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 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 32

Author Topic: Starsector 0.65a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 257870 times)

Uomoz

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2663
  • 'womo'dz
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #90 on: September 24, 2014, 06:34:03 PM »

This patchnote is the undoing of UsS. All I really wanted, as features, is now built in. I also love the first real balance passes. WELL DONE.
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2846
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #91 on: September 24, 2014, 06:41:49 PM »

Some questions: Why the change to the tugs? Why do you want to force a player to get Navigation in order not to slog along at a snails pace with any large ship? And why the removal of the burn speed from the UI mod?
And why make the pirates not trade with the layer at vengeful? To me, I think that the player should ALWAYS have a place to trade, otherwise you will end up creating something like a late game death spiral... Especially since from what you said, getting out of a Vengeful relationship will be almost impossible...
And what about increasing the cargo size across the board that you talked about?
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

Zaphide

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 799
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #92 on: September 24, 2014, 06:47:17 PM »

Quote
Added FleetAssignment.ORBIT assignment

Is there a radius argument for this?

Quote
Added CampaignEventListener interface. Methods so far:
 - void reportPlayerMarketTransaction(PlayerMarketTransaction transaction);
etc.

Love this structure too :) and ship skins! Wow!

Sometimes I swear you save the (subjectively) best to last on purpose :D
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #93 on: September 24, 2014, 07:07:44 PM »

This patchnote is the undoing of UsS. All I really wanted, as features, is now built in. I also love the first real balance passes. WELL DONE.

:) but also :(

Some questions: Why the change to the tugs? Why do you want to force a player to get Navigation in order not to slog along at a snails pace with any large ship?

I see it as more not forcing the player to invest into 4 tugs if they want a capital ship.

And why the removal of the burn speed from the UI mod?

It was too much of a no-brainer for freighters and the like.

And why make the pirates not trade with the layer at vengeful? To me, I think that the player should ALWAYS have a place to trade, otherwise you will end up creating something like a late game death spiral... Especially since from what you said, getting out of a Vengeful relationship will be almost impossible...

I don't think it's a death spiral if to enter it you have to literally make everyone in the Sector mad at you, and not just a little mad, but "we will not rest until you're gone from this world" mad.

In gameplay terms, it should add more tangible differences between different playstyles. Smuggler? You can trade with pirates. Bounty hunter? Maybe if you're careful to walk the line, but probably not.

And what about increasing the cargo size across the board that you talked about?

Erm - I'm pretty sure that if I did talk about it, it was in speculative terms, something like "I might/will take a look at it"... :)

Anyway, my recent playtesting has been focused on a more combat-oriented path through the game - i.e. bounty hunting and such, so I haven't done as much polishing related to trade. The cargo capacities feel ok so far, though.

Quote
Added FleetAssignment.ORBIT assignment

Is there a radius argument for this?

You know, there isn't. There wasn't a terribly convenient way to pass it in, so it just kinda got hardcoded to what was good for the current use cases.


Quote
Added CampaignEventListener interface. Methods so far:
 - void reportPlayerMarketTransaction(PlayerMarketTransaction transaction);
etc.

Love this structure too :) and ship skins! Wow!

Sometimes I swear you save the (subjectively) best to last on purpose :D

Oh, looking at that again, there are more callbacks for stuff getting reported than just that. Here's the bulk of the interface:

Spoiler
Code: java
public static enum FleetDespawnReason {
/**
* param is a SectorEntityToken
*/
REACHED_DESTINATION,

/**
* param is a CampaignFleetAPI
* Both fleets have had getFleetData().takeSnapshot() called right before the battle.
*/
DESTROYED_BY_FLEET,
NO_MEMBERS, // ??
OTHER,
NO_REASON_PROVIDED,
}

void reportPlayerOpenedMarket(MarketAPI market);
void reportPlayerMarketTransaction(PlayerMarketTransaction transaction);
void reportBattleOccurred(CampaignFleetAPI winner, CampaignFleetAPI loser);
/**
* Could be destroyed or simply reached a despawn location. Or had too many accidents
* and lost all of its ships. Or told by other code to despawn itself.
* @param fleet
* @param reason
* @param param
*/
void reportFleetDespawned(CampaignFleetAPI fleet, FleetDespawnReason reason, Object param);

/**
* Planets/stations/etc that are the target of a fleet's assignment.
* @param fleet
* @param entity
*/
void reportFleetReachedEntity(CampaignFleetAPI fleet, SectorEntityToken entity);

/**
* from is generally a JumpPointAPI, but doesn't *have* to be.
* @param fleet
* @param from
* @param to
*/
void reportFleetJumped(CampaignFleetAPI fleet, SectorEntityToken from, JumpDestination to);
void reportShownInteractionDialog(InteractionDialogAPI dialog);
}
[close]
Logged

MShadowy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 911
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #94 on: September 24, 2014, 07:30:09 PM »

eeeexcellet.  I am so looking forward to this next release.

I have nothing more to add... aside from being rather pleased that I'm in a good spot to take advantage of this "skins" business already.  *rubs hands together*
Logged

Debido

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1183
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #95 on: September 24, 2014, 07:35:47 PM »

I like the idea of faction relationships, though I would suggest the possibility to actually go beyond vengeful. You can in fact go further - suppressed relationship. That is you have brought down such wrath, destroyed all of their protection fleets, defence fleets, patrol fleets, attack fleets - etc. and they're all dead - then you enter a status of having 'suppressed' the faction to the point where they will trade with you if you have a significant and overwhelming fleet (or possibly performed a base station attack).

While the faction is suppressed they will sell you everything they have at cost price, but their economy will also be in ruin. The 'suppressed' status has a limited time span like an event, and when the event is over all of their fleets will respawn and your status will be back to 'vengeful' until you suppress them again.

While a faction is suppressed bounty hunter fleets are very likely to come after you, paid for by the suppressed faction. This makes suppressing a faction possible - but very expensive and impossible to maintain.

Equally speaking, one faction can suppress another, but there may be an open bounty to destroy the oppressing fleets - which is where you come in. Destroying an oppressing fleet raises would raise your status with the faction significantly.

Anyway...just one suggestion.
Logged

FasterThanSleepyfish

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 727
  • Blub
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #96 on: September 24, 2014, 08:51:27 PM »

I know you recognized missile pods are a bit "insane" a while back, Alex, but I just thought I'd mention that a single volley of harpoons can do 3000 damage. If you wanna nullify their massive alpha potential, maybe they could fire their missiles very slowly, as in one missile launched every 3/4 a second?

Other than that, that's a might fine patch-notes to go along with my chicken dinner. The sweetest dessert, hands down.
Logged

Histidine

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4661
    • View Profile
    • GitHub profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #97 on: September 24, 2014, 08:53:42 PM »

Ooo, lotsa stuff. Seems mostly good, so I'll just address the specific stuff that I found particularly significant in some way:

Removed speed penalty after winning battle
Wasn't the point of the penalty so that you can't jump a small fleet next to a big one, pummel it, then get away scot-free?

Quote
Unstable injector: removed burn level bonus
Y u make Unstable Injector useless :(
I think it needs to have a lower OP cost now (especially if it still has the quad engine damage effect).

Quote
Ox-class tug: now limited to a maximum of one per ship
Hmm, Augmented Engines are probably mandatory for capitals now (well I always felt they already were...)

Quote
Missile overhaul:
  • Changed missile behavior to reduce clumping and slightly increase pressure on PD
  • Added nicer-looking continuous missile trails (rather than current particle effects)
  • Harpoon MRM: significantly improved maneuverability, increased hitpoints by 50%
    • Sabot SRM: fires 5 2nd stage projectiles instead of 1. Higher overall damage, much worse vs armor due to being distributed across 5 hits. Fired in a spread, less likely to miss completely.
    • Annihilator: increased speed to 400 (from 250), increased acceleration
    • Reaper torpedoes: faster, much higher acceleration
    • Atropos torpedoes: faster, higher acceleration, very poor tracking
    • Salamander MRM: improved maneuverability and top speed; much more reliable.
    • Swarmer SRM: doubled ammo, first 4 shots per burst, 75 points of HE damage per missile instead of 300 fragmentation
    • Pilum: improved top speed and acceleration. Can still be dodged effectively, just harder. Deadly vs non-omni-shield frigates w/o PD
    • All missile pods: increased burst size to 4 and doubled rate of fire
Oh God, 0.65 is gonna be known as "Revenge of the Missiles" now isn't it? (and now everyone is going to be absolutely terrified of Buffalo Mk.IIs :D)
Is low-level PD still viable? I'm thinking in particular of (LR) PD Laser and (Dual) Light Machine Gun here.

Hmm, I don't see the "doubled crew supply usage" change in there, did you decide not to implement it?
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #98 on: September 24, 2014, 09:22:22 PM »

I like the idea of faction relationships, though I would suggest the possibility to actually go beyond vengeful. You can in fact go further - suppressed relationship. That is you have brought down such wrath, destroyed all of their protection fleets, defence fleets, patrol fleets, attack fleets - etc. and they're all dead - then you enter a status of having 'suppressed' the faction to the point where they will trade with you if you have a significant and overwhelming fleet (or possibly performed a base station attack).

While the faction is suppressed they will sell you everything they have at cost price, but their economy will also be in ruin. The 'suppressed' status has a limited time span like an event, and when the event is over all of their fleets will respawn and your status will be back to 'vengeful' until you suppress them again.

While a faction is suppressed bounty hunter fleets are very likely to come after you, paid for by the suppressed faction. This makes suppressing a faction possible - but very expensive and impossible to maintain.

Equally speaking, one faction can suppress another, but there may be an open bounty to destroy the oppressing fleets - which is where you come in. Destroying an oppressing fleet raises would raise your status with the faction significantly.

Anyway...just one suggestion.

Hmm. I think that type of thing might fit in better along with more dedicated mechanics for, well, that type of thing. This feels a little tacked on, since your relationship level doesn't necessarily reflect how "beaten down" the faction is.



I know you recognized missile pods are a bit "insane" a while back, Alex, but I just thought I'd mention that a single volley of harpoons can do 3000 damage. If you wanna nullify their massive alpha potential, maybe they could fire their missiles very slowly, as in one missile launched every 3/4 a second?

Other than that, that's a might fine patch-notes to go along with my chicken dinner. The sweetest dessert, hands down.

Ah, I just meant the Annihilator Pod, with its flux-free continuous stream of HE pressure. The harpoons, well, their point is an alpha strike! Not to say that they're, ah, perfectly balanced, but at least their presence is something you're forced to respect. The Venture has some bite now.


Removed speed penalty after winning battle
Wasn't the point of the penalty so that you can't jump a small fleet next to a big one, pummel it, then get away scot-free?

Yes, it was. After some playtesting, I've made the executive decision that - at least for the time being - I'm ok with that being something you can do, as long as that mechanic is gone. It's an unfortunate combination of "initially unclear", "aggravating", and "likely to get you killed".


Quote
Unstable injector: removed burn level bonus
Y u make Unstable Injector useless :(
I think it needs to have a lower OP cost now (especially if it still has the quad engine damage effect).

Still useful in my experience so far. With the ship AI improvements, slapping it on allied ships doesn't seem suicidal anymore, either - it actually lets them do a better job of managing their fights and not getting hit in the first place.


Quote
Ox-class tug: now limited to a maximum of one per ship
Hmm, Augmented Engines are probably mandatory for capitals now (well I always felt they already were...)

Could be. Capital ships are going to be a bit of "solution without a problem" until there are proper stationary targets. On the other hand, trade fleets around planes *are* that, and they don't tend to run nearly as much while they're loading/unloading.

Oh God, 0.65 is gonna be known as "Revenge of the Missiles" now isn't it? (and now everyone is going to be absolutely terrified of Buffalo Mk.IIs :D)
Is low-level PD still viable? I'm thinking in particular of (LR) PD Laser and (Dual) Light Machine Gun here.

Muahahahha! I can see it now: "Revenge of the Space Pinatas". Especially with Lasher/Wolf having frontal shields now *and* the Salamander getting a huge buff.

It depends on what you mean by viable. Is it going to shoot down everything reliably? No. But if it stops even half the incoming missiles, that's already something, and for many ships, you couldn't really use those slots for meaningful offense due to flux issues, anyway. As far as better PD, Flak is still incredibly reliable.

Not to say that the various PD weapons might not need some tweaks; this is a pretty big balance change.

Hmm, I don't see the "doubled crew supply usage" change in there, did you decide not to implement it?

Sharp eye :) Yeah, at least for the moment.
Logged

ArkAngel

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 404
  • The essence of strategy is choosing what not to do
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #99 on: September 24, 2014, 09:26:42 PM »

Kind of surprised the wolf no longer has an omni shield. Makes sense I suppose though. I am so excited for this update, the new music and new trading features will be awesome to use.  ;)
Also, the "skins" for ships confuse me. It's not like it's seperate paintjobs for each faction right? I distinctly remember somewhere that you said it would be a bit crazy to do that.

Edit: *cough* Found it http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=5422.0 *cough*
« Last Edit: September 24, 2014, 09:41:37 PM by ArkAngel »
Logged
"Yes... Yes I -am- sending you, alone, unarmed, against the might of the Hegemony defense fleet.  Not to worry - watching how they obliterate your puny frigate will be most... enlightening.  I shall dissect their tactics and emerge victorious!  Any questions? Then get to your ship, you launch in 5."

David

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 909
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #100 on: September 24, 2014, 09:31:34 PM »

Also, the "skins" for ships confuse me. It's not like it's seperate paintjobs for each faction right? I distinctly remember somewhere that you said it would be a bit crazy to do that.

(It turns out that we are, in fact, crazy.)
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2846
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #101 on: September 24, 2014, 09:38:27 PM »

Some questions: Why the change to the tugs? Why do you want to force a player to get Navigation in order not to slog along at a snails pace with any large ship?

I see it as more not forcing the player to invest into 4 tugs if they want a capital ship.
I hate to sound like an a** but HOW the HELL does that make sense? "not forcing the player to invest in 4 tugs if they want a cap" How long would it take to accrue the 80K (if that) to buy a set of tugs for the cap? If you had offered something else to replace the lost speed, I wouldn't be saying this, but you haven't. Are you TRYING to force people into the wolf pack flotilla playstyle if they want to be combat oriented and want to get anywhere within the next cycle?

Also, have the wolf and lasher's shields been enlarged to make up for the fact that they are now front shields or are they still at 150 degrees?
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too

Sundog

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1723
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #102 on: September 24, 2014, 10:49:47 PM »

@Midnight Kitsune: The Tug change makes sense to me. The way I see it, the primary purpose of burn levels is to prevent battles that are too uneven. A large capital fleet should be able to take on any opponent, but it shouldn't be fast enough to engage fleets that are hopelessly outmatched. That encourages farming.
I think Alex was referring more to the long-term investment of tugs than the up-front cost. Lugging a bunch of tugs around reduces the number of 'real' ships you can have and increases upkeep costs. It also clutters the fleet screen.

Also, the "skins" for ships confuse me. It's not like it's seperate paintjobs for each faction right? I distinctly remember somewhere that you said it would be a bit crazy to do that.

(It turns out that we are, in fact, crazy.)
I'm not sure exactly what that means, but I like it.

Voyager I

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 353
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #103 on: September 24, 2014, 10:55:02 PM »

Changes as of September 24, 2014
  • Wolf, Lasher frigates: now have frontal shields, to better work with their front-facing firepower

Quote from: Alex
  • Pilum: improved top speed and acceleration. Can still be dodged effectively, just harder. Deadly vs non-omni-shield frigates w/o PD


You are a terrible person.
Logged

Midnight Kitsune

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 2846
  • Your Friendly Forum Friend
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.65a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #104 on: September 24, 2014, 11:41:34 PM »

@Midnight Kitsune: The Tug change makes sense to me. The way I see it, the primary purpose of burn levels is to prevent battles that are too uneven. A large capital fleet should be able to take on any opponent, but it shouldn't be fast enough to engage fleets that are hopelessly outmatched. That encourages farming.
I think Alex was referring more to the long-term investment of tugs than the up-front cost. Lugging a bunch of tugs around reduces the number of 'real' ships you can have and increases upkeep costs. It also clutters the fleet screen.
The problem is this effects anything bigger than a frigate! This doesn't just effect Caps you know. This is going to drastically slow down trade fleets, making them 1: lose money because of expensive supplies. 2: Made a bigger, easier target to catch, especially with the removal of the "burn 1 after battle" part. 3: the prices could end up changing before the fleet gets there... And 4: This is going to bore the player! Do you REALLY think a player is wanna watch their burn three fleet plod along the campaign screen from point A to point B?
Why have them at all now if they lost most of their main purpose? How USEFUL is ONE more burn speed? Have you ever tried to catch up to a ship when you are one point faster? How long did that take in?  With how little burn speeds differ, you need about a +3 difference to reach your target in a reasonable amount of time...
Logged
Help out MesoTroniK, a modder in need

2021 is 2020 won
2022 is 2020 too
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8 9 ... 32