Print

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

[angrytigerp]

The only real "scaling" is in bounties and such,

<checks patch notes> as of .9, there's no level scaling in bounties, either - it was a small component of their strength before, but now doesn't factor in at all. They do get stronger over time, though.

So: there isn't any level scaling in the game at all at this point.

So then, correct me if I'm wrong: if I just Went Dark, took a couple freighters full of supplies to a corner of a system to stay out of the way, and shift-fast-forwarded a few years, and then flew back to the active parts of the sector, there'd be a bunch of Pirate battleship fleets roaming the sector?

[Alex]

No, because pirates don't have battleships in .9?

But, yes, pirates would get appreciably stronger if you did that. There are other details, though, so "time has an impact" shouldn't be conflated with "time is the only thing that has an impact".

[angrytigerp]

No, because pirates don't have battleships in .9?

But, yes, pirates would get appreciably stronger if you did that. There are other details, though, so "time has an impact" shouldn't be conflated with "time is the only thing that has an impact".

Sorry, was just equating large fleets with battleships. General point I was making was they'd have big fleets and/or bigger ships than some *** in a single Hound trying to stick you up.

[diegoweiller]

The only real "scaling" is in bounties and such,

<checks patch notes> as of .9, there's no level scaling in bounties, either - it was a small component of their strength before, but now doesn't factor in at all. They do get stronger over time, though.

So: there isn't any level scaling in the game at all at this point.

but my in-universe explanation is you're more likely to be given details on bounties involving people with full capital-led fleets as you gain more fame and notoriety in the sector.

(Yep, that's a good way to think about it in-fiction, imo!)

If there is no scaling explain to me please, why named bounties are always a lot stronger than you?

[Alex]

There's no level based scaling. The strength of the named bounties gradually increases - up to a certain maximum - as you complete more and more of them.

[diegoweiller]

But even without doing a single bounty they keep getting harder? intended?

[Alex]

Yeah, they also get slightly more difficult - up to a fairly low cap - with time passing.

[diegoweiller]

Thanks, finally i get it I always wondered why the bounties were so hard if you started as spacer 

[Momaw]

There basically is scaling, but Alex indicated, it's not level. It's time and success. Which is counter to how some people will want to play the game, right?  If the game makes harder and harder encounters the longer you play and the more successful you are, what room is there for players who only want to run a micro-fleet of 2 or 3 ships?  Isn't this system forcing players to become admirals, when they might prefer the idea of being a very small, very elite force instead of an armada?

I'm honestly not trying to be hostile here, just asking how design meets gameplay meets player dreams. I think some people want Battlestar Galactica and other people want Firefly, and I'm just wondering whether there is enough room (in a constantly upgrading universe) for small time operators.

[Alex]

Well, there's plenty of stuff to do if you want to stay small-time for RP reasons - including low-level bounties that pop up fairly frequently irrespective of the overall "bounty level" you've reached by doing them. And bounties are probably the thing that ramps up the most (and a lot of things don't at all), so I wouldn't really equate "bounties ramp up" with "nothing to do if you're small time", if that makes sense.

Beyond that, different playstyles will lead to different things being viable, you know? So even if bounties in particular weren't accessible if you stayed small, that would have to be looked at in the context of what else is accessible, not by itself. And, as mentioned, they do remain accessible to a degree.

[vagrant]

I'd really like the idea of soft/hard power capped content that forces players to optimize their fleet and loadouts to tackle, especially against unfavorable odds.

This could provide other fleet optimization goals besides than building the largest strategically viable fleet and using it to crush the biggest enemies.

Bounties or missions could have fleet point, fleet value, sensor profile, burn level, ship class, or tech level restrictions, giving players another thing to consider besides enemy fleet makeup. Maybe even a combination of these restrictions and an additional reward based on the severity.

The restrictions could carry some flavor about why the special conditions are necessary to access the mission/bounty, and it would directly incentivize play at different sizes and configurations.

Not every mission needs restrictions, but having some restricted condition missions generate could open up some sort of scaled content without limiting the player to that play style accross the entire playthrough.


Example might be:

Pirate assasination
Conditions:
Limited sensor profile
Burn 8 required

If a player fleet doesn't meet the requirements, the bounty wouldn't spawn when they jump to the system, and they'd need to rezone with the correct fleet properties.

[TaLaR]

@vagrant

These are 4th-wall-breaking mechanics, so please no. Current bounties are already problematic in this regard - why are they just waiting to be killed at convenient locations? Aren't pirate supposed to be a bit more proactive? How did they even get a bounty being that passive? They just don't look as part of any meaningful simulation.

Target fleets could try to be stealthy/evasive (run from player) etc, but strictly within what game rules normally allow. So a small fleet of fast frigates running silent and avoiding the player is a valid challenge (assuming player gets at least rough location where to look), but despawning/refusing to spawn on some hard condition is not.

[vagrant]

@vagrant

These are 4th-wall-breaking mechanics, so please no. Current bounties are already problematic in this regard - why are they just waiting to be killed at convenient locations? Aren't pirate supposed to be a bit more proactive? How did they even get a bounty being that passive? They just don't look as part of any meaningful simulation.

Target fleets could try to be stealthy/evasive (run from player) etc, but strictly within what game rules normally allow. So a small fleet of fast frigates running silent and avoiding the player is a valid challenge (assuming player gets at least rough location where to look), but despawning/refusing to spawn on some hard condition is not.

call them what you want, but I think optional challenges with artificially imposed limitations add value to the otherwise open nature of Starsector's campaign sandbox. I don't think additional conditions are immersion breaking in any significant way more than current intel.

Also, my point is that these encounters should encourage different play styles. The flavor should follow the gameplay, not the other way around. Starsector's static missions set up situations that can't always be rolled over with superior firepower or numbers. In this way, I want to crib the interesting conditions the static missions present, while adding SOME elements of player agency afforded by the sandbox campaign.


I'm inspired here by how Heat Signature adds wrinkles to otherwise standard missions for additional challenge, but still lets the player choose how to attack the problem based on the equipment they've collected across the game so far.

I think you have a separate issue with how the bounty implementation doesn't match the flavor that goes along with it.

[RawCode]

"level scaling" is innate issue of all games with "levels" or other means of progression and non linear game play.

main goal to prevent situation, when over leveled player visit super boss and one shot him effortlessly.

at same time, it eliminates any reason to level at all, no matter how hard you try, how long you grind, nothing will change, you managed to get double DPS, enemies have double health to balance.
In worst case, you will have double DPS but enemies may have tenfold more HP and this result in "oblivion scaling".

Drones are "oblivion scaling", more drones you kill (and get levels as result, you may not defeat drones without getting XP), harder it becomes, rewards stay the same.

Same with bounties and many other things, that may depend on time, amount of quests or other factors, but perceived by player as level scaling.

Providing random power derelicts, bounties and stuff without any relationship to player's progress is quite fun, good old Gothic vibes.

[Megas]

I remember playing a console shump in the '90s (basically a Raiden/Gradius clone) where if the player powered-up too much, the enemies got much more firepower and turned the game into a bullet hell.  It was easier to play with basic or mild power-up, instead of trying to grab all the power-ups then die faster because it was too hard to dodge more and bigger and faster bullets.

As for 0.9.1, I hope the time scaling is slower.  Right now, I abandon named bounties soon after early game (about late in 206) because they upgrade to big ships while I am still stuck with ragtag fleet of destroyers led by starter Apogee (and I do not kill enough bounties for them to scale to cruisers or bigger, so it is clearly time).