The Load game and now my save is corrupted thing is still here....
Seriously...this release is disappointing.
The loss of "right click to drop held stack" in the inventory menu
I mean why would you not want a planned course? You can press "A" to resume it after you've made changes to course for whatever reason or just press "S" to cancel it. Plus it gives you extra info like days/fuel needed to reach it.I meant that you can't set a course in the TAB map without laying in a course. ANd many times I do this to dodge around a star or solar flares
The one thing I wish is that Lay in Course was the top choice and not Show Info. Did the hotfix swap those?
Also I really wish Sustained Burn didn't toggle itself off all the time. Especially for sensor pings.Yes...
This isn't the bug forum. And in case people have forgotten, the game is in alpha. If you don't want bugs, wait for version 1.0.
I must have lucked out somehow, because the Lumens I fought just insta-died to swarms of pilums, salamanders, fighters and assorted D-grade garbage I fished out of derelict fields.That's sort of the problem- if they make a mistake, they die instantly. If they don't... they can be outnumbered 6:1, chased by 3 fighter wings, and run everyone out of CR. This is only at low level with a frigate/destroyer fleet so when you can concentrate firepower it might not be an issue, but I'm going for cheap (20-30k) scan bounties on the assumption they're the lowest level and my fleet just gets the runaround.
This isn't the bug forum. And in case people have forgotten, the game is in alpha. If you don't want bugs, wait for version 1.0.
Title of the post is .8 feedback...go troll somewhere else, preferably off a high bridge.
Another vote that having the Aptitude categories grant nothing on level up really sucks.
It feels like my level is completely dead, if I want to maintain the build I'm aiming for. They don't need to be BIG bonuses, but please, give us something!
Then just make them another skillAnother vote that having the Aptitude categories grant nothing on level up really sucks.
It feels like my level is completely dead, if I want to maintain the build I'm aiming for. They don't need to be BIG bonuses, but please, give us something!
eh, count me as a vote against. I don't think there's a point to having aptitude give bonuses and stacking small bonuses make things harder to calculate at times
Aren't the ships you salvage always the same?
First time barely won, having to fight-retreat-fight while losing most ships and barely getting on scraps. Guess bad combination of D-mods on my ships + no access to blaster (to make wolf truly useful) + good ships on pirate side (2 hammerheads with relatively good variants using enough kinetics).It seems the loot is random on the derelict fleet.
On the other hand, Hammerhead got junk for weapons. Had to buy two Heavy Mortars to pair up with two Light Autocannons. It performed adequately. Was more useful as a budget meat shield.My Hammerhead ended up with a Heavy Mortar and a Thumper. Slap Safety Overrides on that and you've got a monster of a ship (Accelerated Feeder Thumper has ludicrous damage against hulls).
i went with arbalest, hvy mortar, rail, dual mg, vulcan vulcan at the back aux thrust and hardened subs.The REDACTED fleets are really aggressive with the torps. And I LOVE it! Twice I have been nailed by a Reaper in my Paragon after having vented and was waiting for my slow expanding shield (*has no Acceled shields or Front shield emitter...*)
wasn't a demon but it could hold its own.
i finally have hvy needler, hvy mauler on it :P
hammer barrage is eviiiiiiiiiil, i met in on an autonomous drone, treated it like a swarm missile not a torpedo, lost half my ship to the 1 glancing blow.
good lesson.
There's a large, blinking instruction to "press F5 to save" after you do the scavenging. You need to do that for the tutorial to continue past that point, which will include getting the transponder ability and some other stuff.He is. He is using RC 19, as stated in his post
(What happened the first time around is you probably switched to another ability bar... Q and W switch between the first two ability bars.)
Edit: a thought occurs, do you have the latest hotfix? The "F5 to save" instruction isn't very prominent in the original release, and the hotfix addresses that.
Edit: a thought occurs, do you have the latest hotfix? The "F5 to save" instruction isn't very prominent in the original release, and the hotfix addresses that.
...but it seems like the supply cost for running around has been reduced significantly which is good. Managing both supplies and fuel was a real bother for me in the previous versions.I'm having the opposite experience with this.
Looks like you really need to put "TUTORIAL: DO THIS THING" to stop the confusion.
>there are now black holesYou DO realize that these ships are doing FTL level speeds, right?
>there's a very prominent event horizon
>it degrades CR when you get near it, ok cool
>go inside it
>you can actually fly back out of it
>you don't get trapped forever inside the event horizon and/or it deletes your save
MISSED OPPORTUNITY
VERY DISAPPOINTED
CHANGE POSTHASTE
otherwise it's p. gud though
>there are now black holes
>there's a very prominent event horizon
>it degrades CR when you get near it, ok cool
>go inside it
>you can actually fly back out of it
>you don't get trapped forever inside the event horizon and/or it deletes your save
MISSED OPPORTUNITY
VERY DISAPPOINTED
CHANGE POSTHASTE
otherwise it's p. gud though
>there are now black holesYou DO realize that these ships are doing FTL level speeds, right?
>there's a very prominent event horizon
>it degrades CR when you get near it, ok cool
>go inside it
>you can actually fly back out of it
>you don't get trapped forever inside the event horizon and/or it deletes your save
MISSED OPPORTUNITY
VERY DISAPPOINTED
CHANGE POSTHASTE
otherwise it's p. gud though
>there are now black holesYou DO realize that these ships are doing FTL level speeds, right?
>there's a very prominent event horizon
>it degrades CR when you get near it, ok cool
>go inside it
>you can actually fly back out of it
>you don't get trapped forever inside the event horizon and/or it deletes your save
MISSED OPPORTUNITY
VERY DISAPPOINTED
CHANGE POSTHASTE
otherwise it's p. gud though
I kinda suspect that it'll be the case but are frigates a total liability in battlestation fights? I imagine they'd just get lain waste to before they can even close in what with battlestations having super crazy long range.Bricks. You want bricks and KE damage to fight them
Also don't forget to sell those A.I. Cores you get from the drone thingies. Get good rep and 10k credits a pop.Don't sell them to the markets. Give them to the station commanders for max profit and rep boost!
also agree with speed boost at 1% flux being not great, 5-10 would be better imho.Agreed with both of these!
i also think faction npc should buy survey data, like cores, keep the tariff or just lower the prices by 30% across the board, but i don't enjoy hanging on to them until i get to a high stability market and selling them for less feels wasteful.
How good is Salvaging skill? Is it required to get the best derelict ship finds (like those people found in best derelicts topic) and looting rare weapons (and fighter chips), or does it just increase the yield of insignificant commodities like supplies, metal, fuel, and other salables only useful for a quick buck?
I suppose 'near'is to cover the eventuality that the ship gets destroyed in battle from overkill damage.My thoughts exactly. I have overkilled enemies before pre-0.8.
Also I feel like removing any sort of bonus from aptitude points makes them entirely arbitrary as a barrier to prevent you from choosing individual perks from different trees.Just remove the extra 2- 3 points on startup and let me choose whatever I want rather than forcing me to waste several lvls worth of experience simply to allow me the possibility to choose something useful.Since we will probably get even more skills for outposts later, just remove the aptitudes (and/or raise the level cap to 50). With so many skills, I already feel the squeeze from lack of points. I barely have enough (or maybe not) for the bare minimum to support the playstyle I desire (hot rods that can snipe and stall, plus few QoL features).
If Alex really doesn't want aptitudes to give combat bonuses they could just unlock extra bonus content the way you do with surveying & salvaging.
ACTUALLY I just hit on something I think, use aptitudes to unlock in-game questlines & missions. Hegemony won't take somebody with freighting 800k units of food to their core world unless you have experience in operating a fleet, tritach won't task you with salvaging a whole [redacted] in tact unless you have the aptitude to conduct industrial work.
"What makes you qualified to bring back a hostile [redacted] in one piece?"
"I can fit 8 torpedoes on a single kite"
"NEXT!"
If Alex really doesn't want aptitudes to give combat bonuses they could just unlock extra bonus content the way you do with surveying & salvaging.
ACTUALLY I just hit on something I think, use aptitudes to unlock in-game questlines & missions. Hegemony won't take somebody with freighting 800k units of food to their core world unless you have experience in operating a fleet, tritach won't task you with salvaging a whole [redacted] in tact unless you have the aptitude to conduct industrial work.
"What makes you qualified to bring back a hostile [redacted] in one piece?"
"I can fit 8 torpedoes on a single kite"
"NEXT!"
Inb4 Speechcraft skill, governed by Leadership.
I'm only half-joking. If more missions (especially story ones like the Tutorial) make it in I can totally see negotiation (and maybe trading as either part of or something separate) skills being a thing.
Also the Mora is absolutely ridiculous. It nearly destroyed a fleet of mine composed of a Medusa, Enforcer, Wolf,Lasher and my Hyperion by itself with just Talons for fighters. Which by the way could keep up with my teleporting Hyperion...
I wonder if a dedicated tactical laser pd boat is gonna be in order
I wonder if a dedicated tactical laser pd boat is gonna be in order
I haven't yet found PDAI modspec in 0.8 to make tac laser pd, despite getting several millions of credits and having an Onslaught.
And as far as countering fighters, one tac laser Wolf is not enough to counter Mora's 3 wings.
Modspecs in general are rare as all hell, except for a group that just about all the stations have. Oh and the drop chance for them? ONE ****ing percent! All the others are 25%+...I wonder if a dedicated tactical laser pd boat is gonna be in order
I haven't yet found PDAI modspec in 0.8 to make tac laser pd, despite getting several millions of credits and having an Onslaught.
And as far as countering fighters, one tac laser Wolf is not enough to counter Mora's 3 wings.
Modspecs in general are rare as all hell, except for a group that just about all the stations have. Oh and the drop chance for them? ONE ****ing percent! All the others are 25%+...I wonder if a dedicated tactical laser pd boat is gonna be in order
I haven't yet found PDAI modspec in 0.8 to make tac laser pd, despite getting several millions of credits and having an Onslaught.
And as far as countering fighters, one tac laser Wolf is not enough to counter Mora's 3 wings.
And it doesn't help that TT LOST two markets while we got yet another low tech using faction that has a dozen markets...
LOLWat? The remnants have like 2% of the total sector in my game. They have NINE damn systems and their best ships, the battlestations, don't even respawn! And many times it is always like 4 different ships in their fleets. They get boring decently quick unless they have a stationModspecs in general are rare as all hell, except for a group that just about all the stations have. Oh and the drop chance for them? ONE ****ing percent! All the others are 25%+...I wonder if a dedicated tactical laser pd boat is gonna be in order
I haven't yet found PDAI modspec in 0.8 to make tac laser pd, despite getting several millions of credits and having an Onslaught.
And as far as countering fighters, one tac laser Wolf is not enough to counter Mora's 3 wings.
And it doesn't help that TT LOST two markets while we got yet another low tech using faction that has a dozen markets...
Well to be fair TT also gotSpoilerthe entirety of the procgen sector[close]
LOLWat? The remnants have like 2% of the total sector in my game. They have NINE damn systems and their best ships, the battlestations, don't even respawn! And many times it is always like 4 different ships in their fleets. They get boring decently quick unless they have a stationModspecs in general are rare as all hell, except for a group that just about all the stations have. Oh and the drop chance for them? ONE ****ing percent! All the others are 25%+...I wonder if a dedicated tactical laser pd boat is gonna be in order
I haven't yet found PDAI modspec in 0.8 to make tac laser pd, despite getting several millions of credits and having an Onslaught.
And as far as countering fighters, one tac laser Wolf is not enough to counter Mora's 3 wings.
And it doesn't help that TT LOST two markets while we got yet another low tech using faction that has a dozen markets...
Well to be fair TT also gotSpoilerthe entirety of the procgen sector[close]
Also, you can not capture Remnant ships.
Do they? I've found them at every probe in every system I've hit so farProbes and the Remnant are not the same...
...
Do they? I've found them at every probe in every system I've hit so far
...
4) Could anyone please explain it like I'm 5 and tell me why you'd take Carrier Command over Fighter Doctrine? Is Fighter Doctrine the obvious first choice and you'd only take Carrier Command if you intend to pilot a carrier...? Do they stack for you if you're piloting a carrier or what?
...
I found a planet named Tartiflette. Coincidence? I wonder how long it's been in the planet name list.
5. I really want the Exploration aspects of play to make the Sector behave in a more dynamic way. It's cool to survey stuff, but when I find a great planet, I expect something interesting to happen, like a new Market.
6. The fighter changes are great overall, but I agree with the posters who have noted that they still are too slow to actually run things down, and they tend to stay too close to their carriers when they should be chasing their carriers' targets (if given one) which makes long engagements a drag.
Duly noted; I haven't yet pushed my Drover's Captain up the skill trees to get Fighter speeds up yet. I can see your point there. Kind of bad that it takes that bonus to happen, though.
As a note of my own: The only reason I knew about engage/withdraw was by having read the blog post months ago. And I had to look in the settings to figure out what key it was. That should probably get included in the tutorial (it does give a condor, after all).Probably as part of the Combat Tutorial - that's a better-fitting place. The campaign tutorial is more for campaign-stuff, like teaching you how to Salvage, use fleet abilities, pick up derelict ships, trade and interact with ports etc. All the tutorials were revamped this update, so adding a carrier bit there wouldn't be out of place.
Hmm. That's a bit counter-intuitive; it goes against the mainly-automated grain of the main gameplay. The main reason this comes up is that when I want fighters to engage something halfway across the map, it's frequently not happening, or they're so slow they don't get there before it's moot. And Frigates routinely out-run Fighters in Pursuits, which just feels really wrong.It's like ordering your weapons to Hold Fire - it's not really going against anything. Also, fighters (not bombers) can and will outrun everything in the game and catch up. More times than not I've seen a Talon wing catch up to a Wolf on the retreat with it's Phase Skimmer and kill it. The range limitation doesn't come into effect too often, just keep your carriers close to the front - no reason not to anyway, you get more bang for your buck if they're closer because faster time to get to the frontlines and back.
Ah well.
2. Exploration is both good and bad. It's good, in the sense that there's finally a real need for Fuel. It's bad in that risk / reward feels a bit off. To explore the farthest areas for exploration bounties, you basically need lots of Drams and lots of Fuel; this means you're not a combat fleet. But the rewards for it don't feel quite big enough to make it worthwhile; in the same amount of time spent, we can kill a lot of Bounties instead.
brief thoughts on the new skill tree:
- 42 skill points does not feel like enough
- The "unlock (tree) level 1,2,3" points feel terrible
- We need a way to respec points (Possible abuses with ship OP)
- Officer skills need to be more deterministic
Also hiding the ability to survey planets with a specific hazard rating behind skill points doesn't feel right.
I agree with RickyRio, except possibly skill respec.To be more precise, if skills could be respec'ed, what I (and I suspect many others) would do is max out Surveying and Salvaging, strip mine all the paychecks (e.g., datapads) from the dungeon, then respec those skills away and get the skills I really want.
To be more precise, if skills could be respec'ed, what I (and I suspect many others) would do is max out Surveying and Salvaging, strip mine all the paychecks (e.g., datapads) from the dungeon, then respec those skills away and get the skills I really want.And this is why we don't balance for or around munchkins and min-maxers.
And this is why we don't balance for or around munchkins and min-maxers.In that particular case, it is relatively obvious. Players do not need to be hardcore munchkins to exploit that. I guess that is why (from a gaming standpoint) Alex has not bothered with skill respec. Milk early-game skills (Surveying) then dump them after they outlive their usefulness for more useful endgame skills (anything to do with combat) via respec.
In that particular case, it is relatively obvious. Players do not need to be hardcore munchkins to exploit that. I guess that is why (from a gaming standpoint) Alex has not bothered with skill respec. Milk early-game skills (Surveying) then dump them after they outlive their usefulness for more useful endgame skills (anything to do with combat) via respec.You just don't balance around them, period. If you do, you end up making stuff so bland and obvious that there's no point in doing anything but what the min-maxers do.
In that particular case, it is relatively obvious. Players do not need to be hardcore munchkins to exploit that. I guess that is why (from a gaming standpoint) Alex has not bothered with skill respec. Milk early-game skills (Surveying) then dump them after they outlive their usefulness for more useful endgame skills (anything to do with combat) via respec.You just don't balance around them, period. If you do, you end up making stuff so bland and obvious that there's no point in doing anything but what the min-maxers do.
If industry skills allowed for more options regarding outposts (when they get added) they would translate into endgame power - just not combat, but an economic one.
Will we get to mass-produce metal domain boxes when with 3 industry and tech aptitudes?
Also, currently surveying isn't that bad, it's just the only placeholder that would work is "it gives money" and since this has to pay off... It does, heftily. I'm looking forward so much to them making planets valuable, not scans.
Hmm... Have you thought about aptitude-specific endgame paths? In general, I mean.
Thank you for your feedback! (& welcome to the forum, etc etc)
Re: officers, that's something I really want to look at 0.8.1a; having to give up on a desired "carrier' officer by the time they're level 18 is a bit rough.
I am trying to avoid putting points into Surveying. It is such as easy money-maker, and bounties are not as profitable as they used to be, after burning fuel. It seems systems in town are less populated before, and there are fewer faction ships, though I have not tried killing major faction fleets yet.
I do not want to put points into Surveying because I want every last skill point to go into other skills I want more. I may put points into Salvaging so I can fully loot the rare weapons and hullmods from stations in the dungeon.
It seems systems in town are less populated before, and there are fewer faction ships, though I have not tried killing major faction fleets yet.
I've got to lvl 40 and sizeable fleet without single point in industry.Not only ITU, but also Converted Hangar (because fighters are good now). How common are Front Shield Generator and Front Shield Emitter? The former is mandatory to make Hound and Cerberus viable is combat, and the latter is so useful for turn some ships shields into 360 (e.g., Monitor, Centurion, Aurora, and Odyssey).
Initially my bread and butter were scan derelict missions, than I transitioned to bounties.
Modspecs seem to be really rare. The only one that I got by salvage (from faction fleet), that is not commonly shop sold is ITU (at least it's the one that matters most).
I've got to lvl 40 and sizeable fleet without single point in industry.Not only ITU, but also Converted Hangar (because fighters are good now). How common are Front Shield Generator and Front Shield Emitter? The former is mandatory to make Hound and Cerberus viable is combat, and the latter is so useful for turn some ships shields into 360 (e.g., Monitor, Centurion, Aurora, and Odyssey).
Initially my bread and butter were scan derelict missions, than I transitioned to bounties.
Modspecs seem to be really rare. The only one that I got by salvage (from faction fleet), that is not commonly shop sold is ITU (at least it's the one that matters most).
- Similar to that, I would love to have "let the second in command handle it" as option in every fight. As far as I have seen it, it's only an option if you join battles, but often some fights are so one-sided that I would just prefer to skip it all together.I would so abuse that for power-leveling... if there was no level cap.
Yep, might as well rename to Coveted Hangars . Very rare, considering that I still don't have them after clearing several Persean League stars and Askonia of patrols (not for profit, just for fun).I just found some for sale at Tri-Tachyon military, but I needed commission and high-relations to buy it. Also found various shield hullmods similarly locked. I think I may go commission-less in my game. There appears to be less things to murder in town, and I really need all the friendly ports I can get to buy supplies and fuel when returning from the dungeon. Without Surveying and Salvaging, it has tough to build up wealth unless I can find two bounties next to each other.
-I always forget "tab" allows me to control my ship in battle every time i don't play for a while and have to google for it (either i'm blind or it's not written anywhere)
-Shouldn't pirates trade tariff-free? They seem pretty anarchic.
-Always too many weapons to choose from... All the time spent deciding between a machinegun and a double machinegun, or the MRM version of a missile and a the MRM version of the same missile (single) is a bit too much time subtracted from blasting away. I'd rather have a hull mod that changes missile types to a multiple version, or one that doubles a kinetic mount, or perhaps a checkbox to change the missile type in the fitting screen. It's also annoying to hoard weapon variants when the need to outfit a fleet from scratch arises.
- I got the entirety of the industry tech tree down first to play as a pure-salvager and using [D]-modded ships still seems like a waste. Every time i get a ship i really want with even a single [D] mod the "stat-pressure" forces me to sell it. Especially in the beginning, when the desire for a better ship is the highest and the [D] mods the most numerous. I'd much rather have my ship swerve at random, turn off with no warning or have a narrower firing arc than know its shields and flux are gimped forever! Because i can compensate for those flaws with skill alone, while being unable to take a full salvo from a bigger ship just makes the [D]-ridden ship i'm using worthless.
-Shouldn't pirates trade tariff-free? They seem pretty anarchic.
I take it as a tribute to the local crime boss ;)
I've always found the situation with pirates confusing. Shouldn't it all be black market?
imo Pirate worlds should have no open market, but the black market gets tariffed at a low rate.
#4. With Surveying 3 being a huge cash cow, that would encourage experienced players who know the game to focus on planet scanner characters early to kickstart their game then dump those skills for combat skills when they no longer need the cash.
You could attach a cost to it that scaled based on your level. It could be fairly linear up to about level 15-20, then exponential after that.Would that work for early scanner characters that avoid combat (and leveling)? I know surveying gives XP, but is it enough to level them up quickly? If not, such characters can make a lot of money before they reach the cutoff to stop surveying and start fighting.
#1. This is when lack of exploration skills, namely no Surveying 3, hurts. For bounties alone, it probably is not too bad at first when they are small, but as they get bigger, it gets expensive fast (because you need a big fleet to kill their big fleet). At that point, if you do not have Surveying, bounties are only worth it if you can kill two or more near each other.
...
#4. With Surveying 3 being a huge cash cow, that would encourage experienced players who know the game to focus on planet scanner characters early to kickstart their game then dump those skills for combat skills when they no longer need the cash.
I am not sure if removing most hullmods from skills was a great idea. It is too hard to obtain many of the better mods. Drop rate from ships with the hullmods is too low, and I am not sure if some hullmods are even used by any ship (e.g., Converted Hangar). It seems most of the best ones that are not readily available tell me "Join Tri-Tachyon or do without!"
If anything, contributes to inverted difficulty. Your greens and standard tire too fast, and your ships are ready to fall apart after one fight. By midgame or later, everyone is elite and is the baseline, if you played bounty hunter much of the game.
You could attach a cost to it that scaled based on your level. It could be fairly linear up to about level 15-20, then exponential after that.Would that work for early scanner characters that avoid combat (and leveling)? I know surveying gives XP, but is it enough to level them up quickly? If not, such characters can make a lot of money before they reach the cutoff to stop surveying and start fighting.
1. This is a game with an incredible combat system, and yet Starsector is still doing its best to actively discourage the player in engaging in fights. Deployment costs are ludicrously high, bounty pay is insufficient considering the cost of battles and fuel,
A skill you develop through use would be most appropriate for surveying, as that'd give a level of progression to the exploitation of space. (Rather than just dropping a load of skill points into a perk and then instantly being able to survey the most financially rewarding planets)
The more i think about it, the more i feel xp progression should be broken into disciplines.
I suppose Skyrim would be an example of this.... Though not a particularly well balanced example.
It'd give greater longevity to skill progression, would encourage an exploration of every play style, and would allow for deeper skill trees and thus more rewarding high level perks.
@SG: welcome to the writing side of the forum!
What the game does is discouraging you from boring combat, i.e. steamrolling the enemy. If you challenge yourself to defeat a given enemy with as few of your ships as possible, you will have little problem paying for the deployment. And a way more exiting fight!
Is being a bounty hunter/merc viable? Yes, if supplemented with some trading. Does it have financial parity with any of the other money-making methods in the game? Absolutely not - it doesn't even come close - and that's what I take issue with. I am encouraged, financially, to survey in a way that I am not encouraged as a combat pilot.
...
Is being a bounty hunter/merc viable? Yes, if supplemented with some trading. Does it have financial parity with any of the other money-making methods in the game? Absolutely not - it doesn't even come close - and that's what I take issue with. I am encouraged, financially, to survey in a way that I am not encouraged as a combat pilot.
...
Is being a bounty hunter/merc viable? Yes, if supplemented with some trading. Does it have financial parity with any of the other money-making methods in the game? Absolutely not - it doesn't even come close - and that's what I take issue with. I am encouraged, financially, to survey in a way that I am not encouraged as a combat pilot.
I think one thing I'd love to see is the seperation of survey (and derelict salvage, although ships are all 0% difficulty? only affects stations etc?) from the skills and instead give modifiers to the salvage you get, or the supplies/crew required for the salvaging.Alex talks a bunch about the design decisions about this in this blog post (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2016/06/09/planetary-surveys/). And more discussion in the corresponding blog-post-thread.
I.e, if you have 1000 men and 5000 supplies, you should be able to salvage and/or survey anything, since you can just keep throwing things at it it until you get a result - but if it's a ship, your crappy salvage people might give you an extra d-mod when they start up the engines and blow them out or something. If it's a planet, maybe your men accidentally detonate a volatiles mine(? dump? pit? whatever..) so it gets reduced in quality.
Ymmv.
I think one thing I'd love to see is the seperation of survey (and derelict salvage, although ships are all 0% difficulty? only affects stations etc?) from the skills and instead give modifiers to the salvage you get, or the supplies/crew required for the salvaging.Alex talks a bunch about the design decisions about this in this blog post (http://fractalsoftworks.com/2016/06/09/planetary-surveys/). And more discussion in the corresponding blog-post-thread.
I.e, if you have 1000 men and 5000 supplies, you should be able to salvage and/or survey anything, since you can just keep throwing things at it it until you get a result - but if it's a ship, your crappy salvage people might give you an extra d-mod when they start up the engines and blow them out or something. If it's a planet, maybe your men accidentally detonate a volatiles mine(? dump? pit? whatever..) so it gets reduced in quality.
Ymmv.
TLDR: If you would get less-than-ideal results from doing a survey with low skill, no one would do low-skill surveys and they'll just wait until they max the skill out before starting.
1) I'm not suggesting subpar results per se, I'm saying that if you want to survey a tough planet with no skills invested, it's going to cost you a lot more men + machinery to get a good result, with a higher chance of getting a poor result. This would give people who invest heavily in combat a reason to explore a little more and would mean the people who invest in the skills would still get a better chance at higher returns and be more efficient.
sell prices of ships are trash for d-modded ships to prevent players from making easy money from them
Salvaging:and
(I maxed out the salvaging tree).
It annoys me that you need certain skills to salvage certain things. This should be a fleet setup thing where skills only help, but not enable.
I maxed out every skill in the salvaging tree. It allows for a new playstyle, but it costs you more interesting combat. (More interesting in terms of you missing skills that enable different combat experiences).
Surveying:
Dislike the skill requirement. Again, like for salvaging, make skills help but not a requirement.
Didn't know the first one. Starsector isn't really clear in these things.The tutorial tells you that.
Disagree. Why not make surveying a percentage thing? You don't have enough equipment / skills? Well, you can't survey everything on the planet. Without skills, you'll need quit some surveying oriented ships, capping your potential elsewhere.With the current system, partially surveying something won't work. Besides, why partially survey a planet and have to waste the fuel to go back there to fully survey it? Just wait for more Survey skills. That planet isn't going anywhere quickly.
Salvaging:On Surveys, Alex wanted it so that you never need to scan something (successfully) more than once. However, it would be cool if certain survey ships added +5% to the maximum hazard rating you can survey, or something like that.
(I maxed out the salvaging tree).
It annoys me that you need certain skills to salvage certain things. This should be a fleet setup thing where skills only help, but not enable.
I maxed out every skill in the salvaging tree. It allows for a new playstyle, but it costs you more interesting combat. (More interesting in terms of you missing skills that enable different combat experiences).
Level cap:
Hate it. I stopped playing once I reached level 40. I stop playing every game once there is no longer any progression. Allow me to reset my skillset, something like NG+, but keep everything else. Increase the level cap on the next run. Something you can buy ingame, a brain update or whatever. But don't force this level cap on me. I'm not going to start another game just to re-progress or try another playstyle. I just leave.
Level cap:I've been Level 40 for 5 cycles. I'm in cycle 218 right now and I'm still playing my first save. I'm fine with it. :P
Hate it. I stopped playing once I reached level 40. I stop playing every game once there is no longer any progression. Allow me to reset my skillset, something like NG+, but keep everything else. Increase the level cap on the next run. Something you can buy ingame, a brain update or whatever. But don't force this level cap on me. I'm not going to start another game just to re-progress or try another playstyle. I just leave.
Wrote that I haven't played the tutorial because it was confusing. Still valuable feedback for Alex, because things like that should be absolutely clear even without a tutorial.The tutorial is there to clear things up. If things were crystal clear, you wouldn't need a tutorial to begin with. Starsector by nature is murky, so you *need* to play the tutorial to understand the basic mechanics or you're gonna flop hard. Hell, I played the tutorial, and despite having been owned Starsector for more than five years now and not having actually played it in the past year (due to reasons), I still understood every step and didn't trip up on it.
Level cap:I've been Level 40 for 5 cycles. I'm in cycle 218 right now and I'm still playing my first save. I'm fine with it. :P
Hate it. I stopped playing once I reached level 40. I stop playing every game once there is no longer any progression. Allow me to reset my skillset, something like NG+, but keep everything else. Increase the level cap on the next run. Something you can buy ingame, a brain update or whatever. But don't force this level cap on me. I'm not going to start another game just to re-progress or try another playstyle. I just leave.
Level cap:
Hate it. I stopped playing once I reached level 40. I stop playing every game once there is no longer any progression. Allow me to reset my skillset, something like NG+, but keep everything else. Increase the level cap on the next run. Something you can buy ingame, a brain update or whatever. But don't force this level cap on me. I'm not going to start another game just to re-progress or try another playstyle. I just leave.
I've always cheated in SP games and I always will, it's how I play my games and that's about it, anybody who thinks my choice of playing a game how I want is wrong or unfun as it is clearly fun for me for over a decade now and I prefer to avoid this "oh you shouldn't cheat" boll yotz, are we clear? Good. Because I'm having none of the anti-cheat arguments anymore as I'm too old for that dren.
Err... great?
Not sure why you feel the need to preemptively defend the way you prefer to play a singleplayer game, especially one that's still in development and offers all kinds of not-exactly-balanced mods (looking at you Knights Templar).
I'm mostly wondering because you made a somewhat similar post in that mod thread you necro'd, so maybe that's a personal issue on your part, as I have yet to see anyone in this forum trying to tell others how to play the game.
Anyone else finding themselves greedily snatching up hullmods from markets like they were food, even if they have no use for them ever?I do, in addition to hoarding every weapon I earn and every ship I deem worth salvaging. They're trophies, I swear!
Anyone else finding themselves greedily snatching up hullmods from markets like they were food, even if they have no use for them ever?I do, in addition to hoarding every weapon I earn and every ship I deem worth salvaging. They're trophies, I swear!
... buuut I've learned that some strange thing happens at level 47 and you can't progress past it
Huh - that's weird, any more details? Seems to be working on my end.*tries with console commands, progresses to 127 level where points don't matter anymore*
Nobody here is criticizing your play stile.
-snip-
Calm down, nobody's attacking anybody. I similarly don't like the hard cap and tried to circumvent it, buuut I've learned that some strange thing happens at level 47 and you can't progress past it (to max out everything you need lvl 97).CheatConsole Commands come in handy now.
Right now respeccing is a bad fit for Starsector because you could invest into surveying and salvage skills, exhaust those sources of income making all the money you'll ever need, and then respec into combat skills. This will probably work differently eventually but right now it would allow you to eat your cake and have it too.
Right now respeccing is a bad fit for Starsector because you could invest into surveying and salvage skills, exhaust those sources of income making all the money you'll ever need, and then respec into combat skills. This will probably work differently eventually but right now it would allow you to eat your cake and have it too.
So what? It's not a multiplayer game, I want to have my cake and eat it too. I invested in survey/salvage skills, hit the level cap hours before I even got to endgame content and I now have two paragons, an astral, an aurora, an apogee, two dominators, *** tons of moras and other carriers, 10Million credits, 30 alpha cores blah blah blah. It bothers me that when I drive my badass paragons around I'm taking a 20-30% speed/damage/hitpoints/flux penalty over having my officers drive it.
I should be able to salvage effectively, survey effectively and drive the best ships and be a badass doing it. I want all of those things it and doesn't affect anyone else because it's a single player game. I think the leveling/skill mechanic is broken in this regard.
So what? It's not a multiplayer game, I want to have my cake and eat it too.I reached lv.40 before I even got a decent fleet together or started actively seeking combat and it felt a bit hollow because progression just stops. I just set the skill cap to 99 and am quite happily plodding away against a soft cap, and we'll see how far it goes before it gets dull.
If you can do everything in one game, then every game is the same and there is no reason to play twice.Disagree. The player chooses the direction of the game based on what they feel like doing.
If you can do everything in one game, then every game is the same and there is no reason to play twice.
trivially moddable:
data/config/settings:
playermaxlevel: 40 <- change to 100000
xpgainmult: 1 <- change to 1000000
enjoy your invincible godliness
If you can do everything in one game, then every game is the same and there is no reason to play twice.Disagree. The player chooses the direction of the game based on what they feel like doing.
Even with a completely static sector in previous versions which never changed from game to game this was never an issue.
Good to know. I still think the core game should address these issues though because I'd like to see the gameplay balanced around it instead of doing something that feels a bit cheaty (like adding 100 lives in contra cheaty) but thanks for the info!
Good to know. I still think the core game should address these issues though because I'd like to see the gameplay balanced around it instead of doing something that feels a bit cheaty (like adding 100 lives in contra cheaty) but thanks for the info!
Welcome. That said though, I disagree that the core game should balance around these issues because... well... that's a matter of preference and I think it's against alex's vision for the game. Personally, my preferences are the direct opposite of yours and I'm using a "cheaty" solution. I have exp gain turned down to 0.3, tripled ship prices and pentapled ship maintenance (in fuel and supplies), among other things to slow down progress and make the game more difficult
I finally found my first Paragon... after prying it from the cold, dead hands of a TT deserter. Did not get the chance to play with it in the campaign yet.
Come to think of it, I have not recovered an Odyssey yet. Not sure how well it compares with Legion. Legion is fun to use when I do not need to control the Astral mad bomber.
At this point, I am well into endgame. The only new thing left to do that I have not done yet is farm Remnants for their fighters (and kill a battlestation if I want to kill the golden goose).
Please don't do this as it could cause problems. Just set your level to 97? (you get two extra points at the start) and you will cap out at the same time you get your last pointtrivially moddable:
data/config/settings:
playermaxlevel: 40 <- change to 100000
xpgainmult: 1 <- change to 1000000
enjoy your invincible godliness
Good to know. I still think the core game should address these issues though because I'd like to see the gameplay balanced around it instead of doing something that feels a bit cheaty (like adding 100 lives in contra cheaty) but thanks for the info!
That applies to games where by making different choices you get a different experience (e.g. WoW, Diablo 3, Fallout). The skills in this game do not create a different experience. I do not think it is comparable.
Please don't do this as it could cause problems. Just set your level to 97? (you get two extra points at the start) and you will cap out at the same time you get your last pointtrivially moddable:
data/config/settings:
playermaxlevel: 40 <- change to 100000
xpgainmult: 1 <- change to 1000000
enjoy your invincible godliness
Good to know. I still think the core game should address these issues though because I'd like to see the gameplay balanced around it instead of doing something that feels a bit cheaty (like adding 100 lives in contra cheaty) but thanks for the info!
ye of little faithThe issue is that it could cause issues down the line with overflow. If you want a maxed out character at the start, just download the Console Commands mod and add in some skill points instead of suggesting and doing something that could end up leading to more bugs for Alex to worry about!
http://imgur.com/a/4GY9u (http://imgur.com/a/4GY9u)
(don't mind the experience loss from the last bit, it has no real effect on gameplay and is only caused by the tutorial script)
I disagree. Skill choices in the game as it is can alter the playstyle in regard to what kind of combat you're seeking out (and what you try to avoid), what kind of missions you're better at, and how efficient it is to build your fleet one way or another. There is room for far more specialization, and I think the game would only benefit by providing it. Sandboxes tell stories, and stories about how youre good at everything are boring. In addition, there are upcoming features that will add more opportunity for specialization.
The only thing keeping the game from enforcing more specialization at present is how wide open the economy is, and how easy it is to make money. If the economy tightens (as it should), it will no longer be cost efficient to build jack of all trades fleets that can do everything.
Example: Running bounty missions is profitable if your fleet and skill selection makes your fleet efficient at combat (need to spend fewer supplies on ship deployment and repair costs, need to drag around fewer ships that dont contribute to combat effectiveness). Run a dedicated combat fleet with just enough fuel ships to get you where you need to go and back, and the skills to make that fleet effective at combat with minimal deployment, and bounty missions will always be insanely profitable. Run a bloated fleet with a bunch of extra salvage and storage ships, skills that dont make you efficient at combat, and you can easily blow the entire mission reward with round trip travel, deployment, and maintenance costs.
The current economy trivializes ship acquisition, supply purchase, and fleet inefficiency, reducing overall game challenge. If that ever changes, as I expect it has to to provide any kind of challenge, you will have to specialize more to get ahead. If the game didnt provide a lot of opportunities for specialized playthroughs with different fleet compositions, I would have tired of it long ago. Otherwise the game would be just about pursuing the same superior ships over and over with each playthrough, and I would have tired of that rapidly.
Your notion that the game will be so delicately balanced that your skill selection will determine if bounty missions are profitable or not... Sound so unfun :-\ I really hope we don't end up there. More power to you if you like it, but we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Besides that, your example seems a bit contradictory. Right now, anyone and everyone can salvage most things and if you can't salvage something then you blow it up and salvage the debris instead. As such salvage ships are good for everyone. Further more, if you follow PCCL's example and quintuple supply costs and/or follow your example of locking down the economy more (I think that's what you were implying. Apologies in advance...), flying 4-20ly to the nearest bounty without storage and fuel ships and industry/leadership skills to reduce those costs will be harder and less efficient.
Maybe what you were going for would be well served by having faction specific opportunities. The games I think told really good stories and had good replayability involved aligning the player with different factions each play through. Today you could go all Pirate, and that's pretty dope. Go rob people blind. Another play-through you could be the bounty hunter and chase down the pirates you used to play as in a previous life. Be a TT shill or Hegemony officer another day. Skills have nothing to do with it though.
Right now, anyone and everyone can salvage most things and if you can't salvage something then you blow it up and salvage the debris instead. As such salvage ships are good for everyone.
Ironically, this is a good example for the argument I was making. For me the odyssey works really well in AI hands because without enough combat oriented skills, it's hard to make the funky layout work (700 range autopulses is no bueno on a ship of that size and layout, i'll just hop in my Paragon which only costs 5 more OP and has built-in mega range extenders). Personally I'm super annoyed that a skill decision I made forever ago means I can't effectively use one of my favorite ships >:(Given the fighter changes, I have a feeling Odyssey may work better as a beam boat, and use its fighter bay for kinetics. I have a feeling that one fighter bay may not be enough. I need to find one now to see what it can do. Odyssey is the original battlecarrier, but it appears Legion may steal all of its thunder.
btw, super jealous you got a Paragon without TT commission. I went the commission route and then snuck into a Hegemony base an gave'em 20 betas to make them friends again (300% rep gain). No big deal but I was hoping to remain unaffiliated.Just whack some bounties and you will get one eventually. That is how I found most of my ships. The independent military markets are not reliable enough, or they sometimes offer the ships I want but I cannot afford them at the time, and then they are (sometimes) gone when I have cash to spare later.
Your notion of a game that is so untuned as to provide little incentive for player experimentation, roleplay, and specialization, and hence little replay value sounds fun to me...for about 2 hours until I get the best ships and faceroll the AI, and then never play the game again. To each their own I guess.
No need to be snide,
5. I love fighters but it seems that you can just roll with 4 or more carriers and win most fights,even the final battle.It's on you tube if you want to see.I get people want to play how they want to play but I think
fighter are to op that's just my opinion.
Well this one is composed mostly of carriers with a capital ship that does some damage,however as you can see fighters are a powerful swarm.
Interesting, I guess your point stands! Although it's worth noting that player modded something, he has 300 op points available for that battle and you normally only get 120 (unless there's some mechanic I don't understand, *I* only got 120). That said, he only used like 122 (that still means one free ship! nyah). He also has incredible range on those 4! tachyon lances, I bet he could've done it with the Paragon alone.Not sure about that. Maybe with skilled; but with an unskilled Paragon (D), I needed the fighters to distract the battlestation. Its HIL has more range than yours, and if the Paragon gets flux-locked, that HIL will hurt badly once your shields drop. Combined with Gauss and Squalls, it is a bad situation.
...he has 300 op points available for that battle and you normally only get 120 (unless there's some mechanic I don't understand, *I* only got 120).
I have some Feedback, minor but I'm still discovering everything.
1. Carrier Command, and Fighter Doctrine(both are the exact same skill, mostly): Please remove Carrier Command, it makes no sense having two skill that do the same thing, plus stacking them will make fighters very OP! Both have the same exact level up bonus, except fighter Doctrine gives you hull mods. I am thinking this was just missed, rather than intentional.
Question: Can we expect to see mining added to the game? I figured something would be added by now, scavenging is one thing, but I want to blast some rocks too!
Mining will probably be added, but more likely in the fashion of establishing, managing and protecting a mining facility of some sort. Blasting rocks yourself tends to get boring quickly.
Mining will probably be added, but more likely in the fashion of establishing, managing and protecting a mining facility of some sort. Blasting rocks yourself tends to get boring quickly.
It would be useful for long-distance fleets if it could allow the player to replenish supplies/fuel particularly if stranded but also maybe as a mechanism for deep space expeditions
Do officers really have the EW skill? The only time I noticed EW from enemy fleets are those with Omens in them, which (I think) have the ECM hullmod built-in.
I do not see how UI would work for frigates (aside from missile boats). Shot range is so bad that I might as well take Safety Override instead (and that eats most of the OP). Frigates, at least those I pilot, need all the shot range they can get
As others have mentioned here, I really feel like the combat path is not at all balanced with the scavenging path. Given the limited number of skill points (which I will probably bypass via mod at some point), I feel that bounties need to have their rewards greatly increased. As of right now, I can only have a decent start by going industry; everything else is not worth the investment.Bounties are only worth it if you can kill two or more at a time. Killing only one bounty before going home is not profitable enough. Having new bounties posted as soon as they are available, much like distress calls and faction wars, would help with this.
I'm all for UI staying as it is - I think its much better for gameplay for the speed booster to be only good in niche builds. I've used it on precisely 1 ship build so far.The -25% penalty is too harsh. Every time I tried it on a conventional warship, it gets outranged badly and loses the flux war. With high-tech ships, it is already hard to win a flux war with inefficient weapons and the now overly cowardly AI. (I feel like I am playing against a camper or turtle player.) With other ships, my long-range weapons become medium range weapons, and if I use 700 range ballistics, they suffer just like high-tech ships. Maybe on a carrier that has no business fighting (though I have no room for it since other hullmods are more valuable). With various relay hullmods, I now use those instead of Unstable Injector on civilians. -15% may be more reasonable. Even with Gunnery Implants 3, it would only break even.
the speed booster to be only good in niche builds. I've used it on precisely 1 ship build so far.Same. Civilian ships only, for maximum running away speed.
UI is not that useless.I would not call it auto-pick unless I have Gunnery Implants 3. When I tried it on Wolf and Medusa (with unskilled character), they get outranged so badly by similarly sized enemies that my flagship gets flux-locked before they get into range to fire. They already have trouble trying to pressure enemies without getting shot back with only 600 range. I was better off with Safety Override if I wanted to get that close (and I do not have enough OP left to stack Unstable Injector with Safety Override).
It's still auto-pick for most frigates. They can't hope to outrange anything more than other frigates and maybe some DEs anyway, so it's best to stack speed as much as possible. Unless you pick SO instead.
It's also auto-pick for Carriers (just put a Cautious/Timid officer in it and enjoy).
Otherwise it can be useful for Medusa(player piloting only), Aurora (AI can use competently only beamboat variant), Odyssey (just in case, of course it's better to get a real Capital). Ships that are not going to impress anyone at range, but have decent base speed.
I agree that -25% may to be too harsh though. Especially when combined with SO.
Taking a commission with a major faction early on helps to make fighting random, non-bounty battles a bit more profitable. Of course, taking a commission also has its downsides...
As for Skills, I know the intent was definitely to nerf Combat—the player and lvl 20 officers were so good that non-officer'ed ships were practically irrelevant.
The fighters set to engage causing the zero flux boost to not work is probably intentional as well—it'd make it far too easy for carriers to kite while their fighters whittled down their target. Of course, the Helmsmanship skill can allow carriers to keep the ZFB, so maybe look into getting that for your carrier officers?
my issue is the utter lack of fleet wide skills in the skill trees that affect combat rather than campaign they have gone from overpowered to almost non-existent.
As others have said Combat in general has been punished in this patch with the combination of high deployment costs, lack of salvage, and terrible recovered ship resale value, attaching a band aid to the wound by taking a commission does not rectify that.
I understand the issue with 0.72a skills and they largely deserved a nerf, my issue is the utter lack of fleet wide skills in the skill trees that affect combat rather than campaign they have gone from overpowered to almost non-existent.
Gameplay: Overall starting out is a massive grind as combat/trade is even less profitable since you seem to want to nerf anything profitable into the ground. The lack of discovering / exploiting trade routes that don't involve a temporary event, the stingy salvage and even stingier selling of (d) mod hulls to shipyards has made the game if anything more unpleasant to me.This is where the missions come in. You can take missions to scan things in far-flung systems for 100,000 a pop, and doing them only requires a Dram and maybe your starting frigates if you want to fight the domain Probes. You do one of those and you've got enough to buy and outfit a pair of destroyers.
The fighters set to engage causing the zero flux boost to not work is probably intentional as well—it'd make it far too easy for carriers to kite while their fighters whittled down their target. Of course, the Helmsmanship skill can allow carriers to keep the ZFB, so maybe look into getting that for your carrier officers?That is the only thing redeeming about Helmsmanship 3, the carrier will be at full speed even while fighters are engaged. Without it, the perk is a complete joke.
There are a few questionable decisions in the Combat Tree that I'd like to see resolved but going heavy Combat means you're ship is 3x harder to kill, hits way harder, and is a lot more maneuverable vs. base. You can turn a single ship into the equivalent of 2 or 3 but you're never going to turn it into a fleet-killing murder machine like before.That is the problem. I sink everything into Combat and only come out mildly stronger. I get better results investing into fleet skills in Leadership, Technology, and (if going for clunkers) maybe Industry; and probably only need to spend fewer points. There are not very many good perks in Combat (but there are some).
The fighters set to engage causing the zero flux boost to not work is probably intentional as well—it'd make it far too easy for carriers to kite while their fighters whittled down their target. Of course, the Helmsmanship skill can allow carriers to keep the ZFB, so maybe look into getting that for your carrier officers?That is the only thing redeeming about Helmsmanship 3, the carrier will be at full speed even while fighters are engaged. Without it, the perk is a complete joke.
Focusing on Combat skills only is a waste of time. Combined with cowardly AI and gutted Unstable Injectors, your flagship has trouble punching above its weight quickly. Player gets more bang for his buck focusing mostly in fleetwide and/or campaign skills. A few Combat skills should be okay, but putting everything in pilot-only skills and ignoring fleet is very limiting.There are a few questionable decisions in the Combat Tree that I'd like to see resolved but going heavy Combat means you're ship is 3x harder to kill, hits way harder, and is a lot more maneuverable vs. base. You can turn a single ship into the equivalent of 2 or 3 but you're never going to turn it into a fleet-killing murder machine like before.That is the problem. I sink everything into Combat and only come out mildly stronger. I get better results investing into fleet skills in Leadership, Technology, and (if going for clunkers) maybe Industry; and probably only need to spend fewer points. There are not very many good perks in Combat (but there are some).
Skills:
Industry skills are nearly mandatory to start out / turn a profit. Single D hull mods are nearly non existent without skills and mostly non existent with skills.
Technology/Leadership/Combat all lack fleet wide punch and are mediocre compared to 0.72a skills.
Combat: Ordering fighters to engage will constantly trickle flux and prevent the carrier from gaining zero flux speed bonus.
TL;DR: It feels like you tipped the scales too much in favor of the new salvage / survey / skill revamp and basic gameplay has become an uphill climb.
After more playing I've actually found industry to be largely a waste. For three very important reasons:
1. There's no skill limitation on the size of your cargo hold
2. You don't need any skills to do analyse derelict missions
3. Having a powerful combat fleet is not mutually exclusive to trading and salvaging
So if you actually take a look at the skills and what they offer:
- Surveying planets costs supplies and is inconsistent and will be uneconomical until outposts. When you factor that the supply cost reduces the time you can spend in far flung corners and that there are finite planets nearby it's not worthwhile.
- Recovering ships, well it's very easy to just not, or to only salvage fuel/cargo ships as pack mules until you're loaded and want to keep good rare ships and can afford to fix them
- Salvaging, one point in this is essential since those domain era probes have decent amounts of loot. Survey ships, motherships and outposts above 25% rating are few and far between and you certainly couldn't rely on them to sustain a fleet.
The easiest, funnest, best way I've found is to jack up combat and those essential blue skills (longer weapon range, +5 to S-burn and transverse jump, lower fuel cost, increased flux capacity and dissipation, the godly 10% extra ordnance points) and build up a fleet with lots of fuel and cargo space to do both surveying derelict missions and bounties in the same general vicinity. It's not that much harder or more expensive than having a pure combat fleet as tankers and freighters are actually quite cheap. I mean you don't actually need any skills to do analyse derelict missions and they pay well so why would you limit yourself to having a weak combat fleet when the bounties are where the real money is? Furthermore it's actually much more profitable and efficient to crush fleets and steal their loot and trade that off alongside other trade missions than to avoid fighting.
Ehhhh I find the combat tree to be more potent than that, if you really want an indication then battling a ship with an officer vs one without is very noticeable, also try running a simulation on a ship with and without a high ranked pilot, it makes soloing with a decent ship a lot easier if done right and the benefits compound.I tried; not impressed with the results. Ships still run away from you. Multiple capitals will still wreck you (except maybe for Paragon flagship). If I take Paragon to kill capitals, the other ships will kite and run down my CR (because there are many), and there is little I can do about that. If I take a faster ship, it is not powerful enough to kill everything, if it can survive getting hammered by capital-grade firepower.
Odyssey is perhaps the weakest capital in the game.
P.S. Or... as alternative, Odyssey can go like Apogee and have its campaign stats boosted so that it is truly a hybrid ship akin to Gemini or Apogee instead of a warship with slightly better capacity stats. Currently, Odyssey is a mediocre master-of-none.
It has been exactly that for a long time already.Not really. Astral was worse. It was an Odyssey with more flight decks at the cost of worse stats all-around and much slower and fatter profile. During 0.7x, fighters were so bad that both was bad, though Astral was worse. Also, Odyssey had somewhat better defenses than Conquest. During 0.71, both battleships and both battlecruisers could solo fleets, though battleships were best.
Not really. Astral was worse.
As for hybrids, few are good, at least early in the game. Shepherd is great for early-game. Gemini can do in a pinch as a freighter despite eating a bit more. By endgame, sure, you want Colossus/Atlas and Prometheus as your stat sticks.
-snip-
5. I'm not sure if Alex wants there to be storyline and quests. I guess we'll see.
-snip-
Shepherd is good, but in part because there simply isn't a dedicated freighter frigate to compare with.It depends on weapons I have and capacity I need. I probably would lean toward two Gemini, because of more capacity, and they have fighters. Even better would be Drover/Condor and Gemini because I have more fighters, almost as much capacity (for looting), and Gemini can fight with its fighters and maybe weapons, if necessary.
Would you prefer 2 Geminis to Drover + Buffalo? Same amount of fighters, more survivability (due to speed), need only 1 officer. Still Gemini is among better hybrids. There are worse.
Also, while I agree that finding use for Hybrids is easier in the early game, that doesn't help Odyssey at all. By the time I can afford a Capital, I want one that's worth it.
At the very least, I want a win condition that says you win the game and maybe end it (e.g., you kill Morgoth, you have Grond and the iron crown, retire anytime to win). I would not mind a lose condition that ends the game (e.g., Kohr-Ah reach Earth, everyone dies, you lose, Game Over!)
I suspect that endgame will be there "when it's done".
- Add in an extended Fleet log that shows all of the "Sensor Data" you collect for the entirety of the game. Data could be cleared whenever a target is Surveyed/Scavenged/Pounded to Scrap.
- Add in an indication on the Sector or Intel map that shows warning beacon information. This could be as simple as a note on the system, saying "Warning Beacon: Yellow/Orange/Red" or "Threat Level: Y/O/R", or similar. I've found in all of my campaigns, once I get close to wanting to enter Orange/Red level systems, I am at a high enough fuel consumption that I do not want to go searching for them. I could drop off Ships to search, and write down the information but that doesn't really make sense. I like flying my fleetball of death and watching enemies scatter.*
Spoiler*Well, except for when I did a Fuel Procurement mission in between bounties...and my fleet with a Dominator, Mora, multiple Enforcers and other destroyers was intercepted by a Pirate fleet whose fleet highlight was 4 combat mules. I admired their reckless bravery. They, of course, did not survive ;D[close]
(This has probably been mentioned before, but I couldn't find the thread...)
@Drokkath there's also a map filter which shows if you've surveyed completely given system or planet, depending on whether map is in sector or system mode.
@A.Winge Uhh, methinks there is something like that already in the game, its rather hidden in under Intel section where there's a tab Planets [2] and I can confirm because I'm looking currently straight at it, the new tab section I mean. Since I've explored and surveyed many planets in star systems I've been to which is about 5-15% of the entire medium/normal sized game's star map already, which surprisingly feels like I've explored more than that and in a good way, doesn't really bother me as much if I start running into similar planets but fortunately with the way SS is built up it's probably a more easy thing to "fix"/add down the line by making or altering a few existing 2d planet art (which seems to be a case already) with slight different craters and landscape areas and atmosphere effects and size if it has any to making a few unique planets like bombarded and blown in half types of planets or massive objects and thus implementing more variety along with text.
*Snip*
What I cannot find is a way to store log entries after the fact. As others have mentioned, this includes things like Research Stations, Derelict Ships, or (please leave this one for as long as I need it) Domain Motherships. I think that all of these are seeded during map generation, and only despawn once the player interacts with them (like the stable debris fields in some systems). Distress calls that expire or objects that are interacted with could be removed from the list or put in an archive; whatever works best or is doable in the current implementation.
And I should also clarify that I do understand the different warning level pings (although Red and Orange could be slightly more distinct colors). What I want is that as soon as I discover a warning beacon (when I get the XP), I would like it to permanently show up on the system map/intel map differently without having to enter or explore the system. Think of it as a way to explore the system later, or avoid bounties/sensor missions in that system if unprepared.
And I should also clarify that I do understand the different warning level pings (although Red and Orange could be slightly more distinct colors). What I want is that as soon as I discover a warning beacon (when I get the XP), I would like it to permanently show up on the system map/intel map differently without having to enter or explore the system. Think of it as a way to explore the system later, or avoid bounties/sensor missions in that system if unprepared.
Umm... Wat? ??? Systems with warning beacons do show up on your sector map as you see them, permanently. You don't have to go into them. You just have to discover the beacon from hyperspace.
[Finally gets the chance to try this out.]
Ah, I see now. One of the filter options (I think Starscape) hides them by default. Thank you!
I would still like them to be color-coded; right now, they all show up as orange. I don't want to spend 2,000 Fuel only to find that a warning beacon I wanted to farm was only threat level yellow. Additional filter options to highlight those systems would be nice as well (though not required).
Maybe I'm not reading the bounty descriptions right, but right now it seems that no matter what the bounty amount is the description is always a kind of vague "sizeable fleet"? I'm guessing this is on the docket for future tweaking but a bit more detail of the bounty fleet would go a long way to encouraging bounty hunting since you kind of just have to learn what size fleets tend to correspond to certain bounty amount thresholds. I've only gone up to 80k~ bounties so I could be missing something.
No, I think it basically always says "sizeable fleet". If I'm honest I agree that there needs to be some more information: maybe what the bounty's flagship is or something.That would be nice. I would hate to drive all the way out somewhere only to find out my fleet is not strong enough to kill the fleet because one of the ships is too powerful.
QuoteNo, I think it basically always says "sizeable fleet". If I'm honest I agree that there needs to be some more information: maybe what the bounty's flagship is or something.That would be nice. I would hate to drive all the way out somewhere only to find out my fleet is not strong enough to kill the fleet because one of the ships is too powerful.
QuoteNo, I think it basically always says "sizeable fleet". If I'm honest I agree that there needs to be some more information: maybe what the bounty's flagship is or something.That would be nice. I would hate to drive all the way out somewhere only to find out my fleet is not strong enough to kill the fleet because one of the ships is too powerful.
The bounty fleets start off pretty anemic and they only increase in size as you complete bounties. If you haven't been doing bounties for most of the game then your late-game fleet will severely over power any and all bounties until you complete a dozen or so (possibly at a loss in terms of time and fuel). It'd be nice if there was always a mix of bounties (big and small). However, that would necessitate the player having clarity into what they're going after or else the issue you've raised would plague players.
The bounty fleets start off pretty anemic and they only increase in size as you complete bounties. If you haven't been doing bounties for most of the game then your late-game fleet will severely over power any and all bounties until you complete a dozen or so (possibly at a loss in terms of time and fuel). It'd be nice if there was always a mix of bounties (big and small). However, that would necessitate the player having clarity into what they're going after or else the issue you've raised would plague players.
Let's not nerf the Mora, okay? Let's accept that not all ships can be killed in the same way as every other ship. Bring HE, bring bigger guns—not everything should go down easily to a pack of frigates or some other anemic composition.
We have way too many hammers in Starsector and not enough anvils—the fact that the Mora has been standing out such much is proof of that!
(Hint: Not really possible, but more due to devious AI than lack of skill power.)
There's a huge difference between "Mora", "Mora with level 20 officer", and "Mora with level 20 officer with all the defensive skills". DF makes those scale just entirely too well.
Damper Field: damage reduction down to 50% (from 67%), charge regen rate halved (1 per 20 seconds)
Damper Field ... immunity to EMP
In 0.7.2 brawler could face tank 2 reapers thanks to DF and still live... Now 1 reaper leaves it at less than half of its HPs. At 50% damage reduction it'll barely survive one reaper.
Problem with DF is that there are 2 frigates with it and one cruiser and now DF is balanced around that cruiser because it's getting into durability ranges outside the game scope (Mora DFing has effectively 3750 armour and 30000 HPs), while frigs were hardy but not impossible to destroy... And they couldn't attack you while DFing, whereas Mora can. I wish DF scaled inversely with ship size because otherwise Brawlers will loose effectiveness and Centurions all they have going for them.
Hybrid mounts is not a good enough reason for Centurion when it can only point two at enemies, and ballistics are generally better than energy unless you want EMP. Because enemies are constantly kiting now, Centurion does not have time to point three guns at enemies (when it is already difficult enough to do) and keep up with them. The best Centurion can do is keep firing two railguns at small ships while constantly advancing, never giving the enemy the chance to lower shields, vent, and recover. Despite less damage to armor, constant long-range kinetic pressure is perhaps the easiest way for Centurion to kill frigates.I use them as anti-fighter screens with tac lasers and an escort order. They work quite well.
IMO: make the Mora's "combat prowess" more about firepower instead of toughness. Change its medium missiles to medium composites, up its flux stats and lower its shield efficiency/arc.I prefer Heron for combat prowess because it can mount HVD (or Mauler) and kite-and-snipe. I usually use Mora because more enemies use it (and more easy to recover) and because it can tank. If it cannot tank, then why use Mora once player can find enough Heron to use? Also, Mora consumes 4 fuel instead of 3 like most cruisers. The point is if Mora cannot tank anymore and gets nothing else, then it effectively becomes a pirate-style junk ship like Buffalo mk 2.
They shouldn't be nerfed to the ground, Mora should have some niche. Tanking is interesting, but it's also irritating if you can do that for much longer than any other ship in your weight class.
About level cap: look for "maxlevel" or something like that in starsector-core/data/config/settings.json.
Don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure that Damper Field's damage resistance procs before the armor formula. So if a harpoon (750 HE) hits a Mora with its base armor value (1250), it should only do 281 damage. Not to mention the Mora still has its shield and fighters to keep missiles at bay. The missiles also are good to keep enemy ships at bay.
Don't quote me on this, but I'm pretty sure that Damper Field's damage resistance procs before the armor formula. So if a harpoon (750 HE) hits a Mora with its base armor value (1250), it should only do 281 damage. Not to mention the Mora still has its shield and fighters to keep missiles at bay. The missiles also are good to keep enemy ships at bay.
Hmmm, I dunno. I've been playing 'The Last Hurrah' a lot, and I'll pump multiple Reapers into a Mora and just barely get through the armor. I'll check to make sure its not just bias.
I think you may have had bad luck with the starting markets, I had a Paragon, Astral, Odyssey, Aurora, and Apogee in my first visits to Tri-tachyon markets.
30 days, although you could also install console commands and use forcemarketupdate. Alternatively, you could try going on a long surveying trip or something. (Long travel times are the quickest way to burn days relative to playtime I've found.)I think you may have had bad luck with the starting markets, I had a Paragon, Astral, Odyssey, Aurora, and Apogee in my first visits to Tri-tachyon markets.
I remember seeing good variety in the Tri-Tac market before getting a commission. But in that same game, once I decided to go with the Tri-Tac, the only ship I could find afterwards was the Odyssey. I was not pleased... >:(
How often do the markets refresh?
Way too often after completing the tutorial I was trapped in a slow death spiral as I didn't have enough money or supplies to really get out of Corvus, the local bounty ran out before I could build up any cash, and I couldn't sell my ships to get anything different since sell prices are so low now
my advice is, sit in hyperspace and go dark
if you don't move, you don't burn fuel. chill out near a star somewhere and pick off passing fleets.
you still get the bounty as long as you are near enough to the star in hyperspace.
I thought Alex said small fleets (or in your case a single ship) wouldn't or couldn't IP a larger fleet. ???Either it is bugged or not working as advertised as my end game fleet gets interdicted all the time by tiny and weak ass shuttle fleets. And while yes, I don't get stunned in place but I do lose active SB and it is forced into a cooldown
Could IP work with two button presses, like the Transponder does? So, a prime on an initial press (which would reveal the range and perhaps highlight nearby fleets which are likely to be affected by the pulse), then actually activated on a second press.
(I wouldn't mind if it had its fuel cost brought back in as well, though I do understand the reasons that was removed.)What?! Emergency Burn still burns fuel to activate.
I'd actually like it if Emergency Burn didn't cost CR, or cost a lot less.That is what the Safety Procedures 3 perk does, along with halving (D) mod penalties. (I would get Safety Procedures 3 for the (D)-mod penalty mitigation alone.) Even without CR loss, Emergency Burn hurts too much to use. The worst part of Emergency Burn is blocking Sustained Burn until EB fully recharges. The fuel cost also hurts, especially if you have a big fleet and no Navigation 2 perk.
Emergency burn is good for anything where you need a sudden burst of agility and speed, really. Sustained burn does not have that - it takes precious moments to charge up during which you are quite visible, acceleration is slow and turning is horrible.For someone who has Sustained Burn on at nearly all times, using Emergency Burn hurts because it paralyzes the fleet for about a second or two before EB kicks in, then it is better agility at significantly slower top speed for a few seconds, then EB ends and neither EB nor SB can be used for a few more seconds. EB practically kills speed and eats more resources (CR and fuel) on top of that. EB is a raw deal.
(I wouldn't mind if it had its fuel cost brought back in as well, though I do understand the reasons that was removed.)What?! Emergency Burn still burns fuel to activate.