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 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 90

Author Topic: Starsector 0.7a (Released) Patch Notes  (Read 574336 times)

Sy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #495 on: November 05, 2015, 09:55:28 AM »

i'd actually prefer unlocked hullmods to be 'sidegrades' rather than straight upgrades to other hullmods. something you'd prefer in most cases (as you do have to spend skill points to get it) but not something that makes another hullmod completely obsolete.
Logged

CrashToDesktop

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #496 on: November 05, 2015, 10:03:55 AM »

i'd actually prefer unlocked hullmods to be 'sidegrades' rather than straight upgrades to other hullmods. something you'd prefer in most cases (as you do have to spend skill points to get it) but not something that makes another hullmod completely obsolete.
Well, to be honest, Starsector isn't exactly strong with the sidegrade things.  Take the Buffalo Mk.IIs or the (D) variants, Dedicated Targeting Core, and even the Light Mortar - ships, weapons, and hullmods are made explicitly worse than other things in this game.  It's balanced akin to CS: GO - prices and availability are king here.
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.

Sy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #497 on: November 05, 2015, 10:59:22 AM »

Well, to be honest, Starsector isn't exactly strong with the sidegrade things.  Take the Buffalo Mk.IIs or the (D) variants, Dedicated Targeting Core, and even the Light Mortar - ships, weapons, and hullmods are made explicitly worse than other things in this game.  It's balanced akin to CS: GO - prices and availability are king here.
true, but hullmods don't have a price every time you install them and you only have to unlock them once for the whole fleet. there's no reason to ever use a strictly worse hullmod again after having unlocked its superior version. with ships and weapons, every new acquisition is affected by cost and rarity, even if you already have a large fleet of high-tech ships with elite loadouts.
Logged

Thaago

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 7174
  • Harpoon Affectionado
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #498 on: November 05, 2015, 11:07:59 AM »

True, but the opportunity cost of unlocking those hullmods is part of the balance of skills. At present the +OP% from Tech skills is good, but not good enough for me without the hullmods.
Logged

Aeson

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 501
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #499 on: November 05, 2015, 12:09:13 PM »

Another thing to remember about the hullmods is that there really aren't that many that are strictly superior to other hullmods. The Dedicated Targeting Core and Integrated Targeting Unit, and maybe Reinforced Bulkheads and Blast Doors are the only pairs of hullmods where one could be said to be strictly superior to the other that I can think of off the top of my head.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #500 on: November 05, 2015, 12:28:07 PM »

And only a tiny fraction of the sector is now present in-game.

I wouldn't say that. The original target for the number of "core" worlds was somewhere around 20. As far as the number of star systems total, it's gone in a bit of a different direction - there's much more detail to individual star systems, which I think will work out better than having a ton of less-detailed systems. I'd say in terms of Sector area, we're something like 25% of the way there (though that's very much subject to change). As far as the number of markets, it's probably about halfway or thereabouts.


Why the nerf to the Atlas its already incredibly squishy did it get buffed in some other way?
Re: Atlas losing flight deck:  I thought Atlas had zilch for mounts because of flight deck.  Prometheus, the big fuel tanker, can equip enough weapons to defend itself from enemy frigates.  The Atlas cannot.  Also, Prometheus has drones to add to its firepower, but Atlas just has worthless flares.

It would be nice if the Atlas can be buffed some other way, like upgrading it small mounts to mediums or replacing the system with something more useful.

The Atlas just isn't a combat ship, and the flight deck doesn't make a lot of sense. I think I originally added it back in the missions-only days, when the Atlas's cargo capacity had no use? Either way, a flight deck on a dedicated superfreighter doesn't feel right right now. For the Prometheus, its armament and ship system reflects the volatility of its cargo.


Would be cool if that was an alternative/complementary way of resolving a "faction ties" investigation. "What, you think I like them Hegemony bastards just because I worked with them? Watch me!" **** gun*

You can do that, actually :)

Can you discover a commander's personality when you speak with them, or just via observation of their behavior? Also, I assume the fleet commander takes part in battle as a combat officer?

Can't at the moment, and yes, they do take part in battle.

What about asteroids? They seem like the less "hyperspacy" of the two.

...a special hyperspace terrain feature would be awesome at some point. Imagine suddenly opening rifts, or a maelstrom, or wormholes leading to the other side of the battle map ;D

Doesn't come up because there aren't any in hyperspace, but they'd show up on the battlefield if they were. It might be nice to have something special, yeah - just want to make sure it's a good fit. Don't want something super gimmicky or that confuses the AI, since combat in deep hyperspace is going to be fairly common.


Augmented Engines vs Emergency Burn
It works similarly for both sensor strength/range sensor profile, so let me just talk about strength/range. Each of your fleet's ships contrubtes to a total fleet sensor strength. This is where the penalty for Augmented Engines takes effect - an Onslaught with it would only contribute 2 points of sensor strength instead of 4.

The combined strength is then used to generate a sensor range, which is how far away you can detect another fleet. The range depends on the sensor profile of the other fleet. The important point here is that the range is not linear in terms of strength, but is rather a logarithmic function. So halving the sensor strength is only going to reduce the effective range by a much smaller fraction.

Emergency Burn, unlike Augmented Engines, applies to the sensor range. So that 50% sensor range penalty really does halve the range at which you'll detect stuff while EB is on.

So, in real terms, putting AE on an Onslaught isn't going to make a world of difference, especially not if it's part of a larger fleet.



Something I thought of:  If faction ties only check for major factions, and Pirates do not count as major faction, and if becoming friendly with one major faction makes the rest of the majors hate you, then it seems eventually, it may be a good idea to become friendly with pirates too, if only to gain access to military market and be able to buy rare weapons, once player graduates from killing pirates to killing the N-1 majors.  Trading with pirates should not be a problem in systems where the only other factions there are enemies.

P.S. Another benefit of friendly pirates is another place to repair your fleet.  That is better than buying rare weapons at Umbra.

The thing about pirates is while they don't care if you're friendly with somebody else, others *do* care that you're friendly with pirates. Except for independents.
Logged

Sy

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #501 on: November 05, 2015, 01:52:51 PM »

True, but the opportunity cost of unlocking those hullmods is part of the balance of skills. At present the +OP% from Tech skills is good, but not good enough for me without the hullmods.
right, and i do think unlocks should generally be more powerful because of that. i just prefer them to be better for most ships or playstyles, rather than an objective upgrade in every case. of course, getting that balance right can be pretty tricky. the Unstable Injector for example is technically a sidegrade, as it also increases acceleration. but in practise, there's not much reason to put it on any ship after you've unlocked Augmented Engines :/


Augmented Engines vs Emergency Burn
ooh, interesting. so even putting Augmented Engines on every ship in the fleet wouldn't actually half the range at which we can detect other fleets?
Logged

orost

  • Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 436
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #502 on: November 05, 2015, 01:59:56 PM »

Quote
I'd say in terms of Sector area, we're something like 25% of the way there (though that's very much subject to change). As far as the number of markets, it's probably about halfway or thereabouts.

As of 0.65 or 0.7?
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #503 on: November 05, 2015, 02:08:37 PM »

ooh, interesting. so even putting Augmented Engines on every ship in the fleet wouldn't actually half the range at which we can detect other fleets?

Right, exactly.

Quote
I'd say in terms of Sector area, we're something like 25% of the way there (though that's very much subject to change). As far as the number of markets, it's probably about halfway or thereabouts.

As of 0.65 or 0.7?

As of 0.7a. Although in terms of *area*, they're the same.
Logged

CrashToDesktop

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Quartermaster
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #504 on: November 05, 2015, 02:15:57 PM »

As of 0.7a. Although in terms of *area*, they're the same.
Wait, does that mean you're shoving 4 times as many systems as there are in 0.7a with the same hyperspace map?  Is it going to get anywhere near as crowded as the Ironclads mod gets?
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.

Gothars

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 4403
  • Eschewing obfuscatory verbosity.
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #505 on: November 05, 2015, 02:18:27 PM »

Pretty sure he meant the 5 new systems in 0.7 will not be accomplished by any new area, while the end game might have an area four times as big as the current one.


You can do that, actually  :)

Awesome :)
« Last Edit: November 05, 2015, 02:20:12 PM by Gothars »
Logged
The game was completed 8 years ago and we get a free expansion every year.

Arranging holidays in an embrace with the Starsector is priceless.

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #506 on: November 05, 2015, 02:24:07 PM »

Pretty sure he meant the 5 new systems in 0.7 will not be accomplished by any new area, while the end game might have an area four times as big as the current one.

Right, that's exactly what I meant. Disclaimer: totally subject to change etc. Determining the final Sector area is something that'll likely take some experimentation to get right.
Logged

Zapier

  • Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 216
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #507 on: November 05, 2015, 03:24:59 PM »

And only a tiny fraction of the sector is now present in-game.

I wouldn't say that. The original target for the number of "core" worlds was somewhere around 20. As far as the number of star systems total, it's gone in a bit of a different direction - there's much more detail to individual star systems, which I think will work out better than having a ton of less-detailed systems. I'd say in terms of Sector area, we're something like 25% of the way there (though that's very much subject to change). As far as the number of markets, it's probably about halfway or thereabouts.

So, I'm curious... the procedural generated parts are still planned, just with fewer but more fleshed out star systems rather than more numerous and less detailed ones? I ask since my first impression from that comment was that maybe you're planning for more of fully hand-made sector rather than a mixture of both which can still be good too.
Logged

Alex

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 23986
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #508 on: November 05, 2015, 03:33:48 PM »

I don't want to get into the details too much (too liable to change and all that), but right now thinking in terms of randomly generating some systems.
Logged

Dri

  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
    • View Profile
Re: Starsector 0.7a (In Development) Patch Notes
« Reply #509 on: November 05, 2015, 03:46:03 PM »

Please take it easy with procedural generation - its bland, boring and you soon see through it to the formula beneath. =/

I'd much, much rather have fewer but hand-made systems with unique and polished content.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 90