Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 87

Author Topic: Starsector 0.9a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 304780 times)

Embercloud

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #390 on: October 24, 2018, 10:00:12 AM »

To be frank, why wouldn’t you endeavour to sell already known hullmods? They may be redundant to you but there is always someone where that is not the case. It’s a really good way to make money
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 17412
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #391 on: October 24, 2018, 10:10:23 AM »

This reminds me alot of another book from H. Beam Piper (Space Vikings), The Cosmic Computer. It describes an entire planet where the industry is based on tech mining, as it was once a miliatry staging point in an interstellar war. The protagonists are looking for the crown jewel of the technological remains, said super computer. I dind't get very far yet though, the blatant 50s misogyny is a real turn-off.

Yeah, that may or may not be a direct inspiration for tech-mining. Aaand, yeah, I kind of had to approach the books as a "historical artifact" to get past that stuff - like, they're very interesting, but it's also hard to unreservedly recommend them.

Doesn't that mean you can never decivilize a rich factions colony? Like, you completly control the system, raid/bomb the enemy colony to reduce stability, they just pay a heap of credits and like by an invisible hand, all your destructive effort is undone? Same for the reverse, just channeling credits seems like a boring way to safe your colony.
Maybe something like a expensive "disaster relief fleet" that has to be send from another planet would provide more chances of interaction.

Well, the AI doesn't do that :) Right now, it's just a mechanic for the player to be able to do something to save one of their colonies. If the AI did do this, then it'd probably be possible to balance out with costs and alternate demands on credits. For example, does it do that, or does it launch a military operation to defend another system? As long as it's plausible, I think it'd be alright. A relief fleet is a nice idea, though; could definitely go in that direction if it were to get more fleshed out.

(It also wouldn't undo all of the destruction - you may stabilize the colony and prevent decivilization, but all of its industries are still knocked out for the better part of a year, and it may have gone down in size as well.)
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1535
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #392 on: October 24, 2018, 10:49:31 AM »

To be frank, why wouldn’t you endeavour to sell already known hullmods? They may be redundant to you but there is always someone where that is not the case. It’s a really good way to make money
My understanding of the patch notes is that learned hull mods no longer drop as loot, so you can't sell them because you will never get them. Obviously you would sell duplicate hull mods if you had them. Someone pointed out that this might result in behavior where you don't learn hull mods so that you can continue getting them as loot to sell, which seems like counterintuitive gameplay.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #393 on: October 24, 2018, 11:23:32 AM »

My understanding of the patch notes is that learned hull mods no longer drop as loot, so you can't sell them because you will never get them. Obviously you would sell duplicate hull mods if you had them. Someone pointed out that this might result in behavior where you don't learn hull mods so that you can continue getting them as loot to sell, which seems like counterintuitive gameplay.

Especially considering that hullmods are only rivaled by AI cores in cost/weight ratio.
Logged

Deshara

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1068
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #394 on: October 24, 2018, 02:48:27 PM »

Like Foof, I do not care about Solar Shielding's campaign benefit.  There are much better campaign hullmods I like to use (like Automated Repair Unit) but do not due to limited OP totals.  Less energy damage taken would be the only reason I would want to install solar shielding.

that reminds me, hey Alex since you're implementing campaign-level costs to campaign-level logistics hullmods, and since I never use them bc my fleet is always so OP-starved for effectiveness in combat, how would you feel about a hullmod that translates the OP cost of all logistical campaign-level hullmods into increased operations costs & free up OP for combat, as a reward for late-game fleets that have a hefty income in need of a profit sink that feeds back into combat?

are system requeriments modified by new release ? (i hope you all understand what i wanna mean, i'm still learning english and not sure if i write correctly)
thanks

The game doesn’t really require a high end computer, in any case, and if your computer is struggling during large battles, a workaround could be to lower the possible deployment points. This would force less ships participating in the battle.

the reason I fell so deeply into this game is bc I was stuck playing on a potato (and a mac, at that lmfao)

Thank you! Really looking forward to that, (gritty) Enterprise roleplaying enabled!

It's not a single ship, right, but you could of course scuttle everything else :)


Scuttle it? What do you take me for?

I will of course lose those other ships in the dramatic opening scene fight, against the terrible pirate armada which is thereby established as my mortal enemy (and totally not just the first big pirate fleet I see). You see, the pirate admiral is actually my uncle, who, as I discovered earlier, murdered my father, an techno-archaelogist, to get to the rare treasurers he uncovered.
After this failed attempt at revenge I will have no choice but to flee to the furthest reaches of the Sector, only to discover a new purpose for my existence, out among the stars. While I turn towards exploration and archaelogy, just like my father once did, my uncle's treachey and my need for revenge never quite leave the back of my mind...

you know it doesn't sound like it'd be that much work for someone to mod (or dev ;) ) in a starting screen dialogue that lets you select ships in your starting lineup to "sell", the game starts in a retreat battle with an overwhelming force that'll salvage after the battle and then disband and all the ships you sold have malfunctioning burn drives & can't flee the battlefield but you start with their market value in cash.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2018, 03:10:04 PM by Deshara »
Logged

Goumindong

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1333
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #395 on: October 24, 2018, 11:01:23 PM »

My understanding of the patch notes is that learned hull mods no longer drop as loot, so you can't sell them because you will never get them. Obviously you would sell duplicate hull mods if you had them. Someone pointed out that this might result in behavior where you don't learn hull mods so that you can continue getting them as loot to sell, which seems like counterintuitive gameplay.

Especially considering that hullmods are only rivaled by AI cores in cost/weight ratio.

True, but diagetically selling hullmods doesn’t work.

Hull mods take up space because everything takes up space but otherwise they would be zero.  They’re not things you install but rather learn. The problem is that hull mods could not be treated as a commodity and would be difficult to implement into the game terms of acquiring... as everything else goes into inventory and is a commodity.

So if you use a hull mod think of, instead of this being a value to you, that you have lost the ability to sell exclusivity rights.  It was exclusivity rights that were being bought when you sold a hull mod, rather than the thing itself. The main colonies make money by selling their knowledge... but only if things they don’t feel they need exclusive use of. Others won’t buy wheat you have learned because you cannot sell them what they want, which is the right to use it exclusively.  Not the right for you to dilute their use by selling it to someone else
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 8524
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #396 on: October 25, 2018, 12:55:29 PM »

For the releases 0.7a and 0.8a, it appears their release were about one month after their last pre-release patch notes.  If this October patch notes is the last before release, and the upcoming release follows history, we could see a release around mid-to-late November.
Logged

Sutopia

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 301
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #397 on: October 25, 2018, 03:52:43 PM »

For the releases 0.7a and 0.8a, it appears their release were about one month after their last pre-release patch notes.  If this October patch notes is the last before release, and the upcoming release follows history, we could see a release around mid-to-late November.
So now the question is, will 0.9a be our thanksgiving or Xmas gift :D
Logged

Baqar79

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 228
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #398 on: October 25, 2018, 08:06:27 PM »

Many thanks Alex for the new notes!

Apogee Fan wall of text to follow.....

As someone that fell in love with the Apogee during my iron-mode play-through, the Apogee is already an excellent cruiser:
-1st Rate shields (0.60 base)
-Large Energy & Large Missile hardpoints
-Reasonably good base speed (60)
-Decent amount of cargo space
-Built in High resolution sensors and surveying equipment (Excellent for reducing surveying costs in the current version).

With the right officer perks and hardened shields you can get the shields flux down to 0.32/Damage, making them extremely tough.  I use Locust SRM'S and a converted hanger with a Xyphos wing for additional PD support (not to mention the built in Active Flare launcher) to make it an excellent anti-fighter platform/tank, and use an Autopulse & 2xMedium Gravitons and a Tactical laser for primary damage (it's forward damage is it's weak point, and I'm short on OP after all the hullmods I have installed).  This current configuration works best against swarms of fighters, but holds up well against any other high damage sources; there were very few cases that I was concerned even on iron-mode due to the overall durability of the Apogee.

The Autopulse laser & Converted hanger changes will free up another 14 OP (50% OP cost on Xyphos (15 OP) & no need for Expanded magazines (7 OP) ); so while I would say overall that the Converted Hanger changes will be a nerf in this case, I'll still have spare OP in exchange (Xyphos are tough and stick close to my Apogee so don't often die, so the replacement rate was never an issue for me).

Looking at the changes:
"Reduced fuel/ly to 2"
-This is a rather nice buff, makes sense for a long range exploration ship to get better fuel/ly, and it becomes an even nicer choice for exploration/surveying/salvaging.

"Increased fuel capacity to 200 and cargo capacity to 400"
-Small, but nice little buffs, I guess it is being moved further into an explorer/salvaging role, which suites my current play-style :)

"Changed arc of large front hardpoint to 10 degrees (was: 5)"
-Don't think I really noticed this...or perhaps I did at first but learned to work with it as I familiarized myself with the Apogee.

"Reduced deployment and supplies/month costs to 18 (was: 25)"
-It may be because I love level 3 energy weapons (and exploration), but I've tried the Aurora, Dominator, Doom (well it is getting buffed now..), Eagle & Falcon and the Apogee is my favourite of the lot.  If the other cruisers got OP reductions as well I would feel better about this change, but otherwise it seems a bit too much for the only cruiser with a Level 3 Energy weapon and 0.6 flux/damage shields (If you have to nerf anything, please leave the shields at 0.6; the best feature of the Apogee IMO is it's ability to take huge amounts of shield damage).

However:
"Changed coverage of medium turrets to not cover front and overlap in the back"

This is a bit of a downgrade, but the Apogee is pretty weak in terms of forward firepower.  I admit I only use the two Medium's for Graviton beams, but I'm running short on OP (Lots of hull-mods, and no vents or capacitors).  Not having that additional extra power (albeit weak) of those mediums is going to be missed (even if they were useless against small targets since the beams can't converge).  I'm wondering what your intention was with this change (eg stop the Apogee out damaging other cruisers in exchange for better cost effectiveness as an explorer/salvager ship)?

If the reason for the change is to reduce it's forward firepower, then perhaps those medium energy turrets could be removed and replaced with non-removable 360 degree Point Defence system (eg something like the monitor's Flak), it's already a tough ship, but I feel that this would be much more useful then having two rear-only firing medium energy weapons.

Another separate thought is that the forward-most (left side) small energy turret only covers the back & side, while the other small energy turret (rear, right side) overlaps a little on the front.  With the changes to the medium energy turrets, only a single small energy turret will now be able to cover part of the front (rear, right side one).  If you could rotate the arc of the forward-most small energy turret 45 degrees or so clockwise so that it covers part of the same arc in the forward position as the other small energy turret then at least they could both provide focused fire on front located threats with PD weapons or be equipped with tactical lasers to provide a bit more extra DPS to make the loss of the two front facing mediums a little easier to digest.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 17412
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #399 on: October 25, 2018, 08:35:18 PM »

Thank you for the writeup, it's always fun to read something in-depth!

The Autopulse laser & Converted hanger changes will free up another 14 OP (50% OP cost on Xyphos (15 OP) & no need for Expanded magazines (7 OP) ); so while I would say overall that the Converted Hanger changes will be a nerf in this case, I'll still have spare OP in exchange (Xyphos are tough and stick close to my Apogee so don't often die, so the replacement rate was never an issue for me).

Hmm - unless I'm missing something it's actually a wash, since the Xyphos will cost 50% *more* than its base cost, while bombers in CH would cost double.

Not having that additional extra power (albeit weak) of those mediums is going to be missed (even if they were useless against small targets since the beams can't converge).  I'm wondering what your intention was with this change (eg stop the Apogee out damaging other cruisers in exchange for better cost effectiveness as an explorer/salvager ship)?

(Mostly because it's just awkward - both for arc and placement reasons - and the beams overlap the hull in ways that I generally try to avoid when working out ship layouts. It also seems like a reasonable thing to pair with the deployment cost reduction, which in turn makes it a more viable exploration ship - especially considering it's now available with one of the starting options.)
Logged

Baqar79

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 228
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #400 on: October 25, 2018, 09:38:38 PM »

Hmm - unless I'm missing something it's actually a wash, since the Xyphos will cost 50% *more* than its base cost, while bombers in CH would cost double.

Ahhh...so it is, I read the notes incorrectly as a discount, whoops!. 

Hmmm, this seems rather harsh cost in some cases for the converted hanger.  If you don't care about replacement rate in the case of me using Xyphos for mobile point defense, it is all pretty much bad news (more expensive ships that are slower and easier to kill).  Currently bigger ships with converted hangers provide better replacement rates, but cost more OP to install.  Could the converted hanger cost be flat across all ship types, ie make it 10 OP cost regardless of whether it is on a Destroyer/Cruiser/Capital ship, or provide some other benefit for the increase in OP cost as before?

(Mostly because it's just awkward - both for arc and placement reasons - and the beams overlap the hull in ways that I generally try to avoid when working out ship layouts. It also seems like a reasonable thing to pair with the deployment cost reduction, which in turn makes it a more viable exploration ship - especially considering it's now available with one of the starting options.)

Fair enough, I can easily accept the cost reduction as part of that deal, but I guess then the medium mounts don't really seem to have a clear role/purpose, hence the thought of removing them all together and replacing them with a fixed built in system with better coverage, but perhaps that will be the same problem with the overlap that you don't like.  I'm guessing that the small energy turret mount on the front left having it's turret arc rotated so that it covers part of the front is a no go, maybe for the same reasons?
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1535
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #401 on: October 25, 2018, 09:44:31 PM »

I like the idea of replacing the mediums with some built in pd. Maybe like the monitor with built in flak, but that might too good so maybe some nerfed flak or built in burst pd?
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 17412
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #402 on: October 25, 2018, 10:08:10 PM »

Hmmm, this seems rather harsh cost in some cases for the converted hanger.  If you don't care about replacement rate in the case of me using Xyphos for mobile point defense, it is all pretty much bad news (more expensive ships that are slower and easier to kill).  Currently bigger ships with converted hangers provide better replacement rates, but cost more OP to install.  Could the converted hanger cost be flat across all ship types, ie make it 10 OP cost regardless of whether it is on a Destroyer/Cruiser/Capital ship, or provide some other benefit for the increase in OP cost as before?

It's definitely just more expensive for that specific case, but, well, making it more expensive is kind of the point. On the flip side of not caring about the replacement rate, you also don't care about the speed penalty, and the damage taken penalty doesn't seem huge in that case either - and if it is an issue, then the replacement rate is better, and that factors in too.

As far as larger ships, I *think* a higher cost for hullmod is probably warranted because fighters can add a lot of flexibility and act as a force multiplier for the ship; e.g. a wing of say Longbows is worth more on a ship with the firepower to back them up, etc. It kind of has to be a case of picking an optimal set of fighters for a ship to maximize the effectiveness, rather than slapping on any fighter being baseline-beneficial.


(It's hangar! Sorry; pet peeve.)


I'm guessing that the small energy turret mount on the front left having it's turret arc rotated so that it covers part of the front is a no go, maybe for the same reasons?

Yep, it's just not positioned well for that.


I like the idea of replacing the mediums with some built in pd. Maybe like the monitor with built in flak, but that might too good so maybe some nerfed flak or built in burst pd?

Generally speaking I want to be restrained with built-in weapons and such to keep them special. I also don't really like making "regular" weapons built-in; the Monitor is a bit of a special case, not something I want to add more of, if that makes sense. That said, yeah, the mediums are of limited utility - but even if they end up being used for small PD, that's not too bad.         
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3742
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #403 on: October 25, 2018, 10:15:02 PM »

For me, the Apogee has first and foremost been a support ship.  Always have a couple other ships, even if only frigates, along with it, as it was never designed to deal with other enemies completely on it's own.  200 extra Kinetic beam DPS from Gravitons was never a considerable amount of damage due to beams not causing hard flux (and was only really effective against cruisers or larger due to the arcs being directly forward, meaning there's a wide gap).  So that nerf doesn't affect me in the long run, but I'm glad for the other buffs especially.
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.

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2263
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #404 on: October 25, 2018, 11:35:48 PM »

Apogee could stand on it's own with Autopulse or Plasma (losing 2 Gravitons in forward arc would probably make this unfeasible).
But then there is a problem of being slow and short ranged (hard flux range) at the same time. You can win against faster+longer ranged opponent because AI is fairly bad at range management, but it's still better to not put yourself in such disadvantaged position by piloting one of better ships.

Hmm, considering that Needlers are obsoleted in next update (at 700 range they are inferior to Railguns for most practical purposes), Apogee might be actually decent in next update.
Needlers were Apogee's main weakness, HVD on something like Hammerhead has just low enough damage/fire rate to be vent-tankable till enemy CR runs out.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 [27] 28 29 ... 87