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: Skills and Story Points (07/08/19)

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 35

Author Topic: Starsector 0.8.1a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 179569 times)

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4155
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #90 on: May 25, 2017, 10:17:44 AM »

My concern here is: You get things like HVD/Gauss Cannon being moderately effective against some ships' armor while doing nearly nothing to other, visually identical ships, without a readily available indicator of why this should be the case. Likewise with sending fighters against a ship and them Doing Something or getting swatted like flies.

The invisibility aspect is true of many other buffs. But at least with something like a ship having the zero flux bonus with its shield up or its missiles flying faster, the player can easily see what's going on even if they don't know why. The damage calculation is completely hidden except for the final output. And unlike, say, Heavy Armor, the bonus from Advanced Countermeasures doesn't even appear on the stats card.

I think this is more an argument for more transparency of the officers skills in combat, not for excluding stat buffing skills (of which many are "invisible"). If you could open this window
Spoiler
[close]
during battle, that would enable you to make informed decisions on how to handle a threat. Or if that's too much information, it could be compressed in single phrase, e.g. carrier specialist/offense specialist/defense specialist/all-rounder.
Logged

grinningsphinx

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 256
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #91 on: May 25, 2017, 10:20:11 AM »

Aint no one gonna be using Piranha now.  They are worth precisely zero OP as stands now, on par with the nerfed Talons.  Overall, good patch and thank you, but there are several things ill be changing back right away as i *vastly* disagree with new scores or implementation.

Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4190
  • Quantum Mechanic
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #92 on: May 25, 2017, 10:39:05 AM »

Aint no one gonna be using Piranha now.  They are worth precisely zero OP as stands now, on par with the nerfed Talons.  Overall, good patch and thank you, but there are several things ill be changing back right away as i *vastly* disagree with new scores or implementation.



I think it really depends on if we can get the bombs to hit target better than they are in this version.

Idea: Instead of the bombs releasing straight forward, release multiple bombs at a time: some go straight forward, but some have a decent sideways component. This makes it harder for the target ship to dodge everything.

It also makes Piranhas uniquely effective in attacking multiple ships at once that are in a "death ball" formation. Even with some spread the target ship will dodge most of them, but there will be so much ordinance that the other ships will ALSO need to dodge or turn their shields.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 15388
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #93 on: May 25, 2017, 10:43:27 AM »

I'm not sure Advanced Countermeasures should even exist to begin with, in light of these changes.
Spoiler
My concern here is: You get things like HVD/Gauss Cannon being moderately effective against some ships' armor while doing nearly nothing to other, visually identical ships, without a readily available indicator of why this should be the case. Likewise with sending fighters against a ship and them Doing Something or getting swatted like flies.

The invisibility aspect is true of many other buffs. But at least with something like a ship having the zero flux bonus with its shield up or its missiles flying faster, the player can easily see what's going on even if they don't know why. The damage calculation is completely hidden except for the final output. And unlike, say, Heavy Armor, the bonus from Advanced Countermeasures doesn't even appear on the stats card.
[close]

There's a bunch of other stuff like this from other skills: -20% damage against armor, +15% damage to shields, etc. But, yeah, ok, this is more extreme. Hmm.


i think the reduced kinetic damage against armor and reduced HE damage against shields are just bad perks from a design perspective; making kinetic/HE even worse against the things they're already bad at doesn't seem like a great idea, especially since the numbers need to be pretty big to be worth spending a skill point on mitigating damage from what is already only a minor threat (relative to other damage types).

Design-wise, the idea is having this skill rewards "playing well" (i.e. taking the right damage on the right defenses) even more. It's a point that it's probably not very compelling unless the numbers get quite high, though.


  • retain higher armor damage reduction on exposed hull
  • convert a portion of all shield damage taken into soft flux rather than hard flux (should be a significant amount, since there's already a perk that completely negates 20% of all shield damage taken)
  • make some projectiles/missiles pass through unphased phase ships (or just reduce all damage taken), as long as cloak is not on cooldown (so it wouldn't make phase ships that recloak asap more annoying to fight)
  • increase range of PD weapons
  • increase accuracy / reduce recoil / improve target-leading of PD weapons
  • reduce flux of PD weapons (maybe by a flat amount, so low-flux PD weapons would become zero-flux)
  • increase firing rate of PD weapons (unlike damage boost, this would be visible to an opponent. but wouldn't really work for beams)
  • reduce speed/maneuverability of missiles locked onto this ship (this might also be problematic to communicate to the attacker though)
  • increased/guaranteed chance for flamed-out missiles to harmlessly bounce off this ship

Some interesting ideas here, nice.


Quote
Damper Field: damage reduction down to 50% (from 67%), charge regen rate halved (1 per 20 seconds)
If we're going with the nerf as stated (rather than only reducing charge regen, or making the damage reduction scale with hull size, as suggested in that other thread), Brawler and Centurion could stand to receive a compensatory buff perhaps. Centurion in particular doesn't seem to have a combat role at present other than "be annoying to kill".

Maybe the Centurion could just do with a cost reduction - "being annoying to kill" seems like a reasonable role for an escort frigate. Hmm.


On FSG: If it's going to inflict such a huge speed penalty I'd say it needs some other buff, like lower upkeep cost (i.e. not ~100 f/s on a Hound). (Or make it cost 0 OP ::))
Spoiler
Perhaps having it vs. not having it was indeed far too dramatic a change for the ships it goes on.

But now I can think of exactly one case where I'd bother using it now: HVD/Mauler sniper Hounds that need to not die to Tactical Laser/Swarmer SRM return fire. For just about any other build, things that don't have a shield and need it to survive... need a 25% speed reduction scarcely any more (Buffalo Mk. II) or arguably even less (Hound, Cerberus). I haven't had a reason to field these ships (with or without shields) in my games as it is, not when I can just get proper warships and cargo haulers in their place.
[close]
(and other responses re: MSG)

1) Good call about the upkeep cost, lowered it to .5 (was .75).

2) Played around with it a bit, and it seems decent. Added a Hound and Cerberus variants using MSG and an Arbalest (thanks, Voyager I) to pirate fleets, and they're quite decent. I think overall it'll increase survivability in the context of a larger garbage-ball while reducing it when facing larger numbers of enemies (where speed becomes important). You're probably not going to want to keep using them past the early-midgame, but imo that's alright.

Plus hullmods now have a new balancing factor: rarity. ITU is "mandatory" but isn't available readily. MSG could be similar: if say it's available by about midgame, it may be thought of as something that keeps shieldless ships relevant as weaponry that chews through them becomes increasingly prevalent.

The goal is to make it available early, since by mid-late game, MSG or not, those ships aren't going to be super useful in combat.


Interdiction Pulse. It's cool to see a more aggressive campaign ability. But I'm confused. Is it for stopping fleets from catching you, or stopping fleets from getting away from you?

Some "stopping fleets from catching you", and some "ambushing fleets heading towards you"; not so much "getting away from you" since it'll have no effect on anything heading away. It'll also make using Sustained Burn around enemy fleets rather more dangerous.



Quote
New bounties will not spawn near where the player is

It's weird to see world rotate around player that obviously. Plus, it was nice to get extra income for surprise double bounty.

It's only obvious if you're reading the patch notes. Perhaps a better way to put it, in the patch notes, would have been "stopped bounty fleets from occasionally spawning in the same system the player is in, which was confusing and felt weird".


Maybe it should depend on relative sizes of fleets (both chance to interrupt SB/EB and burn level reduction. With cutoff to 0% if casting fleet is too small)? Having single frigate stop Onslaught armada in it's tracks doesn't feel right.
And would be annoying to no end if spammed by small fleets that like to swarm around player due to being too weak to attack directly.

Yeah, I'm still looking at the details here. There's definitely potential for annoyance.


Do they have nerfed swarmers like Talons?

Yes.



Quote
Bounty level goes up with player level even if the player hasn't been doing bounties

one step closer to obvilion in space and difficulty slider.

Just to make sure I was clear, already-posted bounties won't scale up with player level. It's only newly-posted bounties that are affected.


That's only the theory though. I think testing against an Odyssey would be more important than testing as an Odyssey to avoid making it unfun.

It's still not super maneuverable, and since it doesn't have a mobility system, I don't think chasing it down would be too much of a problem. Especially given that by the time you're facing one, you've got the resources to invest into any one of a number of faster options - it's not like, say, the Hyperion, where you're just not going to be able to chase it down no matter what. But yeah, it's a good point re: looking at it from the other direction.


Honestly, the AI running around with S-Burn just seems incredibly scary to me. The AI S-Burn buff (no more sensor penalties), combined with the transverse jump and e-burn nerf, will make escaping patrols absolute hell. I mean, how does one even escape from an AI fleet at 18 burn? Is the only option just to S-Burn as well to get away? Is it possible to E-Burn out of sensor range during the AI's S-Burn windup? Is the T-Jump delay short enough to allow for a T-Jump while the AI windsup its S-Burn?

The think to keep in mind is SB fleets have low acceleration and are much easier to dodge by just moving sideways. Also, Inderdiction Pulse more or less hard-counters SB as a pursuit tool.


Hi Alex, I was wondering if there are any user interface changes looking to be added in the new update? I feel like a toggle feature for speeding up time and (in combat) ships facing the mouse would be really ergonomic and fab for taking the strain off some tired fingers ^^*.

No, sorry! For combat, though, there's already a setting to invert shift behavior, so that may be of use to you.



The problem with Heavy Mauler (and HVD) is it is too rare except maybe by endgame.  Heavy Mauler is rare enough that I usually reload the game if I lose a ship with them.  It is easier for me to replace or recover most ships than Heavy Mauler.

HVD, sure, but I've had a lot more luck picking up Heavy Maulers. Maybe a bit more than average on that particular playthrough.


Lux losing half speed for IR Pulse Laser, why?  They were not very strong offensively, and they are more expensive than Sparks.  With that change, I might ignore Lux and stick with Broadswords.

It was entirely too good in terms of damage output. Just spamming Lux wings would maul things, and mauling things isn't a heavy fighter's job.


Just as 0.8 made them finally worth using. I don't think I'll ever prefer a Piranha to Khopesh/Dagger after this change.
Re: Piranha.  They would become the low-grade guns of bombers.  (Actually, they already are, but at least they are effective.)  Only good to put on disposable ships if you cannot afford to lose better bomber chips.

They still have the highest damage potential out of all bombers, so I think they'll still have a niche vs larger targets. If you're mainly fighting destroyers or faster cruisers, then yeah, the other bombers will do better, but that's the point - that it was competitive against smaller targets was the problem.

That said, they could possibly use an OP cost reduction, maybe to 8. I'll take a look.

Idea: Instead of the bombs releasing straight forward, release multiple bombs at a time: some go straight forward, but some have a decent sideways component. This makes it harder for the target ship to dodge everything.

It also makes Piranhas uniquely effective in attacking multiple ships at once that are in a "death ball" formation. Even with some spread the target ship will dodge most of them, but there will be so much ordinance that the other ships will ALSO need to dodge or turn their shields.

I'll take a quick look and see how that goes. IIRC I tried something similar and it didn't pan out but I'm not 100% sure on why or even if I did.


Just wanted to chime in that in a play through to level 40 with a fairly even split between combat, leadership, and tech, slightly leaning toward combat, I found that I could accomplish quite a lot with 1 Eagle (Flagship), 2 Pirate Eagles (restored and with combat officers), 2 Sunders (No Officers, HIL), a Heron and a Drover (Both with Carrier officers).  My biggest problem was with high tech fleets, as I had to be really careful in dealing with phase ships, since I didn't have a good way to get rid of them quickly, and they can cause havoc. I would reload after failed battles to try again, but I was up to 270 to 300K (Legion flagship for one, Doom for another) bounties and heavily out numbered and still able to win with this setup. It would have been easier with a larger fleet, but not having to worry much about fuel and supplies was the trade off.

Thank you! Good to know, yeah.


I really liked the ideas from Sy about Advanced Countermeasures and agree that the current skill doesn't look that fun, so started a new thread with additional ideas/suggestions: Thread

Cool, will check that out :)


Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2644
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #94 on: May 25, 2017, 12:13:51 PM »

I can already see the addition of AI S Burn and the I Pulse being annoying at best and infuriating at the worst. And cheese-able as well.
How far off course does someone need to be before they are unaffected by the pulse? How far out does it reach? Does the AI have some built in reaction time to avoid it?
I can see this ability and S Burn for the AI making pirating unfun and impossible to be profitable due to the nature of everything. How would one take down a trade convoy when it is going at burn 18 and the Pulse has a charge time?

Now that E Burn has half the duration, have the costs been reduced or the acceleration increased? If not then I can see this becoming more and more an AI only ability, even with the no CR loss skill
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]

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1513
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #95 on: May 25, 2017, 01:03:33 PM »

Quote
Maybe the Centurion could just do with a cost reduction - "being annoying to kill" seems like a reasonable role for an escort frigate. Hmm.
The problem is that both Centurion and Brawler are hard to kill, can stop bigger things and are reasonable escorts (Centurion is better for PD duties, while Brawler will stop bigger ships due to having guns). The main difference is that Brawler has an overwhelming firepower, while Centurion has very little of it.

zaimoni

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #96 on: May 25, 2017, 01:54:33 PM »

One of the highest-utility early-game micro-management orders that doesn't belong in SS is "exactly one of you, eliminate that target".  Use specifically for Hound/Cerebus/Mudskipper Mk II, all of which only need one AI Wolf or AI Lasher to erase if they don't have an FSG.
Select the ship or ships you want to kill the target, then right-click on the target. This will give an eliminate order that only the selected ships will follow. This also works for escort orders.
I need right-clicking on the target to be an operation, for that.  It's a no-op on the machine I play SS on.  Shields toggle fine, but no other right-click does a thing in either tactical or strategic views.
Logged

Cycerin

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1646
  • beyond the infinite void
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #97 on: May 25, 2017, 02:06:05 PM »

I put an Odyssey's speed to 90 and decided to test a couple of ships against it, and yeah, it's kind of aggravating to have a ship with such a strong omnishield be able to constantly reset, especially thanks to the capital peak performance time. It is however interesting to see the odd one out (HEH) of the vanilla capital ships get some attention. I would like to see a sprite overhaul sometime too : V
Logged

Hussar

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #98 on: May 25, 2017, 02:36:02 PM »

It won't make it any less a god-ability - but it's good to see change like this in my opinion. That hovever - if attacked - what happens after battle? Will fleet be able to do a transverse jump upon victory or successful disengage? If victorious, will we be scavenging and then making the jump?
It's interrupted if there were hostilities.

The question then is: "Upon successful disengagement from a forced battle, is it possible to load up the transverse jump again BEFORE the invulnerability period comes off?".
I think we should.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 15388
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #99 on: May 25, 2017, 02:41:26 PM »

... Shields toggle fine, but no other right-click does a thing in either tactical or strategic views.

That's... super weird.

The question then is: "Upon successful disengagement from a forced battle, is it possible to load up the transverse jump again BEFORE the invulnerability period comes off?".
I think we should.

Oh, I see - not before invulnerability, since that's super short, but I think the other fleets will be "standing down" for long enough that you should be able to.

Logged

Wyvern

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2410
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #100 on: May 25, 2017, 05:03:07 PM »

Oh hey!  Random thought of the moment: if we'll actually be able to mod in multi-part ships in 0.8.1, how will that interact with phasing cloaks?  If I give the main ship a phasing cloak, will it phase out its modules with it?  If I give a module a phasing cloak... does that even work?
Logged
Wyvern is 100% correct about the math.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 15388
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #101 on: May 25, 2017, 05:19:16 PM »

Just off the top of my head, they'd probably all be able to phase independently of each other.
Logged

Hussar

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 257
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #102 on: May 25, 2017, 05:28:30 PM »

The question then is: "Upon successful disengagement from a forced battle, is it possible to load up the transverse jump again BEFORE the invulnerability period comes off?".
I think we should.
Oh, I see - not before invulnerability, since that's super short, but I think the other fleets will be "standing down" for long enough that you should be able to.

Guess we'll have to see. If you agree with me on this, it can always get fixed in next patch if it proves to be a problem. Since not always you get all fleets to stand down, as sometimes few fleets tries to gang up on you but they don't do it together (like they can be literally pixels away from joining, so they don't get affected and force another battle in matter of seconds). Hence why my questions.
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7458
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #103 on: May 25, 2017, 06:14:28 PM »

Quote from: Alex
HVD, sure, but I've had a lot more luck picking up Heavy Maulers. Maybe a bit more than average on that particular playthrough.
For Mauler, I guess it depends on who I am friends with.  If I go without commission, and I do not visit too many Black Markets, then access to Mauler is limited.  Black Market occasionally carries the Mauler, but only like one or two at a time.  I cannot stockpile lots of them like I can with other weapons.  HVD is like Mauler except I see even less at Black Markets (although I can farm those from stronger Remnants if I want).

If I took commission from someone like Hegemony, or fight their fleets constantly, I probably would find many more Maulers to use.

Quote from: Alex
It was entirely too good in terms of damage output. Just spamming Lux wings would maul things, and mauling things isn't a heavy fighter's job.
I could not believe that, so I just tried three wings (and three other wings later), and they seem just slightly behind Sparks at killing things (my test subject was a Falcon).  Broadswords had trouble chewing through armor.  Warthogs were better but they were a bit slower and cost more OP.  Lux or Sparks chewed up Falcon faster.  Okay, I underestimated their offense.  Lux are good, better than I thought, but Sparks still kill most things a bit faster than Lux (at least with three wings of either).  If anything, that just shows how good Sparks are and I should farm Sparks instead of Lux (due to Sparks killing faster and cost less OP) if I had to choose which chips to loot and scum for general purpose assault if I cannot get both.  Lux would be good if I needed something that can survive swarming an Onslaught a bit longer, but if I need sub-capitals dead fast, Sparks would be my go-to between that and Lux.

I expect "fighters" to fight and maul things at least as well as interceptors, just be slower but beefier.  I would not expect "fighters" to be decoys or jokers that are only good for playing distracting jokes on the enemy until the wizards/artillery unload on the target.  I expect fighters to stab the enemy dead, not play linebacker for the wizard until he casts the "I Win" button spell.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 15388
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.8.1a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #104 on: May 25, 2017, 06:39:24 PM »

Lux are good, better than I thought, but Sparks still kill most things a bit faster than Lux

Right - almost as good as the most OP fighter in the game by far, which also lost half its offense :)

I expect "fighters" to fight and maul things at least as well as interceptors, just be slower but beefier.  I would not expect "fighters" to be decoys or jokers that are only good for playing distracting jokes on the enemy until the wizards/artillery unload on the target.  I expect fighters to stab the enemy dead, not play linebacker for the wizard until he casts the "I Win" button spell.

That's fair in general, but wrong for Starsector. In general, I don't think durable fighters that can also deal decent damage work at all, because they're too good in the sense that it's unavoidable damage with no risk to the carrier. Interceptors are fragile but can deal damage; bomber damage can be shot down, while heavy fighters don't have a similar method by which their damage can be mitigated. It pretty much inescapably has to be poor.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 35