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 [2] 3 4 ... 23

Author Topic: Starsector 0.6.2a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 163165 times)

goduranus

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 858
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2013, 07:53:32 AM »

"CR: Does not modify rate of fire, modifies damage dealt instead"

This shouldn't be the case for projectile weapons. A bullet is a bullet regardless of how maintained is the gun, CR affecting their rate of fire makes more sense, like how you can push a well oiled machinegun harder without worrying about it's getting jammed. Less-well-maintained energy weapons doing less damage makes more sense though.

However, making it different for each case is too much abstraction to make sense. Rate of fire penalty, less-efficient shields, and less-efficient flux vents was already making a low CR ship do less damage, what's the reason for the change?
« Last Edit: October 22, 2013, 07:55:12 AM by goduranus »
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 15343
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #16 on: October 22, 2013, 09:35:51 AM »

And the flare thing, thank you so much.

It was an oversight not to have that in the first place, thanks for bringing it to my attention!


Looks pretty solid!  Too bad no fighter wing changes happened, especially in terms of ship system usage or AI...  :(

Well, these aren't the full notes. I expect to at least look at the fighter AI - improvements aside, there seems to be at least one legitimate bug with it.


Umm... any change you know exactly what else is going to be added? Economy? Don't gotta answer if you don't know!

:-X

I wouldn't expect anything earth-shaking or major for 0.6.2a, though. It's mostly a cleanup effort.



Quote
So ships no longer have a maximum amount of supplies they can use to repair per day? Does that mean that if I had a solo ship with a maxed out logistics capacity and maxed emergency repairs stat, that I could almost instantly repair a ship from near destruction to max hull/armor?

yes, In practice though, about the best you could do is fully fix up a wrecked destroyer in a day or so, according to the blog post

Right. If you've got, say, a lone Onslaught, and maxed out logistics and emergency repairs, then you're probably looking at about 8 days (and more supplies than it can reasonably carry alone) to repair it from 0 to full. And if you've got more supplies, then being over-capacity eats into the repair rate. So, in this case, it's a good deal faster than it used to be, but it's still not *that* fast.

It's one of those things where it seems to, at first glance, produce unreasonable results, but almost entirely doesn't. I'm sure it will in a *few* cases, but even then it's still marginally believable and more than worth the drastic reduction in needless complexity.


  • Frigates: "peak active time" will continue to count down while any enemy ship is within visual range of the frigate

Oops, that shouldn't be there. Was obviated by the line-of-sight change.

  • Frigates: "peak active time" will continue to count down while any enemy ship is within visual range of the frigate
  • Reduced peak active time for frigates (generally by about a minute, less/more at the low/high ends of the spectrum)
  • Halved deployment cost and CR recovery rate (i.e. supply cost and recovery time remain the same, more deployments are possible)

Not too fond of these changes, especially with the current supply system.

Edit: To clarify, I feel as if there is too much reliance on a single resource to do everything, and everything you do affect it. Instead of having crewmembers use a seperate resource called "provisions" or something, they also consume supplies.

I think you forgot the most important/interesting part: why do you think that? :)

As Gothars said, though, a more in-depth discussion probably belongs in the suggestions forum (or in general, depending).


Quote
•Engine malfunctions: now do not cause a flameout by themselves; need at least some of the engines to have been taken out by combat damage, unless the last active engine malfunctions
Does this mean that replacement fighters at low CR will not flameout spontaneously shortly after leaving the carrier?  Currently, once CR gets low enough, engine malfunctions makes fighters useless.

Oh, forgot to mention: malfunctions don't affect fighters anymore. They're only affected by the CR-related stats changes.


"CR: Does not modify rate of fire, modifies damage dealt instead"

This shouldn't be the case for projectile weapons. A bullet is a bullet regardless of how maintained is the gun, CR affecting their rate of fire makes more sense, like how you can push a well oiled machinegun harder without worrying about it's getting jammed. Less-well-maintained energy weapons doing less damage makes more sense though.

However, making it different for each case is too much abstraction to make sense. Rate of fire penalty, less-efficient shields, and less-efficient flux vents was already making a low CR ship do less damage, what's the reason for the change?

I think you might be looking at it too literally. There's no such thing as "too much abstraction to make sense", the more abstraction there is, the easier it is for it to make sense!

Case in point: the damage bonus could be due to, say, a better-maintained targeting system. Or, the damage bonus could simply represent different things for different weapon: a rate of fire for ballistics, better calibration for beams, etc.

Before you say that the rate-of-fire is already represented in game - yes, it is, but the rate of fire of the weapons doesn't directly translate to their in-fiction rate of fire. For example, something like the Vulcan fires 20 times per second in the game. Lore-wise, that number is probably closer to several thousand rounds per second, but that's highly impractical to try to represent, and also to model something that improves the Vulcan's RoF as an actual RoF increase.

So, everything you see is already highly abstracted, including relative ship/weapon scales, weapon stats, etc.

Mechanics-wise, the idea here is that CR should affect very core ship stats, such that it has an impact on everything. Changing the damage/dealt taken is about as core as it gets. (Also: it doesn't actually affect the flux dissipation rate.)[/list]
Logged

Trylobot

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1168
    • View Profile
    • Github profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #17 on: October 22, 2013, 10:27:49 AM »

Once again, Alex, a highly thoughtful and responsive change list. It's why I continue to support Fractal Softworks.
Logged

Cosmitz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 753
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #18 on: October 22, 2013, 12:16:13 PM »

I take pride in saying that Starsector is the best developed and managed indie game that i know of. Mentioned it a few times on the forum here. :)
Logged

ValkyriaL

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2145
  • The Guru of Capital Ships.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #19 on: October 22, 2013, 12:44:40 PM »

indeed it is, this is by far the best dev team and indie game i've encountered so far. i've taken a look at space engineers aswell, the game seems really awesome, but the dev of that game is a ******** that scams people big time and bans everybody that has a different opinion than he does or tries to reveal what he is doing.
Logged

NikolaiLev

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 325
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #20 on: October 22, 2013, 01:21:03 PM »

Gimbal's a pretty awesome game!  Unfortunately, it lacks a playerbase.  The tragedy of multiplayer-based indie games...   :(
Logged


DatonKallandor

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 424
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #21 on: October 22, 2013, 02:32:16 PM »

I fully agree, some sort of automatic or manual rationing would be very welcome. The other side of hat idea would be to allow the distribution of extra supplies to boost CR for a short time.

Nevertheless, this is not the right place to discuss that idea further. Maybe make a suggestion in the appropriate subforum?

You maybe right. Maybe another button is needed in the fleet screen. Sort of the opposite of "logistics priority" - call the current rate of repair, CR recovery and supply drain something like "crash repairs" and give the option for a slower less supply intensive repair and recovery rate. So if you notice it's getting hairy you can stretch your supplies at the cost of recovery time - not something you'd do when there's still hostiles around, but hey. Tradeoffs. Plus it'd give an explanation for why we can repair huge ships, while flying, within a day or so.
« Last Edit: October 22, 2013, 02:52:30 PM by DatonKallandor »
Logged

Gibbatron

  • Lieutenant
  • **
  • Posts: 71
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #22 on: October 22, 2013, 07:55:07 PM »

I fully agree, some sort of automatic or manual rationing would be very welcome. The other side of hat idea would be to allow the distribution of extra supplies to boost CR for a short time.

Nevertheless, this is not the right place to discuss that idea further. Maybe make a suggestion in the appropriate subforum?

You maybe right. Maybe another button is needed in the fleet screen. Sort of the opposite of "logistics priority" - call the current rate of repair, CR recovery and supply drain something like "crash repairs" and give the option for a slower less supply intensive repair and recovery rate. So if you notice it's getting hairy you can stretch your supplies at the cost of recovery time - not something you'd do when there's still hostiles around, but hey. Tradeoffs. Plus it'd give an explanation for why we can repair huge ships, while flying, within a day or so.

I think a slider of some sort would be the most effective solution, giving you the option to set it to absolute minimum usage which might be just enough to keep the crew alive but not recvoer any CR or repair, maybe even slow the fleet down; or set it to absolute maximum usage which uses as much as possible to get everything up to working speed as quickly as possible (and the crew might get start getting fat).

Or anywhere in between. Depending on how micro intensive fleet management is meant to be you could have several sliders.
Logged

Frosty939

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #23 on: October 24, 2013, 10:26:51 AM »

Is there any estimate on when Officers/Industry/Outposts will be coming along?

I find myself randomly clicking those buttons in the hopes it'll do something lol. They have so many possibilities I can't wait :D
Logged

NanoMatter

  • Ensign
  • *
  • Posts: 41
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #24 on: October 24, 2013, 06:22:46 PM »

I wonder, why does CR stop around the max of 50 to 70 Why not just double everything?
Logged

The Soldier

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3734
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #25 on: October 25, 2013, 10:54:14 AM »

It depends on Crew skill (Green - 50% to Elite - 70%, I think).  Character skills can allow the flagship to reach 100% CR.
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.

Darloth

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 551
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #26 on: October 26, 2013, 06:06:58 PM »

It might make more sense to have what is currently 70% CR be 100% though, as that is indeed the maximum you can get 'normally'.

Then character skills could go up to 140% (or thereabouts) and it would emphasize the bonus you're getting from your personal combat skill - I'd certainly prefer that.

Of course, when we have officers, perhaps getting to 100% will be a regular thing?
Logged

dmaiski

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 422
  • resistance is futile
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #27 on: October 26, 2013, 06:26:20 PM »

Quote
Added MissileAPI.isFlare()
Added GuidedMissileAI interface; a MissileAIPlugin implementation can implement it to be properly affected by flares

how dose that actualy work, because some of my missileAI need to track alot of diffrent things to work properly
Logged
BISO
(WIP) lots of shiny new weapons ( :-[ i have more weapons then sprites :-[ )

i got a cat pad
its like a mouse pad but better!

xenoargh

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4815
  • naively breaking things!
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #28 on: October 28, 2013, 07:31:23 AM »

Alex, I haven't seen anything about using the API code for changing CR values in the changelog yet.  I take it that this stage is awaiting further work on the core CR system? 

As a suggestion to perhaps make that easier:  since scaling CR downwards already works, perhaps the easiest fix is to start all spawned Ships or Wings at 100% CR (rather than zero, as now) and leave making it "correct" require further manipulation via the current API code?
Logged
Check out my SS projects :)

Unfolder

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 190
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.6.2a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #29 on: October 29, 2013, 10:19:28 AM »

Any idea when this patch will be realeased? No rush, but my mouth waters for halved CR deployment costs and automated repair unit CR recovery boost. Heh heh heh, my one ship super battler cruiser yamato strategy will be even MOAR overwhelming >:D
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 23