #106 on: May 25, 2017, 07:18:05 PM »

I don't see any notes about the factions so is it safe to assume Hegemony is staying as the "starting" faction with TT only opening up to players after a lot AI core trading / bounties? Have you thought about giving us the option to take a commission with any faction during a new game?
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7526
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #107 on: May 25, 2017, 07:35:01 PM »

Like Histidine says, if "heavy fighters" will be distractors and jokers, "support fighter" would be a more apt label, much like Xyphos is when highlighted in the codex.

I can imagine newbie or someone less familiar with the game mechanics thinking "Heavy fighter? Cool!  Let's watch them kill things?  Why are they making a pretty mahou shoujo light show and not killing anything?  This sucks!"  More like wrong expectations from a misleading label.

A true heavy or super fighter as Histidine says could be fun.  Closest the game has now is the Terminator drone.
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3734
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #108 on: May 25, 2017, 07:40:09 PM »

The terminology should be changed. Except for Warthog and classic Lux, none of the "heavy" fighters are actually heavy anything. They're primarily flare-droppers; "support fighter" would be more accurate.
The "heavy" role in fighters is currently perfectly defined - pretty much any fighter with flares.  There can be Heavy Interceptors like the Gladius or Heavy Fighters like the Broadsword.  In reall life, heavy fighters were generally larger fighters designed to have longer range and have heavier armament to escort friendly bombers or take down enemy ones.  The "heavy" typically indicates a job to distract enemy point-defense.  The target of said enemy point defense can vary depending on the main role - Fighters focus on enemy ships, Interceptor on enemy fighters, for example.

The fighter archetype you're thinking of is probably a "fighter-bomber", which is essentially a fighter armed with bigger armament capable of engaging targets larger than itself - like ground targets such as tanks or bunkers or naval targets such as ships (though not as dedicated or as big as bombers or torpedo bombers like the Lancaster bomber or the B5N "Kate" torpedo bomber) .  Stuff like the P-47 Thunderbolt with an armament of nearly a dozen rockets would class in that.  The Thunder (before the 0.8.1a patch with a total change in it's armament) could be pretty well classified as a "fighter-bomber" with it's Harpoon and Ion Cannon.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2017, 08:36:00 PM by The Soldier »
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.

AxleMC131

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1475
  • Amateur World-Builder
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #109 on: May 25, 2017, 08:29:48 PM »

The "heavy" role in fighters is currently perfectly defined - pretty much any fighter with flares.  There can be Heavy Interceptors like the Gladius or Heavy Fighters like the Broadsword...

The fighter archetype you're thinking of is probably a "fighter-bomber", which is essentially a fighter armed with bigger armament capable of engaging targets larger than itself ...  The Thunder (before the 0.8.1a patch with a totaly change in it's armament) could be pretty well classified as a "fighter-bomber" with it's Harpoon and Ion Cannon.

This basically matches my understanding, yeah. Conversely, a "Support Fighter" (like what the Longbow used to be classed as or the Xyphos now is) is a fighter designed to hang close to a larger ship and providing supporting fire or additional point defence.
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3734
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #110 on: May 25, 2017, 08:38:44 PM »

This basically matches my understanding, yeah. Conversely, a "Support Fighter" (like what the Longbow used to be classed as or the Xyphos now is) is a fighter designed to hang close to a larger ship and providing supporting fire or additional point defence.
Indeed.  Finding an Aurora with triple Phase Lances and SABOTs and as many Vents and Capacitors as I can fit on it with Converted Hangers and a Xyphos to be surprisingly effective.  I nuke the shields and hull while the Xyphos takes care of point-defense and making the enemy ship incapable of fighting back.  The description for the Xyphos is rather fitting right now, same as the rest of the Heavy Fighters.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2017, 09:05:25 PM by The Soldier »
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.

Mazuo

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #111 on: May 25, 2017, 08:47:36 PM »

Love the right-click for destinations in empty space addition.  Was about to suggest it myself until I saw the notes.

In regard to the makeshift generator, has it already been tried with crappy stats for shield damage/flux, upkeep etc. instead of the speed nerf?  Seems like it'd still be nice for unshielded ships on the edge of usefulness but the concern of it easily overloading would balance it somewhat.
Logged

ciago92

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #112 on: May 25, 2017, 09:56:22 PM »

(big enough that anti-ship weapons are effective against them)


This just reminded me (and I should probably post this somewhere else but it's super late and I'm exhausted) I've seen REDACTED ships fire plasma cannons at my spark fighters and miss and end up blasting their own ships. AI should probably give extra weight to "allied ships behind this fighter if I miss" when considering firing heavy weapons like that
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2646
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #113 on: May 25, 2017, 09:58:34 PM »

(big enough that anti-ship weapons are effective against them)


This just reminded me (and I should probably post this somewhere else but it's super late and I'm exhausted) I've seen REDACTED ships fire plasma cannons at my spark fighters and miss and end up blasting their own ships. AI should probably give extra weight to "allied ships behind this fighter if I miss" when considering firing heavy weapons like that
or flat out have the Plasma get a strike tag. I remember having to add that in, in .72
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]

Embolism

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 347
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #114 on: May 25, 2017, 10:02:10 PM »

The way I see it there's currently five roles for strike craft in SS.



Bombers: self-explanatory. Should generally be more effective against larger ships.


Interceptors: anti-bomber and anti-ordnance, so in theory a defensive fighter type. Currently they're far more offensive than they should be, essentially being light assault fighters. May change next patch.


Assault Fighters: bit harder to define. In theory they should be like bombers in that they're meant to fight ships, maybe with more focus against smaller rather than larger ships. In practice the traditional SS assault fighter - the Warthog - had always been slow and unable to catch nimble vessels, making interceptors better at the role. A better role for these might be that of a corvette, bridging the gap between strike craft and frigates. They'd be well-armed and difficult to destroy but vulnerable to heavier ship weaponry.


Support Fighters: to my mind this means strike craft that can potentially outrange their target ships, so things like Xyphos, Longbow and maybe Khopesh. A better term might be "close support" fighter. I'd classify the Claw as more of an assault fighter, even an interceptor if you disregard the fact it can't shoot down ordnance.


Heavy Fighters: their job is to open the way for bombers by softening up targets, distracting PD and chasing away interceptors. In practice they do the first two okay but aren't that good at dealing with interceptors, and in any case current interceptors seem more interested in assaulting enemy ships rather than neutralising bomber threats. A lot of blurring between this and the assault fighter role, to the point where the assault fighter may not truly exist anymore: which may be what Alex wants, since assault fighters by definition should work well without having to mix in other strike craft types.



I think the Gladius is very much lost in translation. It was originally more of an assault fighter, now it's... kinda-sorta assault with a half-assed attempt at playing heavy, with the end result that it does nothing well. It also became a Thunder-wannabe which IMO doesn't fit its look: whereas the Thunder looks sleek and fast, the Gladius looks almost awkward. IMO it should return to being a slower, heavily armed and heavily armoured assault fighter. Its current non-role is weird.
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3734
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #115 on: May 25, 2017, 10:24:40 PM »

@Embolish
Interceptors aren't exactly the most well-armed fighters - usually they've got a large number of lightly armored craft in their wing, but only one or two weapons per fighter at most.  The Talon and Sparks are incredibly OP right now, even Alex admitted that (and nerfed them), so leave that out of your calculations. :) They can be used offensively or defensively, in any anti-fighter capacity, which is fitting.

Assault Fighters here pretty much take up the role of anti-ship fighters that aren't dedicated bombers.  Lots of armor, heavy ordnance (for a fighter), and possibly something else.  Currently the only Assault Fighter we have is the Warthog, so we can't really tell what the "possibly something else is", as the Warthog's is flares -speaking of, if you ask me, the Warthog is a tad bit OP because it takes the dedicated Heavy Fighters flare and simply walks with it while being better in nearly every respect.  Single flares would probably be better, or a different ship system entirely.

Heavy Fighters aren't exactly the best at taking down ships; the Lux, Broadsword, etc. don't have much stopping power (though they do have more firepower per fighter than Interceptors) -
 Warthogs have a definite advantage over them with triple Light Mortars on each craft.  Their main role, far as I can tell, is to take hits and attract attention to make way for the bombers.  Reasonable and venerable role, if not a tad bit dicey for the pilots. ;)

Speaking of the Gladius, I think it's intended role is (as it says on the tin) to be an Interceptor - but not just any, a Heavy Interceptor.  I'm assuming here Alex intended the single-use flares on it to be deployed when engaging a group of other Interceptors so the flares attract their weapon's fire (which are usually PD) while the MGs and IR Pulse Lasers eat into them.  Very, very niche (possibly too niche - only works against other enemy Interceptors), and though I haven't tested it, I don't feel it would be very effective.  It needs a change.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2017, 10:32:41 PM by The Soldier »
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.

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2412
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #116 on: May 25, 2017, 10:57:35 PM »

Actually, when I open the codex and play around... we don't have anything that's classed as an assault fighter?  Is that a bug?  And the Claw's description says it's a support fighter, but it's listed in the codex as a heavy fighter?
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Clockwork Owl

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 752
    • View Profile
    • Starsector South Korean Community
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #117 on: May 26, 2017, 01:18:21 AM »

Why would Front Shield Generator lower the top speed?
(As in both gameplay reason and lore-wise description)
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1916
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #118 on: May 26, 2017, 01:37:29 AM »

Why would Front Shield Generator lower the top speed?
(As in both gameplay reason and lore-wise description)

Fluff: Power is reallocated from engines.
Gameplay: To prevent Hounds from kiting with Mauler/HVD.

I'm not saying it's a good decision though. Hounds have horrible flux stats, then you add inefficient shield that costs OP + OP-expensive weapon... Results were mediocre at best even before speed nerf.
Plus frigate swarms are twice obsolete anyway (due to 10 officers limit in combat and SB/EB making their burn advantage unimportant for campaign).
Logged

AxleMC131

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1475
  • Amateur World-Builder
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #119 on: May 26, 2017, 01:46:42 AM »

Actually, when I open the codex and play around... we don't have anything that's classed as an assault fighter?  Is that a bug?  And the Claw's description says it's a support fighter, but it's listed in the codex as a heavy fighter?

Yeah, the tags and codex tabs need a definite cleanup.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 35