Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => General Discussion => Topic started by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 07:27:56 AM

Title: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 07:27:56 AM
I've played so much I got in the habit of picking the Industry tree pre .95a. I'm now truly looking at the tree and can't justify the points spend in an environment were 15 is everything.

Field repairs and Damage control are the only parts of the tree I feel are justified now and damage control doesn't even fit the tree.

This isn't a industry/logistics tree anymore. "Skills that improve salvaging, colonization, and the overall resilience of your fleet in and out of combat." It's the "Random good ideas with no synergy that didn't have space in other trees tree"

T1
Bulk transport - Merchant skill I guess and since black market trades are the only viable ones because of giant tariffs you don't need the space. It's a QoL upgrade only. Also strange limitations attached to how much increase because we need to apply new nerf game mechanics to an already weak skill.
Salvaging - Complete garbage and a total waste of a point. I have no clue why the rare find rate was removed as it justified the investment which is larger now with less points...

Both wastes of points.

T2
Damage control - see bellow
Reliable engineering - see bellow

These personal ship only skills do not fit this tree or it's playstyle. They have no secondary elements that support the playstyle.

Intermission

2 points into the tree and nothing meaningful is gained towards the goal of the tree.

T3
Containment Procedures - Okay industry skill
Makeshift Equipment - Okay industry skill

These wouldn't be overpowered if they were folding into a single skill. Considering we are 3 points into the tree and this is the first meaningful Industry related improvement they should be folded 1 skill.

T4, special notes...

Field Repairs - Great industry skill, high general functionality. A bit slow on repairs but still a great pick.
Derelict Contingent - This is exactly what people, me specifically, don't want from the Industry tree. What happened to reduced operational costs for d mods? What happened to reduced penalties for taking d mods? This mutant skill doesn't belong in this tree at all.

Special notes: Can't go 10 points into this tree without getting both of these one actively negating the other. We get 15 points total and we are forced to waste 1 on the other half of this tier.

T5

Industrial Planning - Totally useless if you plan on using AIs, way too weak even if you do go no AI
Colony Management - Totally useless if you plan on using AIs, way too weak even if you do go no AI

This entire tier is worth 1 point if they were folded into each other. The Idea that I'd have to waste 10 points in this basically do nothing tree to get the other one is absurd.

Conclusion -

This tree doesn't do it's intended job at all. Both T3 and T5 have no right being separate skills and T4 is completely broken if you go 10 points into this tree. T1 are super weak, T2 doesn't fit the tree at all.

I feel like this tree was an after though. 10 points in this tree has barely any impact on your playstyle because nothing in this tree fits together for an arching build.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 07:47:57 AM
I think I'm just gonna have to roll back the game to an earlier version if I want my playstyle back. This is the Minimum Game Impact tree now.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 11, 2021, 08:09:20 AM
For the previous v0.9 releases, I wanted Industry solely for colonies (before I learned of the Pather bug) because I want my empire of many planets, and annoyed they are all tier 5.  At least 2 and Field Repairs have my interest, and Bulk Transport is okay.  I want my character to be more than a meathead who is a dog of the state (i.e., big dumb fighter trope).  I want him to be an emperor who rules the galaxy (Emperor Palpatine, Ming the Merciless).

I agree that Industry is all over the place and is more of a miscellaneous tree.  As a result, double dipping Industry is dumb.

Industrial Planning seems weak, only +1 to commodities to meet demand which is only good if I go no AI and no items.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Arcagnello on April 11, 2021, 08:41:56 AM
I've regretted investing in industry my first time around and I'm going to ignore anything but the Level 1 Bulk Transport skill which somewhat decreases the amount of haulers, tankers and troop transports mid to late game.

Double dip into technology and the first 4 skills into leadership is what works best for me. It is not hard to make money anyway, and I'd rather massively buff my whole fleet instead of buffing the one indubitably broken ship I'm going to pilot myself, IF I feel like piloting it.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 11, 2021, 09:46:47 AM
Salvaging is bunch of free supplies and resources (that turn into money). It's pretty useful for exploration IMO. Bulk transport is much worse, just buy two colossus. IMO, industry is more like an exploration/colonization tree now.

I still probably want to take 4 skills here early game (right side all 4 skills) and swap out later in the game. I might even want to take the 5th to cheese an extra admin before swapping out, but that relies on finding an extra admin worth keeping which could take a long time. I'm kinda liking having leadership skills now though for officers, so I might just ignore the whole tree.

I do really like the tier 2 CR skill for piloting SO ships though, I wish it was in the combat tree so I wouldn't need to invest points into industry to get it.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: ChaseBears on April 11, 2021, 09:53:05 AM
I don't think it's intrinsically a problem to have personal pilot skills in the Industry tree.  I mean would you even care about that if Derelict Contingent was changed to a 'spam D-mod ships' instead of an elite pirate skill?

I agree that the Salvaging skill is kinda pointless because it's worse at Salvaging than Bulk Transport is. I've never had a salvaging run where i wasn't tossing resources out of the airlock, usually not just Metal either, no matter how many freighters i bring.  If I have more cargo space I push the run further.

(Thought of the day: should be able to use Metal for difficult recovers with Industry instead of Story Points.)
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 09:55:35 AM
At least 2 and Field Repairs have my interest, and Bulk Transport is okay.

Bulk transport wouldn't make me crazy I don't think if the rest of the tree wasn't wacky, again I feel it's more QoL then a good upgrade. Like if I was 13 point into other builds and had a 2 points to screw around with.

Field Repair isn't great for only one reason, you have to invest 4 points in this mess to reach it. I was staring at it last night and I realized I was only taking the industry tree for that 1 thing...

I want my character to be more than a meathead who is a dog of the state (i.e., big dumb fighter trope).  I want him to be an emperor who rules the galaxy (Emperor Palpatine, Ming the Merciless).

I agree that Industry is all over the place and is more of a miscellaneous tree.  As a result, double dipping Industry is dumb.

Industrial Planning seems weak, only +1 to commodities to meet demand which is only good if I go no AI and no items.

That sounds like a fun build. Emperor Palpatine is a bad guy to model an empire after if you know the details lol. His empire is broke as hell and it's why everyone is poorly equipped and trained. He's from the Zapp Brannigan method of leadership, send wave after wave of troops to their death until the kill bots reach their kill limit and shut down.

Maybe there should be a new tree for non thematic/specialized skills? I feel like every skill that didn't fit the 2 per level model got mushed into Industry. I mean expanding this 2 per level pick 1 stuff is gonna seriously limit the systems growth in the future. Any great new idea for a skill goes where exactly now? Are we picking from 3 then? Does every other tree need 3 now to match it? Do we put them together so it stays 2?

(Thought of the day: should be able to use Metal for difficult recovers with Industry instead of Story Points.)
That my friend would be an cool Industry skill if it was added to an existing one.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: SCC on April 11, 2021, 09:56:36 AM
I assume that the reason why Salvaging gives no bonus to rare item rates is because it would basically become skill tax for exploration.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 10:03:27 AM
I assume that the reason why Salvaging gives no bonus to rare item rates is because it would basically become skill tax for exploration.

I see what you are getting at but at the same time isn't the carrier skill tax for using non gimped carriers? This new system seems like it's balanced around having the skills rather then the skills being a bonus.

Seems like there is a lot of that in these new trees.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 11, 2021, 10:07:38 AM
The problem with bulk transport is that most resources are nearly worthless (after tarrifs and sell price reduction due to high volume). 2k metals have the same base value at 150 heavy armaments, but will sell for even less than that because of the supply/demand mechanics. I would rather get the skill that gives me some extra heavy armaments and supplies when I find them, than the one that lets me bring extra metals/organics/food/ore home. Those resources are worth basically nothing and I rarely if ever have to throw out thing worth more than 30 credits/unit. I also spam colossus, and usually have 6-8 by mid game. I aim for 10k cargo by mid game, so bulk transport is already doing much less than the advertised value very early on in the game for me. I don't really see why I would not just get more colossus if I need more cargo space.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: SCC on April 11, 2021, 10:10:14 AM
I see what you are getting at but at the same time isn't the carrier skill tax for using non gimped carriers? This new system seems like it's balanced around having the skills rather then the skills being a bonus.
I am successfully using carriers (not many, admittedly), despite not having any carrier-specific skills.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Thaago on April 11, 2021, 11:03:13 AM
Currently the skill tree alternates between "money/exploration longevity" and "combat" every other tier, then colonies, which is fine. It has a game defining skill in tier 4 (DC).



By tier:

I1L: convenience pick for not having to bring logistics ships (allows for longer expeditions as supply/fuel cost is lower, especially early game), and the smuggling pick to have lower sensor profile with larger capacity. I2R: medium strength salvage booster. It raises profits for salvage fleets, increases the amount of fuel and supplies received exploring to allow for staying out exploring longer, and the 20% post battle salvage lets less efficient fleets make more supplies than they spend. Both of these are fine, and salvage combines EXCELLENTLY with the Tier 3 skills for unlimited duration expeditions.

Tier 2: I don't undestand why these don't fit in the tree. They are about the physical repair and maintenance of your flagship, seems rather on point for industry to me. I2R is a solid bonus for all ships (including carriers) and especially good for phase ships. I2L is also quite good: -25% hull damage is just 33% more hitpoints, very nice on low tech ships, but 50% faster weapon and engine repairs can be the difference between life and death against an enemy with the disabling skill or emp.

These are both excellent skills.

Tier 3: They save significant amounts of money and allow for easier expeditions. A fleet with one of these and salvage can stay out exploring indefinitely with little trouble or planning. T3L is "stay out of the core forever, go anywhere, fight over and over" between the crew loss reductions, fuel use reductions, and + fuel salvage. No supply/CR hit on Eburn means the fleet can run OR chase better, and chip damage in the form of crew losses to a fleet that wants to never go to port is much reduced. T3R is "survey everything" because with this its easy to get almost any planet down to 5 supply cost.

Tier 4 is a bit of a weird one because it splits between money/quality of life (left) and combat (right).

T4L: Less D mods on recovery and free repairs are quite nice and really raises the mount of post battle loot (ships!). Free repairs and faster repairs saves a lot of money and allows for chain battling. Finally, D mod repair saves a huge amount of money (millions), and combined with less D mods on recovery means a player never needs to worry about losing a ship, including their unique triple S mod capital.

T4R: Derelict contingent is a thing thats been talked on a lot. Its the most powerful skill in the game right now bar none, enough to completely define a playstyle, and is probably changing. A 5 D mod tank ship with impact mitigation, damage control, and shield bypass just doesn't die, and it keeps shooting too. If 3 of those D mods are logistics penalties... well the skill tree handles that rather nicely and now thats a true monster of a ship!

T5: Colonies. More Colonies vs Better Colonies. Its a money skill again.



IMO if there's a weakness in the Industry skill its that money is easy for experienced players to make, but there are a lot of build paths that are viable.

For instance, a Derelict Contingent combat player is going to want at least C3 for armor, but C4 doesn't do anything (no shields), and C5 is painful to lose but not critical because DC is better still. Thats 2 points. Leadership 5 is colonies, so no value to a combat player, thats 3 points. To get DC, the player needs to give up either L4 (officers) or T5 (special mods/automated ships): a tough choice, but still worth it IMO. (And hey look, hard choices in a build! Neat.)

A player who wants to explore everything before diving into endgame (triple ping remnant) bounties just takes industry up to tier 4. Not much sacrifice, just be awesome at exploration. They can still explore triple ping systems if they have sensors too, because they can just dodge the patrols (going dark at 8/9 speed with -25% on top).

A hardcore combat character looking to kill endgame fleets either wants DC at 4, one of the 2cd tier skills (giving up either combat 5, tech 5, or leadership 4), or 0. And IMO its ok for a single combat path choice to not want industry at very endgame.

I see what you are getting at but at the same time isn't the carrier skill tax for using non gimped carriers? This new system seems like it's balanced around having the skills rather then the skills being a bonus.
I am successfully using carriers (not many, admittedly), despite not having any carrier-specific skills.

Yeah, carriers are absolutely fine as support ships with no skills to back them, and there are 2 or 3 carrier offense skills (depending on fighter or bomber) for officers even, if the player wants to get an officered carrier. A non-officered carrier can have built in ECCM + Missile Racks for fire support if it has the mounts, or it could have a nav relay and ECM module, etc. Not being fired at gives some nice leeway in terms of built ins.

In my playthrough where carriers are 2/3 of the fleet (~100 DP, 16 decks at the moment) and I took the carrier boosting skills and they are reduced but still quite impactful. I don't know about endgame yet, but up to midgame carrier centric fleets are fine. Considering that I'm piloting a carrier too and therefor wasting most of the player impact, I'd say they are doing more than fine. (I kind of want to switch to a destroyer or buy a cruiser, its just not very interesting playing as a carrier to me.)
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Jet Black on April 11, 2021, 11:07:42 AM
The problem with bulk transport is that most resources are nearly worthless (after tarrifs and sell price reduction due to high volume). 2k metals have the same base value at 150 heavy armaments, but will sell for even less than that because of the supply/demand mechanics. I would rather get the skill that gives me some extra heavy armaments and supplies when I find them, than the one that lets me bring extra metals/organics/food/ore home. Those resources are worth basically nothing and I rarely if ever have to throw out thing worth more than 30 credits/unit. I also spam colossus, and usually have 6-8 by mid game. I aim for 10k cargo by mid game, so bulk transport is already doing much less than the advertised value very early on in the game for me. I don't really see why I would not just get more colossus if I need more cargo space.

I take the skill so I dont have to have tons of huge ships eating up my profits in fuel, supplies and crew. It all adds up.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: ChaseBears on April 11, 2021, 11:14:11 AM
yeah bulk transport is kind of ridiculously good when you sit down and look at it.  you could probably convert the logistics savings straight into having more salvage rigs and come out even to Salvaging, lol
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Thaago on April 11, 2021, 11:26:51 AM
yeah bulk transport is kind of ridiculously good when you sit down and look at it.  you could probably convert the logistics savings straight into having more salvage rigs and come out even to Salvaging, lol

Not to mention that it increases burn by 1 of civilian ships, so salvage rig gets to burn 9. And the almighty shepherd also gets to 10 speed without needing militarized subsystems: saves crew (and therefor credits) and makes them better in combat because the 5 OP can go into capacitors for another 1000 shield. As a reference point, a fleet with 4 shepherds and the combined effect of:

Cost: ~65k pristine from markets
4 drone bays, 4 salamanders (or other missiles) in combat for distraction, fleet PD, anti fighter etc. Doesn't count as combat ships for scaling skills! Also doesn't count for ECM though.
400 cargo, 600 with bays removed
60 crew required, 120 capacity
12 supplies/month, 400 capacity
4 fuel/ly, 160 capacity
+25% salvaged resources including fuel and supplies from exploration
+5% post battle salvage
-20 supply cost for surverying, -20 heavy machinery needed

I <3 Shepherds.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 11, 2021, 12:33:17 PM
The math works out so that it's pretty much a flat 1000 extra cargo and fuel once you pass 2000 (not sure if there are rounding effects, but it should be exactly 1000 extra regardless of your cargo capacity once you pass 2000). That's more or less one phaeton and one colossus (920 cargo and fuel) which cost 10 supplies/month 6 fuel/ LY and 60 min crew. It's really not much and can be reduced further in a variety of ways.

I'm also almost certain that the skill bonus does not count for the diminishing returns calculations of salvaging gantries, so it's a lot better to have the salvage skill plus ships with salvage gantries than additional ships with salvaging gantries.

The amount of money you routinely make selling resources from exploration is in the hundreds of thousands (50% more will be on the same order of magnitude), the amount of money you save on crew and supplies be not having 1 colossus and 1 phaeton is like 1-2 thousand per month. It's orders of magnitude different. When you factor in an upkeep reduction skill and efficiency overhaul it's even more trivial. Cargo ship upkeep is tiny compared to warships. 90% of your upkeep will be warships usually. If you want to save on upkeep, bring less warships. Min-maxing logistic ship upkeep is such a tiny amount of money compared to the amounts you make from extra high end resources.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 01:08:10 PM
Spoiler
Currently the skill tree alternates between "money/exploration longevity" and "combat" every other tier, then colonies, which is fine. It has a game defining skill in tier 4 (DC).



By tier:

I1L: convenience pick for not having to bring logistics ships (allows for longer expeditions as supply/fuel cost is lower, especially early game), and the smuggling pick to have lower sensor profile with larger capacity. I2R: medium strength salvage booster. It raises profits for salvage fleets, increases the amount of fuel and supplies received exploring to allow for staying out exploring longer, and the 20% post battle salvage lets less efficient fleets make more supplies than they spend. Both of these are fine, and salvage combines EXCELLENTLY with the Tier 3 skills for unlimited duration expeditions.

Tier 2: I don't undestand why these don't fit in the tree. They are about the physical repair and maintenance of your flagship, seems rather on point for industry to me. I2R is a solid bonus for all ships (including carriers) and especially good for phase ships. I2L is also quite good: -25% hull damage is just 33% more hitpoints, very nice on low tech ships, but 50% faster weapon and engine repairs can be the difference between life and death against an enemy with the disabling skill or emp.

These are both excellent skills.

Tier 3: They save significant amounts of money and allow for easier expeditions. A fleet with one of these and salvage can stay out exploring indefinitely with little trouble or planning. T3L is "stay out of the core forever, go anywhere, fight over and over" between the crew loss reductions, fuel use reductions, and + fuel salvage. No supply/CR hit on Eburn means the fleet can run OR chase better, and chip damage in the form of crew losses to a fleet that wants to never go to port is much reduced. T3R is "survey everything" because with this its easy to get almost any planet down to 5 supply cost.

Tier 4 is a bit of a weird one because it splits between money/quality of life (left) and combat (right).

T4L: Less D mods on recovery and free repairs are quite nice and really raises the mount of post battle loot (ships!). Free repairs and faster repairs saves a lot of money and allows for chain battling. Finally, D mod repair saves a huge amount of money (millions), and combined with less D mods on recovery means a player never needs to worry about losing a ship, including their unique triple S mod capital.

T4R: Derelict contingent is a thing thats been talked on a lot. Its the most powerful skill in the game right now bar none, enough to completely define a playstyle, and is probably changing. A 5 D mod tank ship with impact mitigation, damage control, and shield bypass just doesn't die, and it keeps shooting too. If 3 of those D mods are logistics penalties... well the skill tree handles that rather nicely and now thats a true monster of a ship!

T5: Colonies. More Colonies vs Better Colonies. Its a money skill again.



IMO if there's a weakness in the Industry skill its that money is easy for experienced players to make, but there are a lot of build paths that are viable.

For instance, a Derelict Contingent combat player is going to want at least C3 for armor, but C4 doesn't do anything (no shields), and C5 is painful to lose but not critical because DC is better still. Thats 2 points. Leadership 5 is colonies, so no value to a combat player, thats 3 points. To get DC, the player needs to give up either L4 (officers) or T5 (special mods/automated ships): a tough choice, but still worth it IMO. (And hey look, hard choices in a build! Neat.)

A player who wants to explore everything before diving into endgame (triple ping remnant) bounties just takes industry up to tier 4. Not much sacrifice, just be awesome at exploration. They can still explore triple ping systems if they have sensors too, because they can just dodge the patrols (going dark at 8/9 speed with -25% on top).

A hardcore combat character looking to kill endgame fleets either wants DC at 4, one of the 2cd tier skills (giving up either combat 5, tech 5, or leadership 4), or 0. And IMO its ok for a single combat path choice to not want industry at very endgame.

I see what you are getting at but at the same time isn't the carrier skill tax for using non gimped carriers? This new system seems like it's balanced around having the skills rather then the skills being a bonus.
I am successfully using carriers (not many, admittedly), despite not having any carrier-specific skills.

Yeah, carriers are absolutely fine as support ships with no skills to back them, and there are 2 or 3 carrier offense skills (depending on fighter or bomber) for officers even, if the player wants to get an officered carrier. A non-officered carrier can have built in ECCM + Missile Racks for fire support if it has the mounts, or it could have a nav relay and ECM module, etc. Not being fired at gives some nice leeway in terms of built ins.

In my playthrough where carriers are 2/3 of the fleet (~100 DP, 16 decks at the moment) and I took the carrier boosting skills and they are reduced but still quite impactful. I don't know about endgame yet, but up to midgame carrier centric fleets are fine. Considering that I'm piloting a carrier too and therefor wasting most of the player impact, I'd say they are doing more than fine. (I kind of want to switch to a destroyer or buy a cruiser, its just not very interesting playing as a carrier to me.)
[close]

I'll simply say that the Industry does not have synergy with itself. The skills are disjoined and unfocused. Every other tree is working, generally, towards a type of play.

T1 - I1L saves you on the cheap to maintain (edit: intrinsic_parity post above) available everywhere in wrecked fleets logistics ships, Militarized subsystem/Field Drive already covered the +1/+2, who cares about OP on support ships. I1R doesn't do anywhere near enough to justify a skill point.

T2 - It's not about lower fleet costs, it's about your personal ship. That's the problem. It's a purely combat thing. I'm not saying the tree can't improve personal combat but a skill tier solely improving combat recovery for only your personal ship has no place in the Industry tree. The skills are good, but they don't belong in this tree.

T3 - You can't get both without looping the tree. 8 points in. You can only get one early game, when it would actually matter to have both. That's not good design.

T4 - Field repairs is good. The other skill fits the tree oddly enough but is smack dab next to a Field Repairs which destroys it if you looped the tree for the second I3.

T5 - Not money, those skills are outliers. AIs = money, you running things yourself = wasted skill points. Not to mention both are completely useless till you have a colony.

This tree is a whole lot of nothing with a few good point sprinkled in. I feel like I2 personal ship abilities fit just as well in this tree as they would in Leadership, The 2 trees that have to do with command/management and logistics. Combat is for strictly personal bonuses, Tech is a mix of personal and fleet.

Based on your post I feel it's unlikely we will see eye to eye on this.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 11, 2021, 01:19:41 PM
That sounds like a fun build. Emperor Palpatine is a bad guy to model an empire after if you know the details lol. His empire is broke as hell and it's why everyone is poorly equipped and trained. He's from the Zapp Brannigan method of leadership, send wave after wave of troops to their death until the kill bots reach their kill limit and shut down.
I do not care how he got into power or maintained it (however briefly).  All that mattered was he was the emperor with the big hammer.

T5: Colonies. More Colonies vs Better Colonies. Its a money skill again.
Player chooses between two better colonies vs. two more colonies, one of which can be better with the third admin, with maybe two skills instead of one unless player gets Leadership 5.  In effect, player chooses between one better colony vs. two more colonies.  If I pick I5R, building another Heavy Industry on one of the two extra colonies can make up for the other's +50% production.

I5L main advantage over I5R is forgetting it via respec hurts less.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: KDR_11k on April 11, 2021, 01:30:06 PM
Industry and Tech are both unfocused. What playstyle is Tech for? More importantly, what playstyle is Tech NOT for? Both Industry and Tech give scattered bonuses that seem a bit weird to have in a linear progression like this.

I assume that the reason why Salvaging gives no bonus to rare item rates is because it would basically become skill tax for exploration.

I agree and I'm absolutely in favor of it staying that way. Making us pick a specific skill or else we miss out on the limited rare loot that's available in the sector just isn't fun.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 01:59:43 PM
I5L main advantage over I5R is forgetting it via respec hurts less.

I'm against the hard locks on respec. Feels like that needs to be handled differently.

Also I find the concept of specing and completely abandoning said spec later on for meta gaming like it's an MMO highly annoying. I don't want Industry to be that "Leveling build".
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Thaago on April 11, 2021, 02:11:24 PM
...
I'll simply say that the Industry does not have synergy with itself. The skills are disjoined and unfocused. Every other tree is working, generally, towards a type of play.
I don't feel you've given any reasoning as to why it doesn't have synergy with itself. I1 (both, though L is early game and R is later game), I3 (both), and I4 L work very well together and stack towards allowing the player to explore for long times without having to go into port (the free fleet repairs from I4L save a ton of supplies). And actually, I2L is the same, especially with the elite skill, because less damage and less crew losses (and free repairs) are less trips back to the core needed. Thats potentially 4 of 5 skills all synergizing, which is pretty darn competitive. Now if you don't WANT the synergy of a sustainable fleet and don't value it, thats a fair point, but its not fair to say the tree doesn't have synergy.

Quote

T1 - I1L saves you on the cheap to maintain (edit: intrinsic_parity post above) available everywhere in wrecked fleets logistics ships, Militarized subsystem/Field Drive already covered the +1/+2, who cares about OP on support ships. I1R doesn't do anywhere near enough to justify a skill point.


I1L gets weak in the midgame, but is useful early game. I1R gives +50% "resources". I had assumed that included fuel and supplies, like the salvage gantry hullmod, but if it doesn't then it goes down in value. If it does, then that stacks very nicely with ships and other skills to reach the 'explore forever' threshold. Or recover hundreds of thousands more money for a high cargo fleet.

Even if this is a weaker skill, that doesn't mean the tree is bad or broken... just that either this or a later skill (since this unlocks those and its value as an unlocker is part of the skill value) needs a buff. I wouldn't say no to either, it wouldn't be broken with a buff.

Quote
T2 - It's not about lower fleet costs, it's about your personal ship. That's the problem. It's a purely combat thing. I'm not saying the tree can't improve personal combat but a skill tier solely improving combat recovery for only your personal ship has no place in the Industry tree. The skills are good, but they don't belong in this tree.
I2L (damage control) does actually lower fleet costs by letting the player take lots of damage and then giving free repairs, but I agree that its less of a fleet cost reduction than the others. Gunnery and EWM are in tech, but those are personal combat skills, so I don't see what the problem is with having these here considering that they thematically match. Really its leadership that is the odd skill for having no flagship combat skills in it. I suspect we won't agree on this one as you really don't like it while I don't see it as a downside at all.

Quote

T3 - You can't get both without looping the tree. 8 points in. You can only get one early game, when it would actually matter to have both. That's not good design.


This is not valid criticism. Shouldn't this be the ideal case, where you have 2 desirable skills that do different things but both are good? You don't need both for either to be a good skill. Pick to either optimize for fuel and travel or supplies and surveying, depending on what the player wants to do either could be the more correct choice.  Having a skill actually worth looping for is not bad, its good.

Quote
T4 - Field repairs is good. The other skill fits the tree oddly enough but is smack dab next to a Field Repairs which destroys it if you looped the tree for the second I3.

I agree that these two skill actively fight each other when looped, which is not good. I feel like DC needs a rework and this is part of it. You seem to care about looping a kit more than I do, but thats a much more subjective thing so I can't fault you on this criticism at all.

Quote

T5 - Not money, those skills are outliers. AIs = money, you running things yourself = wasted skill points. Not to mention both are completely useless till you have a colony.


Colonies are money and resupply points, so I don't understand how these skills are not money. I agree that colony skills are pretty much a waste with alpha cores being able to act as admins though, so I wouldn't take these. I feel the same way about leadership though and I felt the same way last version: colony skills aren't worth taking. I feel like thats not an industry problem, thats a colony skill problem in general.

Quote

This tree is a whole lot of nothing with a few good point sprinkled in. I feel like I2 personal ship abilities fit just as well in this tree as they would in Leadership, The 2 trees that have to do with command/management and logistics. Combat is for strictly personal bonuses, Tech is a mix of personal and fleet.

Based on your post I feel it's unlikely we will see eye to eye on this.

Well, probably not... I'd rank the tiers in order as good/good/good/great/colony (dead for me). Its a competitive tree in the early/mid stages of the game for 4 or even looping to 8 just for logistics alone before the player has money printing fully online (though I think thats excessive dedication to the synergy and its not needed in practice to solve logistics), competitive for 2 points for pure combat builds endgame where those skills are good for the ships, and competitive for 4 points for combat builds endgame that want to use DC. So I don't really see whats so wrong with it.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Amoebka on April 11, 2021, 02:11:52 PM
I don't want Industry to be that "Leveling build".
To some extent this is unavoidable. Late game fights are necessarily difficult so combat skills always become more important in the end.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Maethendias on April 11, 2021, 02:22:11 PM
the whole skill system would need 3 more skill TREES to be effective ngl

cramming all playstyles of a 4x into... well, 4 skilltrees is not only super clumped and exactly the reason why some things are all over the place

it also removes the whole "take skills to improve your playstyle" thing, because as you said it yourself.... alot of the time skills and skill picks are getting in the way of each other
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Flying Birdy on April 11, 2021, 02:26:55 PM
I think the industry tree is nearly all just QOL stuff for the early game as noted several times in this thread. It's kind of the perfect tree to take early on without getting any of the specializations and then re-assign by using a story point once you hit level 15.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 11, 2021, 02:57:36 PM
Bulk Transport is good for raiding.  I do not salvage much aside from obvious sources of rare items.  But, after I raid all over the place for supplies and drugs, the extra capacity is nice to carry more stuff.

If I plan to use alpha core admins, then yes, Industry 5 is a waste.  But, for my current game where I do not plan to farm Radiants for cores, and do not want to deal with Hegemony or Pathers, Industry 5 is nice for the colonies I want.  Even if I change my mind and decide to farm Radiants, at least I can respec Industry 5 away once I have alpha cores on hand.  I could not respec Industry away in 0.9.1a.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 04:00:47 PM
I don't feel you've given any reasoning as to why it doesn't have synergy with itself. I1 (both, though L is early game and R is later game), I3 (both), and I4 L work very well together and stack towards allowing the player to explore for long times without having to go into port (the free fleet repairs from I4L save a ton of supplies). And actually, I2L is the same, especially with the elite skill, because less damage and less crew losses (and free repairs) are less trips back to the core needed. Thats potentially 4 of 5 skills all synergizing, which is pretty darn competitive. Now if you don't WANT the synergy of a sustainable fleet and don't value it, thats a fair point, but its not fair to say the tree doesn't have synergy.

How is I4L increasing your explore time? It doesn't, it's QoL. What scav is taking d mods that cost supplies, scavs take combat d mods and avoid fights. Are you counting on RNG repairs for supply/fuel and maintenance d mods over the dozens of combat d mods? It's great but has nothing to do with exploring.
I1R is the scavenging skill but I1L is the one you take for it? Why is that?
I3 both, are good.

I3 generic efficiency
I1L pretend it's making more of a difference then it is
I2 both, no, you are not getting into fights while exploring with your early game fleet. You are avoiding combat. You are reaching so hard to pretend it helps exploring. As if having less losses on your main ship is gonna let you stay out for even a few more days...

Want my point on synergy. What are you good at with this tree now? You are good at nothing specific with this tree and we have to pretend 2 skills make you good at scavenging. You might actually be a decent scavenger if you could have both I1 and both I3, but you can't without massive investment in things that do nothing for you.

I'm not failing to prove lack of synergy, you are stretching to show it exist. It's synergy was clear before 0.95a.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Thaago on April 11, 2021, 04:51:21 PM
But why not get into fights while exploring? It sounds really limiting to not fight at all. Research stations, mining stations, probes, mothership, etc... all can have defenses; pirates are out there as free supply pinatas and bounty income sources (from commission at the very least), and they can spawn as an ambush after scanning stations or derelict ships; single and even double ping remnant systems have loot in them and they drop good hullmods, AI cores, and high tech weapons. All good reasons to fight while exploring. Things that save supplies and crew, and that recover more supplies, help to stay out exploring after doing so.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Sutopia on April 11, 2021, 05:03:07 PM
Bulk transport is such a waste because you can't rely on that +1 burn for non-mil.
Militarized subsystem will negate the +30% capacity hull mods' +50% maintenance penalty WHILE giving that burn
Especially with the 30 ship fleet cap it's better off NOT taking the skill to maximize available cargo with minimum logistic civilian ships
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 11, 2021, 05:18:05 PM
But why not get into fights while exploring? It sounds really limiting to not fight at all. Research stations, mining stations, probes, mothership, etc... all can have defenses; pirates are out there as free supply pinatas and bounty income sources (from commission at the very least), and they can spawn as an ambush after scanning stations or derelict ships; single and even double ping remnant systems have loot in them and they drop good hullmods, AI cores, and high tech weapons. All good reasons to fight while exploring.

Avoid fights doesn't mean no fighting, I mean you limit it.

2-3 redacted frigates isn't really a fighting so much as swatting a bug. Even an early game fleet can handle that quickly with no losses. I can't even remember taking non shield damage from them on anything bug a Hound or Cerberus. Any fight where your personal ship is taking real damage is what you avoid.

Also if you are out there for months you aren't seeing those bounties. Those ambush fleets, you fight them? They are a waste of time and supplies, nothing in the industry tree makes up for fleet wide damage. I3 isn't reduction to battle damage and I2 is your ship only. That combat would just reduce your run time.

What kinda early game fleet are you running, because your reply indicates to me you are in a mid game fleet.

Things that save supplies and crew, and that recover more supplies, help to stay out exploring after doing so.

We had more of those things in the Industry tree before 0.95. They were't overpowered, but they are still gone. I mean aside from the rare find rate increaser.

Know what helps you stay out longer when you hit bounties and stuff? The trees that buff you in combat. Because you end the fight faster and take less damage, meaning less CR loss and Less repair cost. The other trees do a good job of making you better at combat in a very focused and directly connected way. Know what tree doesn't do that in a direct or connected way and in most cases not at all.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Eluxor on April 11, 2021, 07:48:06 PM
My main gripe with the new Industry tree, and what serveral other people have been saying in other posts is just part of what changed with Skills this update.
Like previously you could get alot of D-ships with lowered maintenance costs and the such, it made the industry tree good for a scrap fleet/low tech game. But now? It doesnt matters, honestly none of the skills are truly worth investing in them. And the choices are so god damm awful. "Oh less supplies used... Vs less fuel used..." You use both when exploring early game! Of course you want both. In the old system you could waste your points in skills that would give you both in different paths. But now you cant, you gotta lvl to max just to get to them... And when you do, you are not in the early game anymore, so fuel and supplies costs are worthless.
The whole tree feels lackluster, it has no fleet wide abilities, it doesnt makes you a better scavenger\explorer, it just gives you meager rewards.
I even downloaded mods which remove the having to choose one skill per tier, but even then, when I look at the industry tree, the fuel and supplies skills are the only ones worth it (for early game) the rest are pointless.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Null Ganymede on April 11, 2021, 08:56:30 PM
Industry tree is actually a must for mid-to-lategame lowtech. Armor/hull tanking is amazing in the new patch, and either of the 2nd-to-last skills take it to the next level.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: SCC on April 12, 2021, 12:18:31 AM
But why not get into fights while exploring? It sounds really limiting to not fight at all. Research stations, mining stations, probes, mothership, etc... all can have defenses; pirates are out there as free supply pinatas and bounty income sources (from commission at the very least), and they can spawn as an ambush after scanning stations or derelict ships; single and even double ping remnant systems have loot in them and they drop good hullmods, AI cores, and high tech weapons. All good reasons to fight while exploring. Things that save supplies and crew, and that recover more supplies, help to stay out exploring after doing so.
Salvaging and Reliability Engineering are super good for exploration. Former nets you more loot from combat, and I can come even on fights even without it, while the latter lets your ship (preferably a frigate, ideally a Tempest) deal with more enemies before running out of PPT, which lets you spend less on fights. To deal with pirates you need a bit more, but they indeed are great for loot.
I'm surprised people complain that they want both I3 choices and not that they are fairly lame. At least Containment Procedures upgrade Emergency Burn so it doesn't burn CR.
That's it from me, I have no further interest in the industry skills.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Flet on April 12, 2021, 01:49:52 AM
i grab 1l and 2r. there are not enough skill points to contemplate spending more.
The new d mod skill i think is the opposite of what dmods are supposed to do. It used to be the dmod skill was a 'now you dont care about dmods' enabler, but this new skill is a 'now you must tediously savescum and micromanage dmod accumulation' skill, where needing to recover a ship is even more potentially upsetting than people playing with out dmods since its not a matter of just fixing it when you get back to a station but it has potentially thrown a wrench into your carefully cultivated stack of unimportant dmods.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 12, 2021, 05:04:07 AM
At least Containment Procedures upgrade Emergency Burn so it doesn't burn CR.
But it still burns fuel, which can be a big chunk depending on the fleet.  I usually use it if I need to dive into a corona to reach a mission target or loot pinata (i.e., research station), or to cut through a neutron star and evade pulsar beams.

I have Containment Procedures and still rarely use E-Burn due to the fuel it consumes.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 12, 2021, 05:18:07 AM
I5L main advantage over I5R is forgetting it via respec hurts less.

I'm against the hard locks on respec. Feels like that needs to be handled differently.

Also I find the concept of specing and completely abandoning said spec later on for meta gaming like it's an MMO highly annoying. I don't want Industry to be that "Leveling build".
Starsector is a game, and respec is an acceptable break from reality that I am grateful for since I have less time to play games these days.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Flet on April 12, 2021, 05:36:45 AM
The problem i have with respecs is they tend to be used as crude fixes for design problems (skill systems in general often fall under this, with 'choice' being used as an excuse to not fix broken skills). A respec should be a way to undo a mistake or help you better explore the games systems by trying things. If it becomes a matter of 'do this and then respec out of it later' as a normal matter of the games meta then something is badly designed with the game. A system should be able to be optimally played with out ever using respecs if you know what build you want ahead of time.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 12, 2021, 07:45:28 AM
The problem i have with respecs is they tend to be used as crude fixes for design problems (skill systems in general often fall under this, with 'choice' being used as an excuse to not fix broken skills). A respec should be a way to undo a mistake or help you better explore the games systems by trying things. If it becomes a matter of 'do this and then respec out of it later' as a normal matter of the games meta then something is badly designed with the game. A system should be able to be optimally played with out ever using respecs if you know what build you want ahead of time.
My biggest complaint about respec is I change flagships too much to fully enjoy the Combat tree.  4 and 5 varies depending on which flagship I pilot at any given moment.  Just earlier about an hour ago, in my last fight, I started the fight with Harbinger, but took too much damage, and retreated it and swapped to the Paragon that was nearby mid-fight.

But for respec in general, Starsector is loo long of a game for me to play many new seeds casually, and my favorite part of the game is endgame when player power is at maximum and money is of no or little concern.  If the game was short like DoomRL, I would not mind fixed choices, but in Starsector, I stick with a given seed for weeks (partly because of available playtime) and fixed choices for that long hurt.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 12, 2021, 01:19:07 PM
I'm surprised people complain that they want both I3 choices and not that they are fairly lame. At least Containment Procedures upgrade Emergency Burn so it doesn't burn CR.
That's it from me, I have no further interest in the industry skills.

And that is a perfect explanation of my problem. You have no interest in the industry tree except a few combat related skills. Because the tree and specifically the I3 choices are for the old industry playstyle that properly supported Scavenger play. You including Thaago are talking about a Privateer type builds when they/you/whoever say it's fine, because you are after different things then a Scavenger. So I gotta say everyone who plays that way and tells us it's fine feels like a vulture picking at the couple of things they like then building in other trees where the bulk of their investment is. These people shouldn't be telling anyone if this build works.

So it's a side grade tree for people to pick a couple of things out of and pretend like the tree as a whole works like it did before for everyone. While at the same time never picking the tree as a whole because it doesn't work...

I could play a scavenger before, with no commission, stay neutral and explore to my hearts content and make a decent profit. I can't now. Because everything that made it work got stripped out. Story points finally make ships like the Venture a viable mid game ship for Scavengers and the entire tree gets gutted of everything that made it work.

This realization really makes me laugh, commissions are now a requirement to make it work. I lost playstyle freedom and the tree is fine...

Please don't read this is hostility directed at you SCC or at Thaago, I've got very little happiness right now and this patch feels like a big letdown. If someone understands my rant and can put this in better/clearer terms please do.

Starsector is a game, and respec is an acceptable break from reality that I am grateful for since I have less time to play games these days.

Repecing isn't what I'm against. I'm against the idea of a tree being it's for early game only to be abandon late game because it sucks late game. I'm saying no tree should be designed to work like that.

I fully support respecing.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Amoebka on April 12, 2021, 02:03:02 PM
Is it really that bad? I'll be honest, I was never a scavenger-oriented player myself, but to me it looks like the basics are there. You have the bonus salvage skill at t1, bonus fuel + fuel saving vs supply saving and surveying at t3, and ship restoration at t4 (encourages recovering ships). Are there some particular elements of the old industry playstyle you are missing?
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Thaago on April 12, 2021, 02:05:28 PM
Could you define a scavenger type character for us? What do they do, how do they make money, how do they spend their time, etc? You seem to have a way of doing it thats very different than what I do, so I'm curious.

...
Please don't read this is hostility directed at you SCC or at Thaago, I've got very little happiness right now and this patch feels like a big letdown. If someone understands my rant and can put this in better/clearer terms please do.
...


You're good, I didn't think you were being hostile. Sorry if I've come across as aggressive, I also didn't mean to!
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 12, 2021, 02:11:48 PM
Repecing isn't what I'm against. I'm against the idea of a tree being it's for early game only to be abandon late game because it sucks late game. I'm saying no tree should be designed to work like that.

I fully support respecing.
Ah, okay.  I1R feels very guilty on this!  Up to 5 DP for big bonuses for a civilian that is militarized and gets one of the new hullmods.  What a ripoff!  Gemini needs to be reverted back to non-civilian status!  I1L is a no-brainer if I want Industry 2+.

Also, carriers feel too weak once objectives appear and enemies spam officers.  Before then, carriers work alright.  Also, the big carrier skill, L3R is only good for six bays.  SIX... BAYS!  What a ripoff!  And it competes with one of the better skills in Leadership, Crew Training.

Automated ships can be this if player wants Spec.Mods, but does not have enough story points to powerup every ship.  My level was still in the single digits when I got T5R, and I needed a capital quick, and the Radiant guarding the Red Planet was the easiest I could get.

Colony skills are ultimately this if player grinds for alpha cores and install them all over the sector.  (I do not plan to play that long for my first 0.95a game.)  Come to think of it, so is the rest of the non-combat skills of Industry if player has unlimited money.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: intrinsic_parity on April 12, 2021, 02:21:24 PM
I wonder if adding back the old 'd-mod deployment cost reduction is applied to maintenance as well' to Makeshift Equipment (I think that's I3R) would help? Also if derelict contingent gets reworked into something like the old 'negative effects of d-mods are reduced', that could help. DC is definitely getting reworked, so there's a decent chance of something like that I think.

SIX... BAYS!  What a ripoff!  And it competes with one of the better skills in Leadership, Crew Training.
To be fair, that skill gives WAY more of a bonus than the old leadership skill at 6 bays. I think the old skill was 15% fleet wide and the new one gives 50% at 6 bays, 30% at 10 bays, 15% at 20 bays, so as long as you're using less than 20 bays, it's better than old skill.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: SCC on April 12, 2021, 02:21:49 PM
These people shouldn't be telling anyone if this build works.
I'm gonna tell you what Industry should get. Safety Procedures. Roll CP and ME into one (though rip emergency burn's no CR burn and give it to Safety Procedures). Now you choose between "boring" logistical efficiency and risky, storm-riding, star-diving, d-mod-mitigating Safety Procedures. That was a good skill.
Though more realistically Derelict Contingent would probably become the d-mod mitigating skill, unless Alex is going to just nerf it and not rework it.

So it's a side grade tree for people to pick a couple of things out of and pretend like the tree as a whole works like it did before for everyone. While at the same time never picking the tree as a whole because it doesn't work...
Hey! I don't pretend Industry works! I pretend it doesn't exist past tier 2. Especially Derelict Contingent, the strongest combat skill in the game, heh.

I could play a scavenger before, with no commission, stay neutral and explore to my hearts content and make a decent profit. I can't now. Because everything that made it work got stripped out. Story points finally make ships like the Venture a viable mid game ship for Scavengers and the entire tree gets gutted of everything that made it work.

This realization really makes me laugh, commissions are now a requirement to make it work. I lost playstyle freedom and the tree is fine...
That's a paddlin'. I spent first half of my game bounty hunting and doing academy missions (without the stipend, as I disabled it in the settings, and I didn't take any commission, as I felt no need for it) until cycle 213, where I got what I wanted and focused exclusively on exploring (You can easily see when my fleet composition stagnated (https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/822063453837590528/831270169955139615/unknown.png) (peak credits is 3m, average fleet is 200 points (peak is 700 points when I was moving my stash)) and became 1 Fury, 1 Apogee, 2 Enforcers, 2 Omens, 2 Centurions, sometimes a Tempest or a Medusa).

On account of my laziness, I didn't respec anything to make exploration easier, so I had just Salvaging and Reliability Engineering skills from Industry (and C LLRLL, L LLL, T LLLLL aside from that). After exploring enough, I finally made permanent colonies that had more than tech-mining, but otherwise, for majority of the run I've been bleeding around 50k credits monthly in salaries. I wish I remembered what was it that made cycle 218 so profitable to me. It's probably those hordes or pirates I fought, so I ended up with a bazillion of supplies, but I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 12, 2021, 02:24:27 PM
To be fair, that skill gives WAY more of a bonus than the old leadership skill at 6 bays. I think the old skill was 15% fleet wide and the new one gives 50% at 6 bays, 30% at 10 bays, 15% at 20 bays, so as long as you're using less than 20 bays, it's better than old skill.
Which is offset by greatly weakened Expanded Deck Crew, which carriers still need.  If Deck Crew has been hit hard, then player needs the big bonus from the skill.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Sutopia on April 12, 2021, 02:24:38 PM
Too long to quote
Tl;dr the latest iteration of skill system has limited player choices and playstyles big times.

The original aim of the tier unlock system is to reduce the confusion for new players so they only need to choose between 8 skills instead of 40. However, we all knew how it actually played out: players are still staring at 40 skills, and it became much harder to plan for character build due to unnecessary additional unlock restrictions.

Most of the posts complaining about new skill system doesn’t really address the problem but asked for the tree order to swap so they get all what they wanted.
This is a harsh comment but I must say this iteration of skill system is better buried six feet under. Most people can’t enjoy it no matter how much tweaks are made solely due to the extreme restrictions posted for acquiring any given skill.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: KDR_11k on April 12, 2021, 02:25:30 PM
Ah, okay.  I1R feels very guilty on this!  Up to 5 DP for big bonuses for a civilian that is militarized and gets one of the new hullmods.  What a ripoff!

That's L1R you're thinking of, I believe? I'm still trying to come up with some sort of gimmick build using vulcans and the extra range from escort package but for some reason I thought all those combat freighters were civilian hulled.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 12, 2021, 02:27:22 PM
Yes, Leadership 1 R.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Amoebka on April 12, 2021, 02:28:56 PM
The purpose of L1R is fielding 3 Kites (A) with omega weapons. Better stats than wolves for 2 DP!  ;D
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Razor Feather on April 12, 2021, 03:30:35 PM
I frankly fail to see where this change from "Skills that improved salvage ability and resilience" to "random stuff" is supposedly coming from.

It lost the reduced CR loss to hyperspace storms, and the bonus rare resource finds completely, I can see that. It also lost the dmod maintenance cost reduction stuff, and the dmod impact reduction stuff, but gained overall maintenance cost reduction and two very powerful tools for handling dmods. The other stuff, like extra resources from salvage, extra fuel, extra ship recovery, etc. is all there. It even gained aspects of other trees that I think fit better with it than their old homes, like fuel usage reduction from tech, and the guaranteed recoverability feature of leadership, in an admittedly roundabout way.

Also I think people are generally underselling just how strong field repairs can be. Make sure all of your officers have one of the industry skills, and throw bulkheads on your non-officered ships, and suddenly all losing ships in battle costs you is some crew and supplies. You always get them back, and when you do they only get 1 dmod or so on average, which simply falls off after awhile. At least for me its made me feel much more comfortable with not save scumming to avert losses.

Further, the changes to fleet cap make salvaging ships as a way to grow and improve the fleet, and thus a "salvage playstyle", much more feasible. You no longer need to intentionally stay below the thirty ship cap just so you actually have a chance of something useful dropping from a fight. If you already have 30 ships, you can still take your pick and then eat a pretty modest supply penalty until you can drop the excess off somewhere and reorganize.

The tree still has issues sure, like the choice between saving fuel and saving supplies being kind of underwhelming due to the similarity in end goal, letting the fleet stay out longer and for cheaper. Derelict contingent is pretty wonky and overtuned, and likely needs to be reworked fairly heavily. The colony skills aren't very good in the face of alpha core use as well, though this isn't exactly a new problem for them. The tree also doesn't scale quite as well as before due to the implementation of softcaps, but that is ultimately just a number tuning sort of thing.

In my own game where I focused industry out the gate as I had in .91 and generally played with a heavy focus on salvage and exploration, it felt... largely the same, except I didn't need to worry about dmods, so net positive. I didn't run a commission or prioritize bounties or anything, just gathered up exploration missions and went out to do my thing, coming back to the core worlds every third of a cycle or so to pick up new missions, stock up on fuel, and sell off anything particularly shiny. Fuel was more of a limiter than before without the relevant skill, but not by a whole lot and I usually had other reasons to head back to civilized areas by then anyway.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: ChaseBears on April 12, 2021, 06:01:09 PM
I frankly fail to see where this change from "Skills that improved salvage ability and resilience" to "random stuff" is supposedly coming from.

It lost the reduced CR loss to hyperspace storms, and the bonus rare resource finds completely, I can see that. It also lost the dmod maintenance cost reduction stuff, and the dmod impact reduction stuff, but gained overall maintenance cost reduction and two very powerful tools for handling dmods. The other stuff, like extra resources from salvage, extra fuel, extra ship recovery, etc. is all there. It even gained aspects of other trees that I think fit better with it than their old homes, like fuel usage reduction from tech, and the guaranteed recoverability feature of leadership, in an admittedly roundabout way.

The original idea behind the industry tree was supporting a playstyle of being able to cope with losses and otherwise focusing on spamming lower-quality ships as opposed to being extremely loss-sensitive as was the general playstyle at the time.   The new industry tree has pretty much abandoned that and partly as a result has kind of lost its theme, with Field Repairs explicitly being for people who don't want to deal with D-mods at all and Derelict Contingent turning d-mod ships into super ships rather than having a quantity over quality focus.

Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Megas on April 12, 2021, 06:18:57 PM
Just fought the Ziggurat and lost four or five ships (all recovered with d-mods).  Also, recovered the Ziggurat, naturally.  Field Repairs will take ages to remove all of those d-mods.  Oh, and I saw a 1.7+ million price tag to restore the Ziggurat.  (I have a little over 2 million credits, waiting to be spent on more colonies when I find a better place to build them.)  Not paying that bill!

Field Repairs is slow at fixing more than a few casualties.  Better than nothing, but still annoyingly slow.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Thaago on April 12, 2021, 07:03:36 PM
Field repairs also saved you a total of 8 D mods - bad luck your recovered ships all had D mods on them, I don't know what the exact odds are but I know that with field repairs its a decent chance at pristine recovery. I do miss the D mod mitigation skills though.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 13, 2021, 01:56:28 AM
Could you define a scavenger type character for us? What do they do, how do they make money, how do they spend their time, etc? You seem to have a way of doing it thats very different than what I do, so I'm curious.

Scavengers focus on survey/scanning missions, and exploration. The idea is to remain neutral, collect blueprints and acquire equipment. Combat is avoided except when blueprints/equipment is on the other side of it, risk adverse generally. Efficiency is everything. Hounds and Cerberus are perfect ships for this kind of build, shields don't matter. Cargo space is key and shielded inventory is a bonus to avoid random scan costing you AI cores when you do head back in stuffed.

Surveying Equipment, Efficiency Overhaul, Militarized Subsystems (for both speed and lower detection range), Augmented Drive Field, Insulated Engine Assembly and High Resolution Sensors are priorities on every ship that can fit them. Moving at max speed, seeing the enemy first, avoiding being seen.

Sneaking around in High danger Remnant systems with a junker fleet where a Mule might be your best fighting ship for those high end blueprints.

Before this build only bled money, now it bleeds supplies/fuel and money. Ya you can cash out with amazing blueprints but without the amazing run times, like 1+ years between core visits, the loss of rare find rares making cash isn't like it was. I'm sure people will post anecdotal " I made 3 million in 1 scav run" but that's not common anymore. Rare tech is way more rare, as are good blueprints as are Pristine nanoforges (which threads have been made about).

"I don't wanna pay skill tax for exploring" I hear in here, lol, well grats the the rare rates are lower for everyone. But those people don't need to feel bad about losing out.

So completely in jest allow me to say "can we remove all the combat bonuses? I feel like they are combat tax for my build and I'm losing out if I do combat without taking them."
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Amoebka on April 13, 2021, 02:15:48 AM
Let's imagine for a moment that +rare item skill exists. What will the players do?

1) Pick the skill, spend several cycles looting derelict stations, refund the skill, profit. Not doing this will be terrible because you miss out on extremely valuable non-replenishable resources forever.

2) If the skill is unrefundable, either miss out on extremely valuable non-replenishable resources, or gimp your character in combat forever. What a fun choice to make!
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: SCC on April 13, 2021, 02:24:54 AM
"I don't wanna pay skill tax for exploring" I hear in here, lol, well grats the the rare rates are lower for everyone. But those people don't need to feel bad about losing out.
Then Alex should increase how many rare, unique, irreplaceable, impossible to get otherwise items there are to find, if you feel there are too few now. Bounties and AI cores can be farmed, but the number of colony items is determined at the start of the game and salvage increasing rare item drops would be the only thing influencing that number.

Scavengers focus on survey/scanning missions, and exploration. The idea is to remain neutral, collect blueprints and acquire equipment. Combat is avoided except when blueprints/equipment is on the other side of it, risk adverse generally. Efficiency is everything. Hounds and Cerberus are perfect ships for this kind of build, shields don't matter. Cargo space is key and shielded inventory is a bonus to avoid random scan costing you AI cores when you do head back in stuffed.

Surveying Equipment, Efficiency Overhaul, Militarized Subsystems (for both speed and lower detection range), Augmented Drive Field, Insulated Engine Assembly and High Resolution Sensors are priorities on every ship that can fit them. Moving at max speed, seeing the enemy first, avoiding being seen.

Before this build only bled money, now it bleeds supplies/fuel and money. Ya you can cash out with amazing blueprints but without the amazing run times, like 1+ years between core visits, the loss of rare find rares making cash isn't like it was. I'm sure people will post anecdotal " I made 3 million in 1 scav run" but that's not common anymore. Rare tech is way more rare, as are good blueprints as are Pristine nanoforges (which threads have been made about).
I was exploring with a fleet of what I mentioned previously for combat ships, plus 3 Colossuses, 2 Tarsuses, 1 Buffalo (P), 2 Phaetons, 1 Prometheus, 5 Shepherds and 1 Salvage Rig. All my combat ships had solar shields because goddamn storms, all my spreadsheet ships had insulated drives and efficiency overhaul or augmented drive field (I didn't want milsubs eating into my bonuses). My only Industry skills were Salvaging and Reliability Engineering, so no help from that. I surveyed only planets that had satellites in orbit, thus ruins.

I wasn't combat averse and I fought all explorarium defences I found and any pirate, pather, scavenger Remnant that thought he was tough got his fleet salvaged. I didn't explore any red beacon systems yet, though, I plan on bringing the big guns for that. I'm not sneaky at all. Fuel I bought constantly, but supplies hovered around 500-ish and increased slowly over time to 1000-ish.
If you are having such difficulties with "pacifist" exploring, it seems that avoiding combat is now way worse, in comparison to even a modestly optimised fleet that isn't afraid of fighting.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Amoebka on April 13, 2021, 02:30:08 AM
I've been exploring with SO lasher as my only combat ship (so no fighting anything other than derelict defenses) and zero industry skills, and still had to airlock supplies and machinery at some point because I had no cargo space left. Salvage is plentiful for a small fleet. The only rare thing is rare colony items (blueprints are everywhere). This IS frustrating, but having a skill for that isn't the right solution. Make drops more common, at least in dangerous places. Survey ships with defenses and stations in remnant systems should be guaranteed to give something good.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 13, 2021, 02:34:10 AM
"I don't wanna pay skill tax for exploring" I hear in here, lol, well grats the the rare rates are lower for everyone. But those people don't need to feel bad about losing out.
Then Alex should increase how many rare, unique, irreplaceable, impossible to get otherwise items there are to find, if you feel there are too few now. Bounties and AI cores can be farmed, but the number of colony items is determined at the start of the game and salvage increasing rare item drops would be the only thing influencing that number.

Scavengers focus on survey/scanning missions, and exploration. The idea is to remain neutral, collect blueprints and acquire equipment. Combat is avoided except when blueprints/equipment is on the other side of it, risk adverse generally. Efficiency is everything. Hounds and Cerberus are perfect ships for this kind of build, shields don't matter. Cargo space is key and shielded inventory is a bonus to avoid random scan costing you AI cores when you do head back in stuffed.

Surveying Equipment, Efficiency Overhaul, Militarized Subsystems (for both speed and lower detection range), Augmented Drive Field, Insulated Engine Assembly and High Resolution Sensors are priorities on every ship that can fit them. Moving at max speed, seeing the enemy first, avoiding being seen.

Before this build only bled money, now it bleeds supplies/fuel and money. Ya you can cash out with amazing blueprints but without the amazing run times, like 1+ years between core visits, the loss of rare find rares making cash isn't like it was. I'm sure people will post anecdotal " I made 3 million in 1 scav run" but that's not common anymore. Rare tech is way more rare, as are good blueprints as are Pristine nanoforges (which threads have been made about).
I was exploring with a fleet of what I mentioned previously for combat ships, plus 3 Colossuses, 2 Tarsuses, 1 Buffalo (P), 2 Phaetons, 1 Prometheus, 5 Shepherds and 1 Salvage Rig. All my combat ships had solar shields because goddamn storms, all my spreadsheet ships had insulated drives and efficiency overhaul or augmented drive field (I didn't want milsubs eating into my bonuses). My only Industry skills were Salvaging and Reliability Engineering, so no help from that. I surveyed only planets that had satellites in orbit, thus ruins.

I wasn't combat averse and I fought all explorarium defences I found and any pirate, pather, scavenger Remnant that thought he was tough got his fleet salvaged. I didn't explore any red beacon systems yet, though, I plan on bringing the big guns for that. I'm not sneaky at all. Fuel I bought constantly, but supplies hovered around 500-ish and increased slowly over time to 1000-ish.
If you are having such difficulties with "pacifist" exploring, it seems that avoiding combat is now way worse, in comparison to even a modestly optimised fleet that isn't afraid of fighting.

Simple question, what build are you using to do that? Because I find it unlikely that heavy industry tree is involved in that success. Also are you using a commission?

I wish solar shields was a more common blueprint. I never seem to have it on any play.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: SCC on April 13, 2021, 02:54:41 AM
Simple question, what build are you using to do that? Because I find it unlikely that heavy industry tree is involved in that success. Also are you using a commission?
As mentioned previously - C LLLLL, L LLL, T LLLLL, I RR (and that one's just for Reliability Engineering). No commission, I even disabled the galatian stipend. I spent majority of my time bounty hunting and questing until 213, when I switched to exploration.
Story spoilers
The reward at the end of the academy questline is useful for exploration, but my exceptional bad luck meant it was completely useless in a half of the galactic rim. More precisely, the half I have been exploring first, so for 5-6 cycles it had nearly no impact, which is why I didn't mention it.
[close]
I wish solar shields was a more common blueprint. I never seem to have it on any play.
Fighting Remnants without ECCM was pain... Thankfully I finally found it, after 14 cycles.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: Locklave on April 13, 2021, 01:13:52 PM
Simple question, what build are you using to do that? Because I find it unlikely that heavy industry tree is involved in that success. Also are you using a commission?
As mentioned previously - C LLLLL, L LLL, T LLLLL, I RR (and that one's just for Reliability Engineering). No commission, I even disabled the galatian stipend. I spent majority of my time bounty hunting and questing until 213, when I switched to exploration.
Story spoilers
The reward at the end of the academy questline is useful for exploration, but my exceptional bad luck meant it was completely useless in a half of the galactic rim. More precisely, the half I have been exploring first, so for 5-6 cycles it had nearly no impact, which is why I didn't mention it.
[close]
I wish solar shields was a more common blueprint. I never seem to have it on any play.
Fighting Remnants without ECCM was pain... Thankfully I finally found it, after 14 cycles.

Sorry I missed the build earlier, teach me to try posting in a rush before heading to work lol. I need to find something that works for me now, I'll give that build a shot.

If you are doing it with the welfare disabled I must say that is in fact very impressive.
Title: Re: Is the Industry tree dead?
Post by: SCC on April 13, 2021, 02:15:54 PM
Sorry I missed the build earlier, teach me to try posting in a rush before heading to work lol. I need to find something that works for me now, I'll give that build a shot.

If you are doing it with the welfare disabled I must say that is in fact very impressive.
I think the least invasive advice I can give you is to give a flagship Tempest a go and see how far can it carry you. It should perform pretty well, even if you don't change much else in your playstyle.