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 2 [3] 4 5 6

Author Topic: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle  (Read 7243 times)

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12117
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #30 on: April 16, 2020, 07:46:32 AM »

Of course this can totally be a subjective thing, but how is it good to remove and sort of challenge from a game?
By making the player feel like an overpowered demon that gets to step on the enemy and turn them into a red stain on the ground.

The challenge in the game may not necessarily be combat itself (because player wants a completely one-sided fight), but to arrange circumstances where such a one-sided smackdown is possible.  Not unlike luring patrols away or waiting for pirates to raid a system and kill patrols, then either raid planet for blueprints or sat bomb it off the map.
Logged

Sordid

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #31 on: April 16, 2020, 08:06:08 AM »

it was faster to reload game than to grind up new replacements

That remains the case. Lost an important ship? Instant reload, don't even finish the battle. I laugh every time I see the Iron Mode checkbox in the new game screen and its tooltip that that's how the game is eventually intended to be played. Even if you can easily produce replacements, you might have to wait up to a month for them, and going back to your home system for them is a PITA if you're out in the boonies farming [redacted] or exploring. That's part of the reason why I like to play with a small deployment - the more ships you have with you, the more chance there is of having to reload because one of them decided to suicide into a clump of enemies. Iron Mode should be renamed Frustrating Mode and the tooltip should read "you might randomly lose because allied AI decided to do something stupid and there was not a damn thing you could do about it, no do-overs".

As far as I'm concerned, Recovery Operations, the industry skill that gives salvage bonuses, needs to also include "allied ships are always recoverable" in the first rank and "recovered allied ships suffer no d-mods" in the second rank. None of this "almost always" BS, none of this "ships with officers" BS.

Quote
I do like colony skills (I want to own an empire), but taking those on my character hurts combat power.  Alpha cores and Pather bug fix that problem, letting player to get more combat (or carrier or zombie) skills and power.

That's why I like the SkilledUp mod that lets you keep leveling until you get everything. A level cap that takes a very long time to get to, yet severely restricts what skills you can get, and no respec? No thanks, that's just anti-fun.

Would that be such a bad thing??
Of course this can totally be a subjective thing, but how is it good to remove any sort of challenge from a game? It sounds to me that you want to play a totally different game, with a different playstyle (which is fine) but there are mods for that. It would be very silly if you could remove the biggest weaknesses for every ship. The very thing you mentioned, plasma jets Paragon speaks for itself, it has no place in vanilla since it removes any sort of choice.

It's like having a greatsword in an rpg where the balance lies in its slow attack speed. Then you want it to swing as fast as a dagger while still doing insane damage. Makes no sense.

I agree, it would be very silly to be able to remove the weakness of every ship. That's why I specifically said it should be very hard to do and very expensive precisely so that you can't remove weaknesses from every ship.

The point of putting Plasma Jets on a Paragon isn't to make it more powerful, it's to make it more fun to play. Giving up the Fortress Shield would make it significantly weaker in direct confrontations, in fact. In your analogy, it would be making the greatsword faster at the cost of reduced durability.

Of course this can totally be a subjective thing, but how is it good to remove and sort of challenge from a game?
By making the player feel like an overpowered demon that gets to step on the enemy and turn them into a red stain on the ground.

The challenge in the game may not necessarily be combat itself (because player wants a completely one-sided fight), but to arrange circumstances where such a one-sided smackdown is possible.  Not unlike luring patrols away or waiting for pirates to raid a system and kill patrols, then either raid planet for blueprints or sat bomb it off the map.

Exactly. Starsector is a game with a progression system, the whole point of which is to make you more powerful over time. In a game with no progression system, where you win by playing better than your enemy, you earn your victory by your actions in the fight itself. In a game with a progression system, where you win because you have better stats than your enemy, you earn your victory by your actions before the fight itself.

The problem with making battles in Starsector challenging is that the challenge is mostly to the player's patience. The game is heavily stats-based, there's not a lot that you can actually do during combat to affect its outcome, especially in the late game. The quality of your ships, weapons, and officers is what determines the outcome for the most part. Which you do have control over, but the game needs to be set up in such a way that even late-game content can be made easy by diligent preparation. Otherwise you're just producing frustration and tedium as the player loses an even battle they have barely any control over through no fault of their own because their AI decided to do something stupid.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2020, 10:46:52 AM by Sordid »
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #32 on: April 16, 2020, 09:01:57 AM »

I agree, it would be very silly to be able to remove the weakness of every ship. That's why I specifically said it should be very hard to do and very expensive precisely so that you can't remove weaknesses from every ship.

The point of putting Plasma Jets on a Paragon isn't to make it more powerful, it's to make it more fun to play. Giving up the Fortress Shield would make it significantly weaker in direct confrontations, in fact.
It sounds like to you, more powerful = more fun, but the intent of your suggestion doesn't matter. The reality is that putting plasma jets on a paragon makes it way way more powerful. Paragons biggest strength is range boost, not fortress shield. It only needs fortress shield because it's too slow to run away and would get swarmed too easily, but if it can just run away when in danger (and you still have insanely efficient shields to win brawls), there's no need for absurd damage tanking: you can just back off to vent when you need to and kite stuff that could actually hurt you. Range + speed is way way stronger for the player than range + defense. In previous versions of the game where you could get massive range and speed bonuses with skills, a player piloted medusa could 1v1 an unskilled paragon (it didn't have the range boost hull mod IIRC) by abusing range + speed. You would have to make plasma jets paragon a super late game trophy that is not available until you have already won, otherwise it would trivialize a lot of fleet composition choices.

Exactly. Starsector is a game with a progression system, the whole point of which is to make you more powerful over time. In a game with no progression system, where you win by playing better than your enemy, you earn your victory by your actions in the fight itself. In a game with a progression system, where you win because you have better stats than your enemy, you earn your victory by your actions before the fight itself.

I disagree strongly that starsector is just a progression based game, starsector is both of these things. There absolutely is an aspect of improving you performance by getting better stuff, but the combat layer of starsector is also very much skill based, and you can improve results significantly by piloting better. I generally get more kills with my flagship than the entire rest of my fleet all the way through late game (I use the combat analytics mod to monitor my fleets performance and optimize so I can see the exact impact that I am having). Adding things that reduce/trivialize the player effort required to win fights ruins the combat portion of the game. If you just win with stats, you might as well auto-resolve every fight. The most enjoyable fights are the ones you just barely won by the skin of your teeth IMO.
Logged

Sordid

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #33 on: April 16, 2020, 09:13:48 AM »

In previous versions of the game where you could get massive range and speed bonuses with skills, a player piloted medusa could 1v1 an unskilled paragon (it didn't have the range boost hull mod IIRC) by abusing range + speed.

Yeah, and wasn't that a lot of fun? I had a lot more fun doing that than bringing a Paragon of my own and slugging it out in slow motion.

You would have to make plasma jets paragon a super late game trophy that is not available until you have already won, otherwise it would trivialize a lot of fleet composition choices.

You don't say...
An endgame option for the player who has everything.

Quote
I disagree strongly that starsector is just a progression based game

Good, because that's not what I said.

Quote
The most enjoyable fights are the ones you just barely won by the skin of your teeth IMO.

Again, I agree, which is another part of why I like using a small deployment. I'd just like the battle to not take three weeks when you do that.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2020, 10:45:13 AM by Sordid »
Logged

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12117
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #34 on: April 16, 2020, 10:35:35 AM »

Quote
That remains the case. Lost an important ship? Instant reload, don't even finish the battle. I laugh every time I see the Iron Mode checkbox in the new game screen and its tooltip that that's how the game is eventually intended to be played.
Early game, I use whatever clunkers I loot from battle.  If they die, I pick them up and use them again.  They are disposable.  (No, I do not get any of the zombie industry skills that make clunkers better.)  Late game, I have enough colony income that I can afford to lose a few ships.  I order new ships to replace the fallen.

There are exceptions.  If my ace flagship gets popped, sure, I probably will reload.  But dumb AI?  With the current release, I will take the hit and continue play.

I do not like Iron Mode.  Starsector is too long for that.  It would need to be something relatively short or casual like DoomRL for me to tolerate that kind of play.  Also, even if I wanted that, Iron Mode is not hardcore enough because there is no forced permadeath after fleet wipe.


If I wanted one buff to Paragon, it would be to upgrade Advanced Targeting Core to Targeting Supercomputer so it can snipe at things across the map like it used to when Tachyon Lance had 2500 or more range.  It did not need to move far to kill things because its death radius to small stuff was huge, like beyond fog-of-war.

The most powerful combat skill in old versions was hull regeneration.  Since few things could one-hit kill things, a ship can just run away and regenerate.
Logged

intrinsic_parity

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3071
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #35 on: April 16, 2020, 11:54:32 AM »

@ Sordid
First of all, you've edited your posts after I responded to include things that you originally didn't say... If you want to expand on your points please do it in a new response so it's more clear what points have been made and what was responded to. Also please finish writing your comments before posting them. Comments are changing in the middle of me trying to quote them.

You would have to make plasma jets paragon a super late game trophy that is not available until you have already won, otherwise it would trivialize a lot of fleet composition choices.
You don't say...
What's the point then? If you can't get something until you've already won, then it basically has no impact on actual gameplay. To me, messing around and having fun  in late game  with an OP ship when nothing matters is the role of mods, not the base game.

Quote
I disagree strongly that starsector is just a progression based game
Good, because that's not what I said.

I was responding to the idea that combat outcomes are based solely on progression, which is what you said:
In a game with a progression system, where you win because you have better stats than your enemy, you earn your victory by your actions before the fight itself.
I believe this is only true in a game where combat outcomes are based primarily on progression, which is what I was referring to when I said 'just a progression based game'. I believe that in starsector, player skill in combat matters, and you earn victory by your skill, while your stats (ship quality, weapons etc) function as an amplifier of your skill rather than the determining factor for victory.

So what I am trying to say is that I disagree strongly with this:
The problem with making battles in Starsector challenging is that the challenge is mostly to the player's patience. The game is heavily stats-based, there's not a lot that you can actually do during combat to affect its outcome, especially in the late game. The quality of your ships, weapons, and officers is what determines the outcome for the most part. Which you do have control over, but the game needs to be set up in such a way that even late-game content can be made easy by diligent preparation. Otherwise you're just producing frustration and tedium as the player loses an even battle they have barely any control over through no fault of their own because their AI decided to do something stupid.

The player has a huge impact on combat in all stages of the game (in my experience), and can turn a fight which would be totally lost under AI control to a win. That ability is what makes combat fun. If the AI would win on their own without me, I might as well just auto resolve the fight and save myself 10 minutes. If I win on my own without the AI, then there's no point in having a fleet based game in the first place. The key to the game balance is find the right mix where the player matters, but can't win on their own and needs to implement strategies involving the AI to win. I wish the AI was a little better at enabling interesting strategies, but in my personal experience, the game is very close to balancing player agency in combat right now.

It seems like you and I have different experiences in that sense (how much agency the player has). I've found that there is a huge amount of challenge and skill in creating 'AI friendly' load outs and devising in-battle strategies to mitigate the AI's tendency to make bad decisions (and these often involve not using the 'best' weapons and ships from a stats perspective). I think that treating the AI's decision making as a problem to be solved rather than an insurmountable obstacle makes for more enjoyable (and successful) gameplay. In my experience, it's possible to devise fleets that can safely engage significantly superior opponents (by deployment points with similar ship quality) while you take risks in your flagship to win the fight (that's my general strategy for combat in this game).

...but the game needs to be set up in such a way that even late-game content can be made easy by diligent preparation...
I prefer the exact opposite. I never want there to be a point in the game where there are not challenging things to do. The player should be required to use their skill to win the game, not endlessly grind easy fights and get upgrades that guarantee future fights will also be easy. That's literally the most boring description of a game I could imagine. I guess this boils down to some fundamental differences about what makes for fun gameplay.
Logged

Sordid

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #36 on: April 16, 2020, 12:38:28 PM »

First of all, you've edited your posts after I responded to include things that you originally didn't say...

Which do not change the meaning of what I originally said, only expand and elaborate on it.

Quote
What's the point then?

I've been explaining it for three pages now.

Quote
I was responding to the idea that combat outcomes are based solely on progression, which is what you said:
In a game with a progression system, where you win because you have better stats than your enemy, you earn your victory by your actions before the fight itself.

I never said that SS is a game where combat outcome is based solely on stats. Stop trying to put words in my mouth. Kindly respond to what I actually do say, rather than to cartoonish caricatures of it devoid of all nuance created solely for the purpose of being easy to refute.

Quote
the game is very close to balancing player agency in combat right now.

Disagree completely.

Quote
It seems like you and I have different experiences in that sense (how much agency the player has). I've found that there is a huge amount of challenge and skill in creating 'AI friendly' load outs and devising in-battle strategies to mitigate the AI's tendency to make bad decisions (and these often involve not using the 'best' weapons and ships from a stats perspective). I think that treating the AI's decision making as a problem to be solved rather than an insurmountable obstacle makes for more enjoyable (and successful) gameplay.

Maybe I don't want to just be the AI's sidekick and adjust my playstyle to mitigate the AI's shortcomings. Maybe I want the AI to complement my playstyle, or at the very least not get in the way of it.

I prefer the exact opposite. I never want there to be a point in the game where there are not challenging things to do. The player should be required to use their skill to win the game, not endlessly grind easy fights and get upgrades that guarantee future fights will also be easy. That's literally the most boring description of a game I could imagine. I guess this boils down to some fundamental differences about what makes for fun gameplay.

As I said, in a game where the player's actions matter as little as they do in Starsector, it's either a choice between making fights easy or making them random and frustrating. This isn't Dark Souls, you can't dodge and parry enemy attacks and win the game through sheer skill with a level 1 character (or the SS equivalent, a Wolf-class). I wish it was like that, but it ain't.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2020, 12:41:33 PM by Sordid »
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2975
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #37 on: April 16, 2020, 12:58:53 PM »

As I said, in a game where the player's actions matter as little as they do in Starsector, it's either a choice between making fights easy or making them random and frustrating.
Well if you're so sure in your little theory please go do a playthrough where in every single fight you'll put your ship on autopilot. And then compare it with a usual run. Look, I know what I'm saying, I've played this game since ship systems weren't even a thing, and I've seen how streamers play for the first time ever. The difference is astronomical, you're probably just not very good at piloting so it seems as you're not making a difference. Which actually proves how good the AI is in this game, being as good as yourself.
This isn't Dark Souls, you can't dodge and parry enemy attacks and win the game through sheer skill with a level 1 character (or the SS equivalent, a Wolf-class). I wish it was like that, but it ain't.
This is the silliest analogy I've seen in a long while. You're comparing apples and oranges.
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Sordid

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #38 on: April 16, 2020, 01:04:50 PM »

Look, I know what I'm saying, I've played this game since ship systems weren't even a thing

I've played three years longer than you.

Quote
This isn't Dark Souls, you can't dodge and parry enemy attacks and win the game through sheer skill with a level 1 character (or the SS equivalent, a Wolf-class). I wish it was like that, but it ain't.

This is the silliest analogy I've seen in a long while. You're comparing apples and oranges.

That's... the point. You want a game that actually does strike a great balance between stats and skill? Dark Souls is that game.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2975
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #39 on: April 16, 2020, 01:27:58 PM »

I've played three years longer than you.
Soo you've played the game in 2009 when it wasn't even available? Alright kiddo.
That's... the point. You want a game that actually does strike a great balance between stats and skill? Dark Souls is that game.
Then just play those games? Why does everything need to be the same as there? You have a fleet here, in Dark souls you play one character and that's it. Let's not even get started with other dozen differences in combat. There's 3 pages here of you wanting the game to be something it's not. If every encounter could be solved with a single Wolf frigate (as you put as an example) there would be no point in having other ships. Meaning that would be the only viable playstyle, meaning this topic shouldn't have even been called a ''playstyle'' since all you want is to have a god ship and ignore basic mechanics of the game.

Look dude just make a mod yourself with a crazy overpowered ship and then give yourself a pat on the back. Clearly you want to play something completely different.

EDIT: Actually I think there are already a couple of mods with ships like that, go check them out.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2020, 01:31:50 PM by Grievous69 »
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Sordid

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #40 on: April 16, 2020, 01:30:43 PM »

Soo you've played the game in 2009 when it wasn't even available? Alright kiddo.

You registed in 2015. Go troll somewhere else.
Logged

Grievous69

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2975
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #41 on: April 16, 2020, 01:33:40 PM »

Way to go avoiding the question...

Anyways I was a long-time lurker, my English wasn't the best back then so I didn't bother writing anything.

EDIT: I can already tell some blue text will come for me so I shall withdraw from this thread. Good luck with Darksector/Sectorsouls :)
« Last Edit: April 16, 2020, 01:35:31 PM by Grievous69 »
Logged
Please don't take me too seriously.

Megas

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 12117
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #42 on: April 16, 2020, 01:44:01 PM »

Re: Progression.
While I like to pilot a godship, if all the player can do is be a low-level brute that a power can sic at others like a dog, then the player faction can only go so far.  It is like early D&D fighters that do not get much more personal power after name level (just a few more hp).  Their main late-game class feature is attracting (possibly free) followers to build up an army or run a keep.  If an individual fighter cannot keep with a wizard, he can use the people granted by his class feature to do the work of a hundred or so men.

In terms of Starsector, player builds up his flagship and fleet early.  Later, player builds up some colonies so he can gain more manpower to throw at the problem.  It is nice that the player shifts from growing his personal assets to growing his empire.  First, the player grows his personal power in a battle, then he can grow in power on how to shape the world.

I would like high colony income be useful for doing epic, strategic scale things that are beyond the scope of a few battles.  (Paying off extortionists is not what I have in mind, not when I can wipe them off the map if they bother my empire too much.)
Logged

Sordid

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 313
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #43 on: April 16, 2020, 02:07:58 PM »

Re: Progression.
While I like to pilot a godship, if all the player can do is be a low-level brute that a power can sic at others like a dog, then the player faction can only go so far.  It is like early D&D fighters that do not get much more personal power after name level (just a few more hp).  Their main late-game class feature is attracting (possibly free) followers to build up an army or run a keep.  If an individual fighter cannot keep with a wizard, he can use the people granted by his class feature to do the work of a hundred or so men.

Yeah, but in D&D you can choose to play a wizard. In SS, a fighter with a bunch of followers is the only option. I think the game would be a lot richer and more interesting if it gave you the option to play as a wizard.

Quote
I would like high colony income be useful for doing epic, strategic scale things that are beyond the scope of a few battles.  (Paying off extortionists is not what I have in mind, not when I can wipe them off the map if they bother my empire too much.)

Agreed. I don't much care for colony management in the current version, since all it really does is provide a passive income and a way to get ships and guns on demand, without having to run around from one market to another looking for them. The former shouldn't even be necessary, and there are better and more interesting ways of providing the latter. I find it hard to believe the far future doesn't include the equivalent of google that could be used to find the things you're looking for.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7173
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Combat buff ships for solo playstyle
« Reply #44 on: April 16, 2020, 02:16:12 PM »

Disagreements and debate are good, but lets keep everything polite please.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6