Will this be compatible with 0.7a saves?
Will this be compatible with 0.7a saves?
Doh, since I decided to play Ironman for my first .7 game I went with Easy to get the hang of all the new changes but now those easy changes are waaaay too easy for me, lol. Are the Easy mode changes retroactive to current save games or no? If they are is there a way to change it to Normal mode via some command?
It seems like it, at least until a temporary faction hostility event ensues.
I probably need to restart a new game. I am Vengeful with everyone except Hegemony and Independents. No way to raise relations even after doing bounty work.
Also, regarding the faction commissions, can those be canceled at any time without dropping down to Suspicious?
...Also, as a side note, can we edit those Easy Mode modifiers to make the game harder, e.g. lower the salvage or up damage multipliers? Just out of curiosity, if the game can even comprehend what I'm trying to do with that so-called "Easy Mode", heh.
So can you have a commission with the Independents + one of the big four and still be cool?
Also I've only encountered some of the bugs you fixed, but that one where you can fight yourself sounds hilarious. Especially if you got it to correspond with the clone yourself to all your ships.
Wondering about the SO change on civilian hulls, though. Now Kite(o) will no longer be hilarious fast. :'(
I know this is a stupid question but what does SO mean? ???
Ouch, you sure on cutting the Gryphon's OP by 15 isn't going a bit overboard? Seems harsh considering the cost of cruiser class hullmods and it IS a combat cruiser with a large OP-sucking mount.
Maybe, maybe -5 or -10? ;_;
I have a small request. Can you set it so that the intel map stays centered on the player or is scrollable? This would make it much more viable for mods to fill the deeper reaches of the sector. This could even be an API method that could be turned on by mods if they spawned outside of the normal sector region. I managed to snag a spot inside the intel map, but other mods may not be so lucky, especially if they add multiple systems.
I think Independents or pirates shouldn't require(or offer) commission...right?
I have a small request. Can you set it so that the intel map stays centered on the player or is scrollable? This would make it much more viable for mods to fill the deeper reaches of the sector. This could even be an API method that could be turned on by mods if they spawned outside of the normal sector region. I managed to snag a spot inside the intel map, but other mods may not be so lucky, especially if they add multiple systems.
That's pretty non-trivial, but I'll take a look the 0.7.2a. Definitely can't do it for the .1.
Hm. So in .1 we won't have access to independent military + one faction military markets? That's a significant nerf to ability to find ships.
so no commission with pirates? it doesn't really fit but pirate campaigns are already very difficult.
can i beg your opinion on the status of fighters directly, by the way? do you think they are balanced? too powerful? not enough?
i really like fighters and want to use them, but you've probably read my opinions already.
Ah, didn't know how hard it would be to implement. It's not a hugely pressing issue, but over the long term it'll mean that modders can add more systems than they could otherwise. Right now, the size of the intel map is a bit of a soft cap on the size of the er, "modiverse".
So as it is now, the Independents and Pirates just work the old way - you get friendly over time and then get access to their military market? Since they're both loose organizations, I think that'd make the most sense. Less of a 'Leader gave you the golden keycard' and more of a general reputation in the sector.
What happens for military submarkets under factions that don't do commissions, such as Pirates? They've got a couple military submarkets here and there.
Say i take a commission with the hegemony, immediately dropping my relations with the tri-tachyon to hostile. later, a faction hostility event breaks out between the hegemony and the Sindrian Diktat. My relations to them drop straight to hostile as expected. but when the event is over, what happens to my relations with them? does it go back to neutral or stay at hostile?
Small monthly reputation penalties for being hostile with neutral factions, and for not being hostile to faction enemies
Increased range at which most pirate fleets can be detected by making (D) hull hull-mods increase sensor profile
Faint "near sensor range" indicators now shown for fleets that are only at "unidentified contact" level
Fleets now have a minimum sensor strength of 4; fleets with a lower strength receive a "low engine interference" bonus to make up the difference
Boarding: when multiple ships are potentially boardable, more expensive ships have a higher chance of being picked in proportion to their cost
Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployed
Boarding: when multiple ships are potentially boardable, more expensive ships have a higher chance of being picked in proportion to their cost
Actually, this isn't always preferable. For example, I want every Hyperion, Medusa, Omen and Tempest I can get, but do not particularly care about high tech cruisers or Astral that are likely to be present in the same fleet. Maybe we could get to pick from eligible candidates?
For high-tech, I probably want Hyperion above all else because it is so freaking rare and powerful! After that, probably the Paragon, then Medusa or Tempest.Boarding: when multiple ships are potentially boardable, more expensive ships have a higher chance of being picked in proportion to their cost
Actually, this isn't always preferable. For example, I want every Hyperion, Medusa, Omen and Tempest I can get, but do not particularly care about high tech cruisers or Astral that are likely to be present in the same fleet. Maybe we could get to pick from eligible candidates?
7. Destroying enemy ships sometimes yields "intel" that allows you to briefly see the location of all their ships in sector, capturing a ship yields a longer buff, maybe as long as a minute or more depending on the caputre size. This is the equivalent of "cracking the enigma code." Could also be a mission, capture x units of intel.
There should be one more consideration for boarding: Marines we have. If player has enough to board a small ship, but not a capital, pick the best ship we can board. Don't pick the capital if we have no chance to board it (due to insufficient marines) if there is another ship we can board and capture reliably.
It makes very good sense that one lone ship would have crappy sensor range, cuz in space you presumably won't be able to get very good sensor readout unless you have multiple sensors far apart, both to triangulate and to cancel out background noise.Actually, in real world, you can figure out pretty much about where things are by tracking heat radiation... but that goes off-topic here. Also, science fiction.
Sounds to me like a doubling of ammunition at best, almost nothing at worst (read: to early, AI).
- Gryphon:
- Reduced ordnance points by 15
- Missile Autoforge:
- Increased flux generation
- Limited to 1 use per battle
- Removed CR cost
•Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployedDoes the player count as an officer for this purpose? If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?
If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?
Quote•Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployedDoes the player count as an officer for this purpose? If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?
?Small monthly reputation penalties for being hostile with neutral factions, and for not being hostile to faction enemiesOne more question: Hostile includes Vengeful too? It would be silly if I lose reputation with my faction enemies if they hate me too much.
- Fleet compositions: reduced number of fighters in carrier groups, improved algorithm to more closely match intended ship distributions
Say i take a commission with the hegemony, immediately dropping my relations with the tri-tachyon to hostile. later, a faction hostility event breaks out between the hegemony and the Sindrian Diktat. My relations to them drop straight to hostile as expected. but when the event is over, what happens to my relations with them? does it go back to neutral or stay at hostile?
Pretty sure that you don't become automatically hostile if your commission-faction declared war to it after you joined. Otherwise this would not be there:
Still, that would mean you have to get hostile with them on you own and then quickly get neutral with them again on your own, otherwise you would get hit with a rep loss for your commission-faction. Seems as if at least some help here would be in order. I wouldn't be much fun if the "right" way to play were to get barely hostile and then don't attack anymore, so you can become neutral again quickly.
Maybe you should get no (or minimal) negative reputation automatically (it's easy to get on your own) upon declaration of war, but a huge reputation boost when your commission-faction ends the hostilities (if you are hostile yourself).
Oh, and please don't forget the bug where pirate raiders attack you while you are friendly with pirates :)
Gryphon changes sound good, but maybe the system still could use a bit of a delay? Maybe as long as a typical overload. Seems as if the double Reaper/Harpoon barrage would be a very viable option for every battle now, and still OP.
Come on! (D) hulls are bad enough without the sensor profile increase! I can't believe I'm the only one that is yet to be (succesfully) ambushed by a pirate fleet!
Sounds to me like a doubling of ammunition at best, almost nothing at worst (read: to early, AI).
Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?
Like:
75% Hard Flux generation
50% Missiles Refilled
10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented
This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds
(Why does this always end with)[/list]
It is almost starved for OP if you want Safety Override on it.
Actually, that could be one more nerf for Gryphon: Disable Safety Override for it because missiles do not get the range penalty, and the ballistics will probably be filled with short-ranged Vulcans and Flak.
Why remove rep decay? This seems like a good way to forgive/encourage experimentation by the player. Unless you read the forums religiously, you won't know all the rules about factions and relationships; neither do I think that the game should explicitly tell you all these things. Leaving it opaque is fine, but the decay is a mechanic to make sure it isn't too punishing.
Pirates have a military market at Umbra, or will that be ripped out in 0.7.1?
There is a Pirate market on Umbra as someone mentioned. Pirates deserve to have their special market so the faction maintains some kind of viability. Getting accepted by the pirates should be hard, and it is, but there should still be rewards for it. Commissions don't fit them, but leave some other way to get into the market by rep alone?
Does this hold true for your site, too? Wouldn't want my timid carrier to charge the enemy, just because I have no other officers deployed.
Quote•Timid officers behave as if they were cautious if only timid officers/non-combat ships are deployedDoes the player count as an officer for this purpose? If so, what personality does the game assume the player to be?
Quote?Small monthly reputation penalties for being hostile with neutral factions, and for not being hostile to faction enemiesOne more question: Hostile includes Vengeful too? It would be silly if I lose reputation with my faction enemies if they hate me too much.
One more question: Do non-combat ships piloted by Aggressive officers count as combat ships for the purpose of toggling Cautious for Timid officers?
Maybe, devs should reconsider chances of boarding? ::) Current 5% chance is too low and makes boarding feature (marines) in game totally useless. I've changed chances to 20% and it makes sense now.
Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?
Like:
75% Hard Flux generation
50% Missiles Refilled
10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented
This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds
(Why does this always end with)[/list]
One big reason is the AI would not be able to handle this well.
Why not make the system incredible difficult to use, but unlimited?
Like:
75% Hard Flux generation
50% Missiles Refilled
10 sec duration of refill while hard flux can't be dissipated/vented
This way you can't just spam missiles in the midst of battle (you would be overloaded and dead pretty soon) but it can still be used to constantly put out missiles in a prolonged battle, if the Gryphon manages to get a quite few seconds
(Why does this always end with)[/list]
One big reason is the AI would not be able to handle this well.
The question is how well will the AI use the system you will implement in the next version.
And as stated above in the one shot form it's little more than an increased missile rack size, as you can in the best case "only" double the rack size
The AI handles it fairly well imo.
And as stated above in the one shot form it's little more than an increased missile rack size, as you can in the best case "only" double the rack size
On my list for .2!
Expanded missile rack is a extremely, mh, economical hullmod for what it does on ships with many missile mounts. Maybe its relative low cost skew how people see the worth of the (in effect similar) auto reloader?
How are the chances that the pirate way of life in general will see some love in that update? Maybe even a pirate start option?
Removed half damage option from global settingsSorry if this has already been asked and answered, but would you mind explaining why? The easier you make Easy relative to Normal, the harder it'll be to transition from one to the other, and folding the only other difficulty-customization option we had into the Easy start isn't going to help that at all. Plus, while I might want to play Easy for the additional loot, easier economy, etc, half damage to my own ship and half again to my ship's damage output isn't exactly appealing to me (and yes, I realize that this will be something I can change in one of the settings files if I really want the easier economy but not the better flagship).
Sorry if this has already been asked and answered, but would you mind explaining why? The easier you make Easy relative to Normal, the harder it'll be to transition from one to the other, and folding the only other difficulty-customization option we had into the Easy start isn't going to help that at all. Plus, while I might want to play Easy for the additional loot, easier economy, etc, half damage to my own ship and half again to my ship's damage output isn't exactly appealing to me (and yes, I realize that this will be something I can change in one of the settings files if I really want the easier economy but not the better flagship).
The game doesn't really have a good way to build up pirate standing right now.
Hmm. Maybe attacking someone with your transponder off could give you a point or two of pirate standing :) Yeah, going to look at it.
Wow yikes.... I just won a fight with 3 pirate frigs..
one of them was boardable, with 1 lifesign on board.
I figured, this should be easy right? I've got over 150 marines in my fleet... lets kill that guy and take the ship right?
67 marines where lost.... This ship in question can't even accomadate 67 people... A Kite Class with a max crew space of 30.
So no more coffee for my marines.... thats for sure.
The game doesn't really have a good way to build up pirate standing right now.
Hmm. Maybe attacking someone with your transponder off could give you a point or two of pirate standing :) Yeah, going to look at it.
...
It takes a lot of time and its a grind
Grants a small bounty for fighting faction's enemies, similarly to a system bounty but not restricted to a specific system
Fixed bug where buffs would not apply to ships in the refit screen or in simulation.
does it mean buff managers? or Mutablestats can be changed in the campaign and brought into combat?
Pilums regenerate regardless of the ship you mount it to. It's a support missile and all that jazz.
Interaction of "low engine interference" with hullmods is an interesting question.
Will single Omen have only 4 sensor strength, ignoring it's bonus?
What about single civilian grade frigate with augmented engines? still 4?
Hmm... How about making bonus value not [4 - sensor strength], but [4 - sensor profile]. This will solve all above issues, and works as is for usual military vessels. Slight buff to phase ships as side effect though.
Question - which files containing texts(for player to see) recieved changes? rules.csv obviously, and what else?
Translating stuff and, you know, having to check all the files for change is terrible.
Interaction of "low engine interference" with hullmods is an interesting question.
Will single Omen have only 4 sensor strength, ignoring it's bonus?
What about single civilian grade frigate with augmented engines? still 4?
Hmm... How about making bonus value not [4 - sensor strength], but [4 - sensor profile]. This will solve all above issues, and works as is for usual military vessels. Slight buff to phase ships as side effect though.
Oh, good call. Did that. Slight buff to phase ships from this makes perfect sense, this is nice.
Uhm. Sorry to be a bother but could somebody explain what just happened? To break it down to a layman's point of view, what happens to the sensor strength and sensor profile with the aforementioned changes?
Found simple, repeatable bug/issue. The Tempest's shield arc is too small to protect it from an Omen's EMP emitter. It will get fried every time it comes near, even with its shields up. I'm not sure if this part is a bug or an intended interaction, but if the latter is the case then the issue is that the Tempest doesn't know its shields won't work and will willingly, repeatedly bring itself into EMP range to get its engines turned off.
Uhm. Sorry to be a bother but could somebody explain what just happened? To break it down to a layman's point of view, what happens to the sensor strength and sensor profile with the aforementioned changes?
Having strict 4 minimal sensor strength makes sensor strength of single frigate (or several of them, to lesser extent) not important. For single frigate any value in 0..4 range would work exactly same.
Changes I proposed preserve hullmod bonuses/penalties to sensors (considering that penalties apply to both sensor strength and visibility), while maintaining same minimum of 4 for ships that have no such hullmods.
Makes lore sense too, consider this analogy: it's easier to hear things, when you are quiet yourself.Found simple, repeatable bug/issue. The Tempest's shield arc is too small to protect it from an Omen's EMP emitter. It will get fried every time it comes near, even with its shields up. I'm not sure if this part is a bug or an intended interaction, but if the latter is the case then the issue is that the Tempest doesn't know its shields won't work and will willingly, repeatedly bring itself into EMP range to get its engines turned off.
Yes, Tempest's shield is somewhat hard to use even for player. Though it's also a benefit too - you are a smaller target (when you correctly align your hull behind shield).
Having AI better understand narrow shield limitations would be certainly nice.
Interaction of "low engine interference" with hullmods is an interesting question.
Will single Omen have only 4 sensor strength, ignoring it's bonus?
What about single civilian grade frigate with augmented engines? still 4?
Hmm... How about making bonus value not [4 - sensor strength], but [4 - sensor profile]. This will solve all above issues, and works as is for usual military vessels. Slight buff to phase ships as side effect though.
Oh, good call. Did that. Slight buff to phase ships from this makes perfect sense, this is nice.
Tempest (and Hyperion) almost needs Extended Shields - get it. You better have a good reason not to use Extended Shields.I guess a Terminator carrier with timid officer is a reason not good enough, right?
If I want to take over and use it myself as a temporary flagship, I do want Extended Shields (unless I attempt double blaster configuration, which AI cannot use effectively). More aggressive AI using a Tempest benefits from Extended Shields.Tempest (and Hyperion) almost needs Extended Shields - get it. You better have a good reason not to use Extended Shields.I guess a Terminator carrier with timid officer is a reason not good enough, right?Aside from the fact that a single Terminator can't really terminate anything with shields
Maybe, devs should reconsider chances of boarding? ::) Current 5% chance is too low and makes boarding feature (marines) in game totally useless. I've changed chances to 20% and it makes sense now.Wait, how do I do that?
Find settings.json in Starsector\starsector-core\data\config, search for the variable boardingchance, and change the value from 0.05 to 0.2 (or whatever other value you desire). Note that these are decimal equivalents of the percentage chance to have the ability to board the ship.Maybe, devs should reconsider chances of boarding? ::) Current 5% chance is too low and makes boarding feature (marines) in game totally useless. I've changed chances to 20% and it makes sense now.Wait, how do I do that?
Tempest (and Hyperion) almost needs Extended Shields - get it. You better have a good reason not to use Extended Shields.
What if all ships were theoretically boardable, or "salvageable" after a fight. You would need to repair them at your base of course, and supply a lot of materials for the truly mangled ones. Boarding actions could vary based on how badly damaged ships were, with ships that still have a lot of armor and werent pushed far into "overkill" territory (completely blow up) be much more likely to be operational whereas ships that were wrecked be much more dangerous to board. Also there could be more marine complements in less damaged ships. You could do mini-text adventure type events, you round the corner-ambush!-security drones pour out of the wrecked air vents-muwhahhaha.
also marines could gain experience the way crew do, to better deal with these shenanigans
Found simple, repeatable bug/issue. The Tempest's shield arc is too small to protect it from an Omen's EMP emitter. It will get fried every time it comes near, even with its shields up. I'm not sure if this part is a bug or an intended interaction, but if the latter is the case then the issue is that the Tempest doesn't know its shields won't work and will willingly, repeatedly bring itself into EMP range to get its engines turned off.
@Gothars
I assumed that:
1)Bonus is applied only if positive
2)Bonus is calculated once per fleet, not per ship
So:
now -> min 4 total -> +max(0, 4-profile)
(1,1) -> (4,1) -> (4,1) normal frigate
(4,1) -> (4,1) -> (7,1) single Omen
(0.5,2) -> (4, 2) -> (2.5, 2) single civilian frigate
(16,4) -> (16,4) -> (16,4) four Omens, unaffected either way
Can you answer a little question : Does the damage buff and such only apply to the piloted ship or every ship of my fleet ( since its altered to the current game option )
and maybe you might consider giving us a little more flexibility in choosing the difficulty other then editing the files.
Like adding a simple question for each of the settings.
Damn it!, i'm an awful alpha tester. I noticed this earlier on and I didn't report it. Instead of reporting it I just tried to play through the tutorial faster (which actually worked).
- Fixed issue where combat tutorials would end automatically after a couple of minutes
Well, couldn't you just offer Easy, Standard, and Custom choices when choosing difficulty, where the custom option allows individual choices while Easy and Standard are still fixed? So if new players don't have any idea of what the options do, they can still pick "easy" or "standard"?and maybe you might consider giving us a little more flexibility in choosing the difficulty other then editing the files.
Like adding a simple question for each of the settings.
The issue there is that you're asking a new player to make choices about things before they know what those things are. "A la carte" settings are also more troublesome from a feedback/debugging/meaningful discussion point of view.
Damn it!, i'm an awful alpha tester. I noticed this earlier on and I didn't report it. Instead of reporting it I just tried to play through the tutorial faster (which actually worked).
- Fixed issue where combat tutorials would end automatically after a couple of minutes
There was something else I noticed; the movement of ships on the map sometimes have a spinning movement to them...it looks rather crazy so I don't think it is intentional, since the rate of change in direction is very fast (it's part of the reason those fleeing fleets are so difficult to catch). I thought I saw you posted something earlier showing a ship on the map just spinning around in circles, but I can't locate that one again. Anyway that was similar to the movement I observed.
Well, couldn't you just offer Easy, Standard, and Custom choices when choosing difficulty, where the custom option allows individual choices while Easy and Standard are still fixed? So if new players don't have any idea of what the options do, they can still pick "easy" or "standard"?
Not quite sure what you mean - that is, haven't seen it myself. Unless we're talking with emergency burn, that can get a little crazy sometimes...
Not quite sure what you mean - that is, haven't seen it myself. Unless we're talking with emergency burn, that can get a little crazy sometimes...
I'm pretty certain this occurs when other fleets engage emergency burn. I've seen on occasion this weird spiral escape pattern (like a corkscrew placed on it's side, ie tilted spiral).
Most of the times I see this weirdness it is probably just as you describe: 'crazy sometimes...'
There's this pervasive fixation folk have regarding minigames for boarding.
Maybe they'd be fun the first few times you did them, but they will quickly become a chore that just got in the way of playing the actual game. Just another thing to be run a quickly as possible, or more likely skipped altogether.
I mean, lol, okay, that's a funny critique. "Boarding games would SUCK, boarding already SUCKS with the minimum amount of work, no need for further improvements in the work to suck ratio"
I mean, idk, boarding is repeatedly hyped as critical to the game's final form, particularly in regards to capturing these blueprints or w/e, but the thing consistently hasn't been fleshed out and is horribly griefy and it's just funny, cause of all the things that could be fleshed out and ungriefed with the minimum of effort, a thing which is essentially a text adventure with some maths would seem to be high on the "low hanging fruit" list. I mean, text adventures can be quite fun, and given the huge number of ships and possible iterations of situations, you could add a "random generator" system that could create a huge number of situations. For example, boarding in hyperspace, around planets, in asteroid belts could be very dangerous, attacking troop transports could potentially be disasterous as a compartment full of marines you didn't scan burst forth, tri-taychon ships could use advanced robot defenses, on and on and that's just one minute of off the cuff ideas. Plus it provides a huge avenue of potential logistics skills, boarding actions, crew manuver, officers could provide buffs to their crews, with aggressive officers suicide bombing the marines and timid officers immediately surrending, lol.
idk w/e maybe starsector was just designed to have crappy griefy boarding actions okay lol that's cool i guess reach for those stars
Question - with economy being fixed in 0.7.1, what effect would [the massive stockpiles caused by 0.7.0] have on the game economy?
Yes the boarding mechanic in SS is pretty useless and should be changed
"With tears in his eyes"
Yes, it did help. I just started it a little, because I was trying a new space EA game, BUT IT WORKS OMG. IT WOOORKS. I couldn't get used to my screen not freezing every few seconds. I just flew around for 5 minutes. Just flew. Around. Beautiful.
Who knew space was such a pleasure to travel?
Sounds like it's a bit late for 0.7.1... but maybe for 0.7.2? I'd love to see some trading and sensor related skills in the Leadership branch. Like lower tariffs, lower smuggling risks, better price intel, lower sensor profile, longer sensor range (maybe make the sensor ones based on fleet size, so it makes more sense under leadership instead of technology).
nice changes
btw, could officer recruiting dialog change a bit? Right now, if you have 10 (which is maximum) officers already recruited, if you speak to mercenary on planet you aren't even able to find out what skills/trait he has, you have to dismiss one of your officers first ... which means if you are looking for new officer to replace one of your old ones (because you want different skills or character trait) you either have to run with 9 officers only to have room for one more, or you have to do a bit of save scumming (dismiss one officer, talk to new one on planet, if he doesn't have skills/trait you want load game).
So ... could the skills/traits display immediately in the first message?
Better yet, when you click on a merc, he should display his skills instead of asking if you need help. One less click to do.
:(
It's not going to be today, but assuming all goes well with the last bits of playtesting - very soon!
Hmm, you know - if you edit settings.json and change:
"maxMarketProcurementConcurrent":20;
To 0 instead, that *may* help the stuttering issue. It'll also stop new procurement missions from being generated, though.
I assumed it to be a placeholder for future, more interesting conversation options.
It's out, updated OP.AWWW YEAH
You should be able to just install on top of it - the installer deletes the old version automatically prior to installing the new one. It occasionally fails for, let's call it "windows reasons", but in my experience it's rare.Savegames will work, right?
Phase Beam had 700 range. Current Phase Lance has only 600 range and is totally outclassed by Pulse Laser. The only time Phase Lance is good is if you can support it with Advanced Optics, then it becomes very good (because Adv. Optics enables a few ships to kite enemies with a Needler and Phase Lance combo). However, seven points for Advanced Optics is a high opportunity cost just to make Phase Lance viable.
Savegames will work, right?
Is it normal that we have to redownload and reinstall the whole thing once again? I don't mind since I have unlimited bandwidth but for other people this might be a problem.
The game is like 300 megs; I really hope thats not a problem.
just reporting on windows 7, got some instability on trying to run 0.7.1a exe after uninstalling 0.7, will try again
What do you mean by instability?
Already loving the faction commissions :-*
What do you mean by instability?
I might be being real dumb here, but when I click the download to windows link on the front plog post, it downloads something that is 153 megs, when I double click on it, it goes into an infinitie loop wait icon and nothing else happens, computer still running but the program itself is stuck in statis. keep in mind i uninstalled everything
it goes into an infinitie loop wait icon and nothing else happens
i just bought 50 supplies from maxios for 500 in the black market even though the price per unit is 50, 500 vs 2500I think the price updates on a per-item basis, not on a per-purchase basis. Some of the stations have such low stability and demands that that can happen.
working as intended?
Interesting update, in brief:
1. Faction mission loyalty is great. Rather than have a minimum loyalty of 10 to take on missions, simply make 0-10 not pay anything but gain loyalty. You are "proving yourself." this eliminates grief and grind in event that starting faction is offering no bounties, no trade runs, nothing that could possibly boost your loyalty. Tri-tachyon took 20 minutes to generate enough stuff to gain 10 loyalty.
2. Check pricing in regards to stations accurately updating based on stability, as well as crew casualty numbers, seems a little bugged in its readout.
3. You need an option to eliminate large ship explosion lense flare in the settings, or tune it down like 90% (acctually 99%). It's unbelievably bad and annoying. It's really, really terrible. If this were a AAA game your legal department would be sending you an order to eliminate it for medical health reasons. Almost makes the game unplayable. This is not Star Trek and you are not JJ Abrams. Please drop everything and do this and release it in 7.2. If it's too complicated just copy and paste the code from SS+ ;D thanks,Spoilerno really, do it[close]
edit: oh hai i found the setting that allows you to change that in the data files. still, my point stands in how bad it is, should consider bringing the turn off function to the main settingsSpoileractually just get rid of it, or turn it off by default, so bad[close]
Is this how people normally tell Alex on how to make changes to the game? Maybe I'm just new here but it seems to set the tone of saying the developer doesn't know what he's doing. Though I believe otherwise.
Odd thing: I definitely started a new game one normal mode, but the load game and save a copy buttons are missing.
Is this how people normally tell Alex on how to make changes to the game? Maybe I'm just new here but it seems to set the tone of saying the developer doesn't know what he's doing. Though I believe otherwise.
Maybe add a tickbox to either make shift a toggle or current behavior? Or add another key that does that, that I could bind to CTRL for example.There already is a tick box in the settings tab
Maybe add a tickbox to either make shift a toggle or current behavior? Or add another key that does that, that I could bind to CTRL for example.There already is a tick box in the settings tab
Are you sure you installed into the same directory?
If yes, have a look if the backup file still exists.
You can recover your previous save from the campaign.xml.bak file found in the save's directory ("C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves"). Just move the campaign.xml somewhere, and then remove the ".bak" from the filename of the backup file.
I'm not sure since I don't work with that OS at all, but it should be wherever you installed the game. "SomethingsomethingOSX\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves"
I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?
Sounds like you aren't experiencing it.... Right?I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?
Hi,
Sometimes there's a time delay in payment, because you're far away from a hyperspace relay. But this sounds more like a bug. It would probably help to track it down if you could send your save file to fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com.
You'll normally find the save under "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves".
Eh, I like it; whether it's "bad" or not is very much subjective. Can see how it could be annoying if you're playing in the dark or have more sensitive eyesight, though. Or, heck, if you just don't like it. But making it a proper settings toggle seems iffy to me - it's a slight advantage to have it off, so you'd probably want to do it regardless of how you feel about it, at which point you might as well remove it entirely. Which brings us back to the point re: me liking it.
I looked at the package contents of the application in the Applications folder, but all folders apart from the main one are empty. So no mods (not that I had any), saves (I had a lot), or anything else.
Time to start again, I guess. I won't be updating any more unless I can be sure that saved games are properly saved.
I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?Yeah, same here.
I looked at the package contents of the application in the Applications folder, but all folders apart from the main one are empty. So no mods (not that I had any), saves (I had a lot), or anything else.
Time to start again, I guess. I won't be updating any more unless I can be sure that saved games are properly saved.
You need to open the package and only copy over the contents folder to replace the old one. Otherwise you will replace all of your saves and everything you liked so much.
I'm not getting any money from bounty fleet kills. All it says is that something unrelated has taken care of the fleet. I am not commissioned to any faction yet, is that the problem?
Hi,
Sometimes there's a time delay in payment, because you're far away from a hyperspace relay. But this sounds more like a bug. It would probably help to track it down if you could send your save file to fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com.
You'll normally find the save under "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves".
I'm on OSX though, so is there any way to find a backup in OSX? Appreciate your help in any case!An install on OS X is just copying a folder into place - none of this windows everything-has-to-be-in-the-registry nonsense. To preserve saves, you have to show package contents and pull the saves folder out of the old copy, otherwise it's overwritten.
I realise that now, too late to save Chocomatic and his fleet though... :'(
You'll normally find the save under "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\saves".
I've sent it, thanks.
Ugh, sorry :( I'll try to remember to mention OS X/Linux in the future when talking about save compatibility. Just didn't occur to me; was only thinking about whether old saves would be compatible, not what you'd need to do to transfer them over on OS X.
Would it be possible to move the saves folder into a library/application support/fractalsoftworks folder?
This is the industry standard way of placing saves on OSX and would prevent this from happening in the future.
Anyone else having problems getting paid for bounties? I've hunted down quite a few and either get nothing or a fraction of the posted listing.
I'm running a commission from Hegemony. I did one for Luddic (0/100) and got nadda. I did several for Hegemony and I'm getting 1500 - 2700 credits. All of these should have been easy 20k hunts.
It's turning out to not be an easy go of it as a bounty hunter. In one go at it I had 2 20k hunts in PS. I figure from Corvus I can make it if I buy up what supplies I could with the 3300 I have and the little I have from pirate hunting at the start. I set out with ~80 supplies and plenty of fuel. Between the two bounties some needed repairs and the trip to EE I ended up with no supplies and about 8700 credits. Well short of the 40k I was expecting. Those help wanted signs need to come with the disclaimer that you might not get paid in full ::)
It's a bug. Hotfix soon.
... with the number of hotfixes I've had to do for this seemingly minor release, I won't say no.
Yay! I love the update thus far; haven't gotten to play it much past reading the patch notes and taking a brief whirl, but it looks good. I'll have my son try it later and see if Easy is Easy Enough but it definitely feels a lot better from here :)
Yay! I love the update thus far; haven't gotten to play it much past reading the patch notes and taking a brief whirl, but it looks good. I'll have my son try it later and see if Easy is Easy Enough but it definitely feels a lot better from here :)
I'd love to know how that goes!
Reports indicate that XXXXXX was killed in an incident unrelated to the bounty posting....
Right after i just killed the guy with my transponder on.... this is the 4th time i got jew'd out of my payday so far.
And yes i've triple checked it... transponder on... even an allied fleet nearby this time, but not in the fight.
Really killing my early game, trying to work up some credits.
Wonder what caused it.
Did something other than hotfixing happen with RC5?
Because for the first time since I moved everything over to this machine I've had to put my key in to start SS.
.....And then you try to run a procurement mission, probably for the pirates faction itself, and a raiding party spawns as soon as you enter hyperspace and attacks you. If you run away, you only lose a few rep, whatever. But, if your fleet is too large/slow to flee, you have no choice but to fight them -- which counts as a hostile action on a non-hostile faction and you lose 50 rep. I had to reload a save from like 3 hours ago to undo that, because I hadn't been saving :\
Am I missing something or is there no system map that shows where the factions are.
I'm trying to buy some fancy ships and I have no idea where to go.
Ugh, sorry :( I'll try to remember to mention OS X/Linux in the future when talking about save compatibility. Just didn't occur to me; was only thinking about whether old saves would be compatible, not what you'd need to do to transfer them over on OS X.
Would it be possible to move the saves folder into a library/application support/fractalsoftworks folder?
This is the industry standard way of placing saves on OSX and would prevent this from happening in the future.
just check the Intel/Map and hover the cursor over a star
Yes, Independents shouldn't be getting into wars with other factions, even if they offer commissions. Like Megas said, it makes them feel like a singular unified entity, rather than a number of small factions.
I think independents & smugglers shouldn't been an faction, i mean they should be everyone for himself
like you attack one independent/smuggler & there should be no reputation drop
...uh, what?
- Fixed issue where if a bounty fleet lost its commander, but wasn't entirely destroyed, the player would still get a bounty for them
Question: I noticed Black Market trade at a "Free Port" (e.g., Port Tse Franchise #3 and Tibicena) does not raise suspicion, meaning it stays at "none". Does this mean no smuggling investigations if I trade at a Black Market with a Free Port? If so, this is nice! I can eat an immediate minor reputation penalty for too much trade, but I do not want an investigation that sends cooperative rep crashing down to inhospitable.
...uh, what?
- Fixed issue where if a bounty fleet lost its commander, but wasn't entirely destroyed, the player would still get a bounty for them
But the bounties are for the commanders. They read that "[faction] authorities on [planet] have posted a bounty for bringing [commander's name], [crime], to justice."
You shouldn't need to destroy the fleet. Only the commander.
Should the bounty notifications be re-written to specify they are for the commander and everyone in their present company?
In any case, how do bounties work, now?
Every time I hunt one down, even one for the faction I've accepted a commission for, I seem to get "Reports indicate that [enemy] was killed in an incident unrelated to the bounty posting."
I tried going to the planet the bounty was first posted by but there's no option I can see to accept it.
Am I not allowed to bounty hunt under commission?
Sorry that wasn't clear - you'd still get a bounty is *someone else* killed the commander, and then you mopped up the now commander-less fleet.Oooooh, okay.
As for not getting any bounties: yeah, that's a bug. The hotfix for it (0.7.1a-RC5) is up.
Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments? Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.You can check that before the battle actually starts, when you first engage the fleet (spot out the star). I had to fight a level 20 Tri-Tachyon Deserter Officer in a Hyperion without any Hyperion of my own, and I destroyed him, so it's not impossible.
possible bug
50000 credit bounty posted is listed as 75000C on my intel screen...
Varda Lim by the tri-tachyon.
Bug? am am neutral with tri-tachyon.
I can click the 75000 bounty and it reads 50000 credit at the top.
Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments? Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.
So you've got an initial tactic, and then a fallback if that doesn't work out. Seems reasonable to me; thoughts?
Did something other than hotfixing happen with RC5?
Because for the first time since I moved everything over to this machine I've had to put my key in to start SS.
Strange, not sure what would cause that. The key is stored in the registry, and the only way this would happen is if the key from the registry failed to validate. But since you presumably entered the same key when it asked for it, and that validated fine... I did ban a couple of keys that were out in the wild, so to speak, but that shouldn't have affected anything with your key.
I just wanna chase bounties and have _one_ faction where accepting a commission with them doesn't result in you eventually being hostile to everyone else.This is pretty much exactly how I'd usually prefer to play.
Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)Some people have no shame or decency...
Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)
Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)
If you enjoyed the game as much as you say, surely $15 is a worthwhile investment of your money?
(Not to mention a reasonable reward to the creator(s) of said work!)
Fixed bug where player would become hostile with "Knights of Ludd" (which aren't in the game) on accepting a Tri-Tachyon commission
Would it be possible to make the Independents excempt from the newly added hostility events between factions? Or at least make it so that for them there's no penalty for being non-hostile with their enemies? I just wanna chase bounties and have _one_ faction where accepting a commission with them doesn't result in you eventually being hostile to everyone else.
Seriously, it's killing my enjoyment with the otherwise awesome patch that the game keeps taking control away from me when all I wanted to do was play the neutral bounty hunter (and getting good gear/ships pretty much requires you to take a commission with someone, give us a truly neutral option dammit!). Can we at least get an option to resign a commission to avoid the punishing rep hits and then re-commission when the random war's ended?
QuoteFixed bug where player would become hostile with "Knights of Ludd" (which aren't in the game) on accepting a Tri-Tachyon commission
It's a bit hard for me to tell which fixes are in which release candidate but I'm playing RC5 and losing rep from TT from going too easy on the Knights of Ludd. I'm going to assume changes posted on Dec. 5th are in a forthcoming release and not in RC5.
Yeah, I think I'll actually turn off independent commissions. For now, to do what you want, don't take on any commissions - you can still get good ships gear from the black market.
The independents I think of sort of like the EU-- even the flag is a bit similar. I don't quite see why they wouldn't have commissions. If you're going to turn off commissions for them, they shouldn't have as much good stuff in their military markets as a way to balance the appeal of playing as an independent.
The pirates military markets are balanced by how hard it is to get in their good graces. The other factions are balanced by having to do commissions to get the military markets.
The pirates military markets are balanced by how hard it is to get in their good graces. The other factions are balanced by having to do commissions to get the military markets.But it's hard to get a good reputation with the independents, and fewer military markets mean much less choice. I think it would balance out in the end.
Yeah, conceptually I think commissions make sense for them. It's more a question of it becoming rather inconvenient to be hostile to them.
"custom":{
"allowsTransponderOffTrade":true,
"offersCommissions":true,
"engagesInHostilities":false,Oooh, so that's why I can't play anymore :(. Welp, cya all another time guys, it was great while it lasted. Cheers ;)Some people have no shame or decency...
Problem with that is, you pick an independent commission, and then you're stuck with not having any faction-level enemies.
In my opinion, "early access" games should be free, you're basically asking people to pay to betatest your game, which is wrong.Yeah right, and you should never pay MMO subcriptions because the game will always continue to evolve, or teachers because you always learn something new everyday, or doctors because you are still going to die someday...
MMOs need steady income for server infrastructure. Teachers and doctors I'm not even going to bother as they're ridiculous comparisons. Last time I checked, a playtester was actually paid to play a game, not the other way around. I know every penny helps development, but 15 to 20 euros is what I'd pay for a finished product. If the game was free to download and play and donations were possible I would have actually donated 5 euros.In my opinion, "early access" games should be free, you're basically asking people to pay to betatest your game, which is wrong.Yeah right, and you should never pay MMO subcriptions because the game will always continue to evolve, or teachers because you always learn something new everyday, or doctors because you are still going to die someday...
(But my remark was less about his choice and more about rubbing it in the face of the developer.)
Alex, could you please tell us the reason behind increasing the sensor profiles for (D) hulls? I think it is really unnecessary to further affirm their status of being the worst ships in the game.
They exist to make pirates easier to fight.
Feedback/bug reports are useful and great, and I appreciate them very much, but no-one is obligated to provide those, and I make every effort to make individual releases playable and enjoyable stand-alone. Plus there's the "minor" point that preorders are what allows the game to exist at all - saying it ought to be free is, in real terms, saying it shouldn't exist.
BTW, I think the problem I've run into most often in .7 was being caught with my transponder offline while not being aware that it was offline. There were some suggestions about that, like an altered fleet circle to indicate its status. Something like that for .2 would be really nice :)I vote for the player color being the old Flashy Happy Green when transponder is on and that new Shady Sneaky Smuggler-like grey when it's off.
Fleet circle should not rely on color to indicate transponder status.
Why? It would be a nice feature if after you accept a commission, your fleet color changes to match (or be a slightly different shade of) the color of your patron faction.
Gameplay reason: make the primary early-game enemy - i.e. pirates - easier to see. Early-game fleet visibility range was an issue.
(I've been play testing as a smuggler/pirate for ideological reasons since the game falsely portrays them as bloodthirsty raiders when in fact they're just a separate polity whose pluralistic philosophy threatens regimes like the loathed authoritarian diktat or the totalitarian church)This is why would-be pirates who want the best gear enlist at their <major faction of choice>'s military and act as pirates to their enemies. If they join with so-called pirates, all they get is junk and enmity from everyone. In Starsector, there is no meaningful difference between pirate and privateer aside from the military market you can shop at.
Hey that's not fair! It makes it even harder to be a pirate or smuggler :) We accept, nay approve, of our own faction trying to abort us as soon as we start the game because only the strong deserve to survive, but enough is enough:
As a pirate or smuggler you rely more than other factions on stealth, yet all our ships are now the least stealthy. Our shielded cargo holds are now canceled out by the D sensor profile. You need that for going dark when you bring contraband into a market for pirate missions. Lorewise it's also hard to imagine why pirates wouldn't put all their resources into stealth since their prosperity and indeed survival depends on it with the whole sector arrayed against them.
Perhaps* people who have problems either getting jumped by pirates or not being able to catch any just aren't good enough at SS yet. There is stealth, there are terrain effects, there are ally battles. When you're weak, it isn't hard to join chases with police fleets if you want to fight pirates to get XP, or stick close to safe areas and patrols if you want to avoid them. SS has a real, lovely challenge at the beginning with delicious complexity and reverses. Why can't people just think critically, scheme, and machinate better instead of whinging for easier fodder? I know a lot of people complain about difficulty, but at least one person really, really likes that difficulty and nigh perverse challenge.
(I've been play testing as a smuggler/pirate for ideological reasons since the game falsely portrays them as bloodthirsty raiders when in fact they're just a separate polity whose pluralistic philosophy threatens regimes like the loathed authoritarian diktat or the totalitarian church)
But yea re: fleeing pirates, no faction should give you a rep hit for fleeing battle. I can't explain why; just that it's like fried eggs with the flavour of strawberries. Seems out of kilter.
*definitely
Really, the only thing I see that needs to be fixed here is to make regular non-degraded hulls available for purchase in pirate ports on occasion -- so a player pirate can pick those up as he goes, and perhaps even start out with one (rather than a D-hull) on the basis of being a cut above the rest. The "elite" pirates are noble browncoats who care more about personal freedoms and independence against increasingly totalitarian regimes,
This is why would-be pirates who want the best gear enlist at their <major faction of choice>'s military and act as pirates to their enemies. If they join with so-called pirates, all they get is junk and enmity from everyone. In Starsector, there is no meaningful difference between pirate and privateer aside from the military market you can shop at.
possible bug
50000 credit bounty posted is listed as 75000C on my intel screen...
Varda Lim by the tri-tachyon.
Bug? am am neutral with tri-tachyon.
I can click the 75000 bounty and it reads 50000 credit at the top.
It's a bug - fixed, thank you. The actual bounty amount is the higher one.Are you going to build in any sanity checks for some of the bounty fleet admiral assignments? Taking on a bit pile of Tri-Tach jerks only to find out their Admiral is in a Medusa or some phase frigate that's literally uncatchable in a pursuit scenario (with a level 20 officer they can often traverse the map without leaving phase for more than a few flickers) is bit of a sucker punch with the current binary mechanic wherein only the flagship matters for determining whether you get paid.
I've run into similar stuff in playtesting and the solution has been to make sure you take them out early on in the battle before they run. It's harder, but also mixes up the things you actually need to do in battle. So I'm not entirely sure this is something that needs to be sanity-checked or fixed - just something that requires an adjustment in tactics to deal with.
If that gets to a pursuit scenario, that's basically a loss condition... well, not quite, even then. You could harry them instead (to avoid a long and pointless pursuit) and if you catch them enough times and harry their CR down, they should stand and fight eventually. Or crash-mothball when they flee and become easily catchable. Or not crash-mothball and explode from critical malfunctions. This would get more expensive with all the emergency burns and such, but if it's a big bounty, it's probably still worth it.
So you've got an initial tactic, and then a fallback if that doesn't work out. Seems reasonable to me; thoughts?
Really, the only thing I see that needs to be fixed here is to make regular non-degraded hulls available for purchase in pirate ports on occasion -- so a player pirate can pick those up as he goes, and perhaps even start out with one (rather than a D-hull) on the basis of being a cut above the rest. The "elite" pirates are noble browncoats who care more about personal freedoms and independence against increasingly totalitarian regimes,
I'm not sure how much terrain can solve this. Imagine something like an end-game bounty battle where cruisers or even capitals are legitimately being deployed by both sides. Even when they have a Paragon on the field, the enemy Admiral might be a level 20 officer commanding from an Afflictor, which depending on how the AI feels like flying it is pretty likely to live through the main battle and survive a pursuit scenario, probably either by itself or with some other phase frigates and such. The heavy duty fleet you brought for the primary battle can't and shouldn't be able to chase down a handful of burn 10 frigates, and any scenario where it can probably just means the AI is making unnecessary mistakes or doesn't understand some new game mechanic. Of course, as it currently stands you can't park your cruisers and split off with your own fast movers for an exhilarating chase sequence, so instead what happens is that if the enemy Admiral happened to be one of those escaping frigates then you just don't get paid for wiping out a deserter's band the size of a system defense fleet (or sometimes you do, but only because the AI flew back into your fleet of its own accord for no discernible reason, which isn't really a satisfying way to achieve your goals). "Destroy this large enemy fleet" is a very different job from "hunt down this fast moving enemy frigate" and you probably shouldn't be able to be good at both with the same fleet, but sometimes you come to do one and end up having to do the other and you don't have any way to switch fleets on the fly.
A simple, short-term fix might just be putting the Admiral into the largest non-civilian hull in their fleet. Later on, when you add more detailed mechanics around pursuit etc, you can look at adding more depth to admiral assignments.
I just got punished -5 for not being hostile with the independents from Hegemony. I thought the idea was you didn't have to pick only one. And I am being punished so frequently I don't have a chance to run around the galaxy picking fights with every single other faction to maintain my standing with one.
I feel like something has to be wrong with smuggling investigations. A while ago I incurred an investigation after picking up a couple of AM blasters and disregarded it because it's just a pair of guns, who cares. Later the investigation hit me with an about 100 point penalty, breaking my almost cooperative relations and my commission, but I was able to load just far enough back to burndrive over and pay a big ass bribe. More recently, I incurred another investigation after offloading 40 units of drugs and tried to go pay the bribe, but a patrol decided to orbit the respective planet for at least an ingame month. I eventually loaded back and went off to do other stuff before returning, where I had the choice of eating a 124 point penalty or paying a bribe of 192,000 credits.
It seems that investigations that find you guilty always set you to about -30 relations and always entail absolutely enormous bribes. I could understand if it was a neutral faction and I was drowning their black markets in drugs, weapons, and organs, but in this case the most I'm doing is occasionally buying the odd rare weapon or offloading some drugs looted from pirates and with a faction that I'm cooperative with and hold a commission. Honestly, the smuggling investigation system right now feels just as random and arbitrary as the old boarding system and likewise only results in frustration.
I just got punished -5 for not being hostile with the independents from Hegemony. I thought the idea was you didn't have to pick only one. And I am being punished so frequently I don't have a chance to run around the galaxy picking fights with every single other faction to maintain my standing with one.
You're limited to one, and it opens up lots of hostilities. The point is that you pick one, rather than it happening through investigations and such. But once you pick a faction, yeah, that's how it's going to go.
Shouldn't this punishment be based on the actual diplomatic relations of the faction you get a commission with?
Note that if you do attack them, you'll recover some standing with the independents once hostilities end.
I'm not sure what you're saying, why do you need to be come hostile with "everyone"? Unless you're joining the faction at a time when it's hostile with everyone, I suppose.
... thinking about just making hostility automatic, though, i.e. w/o making you need to hunt down that faction's fleet. Have a commission, and the other faction is at war with yours? Hostile!
Taking penalties for lack of hostilities is probably lesser of two evils than getting wiped if you are deep in friendly-turned-hostile space.
On the other hand, that might lead to an uncommon case where a previously peaceful defense fleet or three turns on you and attacks before you react, possibly before you get the news, if you are elsewhere. (For example, Sindrian fleets gang-up on you suddenly just as you are ready to shop at Sindria.)
True but at two factions a piece that's -10 at a regular interval and enough to reduce you from getting any of the equipment benefits you opted into getting.
I just don't think there's enough benefit outside of equipment for picking a side. Maybe if the tariffs were less stiff (that would make up for the measly 300 per ship they toss at my begging hands) or if I got military weapons at a reduced rate... there needs to be some extra benefit if I am going to sacrifice all of my sanity tracking down fleets to continually attack.
That would be convenient, usually, if you are grinding enemies in your faction's system. On the other hand, that might lead to an uncommon case where a previously peaceful defense fleet or three turns on you and attacks before you react, possibly before you get the news, if you are elsewhere. (For example, Sindrian fleets gang-up on you suddenly just as you are ready to shop at Sindria.)
Perhaps the safe option is to let player opt into the hostilities, so player does not rage quit if big fleets turn killer at a bad place. Taking penalties for lack of hostilities is probably lesser of two evils than getting wiped if you are deep in friendly-turned-hostile space.
Perhaps player v faction hostilities just start on a timer? 10 days or something?
e.g. "You have declared loyalty for <faction>. <other_faction> will actively expel you from their controlled space in <number of days>".
Smuggling investigation penalties sound like they should scale with market size.
I mean, it's hard to imagine the central Hegemony authorities really caring about even seriously destabilizing smuggling on some random size 3 station (probably happens every other week), and in the larger scheme of things the effect isn't all that significant.
But if you somehow smuggle enough to get the full 5 point penalty on Chicomoztoc and get convicted of it, you should get declared enemy of the state and go straight to vengeful status instantly.
Perhaps player v faction hostilities just start on a timer? 10 days or something?
e.g. "You have declared loyalty for <faction>. <other_faction> will actively expel you from their controlled space in <number of days>".
That sounds good.
It has already been discussed a dozen pages ago but I'd like a way to tone down or maybe filter the explosions.
Ooh, I'd really like for random shakedowns to have a comeback, with some new shiny hullmods that reduce sensor profile. Would make sense to have a fleet dedicated to stealth, no? Possibly even have a whole faction dedicated to stealth. (yes, there's phase frigates) But I'd like to see a greater variation to the stealthy line of ships. Currently we only have 3 phase ships, 2 frigates and a cruiser. Maybe at least expand the lineup to a whole fighter to capital series?We have phase destroyers missing. Capitals? Dunno. Capitals don't seem to have enough mobility to disengage in time - life or death matter to a phase ship.
@ Gothars: Would dropping relations down to inhospitable satisfy your faction? If not, then this is useless since you still lose reputation with your faction. Your idea would be good, if inhospitable is enough to keep the boss happy.
Random shakedowns were aggravating to say the least; I am glad to see them gone! The current way is better if you really need to sneak.
I'm not sure what you're saying, why do you need to be come hostile with "everyone"? Unless you're joining the faction at a time when it's hostile with everyone, I suppose.
... thinking about just making hostility automatic, though, i.e. w/o making you need to hunt down that faction's fleet. Have a commission, and the other faction is at war with yours? Hostile!
If you lose a small amount of rep black market trading, that means they 'caught' you and they know who you are.
after the hostility events and the general amnesties, your relations with the formerly hostile factions should drop back to merely suspicious.
Perhaps player v faction hostilities just start on a timer? 10 days or something?
e.g. "You have declared loyalty for <faction>. <other_faction> will actively expel you from their controlled space in <number of days>".
That sounds good.
Hm, what I don't like about it is that you have no choice in the matter anymore. Sometimes I care more about doing my own stuff than participating in my faction's silly (or scary) wars, which would be hard with that change. Bounties, missions or explorations that lead me into the space of the other_faction (which is in some cases almost everywhere) will become very hard to reach. This is especially true if your fleet is still small (you can easily get commissioned while in the starter frigate) and you can't really trade blows with other_faction's patrols yet. And that, after all, is the time where you most need the bounties/missions to grow.
I was thinking, maybe it would be enough if you get automatically dropped to "inhospitable" with other_faction, at which point your relationship to your faction is stable. You couldn't trade with the others anymore, but still traverse their space without being outright killed. Or you can actively decide to attack and take it to "hostile", at which point your faction might "welcome you to the war" with a reputation bonus (once per war). (Rewards are always more fun than punishments.)
It would also make sense for inhospitable (and suspicious?) factions to make random inspections even if your transponder is on (without the old waiting bar please) so smuggling in their space gets a bit more exciting.
Hm, what I don't like about it is that you have no choice in the matter anymore. Sometimes I care more about doing my own stuff than participating in my faction's silly (or scary) wars, which would be hard with that change. Bounties, missions or explorations that lead me into the space of the other_faction (which is in some cases almost everywhere) will become very hard to reach. This is especially true if your fleet is still small (you can easily get commissioned while in the starter frigate) and you can't really trade blows with other_faction's patrols yet. And that, after all, is the time where you most need the bounties/missions to grow.
I was thinking, maybe it would be enough if you get automatically dropped to "inhospitable" with other_faction, at which point your relationship to your faction is stable. You couldn't trade with the others anymore, but still traverse their space without being outright killed. Or you can actively decide to attack and take it to "hostile", at which point your faction might "welcome you to the war" with a reputation bonus (once per war). (Rewards are always more fun than punishments.)
It would also make sense for inhospitable (and suspicious?) factions to make random inspections even if your transponder is on (without the old waiting bar please) so smuggling in their space gets a bit more exciting.
A stupid question, but how can I change faction commission? I am with hegemony (have around 90 reputation), but want to change it to Independent (with witch i have 100), so how can I do it? Do i need to attack hegemony?
One potential problem is that if you're smuggling stuff that's not illegal, but you're just planning to sell on the black market, contraband scans won't do anything to deter you.Cargo inspections could be used to catch the player smuggling goods out of a market rather than into it; the local patrol knows that the player purchased X credits of stuff on the open market and the player (is assumed to have) declared Y credits worth of specified (legal) cargoes that the player had coming into the port and did not sell prior to departure. Patrol scans the cargo bay and finds Z > X + Y credits worth of cargo (using open-market prices as of the time the player left the port, or more likely just using the number of units of cargo rather than the value, possibly with a fudge factor involved and maybe some allowance for engagements). If Z is only a little greater than X + Y (say, 10% or less), that's maybe a little suspicious, but nothing to be too concerned about. If Z is a lot greater than X + Y (say, between 10% and 50%, then that's a strong indication that the player is involved in smuggling activity and will make it more likely for the player's activities to be investigated in the (near) future, but perhaps not enough that the patrol is (legally) entitled to take any immediate overt action against the player (either demanding payment of tariffs or attacking the player). If Z is enormously greater than X + Y (say, greater than 50%), the patrol is legally entitled to (attempt to) collect either the unpaid tariffs or the illegally-acquired cargo (i.e. the patrol gets to demand money and attack the player if payment is refused, and the player gets flagged as likely being engaged in smuggling activity at this planet). And maybe for any of this you can (try to) bribe the patrol to go bother someone else and not report the transgression, or at least understate it, resulting in a lower likelihood of suffering an investigation for the smuggling.
Got to "C:\Program Files (x86)\Fractal Softworks\Starsector\starsector-core\data\config\", open the file "settings.json" with a text editor and find "enableShipExplosionWhiteout":true. Change it to false. Voilà :)
The bribe amount sounds way wrong. It's supposed to max out at 100k credits when the investigation has a maxed out chance of starting/finding you guilty. If it's just a minor BM purchase here and there, the bribe shouldn't rise much about 10k.
Checked into it a bit - looks like there's a bug where it wasn't being properly capped, but still, to get to 192k credits, the probability of an investigation (i.e. suspicion level) had to go to almost 200%. Which would require selling a *lot* of stuff on the black market, or for the market to be really small. So I suppose it's possible that this is a legitimate outcome - if you sold 40 drugs at a premium to a very small market, then this might have happened, but it still sounds unlikely. I just tried selling 40 drugs to a size 5 market, and the investigation chance from that was 20%. so to get to 190% or so? I suppose it is possible, with a market with a lower trade volume and high stability. Are you sure that black market ship purchases and such weren't involved?
Anyway, the major difference in effect from selling the same amount on a small vs large market is rather hidden from the player... hm. Something I'll need to look at, for sure. Right now smuggling investigations are there so that there's a real risk to smuggling (plus, sneaking into a market to pay a bribe can be fun, though the issue there is it just interrupts whatever you were doing, and that can be annoying, hence the long duration); but might be able to find another way of accomplishing the same thing.
I've been thinking about the "transponder on smuggling" stuff - considering inspections when there's any suspicion of smuggling. Adding "or inhospitable" to that might make sense, too.
Customs also charging tolls - once you're being watched, that is - might do the job, though.
This is starting to look like a new bug; the significant majority of officers I've seen available so far have had aggressive personalities. My first officer has hit level 20 and I have yet to hire a second despite hitting up every planet I see because they have consistently had unusable personalities. In fact, I think I've only seen one steady personality on this entire playthrough (who I didn't hire, because was level 7 with bad skills).
This is starting to look like a new bug; the significant majority of officers I've seen available so far have had aggressive personalities. My first officer has hit level 20 and I have yet to hire a second despite hitting up every planet I see because they have consistently had unusable personalities. In fact, I think I've only seen one steady personality on this entire playthrough (who I didn't hire, because was level 7 with bad skills).
That sounds odd, hmm. Tri-Tachyon markets should have a roughly 2:2:1 ratio for cautious/steady/aggressive, with a few timid sprinkled in. Hegemony is a bit more even between steady and aggressive. Not seeing anything that looks off in the code that picks personalities, and it hasn't changed recently/has worked in the past. Possibly just bad luck?
I'm also playing Tri-Tachyon for this playthough, so I've been mostly hitting up their stations and Independents. It's an odd outcome for sure, but I've probably still only seen maybe ten officers in my playthrough so far so I guess I'll chalk this one up to the joys of small sample sizes. If I make it through another fives hours of the same I'll make another post.
Thanks for taking the time to check, anyhow!
Happy to help! In case it wasn't implicit, I'm very happy with the game as it is and with the direction it's moving in the future.
SpoilerHere's a question I have about a long-term design goal. What mechanics do you see around the player absorbing losses in a more complete version of the game? Right now I'm a fairly shameless savescummer because loss is so devastating. Unless you have a significant nest-egg banked or a spare fleet in storage, one wipe can be a practical game reset in terms of material progression. Even if it's not something so extreme, with the current scarcity of ships and equipment, losing a high-end ship like a Tempest comes with no guarantee that you'll get to own one again in the foreseeable future, meaning you might be permanently out a gameplay option. I don't want to play like this, but I'll often F9 over something as trivial as a Lasher with a Light Needler on it blowing up just because of how long it will take to find a new one (though nowadays I mostly just avoid putting rare weapons on frigates, which might be the intended dynamic).
The game that Starsector seems to draw the closest parallels to is Mount & Blade, another game I enjoyed. Getting a well-developed army wiped out was a frustrating experience that often undid hours of work, but I would usually stick with the outcome because there was a clear, viable path towards recovery. The player escaped captivity with their horse and gear, meaning they kept a significant portion of their material progression and were capable of winning small encounters by themselves (which was necessary, since training new recruits usually meant doing all the work for a few battles) and you always knew you would be able to find more recruits and get back what you had lost. Similarly, it was annoying when one of your elite cavalrymen got themselves killed in a trivial battle mopping up river bandits or some such, but it was nothing worth quickloading over since none of your troops were irreplaceable, even if some of them took some work to develop
Nothing's strictly irreplaceable in the current version of Starsector, but plenty of things are currently rare enough that the difference becomes rather fine. In a game where the player generally isn't in direct control of whether or not any individual ship survives a battle, this can lead to either excessive frustration for the player, or players being driven to play in ways that violate the core gameplay experience. Restarting a player who is already struggling with the early game difficulty curve (as demonstrated by them dying) in a shuttle almost seems like some kind of cruel joke.
To make another analogy, it seems like the game is meant to handle loss like XCOM; sometimes your best soldier dies, and it's a bad thing with meaningful consequences, but you deal with it and keep on going and working around loss is a core part of the game. Right now it works like Baldur's Gate, where your favorite party member dying is essentially a Game Over condition that results in your most recent save being loaded. I want to play a Starsector where sometimes I lose ships and battles and that loss becomes part of the narrative for my story, and I'm pretty sure that's also how you want people to play Starsector, so I'm curious as to what your plans are to make that part of the experience a bit more sustainable in the future.
I'm imagining industry might tie into this (ie, you find the blueprint for [cool thing] and gain the ability to make them yourself at some significant cost, so losing a fun toy doesn't mean it's gone forever) and I understand if I'm asking too far forward for there to be any concrete answers, but it seems almost certain that this is something you have thoughts on.[close]
in some the price supplies can be horridly inflated, going for upwards of 400c.I would love to see such places. I saw a few at the upper 200s, in which I sell as much as I can spare. This is the kind of opportunistic trade I exploit. No need to bother with commodities that do not maintain your war fleet, aside from maybe organs.
?Improved autofire logic when using beam weapons for point defense (less likely to keep turning beam on and off vs a fast moving target)Beam PD is more effective than ever. Tactical lasers with IPDAI are extremely effective, noticeably more than before. Only reasons to use alternatives is lack of Tactical Lasers, lack of OP to support the Adv. Gyros and IPDAI hullmods, or flux cost is too much.
Why remove rep decay? This seems like a good way to forgive/encourage experimentation by the player. Unless you read the forums religiously, you won't know all the rules about factions and relationships; neither do I think that the game should explicitly tell you all these things. Leaving it opaque is fine, but the decay is a mechanic to make sure it isn't too punishing.
I don't think it was actually doing that, though. So in my view it's more cleanup of stuff that's in there but, if we're being honest, that I've completely forgotten even existed. Not opposed to possibly bringing this back in some other form eventually, though.
sidenote on the gryphon's ability: instead of only 1 use, you could give it a sizable cooldown that is multiplied by how many missiles it replaced. So first use is 'free' but if it replaced all the missiles, a very long cooldown. This might even make it easier on the AI as an 'early' use wouldn't get as much cooldown.
Not sure if faster repairs means less supplies used or proportionately faster supply drain over time.Sadly this is the latter version and it sucks, especially with Hyper storms and such
I still think players should have room to break with a faction. Commissions seem to make you an official member of a faction, which makes me wonder why there are privateers in the game as privateers are basically hired pirates. Shouldn't there be some 'sneakier' way to work with a faction, via a temporary contract or something -- 4 to 8 months, still limited to one faction, still gaining rep and credits, but maybe not access to anything over favorable? Also, the ability to downgrade from a commission to a temporary contract would be great. A little rep loss (-10 or 20) and if you break the contract before it ends, faction goes inhospitable.
Large missile weapons are super rare in my game. I went to like 6 different systems and checked ALL the markets and out of all of them only Volturn, of all places, had two Cyclone reaper launchers.Aren't there normally loads in military markets? Time to take that commission so you can more easily equip your black market cruiser I suspect.
That is all I can find; the two new large missile weapons are nonexistant thus far. Granted, the Cyclone launcher is fine but still! =/
Just remembered:Quote?Improved autofire logic when using beam weapons for point defense (less likely to keep turning beam on and off vs a fast moving target)Beam PD is more effective than ever. Tactical lasers with IPDAI are extremely effective, noticeably more than before. Only reasons to use alternatives is lack of Tactical Lasers, lack of OP to support the Adv. Gyros and IPDAI hullmods, or flux cost is too much.
officers are really neat, but a bit crazy. i don't mind the actual skill buffs they give to the ships, but they seem too common in "low-order" fleets. i just encountered a random picket fleet wandering through space that had 6+ officers over level 10, and i think 3-4 of them were level 20. at least to me that seems a little silly, besides the problem of having huge problems gauging what is possible for me to engage, it's a little weird lore-wise; at least as i understood it, a level 20 officer should be pretty rare, just living through so many battles must be a huge rarity, plus who even can say if most people are even capable of getting to that level? seems to me like it'd be better to have officers be more common and less skilled, except perhaps in huge warfleets that can of course pick and choose their soldiers from the entire faction, like system defense fleets, massive supply fleets, etc. discarding all that though, level 20 officers are incredibly ludicrously powerful, so making them rarer might help players climb the ladder, and also make engaging non-pirate fleets less of a horrific gamble.
Might be more than that, I also have found big missiles to be extremely rare. In my 7.1 playthrough I have seen three in total, and that is while actively looking for them and having access to the Heg military markets from early on.I found 7 MIRV in the first miltary market I looked (Port Franchise #3). Maybe Hegemony just doesn't have very many large missiles on offer or I am just lucky.
Possible. Are there any Mastery Epoch vessel has a large missile mount? I can recall none.You can't recall any because there aren't any. Only the Apogee, Aurora, Gryphon, Conquest, and Astral have large missile mounts.
Possible. Are there any Mastery Epoch vessel has a large missile mount? I can recall none.What is a Mastery Epoch vessel? that's not a phrase I have seen before here.
What is a Mastery Epoch vessel? that's not a phrase I have seen before here.Mastery Epoc ships are the "low-tech" ships.
Yeah, it's old lore from the game's former writer Ivaylo, not reflected in the game proper. I'm not sure if it can even be considered canon anymore.I'd argue that it can't really be considered canon anymore. For starters, as far as I know the Mastery Epoch is no longer referenced anywhere within the game, and searching descriptions.csv for 'mastery' didn't turn anything up. Then you have the description of the Hammerhead making things somewhat blurry, as it would be redundant, though not wrong, to describe the vessel as a 'Core Epoch midline destroyer' if Core Epoch implied midline and midline implied Core Epoch. You also have the Sunder, which at least in my opinion is a midline destroyer (visual appearances match midline, armament of mixed ballistics and energy is typical of midline, though the flux capacity and dissipation is perhaps a bit on the high side for a midline ship of its armament and the defenses couple the thin armor of high tech ships with the inefficient shields of low tech ships instead of the more typical midline approach of moderately efficient shields coupled with average armor), but which is explicitly stated to be an (early) Expansion Epoch design; if the Sunder is midline, then midline very definitely cannot imply Core Epoch, though Core Epoch could still imply midline (but, of course, the Gryphon and Heron cast doubt upon that).
But for example the Gryphon, which is visually a midline design, is now described as being used just before the Gates collapsed, which would put it in the Expansion-epoch. I don't know if that's a mistake or if David is throwing those old concepts over board.The Heron is another example of this; it is by appearances, stats, system (midline drones like the Gemini or Atlas rather than high tech drones like the Apogee, Astral, or Tempest), and armament a midline ship, but as the embodiment of a doctrinal shift which was interrupted by the Collapse it'd be somewhat odd for it to be a Core Epoch design since the Collapse ended the Expansion Epoch.
for purposes of faction loyalty having all three branches of the lud count separately is killing me. That's -15 at a regular interval until you find all three branches and hit them. You would think that by attacking one the other two would become hostile with you.
for purposes of faction loyalty having all three branches of the lud count separately is killing me. That's -15 at a regular interval until you find all three branches and hit them. You would think that by attacking one the other two would become hostile with you.
Yeah, adjusting how this all works is very much a TODO item for 0.7.2a.
Spoiled because I don't think that a discussion of whether or not the tech level-Epoch equivalencies are still canonical is really appropriate for this thread.SpoilerYeah, it's old lore from the game's former writer Ivaylo, not reflected in the game proper. I'm not sure if it can even be considered canon anymore.I'd argue that it can't really be considered canon anymore. For starters, as far as I know the Mastery Epoch is no longer referenced anywhere within the game, and searching descriptions.csv for 'mastery' didn't turn anything up. Then you have the description of the Hammerhead making things somewhat blurry, as it would be redundant, though not wrong, to describe the vessel as a 'Core Epoch midline destroyer' if Core Epoch implied midline and midline implied Core Epoch. You also have the Sunder, which at least in my opinion is a midline destroyer (visual appearances match midline, armament of mixed ballistics and energy is typical of midline, though the flux capacity and dissipation is perhaps a bit on the high side for a midline ship of its armament and the defenses couple the thin armor of high tech ships with the inefficient shields of low tech ships instead of the more typical midline approach of moderately efficient shields coupled with average armor), but which is explicitly stated to be an (early) Expansion Epoch design; if the Sunder is midline, then midline very definitely cannot imply Core Epoch, though Core Epoch could still imply midline (but, of course, the Gryphon and Heron cast doubt upon that).But for example the Gryphon, which is visually a midline design, is now described as being used just before the Gates collapsed, which would put it in the Expansion-epoch. I don't know if that's a mistake or if David is throwing those old concepts over board.The Heron is another example of this; it is by appearances, stats, system (midline drones like the Gemini or Atlas rather than high tech drones like the Apogee, Astral, or Tempest), and armament a midline ship, but as the embodiment of a doctrinal shift which was interrupted by the Collapse it'd be somewhat odd for it to be a Core Epoch design since the Collapse ended the Expansion Epoch.
The Monitor is another ship that casts doubt upon the Epoch-tech equivalency, as it is a more-or-less midline design whose description can be read in a way that implies it to be a post-Collapse and thus post-Expansion Epoch design.[close]
Spoiled because I don't think that a discussion of whether or not the tech level-Epoch equivalencies are still canonical is really appropriate for this thread.
Does INDUSTRY do anything yet? or am i a box of rocks that doesnt notice anything?
I'm finding it really quite difficult to get weak pirate spawns to slaughter around the starter system.... I just cant find ANY :/
Yeah, it's old lore from the game's former writer Ivaylo, not reflected in the game proper. I'm not sure if it can even be considered canon anymore.Thanks.
Back then it was:
Mastery-epoch = low-tech
Core-epoch = midline
Expansion-epoch = high-tech
But for example the Gryphon, which is visually a midline design, is now described as being used just before the Gates collapsed, which would put it in the Expansion-epoch. I don't know if that's a mistake or if David is throwing those old concepts over board.
Is there any way to tell how far out the system bounty range extends in hyperspace? I just had an absolutely epic battle that would have netted me 30k+ if the payment triggered, instead I'm left trying to pick up the pieces of my fleet with zero cash :( Gravity wells from the issuing system (Eos Exodus) were close enough to be seen on the same screen as the battle site--the battle didn't have the grav well backdrop though.
Game is improved greatly during 2015, but still same two words to describe vanilla campaign mechanics:
1) Boring - if you want hull A and weapon B, relax, take a deep breath, go to 2
2) Frustrating - sorry mate, you hull and weapon is in another station!
With addition of officers and "military comissions" one more word is added: Illogical.
"Military market" with reputation and comission restriction is great addition to sandbox style game where player can purchase nuclear weapons and ever people on "black market".
Civilization is collapsed, entire worlds struggle to survive, starvation is pretty common event, pirates fly around and killing everyone on spotreapers are coming
sorry commander shepard, please grind reputation for 120 minutes first!
Really?
Is there any way to tell how far out the system bounty range extends in hyperspace? I just had an absolutely epic battle that would have netted me 30k+ if the payment triggered, instead I'm left trying to pick up the pieces of my fleet with zero cash :( Gravity wells from the issuing system (Eos Exodus) were close enough to be seen on the same screen as the battle site--the battle didn't have the grav well backdrop though.
There isn't, and yeah, that's a bit of a problem. IIRC it's 2000 units, or one map grid cell.
Really?
Buying nuclear weapons on the black market is highly illegal and if the local authorities get proof that you did it they will ban you from their stations and their fleets will try to kill you.
There are serious cracks in civilization, but it's not all gone yet and the people trying to hold things together in the apocalypse aren't *** around.
Small CREDIT icon that flickers in somewhere when you'll get paid if you fight someone off. Preferably with the faction icon of whoever holds the bounty.
Sounds like a good idea.
Preferably with durations measured in days.Small CREDIT icon that flickers in somewhere when you'll get paid if you fight someone off. Preferably with the faction icon of whoever holds the bounty.
Sounds like a good idea.
If the mouse-over tooltip could show how much bounty a fleet is worth at the given moment/position that would be tremendously helpful. Even in-system you often don't notice when a system bounty runs out or a new one starts.
Any update on next 0.7.2v?
work in some "bonus" things.
Mudskipper variant hulls with phasing cloaks!work in some "bonus" things.Oh my, when you say something like that I immediately have ten voices in my head who shout over each other "Waaah, could he mean sinking ships/codex overhaul/enlarge llustrations/fighterascarrierweapons/operation time/station battles/yadayada...!"
I might have missed this being mentioned - its quite minor - the Hound Luddic variant is missing the [Luddic Path] in the name.
Another small request--it'd be nice to be able to click on a notification and be taken to the full story in the Log screen, regardless of what filter is set on the Intel tab. Depending on how I'm playing at the moment, I either have the map filter set to Prices or Bounties, so it's a little annoying having to switch to All in order to read an event description. Not a huge deal, but something that comes up every few minutes while playing.Seconding this. Kept forgot to suggest it.
Another small request--it'd be nice to be able to click on a notification and be taken to the full story in the Log screen, regardless of what filter is set on the Intel tab. Depending on how I'm playing at the moment, I either have the map filter set to Prices or Bounties, so it's a little annoying having to switch to All in order to read an event description. Not a huge deal, but something that comes up every few minutes while playing.Seconding this. Kept forgot to suggest it.
Quick random thought: I bet at least half of the complaints about civilian ships being made unattractive by their "civilian grade" hullmod would be silenced if the mechanic was reversed and military ships would instead get a "military grade" mod providing a sensor boost.
It does feel like people may be overestimating the impact of it, especially on larger fleets. Probably a consequence of the "actual sensor range is something like a log scale of the strength/profile", which isn't explained very well. Need to explain this better somewhere, I think. Perhaps right on the civ-grade hullmod's tooltip. Hmm. Just not sure about how to phrase it so that it's sufficiently clear and doesn't "break character" too much.
I wonder if it'd raise different questions (i.e. why do the numbers for each ship keep changing as you add/remove ships?)
If you MUST add difficultly through stealth/senor penalties, do the following: add a penalty based on the fleet point RATIO of military to civilian. For example, if you have one frigate and one civilian, there's is little to no penalty to your sensors. If you have one frigate and ten mudskippers, the penalty is maxed out.
That's pretty much exactly how it works out given the formulas involved.
By the way, could you briefly explain what the enemy sensor "radar rings" actually mean.
really? Then I literally have no idea how sensor profiles work? That might be a problem? Perhaps someone could post a sensor profile graph showing the log scale of military ships versus civilian ships versus 50/50 mixed ships???
There are two problems I have with the sensor mechanic - one is minor and down to preference/play style, the other is a fair bit bigger of a deal.
Firstly the minor: You can't pick your targets any more.
So you are limited to targets which are "in transit" which costs a lot more fuel and supplies (and time!) to locate as you cannot see anything that isn't right next to you, meaning you are more dependant on finding a good target, which is much harder to find as you can't go near where most of the targets are.
As to not being able to display sensor/profile values for individual ships, why not?
Those numbers must be available somewhere otherwise how does the game come up with the values to add to the detection ranges in first place? Every ship will have a base value somewhere for how much it adds to those two numbers above just for existing.
It will be clear and simple, as long as player dont have any destroyers (or civilian ships) profile defined by just number of frigates:I don't like this at all. why should a fleet of 9 frigates have less profile than a single Hammerhead? It's a set of arbitrary rules relating to not taking a particular type of ship rather than emergent gameplay like the current system.
I can see sensor ranges change as I change my fleet, but I have no idea how it works. Nor do I have any idea how much a given ship will help/hinder me in that regard.
There is no indication on the screen of how far I can see or be seen, save for a pair of numbers for the ranges. But without anything visually telling me how far that is it is not of much use.
There is no clear indication of what anything does save terrain, and the whole thing is pretty confusing tbh.
As to not being able to display sensor/profile values for individual ships, why not?
Those numbers must be available somewhere otherwise how does the game come up with the values to add to the detection ranges in first place? Every ship will have a base value somewhere for how much it adds to those two numbers above just for existing.
Literally anything that gives some indication of the relative difference between ship A and ship B would be helpful, and context really wouldn't matter as all it would be is a means to say "this ship can see further than that one".
Hmm. Maybe it would make sense to show the "range" values as a percentage instead. Yeah. 100% sensor range would mean "exactly average for a fleet of your size", under 100% would mean something like "you've got a civ ship or two dragging you down", while over 100% might mean dedicated sensor ships. Yeah. This seems like a good first step regardless of anything else - at least you get an at-a-glance "your sensor stuff is comparatively good or bad" evaluation. And it wouldn't confuse by showing a range number that's not useful aside from self-comparison purposes. Wrote this down.
maybe you could toggle your sensor ring to "threat range" and "sensor range" with threat range determining what range at which fleet size X can probably detect you and sensor range determining at what range you can probably detect fleet size X. You can plug in a fleet size of your choosing depending on the situation.
For example if you are fleet size 5, you are not really worried about fleet size 5, but fleet size 10 would be a problem, so you set your threat range to 10, a ring surrounds your ship. you intuitively know that any signatures outside that ring is bigger than 10, and too be avoided (or investigated).
This makes me think of a drastic simplification of the whole sensor system, where there are only like five sensor/detection ranges. Similar to the discretization that happened to burn speeds a few updates ago. Then you could display the real value at which a fleet of any of the five sensor strengths could detect you/be detected by you.
I wonder if it'd raise different questions (i.e. why do the numbers for each ship keep changing as you add/remove ships?)
Hmm. Maybe it would make sense to show the "range" values as a percentage instead. ... And it wouldn't confuse by showing a range number that's not useful aside from self-comparison purposes. Wrote this down.
<tooltip stuff>This would make things a bit clearer.
That indicates the outer edge of the range at which they can detect you, and is only shown when you're near that range. If you're outside it, they can't see you (yet). If you're inside it, they can see you. You also have to see *them* to get this indicator in the first place.
And would it be a hassle to have a sensor overlay you could activate/toggle on both the campaign and mini maps?
A pair of coloured/shaded circles centered on your fleet - green for how far you can see, red for how far you can be seen.
Space submarine simulator is pretty fun, but it is damn frustrating trying to figure out how to set things up when it's all black-boxy and mysterious. :P
I just want to say that i like the direction the game is going. Feel like a whole new game from the last time i played. I have to say this the biggest bang for my 10 bucks i've gotten in awhile.The issue was addresed already and will be fixed in the next version.
Ran into a bug, I took the tri-tach commission, and they are upset i am friendly with knights of ludd. I installed the latest hot patch.
No patch notes for 0.7.2 yet?
No patch notes for 0.7.2 yet?
Not quite yet :) Thinking about it, though.
Just that two of the same portrait are having roles on the same planet x.x
I already am the kind of person that makes sure all of their officers have different portraits, lol.
Quadruplets?Spoiler(http://i.imgur.com/GxA3inw.jpg)[close]
Maximum reduction is 85%. Damage reduction from stat buffs is applied before armor calculation. Solar Shielding's buff stays the same regardless of armor level. For example, if a 250-damage beam is hitting your normal 500-armor ship, 80% is reduced and the final dps is 50.
With solar shielding, that becomes effectively 225 dps, with 81.6% reduction, for final dps 41.3.
Another small one Alex, the Hegemony Auxiliary Buffalo still has the civ hull mod.
still, would rather have environmental armor shield against flux storms then solar flares,
If thats the case, that made it soooo much more useful. Though, I'd reccomend renaming it to something to tell the player that it does protect against both.still, would rather have environmental armor shield against flux storms then solar flares,
Looking at the code, it actually does protect against both. Not 100% sure if that's just a dev version thing, though.
solar shielding is extremely weak for 10th level feat.So is Omni Shield Emitter, given its exorbitant OP cost and shield arc cut. I post this to mean this needs fixing too.
ever if solar shielding will provide complete immunity to beams, reasonable player wont pick it.If it did that and the hullmod would be common on endgame threats like say, elite Sindrian detachments, that means I need to reconfigure my ships to not use beams. For example, sniper beam Eagle would be ruined, and I would either need to use a configuration more useful against everyone or abandon Eagle and use Dominator instead.
For example, sniper beam Eagle would be ruined, and I would either need to use a configuration more useful against everyone or abandon Eagle and use Dominator instead.Seems reasonable if you ask me.
@ The Soldier: How so? If only beams become victim of immunity, that is yet another strike against beams, and immunity would reduce variety in ships and configurations.Beams have a massive range advantage in the small slots, fairl advantage in medium (they outrange 90% of the weapons in the medium slot), and fall behind a bit in large. Range itself is valuable, and depending on the situation, better than DPS. So there's that.
So for example, don't use beam weapons against ships outfitted with Solar Shielding (might be good to mention when targeting a ship or having a small visual effect on the hull to indicate that Solar Shielding has been fitted, though) until you've stripped away the armor. Doesn't seem very terrible at all if you ask me.That is a problem because that tells me do not use beams. Use more low-tech or midline ships, or fit high-tech shields with nothing but pulse lasers and blasters, which I generally do anyway. In other words, this reduces the variety of viable ships.
I agree that Graviton Beams being kinetic-type is a broken kneecap on top of a spinal cord injury.
Beams don't do hard flux damage to shields, making them very bad vs shields. Graviton Beams do kinetic damage which, combined with beams being considered to do half their DPS for the armor damage reduction calculation, makes them completely worthless vs armor. What are they even supposed to be fired at? They're only good for bullying (D) ships with terrible flux stats.QuoteI agree that Graviton Beams being kinetic-type is a broken kneecap on top of a spinal cord injury.
why? the whole point is that they are long range support weapons, and kinetic is an ideal damage type for support.
it's also unique for energy weapons; though i guess isn't as important as it used to be, since regular weapons don't use ammo anymore.
Beams don't do hard flux damage to shields, making them very bad vs shields. Graviton Beams do kinetic damage, making them worthless vs armor. What are they even supposed to be fired at? They're only good for bullying (D) ships with terrible flux stats.QuoteI agree that Graviton Beams being kinetic-type is a broken kneecap on top of a spinal cord injury.
why? the whole point is that they are long range support weapons, and kinetic is an ideal damage type for support.
it's also unique for energy weapons; though i guess isn't as important as it used to be, since regular weapons don't use ammo anymore.
They're very good at shield pressure against an enemy actually using their weapons, which is why they're a support weapon - they don't get the job done by themselves. That's okay though since you have flux to spare when using them.
Sunder - 2x Graviton beams - 400 DPS vs shields, (600 using ability.)
Against a Balanced-variant Enforcer, that works out to 480 DPS versus 320 dissipation. Even without causing hard flux, it's enough to overwhelm the shields just by themselves. Now, obviously, an Enforcer captain can just drop their shields; but that leaves them up to the Autopulse laser or Tachyon lance or missile mounts or w/e.
Or you could just fire your HEF-boosted Autopulse Laser, overload it in 3 seconds even if it doesn't fire, then punch right through its armor with two HEF-boosted Pulse Lances. Or do 600 Hard Flux DPS with the two Light Needlers you can put on the front ballistic mounts, then move in with the Autopulse. I really don't know why you chose a Sunder, it's probably the worst thing to mount Graviton Beams on. Its energy weapons benefit from being bursty to take full advantage of the HEF, and it has access to Light Needlers which have 800 range, do hard flux, and go in a small ballistic slot.Light Needlers are great, but there's a pretty significant range and accuracy difference between them and Graviton beams. You also arn't prevented from using both of them at the same time so ?.
People complaining about beams not mention their main advantage - accuracy compared to ballistic weapons. Officers without ordnance 5 skill will miss most of ballistic shots even on slow targets but will hit well with beams.This is a good point. Graviton and Tachyon beams have suffered (relatively speaking) from the projectile speed and accuracy buffs given by Officers.
Enforcers have 80 shield cost - so they only have 320 dissipation while their shield is up. Also, their max flux usage is highly misleading owing to so much of it being tied up in its Assault Chainguns.I took that into account in my revised edit, which I made before you posted. I also calculated for only firing the Arbalests, and not firing at all.QuoteOr you could just fire your HEF-boosted Autopulse Laser, overload it in 3 seconds even if it doesn't fire, then punch right through its armor with two HEF-boosted Pulse Lances. Or do 600 Hard Flux DPS with the two Light Needlers you can put on the front ballistic mounts, then move in with the Autopulse. I really don't know why you chose a Sunder, it's probably the worst thing to mount Graviton Beams on. Its energy weapons benefit from being bursty to take full advantage of the HEF, and it has access to Light Needlers which have 800 range, do hard flux, and go in a small ballistic slot.Light Needlers are great, but there's a pretty significant range and accuracy difference between them and Graviton beams. You also arn't prevented from using both of them at the same time so ?.
I went ahead and scrimmaged an Assault Sunder (autopulse/pulse/sabot/needler) vs a similar Sunder with autopulse/graviton/sabot/vulcan. The second Sunder (on Autopilot) won 4/5 fights; though for some reason it was using its Sabots more than the Assault Sunder. So I took off the Sabots (without adding more vents etc.), and the second Sunder still won 2/3 fights. Although the real reason for its victory seemed to be higher flux reserves owing to less OP spent on Needlers and less flux spent on offense; this gave it just enough shield flux to withstand an autopulse barrage. The Pulse Lasers were completely useless for the Assault Sunder.
Note: The only Technology effect in play was +10% hull armor, which I judged to make no difference to the outcome of any of the fights.
Point is, Graviton beams are support weapons. They are pure Gravy and highly defensive, letting you control fights with long range, high accuracy and great sustain.
Please tell me you actually swapped those out for medium-sized Pulse Lasers and didn't just use the default Assault Variant. Oh wait, you can't, the simulator doesn't let you.
Honestly, I've had good luck with a variety of Sunder builds - though almost all use some form of kinetic gun in the front small ballistic turrets. HIL and 2x Pulse Laser works well - the HIL can take out fighters that'd otherwise be pesky, and helps force your opponents to keep shields up when you back off to vent. Tachyon lance and 2x graviton beam works well; they may do soft flux to shields, but even cruisers can't shrug off that much damage, the lance rips through armor (and fighters), and the graviton beams keep the pressure up inbetween lance shots.I just ran a test in-sim using my max-skill testing character. Without an officer in the Sunder, using only the Tachyon Lance and Graviton Beams, and attempting to activate HEF whenever a Tac Lance shot was about to fire, it took 64 seconds for a Tachyon Lance 2x Graviton Beam Sunder to force a Support Dominator to drop its shields. When using only Light Needlers, the same Sunder took 30 seconds to force the same Dominator to drop shields. When using only Dual Autocannons, it took 36 seconds to force the same Dominator to drop shields.
All continuous beams are kind of lame ever since the flux damage bonus was removed.I doubt it; they were side-graded. Cheaper OP cost (and longer range for some beams) means I can spend more OP on other stuff to enable my ship kill things and/or defend itself more efficiently. Most beams are still weak, and some are still bad. LR PD Laser is underpowered and/or overpriced, Burst PD has too few charges and is overpriced. Heavy Burst PD is barely stronger than the light version.
Just because beams are weak does not always mean they are useless, especially if there are no viable alternatives. For example, if I mount HVDs and Mauler on an Eagle, what else can I use in its energy mounts? Pulse lasers and blasters do not have enough range (plus Eagle cannot use blasters effectively unless built for it). Tactical and graviton beams have matching range. Yes, they are weak, but some damage is better than none if I kite-and-snipe at maximum range.
Continuous beams that hit for hard flux is overpowered because the AI has no idea how to counter it. AI will keep shields up until it overloads, every time. Burst beams that can hit for hard flux should be okay because AI has a chance to recover between bursts.
Oh god, You are really using AI as an argument for why hard flux beams are a bad idea?Unless you want to write your own AI, it's a pretty good reason.
Oh god, You are really using AI as an argument for why hard flux beams are a bad idea? Does the AI do the same thing with, say, Autopulse laser, or... Something else which does a lot of damage really fast? I mean, if the AI having trouble is the problem, improve the AI.Unless Alex spends time to improve AI, the AI we have is what we are stuck with.
The AI doesn't seem to treat high alpha weapons as a threat requiring them to maintain lower flux, true. I would say that in part, absorbing attacks like that even if it causes an overload might be a good idea, since that level of damage is easily able to tear through armor and deal critical damage. It is still situational, but A frigate should always try to take a reaper on it's shield if it can't dodge, rather than drop the shield and explode.QuoteOh god, You are really using AI as an argument for why hard flux beams are a bad idea? Does the AI do the same thing with, say, Autopulse laser, or... Something else which does a lot of damage really fast? I mean, if the AI having trouble is the problem, improve the AI.Unless Alex spends time to improve AI, the AI we have is what we are stuck with.
AI does better against rapid-fire shots; it will lower shields instead of allowing itself to get overloaded. As someone who has not read Starsector's code aside from snippets posted here and there, the AI... just... knows.
Another attack form that can be overpowered against AI despite appearing balanced on paper is shots that hit for unusually high damage to shields. When AI gets high on flux, it dissipates a little flux, but otherwise tends to maintain flux at an acceptably high level if forced to keep shields up. Shots that hit for big damage will exploit this and overload the AI. This is why Antimatter Blaster costs more to mount than IR Pulse Laser despite the former having inferior DPS and range to the latter on paper - and limited ammo. This is a hidden benefit of the Target Analysis 10 perk (that does +25% damage to shields); you can overload ships more easily with that perk.
Main issue with beams is that they are massively effective vs unshielded ships. This is, as you said, mainly because of the range bonus, but it makes playing anything without shields a horrid idea. Even a graviton beam can... Wear down armor unless you hit the Combat readiness threshhold.
...
Here, beam weapons are not quite that bad, but they are exactly as bad as you claim hard flux beams would be vs shields already, Vs Armor. Armor doesn't regenerate, and hence unless you backup armor with shields, or else the armor is very high quality (meaning cruiser or heavier) then even light beams are a massive threat.
Main issue with beams is that they are massively effective vs unshielded ships. This is, as you said, mainly because of the range bonus, but it makes playing anything without shields a horrid idea. Even a graviton beam can... Wear down armor unless you hit the Combat readiness threshhold.
.
.
.
Vs shields, the polerization is when you deal more soft flux than dissipation,which causes you to suddenly go from zero damage to massive damage. That kind of thing is not really seen in other weapons. Other weapons, hard flux builds up, eventually breaking the shield. Beams, its no apperent damage until its massive damage, which I think is a problem.
Not really sure how to explain my thoughts on the situation. Still wish I could get the beam hard flux script to work...
Hmm. So none of the vanilla game ships without shields/phaseshifting are intended for combat? There are quite a few of them at low level, although admittely at high level not so much. EMP is more of a hard counter, but unless its, heh, a beam, you can still outrange and/or dodge it.
Well, yeah - lots of things make flying an unshielded ship a dangerous proposition; beams are hardly unique in that. EMP damage is essentially a hard counter, for example. There's a reason they're the exception and not the rule! If someone is making a shieldless combat ship without accounting for beams (and without intending for beams to counter that ship), that's an issue with the ship design. What you're talking about re: regenerating armor sounds like a possible way to address that, though I'd imagine that'd be tough to balance so that it's effective vs beams but not over-effective vs everything else.
And, right, that's very much what things would be like across the board if beams did hard flux damage. Which makes it a bad thing, no? I'm not saying it couldn't work somehow, but it'd require a pretty major redesign.
Yes, it is. That is how it is currently. It used to be that good flying could allow you to use unshielded ships vs beam ships since you could outrange them (albiet it being hard to get enough hits in) I understand why that was changed.
I think this is exactly how beam weapon is being used.
When their shield is up;
Your beam either is thick enough to overcome their soft flux dissipation or don't bother to kill them with it at all(unless you are using it to build up their flux or harassing them).
Other time, it is geared up to murder those who do not have a shield(Hound). It is just non-sense throwing a Hound at Wolf's tactical laser embrace.
It is an excellent choice to deal with rag tag pirate ship whose flux dissipation capability is universally bad or has no shield at all.
Hmm. So none of the vanilla game ships without shields/phaseshifting are intended for combat? There are quite a few of them at low level, although admittely at high level not so much.
The point I was trying to make, aside from beam damage not scaling with firepower, either being all or nothing, was that you can get the same exact effect with rapid-fire ballistic weapons, and they DO deal hard flux.
The Medusa can mount Light Needlers, which have only 200 less range than most beams and are only slightly worse than Heavy Needlers. Integrated Targeting Unit and Gunnery Implants 5 pushes that well over 1000 range. The Medusa totally can do it.The point I was trying to make, aside from beam damage not scaling with firepower, either being all or nothing, was that you can get the same exact effect with rapid-fire ballistic weapons, and they DO deal hard flux.
The thing to consider here is what kinds of ships generally carry which kinds of weapons. Beam weapons are mostly mounted on high-tech ships, which are more mobile. E.G. an Enforcer with HVDs has the ability to deal hard flux at range, sure, but it's not going to be the same kind of uncounterable it would be if the Medusa could do it.
The Medusa can mount Light Needlers, which have only 200 less range than beams and are only slightly worse than Heavy Needlers. Integrated Targeting Unit and Gunnery Implants 5 pushes that well over 1000 range. The Medusa totally can do it.
New patch notes... please. *gasp*
The Medusa can mount Light Needlers, which have only 200 less range than most beams and are only slightly worse than Heavy Needlers. Integrated Targeting Unit and Gunnery Implants 5 pushes that well over 1000 range. The Medusa totally can do it.Light Needlers are rare. That said, Medusa (and Shade) are prime candidates for Needlers because they use them well and there is no substitute. I mount Arbalests instead of Railguns or Needlers on Hammerhead/Falcon/Eagle because Arbalest is common as dirt but high-grade kinetics are rare and are needed by ships with smaller mounts.
Light Needlers are a special case - their per-shot damage, combined with the kinetic damage type, is why it's ok for them to have such long range for a small slot. It's not practical to grind down something with Light Needlers from range because their armor damage is too low.Before 0.6, Afflictor with four Needlers could kite and shred anything to death with them, despite armor resistance (because the armor eventually broke down and hull gets hit). Some time later, armor was made more effective. With Target Analysis 10, Afflictor can shred things with Needlers like it used to.
I'm glad to hear that this has all been thought out beforehand. While I might disagree with some decisions you've made, hearing the reasons behind those decisions has helped me better understand why things work the way they do and helped me to see the shape of the system you're designing. Thanks for taking part in this discussion, it's nice to be able to directly talk about balance with game devs.The Medusa can mount Light Needlers, which have only 200 less range than beams and are only slightly worse than Heavy Needlers. Integrated Targeting Unit and Gunnery Implants 5 pushes that well over 1000 range. The Medusa totally can do it.
Light Needlers are a special case - their per-shot damage, combined with the kinetic damage type, is why it's ok for them to have such long range for a small slot. It's not practical to grind down something with Light Needlers from range because their armor damage is too low. It can combine nicely with beams in the other slots, though. But, well, this sort of thing is exactly why universal slots are used sparingly. Small universal slots on the Medusa? Neat and powerful, but not unreasonable. Medium universals on it, on the other hand, would be way overpowered.
(I'm not just coming up with these reasons now, btw. It's all stuff that was considered at the time the ships/weapons were put together.)
(There's still an argument to be made for the Medusa's universals being changed to something else, though.)
If you have continuous beams do hard flux damage while keeping their range, they become hard counters to a lot of things. The issue is mainly qualitative, so tuning things like DPS or flux costs wouldn't be very effective. I.E. you'd have to tune their stats to be bad enough that a ship using them would run into peak performance problems; otherwise all it's doing is just making the kills slower but no less inevitable. To keep some kind of balance, you'd have to reduce beam range, which in turn would make them very similar to other energy weapons....which is why, when I made that work in Vacuum, Beams had the lowest range band or had a very long recharge time; that kept them nice and balanced in their niche; good in their prime roles (PD / anti-fighter) good for close assaults and DPS trading... but bad for kiting, where they're a real problem.
ALEX GIVE MULTI-BOARDING MOD OPTION FOR SS+ plzzzz
Honestly, I don't see doing that. Autofire state isn't meant to be static; it's something that you end up toggling on and off a fair bit during combat.
With some ships and weapons, yes. E.g. I've got 4 Swarmer SRMs on my Paragon that I toggle autofire depending on whether there's a bunch of frigates or fighters near me. I don't want to waste them on destroyers or cruisers, but I don't want to have to switch from the main guns every few seconds to hit the fire button when I'm surrounded by frigates. So I just turn autofire on when they're useful, and turn it off when they're not. Or with the Vindicator, a SS+ added ship, I turn the autofire guns off when I need to start spamming Fast Missile Racks so I don't flux-cap myself.Honestly, I don't see doing that. Autofire state isn't meant to be static; it's something that you end up toggling on and off a fair bit during combat.
Uh, whoa. That's not at all how I use autofire, nor how I see the AI using it. (except when it turns everything off, reducing its DPS to nothing and disabling its PD) I've actually been holding off making a big "the AI badly misuses weapon groups and autofire" post for awhile now, as once I start typing it up a fair bit of rage is gonna leak out. =P Maybe I'll start on that tomorrow.
But seriously, you play toggling auto-fire on and off in battle?
But seriously, you play toggling auto-fire on and off in battle?
But seriously, you play toggling auto-fire on and off in battle?Yes, I play like that all the time too.
With some ships and weapons, yes. E.g. I've got 4 Swarmer SRMs on my Paragon that I toggle autofire depending on whether there's a bunch of frigates or fighters near me. I don't want to waste them on destroyers or cruisers, but I don't want to have to switch from the main guns every few seconds to hit the fire button when I'm surrounded by frigates. So I just turn autofire on when they're useful, and turn it off when they're not. Or with the Vindicator, a SS+ added ship, I turn the autofire guns off when I need to start spamming Fast Missile Racks so I don't flux-cap myself.That's another issue for an AI thread, I guess - a missile marked anti-fighter with limited ammo shouldn't be shot at anything larger than a frigate really ...
That's another issue for an AI thread, I guess - a missile marked anti-fighter with limited ammo shouldn't be shot at anything larger than a frigate really ...Swarmers backed by max Missile Specialization can hurt glass cannon destroyers (i.e., Sunder and Medusa).
New hyperspace terrain adds a little bit of old world "high seas navigation" appeal to traveling between systems, and I think it's a good start. I'd like to see hyperspace storms have some minor visual indication that they're about to start, but that might just be my laziness talking.They flash briefly before starting. Although it seems pretty sketchy as to how briefly, as I frequently get caught in storms which are still in thier "warning" state and get hit for -50 (or more) maint. for not avoiding something that shouldn't even be there yet.
They are fairly predictable; just watch the color. Brighter = about to erupt.
They are fairly predictable; just watch the color. Brighter = about to erupt.