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 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 62

Author Topic: Starsector 0.9.1a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 351492 times)

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #75 on: February 03, 2019, 11:14:17 AM »

A standard stock-loadout Onslaught has a fairly even (though ultimately losing) fight with it when both are under AI control. Given how much the player can do to improve loadouts or simply maximize the effect of their ships, I think there's plenty of room for beating it with different options.

It *is* supposed to be better at a baseline level than a player-available battleship, though.
Logged

DrakonST

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 341
  • Lizard-Wizard
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #76 on: February 03, 2019, 11:36:45 AM »

I don't think Radiant is impossible to kill with a Conquest or an Onslaught, nor do I think it's unfairly overpowered. It provides a good challenge and your fleet is much more important than what capital ship you use.
Capital ships it everything in this game.

You can take 3-4 Paragons, and blow-up everything what you can found in sector, even if you need to blow-up 5 Remnant Ordo with 10 Radiants. But 5 Onslaught can`t do this anymore. They can do it 0.8 before Radiant appear in game.

Yep i can take 5 Onslaught/Conquests and blow-up max sized defenders fleet of Red Planet. But it everything what can do this capitals. 3 Paragons can do much more.

When Radiant appear in game it just killed sense to use all other ships except Paragon-class. 
« Last Edit: February 03, 2019, 11:41:32 AM by DrakonST »
Logged
I a Russian. And i communicate with the help of Promt Translate. And I am a color-blind person.

Morrokain

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2143
  • Megalith Dreadnought - Archean Order
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #77 on: February 03, 2019, 12:06:35 PM »

Nice update!

I like the new added support for music in mods, especially. :)

Two quick questions I haven't seen yet:

1) What do you mean by "Danger Level" on the fleet tooltips? If it is an indicator of how powerful the fleet is, then in what context? Relative to the player's current fleet? Also, how is it calculated and can it be changed or set by mods, such as in the faction file?

2) I know tags can be changed by skins, but would it be simple to add an optional section to the variant.json file that could modify tags by variant as well? For instance, the new tag for the Mora and Legion would make a lot of sense for the attack variant of the Astral in my mod, but not at all for the Elite variant.

*Edit* I meant hints, not tags. I get those confused a lot.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2019, 12:09:13 PM by Morrokain »
Logged

Toxcity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 561
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #78 on: February 03, 2019, 12:27:19 PM »

I mean Radiant existing doesn't invalidate every ship not named Paragon.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #79 on: February 03, 2019, 12:28:07 PM »

1) What do you mean by "Danger Level" on the fleet tooltips? If it is an indicator of how powerful the fleet is, then in what context? Relative to the player's current fleet? Also, how is it calculated and can it be changed or set by mods, such as in the faction file?

See here:

https://twitter.com/amosolov/status/1070133506947366912

It's relative to the strength of the player's fleet, based on the relative fleet point values, modified by quality/officers/etc. It can't be modified directly... although, actually, let me add a $dangerLevelOverride to fleet memory - that's pretty simple.

2) I know tags can be changed by skins, but would it be simple to add an optional section to the variant.json file that could modify tags by variant as well? For instance, the new tag for the Mora and Legion would make a lot of sense for the attack variant of the Astral in my mod, but not at all for the Elite variant.

*Edit* I meant hints, not tags. I get those confused a lot.

I don't think that makes sense since variants are something that can be modified by the player. This sort of thing would have to be player-facing, otherwise you'd have a situation where the behavior of a player-modified variant depended on what the variant was originally, which would be super weird.
Logged

TaLaR

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2794
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #80 on: February 03, 2019, 12:36:02 PM »

When Radiant appear in game it just killed sense to use all other ships except Paragon-class. 

Reaper Harbinger deletes it without any problems in current release (Harbinger will only get nerfed in next one).
2 Afflictors can easily delete it too (1st with Reapers to cripple, 2nd with AM blasters to finish while avoiding death aoe).

A standard stock-loadout Onslaught has a fairly even (though ultimately losing) fight with it when both are under AI control. Given how much the player can do to improve loadouts or simply maximize the effect of their ships, I think there's plenty of room for beating it with different options.

What Radiant variant? 5 TL one with 20 lvl officer and correct skills may be actually quite close to un-solo-able except for Paragon in straightforward combat.
At least without player bringing a Capital with similarly maxed out character skills and piloting it personally.
Logged

ANGRYABOUTELVES

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 592
  • AE ALTADOON GHARTOK PADHOME
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #81 on: February 03, 2019, 12:37:20 PM »

Onslaughts can absolutely fight Radiants as long as you equip them right. I'm personally fond of putting 3 Heavy Needlers in the central mediums backed up with Haephestus Assault Guns in the larges and Harpoon Pods for missiles. The Radiant gets a massive needler burst when they jump in, the Haephestus forces the shields up so they have to tank the kinetics, and the Harpoons chase it down when it tries to back off.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #82 on: February 03, 2019, 12:38:32 PM »

What Radiant variant? 5 TL one with 20 lvl officer and correct skills may be actually quite close to un-solo-able except for Paragon. At least without player bringing a Capital with similarly maxed out character skills and piloting it personally.

The other one, which is what I happened to have in my sim opponents file :) But since the loadouts for most of the Radiants you'll see in the wild are dynamically generated...
Logged

Delta7

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • forum idiot
    • View Profile
    • my personal DA account
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #83 on: February 03, 2019, 02:47:56 PM »

Is the crash related to salvaging debris fields being fixed in 0.9.1?
Logged
warning: may be prone to random outbursts of stupidity

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #84 on: February 03, 2019, 02:49:45 PM »

Yep!
Logged

Morrokain

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2143
  • Megalith Dreadnought - Archean Order
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #85 on: February 03, 2019, 03:49:48 PM »

It's relative to the strength of the player's fleet, based on the relative fleet point values, modified by quality/officers/etc. It can't be modified directly... although, actually, let me add a $dangerLevelOverride to fleet memory - that's pretty simple.

I'll see how it handles Archean Order's ship/weapon rebalance, but thanks for the memory option that will prove handy if it doesn't pan out. :)

I don't think that makes sense since variants are something that can be modified by the player. This sort of thing would have to be player-facing, otherwise you'd have a situation where the behavior of a player-modified variant depended on what the variant was originally, which would be super weird.

Ok yeah that makes sense.

I was originally thinking along the lines that Support almost always means that carrier-like behavior would be the preferred option, whereas Strike and Attack/Assault would always prefer having that hint to commit to front-line combat. I had thought that would translate well to the player based on variant description, but I see where it being an obscure source of changing AI behavior could become problematic when it doesn't necessarily fit into those archetypes (like player controlled variants).

Edit:

Though to be honest, I would be all for simply putting this into the autofit U.I as a toggled behavior. I'm sure that has been suggested before though.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2019, 03:52:16 PM by Morrokain »
Logged

R.U.A

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #86 on: February 04, 2019, 03:11:38 AM »

Do you mean in the past this calculation is wrong?
It was wrong just for display purposes, it was still deducting the correct (reduced) amount of fuel.
What?s the meaning of ?reduced?? Do you mean that when the fleet is at a ?free? speed, it in fact doesn?t cost as much fuel as the displayed number? For example, assuming that a fleet consumes 200 fuel/day at a normal speed of 14(with sustained burn). When the fleet reaches the ?free? speed of 25, should it still consumes 200 fuel/day or more fuel/day?
Now properly handles weapons with a very large interruptible burst
Can you give a few examples of such weapons?  I didn?t fully get the point orz.

And thank you a lot for bearing my shooting questions.   :D
Logged
Access to RDS failed.

SirOstrich

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 3
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #87 on: February 05, 2019, 07:11:35 AM »

RIP Reaper Harbinger. Your OP-ness will be missed.
Logged

SCC

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4112
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #88 on: February 05, 2019, 07:25:58 AM »

What?s the meaning of ?reduced?? Do you mean that when the fleet is at a ?free? speed, it in fact doesn?t cost as much fuel as the displayed number? For example, assuming that a fleet consumes 200 fuel/day at a normal speed of 14(with sustained burn). When the fleet reaches the ?free? speed of 25, should it still consumes 200 fuel/day or more fuel/day?
If you move at burn speed higher than 20, tooltip showed increased fuel usage, when it actually used as much fuel as fleet moving at 20 burn does (so going over 20 is "free").
Can you give a few examples of such weapons?  I didn?t fully get the point orz.
See tooltip for Storm Needler. It shows "burst" of 9999.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12117
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.9.1a (In-Dev) Patch Notes
« Reply #89 on: February 05, 2019, 07:33:56 AM »

With upcoming industry limit to prevent single self-sufficient colony, I considered trying to avoid active Pather cells since they are so annoying and the most dangerous threat in endgame.  Only the Intel exploit makes them tolerable (and only if I can disrupt all of them for a year after destroying only a single pather base), and that will be gone soon.

If Industrial Planning does not reduce demand anymore, then that means the only way to meet fuel demand for a big colony (with megaport, waystation, and/or military base) is to use a synchrotron (or alpha core), which means that colony with fuel production and synchrotron will be targeted by pathers, because synchrotron increases pather interest.  It will be impossible to have faction-wide self-sufficiency without starting more fires that need to be put out.  (There are already too many fires that require direct player intervention to stop.)

According to the wikia, fuel production with synchrotron has 4 interest, instead of 2 on fuel production without it.  I noticed player gets sleeper cell at 3 that does nothing harmful (presumably as a warning), and active cells at 4+ which becomes a recurring pain to deal with short of removing industries.  Curiously, heavy industry stays at 2 regardless of upgrades or nanoforge.  I like that heavy industry does not exceed 2 because no heavy industry on any colony is very painful, given the junk player gets without one.  (I would not want to see heavy industry spike to 4 just because player upgraded to orbital works or installs nanoforge.)

It would be nice that synchrotron did not spike pather interest.  If not, at least something (either new item or old Industrial Planning 1 restored) that can either boost fuel production or reduce demand that does not cause more problems (either pather cells or hegemony inspections).
« Last Edit: February 05, 2019, 07:39:33 AM by Megas »
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 62