public class StarshipLegends {And calling the createTraits method like this:
public static void createTraits() {
starship_legends.Integration.registerTraitEffect("your_energy_damage_trait_key", new starship_legends.TraitType.Effect() {
@Override
public void apply(MutableShipStatsAPI stats, FleetMemberAPI ship, String id, float effectPercent) {
stats.getEnergyWeaponDamageMult().modifyPercent(id, effectPercent);
}
@Override
public boolean isAppliedToFighters() {
return false;
}
});
starship_legends.Integration.registerTraitEffect("your_special_trait_key", false);
// The scale of this effect can be accessed by using stats.getDynamic().getValue("your_special_trait_key")
}
}
public class ModPlugin extends BaseModPlugin {This method will allow your mod to work with or without Starship Legends by sidestepping class loader conflicts.
@Override
public void onApplicationLoad() {
if(Global.getSettings().getModManager().isModEnabled("sun_starship_legends")) {
StarshipLegends.createTraits();
}
}
}
public class ModPlugin extends BaseModPlugin {You might want to iterate through all hulls and pass in their ID if they meet a certain criteria, such as having a hullmod that only your bio-ships have.
@Override
public void onApplicationLoad() {
if(Global.getSettings().getModManager().isModEnabled("sun_starship_legends")) {
starship_legends.Integration.registerBiologicalShip("myHullID_1");
starship_legends.Integration.registerBiologicalShip("myHullID_2");
}
}
}
I can't wait toPlease do! It's much easier to fix bugs when I know about them :)breakplay with it!
This sounds really cool. What are the mechanics behind crew loyalty?I'll flesh out the FAQs soon with answers to this question and others. For now you might want to take a look at the options file to get an idea of how it works. Basically it's the same as good vs bad traits, with hull damage taken in battle being the primary factor.
299393 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain - java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: ruthless_sector/ModPlugin
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: ruthless_sector/ModPlugin
at starship_legends.ModPlugin.reportCrash(ModPlugin.java:140)
at starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation.applyEffects(Reputation.java:186)
at starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation.applyEffectsBeforeShipCreation(Reputation.java:229)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetMember.updateStats(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetData.syncIfNeeded(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetData.getMembers(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.FleetData.getMembersListCopy(Unknown Source)
at data.scripts.SWPModPlugin.onGameLoad(SWPModPlugin.java:209)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.title.TitleScreenState.dialogDismissed(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.while.dismiss(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.float.dismiss(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.LoadGameDialog.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.OoO0.buttonPressed(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.oooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.Ò00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.oooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.processInput(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.V.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
Caused by: java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: ruthless_sector.ModPlugin
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.net.URLClassLoader$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
at java.net.URLClassLoader.findClass(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadClass(Unknown Source)
... 22 moreI agree with the hull damage concerns. I tend to fly my ships to their last weld in combat but don't typically actually lose them. Maybe the metric could be number of crew casualties? Or maybe CR degradation in combat, representing over-working?
Also, grats on getting mentioned on Alex's twitter.
Are these applied to AI fleets in any way though? I could see this working hand in hand with bounties, facing some legendary fleets and such.Currently reputations only apply to player-owned ships, and for the most part that won't change. The problem with NPC ships having traits is that there would be no good way to show those traits to the player, which would lead to random and unpredictable variations in the strength of enemy ships.
I haven't yet fiddled around with the mod, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think it'd be interesting to have certain good traits associated with getting battle damage (but surviving) and certain bad traits associated with getting through unscathed.This could make sense thematically and I do think it could be interesting, but I wouldn't want to encourage players to get their ships damaged in the hopes of getting certain traits. I think players should be rewarded for playing effectively, not ineffectively.
I agree with the hull damage concerns. I tend to fly my ships to their last weld in combat but don't typically actually lose them. Maybe the metric could be number of crew casualties? Or maybe CR degradation in combat, representing over-working?Using hull damage as the primary metric isn't perfect, but I still think it's the best one. I think the complications for things like crew losses or CR are worse. I think the best way to go about it is to make adjustments based on things like how difficult the battle was (which is accounted for in the current version) and how much damage the ship dealt (which I'll probably add soon).
in my experience, any ship that relies on armor as its primary defense (i.e. the entire low-tech line-up) will usually take a small-to-moderate amount of hull damage in the course of a normal battle.I agree that low-tech style ships are more likely to take some hull damage, but in my experience you can prevent them from taking massive damage more reliably than high-tech ships. I think the real problem is tanky vs squishy ships. I think glass cannons like Sunders should be able to compensate for taking some hull damage by dealing hull damage.
And then you get into the industry fleet-of-clunkers playstyle where you expect your ships to get battered in combat...I agree that starship legends could cause gameplay problems for this playstyle, but thematically I think it fits perfectly. The crewmen of a fleet like that would hate their ships, captains, and lives, and It makes sense that rust-buckets would have bad reputations. From a gameplay perspective I don't think the commonality of bad traits would be too bad due to how disposable ships are in a fleet like that. High ship turn-over means more bad traits, but it also means more ships (with different reputations) to choose from.
Personally, I already skew towards preferring high-tech shield-based ships just because I don't like taking crew casualties. I don't need another thing that encourages that same playstyle.Same. Overall, I do think that high-tech ships are generally the most powerful, but I don't want to try to compensate for imbalances in vanilla.
I'd suggest that there be a way to wipe the slate clean and start over - maybe treating the reputation mod as a d-mod that'll get removed (and then re-applied clean) after a full shipyard restoration of the hull?I would personally prefer for reputations to persist through restorations so that it's possible to restore a ship with a reputation you like. However, I am considering adding an opt-in option to make it so that ships in storage gradually lose their traits.
I haven't yet fiddled around with the mod, so take this with a grain of salt, but I think it'd be interesting to have certain good traits associated with getting battle damage (but surviving) and certain bad traits associated with getting through unscathed.This could make sense thematically and I do think it could be interesting, but I wouldn't want to encourage players to get their ships damaged in the hopes of getting certain traits. I think players should be rewarded for playing effectively, not ineffectively.
with hull damage taken in battle being the primary factor.
Would it be possible to have a modifier that changes the chances for negative traits either on tech-level or deviation from average size health pool basis?in my experience, any ship that relies on armor as its primary defense (i.e. the entire low-tech line-up) will usually take a small-to-moderate amount of hull damage in the course of a normal battle.I agree that low-tech style ships are more likely to take some hull damage, but in my experience you can prevent them from taking massive damage more reliably than high-tech ships. I think the real problem is tanky vs squishy ships. I think glass cannons like Sunders should be able to compensate for taking some hull damage by dealing hull damage.Personally, I already skew towards preferring high-tech shield-based ships just because I don't like taking crew casualties. I don't need another thing that encourages that same playstyle.Same. Overall, I do think that high-tech ships are generally the most powerful, but I don't want to try to compensate for imbalances in vanilla.
New Known Issues
- Restoring a ship will remove it's reputation hullmod until it has any new reputation change (including crew opinions of officers), at which point all previous traits will be restored.
- It's possible to get the same type of trait. Starship legends prevents ships from getting traits they already have, but not ones that they will have.
@Zhentar: Hull damage doesn't matter for civilian ships that aren't deployed. Their chance of getting a negative trait is simply 50%. The other things are bugs that have recently been reported to me. I just came here to let people know about them until I can get a fix out, but thanks for telling me about them!
@Tei, Flunky: Thanks for the feedback, guys! I'll reply soon, but for now I want to focus on getting a patch out.
That way i could still behave like a glory hound while spacing half of my crew.
The combat analytics mod by Nick allow for some pretty impressive stat recording during battle. Perhaps something similar could be exploited to determine the traits one ship can gain depending on its performance?That way i could still behave like a glory hound while spacing half of my crew.
A suggestion I have is to make the traits not purely positive or negative, but to give them mixed upsides and downsides. So there would be traits that are better and traits that are worse, but you'd get a bit of something even out of bad traits.I am very much in favor of this. If the goal is to give ships variety and uniqueness, rather than straight up "buffs or re-roll", this would be better. Using the existing system, basically at each fame level the ship could get a guaranteed positive and negative trait that are semi-linked in a thematic way.
Would it be possible to make it a three point chance of malus plot rather than the two currently? E.g. instead of "chanceOfMalusAtNoHullLost" and "chanceOfMalusAtHalfHullLost", it could be a 0->33->66 sort of thing or the like?It's certainly possible, but I want to avoid making the system any more complicated than necessary. I think it's important for game mechanics to be easy to understand.
Small typo: "Volitile Flux Core"Thanks! Fixed for the next release.
what the long term goal of the mod. Is it to make the player look to build ther "perfect" starship, with no critical nigative traits? Or is the goal to give ships variety by giving ships both positive and negative traits?Very much both, depending on the stage of the game. At the start of a game I want it to be about dealing with whatever traits you end up with as best you can, but by the very late-game the goal is to provide both a money and xp sink in the form of optimizing traits to build ideal ships.
Minor feature suggestion: changed hullmod description/"trait-up" description for ships with zero crew capacity. Mechanically it still works, but an automated ship with reference to crew can be an odd inconsistency.Agreed. It's on my TODO list, along with a few other things to support automated ships.
Would it be possible to have a modifier that changes the chances for negative traits either on tech-level or deviation from average size health pool basis?Possible, yeah, but I'd like to avoid deliberate balancing. I think change 4 will help normalize things. Change 1 might help too, especially in cases like Dominator/Onslaught.
Does this mod add the ability for enemy captains and their fleets/ships to also have a reputation and custom ship hullmods?
Are these applied to AI fleets in any way though? I could see this working hand in hand with bounties, facing some legendary fleets and such.Currently reputations only apply to player-owned ships, and for the most part that won't change. The problem with NPC ships having traits is that there would be no good way to show those traits to the player, which would lead to random and unpredictable variations in the strength of enemy ships.
However, if I can figure out a good way to do it, I would like to make it so that the flagships of bounty fleets have traits sometimes. I would have to be able to list the traits in the intel screen though, so it might not be feasible.
Speaking of which, what exactly influences what traits you get? My dominator flagship has reduced vent rates, is it because I vent so much in battle?Nope. It's mostly just RNG (for reasons discussed above)
On the other hand, i should probably wait for the inevitable others gameplay-change mods you'll release after this one before playing. I mean, this is your fourth one, you won't stop there right?For now I will. My other ideas for gameplay-change mods have a much lower ROI than the ones I've made so far. I think my next mod will be a very small, refined version of ICE. And when I say very small, I mean only 3 new ships.
I have noticed that some (but not all) Sylphon ships do not seem to get traits. In my "pursuit" frigate/fast destroyer squadron for auto-resolving stragglers, most ships are now "Famous", while the Celica Rel I have has no traits. Meanwhile the Sylphon battlecruiser and the totally-not-Spaceship-Yamato I have get traits just fine, even without a crew for the former.Starship legends currently neglects ships with a crew requirement of 0, assuming any excess crew are just along for the ride. I'll work on improving this.
You could go more in depth and track a lot more metrics, [snip] although associating stuff that happens in battle to traits more closely might have its own issues and would result in a lot more coding work for Sundog.While basing traits on specific things that happen in battle would be better for the storytelling aspect of things, I think it would be extremely difficult (if not impossible) to make the gameplay work well.
A suggestion I have is to make the traits not purely positive or negative, but to give them mixed upsides and downsides. So there would be traits that are better and traits that are worse, but you'd get a bit of something even out of bad traits.
I am very much in favor of this.Do you guys think change 4 would do a good job of accomplishing the same goal?
...A suggestion I have is to make the traits not purely positive or negative, but to give them mixed upsides and downsides. So there would be traits that are better and traits that are worse, but you'd get a bit of something even out of bad traits.I am very much in favor of this.Do you guys think change 4 would do a good job of accomplishing the same goal?
Do you guys think change 4 would do a good job of accomplishing the same goal?
While basing traits on specific things that happen in battle would be better for the storytelling aspect of things, I think it would be extremely difficult (if not impossible) to make the gameplay work well.
Do you guys think change 4 would do a good job of accomplishing the same goal?
Maybe you could actually add supply cost reductions for negative traits? That would make them still permanent D mods, but at least they would come with the same benefits.
Thanks for all the feedback and suggestions! I'm glad you guys are enjoying it :D
Avoiding Bad Traits
I've received a LOT of good feedback about this (both here and on Discord), and I've given quite a bit of thought to figuring out how best to improve the system. So here's a rough idea of what I have in mind:I also need to write up a clear and detailed description of how the system works for the FAQ.
- Ships that deal enough hull damage in combat will have a reduced chance of getting a bad trait.
- Ships that take very little hull damage in battle will not get bad defense traits for that battle.
- Likewise, ships that do enough damage will not get bad weapon traits.
- Ships will be more likely to get new negative traits the more positive traits they already have, and vice versa.
- Ships that require crew will be able to get traits, just not ones related to crew (maybe some new AI related ones instead)
[...]
Do you guys think change 4 would do a good job of accomplishing the same goal?
ADDITIONS
New trait type: Dutiful/Obstinate Crew - affects chance of improving loyalty.
Added support for ships with no crew requirement, including renamed crew traits (e.g. "Resilient Automated Systems" instead of "Determined Crew")
Clicking the ship icon of a reputation change notification will now open up the refit screen for that ship
FIXES
Fixed trait limit not being applied (by default there should never be more than 2 traits per tier). Existing ships with more than 2 traits per tier should be fixed automatically
Fixed removal of pre-existing duplicate trait types not working
Fixed trait effects not applying to ships in storage
Fixed mothballed ships being able to earn traits
Corrected spelling of "Volitile Flux Core" to "Volatile Flux Core"
REPUTATION GROWTH CHANGES
Reworked calculation for chance of getting positive vs negative traits
Ships that take less than 5% total hull damage in battle will not get a bad defense trait for that battle
Ships that deal more deployment-cost worth of damage than their own cost-to-deploy will not get a bad offensive trait for that battle
Civilian ships are now far less likely to gain new traits beyond "Notable" tier
Normalized loyalty increase chances. It's easier to improve loyalty at low loyalty levels now, but still difficult to get max loyalty
TRAIT BASE EFFECT BALANCE
Agile/Clunky increased from 1 to 3 (maneuverability)
Fast/Slow Turret Gyros increased from 3 to 4 (weapon turn rate)
Robust/Glitchy increased from 2 to 3 (EMP resistance)
Durable/Fragile Mounts increased from 3 to 4 (weapon durability)
Durable/Fragile Engines increased from 3 to 4 (engine durability)
Skilled/Incompetent Engineers increased from 2 to 3 (repair rate)
Removed Meager Fuel Tanks and Meager Cargo Hold traits, which should automatically be removed from existing games on load
Changed Ample Fuel Tanks and Ample Cargo Holds to a flat bonus based on hull size
Ships will be more likely to get new negative traits the more positive traits they already have, and vice versa.You guys brought up some good points about the disadvantages of this change. I'm no longer planning on adding it. I found stormbringer951's argument about how this mechanic would be perceived by players who don't know about it to be particularly compelling. If I can't think of a better way to accomplish similar goals I might add it as an opt-in setting.
Yes, exactly. As well as the time it would take to track all the necessary data (I would basically need to re-implement most of the functionality of Combat Analytics)While basing traits on specific things that happen in battle would be better for the storytelling aspect of things, I think it would be extremely difficult (if not impossible) to make the gameplay work well.
You mean that when it becomes too granular, there would be incentives to do play in a weird way to get optimal chances at good traits, like all the Elder Scrolls player skill-levelling-by-usage shenanigans?
My views may be warped, and I haven't played seriously in a while, but I don't find ships so trivially cheap and easy to find that you can just scrap a ship and expect to get a new one. Generally cash is too tight for that. Also you can't often find a new ship of the same type, at least for the really good ones you want.
Must everything be stat-based?Yes because that would be a "negative trait" in many people's eyes. Hell, many would hate it more due to the fact that they are getting punished, by getting a trait without stat boosts, for doing something hard and succeeding.
Can some titles be simply for fluff/atmosphere?
If a tiny ship kills a big one and get "Giantslayer" does it need a +x% bonus damage agaisnt bigger ships? They very fact it has a history of killing bigger ship allready makes it valuable.
It's an interesting question, becasue when you combine all the mods, bonuses, EXP, skilsl and everything, the power creep is very real simple becasue its all adds up.
Must everything be stat-based?That sounds like a job for a mod that tracks your ships with some degree of accuracy, not this one. I also suspect that non-statbased traits would defeat the point of this mod as well.
Can some titles be simply for fluff/atmosphere?
The issue with perverse incentives and scrapping ships with negative traits is more an issue for the first trait that a ship receives, not so much later ones. This is because: 1) its always the strongest trait, so will keep getting worse.
Must everything be stat-based?
Can some titles be simply for fluff/atmosphere?
These changes look really good - I especially like the incorporation of battle difficulty and damage dealt, as this supports getting positive traits with aggressive playstyles.Ok, I'm glad you think so. I think you've brought up some serious concerns, so it's reassuring that you agree with the changes so far :)
The issue with perverse incentives and scrapping ships with negative traits is more an issue for the first trait that a ship receives, not so much later ones. This is because: 1) its always the strongest trait, so will keep getting worse. 2) Little experience has been 'sunk' into the ship, so there is very little cost to scrapping in terms of building ships with good perks. 3) The ship is worse than a stock version, so replacing it is a net power upgrade.So all three of those points are actually by design. Here's my reasoning for thinking they're good things:
Must everything be stat-based?I'm afraid so, for the reasons stated above, as well as others. I don't think traits would have enough of a point to them without effects. I do think a mod that keeps track of a ship's feats that way would be very cool, but I don't think starship legends is a good fit.
While some buffs are good, one critical bad trait can make a ship permanently tainted to me, cast into the darkest depths of colonial storage. It might be petty, but I can't helping. Having the perfect officer skills, fleet skills, (lack of) d-mods, hullmods, just to get one bad trait and trip yourself at the finish feels not good.Yeah, I hear you. I know there are people who will hate mechanics that force sub-optimal stats no matter what. This mod can't be for everyone, but I do want to make it work well for as many people as I can (within reason).
I'm kinda torn. On one side I understand people who want everything to be PERFECT.If I wanted realism, I'd play a SIM or *gasp* walk outside.
On the other, perfection is boring and unrealistic. It's like making a D&D character with 18 in every score.
I'm kinda torn. On one side I understand people who want everything to be PERFECT.If I wanted realism, I'd play a SIM or *gasp* walk outside.
On the other, perfection is boring and unrealistic. It's like making a D&D character with 18 in every score.
This should be an improvement over notifications, particularly for large fleets:Pay no mind to the wonky outcomes, I cheated quite a lot win.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/iUWSlo0.png)[close]
This list has 3 items: <followed by a padding of 5>
Item 1 <followed by a padding of 3>
Item 2 <followed by a padding of 3>
Item 3 <followed by a padding of 10>
This should be an improvement over notifications, particularly for large fleets:Pay no mind to the wonky outcomes, I cheated quite a lot win.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/iUWSlo0.png)[close]
This should be an improvement over notifications, particularly for large fleets:Pay no mind to the wonky outcomes, I cheated quite a lot win.Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/iUWSlo0.png)[close]
Super impressive! I'd never considered using the Intel screen before to display data.
@Alex: That's a lot of very useful information. Thank you! I had a lot of questions about conventions while putting that together, but ran out of time before I could go digging for examples.
So, since we're on the topic, is there any way to arrange a ship list to the left of a paragraph? I've been meaning to experiment with some hackery to try placing two tool tips side by side.
/* this is the scrolling container */
TooltipMakerAPI outer = panel.createUIElement(width, height, true);
CustomPanelAPI inner = panel.createCustomPanel(width, height, null);
outer.addCustom(inner, 0);
TooltipMakerAPI t1 = inner.createUIElement(width, height, false);
/* do stuff with t1 */
inner.addUIElement(t1);
/* and so on, keeping track of the total height of the stuff added */
outer.getPosition().setSize(width, totalHeight);
/* do this last, since this is where it'll wrap it with a scroller
based on the height we just set */
panel.addUIElement(outer).inTL(0, 0);
Any chance of an option to disable dynamic trait adjustment / getting mixed traits for us powergamers who wanna maximise stats / boosts please!?The options file is pretty flexible, and it should be getting better after the next update. I want this mod to be very flexible, so hopefully there will be a way to make it fit your playstyle well.
This looks great! I'll have to give it a whirl as I'mYou might want to wait a few days! There are a lot of unreleased improvements that I don't have time to finish up at the moment. I'm hoping to have an update out by next weekend.breaking thingstesting my projects :)
I hope not. There's many enough factors when trying to get optimal performance out of a ship, I don't need a trait popping out of the blue and ruining a crucial stat. I'd much rather have it stay optional.
I hope not. There's many enough factors when trying to get optimal performance out of a ship, I don't need a trait popping out of the blue and ruining a crucial stat. I'd much rather have it stay optional.
I'm with this - while I really like this mod and plan on playing with it, I would prefer it stay a mod. Getting good traits is going to be based on difficulty a lot it seems (which I really like), but that means its somewhat new player unfriendly. If I were struggling with combat, it wouldn't be very nice for the game to insult my barely won victory with losses in loyalty and bad traits.
I like the concept, but I must raise my eyebrows at permanent negative effects, that is a serious problem which needs a method of redress, even the dreaded orange bars have a method for repair.Traits will be less permanent in the next update.
I'd like to see a system for negative reputation/crew moral to improve as well, such as switching out captains (or putting an officer into a ship without one to restore discipline) and/or multiple successful battles where the crews moral can improve.Loyalty is how morale is represented in this mod, and it does improve or worsen a ship's traits. I'm not sure exactly what you're suggesting, but it seems pretty similar (at least in terms of the end result) to this work-in-progress feature (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15321.msg247896#msg247896).
Would this be compatible with 0.9a?I think so.
Very cool! I'll add it to my next new game and give overly critical responses. :DGood! :D
Suggestion: Add a 0 OP hull mod to flag ships to keep reputation while mothballed, call it "Museum Ship" or something.So one of the changes between 0.9 and 0.9.1 is that you can put ships in storage without mothballing them, allowing you to store a ship for any length of time without resetting its reputation. Because of this, I don't think such a flag is necessary.
So one of the changes between 0.9 and 0.9.1 is that you can put ships in storage without mothballing them, allowing you to store a ship for any length of time without resetting its reputation. Because of this, I don't think such a flag is necessary.
Being penalized for doing poorly is pretty consistent with the unforgiving supply/fuel grind new players run into. Compared to that, the performance penalties are minor.
"A ship's traits can now change positions or even be removed based on how well they perform in combat"Nope, but that's a good idea. I'll add it to the next release.
Is there an option to disable / adjust likelihood of this in settings at all?
I wanted to check out your after battle report code, but unfortunately you haven't included your source code and your repository is out of date.Just updated it. Sorry about that! I'll have to add that to my update checklist.
Really impressed with your take on 'feature' mods. Keep doing what you're doing.Thanks, I plan to! Although my next project is likely to be a much smaller, higher quality version of my old faction mod, rather than another feature mod.
I noticed carriers show up as 0% damage dealt a lot. Are fighters factored into the equation and just not shown?At one point I had fighter damage being attributed to their carriers, but I guess I must've broken it. I saw my condor's bombers hit hull in my last battle, but the report is showing 0% damage dealt. It ended up with a negative trait too, dammit...
Edit: Found a small bug. See attached screenshot. My 3 Paragons apparently inflicted no damage even though they were the only participants.Well that's no good. Thanks for the report.
I also noticed after combat that my two Afflictors showed 2% and -2% sustained, respectively.Hmm. Were they deployed? Sustained damage is checked by comparing hull level before and after a battle, so it might be possible for a ship to have "negative damage" if it's being repaired.
Edit: Can confirm that in a battle vs. a pirate station, even though I let the game end combat instead of going by the menu, none of my ships were awarded any damage inflicted.Ok. I'm going to have rework how the script decides when to figure out how much damage was dealt anyway, so hopefully that fix will address that issue as well (fingers crossed it won't cause any new issues).
Can confirm the bug with damage dealt - making my way through the tutorial and so far none of the fights have any damage reported as being done.Wait, so are you getting damage reports in the tutorial at all? In my testing they didn't show up. I assumed all intel notifications were suppressed during the tutorial.
Thanks so much for catering to us powergamers Sun!!! ;D:D
Everything is working well so far.That's a relief! Fixing the problem with damage dealt by fighters took far longer than I would've liked...
I was wondering.. since ships can lose a positive trait as result of bad performance instead of gaining a negative trait, could ships lose a negative trait for good performance?Yes they can. I just added an entry to the FAQs about how trait prominence changes work.
"bonusChanceRandomness":0,
"traitChanceMultiplierForReservedCivilianShips":0.0,Yes they can. I just added an entry to the FAQs about how trait prominence changes work.
Anyone know what setting i would need to adjust to have each trait given be its best version so as to avoid +4% armour for 1 ship & +7% for another?Schwartz is correct. Trait effectiveness is also modified by officer loyalty. If you don't want it to be, you can set
Many thanks for makin this so end user adjustable!! ;DYou bet :)
It's just a list of eight separated into groups of two. So doing well over a longer period of time should eventually replace all negative traits downward.Yep, exactly. Any ship that gets a bonusChance above 45% should have zero chance for a bad trait adjustment.
Let me know what you would like me to upload to help debug, although I do have ~10 other mods.If I could get your log file (or the last few hundred lines of it from right after that fight) and a screenshot of your battle report it would be a great help. The cause of these damage reporting issues has proven to be pretty difficult to pin down...
Is the CR decay rate reduction from loyalty perhaps too good? -75% at 'fiercely loyal' means ships can stay up past theirYeah, I think perhaps it is. I think I'll reduce it from 75% to 50%, which would double instead of quadruple operational time after PPT. It's supposed to be hard to get max loyalty. I think I'll also adjust loyalty change values to have a higher tendency toward indifference.bedtimePPT seemingly indefinitely, and it's not as if high loyalty is particularly hard to get.
It's not peak performance time, so.. I find even with a fiercely loyal crew the CR loss feels fast enough that I don't push my luck.I tend to think of PPT as more important than CR decay as well, which is part of how I justify high CR adjustments for loyalty. With the current settings, however, the operational time after PPT at "fiercely loyal" is double that of "loyal," which I think is a bit excessive.
And generally when you do well and you only gather positive traits, they are overall quite powerful. It's not this specific one. I'd argue a legendary-level peak performane time boost is way better than crew level.
Is the CR decay rate reduction from loyalty perhaps too good? -75% at 'fiercely loyal' means ships can stay up past theirYeah, I think perhaps it is. I think I'll reduce it from 75% to 50%, which would double instead of quadruple operational time after PPT. It's supposed to be hard to get max loyalty. I think I'll also adjust loyalty change values to have a higher tendency toward indifference.bedtimePPT seemingly indefinitely, and it's not as if high loyalty is particularly hard to get.
7065729 [Thread-4] INFO org.histidine.chatter.combat.ChatterCombatPlugin - Chatter plugin initialized
7070669 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - broadsword - 6e93b635-2acd-46ad-95d8-5d689e001a0d - 0df439e4-e448-4cbe-81a7-3cbf4937846f
7070669 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - piranha - 9f05e777-22ff-475f-93bc-2d346be593e8 - 0df439e4-e448-4cbe-81a7-3cbf4937846f
7070669 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - piranha - c06e40ee-3f41-44a6-8762-6cb45135606a - 300a2600-bf87-4872-8cfc-10568127abe5
7070669 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - piranha - 3e6286b8-1558-4b13-b52b-c735eebd4ae9 - 300a2600-bf87-4872-8cfc-10568127abe5
7142677 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - Damage dealt by module_large2_lowtech (1)
7142677 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - Damage dealt by piranha (1)
7142677 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - Damage dealt by module_large1_lowtech (1)
module_large1_lowtech dealt 1115.9482/10000.0 damage to module_large2_lowtech (1)
7142677 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - Damage dealt by doom (0)
doom dealt 128.24675/10000.0 damage to module_large2_lowtech (1)
doom dealt 1064.6503/10000.0 damage to module_large2_lowtech (1)
doom dealt 10079.759/20000.0 damage to module_large1_lowtech (1)
7142677 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - Damage dealt by doom (0)
doom dealt 6134.0225/10000.0 damage to module_large2_lowtech (1)
doom dealt 5471.8047/10000.0 damage to module_large2_lowtech (1)
doom dealt 7389.35/20000.0 damage to module_large1_lowtech (1)
doom dealt 40000.0/40000.0 damage to station1 (1)
Total FP worth of damage: 50.0
7142677 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CombatPlugin - Damage dealt by doom (0)
doom dealt 3737.7083/10000.0 damage to module_large2_lowtech (1)
doom dealt 2347.597/10000.0 damage to module_large2_lowtech (1)
doom dealt 2530.891/20000.0 damage to module_large1_lowtech (1)
7154522 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Peekaboo (Doom)
Battle Difficulty: 0.5904762
Damage Taken: 0.0 of total hull lost
Damage Dealt: 1.4285715 of own supply cost worth of damage
Chance of Gaining New Trait: 5% - FAILED
Chance to Shuffle a Trait Better: 25% - SUCCEEDED
7154522 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Virbius (Doom)
Battle Difficulty: 0.5904762
Damage Taken: 0.0 of total hull lost
Damage Dealt: 0.0 of own supply cost worth of damage
Chance of Gaining New Trait: 5% - SUCCEEDED
Bonus Chance: 64% - SUCCEEDED
7154522 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Memory Of Mairaath (Doom)
Battle Difficulty: 0.5904762
Damage Taken: 0.0 of total hull lost
Damage Dealt: 0.0 of own supply cost worth of damage
Chance of Gaining New Trait: 5% - FAILED
Chance to Shuffle a Trait Better: 14% - FAILED
7154522 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Honduras (Heron)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Roger Moore (Heron)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Augustus (Dominator (XIV))FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Foundation (Apogee)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Longinus (Eagle (XIV))FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Raptor (Drover)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Hive (Drover)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Prosperity (Sunder)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Angkor Wat (Sunder)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Bloodhound (Afflictor)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Argyle (Afflictor)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Hungry Raven (Colossus)FAILED
7154523 [Thread-4] INFO starship_legends.CampaignScript - Rolling reputation for AVR Marmite (Phaeton)FAILED
7154525 [Thread-4] INFO com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.intel.bases.PirateBaseIntel - Removing pirate base at [Penelope's Star Star System]Feedback: I dearly love the ability to not mind taking hull damage as long as I murderate the enemy enough. My crew apparently are rather bloodthirsty.Glad to hear it! I was worried that I had made the damage bonus too low for NPC ships to take advantage of.
This mod unfortunately has the side effect of long-lasting negatives applying to ship losses. It makes savescumming more attractive again. Whether people do that or not, well.. up to them.Yeah, absolutely. The addition of the anti-save-scum mechanic to ruthless sector was actually in response to Meso bringing up that same concern.
The mod incentivizes having all ships be combat-able, and using all ships in your fleet for fear of reserves being struck by bad RNG.Negative traits on logistics ships doesn't seem like something so worthy of fear to me. They tend to be fairly insignificant, and replacing logistics ships tends to be cheap. If a freighter ends up with fuel guzzler or something you can always sell it off or mothball it to reset it's reputation. The advantage of eventually ending up with a replacement that has a good reputation seems more than worth it to me.
Bonus chance randomness: Heavily reduced from 0.5 to maybe 0.1-0.2I think the current system is too easy to game without a decent amount of randomness, but I see where you're coming from. I think RNG can be really fun sometimes, but often it's used as a crutch, and I think that's the case with how starship legends handles the bonus/malus rolls. I think I have a way to make the whole system more satisfying while improving on other aspects of the mod that I find lacking. I need to think through it a little more first, but I'll probably post about it here soon.
When it be moved to "Mods"?
Every ship will have a persistent combat rating that affects the ratio of good to bad traits.
What you're losing is the immediate feedback of a positive shift for a battle well fought and a negative shift for a screw-up. You kinda get them, but accounted for with an average score that moves slowly over a period of time.True, but that immediacy (in conjunction with RNG) has some serious downsides. If a ship does well in a large battle without getting a good trait, but then gets a bad trait in the next battle due to sub-par performance, it could be pretty frustrating. With the rating system, immediate feedback would be in the form of adjustments to a ships rating (which would be shown in battle reports).
As the mod strives to become more fair overall, we see it also distance itself a bit from the 'fun' ideal of.. "I saw one of my allies take a risk and take out a tough foe, now it's got determined crew and an armor bonus." Or "I decloaked right into a barrage and now my crew thinks the phase coil's busted." Moments of excellence are very hard to quantify by algorithm.True, and that's a good point that I hadn't considered. The RNG of the current system reflects the fickleness of gossip, but this system wouldn't do that so well. I think the relationship between combat rating and traits would be under-the-hood enough not to completely subvert that impression.
I'd say go for it, but keep the current algorithm on standby in case it doesn't play out.Oh, for sure. I'm pretty sure I'll be able to keep the current system as a setting.
I'll request that it be moved to the Mods subforum (and I'll stop calling it a BETA) once I'm fairly confident that the design goals have been met and that all bugs of any significance have been fixed. Basically, once its core features are "done."When it be moved to "Mods"?
An excellent question.
If you do this, please consider some sort of 'decay' of old reputation. Even if it's just an option that takes the old rating and multiplies by 0.9 or 0.95 before factoring in the newest reputation. It would be nice to know that a couple bad battles early isn't going to doom your ship to have negatives forever. Give people a reason to hang on to old craft. :DThat sounds like it might actually be exactly what I had in mind:
If you do this, please consider some sort of 'decay' of old reputation. Even if it's just an option that takes the old rating and multiplies by 0.9 or 0.95 before factoring in the newest reputation. It would be nice to know that a couple bad battles early isn't going to doom your ship to have negatives forever. Give people a reason to hang on to old craft. :D
That sounds like it might actually be exactly what I had in mind:
new_persistent_rating = old_persistent_rating * 0.9 + battle_rating * 0.1
I'll request that it be moved to the Mods subforum (and I'll stop calling it a BETA) once I'm fairly confident that the design goals have been met and that all bugs of any significance have been fixed. Basically, once its core features are "done."I respect that :P
Could this perhaps be tied to fleet performance too? I mean, it is possible to loose bad traits (https://i.imgur.com/AjLWYWE.png), it is however quite hard thing to do for an dedicated PD escorts? So perhaps victories in hard battles could influence that even if the pd boat iteself haven't really did much damage? Unless shooting down missles and fightercraft is counted towards that already?So this reasoning is why battle difficulty contributes to bonus chance and there's a threshold before damage dealt counts. Battle difficulty basically awards "participation points" to every ship, no matter what role it fills (like PD, which isn't tracked). Damage dealers only earn extra if they go above and beyond. It's certainly not a perfect way to calculate how effective a ship was during battle, but I don't think it has any significant downsides.
I'm starting to think traits should have some common meta effect, so that cumulating both negative and positive traits contributes toward the same meta effect.That would certainly make a lot of sense. If you wanted to pretend to be someone else I'd imagine one of the best ways to do so would be to use a completely different fleet. On the other hand, this mechanic might be difficult to relay in-game, and I'm having a hard time thinking of ways it would improve gameplay, other than the potential to occasionally encourage diversity in fleet compositions.
What I'm thinking about is for them to amplify relationship changes: you have a fleet of legendary ships, all relationship changes are increased (especially negative ones) because your fleet is so well known.
It would also naturaly makes transponder off less effective for obvious reasons. On the flip side great deeds could get rewarded even more especially when joining an ungoing battle to save a fleet or when attacking a market.
Yeah, changing relationships is easy. The difficulty would be overriding vanilla behavior in most places where relationships are changed.
Need to do danger multiplier for player fleet based on how much legendary ships have player. I mean not NPC danger level, i mean danger level of player fleet what see NPC when atacking player.That might work. I would have to give it some thought. Alterations to fleet AI isn't quite within the purview of this mod, and some people get annoyed with having to run down fleets that run away. I don't know how feasible a change like that would be from a technical perspective either.
It can cut stupid situations on endgame when i as player have 5 legendary Conquests what can exterminate any fleet on sector but i has been atacked by some stupid pirates(in such situations and just do "nuke" command, hate boring battles when you know what you do with enemy). No one will want atack a most angry fleet on sector.
Copy all of the relation values to your own variables and do compares after actions, then add a bonus and save the new value (to both).Yes, monitoring relations and adjusting them based on existing changes would work, but it wouldn't result in a good user experience because the actual changes would be different from what the notifications say. To do it properly, I would have to either fix the vanilla relation change notifications, or suppress and replace them.
But what about, say, ships purposely designed to eschew shields in exchange for regenerating hull/armor as a form of defense?My opinion on this is basically "defense is defense," be it from shields, PD, cloak, armor, speed, firepower, ship systems, or anything else that helps the ship avoid taking hull damage. Regenerating hull, on the other hand, is something that isn't handled well by this system at all. I'll have to think about ways to handle that. I might change it to "lowest hull level reached" during the battle instead of "total hull damage taken."
Any chance in the far future of some sort of mechanic to "exclude" certain ships from gaining trait hullmods (both positive & negative) without having to uninstall Starship Legends? A whitelist, perhaps?A blacklist is more likely, but I want to try to figure something out that's not quite so heavy-handed.
(Other than that... thanks for this awesome mod, Sundog. Earning buffs via trait hullmods is helping me kick my ConsoleCommands cheating habit :P)You're quite welcome :)
I got curious and went to check. I've messed with console commands and devmode, mainly to be able to fight any fleets/stations I want immediately, and somehow got records of damage received and dealt completely zeroed. It also appears that if you fight a station with just an Excelsior, then retreat, it doesn't count the damage dealt at all.Thanks for the info! Were these battles all against a lone station? The current version doesn't handle damage dealt to stations (and multi-part ships) well at all, due to how the game records hull damage (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15483.msg249742#msg249742) (basically, the final blow awards 100% damage). Fixing the handling of station damage is one of my main focuses for the next release, and I'm pretty sure this aspect of it is already fixed in the dev build.
Thanks for the info! Were these battles all against a lone station? The current version doesn't handle damage dealt to stations (and multi-part ships) well at all, due to how the game records hull damage (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15483.msg249742#msg249742) (basically, the final blow awards 100% damage). Fixing the handling of station damage is one of my main focuses for the next release, and I'm pretty sure this aspect of it is already fixed in the dev build.I think that in a couple of battles there were ships supporting the station and I think it didn't count damage dealt to them at all. I can go and check it again, but I think the issue with station damage prevented the whole thing from working properly anyway. Also, what about the "records go 0% everywhere" thing? Is it supposed to work like that?
... I might change it to "lowest hull level reached" during the battle instead of "total hull damage taken." ...
I should warn you; I'm planning to add console commands to manipulate reputations at some point.
I would really like to know when a ship's performance is zeroed, to avoid things like these in the future... It was a tough fight and I had to re-engage two times.Sorry about that! Damage won't be recorded for engagements you retreat from. I just fixed it in the dev build today. I'm working on getting a patch out with a few other fixes.
I should have explained all this earlier. Sorry for not doing so!
An overdue explanation of how the new combat rating system interacts with old saves:
How the new system works:So, unlike the previous version, where traits are determined by individual battles, in 1.1.7 it's more about maintaining as high a rating as possible.
- Combat rating determines how many of a ship's traits are good.
- Traits will gradually shift to have a percentage of good traits equal to the current rating of the ship.
- If a ship has a rating of 70% for a long time, it will eventually end up with about 70% good traits and 30% bad traits.
Initial Rating
When an old save is loaded with the current version, it will try to guess what each of your ship's combat rating should be.
It will assign a rating of 100% to ships with 8 good traits and 0% to ships with 8 bad traits. Ship's with 1 or 2 traits should get an initial rating fairly close to 50%.
Rationale for change:
The old system was simply too easy to manipulate. Any ship that did fairly well in most battles would eventually end up with 8 good traits. I used RNG to mitigate this problem, but that had issues of its own, and the law of averages always wins out in the end anyway. With the rating system, I think ships will end up with a much more balanced mix of good and bad traits that more accurately reflects their overall combat performance.
Switching back to the old system:
Making the following changes to your options file should return the trait bonus calculation to exactly how it used to be:
Set "useRatingFromLastBattleAsBasisForBonusChance" to true
Set "bonusChanceRandomness" to 1.0
Yes, monitoring relations and adjusting them based on existing changes would work, but it wouldn't result in a good user experience because the actual changes would be different from what the notifications say. To do it properly, I would have to either fix the vanilla relation change notifications, or suppress and replace them.
My opinion on this is basically "defense is defense," be it from shields, PD, cloak, armor, speed, firepower, ship systems, or anything else that helps the ship avoid taking hull damage. Regenerating hull, on the other hand, is something that isn't handled well by this system at all. I'll have to think about ways to handle that. I might change it to "lowest hull level reached" during the battle instead of "total hull damage taken."
The new system is rating ships based on their cumulative (recent) history. How this interacts with existing save data may be funny, because your recent history isn't stored yet - it will probably 'even out' over time but at first you're going to see sharp changes because some of the math is starting from zero, but other parts of the math already have values in place.Yep, pretty much. Thanks for explaining.
One change I'd propose is to have a grace period of a couple of fights where ships affect their rating, but don't gain any traits at all.That's a good idea. I probably should've done something like that, but I'd hesitate to complicate the code for the sake of a smoother version transition. It's too late now anyway. Combat ratings will still be tracked even if they're not used to adjust traits, so it's possible to manually make it work that way.
Or you could just add yours right after.Yeah, but again, I don't like to make changes unless I can do them right. The screen space for notifications often gets too cluttered after battles even without redundant notifications.
Yeah, Steelclad has an entire faction that is all armor, no shields (and no armor regen by default).The current calculation doesn't penalize ships for taking armor damage, so I don't see why this would be necessary. Non-shield defenses can be just as viable as shields (all vanilla phase ships, for example).
Hmm..perhaps a check if a ship has shields an then a different calculation for it?
"battleDifficultyMult":0.0,
"damageTakenMult":0.0,
"damageDealtMult":0.0,
"enableOfficerLoyaltySystem":false,
"showCombatRatings":false,
"ignoreAllMaluses":true,
"useRatingFromLastBattleAsBasisForBonusChance":true,
"worsenLoyaltyChanceMult":0.0,
"bonusChanceRandomness":1000.0,
"traitPositionChangeChanceMult":0.0,
"useRatingFromLastBattleAsBasisForBonusChance":true,
"traitPositionChangeChanceMult":1.0,
"showCombatRatings":false,
That's actually a decent change. Most ships that got deployed regularly in the previous version tended to get a 'perfect' set of traits after a few dozen battles regardless.Yep, exactly. Hopefully the new system turns out to be a lot harder to manipulate while still being fair.
Was just a bit confusing seeing what it was doing without knowing why. Thanks for the clarification.No problem. Sorry I didn't clarify sooner!
870530 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain - java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: com.fs.starfarer.api.combat.CombatEngineAPI.isEnemyInFullRetreat()Z
java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: com.fs.starfarer.api.combat.CombatEngineAPI.isEnemyInFullRetreat()Z
at starship_legends.CombatPlugin.advance(CombatPlugin.java:93)
at com.fs.starfarer.title.ooOO.o0oO$Oo.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.oOOO.new.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advanceInner(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.traverse(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
0 [main] INFO com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher - Starting Starsector 0.9.1a-RC6 launcher
0 [main] INFO com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher - Running in D:\Games\Starsector0.91\starsector-core
0 [main] INFO com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher - OS: Windows 8.1 6.3
0 [main] INFO com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher - Java version: 1.7.0_79 (64-bit)
According to the patch notes, that missing method was added in Starsector 0.9.1a RC8:Yep, exactly. I should've mentioned this in the update post.
-Added to CombatEngineAPI:
-boolean isEnemyInFullRetreat();
In other words, it looks like the latest version of Starship Legends requires the most recent Starsector hotfix...
I was'nt even aware there as a hotfix.....
I get only one degradation of combat readiness fleet-wideDoes this mean that only one of your ships ran out of peak performance time? That would be crazy, and something officer loyalty shouldn't affect.
Does this mean that only one of your ships ran out of peak performance time? That would be crazy, and something officer loyalty shouldn't affect.
I think I broke this mod in the least interesting way possible.HOW?Spoiler(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/187635036525166592/584850709519007755/screenshot731.png)
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/187635036525166592/584864484867440650/screenshot736.png)
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/187635036525166592/584868785501241384/screenshot738.png)
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/187635036525166592/584871873326743574/screenshot740.png)[close]
a) Without this mod: if I'm in a battle of long duration I would get a big stream of readiness warnings that seem to account for all ships having hit the first degradation level.Hmm... this isn't consistent with my experience (or my intention) at all. Starship legends should only be increasing the peak performance time of ships with the "determined crew" trait (by between 3 and 24 percent). Does the peak performance time display as higher than it should? Does it properly deplete at a rate of 1 second per second?
b) With Starship Legends, the few times that I recall getting readiness warnings since my officers fully leveled, the reporting pattern was more sporadic...and I have never once had to withdraw a ship due to CR depletion. This is a massively good thing.
A perfect 8/8 fleet imported over from the old system will see a slow trend downwards at the beginning. This makes sense. However, I have not once seen a (+) as a result of outstanding performance since the update (talking 400% damage inflicted and at 100% score). Once a ship peaks, there are no trait changes. It has become impossible to 'buff out' bad traits once you have them, whereas with the old system it was difficult and up to RNG to promote the right trait for the negative trait to be demoted.
The config says that RNG is heavily reduced now, but either I'm seeing a pattern of bad luck, or something in the calculations is off. Note that most of these ships are legendary with 6-8 positives, but once they lose some or gain a bad trait, I am not seeing any improvement either. Doesn't a 100% score correspond to 8 positive traits?If everything is working properly, there should be a minimum of an 8% chance for a bad trait to be removed or demoted on a ship with 7 good traits and 1 bad trait for each battle in which it maintains a score of 100%. I've made some adjustments to increase that likelihood (and generally improve how the rating system works for ships at 100%), but I haven't found any bugs that would prevent it from working as intended.
I have even seen crew loyalty promotions and bad traits being awarded simultaneously.Loyalty is still based on the old system, so this would be working as intended if the battle rating was above 50% but below the ship's percentage of good traits.
Where before even a low-ish difficulty rating would allow a ship to excel, i.e. a single player-piloted Afflictor helping an ally vs. pirates and doing upwards of 150% damage, now that is not enough to even push beyond 80% score. This seems a bit harsh and results in me not wanting to engage *anything* that's not a difficult battle against overwhelming odds. It also makes me deploy way less than I usually do. Usually resulting in very difficult fights that still end up with a less than great difficulty score.Yeah, the rating mechanic encourages difficult fights, which isn't a goal of this mod and I'm sure it isn't the preference of all players, but I don't think it's particularly harsh. Fighting easy battles alone can never reduce a ship's score below 50%, which is the (rough) baseline for being the same power as the ship would be without the mod.
Also noticed a bug. Sometimes a score change is shown on the post-combat screen but it doesn't stick.. That last screenshot shows the Afflictor getting to 94%, but now that I look at it it's back to 88%. After a second test: After-battle report (https://imgur.com/1u5xEHk.png). And then checking the ship stats. (https://imgur.com/wM7ljy9.png) I have fought half a dozen battles with these two Afflictors to try and get their score up, yet it seems they are stuck on 88% and 81% respectively.Just found and fixed an issue that could frequently cause this problem. I should've looked into it sooner. There are a few other things I want to add to the next patch, but I should be able to get it out today.
A Heron also went from Legendary down to Well-known without ever dropping below 80% score.This sounds like an unfortunate and unintended consequence of transitioning to the new system. Did your Heron start with nothing but good traits? If so, the mod is probably trying to balance it's traits toward it's rating by removing good traits, but that never does any good since it hasn't gotten any new bad traits to lower it's percentage of good traits below 100%.
When I set "useRatingFromLastBattleAsBasisForBonusChance":true, I get very different results. (https://i.imgur.com/FK1ChpB.png) Even with low battle difficulty. (https://i.imgur.com/IObCExa.png)Yep. That setting should revert back to the old system. Your screenshots reminded me that I need to make it so the rating column shows the ship's rating for the battle instead of it's persistent rating when that setting is true.
I don't know if this problem would fall upon other mod makers, but I think that the battle difficulty calculation could use some work for boss factions like the Blade Breakers from DME. I feel that ~23% significantly underrates the BB dreadnought capabilities when I am going up against it with a fleet with a few not great capitals (DME Zelenograd, 3 HMI Junk for cargo capacity), a couple carrier cruisers and one combat cruiser, and a number of destroyers.Starship legends estimates the strength of a ship based on the supplies required to deploy it. Deploy costs are an important balance consideration, but less so for non-player factions like BB or [REDACTED], so it might not always be accurate. There's not much I can do about this situation other than creating a list of power estimates for every ship, both modded and vanilla, but that has several massive downsides.
I don't know if you could take into account the supply usage increase by the built in hull mod on the BB ships.This might already be the case. I'll have to check.
I think I broke this mod in the least interesting way possible.I'm assuming those numbers are accurate? If so, then I'd say either you earned those combat rating increases by fighting very well, or there's something about your game configuration or mod list that makes combat too easy. A liberal application of cheese, perhaps? If you want to avoid the problem of inverted difficulty created by getting good traits from doing well in battle, you might want to try the "perfect balance" or "completely random" settings.Spoiler(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/187635036525166592/584850709519007755/screenshot731.png)
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/187635036525166592/584864484867440650/screenshot736.png)
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/187635036525166592/584868785501241384/screenshot738.png)
(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/187635036525166592/584871873326743574/screenshot740.png)[close]
Starship legends estimates the strength of a ship based on the supplies required to deploy it. Deploy costs are an important balance consideration, but less so for non-player factions like BB or [REDACTED], so it might not always be accurate. There's not much I can do about this situation other than creating a list of power estimates for every ship, both modded and vanilla, but that has several massive downsides.Fleet points are exactly that, power estimates for every ship. I swear, I've mentioned this one before...
It's fine, I'm just boasting. It's a shame that I can get +10 ship rating every fight and still get negative traits, but I've heard that it's not working properly (still) and you're working on it.Ok, gotcha. There are several fixes and improvements on the way, but the only problems related to trait gain that I'm aware of are fairly minor (there should be no chance of negative trait changes at 100% rating, for example). The new system tries to make ships have the same percentage of good traits as it's combat rating, so it's entirely possible for a ship to get a negative trait in spite of gaining 10%. A ship with only one good trait is almost guaranteed to get a bad one next time, for example. The only way to prevent that would be for the ship to get a rating of 100% before gaining a new trait.
You have. I remember. FP was one of several stats I considered while deciding how best to estimate ship strength while I was initially working on ruthless sector. While FP may not underestimate remnant strength as much as deploy cost, it has several disadvantages that I consider to be much more important considerations:Starship legends estimates the strength of a ship based on the supplies required to deploy it. Deploy costs are an important balance consideration, but less so for non-player factions like BB or [REDACTED], so it might not always be accurate. There's not much I can do about this situation other than creating a list of power estimates for every ship, both modded and vanilla, but that has several massive downsides.Fleet points are exactly that, power estimates for every ship. I swear, I've mentioned this one before...
The new single-combat rating may fluctuate wildly, but it doesn't get in the way and everything works as it should. I think the median rating, even when using the single-combat setting, still produces a more meaningful number, so you could definitely use the other one as well.Good to know that the old system is still working properly. I'm not sure what you mean by using the other one as well.
This release feels pretty polished. Thanks for your hard work and being a good sport through all my complaints. ;)Well, you're quite welcome! Your feedback has all been very constructive and helpful :)
chanceToIgnoreLogisticsTraitsOnCombatShips
chanceToIgnoreCombatTraitsOnCivilianShips
Aforementioned annoyance was mainly because of contextually bad or unexpected negative traitsYou mean like ships getting bad traits after battles in which they do well?
Added new settings, both of which default to 0.75 (75%)Sweet! Can't wait to see how this plays.
chanceToIgnoreLogisticsTraitsOnCombatShips
chanceToIgnoreCombatTraitsOnCivilianShips
Just to be clear; there has always been a 75% chance to ignore mismatches between logistics/combat traits and ships. This change only exposes those settings in the options file.Added new settings, both of which default to 0.75 (75%)Sweet! Can't wait to see how this plays.
chanceToIgnoreLogisticsTraitsOnCombatShips
chanceToIgnoreCombatTraitsOnCivilianShips
How do traits affect certain ships with multiple parts? Does it handle it as the Officer bonuses, and apply the effects of the ships traits to all of the separate sections of the ship, or do the traits only affect the main hull piece?Hmm... that's a very good question. Trait effects are applied the same way hullmod and skill effects are applied, so I'd assumed the effects would carry over to sub-parts in both cases, but that might not be the case. Sub-parts are basically implemented as separate ships glued together, so it would make sense for them to have separate stat modifiers. I'll have to devise some experiment or ask around to make sure, but for now I'd say the affects of traits (along with hullmods, dmods, and skills) probably only affect the core section of multi-part ships.
"baseRating":0.0,
"battleDifficultyMult":0.0,
"damageDealtMult":0.0,
"showCombatRatings":false,
I've now got some traits on some logistics ships which have never been in combat. This is probably a bug? I will say though that I now have 28 ships in my fleet (I increased max fleet size in the settings file).
Weirdly though the logistics ships which gained these traits were at the bottom of the list of ships, which to me means I think that ship 26,27,28 are the ones that got traits despite never having seen combat, being logistics ships.
Is damage against fighters/missiles counted in any way.Nope. Only hull damage and battle difficulty increase rating above 50%. The formula is in the FAQs under"How do I increase combat rating?"
This should probably be mentioned more prominently on the first post.Agreed! Updated the FAQs to mention this under "What options does this mod provide?"
rating = 0.5 - damageTaken*0.5 + damageDealt*0.25rating = 0.25 + battleDifficulty*0.3 - damageTaken + max(0, damageDealt-1)*0.25rating = 0.5 + battleDifficulty*0.25 - damageTaken + max(0, damageDealt-1)*0.25So my concerns about awarding rating for support damage aren't about realism or avoiding rating bloat so much as avoiding perverse incentives. For example, if ships gained rating for taking structural damage, then many people would intentionally damage their own ships. I'm open to ideas for leveling the playing field for ships that aren't damage dealers, but it's out of the question to award rating for anything that would encourage people to prolong battles for the sake of rating. Hull damage works because it's a finite resource that you want to strip away from your opponent as quickly as possible whether you're doing it to improve rating or just to win the battle.To be honest this type of players would just play with no penalties option or abuse the game in either way. I don't see the point to try to go against them at the expense of legit players.
HelloHi! Thanks for your interest
Very interesting mod you made,sir
To be honest this type of players would just play with no penalties option or abuse the game in either way.I don't think that's the case. These aren't exploits we're talking about, just mechanics that reward annoying behavior. Yes, some players limit themselves with self-imposed rules in order to avoid annoying game mechanics. I do it all the time. That doesn't mean games should have annoying mechanics.
As long as there is a coherent set of rules, there will always be a way to abuse, exploit, skirt around those rules. Even at the current state of the mod, you can arguably micromanage to herd enemy ships so your flagship can get all of the kills.You're right about every set of rules being abusable to some degree, and you're right that the current rating system is somewhat abusable. The difference is in how abusable the rules are. The current rating rules do very little to encourage bizarre or annoying gameplay, but a lot of the suggestions I get for adjusting the rules would be downright broken.
Wouldn't this arguably be the exact same thing with damage dealt, not damage absorbed?Not sure what you mean by this. Would you mind clarifying?
I am just throwing a random thought out there but is there a way you could be reward based on trade done?I really like the idea of civilian ships earning logistical traits for taking part in non-combat activities. I've added this to my list and I'll see what I can do!
I love the mod and am waiting for the stable version to come out before updating again. Thanks for your continued work and effort into it.Thanks! I'm glad you like it ;D
I fought multiple skirmishes in one battle against a raid, but only the last skirmish gets a report...Yup. You get one battle report for each battle, no matter how many engagements the battle consists of. The report adds up the data for all of the engagements.
Do you undestand that hull damage system is stupid?I'm afraid I don't, but you're certainly welcome to attempt to enlighten me. A word to the wise though: if you want to change my mind about something, you're better off being civil.
ECM Support - ECM rating bonus while deployed. Only for civilian-grade shipsThe support traits are a bit of an experimental feature, for sure, but yes, I really am hoping those traits will encourage people to deploy civilian ships into battle for the sake of the bonuses they can provide. Hopefully they'll add an interesting twist. We'll see! :)
You suggest deploy some colossus into battle? Omg, you are really mad man.
What about making PD damage or even shield damage secondary(or tertiary) aspect with capped values? So they can effect to some point but at much lesser rate?Well, the idea I have in mind for PD damage (against fighters) would have a sort of cap, although it might be too unconventional to actually call it that. A straightforward cap on support damage was one of the first things I originally considered, but it does very little to mitigate the original problem. Yes, it would discourage people from infinitely farming damage against fighters, but they would still want to make sure to hit the cap. That's not such a big deal if the cap is low, but with a low cap it would fail to adequately reward dedicated PD ships.
Also what about crew losses? Could it also affect somewhat rating?Crew loss is based almost entirely on the hull damage a ship takes. The main difference between the two (mechanically) is that crew losses are easier to manipulate with skills and hullmods (a bad thing imo), and that carriers would be at a massive disadvantage due to how often they lose crew from fighter losses (a very bad thing imo).
Do you undestand that hull damage system is stupid? It makes ships with bad shields or tactics without using shields unsuitable. And here is always some risk to take some hull damage to make fight faster, but we control it to prevent death. You are mad man, i think.I disagree. The idea behind the mod is the reputation the ships develop among the people who crew them. Ships that regularly take hull damage and therefore lose crew are going develop reputations of being ill-fated even if they are statistically successful. And anyway ships with bad shields generally have good armor. Ships with bad armor generally have good shields. Ships that have neither are either compensated in another way such as mobility or standoff firepower, or are bad ships. (At least for combat anyway.) As for tactics, well, a ship that has good shields/armor, but refuses to use them because of the tactics of the captain? Well, I don't think it's unreasonable to think the crew wouldn't be particularly loyal.
Can you explain how does reputation growth work on reserved ships?Sure, although it's likely to change in the near future. Currently, all ships gain traits based on the amount of XP earned from battles. If a battle awards 46 XP and xpToGuaranteeNewTrait is 100, then there will be a 46% chance to earn a new trait. For civilian ships the XPearned from battle is multiplied by 0.25 (traitChanceMultForReservedCivilianShips), and capped at 320k XP (maxXpForReservedShips)
Wanted to play around with settings but its kinda hard to understand if you don't know how the mod worksYeah, at some point I need to expand the FAQs and add more comments to the config file.
Great mod btw, thank youThanks! My pleasure :)
There are some weird interactions with, possibly, Ruthless Sector? Something to do with how battle difficulty is calculated or XP is handed out post battle. I fight non-stop against fleets that have numerical superiority (ie. 1 me vs 10 ships) and somehow I cannot break past combat rating of 65% in my destroyer. Seriously, I pulled 2 cruiser kills + 7 frigates with a single destroyer and my rating went from 65% to 67%. In previous version I had no such issues and went past 70% easily. I cannot imagine what kind of odds need to be stacked against me to go up to 90% right now.A few things that might account for this:
2. Combat rating system as implemented punishes hit-and-run tactics, as it cannot distinguish between orderly retreat and total defeat.The rating system doesn't even distinguish between victory and defeat. It's all about the odds you were up against and hull damage dealt vs sustained.
I did two runs against one huge convoy and even though both times I pulled out with around 20-30% hull (and many kills), my rating went down from 65% down to ~50%. I got entire convoy third time. Went up to like 53%? I mean I just killed smth like 20 ships with a single destroyer. Give me some cred :PHmm... This is a strategy I haven't really considered. Usually when people use a single ship to fight a fleet they retreat in order to refresh PPT (peak performance time) or switch to a different ship, but they still re-engage without ending the battle outright. I'll have to give some thought to how this type of strategy should be handled.
4. While not necessarily a bad design choice, some reputations are game changing for given hulls and some are not very useful.Yup. A big part of the reason traits are randomized is so that ships that are lucky enough to get a bunch of relevant positive traits feel special.
Suggestions:Some of these are vague or seem to be based on false premises, so for now I'll avoid responding to them individually unless you want to reiterate/clarify (Sorry, I've been responding to feedback for several hours now)
Also, when I look at my fleet strength evaluation I also think that your mod counts player level twice. Once as that "1%" and second time as "2.5% per officer level" when strength of individual ship is calculated.Nope. Your player character doesn't count as an officer for this exact reason.
Now tell me if I am wrong, but I don't think that even level 50 player in frigate is going to contribute to a fight as much as a carrier, but according to the formula he would add more fleet strength.Heh, let me tell you about our lord and saviour, the Afflictor class phase frigate... ;)
Unless, everything went into "fleet" skills. I can see why it was done that way, however it not going to work in all situations. Luckily its very easy to tweak in settings :) Amazing mod!Thanks! Yeah, the settings files were definitely worth the effort for mods like these. The character level influence on battle difficulty can definitely be a bit awkward in some situations, but I don't think it's possible to account for player character skills in any accurate way. I think of it more as a way to increase difficulty as the game progresses.
I would suggest adding some more text to FAQ, ie. "If you enjoy playing small, you might want to change the [setting] to [something]".Ideally, I'd prefer for the default settings to accommodate all playstyles and fleet sizes. Your feedback has helped inform me about ways it might fail to do so. I'll have to think about possible adjustments.
Further reading also allowed me to deal with point 6... kinda. There is this "maxBattleDifficultyEstimation" set at default to be 2.0. I think you put a limit, so that even super impressive victory would not catapult player up to level 20 or higher in one go? Now this will also limit how your combat rating is going to rise from same victory, wouldn't it?Precisely.
Is it possible to add another factor in xp calculation? Like "whatever XP I get... multiply it by 0.5". That way I can make impressive battles to have more impressive impact on ships' reputation, but by lowering overall XP by a factor of XYZ, prevent suddenly becoming too high level frigate pilot.There's a vanilla setting for that called xpGainMult in "\starsector-core\data\config\settings.json"
Thanks for lengthy reply. I will explain my reasoning for my suggestions, but don't feel like you need to address those if you would otherwise work on improving your wonderful mods :)As time consuming as it is to reply to feedback sometimes, I find that it's often much more useful than simply reading it because responding forces me to think through the pros and cons of a given issue.
You incentive very cautious gameplay by punishing hull damage. One can claim, that this is how highly skilled player would play, but one can also claim that such playstyle lacks tad bit of bravado. Swinging in, exchanging broadside fire with enemy? Nope, it's better to kite them to death...It's true that starship legends penalizes players for hull damage, but the base game does too, so I don't think it deviates from vanilla design goals in that regard. Part of what makes Starsector's combat great in my opinion is that it encourages players to be as aggressive as they can without making unnecessary sacrifices, and I think starship legend's rating system should reflect that (at least by default anyway).
2. On using hull damage when calculating CR gain after retreatYou're talking about the hull damage you dealt to enemy ships? Still not sure what you're actually suggesting here.
Hull damage can be good indication of how successful hit-and-run raid was as the whole point is to attack and run before enemy can hit back. Also it is an indication of how successful retreat was.
I think you mentioned that the game does not care if I win or lose? If all that matters is relative strength of deployed fleets, why losing a battle after retreat lowers CR?For the same reasons it might be lowered after a victory. The calculation is always the same.
Your solution for that problem is to field weaker ships but I am not sure how that will hold up when I am high level character. Basically you are punishing for being successful and earning levels or not traveling with small ships in fleet.Ok, gotcha. So if you want to avoid the added penalties for deploying as many ships as you want, you should disable the whole battle difficulty mechanic from ruthless sector. The entire point of it is to discourage over-deployment. Here are the relevant settings:
Lastly, I would add in FAQ a short guide on how to play with default setting and what to look for in order to reach high CRYeah, I should definitely expand on that. The FAQ needs a lot of improvement in general, tbh.
# COMBAT RATING CALCULATION #
"baseRating":0.5,
"battleDifficultyMult":0.5,
"damageTakenMult":3.0,
"damageDealtMult":0.5,
"damageDealtMinThreshold":0.0
1. Ignoring hull damage for purpose of estimating CR gain after winning battle.
You incentive very cautious gameplay by punishing hull damage. One can claim, that this is how highly skilled player would play, but one can also claim that such playstyle lacks tad bit of bravado. Swinging in, exchanging broadside fire with enemy? Nope, it's better to kite them to death... And you avoid this whole "is armour tank disadvantaged by this" debate.
Starship Legends 1.2.0 (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15321.0)
Added a file for adjusting the percent of damage taken that is counted for rating calculation: "\sun_sl\data\hull_regen_ships.csv"
This is primarily for ships that regenerate hull damage, and currently only applies to the Excelsior and Royco (from ship and weapon pack), with a 50% reduction
Please let me know of any other ships that regenerate hull and should be adjusted
Noir faction ships (mod Artefact) regenerate Hull and Armor in combat while having at least X amount of CR (I believe it is from 85% upwards)Thank you! I'll check out those ships and try to figure out what a good reduction would be for them.
I feel like the disadvantage this mod gives to armor tank ships is realistic.
Think about it, if you are on a ship that regularly gets large chunks blown off it you wouldn't feel very safe, or confident in the ship.
I for one would feel much safer on an astral than an onslaught if a battle were to happen.
Reduce it so its a more minor thing.Yeah, I think that's what I'll do.
I think it would help to also ie. Explicitly state that even if ship gets bad rep, it can change in the future. I learned about it recently and felt kinda dumb for selling ships with bad rep instead of working towards improving it.Yeah, it's been quite a while since I refurbished the original post. I think if I explain things more clearly it would resolve a lot of the issues people run into.
Regarding regenerating ships - couldn't it be auto-detected by looking if he hull/armor values actually goes up in battle?Yes, that could tell me whether or not a ship has regenerated hull, but it wouldn't tell me how much it relies on regenerating hull as a defense mechanism.
Or even simpler, if at the end of the battle the damage taken is greater than the total HP value of the ship?Same problem as above, as well as not working if the ship takes less than 100% damage during the battle.
Is it possible to change the mod's settings to punish crew losses more than hull damage?I'm afraid not. Starship legends doesn't track crew losses at all.
My damage inflicted is 353% and damage sustained is 17%, I got +8.1 rating but regardless of this was rewarded with a negative trait.So, with default settings, traits will adjust themselves to match the rating of a ship. For example, a ship with a rating of 70% will gradually adjust it's traits so that 70% of them are good and 30% are bad. So if your paragon already had one good trait, the next one is pretty much guaranteed to be negative because 50% is closer to it's rating of 59% than 100%. Don't worry though, that bad trait will eventually go away if your paragon maintains a high enough rating. There is a way to configure starship legends to award traits based only on performance from the previous battle, as you seem to expect. Take a look at the "options presets" in the original post. You might be interested in the "better immersion" one at the bottom.
First of all, why do reserved ships gain traits? Not only that, it seems to always be negative because they of course didn't contribute.Civilian ships gain traits even when they're not deployed because there generally isn't any reason to deploy them. Eventually I want to make civilian ships earn traits for experience gained outside of combat instead. There's supposed to be a flat 50% chance for them to gain a good or bad trait, so this looks like a bug to me. The chance for eight ships to get a negative trait at the same time should be less than 0.04%. In fact, given that you're using ruthless sector settings, I think I may know what's wrong and I should be able to fix it in the next day or two. Until then, you might want to use Console Commands (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4106.0) to clear the reputations from your civilian ships.
clearRep AtlasSorry about the trouble!
clearRep Colosus
clearRep Buffalo
I'm finding the rating actually useful for helping me determine which of my ships are underperforming.It can be handy, but I wouldn't rely on it too much. The rating system is very simplistic and designed with gameplay considerations in mind more than being a proper metric for combat performance. You might be interested in Combat Analytics (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=11551.0)
So, with default settings, traits will adjust themselves to match the rating of a ship. For example, a ship with a rating of 70% will gradually adjust it's traits so that 70% of them are good and 30% are bad. So if your paragon already had one good trait, the next one is pretty much guaranteed to be negative because 50% is closer to it's rating of 59% than 100%. Don't worry though, that bad trait will eventually go away if your paragon maintains a high enough rating. There is a way to configure starship legends to award traits based only on performance from the previous battle, as you seem to expect. Take a look at the "options presets" in the original post. You might be interested in the "better immersion" one at the bottom.Thanks for the quick reply. I thought you might be able to replace bad traits by gaining enough reputation but then I probably got confused by the 8% reputation gain but still getting a negative trait. But I understand how it works now.
Even if it's a 50/50 system and this was caused by a bug in the Ruthless Sector settings I don't think that's an entirely fair system. Would it not be possible to take the average reputation gain (or loss) of all deployed ships and apply it (or half of it) to those in reserve? The way I understand it you can't ever get them above 50/50 good/bad if you're unable to change their reputation. I hate the idea of a system giving out negative traits that I'm completely unable to affect in any way. Also it was 14 ships (every last one of my civilian ships).First of all, why do reserved ships gain traits? Not only that, it seems to always be negative because they of course didn't contribute.Civilian ships gain traits even when they're not deployed because there generally isn't any reason to deploy them. Eventually I want to make civilian ships earn traits for experience gained outside of combat instead. There's supposed to be a flat 50% chance for them to gain a good or bad trait, so this looks like a bug to me. The chance for eight ships to get a negative trait at the same time should be less than 0.04%. In fact, given that you're using ruthless sector settings, I think I may know what's wrong and I should be able to fix it in the next day or two. Until then, you might want to use Console Commands (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4106.0) to clear the reputations from your civilian ships.QuoteclearRep AtlasSorry about the trouble!
clearRep Colosus
clearRep Buffalo
I think a lot of the complains comes from a lack of understanding of the inner working of the mod. Which is a problem given how difficult it is to explain it quickly.I really like the idea of guaranteeing positive or negative traits if the swing is high enough. Though disassociating reputation traits from combat doesn't make any practical sense since that's the only way to earn or lose reputation.
Maybe if the reputation traits where given after a delay instead of after the battle it would disociate them from the direct battle performance. The intel text could also be written with a bit more flavor to point out that the reputation traits aren't necessarily grounded in cold hard facts, especially negative ones.
Another way to deal with it would be to garantee a positive or negative trait if if there is a large swing in combat rating, say more than 5%. That way a really good ship that is cruising to a high combat rating wouln't get stacked with mixed traits that would get replaced over time until it reaches it's nominal rating.
Or maybe a new ship added to the fleet could get a starting rating dependent on its D mods: a pristine one could start at 100% rating since it's brand new and would only get negative traits after loosing that rating, but any dmod present would reduce the starting rating by 15% and early negative traits could be explained by the defective nature of the ship.Could be an idea but I prefer the other solution. D modded ships are meant to be somewhat of a mixed bag that are good for early game or smart usage to save supplies (like compromised storage on a salvage hull). But often the D mods are so terrible its hard to justify their use. If you make this change it would make the difference even bigger and further reduce the incentive to use ships with D mods which is the opposite of what the game needs.
Crew loyalty could also be used to completely nullify the effect of negative traits making them more palatable (but wouldn't remove them) instead of improving good traits, while keeping the ppt boost.
@the discussion over dmods and traits. I would honestly say Dmoded ships should have the strongest traits. Take a car in real life you have fixed up but not completely replaced with factory new parts. Cars like that have a true personality to them. Certain things would still be broken others might be over engineered to fix problem. You learn these things as you operate the car, what gears it might stick in while shifting, how the blinkers might only work if you flick them in just the right way, how your heater might not work but your air conditioning is worse than a freezer. Ect. Sometimes you end up replacing a fuze or light bulb with something vastly better than the original because its all you had at the time. Basically I think of dmods are going to effect trait percentages they should increase them across the board, both positive and negative.
I don't know. Sounds like a lot of work to me, a pain to balance to, but just my two cents.
Another way to deal with it would be to garantee a positive or negative trait if if there is a large swing in combat rating, say more than 5%. That way a really good ship that is cruising to a high combat rating wouln't get stacked with mixed traits that would get replaced over time until it reaches it's nominal rating.I really like this idea. It solves two problems at once, and while it complicates things a bit, it's intuitive. I think I'll end up doing this, or something similar. In fact, I think I might just make it so that ships that improve their rating at all can't get new negative traits from that battle, and vice versa.
I think a lot of the complains comes from a lack of understanding of the inner working of the mod. Which is a problem given how difficult it is to explain it quickly.Oh, for sure. I updated the original post a few days ago, so hopefully that will help.
Maybe if the reputation traits where given after a delay instead of after the battle it would disociate them from the direct battle performance.True. It's ironic that this mod started out using delayed notifications and traits based only on the most recent battle, and now does the opposite. The biggest problem with the notifications was that it could end up creating some pretty serious spam. Battle reports were the solution to that. I'm having a hard time thinking of any sort of hybrid that would work well.
The intel text could also be written with a bit more flavor to point out that the reputation traits aren't necessarily grounded in cold hard facts, especially negative ones.I've tried to do just that, but I'll try to figure out a way to do it better.
Or maybe a new ship added to the fleet could get a starting rating dependent on its D mods: a pristine one could start at 100% rating since it's brand new and would only get negative traits after loosing that rating, but any dmod present would reduce the starting rating by 15% and early negative traits could be explained by the defective nature of the ship.I would personally prefer that all ships start on a level playing field, but perhaps I'm not seeing some benefit to gameplay that you are.
Crew loyalty could also be used to completely nullify the effect of negative traits making them more palatable (but wouldn't remove them) instead of improving good traits, while keeping the ppt boost.I feel like high loyalty is already too powerful due to it's effect on traits, and I'm not too concerned about negative traits bothering some people, because they have the option to turn them off. A little power creep is a bit of an inevitability with a mod like this, but I want to keep it under control as much as possible, at least with default settings.
Even if it's a 50/50 system and this was caused by a bug in the Ruthless Sector settings I don't think that's an entirely fair system. Would it not be possible to take the average reputation gain (or loss) of all deployed ships and apply it (or half of it) to those in reserve? The way I understand it you can't ever get them above 50/50 good/bad if you're unable to change their reputation. I hate the idea of a system giving out negative traits that I'm completely unable to affect in any way.Yeah, that's understandable. Hopefully the new bonusChanceForCivilianShips setting will be able to alleviate some of your frustration. Personally, I like the RNG in this instance. Even at 50/50, starship legends is unlikely to make the civilian ships in your fleet weaker than they would be without it, because you can choose which ones you keep. It would certainly be possible to base civilian ship trait gain on average rating changes, but it would cause a lot of minor complications and confusion while inflating power creep. If I could snap my fingers and make it an optional setting I would, but I'm not convinced it's worth the work it would take.
From a game design point of view you also want to reward or punish players when doing something good or bad and in a way where they can associate the outcome directly with the action they performed (such as doing very well or very poorly in a fight).Good point. That's what I should've told him!
It's hard to determine how much "experience" a ship needs to get a new rank, Combat Analysis can help but it does feel a lil hiddenTrue. In fact, earning new traits is based on RNG. Earning more XP in a battle makes it more likely to get a new trait, but XP does not accumulate for the purpose of earning new traits.
@the discussion over dmods and traits. I would honestly say Dmoded ships should have the strongest traits. Take a car in real life you have fixed up but not completely replaced with factory new parts. Cars like that have a true personality to them. Certain things would still be broken others might be over engineered to fix problem. You learn these things as you operate the car, what gears it might stick in while shifting, how the blinkers might only work if you flick them in just the right way, how your heater might not work but your air conditioning is worse than a freezer. Ect. Sometimes you end up replacing a fuze or light bulb with something vastly better than the original because its all you had at the time. Basically I think of dmods are going to effect trait percentages they should increase them across the board, both positive and negative.All true, and I think this could be a pretty neat mechanic if done correctly, but yeah, the work involved to get it working well would be pretty daunting. Maybe there could be a few traits similar to battle scarred and scrap heap that would be affected by d-mods instead of affecting them. Not sure what stat it would modify though. Hmm...
I don't know. Sounds like a lot of work to me, a pain to balance to, but just my two cents.
>ship lore customization mods;D
THATS THE REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAL *** BABY GIVE IT TO ME
I love the leveling system but it isn't entirely fair to support shipsYeah, this is a longstanding issue that I haven't found a good solution to yet. I might be able to boost dedicated PD ships, but how could I possibly quantify the value of something like distraction kites? The only real solutions I've come up with involve removing damage dealt from the equation and making all ships that participate in a battle have the same battle score.
My Heron Carrier who is covered in Large PD Lasers and only has Interceptors has a Reputation of 30%(And it's still going down), even though he never took a single Hull damage in any of the battles he's in.With default settings it shouldn't be possible for a ship that has never taken hull damage to have a rating lower than 50%. Did you edit the options? If not, this could be a new bug.
My two cent after trying this for a few days- noticeably every ship is worse-off than better, this is all-too frequent repairs on my parts via the console to try and get a single worthy trait.Unfortunately, the rating system will be too hard for some people and too easy for others no matter how it works. To change it, you might want to edit STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS.ini found in the mod's folder. If you like, you can disable negative traits entirely.
The idea that the rating be based on CR over time in battle is ridiculous, because you have no direct control over it other than the loadout you choose.I agree. That's why rating is not (and has never been) based on CR loss.
Actually, now that I'm testing it, something is up since the latest update. I replaced the ruthless settings with vanilla settings and combat ratings are still tanking in general even with flawless battles against similarly sized fleets. Even after changing to vanilla settings, One of my fast carriers, over the course of 5 fairly large battles, has killed roughly 6 frigates, tanked zero damage, but has gone from 51% and confident to 40% and insubordinateI just fought a few battles to test this, but I got the results I would expect each time. Would you mind showing me your options file? It shouldn't be possible to get a rating below 50% without taking damage if you have baseRating set to the default of 0.5
While the progression is nice, it would be even nicer if you could lock-in traits permanently.I think a Darkest Dungeon style trait/quirk locking system could work well, but unfortunately that would require an interface for choosing which traits to lock, and there's no good way to make an interface like that as far as I know.
Thanks for the feedback! I do have a plan for giving non-player ships traits, and it even incorporates some of your ideas. I'll be sure to keep your suggestions in mind when I finally get around to implementing it!
Is there a way to prevent the guaranteed rating loss when fighting single ships? If I'm chasing the one frigate that retreated I lose rating even if I take 0 damage. I know autoresolve doesn't affect rating but then I have to deploy multiple ships to get the same success rate.Have the ship you send be half the deployment cost of the single ship you are fighting. Even if you take damage you'll still have a good rating.
Out of curiosity, does Legends care about total hull damage in making the battle performance calculations, or final hull damage?It's total percent of damage taken during the battle. So if a ship starts a battle at 80% and ends at 50%, it only sustained 30% hull damage.
Yup. Also, the higher your rating is, the harder it becomes to raise it further. If a ship starts with a rating of 40% and scores a rating of 90% in a battle, its rating will improve by 4%, but if a ship with a rating of 100% scores 90% in a battle, it will go down by 1%. I think the main problem with pursuit battles is that ships don't earn rating for dealing damage to civilian ships. I think I'll change that.Is there a way to prevent the guaranteed rating loss when fighting single ships? If I'm chasing the one frigate that retreated I lose rating even if I take 0 damage. I know autoresolve doesn't affect rating but then I have to deploy multiple ships to get the same success rate.Have the ship you send be half the deployment cost of the single ship you are fighting. Even if you take damage you'll still have a good rating.
My problem was that my smallest ship vs a single fleeing frigate will very often lose rating, forcing me to chose between higher supply costs of an multiship autoresolve or losing rating by personally flying one ship. There doesn't seem to be a good way to fix this other than just bringing more ships that are weaker which unfortunately means more cost anyway.Right. I understand your concern and agree that it's a problem, but I see how I might not have given that impression.
Civ ships giving rating seems like a good idea tho. Reward that Kite for killing a Prometheus!Yea, it should work without any issues. My original thinking was based on difficulty calculation for ruthless sector, but in this case I think it makes perfect sense to improve rating for destroying civilian ships.
First things first, I think you're doing amazing work bringing this mod to the community. Its really a robust and unique system for us to become more attached to our officers & crews. Thank you for your work.
That being said, I would like to ask if there are these settings I can turn off or alter.
1). What setting do I change to disable ALL REPUTATION CHANGES(+ or -) to ships who weren't deployed in combat?
2). How do I increase the ratio of good to bad traits? Should I change the multiplier of damagetaken to .5 and damagegiven to 1.5? Even with level 20 officers and d-modless ships I can't seem to get mostly good traits(Combat rating is really hard to get with big fleet battles).
3). Is there a way to increase the speed of losing reputation? Mothballing 30 days for each reputation is a bit long.
Please let me know. Thanks again!
First things first, I think you're doing amazing work bringing this mod to the community. Its really a robust and unique system for us to become more attached to our officers & crews. Thank you for your work.
That being said, I would like to ask if there are these settings I can turn off or alter.
1). What setting do I change to disable ALL REPUTATION CHANGES(+ or -) to ships who weren't deployed in combat?
2). How do I increase the ratio of good to bad traits? Should I change the multiplier of damagetaken to .5 and damagegiven to 1.5? Even with level 20 officers and d-modless ships I can't seem to get mostly good traits(Combat rating is really hard to get with big fleet battles).
3). Is there a way to increase the speed of losing reputation? Mothballing 30 days for each reputation is a bit long.
Please let me know. Thanks again!
I'm trying to figure out #2 myself (beyond just turning off bad traits), but for #3 I got you covered! In the STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS look for this:
"daysMothballedPerTraitToResetReputation":30, # A ship must remain mothballed (in or out of storage) for a consecutive number of days to lose it's reputation
;)
First things first, I think you're doing amazing work bringing this mod to the community. Its really a robust and unique system for us to become more attached to our officers & crews. Thank you for your work.;D
2). How do I increase the ratio of good to bad traits? Should I change the multiplier of damagetaken to .5 and damagegiven to 1.5?
I'm trying to figure out #2 myself (beyond just turning off bad traits)Yeah, you're on the right track.
Even with level 20 officers and d-modless ships I can't seem to get mostly good traits(Combat rating is really hard to get with big fleet battles).Yeah, it's pretty brutal at the moment. I'll be making it a little easier soon.
I have also changed traitChanceMultForReservedCivilianShips to 0. I hope this means reserved ships of all kinds will no longer get any reputation changes.Yup! By default civilian ships are the only ones that can get traits without being deployed.
Some of my ships are getting new traits despite them not being in any fight whatsoever. Interestingly, that's true only for my Prometheus and Atlas ships (basically giant fuel/supply ships). If it's intended, then so be it, just wanted to clarify it.It's intended and can also be disabled (traitChanceMultForReservedCivilianShips). By default, only civilian ships will get traits if they're not deployed.
Overall mod is fantastic, and i'm grateful for your work.Thanks! ;D
Changed: Ships will no longer recieve any type of negative reputation adjustment after a battle in which their rating improved, and vice versa
i noticed one of the changes in this update isOh, I forgot to add that to the patch notes. Good catch!
"useRuthlessSectorToCalculateBattleDifficulty":true
to
"useRuthlessSectorToCalculateBattleDifficulty":false
how much this changes the battle difficulty when Ruthless Sector is active alongside ?That mostly depends on your character level, the officers involved on both sides, and your ruthless sector configuration. The biggest difference when useRuthlessSectorToCalculateBattleDifficulty is true, is that your ships will earn less rating from damage when they have high level captains (which is one of the reasons I turned it off). It also means enemy ships with high level captains wont award as much rating when you damage them. The biggest problem was that it was effectively doubling the strength calculation adjustments, because it was causing them to be factored into both battle difficulty and damage dealt.
It shouldn't. In fact, the biggest practical difference should be when rating is steadily changing, because only adjustments that match the rating changes will be allowed. When a ship's rating becomes stable, it should work out the same way as before. Traits are still chosen and adjusted the same way. This rule will just veto reputation changes that don't make much sense based on the rating change from battles.Changed: Ships will no longer recieve any type of negative reputation adjustment after a battle in which their rating improved, and vice versa
Love this mod, but I feel like this change is going to result in getting 50/50 good/bad mods once you get to the point where you're struggling to get the rep adjustment to go any higher. (Unless you get it to 100%)
Added a new contributing factor to rating calculation that is meant to benifit support shipsNice, hopefully this also fixes the problem where a high-performing ship could cause other ships to bleed rating by stealing all their kills.
Ratings are now increased based on hull damage dealt by all allied ships during any engagement in which the ship was deployed
Ok, thank you for the answer. The problem was not a bad trait for a civilian ship but a bad trait (or any trait) for a ship that didn’t participate in a battle.Yeah, I hear ya. In the future civilian ships will earn traits only for XP earned outside of battle, but for now battles are the only way for them to get traits.
It should help, but the problem still exists. I've thought about maybe making excess rating gains for one ship spill over to all the others somehow, but that might get hairy in terms of implementation, not to mention complicating an already-too-complex mechanic.Added a new contributing factor to rating calculation that is meant to benifit support shipsNice, hopefully this also fixes the problem where a high-performing ship could cause other ships to bleed rating by stealing all their kills.
Ratings are now increased based on hull damage dealt by all allied ships during any engagement in which the ship was deployed
Can i savely change ini setting mid game?You can change ini settings without starting a new game, but you do need to restart the game for the changes to take effect.
Can you update the formula on the FAQ to contain supportMult?Done! Thanks for the reminder :)
customreptiers : {"customreptier1name","customreptier2name",};
"customreptier1name": {xpToGuaranteeNewTrait:1, effectMulti:1.01};
"customreptier2name": {xpToGuaranteeNewTrait:1000, effectMulti:1.02};
sundog, to expand on that configurable / custom ranksI can tell you put a lot of thought into this, and I appreciate the effort, but I'm well aware of what would need to be done in order to make the number of reputation tiers configurable. Unfortunately it would take far more work than I think it's worth. You're welcome to edit the mod yourself if you really want to. Everything you would need is freely available.
This is such a wonderful mod. Thanks for the work put into it!Thanks! It's been a fun project so far :)
If there's only one nitpick, it's very minor, and it's that stuff like tankers and freighters can become legendary even without ever spending a second in battle.It should be quite a bit more difficult for civilian ships to become famous/legendary due the XP they get per battle being capped, but I haven't done enough late-game play-testing since I added that cap to know how well it works. In the dev version civilian ships only earn traits from non-combat XP (unless they're deployed of course), so that should help keep them in check. Not sure I'll keep it that way. I might just drastically reduce civilian trait chance after battle.
Added more flavor text for AI reputation hullmods (thanks to Avanitia for all the help with this!)Awesome. This mod makes everything better.
# SHIP REPUTATION TIERS # custom
"nobody":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":00001, "effectMult":0.01, },
"unskilled":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":00010, "effectMult":0.50, },
"greenhorn":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":00100, "effectMult":1.00, },
"rookie":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":01000, "effectMult":1.10, },
"versed":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":10000, "effectMult":1.20, },
"skilled":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":20000, "effectMult":1.50, },
"recognized":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":40000, "effectMult":1.75, },
"veteran":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":60000, "effectMult":2.00, },
# SHIP REPUTATION TIERS # original
"notable":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":80000, "effectMult":3, },
"wellknown":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":400000, "effectMult":4, },
"famous":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":2000000, "effectMult":5, },
"legendary":{ "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":10000000, "effectMult":6, },
name,id,tier,rarity,tech/manufacturer,tags,uiTags,base value,unlocked,hidden,hiddenEverywhere,cost_frigate,cost_dest,cost_cruiser,cost_capital,script,desc,short,sprite
Nobody,sun_sl_nobody,0,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has certain NOBODY characteristics.,Reputation of ship is NOBODY with certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable_test.png
Unskilled,sun_sl_unskilled,0,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has certain UNSKILLED characteristics.,Reputation of ship is UNSKILLED with certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable_test.png
Greenhorn,sun_sl_greenhorn,1,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has certain GREENHORN characteristics.,Reputation of ship is GREENHORN with certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable_test.png
Rookie,sun_sl_rookie,2,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has certain ROOKIE characteristics.,Reputation of ship is ROOKIE with certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable_test.png
Versed,sun_sl_versed,3,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has certain VERSED characteristics.,Reputation of ship is VERSED with certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable_test.png
Skilled,sun_sl_skilled,4,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has certain SKILLED characteristics.,Reputation of ship is SKILLED with certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable_test.png
Recognized,sun_sl_recognized,5,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has certain RECOGNIZED characteristics.,Reputation of ship is RECOGNIZED with certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable_test.png
Veteran,sun_sl_veteran,5,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has certain VETERAN characteristics.,Reputation of ship is VETERAN with certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable_test.png
Notable,sun_sl_notable,6,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has distinguished itself as having certain notable characteristics.,This ship has a reputation for having certain traits.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/notable.png
Well-Known,sun_sl_wellknown,7,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s is a well-known ship within your fleet.,This ship is well-known within your fleet.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/wellknown.png
Famous,sun_sl_famous,8,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s has achieved fame within military circles.,This ship is famous. People in military cirles have often heard of it.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/famous.png
Legendary,sun_sl_legendary,9,,,,,0,,TRUE,,0,0,0,0,starship_legends.hullmods.Reputation,The %s is a legend throughout the sector.,This ship is legendary. People across the entire sector tell stories about it.,sun_sl/graphics/hullmods/legendary.png
id,name,cr_decay,trait_adjustment,base_improve_chance,base_worsen_chance,rating_required_to_improve,preposition,trait_adjust_desc
mutiny,Mutiny,60,-5,3.0,0.00,0.00,to,losing control
rebellious,Rebellious,50,-4,2.0,0.01,0.01,to,extremely worsening
disobedient,Disobedient,40,-3,1.8,0.02,0.03,to,rapidly worsening
openly_insubordinate,Openly Insubordinate,30,-2,1.6,0.03,0.05,to,significantly worsening
insubordinate,Insubordinate,20,-1,0.8,0.05,0.1,to,worsening
doubtful,Doubtful,10,0,0.4,0.1,0.3,of,
indifferent,Indifferent,0,0,0.2,0.2,0.5,to,
confident,Confident,-10,0,0.1,0.4,0.7,in,
loyal,Loyal,-20,1,0.05,0.8,0.9,to,improving
fiercely loyal,Fiercely Loyal,-30,2,0,1.6,2,to,significantly improving
Where do I go to save edit the traits that my ship has?I would recommend using console commands (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4106.0) for that. Sounds like you'll want to do something like this:
ClearRepYou can use "list traits good" to see the names of all the positive traits.
AddTrait deadly
AddTrait durable
...
Starship Legends keeps getting some error(s) someways into the playthrough. It got one when I save-copied, which I don't know what the error from that is.Hey, thanks for reporting this. Can you tell me anything else about this error? Does it show up at the end of starsector.log? When else does it occur? Does it show a red error notification on the left side of the screen, or does the game crash?
The ship got the +CR time traitI'm not sure which trait you're referring to
Ok, so I couldn't reproduce any issues with the Varnr specifically, but I think I might know why it's not getting any new traits. The most recent version added a rule that prevents ships from getting negative traits after a battle in which their rating improved. The problem is that if a ship only has one good trait, then in order for it to get a second trait it needs to either lose rating (to get a bad one) or have a rating of 100% (to get another good one), and I'm guessing your Varnr's rating has steadily improved without ever reaching 100%. Is that the case? Regardless, I consider this a serious issue, and I'll be adjusting that rule to prevent this kind of thing from happening.That does appear to be a likely explanation. The ship being a late-game capital, I think its rating was improving steadily but not yet at 100%.
Sorry for the late reply. I was just about to post this yesterday morning when a branch fell from my neighbor's tree and knocked out my power and internet.
New Features:
Civilian ships now earn traits based on experience earned outside of combat, but no longer gain traits after battle (by default)
I bought a couple of Hegemony auxiliary Buffalos and have been flying around doing some exploration missions for just under a year. One of them is now famous and the other is well-known.Nope! It sounds like I set peaceful xp gain too high and didn't do enough playtesting to realize it. I'll reduce it significantly for the next version, but in the meantime you can change "traitChanceMultForCivilianShips" in the options file
Is this kind of pace intended?
I turned the peacefulxp reputation gain off and I'm now getting an error in the background (red text telling me to contact modder) for Starship Legends everytime I run into a hostile remnant fleet to start combat.I'm having a hard time reproducing this one. Could you send me the last hundred or so lines of the log file (starsector-core/starsector.log) after this error happens?
@Sundog damn that was a quick addition, thank yee kindly.No problem. It was a good suggestion :)
The new setting has definitely helped (that or I'm miss judging it), but I still get some pop up for random ships. The xp gains for them seem to be from when they repair themselves, as their all freshly captured ships.Yeah, the setting wasn't being applied at all because I was rushing and messed it up. Sorry about that. Fixed in the dev version: https://bitbucket.org/Nate_NBJ/starship-legends/downloads/Starship_Legends_dev.zip
Minor nitpick. In the bar events there's one for derelict ships that mentions 'years', AFAIK all references in vanilla are to 'cycles'.That's a good point. I think you're right. I'll fix that for the next version. Thanks!
I turned the peacefulxp reputation gain off and I'm now getting an error in the background (red text telling me to contact modder) for Starship Legends everytime I run into a hostile remnant fleet to start combat.I'm having a hard time reproducing this one. Could you send me the last hundred or so lines of the log file (starsector-core/starsector.log) after this error happens?
Edit: Hmm... so it looks like an error will occur at that point if the options file could not be read. Are you certain you didn't make any formatting mistakes when editing the peaceful xp gain rate? If that's the case, you should be getting an error when your save loads as well.
i think i liked it best with Annihilator pods.
(https://i.imgur.com/lRiHO11.png)
how's that for a beam weapon?
First off thanks for the mod. Love it :DGlad you like it! In spite of having civilian-grade hulls, kites are still considered combat ships by both starship legends and vanilla. I think venture is another example of this. So a kite will be considered a combat ship whether it has militarized subsystems or not. As a rule, the only hullmods that might affect which traits a ship gets are built-in ones.
Question: if a kite has militarized subsystems, will it still be counted as a civilian ship for purposes of what kind of traits it will get?
i think i found a way to exploit this mod, sry, but if i send in a few well armed cargo freighters it doesn't count them as combat capable ships and i can theoretically send in thirty of them and still it would show them as one point in fleet strength, this makes me able to just spam them with no problem regarding your mod and gain mad experienceHmm... I'll have to give some thought to figuring out the best way to address that. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!
i have no clue on how to fix this but i just wanted to tell you about this
Thank you for the mod Mr. Sundog sir.You're welcome for the mod Mr. Metadane sir.
Ahah, thanks for the quick hotfix :D All is working fine now.No problem. Glad to hear it!
This is the last few lines of the error log.Ah, thank you! I think that tells me what I need to know. It looks like the error happens because starship legends is running out of traits to give remnants. Did you increase "traitsPerTier" by any chance? Either way, it should be fixed for the next release.
https://pastebin.com/c7bZDZrG
This is the last few lines of the error log.Ah, thank you! I think that tells me what I need to know. It looks like the error happens because starship legends is running out of traits to give remnants. Did you increase "traitsPerTier" by any chance? Either way, it should be fixed for the next release.
https://pastebin.com/c7bZDZrG
i think i found a way to exploit this mod, sry, but if i send in a few well armed cargo freighters it doesn't count them as combat capable ships and i can theoretically send in thirty of them and still it would show them as one point in fleet strength, this makes me able to just spam them with no problem regarding your mod and gain mad experienceHmm... I'll have to give some thought to figuring out the best way to address that. Thanks for bringing it to my attention!
i have no clue on how to fix this but i just wanted to tell you about this
Under # Ship Reputation Tiers #, what does "effectMult" modify?It determines how strong effects are at that tier. The "durable" trait, for example, has a base effect of +2% hull integrity, so if the effectMult for the Famous tier is 7, then "durable" will grant +14% (2x7) hull integrity if it is a famous trait.
Also, how does the whole famous flagship and derelict bar event chance section work?Basically, the higher it is the more likely it will be. If you set it to 0 then that event should never occur.
Yeah I'm running at 9 traits per tier with a few other changes in the config file here. https://pastebin.com/f39ZYkAvRight! Sorry, I guess I forgot that you posted your settings while I was troubleshooting the issue. Anyway, this patch should fix it. Please let me know if it doesn't!
Alright! Thank you so much for all your work! Love the new update! Cheers!Glad you like it! Cheers!
Edit: I'm not sure if this is a bug or not. Sometimes the ship that had traits before the start of a battle doesnt have the traits when i salvage it. I'll get back when I experiment more.I'd definitely call that a bug. Sorry for the trouble! I think this happens when you join a battle-in-progress that the famous flagship is involved in, but I haven't had time to properly look into it yet since it's pretty difficult to reproduce.
189136 [Thread-10] INFO sound.oo0O - Creating streaming player for music with id [faction_hegemony_market_03_friendly_var01.ogg]
189136 [Thread-10] INFO sound.null - Playing music with id [faction_hegemony_market_03_friendly_var01.ogg]
189632 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
at starship_legends.RepRecord.existsFor(RepRecord.java:20)
at starship_legends.RepRecord.existsFor(RepRecord.java:22)
at starship_legends.RepRecord.updateRepHullMod(RepRecord.java:39)
at starship_legends.CampaignScript.reportPlayerClosedMarket(CampaignScript.java:447)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.reportPlayerClosedMarket(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.dialogDismissed(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.N.dismiss(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.o0oOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.dismiss(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.newui.Objectsuper.advanceImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.v.advanceImpl(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.o00OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.traverse(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
Thanks for the fix!! :DYou're welcome! But I really am sorry it was necessary at all... Even if it was only up for four hours, a patch should never break anything, let alone the entire mod.
The game was started with the 1.3.5 version, then I updated it to the newest one. Hope this doesn't mean the bar event is busted on that save :'(.Thanks for reporting this. It was another bug introduced in 1.3.5. I didn't catch it with 1.3.6, but that bar event should work now with 1.3.7
hey, just like to say keep it up, my man! this mod truly does add "extra flavor"...especially since i fiddled with the settings.json and have 90+ ships in fleet and 80 officersThanks! Glad you like it :)
Awesome mod!Glad you like it!
Some of the traits should require the system they're modifying to actually exist though. It doesn't really make sense that a ship that has no missile hardpoints can have "Fast Missile Loaders" or a phase ship with "Powerful Shields".Are you seeing that happen? If so it's a bug.
Are you seeing that happen? If so it's a bug.
Is there a reason why my civilian ships always get more negative traits than usual? I obviously don't send them into combat, but I am running Ruthless Sector.I just checked the code, and it looks like the "bonusChanceForCivilianShips" setting should be working as intended. It's set to 0.5 (or 50%) both with and without ruthless sector. I didn't notice any significant deviation from this while playtesting either. It's based entirely on RNG, so there's a chance you've just been unlucky. What kind of good/bad ratio are you getting for civilian ships?
I only noticed it on some modded ships, so maybe its just a compatibility issue. The Vril frigate (from Sylphon) gained the missile loaders buffs - it has 2 small energy, 1 medium energy and 2 built in energy PD turrets. The Royco mod frigate (IBB from SWP) gained shields even though its a phase ship.Yeah, those ships definitely shouldn't be getting those traits. I thought this might be a compatibility issue for the Royco since it's so unconventional, but its shield type is set to PHASE, which is what starship legends checks for, so everything should be working as intended. Were those ships famous flagships or derelicts by any chance? The mod is supposed to check for this kind of thing while generating traits for those as well, but something might be preventing that from working correctly.
i do wonder, any reason after winning battles my crew hates it's captain/officer more ?My guess is that the officer's ship took a lot of hull damage in the battle. Loyalty changes are based on a "battle rating," which is basically a score for how well the ship performed in the battle. Taking hull damage reduces that score a lot.
how do you add more reputation tiers to Starship Legends?Unfortunately, there's no easy way to do it. It's possible, but you'd have to change starship legend's code (which is completely fine by me)
i do wonder, any reason after winning battles my crew hates it's captain/officer more ?My guess is that the officer's ship took a lot of hull damage in the battle. Loyalty changes are based on a "battle rating," which is basically a score for how well the ship performed in the battle. Taking hull damage reduces that score a lot.
It sounds like those Buffalo IIs are working out well for you.Well, when your hull is listed as being at a very low value, I guess it's very easy to scratch some hull and gain a ton of points. They do as much damage with a Pilum+Thunder fighter as a Monitor which has an officer and Ion Cannon + Dual Light Machinegun. But the latter consistently don't get to do hull damage, unlike the fighters who get on everything small that dies.
Do you think the ECM support bonus is too strong?Actually the ECM isn't important, as the most important is just to avoid taking the penalty. But it might make enemies come in closer, though most of the useful damage is done by bombers anyway. Well, the first 4 are handy just on their hull-based 2% to speed, as the fleet deploys with 17% to start with and would like 8 points to reach 25% (while you can use up to another 15 or so to counter the enemy fleet ECM, which is easily done by having those Buffalos carry ECM hullmods).
Though the ones knife-fighting remnant battleships (or superships thanks to the Seeker mod) are the least well-known, compared to the Buffalos who scratch hull from very far away with relatively little risk (Thunder range of 8000).Yeah, that makes sense. Your monitors still seem to have very good ratings, but I assume that's mostly from the rating overflow of other ships. That's an interesting fleet composition. I like it.
Actually the ECM isn't important, as the most important is just to avoid taking the penalty. But it might make enemies come in closer, though most of the useful damage is done by bombers anyway. Well, the first 4 are handy just on their hull-based 2% to speed, as the fleet deploys with 17% to start with and would like 8 points to reach 25% (while you can use up to another 15 or so to counter the enemy fleet ECM, which is easily done by having those Buffalos carry ECM hullmods).Ok, cool. Sounds like the support bonuses are working out roughly as I hoped
Is there a reason I've yet to find any storytellers?i'm having that problem currently as well...i kind of cheated and used transverse before tutorial completion (yes, i admit i'm that guy)
yup. fixedGlad to hear it! Yeah, I suspect that no bar events would occur at all before the tutorial ends.
Hi just installed the update, and imediatly noticed the story tellers are showing up on my worlds now. Great! Except I have both types of story teller completely disabled via the setting files.So you have these lines in your settings file?
"famousFlagshipBarEventChance":0.0,Are you using ruthless sector? If so, starship legends will use RUTHLESS_STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS.ini instead of STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS.ini.
"famousDerelictBarEventChance":0.0,
Hi just installed the update, and imediatly noticed the story tellers are showing up on my worlds now. Great! Except I have both types of story teller completely disabled via the setting files.So you have these lines in your settings file?Quote"famousFlagshipBarEventChance":0.0,Are you using ruthless sector? If so, starship legends will use RUTHLESS_STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS.ini instead of STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS.ini.
"famousDerelictBarEventChance":0.0,
Stroytellers that were there previously would also still be there after changing those settings (at least until the event expires).
Another possibility is that an error is occurring while starship legends tries to read your options file. An error message should show up in-game if that's the case, but if not then the error should still show up in the log.
After re-checking the code it looks like those settings should be working as intended, but I added an extra check just in case.
I was not aware of those lines, I was using:
"allowFamousFlagshipBarEvent":false,
"allowFamousDerelictBarEvent":false,
from the sun_sl folder
Have changed the ones you mentioned, still getting them.
Though I would have expected the lines I mentioned to have worked.
I'm also seeing some stutter on saving. I think this only started after updating to the latest version of Legends though.
It's unfortunate that "civilian" ships do not get ratings, since I just got a nice Valkyrie troop transport blueprint and was using them in combat.
Civ ships do get ratings. It's just slower on them to get it is all.They get traits, are ratings hidden though? It also shows up as just a "-" in the battle results screen, so I can't tell if they're effectively at 50% for getting traits or not.
As for the save stutter, did you modify the game files to use more RAM if you can?Yes, though only 2Gb since the computer has 4. A few other mods, but I think only FDS has a faction in it, the rest are a couple of ship mods, no nex or anything else.
And do you use other mods?
I was not aware of those lines, I was using:Those lines are for setting whether or not an event is available in markets owned by specific factions. It sounds like you edited defaultFactionReputation.json, which defines the defaults for faction configurations, and generally isn't intended to be edited. All vanilla factions (including the player faction) overwrite those defaults, so it makes sense that your edits would've been ignored in most cases.
"allowFamousFlagshipBarEvent":false,
"allowFamousDerelictBarEvent":false,
from the sun_sl folder
Heh I went a step further and started a new game to test it, everythings working perfectly now.Glad to hear it! Sorry for the trouble.
It's unfortunate that "civilian" ships do not get ratings, since I just got a nice Valkyrie troop transport blueprint and was using them in combat.Yeah, it might make things more interesting sometimes for them to get ratings, but it would also inevitably lead to a lot of players arranging weird battles intended for the sole purpose of improving the combat rating of civilian ships. It could probably be done, but it would require quite a lot of work to make it work well, and I don't think it would be worth it.
Civ ships do get ratings. It's just slower on them to get it is all.As Alavaria said, they do get traits, but they don't get ratings (excepting the possibility of some setting I'm forgetting about that would allow it)
First wanna say that I love the idea behind this mod and thanks for making it :DYou're welcome! It's been a fun project so far :)
I wanted to ask if it is possible to add an option where: "if no hull damage where taken" and "new rating is lower than previous rating" then previous rating is unchanged?It's certainly possible. I would like to do something like that to address the types of situations you mentioned. That kind of thing isn't something that bothers me personally, but discouraging the use of more force than necessary isn't one of the goals of this mod. Preventing rating reductions for ships that don't lose any hull during the battle isn't a bad idea. It's too binary for my liking and it would add more complexity to the rating system (which is already too complex), but it would solve the problem. I'll have to mull it over. Something I've been considering for months now is disabling the rating system and all negative traits so that players would only get bonuses, but so would NPC fleets.
Suggest either making things that effect fleet performance rarer, or changing the odds of good bad traits to something other than 50-50I try to keep this mod from affecting vanilla difficulty too much (at least with default settings), hence the 50-50 chance of good/bad traits for civilian ships. Even then, it still makes the game slightly easier because you can choose to keep the ships with the best reputations.
Congrats on overcoming the many troubles you encountered so far. The mechanics and the design of this mod are captivating. Even if I had more fun occasionally helping you with it, than playing with it. Nice work.Well, thanks! It's definitely been interesting so far. If I had to start over I certainly wouldn't base traits on any measure of combat performance. I knew I was opening a can of worms, but damn...
Because a group of ships like the Valkyrie can use fighters to kill frigates (ie: score hull damage) and they don't have a "conventional" rating, it seems rather easy for them to get good traits due to the rule about not getting bad traits if your rating rose. (and they show up in the report with a rating like "- (+5%)"True! That's two bugs right there. I never send civilian ships into battle, so I never noticed. Not sure exactly how I'll address this, but I'll put it on my list. Thanks for pointing it out!
Hi Sundog, first off thank you for the excellent mod!;D
At the moment I feel like the "Listen to the Storyteller" events are a little too common. I'm not sure if they count towards the total for minGenericMissions and maxGenericMissions found in settings.json, but despite having raised those values from their defaults slightly I rarely see e.g. delivery missions anymore, while basically every planet has the rumors bar event. Is this unusual?A high occurrence of storytellers isn't unusual or unintended, but it is a problem if they're noticeably reducing the frequency of other bar events. I'll have to look into exactly how bar events are spawned to check on this. The reason for how common storyteller events are is that I expect most of them (especially flagship intel) to be dismissed, since they're only useful if they offer a ship and traits that the player is interested in. For now, if you like, you can reduce the occurrence of these events by reducing famousFlagshipBarEventChance and famousDerelictBarEventChance in the options file.
Additionally, I encountered a minor bug wherein I took the location of a rumored ship and had my credits deducted into a negative balance. I don't think that the event told me it would cost me in this case, and in any case credits in vanilla are always non-negative, so this seems non-standard. I tried to reproduce it but didn't have any luck there.Hmm... sorry about that! It's not supposed to let you accept the mission if you don't have enough money. After looking through the code I think I see a way this might happen sometimes, so if I'm right I should be able to reproduce it myself.
I can't seem to find the error specific to your mod anymore (or was high off of oxygen and thought it was your mod).Well, thanks for looking! If you still have the relevant log you might try searching starship_legends, which should appear in all this mod's log entries. Dara is the prefix for Disassemble Reassemble.
Mostly seems to be pointing to Varya's mod having some issues, a couple in Tahlans, and one ship not being created in the ship data csv file (Dara_paragus No idea which mod that'd be from, but I'll figure it out and post to them later).
Keep up the solid work :)If you insist :P
Something I've been considering for months now is disabling the rating system and all negative traits so that players would only get bonuses, but so would NPC fleets.
The negatives as well as the positives are what makes the mod interesting. Otherwise it's just a buff mod and that's boring.Yeah, I agree. That's why I haven't done it yet. I'm pretty happy with the rating system anyway, but it will never be perfect.
cheers for 50% storyteller reduction. was feeling a bit spammyAgreed. We'll see if 50% was enough.
Awesome! I like that log! Glad to help ^^;D
Thanks for your job! There is really great pleasure to play such an excelent mod. :)Glad you like it! :)
Some guys just told me that they feel awful when they had to spend many time and energy for a series of buff ( they could not bearing a useless one or even debuff, It's hard to understand for me but everyone have a mind of his own ).You might want to suggest to them setting "ignoreAllMaluses" to true in the options file. It sounds like they might prefer it that way.
As for me, the hullmod of Star Legend are just like a medal, the memory of my battle. It looks well but, lack of sense of participation, i mean it is uncontrolled completely.The randomness of traits in this mod is very deliberate/intentional. Having more control over bonuses definitely has some advantages, but I don't think it's a good fit for this particular mod. On the bright side, the next version of Starsector will allow us to add permanent hullmods without costing any OP, which will have a similar effect.
Maybe, this is just my opinion, the traits we can earn after battle can offer 2-3 choose(it may looks like level-up of officers) will be better, a Limited List is better than random in my thought.
I'm not getting any "storyteller" encounters at all after 1.3.9. Tried to find one on a new save, but either I was unlucky or it really isn't working.I'm still seeing plenty of new storytellers with 1.3.9 (in both old and new saves). Not sure what could be causing them not to show up. Have you edited the options file at all?
I tried rolling back to 1.3.8, and that works just as advertised.
I'm still seeing plenty of new storytellers with 1.3.9 (in both old and new saves). Not sure what could be causing them not to show up. Have you edited the options file at all?
I did get that error again in the new version just fyi.I guess I was wrong about the cause and didn't actually fix it. I never did manage to reproduce it. To make sure it's the same thing, could you PM me the error message from the log? It might look the same as the one from 1.3.8, but it'll have some small differences that are important.
But I am also still seeing 19270872 story tellers.I likely just didn't reduce the frequency enough to make much of a difference. I might also need to increase some of their cooldowns.
I haven't touched the options at all. I will try 1.3.9 version again just to see if I possibly made a mistake while updating.How many markets did you check without seeing any storytellers? It might have just been bad luck. It's also possible for faction mods to disable storytellers at their market's, but as far as I know no one has done that. What kinds of markets have you been checking? Were they all owned by the same modded faction?
How many markets did you check without seeing any storytellers? It might have just been bad luck. It's also possible for faction mods to disable storytellers at their market's, but as far as I know no one has done that. What kinds of markets have you been checking? Were they all owned by the same modded faction?
I still can't reproduce this issue... Here's what I tried:
Started a fresh save
Checked Jangala and Asharu for storytellers
Reloaded and checked Jangala and Asharu again (5 times)
Each time I checked Asharu had a storyteller but Jangala didn't. Am I trying to reproduce this incorrectly?
I don't know why another mod might interfere with storytellers, but it might be a mod compatibility issue. Could you attach your enabled_mods.json?
Fixed the possibility for multiple storyteller events to choose the same target fleetFixed famous flagship traits being based on the storyteller's market instead of the fleet commander
(edit: after looking at the code, it seems like this should already be the case. Not sure what's going wrong)
Starship Legends 1.3.10 (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15321)
Compatible with all previous versions
Fixed stat changes from NPC fleet trait not being reflected in the stats cards of enemy ships (both before and during battle)
Fixed NPC fleets having different traits during different play sessions
Fixed famous flagship intel "show on map" showing the exact location of the fleet instead of just the system
Fixed the possibility for multiple storyteller events to choose the same target fleet
Fixed another error that could sometimes close the bar dialog when viewed
Fixed the ability to save-scum storyteller events (the same event will now be generated every time after reloading)
Fixed storytellers telling "fanciful fabrications" (which means an invalid mission was generated) far too often in some cases
Changes for the Excelsior and Royco (script-heavy ships from Ship and Weapon Pack):
Hull damage no longer counts against rating at all, unless the ship is disabled
Flux related traits can no longer be received
/quote]
Are the flux related traits no longer possible to receive on any ship or just the two ships mentioned from the Ship & Weapons Pack? It seems like you are referring only to those 2 ships, but I just wanted to make sure.
Thanks for the mod and all the work you put into it. It's great!
Are the flux related traits no longer possible to receive on any ship or just the two ships mentioned from the Ship & Weapons Pack? It seems like you are referring only to those 2 ships, but I just wanted to make sure.Those two ships use flux in a very unconventional way, so it only applies to them. I can see why you might be unsure though. I'll edit the post to clarify.
Thanks for the mod and all the work you put into it. It's great!Glad you like it ;D
It also seemed that it took more than (I set it to 15 from 10) 15 days for it to reset on a ship that had no loyalty.How many traits did that ship have? It takes X days per trait to remove a ship's reputation, so the only time it would take about 15 days in this case is if the ship only had one trait.
And is there a way to reset it for ships from the save file or some such?Yeah, you can use "clearRep" with Console Commands (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4106) to remove a ship's reputation instantly. Enter "help clearRep" for instructions on specifying which ship or ships to select.
1. When mothballing a ship to clear rep, I assume you have to keep the ship in your fleet mothballed for this to work? It looks like when you store a mothballed ship it is no longer technically mothballed as far as the game is concerned.It should still work in storage, even if you mouse over the question mark and the CR meter fills up. Starship legends checks a list of all ships with reputations to see if they're mothballed, not just the ships in your fleet.
2. For the X days per trait, are they removed all at once at the end of the total number of days, or are they removed one at a time as each X number of days pass?The entire reputation is removed once the required number of days has passed (or up to 3 days after that). This includes officer loyalties and combat rating.
3. Pretty sure I know the answer already, but does it store mothball progress, or is it reset if the ship is briefly un-moth'd and then re-mothballed?The timer will reset, but it's only checked every three days, so if a ship is only un-mothballed briefly then starship legends might not "notice"
Hey, thanks for the report. Starship legends logs events related to clearing traits. Could you tell me if you're seeing messages in starsector.log about the time remaining before ship's reputations are removed? They should happen every three days or so.It also seemed that it took more than (I set it to 15 from 10) 15 days for it to reset on a ship that had no loyalty.How many traits did that ship have? It takes X days per trait to remove a ship's reputation, so the only time it would take about 15 days in this case is if the ship only had one trait.And is there a way to reset it for ships from the save file or some such?Yeah, you can use "clearRep" with Console Commands (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=4106) to remove a ship's reputation instantly. Enter "help clearRep" for instructions on specifying which ship or ships to select.
It doesn't seem to have a changelog, but I think it was 1.1.11.
Yeah, I know. It doesn't have one. The more recent version does, but the old one doesn't. the Mod_info.json file lists it as 1.0, but I don't think it gets changed between versions.
Yeah, I know. It doesn't have one. The more recent version does, but the old one doesn't. the Mod_info.json file lists it as 1.0, but I don't think it gets changed between versions.I do change it between versions, and 1.0 should be the only version without a changelog, so it looks like the original version you were using was indeed 1.0. I do my best to make sure new versions are save compatible, but going from 1.0.0 to 1.3.11 is quite a leap, so I'm not surprised there was some trouble.
Starship Legends 1.3.12 (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15321)
Compatible with all previous versions
Fixed reputation resets never occuring if the required time to clear the ship's reputation exceded 30 days
Fixed loyalty to the player character being reset for a ship if the reputation hullmod tooltip was viewed without any captain being assigned
Fixed storyteller events breaking if the game was saved and reloaded between first seeing the event and accepting it
Fixed an error that could occur when updating from very old versions of starship legends
Fixed a few typos
Added new integration functionality meant to make it easy for mod authors to allow retrofitted ships to retain their reputations:
starship_legends.Reputation.transferReputation(FleetMemberAPI from, FleetMemberAPI to)
Fixed loyalty to the player character being reset for a ship if the reputation hullmod tooltip was viewed without any captain being assigned
Yeah, I think you're right! In fact, it looks like I never replied to your bug report, which means I probably forgot to look into it. That's a shame. I probably could've fixed the issue three patches ago if I had paid more attention.Fixed loyalty to the player character being reset for a ship if the reputation hullmod tooltip was viewed without any captain being assigned
Excellent! Pretty sure this was what was going on in that post I made a while back.
Damn, you've sure been busyYeah, true, unfortunately. When I set out to make this mod I wasn't planning for it to be so hard to maintain, and yet here we are 30 versions later ::)
Thanks for putting so much thought into this mod; it's definitely one of the best additions to Starsector.;D
Hey, thanks for letting me know! Is this for battles involving allied fleets? I just tried to reproduce this by fighting some pirates, allowing a kite to escape, and choosing "let them go," but it resulted in a victory.Yep, I noticed it doesn't influence the ships' outcome. and I think it's together with an allied fleet when I decide to not join the pursuit.
Also, just so you know, whether the battle report shows victory or defeat doesn't really matter. It's just flavor text and it doesn't affect ratings or anything. Still, I would prefer for it to not to be wrong, so any further details you can provide would be greatly appreciated!
Yep, I noticed it doesn't influence the ships' outcome. and I think it's together with an allied fleet when I decide to not join the pursuit.Ok, good to know. I'll try to reproduce it that way once I get the chance.
Thanks for looking into it :)No problem. And thanks again for the info. I'd never be able to find all these little bugs on my own.
Did you change any starship legends options?Nope.
Decent mod, however, could you tell me what determines the traits that logistics ship end up getting? My logistics ships keep getting mostly negative traits through exploration and surveys, and you never seemed to explain what determines the percentage of good vs bad traits on logistics ships.Yeah, I need to explain that and a few other things on the first page of this thread. Anyway, it's completely random. By default there's a 50% chance for civilian ships to get a negative trait. You can adjust the chance by changing "bonusChanceForCivilianShips" in the options file.
@Kulverstukass: One of the ships in that bounty fleet is broken somehow. It probably has a weapon or hullmod that's not configured properly, which is causing the game to crash. This problem didn't exist before you talked to that storyteller because until then none of the ships in the fleet had any weapons or hullmods (the game doesn't add those until necessary, and starship legends forced it to add them so it could display the flagship's details). I'm fairly certain the problem wasn't caused by starship legends, but I can't completely rule out the possibility, so if you want to send me your save file and enabled_mods.json file I'll take a look. I can't make any promises though. This kind of problem can be difficult to figure out.If you insist ::)
Actually, after taking another look at your screenshot, it looks like your Punisher and Corocotta weren't deployed. As combat ships, I would expect them to have been selected for deployment when you clicked the all button.I'm pretty sure that was purely an effect of my small battle size, they were not far up enough on the list and were cut off by the DP limit. It was not a multiple engagement battle.
Ok, so I took a look at your save file and found out the flagship of the bounty is a ship with modules (like a station). Thanks again for bringing this to my attention. I should be able to get a patch out in the next day or two.Thank you very much for your work, with this issue and mod in general!
Edit2: The key factor seems to be the console-spawning, not the modules. I was able to reproduce the error with the following steps:Hmm... I think there must be something more going on. I just spawned a Nemealion, Cathedral, and Basalisk with console commands, saving between each spawn, and didn't have any issues. Adding traits to them prior to saving didn't cause any problems either. What ship did you spawn? What kind of errors are you getting? Do you use setHullVariantId at all for any KT ships?
- Spawn a ship with console command
- Save with f5
The error was a popup, saying "Starship Legends has encountered an error, please let the mod author know." Below that was simply the word "null."Sorry, I should have clarified. When a message like that pops up it logs the stack trace to starsector.log, just as if there had been a full crash.
The last release version of KT seems to work fine with SL, so I suppose I'll start with that and add things back in until I get the error.Well, that is very disconcerting, but at least there doesn't seem to be a released incompatibility. Please do let me know if you find out anything more about what the cause might have been. That seems like a mystery worth solving.
EDIT2: Okay, I give up. I've tried re-implementing everything I had added to my draft mod into my released mod. No error, SL works just fine. So I have no clue what could have gone wrong.
I guess it means there's no problem - and sorry for the wild goose chase. Very strange overall. I'll be back if I start seeing these errors again.
"legendary":{
"xpToGuaranteeNewTrait":100,
"effectMult":8,
},
The 'no hull tamage taken' bug is still floating around. I've had it happen several times that the whole fleet shows 0% damage taken where I know some ships took hull damage.Well that's a shame. Thanks for letting me know. Any idea how to reproduce it? How often does it happen?
I set "bonusChanceForCivilianShips":0, and "bonusChanceForReservedShipsMult":0, but campaign XP still gives my civilian ships traits. Can I disable this part?You'll want to set "traitChanceMultForCivilianShips" to 0 for that. Bonus chances are the chance to get good traits as opposed to bad ones.
Hi Sundog, I'm absolutely loving this gem of a mod. Thanks for sharing it!Glad you like it! ;D
One question, though. My support ships (tankers, salvage rigs) tend to get notable reputation changes very easily, even if never deployed in battle. I tend to see a reputation change perhaps every other battle/salvage event. Is this normal? I'm playing with an Industry-specced captain.It's normal if you're steadily earning XP outside of battle. Civilian support ships earn new traits based on non-battle XP now.
In the FAQ it says that mothballing a ship removes the traits. Will putting a ship in colony storage also remove the traits?
I'll keep an eye out for which kinds of engagements still cause this.Thanks! In the meantime I'll take a look at the code and see if I can find anything wrong.
Yup! Updated the FAQs to clarify this.In the FAQ it says that mothballing a ship removes the traits. Will putting a ship in colony storage also remove the traits?
Only if it is mothballed before storage.
Hi,Glad to hear it ;D
came back to check out your mod few months later and I gotta say - I love it. Previously I had to alter settings to make it work with my tastes, now it works great right out of the box :D
Just to clarify, when a mothballed ship loses its traits it ALSO loses it's reputation level, right? So a legendary ship getting mothballed will reset it and have to climb up through the ranks again?Yes, that's right.
I ask because it makes sense but is not what I originally expected when I read the FAQ, I was thinking that it would remove the traits but keep the level, so you could basically reroll for different traits at the cost of not getting to keep any of the originals, so a few meh traits would be worth keeping if you also had one you really wanted.That's a good point. Thanks for pointing it out! I'll update the FAQs to make it clear.
Not one of them, not a single ship has achieved any sort of trait at all, save a solitary civilian ship getting a loyal crew.The first few traits should be very easy to get, so it sounds like something is going wrong. By now you've probably fought at least a few battles that would grant enough XP to guarantee new traits. Did you change any settings by any chance? Are you using any mods that modify XP gain in any way?
What do I need to change in the STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS.ini to accelerate these bonuses?Normally you could reduce the "xpToGuaranteeNewTrait" value for each tier, but I suspect that won't work in your case, since you should've gotten new traits with the defaults by now.
Hey Sundog, some bad news. It seems there's a crash that's been happening with regards to traits being added to module ships - but only under specific circumstances.Hmm... that is bad news. Thanks for letting me know. It's very strange that it only occurs for starter module ships. Hopefully I'll be able to fix this once I figure out what the difference is. Anyway, thanks for the solid repro steps!
Not one of them, not a single ship has achieved any sort of trait at all, save a solitary civilian ship getting a loyal crew.The first few traits should be very easy to get, so it sounds like something is going wrong. By now you've probably fought at least a few battles that would grant enough XP to guarantee new traits. Did you change any settings by any chance? Are you using any mods that modify XP gain in any way?
This is one of my favorite mods for Starsector so far, I've been using since I've discovered it and haven't turned it off since.;D
I feel like if fire rate traits also cause average flux costs to increase/decrease, it would more interesting than a simple damage modifier.Right, the change in flux usage would set a fire-rate trait apart from deadly/harmless, but they'd still be too similar imo. However, if I decide to make weapon type specific traits I think a trait that does +/- fire rate for ballistic weapons could work well. I think the increased flux usage from higher fire rate could lead to some interesting builds and strategies.
I don't know, I just want to see how fast I can get a Hammerhead with all mortars to fire.Ha! Fair enough :)
also question if you have the Ample Fuel Tanks trait is it normal that on a loaded save it doesnt get recognized by the game until you fiddle about your inventory?No, that's not normal, or at least it's not supposed to be. Did you see my previous reply (below)? If you can give me instructions for a way to make this bug happen reliably I'll probably be able to fix it.
Hmm... I'm not aware of any issues involving fuel capacities and saving/loading. I just tried giving a fleet of ships the +fuel capacity trait, topping off the fleet's fuel, saving, and reloading, but I didn't see anything out of the ordinary. Are you using an old version of Fuel siphoning by any chance? At one point it had some hacky code involving fuel stacks.
relaunch the game and load my savefileThis was the clue I needed. The game was trying to apply the reputation hullmod before starship legends had a chance to load all of the data it needed, so I just forced an update once everything was loaded. The fix will be part of the next update (which will hopefully be soon). Thanks again!
@All: Can I get opinions on whether or not this an improvement over the current icon?Personally, I don't mind the cropping there; I'd say it's an improvement. Though I'd assume that the laurels would only appear for high fame levels? Or maybe change color or something? (Copper/silver/gold perhaps?)
(https://i.imgur.com/4buxjes.png)
I like the laurels, but I'm not a fan of how they're cropped.
Also: I am very much a fan of the storyteller bar event. That alone makes the Sector feel notably more alive than normal. Though it does feel a bit odd that almost every derelict has the same traits - reduced effect of d-mods and increased recovery chance. (Okay, so the increased recovery chance makes sense.Glad you like the event! I think I'll reduce the likelihood of the dmod effect traits from 3 to 2 times as common as normal. If you like, you can edit the chance of each trait in /data/config/starship_legends/factionConfigurations.json
Hm. Question: will reduced d-mod effect go away or at least start to shift down in priority if I do a full recovery on the ship?)Not currently, but it's on my list of things to do. I think I'll try to squeeze it into the next update.
Shield Bypass is not vanilla.
The reduction of lasting damage due to fame is not cumulative with the trait earned by safety procedures on level 3 which reduces negative effects of d-mods by 50%.I just tested, and it looks like it already works that way. Can you point me to a specific case in which it doesn't? There might be a bug somewhere.
That means the reduction of lasting damage due to fame gets pretty much useless after gaining some levels. I thnk it should be connected multiplicative so you wuld get around 66% reduction ( 50% + 50%*33%).
What do you think?
I see that isTraitRelevantForShip checks the trait type against the hull specs (e.g. shield traits only for hulls that have shields) and considers built-in hull mods. Do you think it would be practical to consider other hull mods? At least in vanilla, I don't think there are too many that would affect traits (shield bypass, makeshift shield generator, and converted hanger) in vanilla. What do you think about considering those as well?Well, you're well informed, aren't you :P
It seems like the only way for me to remove those two traits and replace them with others (or allow others to be chosen) is to reset the ship's reputation and manually add all its traits back in order. Is that right?Yes, that's right.
While looking for the code for isTraitRelevantForShip, I noticed that there's a RemoveTrait command slated for version 1.4. Any ETA on it?Not sure. I wanted to cram a few more things in before releasing, but I'm starting to think I should remove a few incomplete additions and release what's done so far. If you PM me on Discord and promise to report any bugs you find I'll send you the dev build.
Added 10 new traits:
- Rugged/Fractured - Adjusts hull integrity based on the number of dmods
- Rapid/Sluggish Ammo Feeders - Adjusts rate of fire of ballistic weapons
- Efficient/Inefficient Flux Adapters - Adjusts flux usage of energy weapons
- Vigilant/Oblivious PD Gunners - Adjusts range of point defense weapons
- Skilled/Inept PD Gunners - Adjusts damage dealt to fighters and missiles
Added the ability to pay story tellers for information about any other fleet that's trying to recover a famous derelict
Added the possibility for remnant fleets to use famous derelicts as bait (especially old, powerful derelicts)
- Added setting "famousDerelictMayBeGuardedByRemnantFleet" for toggling this feature
- By default, this setting is only enabled if Ruthless Sector is also enabled
Added RemoveTraits console command
Fixed reputations not being handled correctly for stock variants of multi-module ships, which could result in a crash in rare cases at the beginning of a new game
Fixed the possibility for ships to earn loyalty related traits even if the loyalty system was disabled
Fixed recovered ships not always counting as sustaining 100% damage in some cases (such as after recovering an Excelsior)
Fixed the possibility for famous derelicts to end up in constellations with only one system, which aren't named on the map
Fixed a few typos in procedurally generated text
Fixed the possibility for mismatches between reported trait changes and actual changes in rare cases
Fixed a the top header of battle reports being clipped if no trait or reputation changes were included in the report
Fixed fleet fuel and cargo capacity traits not being applied immediately after loading saves in some cases
Fixed ships deployed only for autoresolve pursuits getting trait and rating adjustments
Changed: Enemy NPC fleets now have about half the traits, but the effects of their traits are much greater
Changed the formula for determining the chance for each ship to earn a new trait after battle
- The base chance for new traits is now much lower, but it is increased for...
- Ships that deal and/or sustain a lot of hull damage
- Ships with high-level captains
- Ships that are generally more powerful (based on FP)
- The settings related to trait chances have been completely reworked to support these changes
Changed reputation hullmod icons
Changed: Traits related to d-mods (lasting damage) are now gradually removed if the ship has no d-mods
Changed: Ships with only hardpoint slots can no longer get traits related to weapon rotation speed
Changed: Battle reports now have the "Reports" tag instead of the "Fleet log" tag
I set "useRatingFromLastBattleAsBasisForBonusChance":true, and even though a bad trait gets demoted properly, it seems once it's at the lowest point, it won't get removed and the ship will not get a positive trait to replace it with either, no matter how many tough battles I win. Is this intended?No, traits should be being removed. I took a look through the code and identified some cases when this could happen. Just to confirm that we're looking at the same problem, could you tell me the typical order of good/bad traits for the problematic ships (e.g. good good good bad)?
By the way, it's a really nice touch that positive d-mod traits like "Battle Scarred" still get phased out if the ship does well.Such traits actually get phased out if the ship no longer has any d-mods, but yeah, I'm happy about it too :)
I'm enjoying this overall but the one frustrating part is that logistical ships just seem to constantly get slapped with negative traits out of the blue. They'll occasionally get a good one if I do a massive trade dump on a colony with a sabotaged spaceport or something, but if I'm just doing bounties or exploring there is seemingly no way to prevent this from happening.The likelihood of getting new traits for civilian ships is based on XP earned outside of battle, but whether or not those traits are good or bad is simply based on a 50% chance. You can adjust this likelihood by changing "bonusChanceForCivilianShips" in STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS.ini, which is found in the root folder of the mod.
Fixed RemoveTraits console command not updating reputation hullmods, which could lead to a (harmless) error message in the hullmod description
Fixed traits not being removed from reputations when they should in some cases
Fixed trait changes still being possible in some cases for ships that are only deployed for autoresolve pursuit
Fixed the possibility for irrelevant traits to be chosen to become more prominent
Fixed an issue that could prevent irrelevant traits from becoming less prominent for deployed ships in some cases
Changed: Reduced chance of spontaneous malfunctions from the Cursed trait by half
Like someone said, my utility ships get slapped with negative traits despite never facing battle up to legendary tier.Up to legendary tier? With default settings it should be rare to have famous civilian ships, let alone legendary ones. Are you using any mod that frequently awards XP?
Personally, i would love even crazier traits tied to unique "feats" or achievements in battle. For example destroying multiple enemy ships solo after your fleet has been destroyed, or using a specific ship for many years in a row without ever storing it... or for some bar event ships to have unique traits that cannot be obtained in other ways, to make them more desirable.Yeah, I think achievement-based traits would be really cool too, but it would take a very long time to make it work well, and unfortunately I don't think I'll ever be able to spare the time.
Up to legendary tier? With default settings it should be rare to have famous civilian ships, let alone legendary ones. Are you using any mod that frequently awards XP?
xpGainMult is set to 0.05Ah, that's the clue I needed. By default starship legends compensates for changes made by xpGainMult so that people won't inadvertently change the rate of gaining new traits by editing it. Unbeknownst to me, however, xpGainMult only seems to apply to XP from combat. So in order to determine trait chances for civilian ships, the mod is dividing peacefully earned XP by 0.05 when it was never multiplied by 0.05 in the first place. This will be fixed in the next release. For now, you can change the value of "traitChanceMultForCivilianShips" in the starship legends options file in order to reduce the chance of new traits to your liking. Sorry about the trouble, and thanks for your help in figuring this out!
Fleets from modded factions that haven't integrated with starship legends get a balanced set of randomized traits.
Combat rating determines how many of a ship's traits are good.
Traits will gradually shift to have a percentage of good traits equal to the current rating of the ship.
If a ship has a rating of 70% for a long time, it will eventually end up with about 70% good traits and 30% bad traits.
> Being hostile with Hegemonythis seems to be a nexerelin thing rather than starship legends...
> Order an invasion to take control one of their planets
> When waiting for preparation, adventuring around
> [REDACTED]
> Ended with impressive victory
> Hegemony relationship +5 become not hostile anymore
> Invasion canceled, because they are not hostile anymore
> No War refund
I wasted millions for war, just to gain 5 point of relationship LOL
The relationship change sometimes create weird events
> Hegemony send AI inspection fleet.
> They are already hostile, so the colony order itself to resist.
> Adventuring around because i bet they wont even chip colony defense.
> [REDACTED] happen when they are close to my system
> impressive victory, relationship +5, Hegemony not hostile anymore
> the resist order auto canceled itself and change to comply.
> space police steal 5 Alpha cores and go
> i rush back to my colony, try to track them down, but they are already gone
MAXIMUM RAGE
Seriously, can we exclude relationship change when:
- There is an invasion from us to them and from them to us going on
- AI inspection
- Expedition
That will be nice
- Impressive victory bonus wont apply on faction that is hostile or vengeful to you.This seems sensible and it would solve both problems cleanly, so I'll probably end up going this route.
That'd be the definition of feature creep. Mechanics like that aren't Starship Legends' job.Well... i'm not demanding it? it's literally a suggestion. The author can say "no" and so that's it. If the author feels like i'm harassing him then just tell me and i will shut. By the way, is there a mod that have such feature? that's like you said, do something that's not "starship legends' job"?
Well, to provide a counter-argument, I know many, many, many veterans who get into fights at bars with nobodies. Usually, the nobody is the type of drunk that constantly feels emasculated by someone elses' strength, and feels the need to beat them to prove their own power. Other times, they take issue with the politics that surround the military, and project that onto the veteran. Either way, the fame and power of the veteran become the target of the others animosity.That'd be the definition of feature creep. Mechanics like that aren't Starship Legends' job.Well... i'm not demanding it? it's literally a suggestion. The author can say "no" and so that's it. If the author feels like i'm harassing him then just tell me and i will shut. By the way, is there a mod that have such feature? that's like you said, do something that's not "starship legends' job"?
Can we have extra option that the other fleet consider your fleet's reputation before attacking you?For the moment, no. I get where you're coming from regarding suicidal pirates and I think something like that could be cool if done right, but there are a few technical limitations preventing something like that from being feasible. The biggest problem is that I would have to override the AI of pretty much every fleet in the game, which would cause all kinds of incompatibility problems with any other mod that also affects fleet AI.
New to modding - but long time starsector player. Thought I'd share some kudos and observations. Love the mod. It's likely;Done ofmy favorite.
While I sometimes don't like how much the mod punishes taking hull damage -it only really comes about in the early game before you get a pick of your fleet comp so I've since gotten used to it. The way the mod weighs fights encourages "some" cheese - "bring sacrifical decoys so you can hog all the damage" etc.Yeah, estimating the difficulty of battles is never something I'll be able to get quite right. There are just too many variables to take into consideration (including variables that can't possibly be quantified, like the player's playstyle), not to mention the problems associated with the deployment cost of ships not matching up with their true power. Unfortunately, the only real way to fix it is to remove it.
Further, I'm not sure if this is the mod or Ruthless - but it does not fairly weigh being out-numbered in the difficulty calculation - I don't know if there is a way to fix that. I'll get an "easy" rated battle where me and another cruiser have to go up against a dozen frigates and it will say I've got the easy job. Could also be about the Dmods. Once again, just an early game issue when you are climbing up through fleet strength. Once I hit mid game it's no longer an issue.
It seems the majority of "issues" mod users run into seem to be with transparency as to why something did or did not happen - I'm not sure if this is possible in the mod - but lets say a player has a 100% difficulty 400% accomplished battle - but no one gets promoted nor do negative buffs get purged or positive buffs applied - Would it be possible for there to be a little blurb in the battle report where "nothing happens" but "could have happned - just didn't this time"?Yeah, transparency is definitely a part of this mod I need to improve, and I think more messages like that could be a good way to do it. I'll try to keep an eye out for opportunities to insert messages like that cleanly. It's just a matter of balancing thorough feedback with avoiding cluttery or immersion-breaking messages.
any possibility of a mechanic involving an officer being promoted from within "The crew" of a ship?That could be a cool event. I might add something like that later on, but there are going to be a lot of changes to how officers work in the next version of Starsector, so I'll want to see how all that pans out first.
Had one question. Is famous the highest rank?Nope! There's one more reputation tier, but you basically need to get to the point of frequently winning large battles in order for your ships to start earning it.
OK, I'm not sure that's intended.It's not! Thanks for pointing that out. I'll reduce the effect of that trait. It needs to be toned down a bit anyway, especially for some modded missiles where fire rate matters more than it usually does with vanilla missiles.
I see that isTraitRelevantForShip checks the trait type against the hull specs (e.g. shield traits only for hulls that have shields) and considers built-in hull mods. Do you think it would be practical to consider other hull mods? At least in vanilla, I don't think there are too many that would affect traits (shield bypass, makeshift shield generator, and converted hanger) in vanilla. What do you think about considering those as well?Well, you're well informed, aren't you :P
I've thought about it in the past, but I've always chosen not to consider temporary hullmods when choosing traits because traits are essentially permanent in most cases. However, 1.4 will include a system for gradually removing dmod related traits from restored ships, which could easily be applied to any irrelevant traits. So, yeah, I'll probably end up doing that at some point, it's just a matter of figuring out how to do it right. Your example with shield bypass (vanilla or not) is definitely a problem I'd want to address.
As a rule I try to determine whether or not traits are relevant to a ship based on permanent characteristics such as weapon mounts or built-in hullmods, otherwise the ships traits could quickly become irrelevant. What ship was this for? That trait is only supposed to apply to ships with plenty of energy weapon compatible slots.
Some older discussion on the topic:I see that isTraitRelevantForShip checks the trait type against the hull specs (e.g. shield traits only for hulls that have shields) and considers built-in hull mods. Do you think it would be practical to consider other hull mods? At least in vanilla, I don't think there are too many that would affect traits (shield bypass, makeshift shield generator, and converted hanger) in vanilla. What do you think about considering those as well?Well, you're well informed, aren't you :P
I've thought about it in the past, but I've always chosen not to consider temporary hullmods when choosing traits because traits are essentially permanent in most cases. However, 1.4 will include a system for gradually removing dmod related traits from restored ships, which could easily be applied to any irrelevant traits. So, yeah, I'll probably end up doing that at some point, it's just a matter of figuring out how to do it right. Your example with shield bypass (vanilla or not) is definitely a problem I'd want to address.
can negative traits get replaced with positive traits?Yup, although not directly. If a ship performs well enough it will gradually lose bad traits and earn new good ones.
and also, i cant find in the settings ini where i can increase the amount or traits the ship can have for ea fame level.Should still be the same as always "traitsPerTier"
is it not possible to change it anymore?
The reduced flux cost for energy weapons trait is, I think, over-tuned for high-tech ships (but about right for mid-tech ships, or for modded ships that use hybrid slots.) I'd suggest looking at the ship's largest (non-missile) slots for determining the value of it; if any of those can mount ballistic weapons, leave it at the current value; if none of them can, cut it by 20 to 25%.Yeah, reduced energy weapon flux usage is definitely a top-tier trait for most high-tech ships. Unfortunately, fine tuning it is difficult because it has an effect multiplier of 2, so I can only cut it in half without resorting to displaying decimals (which I try very hard to avoid). I'd prefer to avoid trait effects changing based on ship characteristics as well. I agree that the balance situation for the trait isn't ideal, but I'm not sure there's a good way to fix it.
By contrast, the reduced flux cost for shields trait is seriously under-tuned, even for the ships with the most expensive shields. I haven't run the math for what would be a good value here, but it might be useful to consider scaling it so it grants what's effectively a flat cost discount based on trait level and ship size, rather than a percentage.Hmm... yeah, I guess it does have a very weak effect. To keep things simple I think I'll just double it, making the max effect +/-40% shield upkeep for player ships and +/-96% for enemy fleets. I worry that making it a flat effect could lead to some pretty lopsided balance situations, particularly with some modded ships.
And, lastly, as it is right now, Dutiful Crew is a trait that I never want; I tend to assign an officer to a ship and then leave them there, so getting to the highest loyalty level a bit faster is largely a non-issue. I'm not sure if it's reasonably doable, but I'd suggest adding an officer XP bonus to this trait - that way it gives you an incentive to cycle in officers that aren't yet max level. It'd still eventually fall off to uselessness, but it'd take longer to get there... and in the next version of Starsector it'd become a valuable trait for the player ship just to get access to story points a bit more quickly.I really like the idea of bonus officer XP for this trait. I'll look into how feasible that would be. I think the biggest problem isn't so much the trait itself, but the difficulty of balancing loyalty changes. Ideally (imo anyway) crews should only rarely be fiercely loyal to their officers, instead fluctuating somewhere close to indifference. In that case dutiful crews would basically provide a permanent bonus by allowing officers to maintain higher loyalty. If it's only a matter of time before crews reach max loyalty and never diminish, then yeah, the loyalty traits are all but pointless. Unfortunately, finding that loyalty fluctuation equilibrium is all but impossible since it depends so much on player skill and playstyle, not to mention the fact that many people don't ever want loyalties to ever reduce... I'm rambling. Anyway, as a band-aid fix I'd suggest either adjusting the battle rating settings to make it tougher to maintain good ratings or preventing new loyalty traits by setting the base chance to 0 in traits.csv (row:loyalty, column:chance). I'll give some more thought to how to improve the loyalty adjustment system. I might just end up adjusting the numbers to make it more common to lose loyalty and rarer to gain it.
(Edit: Alternatively, allow Dutiful Crew to be flagged as an irrelevant trait to be demoted and eventually removed if the current officer has max loyalty?)
Starship Legends 1.4.3 (http://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15321)
Compatible with all previous versions
Minor adjustments and fixes for rare or minor bugs.
Also changed reputations for redacted and derelict drones to allow their fleets to have much more diverse trait sets.
Full patch notes here. (https://github.com/NateNBJ/StarshipLegends/wiki/Change-Log)
Edit: fixed it! What what causing the trait spam was the fact I set the maximum level of AI fleet officers to 0. Setting it to 1 makes it work as intended!Yup. Just looked at the code, and setting "officerMaxLevel" to zero would indeed result in erroneous behavior (division by zero). I'll make sure that's handled in future versions. Thanks for pointing it out!
I'm really interested about that better [Redacted] trait variety. I reckon the absolute worst set of traits when fighting remnants would be them getting reduced shield damage taken and higher top speed/acceleration.Yeah, things can certainly get challenging with unlucky combinations of enemy traits. Increased max speed is one I actually disabled for them to prevent things from getting too crazy.
That would make them a lot harder to drown in Sabots. Maybe Sprinkle some improved PD damage against missiles/fighters too? I'm just theory crafting here.
Sometimes all a modder needs to find a bug is enough dumb hamsters fiddling with things they should not. We salute you 8)o7
You should definetly enable max speed traits again once the new patch hits.Maybe. I try to keep this mod fairly difficulty-neutral, and I think the possibility of running into remnants with increased max speed would be a bit too harsh for that. Personally I'm all for challenging and somewhat unfair gameplay, but I think a lot of fans of this mod are more casual.
The upcoming patch also modifies AI behaviour of the last remaining ship to be incredibly aggressive, nullifying the chance of the enemy cheesing the crap out of the player at the end of the battle.Yeah, a lot of good changes on the way with the next version of Starsector :D
Also, here's the screenshot. Now try to imagine fighting a remnant sub-Ordo with the same stuff. HeeeehHah! I would've expected an error message (which would've been better, honestly). That's almost better than the time I got confused about how numbers work and ended up increasing the missile fire rate of ships with "fast missile loaders" by 10,000%...Spoiler(https://i.imgur.com/v5ykGGV.png)[close]
By default, the chance of civilian ships getting a bad trait is a flat 50%, unmodified by anything (certainly not mining lasers missing while mining). It's likely just a run of bad luck. I'm planning to change things a bit so that it won't be possible for RNG to screw over unlucky ships quite so badly.
Suggestion: the AI should sometimes copy the loadouts of legendary ships in the player fleet.Why? I'm having a hard time thinking of a way this would improve anything. Maybe I'm just not seeing it?
Is it normal to have warship that have one bad trait even when they are very successful in battle?Yeah, that's normal. With default settings, only ships with perfect ratings of 100% will gravitate toward have nothing but good traits.
Suggestion: the AI should sometimes copy the loadouts of legendary ships in the player fleet.Why? I'm having a hard time thinking of a way this would improve anything. Maybe I'm just not seeing it?
Best notions I've come up with are maybe someone trying to buy the ship in question off you, or perhaps a few crewmembers who want to sign up (kindof like the marines encounter?)Hah! That's exactly the direction I went with it. I just jotted this down in the "bar event ideas" section of my notes a few hours ago:
Meet crew who are fans of a famous ship/captain, who offer to join for free, increasing loyaltyAnd this one has been in that section for months:
Fleet commander/Aspiring bounty hunter (independent) - offers to buy one of the famous ships in your fleet (can't find decent ships)
Losing legendary traits maintaining 100% combat rating is quite annoying. Gaining negative traits for no apparent reason after a ludicrous salvage on logistic ships is also quite annoying.
Civilian ship amassing all the negative traits is really very annoying and makes me want to never use them, getting combat freighters instead.Some of the changes I have planned should help address these issues by providing more options and making them more accessible.
Is it normal to have warship that have one bad trait even when they are very successful in battle?Yeah, that's normal. With default settings, only ships with perfect ratings of 100% will gravitate toward have nothing but good traits.
Yeah but the said ship have more than a 100% rating.That would be a bug. How high is the rating? If it is consistently at (or possibly above) 100%, then the ship will eventually have only good traits.
If i can change this whit the setting, can you explain me how.The easiest way would be to set "ignoreAllMaluses" to true in the config file. That would prevent any ship from getting new negative traits. You could also use the console commands mod to edit the traits of your ships to your liking. Open the console and enter "help starship_legends" for a list of relevant commands.
Got a storyteller-spawned derelict that was literally inside a star when I entered the system.
It was a binary system of the 'two stars in close orbit around each other, then other things orbiting around the pair of them' type, and fortunately the ship wasn't on exactly the same orbital period as the stars were, so I was able to recover it after waiting a bit.
...But on the other hand, that sounds like it'd be difficult to calibrate well, and might also have issues with communicating to the player what those thresholds are or why traits are changing the way they are. I'd probably still try for it, but I also tend to over-complicate things sometimes.Honestly I think something as simple as "no negative trait gain on positive rating change" is good enough. It might already work this way, but the only but you could scale the chance of positive changes based on performance, but there should be no reason to gain negative traits if the ship performs well.
That said, the thing that I'd most want to avoid is the situation I've seen a few times of "Battle 1, ship gains trait, Battle 2, rating doesn't change much, ship immediately loses the trait it just gained."This also happens to me all the time. "Yay finally got a really good trait" *5 minutes later* "ope, there it goes."
Hm, tricky. I'm not sure there's necessarily a truly simple solution here that'll cover all cases...Lots of good points. Sliding threshholds for reputation volatility would be great. But, yeah, I'd prefer to avoid adding any more complexity than absolutely necessary. Starship legends (particularly the rating system) is already far more complex than I'd like it to be. Mods having a lot of opaque complexity is actually a big pet-peeve of mine, so, franky, I'm ashamed. Honestly, if I could restart this mod from scratch I wouldn't consider making traits depend on combat performance in any way. It's a fun mechanic, but it's also been a huge source of confusion, bugs, maintenance, compromise, and general dissatisfaction.
I'd be inclined to have sliding thresholds based on total reputation (a legendary reputation is harder to change than a notable reputation), and how far out of line the existing traits are with the combat rating (something that's somehow gotten a 100% combat rating with all negative traits can get a positive adjustment even while losing rating... or vice versa).
...But on the other hand, that sounds like it'd be difficult to calibrate well, and might also have issues with communicating to the player what those thresholds are or why traits are changing the way they are. I'd probably still try for it, but I also tend to over-complicate things sometimes.
Edit: Also, do ships actually end up with traits that are wildly out of line with their combat rating? I guess that might happen with combat freighters or something?Not in my experience, but who knows.
That said, the thing that I'd most want to avoid is the situation I've seen a few times of "Battle 1, ship gains trait, Battle 2, rating doesn't change much, ship immediately loses the trait it just gained."Yeah, for sure. Preventing small rep changes of less than 1% from causing trait changes should help quite a bit with that, but it'll still be possible. I might wait to see how much that change improves the situation before considering further changes.
It might already work this way, but the only but you could scale the chance of positive changes based on performance, but there should be no reason to gain negative traits if the ship performs well.Agreed. The default config is pretty aggressive about trying to make a ship's ratio of good and bad traits match up with its rating instead of granting traits based on the ship's performance in the most recent battle. It sounds like that might be your preference though. You might want to take a look at the "better immersion" configuration edits in the "recommended option presets" section of the OP.
I might also consider different thresholds for different types of trait changes.Yeah, that would be good. I'll have to consider the best way to actually achieve that.
Specifically, I'd prefer it to be harder to lose a trait (whether positive or negative) than it is to re-order traits or gain traits.
curious if this needs any tweaking for the game update?Probably. You could always experiment by editing the mod_info.json file so it "claims" that it is compatible with 0.95-RC9
I wouldn't recommend it! While starship legends might mostly work with 0.95a, it will cause errors under some conditions. I've checked and found code incompatibilities.curious if this needs any tweaking for the game update?Probably. You could always experiment by editing the mod_info.json file so it "claims" that it is compatible with 0.95-RC9
That don't work
Quote of error: "Minimum Version: 0.95.0a-RC11"
"Current Version: 0.95.0a-RC10"
My bad, didn't see the new link of download by Alex.
Where is the new link?
Yeah I don't see any new link the only one I see has the RC11 issue
Apologies if this has been mentioned before, but the 0 flux bonus enemy fleets can sometimes get ("Blockade Runner") interacts kind of... iffy with Safety Overrides ships, especially ones with officers. Like, cruisers with 200+ speed sort of iffy. Pathers in particular can make for pretty zany battles if they roll a fleet with a significant bonus to 0 flux speed, given the number of SO ships they generally have.Hmm... not sure what you mean. What's a 0 flux bonus enemy fleet? The blockade runner trait is disabled by default, and only enabled for pirates and independents. So the only factions that should ever get that trait are those two and any mod faction that has explicitly specified that its fleets should get it. So if pather's are getting the blockade runner trait it's a bug. I guess pathers could get the blockade runner trait if they join forces with a fleet from another faction to fight against you, but that should be rare enough that I'm not gonna stress over it.
I adore this mod.Thanks for the kind words! Long ago I tried and failed to add hover tooltips to each ship's row on battle reports, but I'll give it another shot since the game updated with better mod support.
I have one small QoL thought, if you think it makes sense (and isn't a whole bunch of work)- if in the post-battle report, you could hover over each ship and see a tooltip with all of their extra effects' names, and what they do, that would be ***. AFAIK the best way to do that now is to look at the tooltip in the refit screen.
Thanks for your work!
I'll keep an eye to see if I do see Blockade Runner pop up on a Pather fleet and grab a screen shot if so. (So if I don't post anything later, assume I was in the wrong.)I appreciate it!
Quick question for anyone who might know- does damage from your ship's fighters/bombers count toward your ship's damage output for rating purposes?Yes. Fighters are treated like missiles for the purpose of ratings. Damage they deal is counted as dealt by the ship that launched them and damage dealt to them doesn't count for rating purposes at all.
does this mod work with your flagship too? or is it only ai/officer ships ?This mod treats your flagship the same as any other ship, and it treats your character the same as an officer.
Hi Sundog. When the storyteller creates a random ship hook, can you add a low chance for it to have 1 or 2 S-mods? 8)Why, yes. Yes I can. That's a good idea. I'll add it to my TODO list.
how is reputation grinding balanced for the new level cap, or any other modified level cap for that matter?Good question! Honestly I failed to consider the implications of the new skill system for starship legends, so things are a bit off (try not to judge, I've been juggling many projects). In 0.9.1 it took about 8,355K XP to reach max level and in 0.95 it takes 8,140K, so things are about the same in that regard. However, I didn't increase "traitChanceBonusPerPlayerLevel" to compensate for the lower max level, so I'll fix that up with the next update.
Yeah, I think I will tone down enemy fleet trait effects in the next update. I've been considering it ever since the update that originally introduced fleet reputations, actually. I really like the high bonuses, personally, but I knew people would complain about it. I'm hoping to make it easier to configure in the future, but in the meantime you can reduce the effects by editing STARSHIP_LEGENDS_OPTIONS.ini to lower the "fleetTraitEffectMult" setting.
You can also change the specific traits that factions are likely to get by editing the files in "\mods\Starship Legends\data\world\factions\"
To continue: The re-roll of existing traits i do like, though make the likely hood that its negative higher than positive, IMHO, these ships get powerful even with random boosts, being able to veto a few might get too OP too quickly.
- Ships with S-mods gaining reputation a bit faster, like 5/10/15% or so? It seems like the sort of thing that'd mark a ship as something special, rare and, in spacer circles, worth talking about.That could be neat, but I think it might not be worth the additional complexity, since upgraded ships will already gain more, better traits simply by virtue of performing better in battle.
You're likely already aware, but:I was not aware, but I suppose it makes sense given that the number of traits scales with the level of the commanding officer. Still trying to make it to late-game content so I can better understand how my mods interact with the game at that point, but I don't have much time. How many traits did the enemy fleet have?SpoilerThe Ziggurat encounter at Alpha Site gets Legends bonuses, and quite a massive array of them too.
(both positive and negative, I should note, though not sure how various stats like fighter durability apply to it[close]
Am I blind, or is the download link missing on the first post? (I was able to get it from discord.)
Has anyone had their traits disappear randomly from ships without warning? I can for some reason fix it by transferring the ship to storage, ( yeah the trait just comes back idk) and back but its still kinda weird.Hey, thanks for mentioning this! I'm not aware of anything like that. Can't reproduce it on my end by adding traits to shears, saving, and reloading. Would you mind providing a few more details so I can get to the bottom of it?
Maybe im having ram issues? Its honestly confusing.
Edit: Agh, its caused by saving and reloading so its probably memory related. I assume anyway. And it only happens to the Diable Avionics shears too so i give up.
Am I blind, or is the download link missing on the first post? (I was able to get it from discord.)Hmm... yeah, it's not showing up for some reason. Looks like the service that provides those fancy download-count buttons is down. I'll put up a simple link to the download
Welp it appears to be all of the civilian ships that are doing it instead of just the shears, and considering no one else is having this problem I must be running into an outside context mod conflict/ram issue so crud. ( The whole hullmod that simulates the traits disappears.)You probably want to report this bug to DA as well in 'Bug Reports'-'Modded'
Sorry for being so late, i've been unconscious for a few hoursNo worries. Everybody sleeps :P
Alright now i wish i didnt do the testing. I might actually lose my mind.Heh. I know the feeling...
Oh god I literally thought I was just going insane. Thank you too for your willingness to fix it and your understanding of the issue.Heh. Yeah, not insane, we were just overlooking a seemingly insignificant detail. Glad we could help each other! Finding and fixing things like this would be impossible if I did all the testing myself!
The only way they get more than that is if they pick up a negative trait which then can get flipped to a positive one.Flipped? Not sure what you mean.
Hi, if i wanna get traits only when my ships is in the battle regardless other effects like moving from planet to planet, storms atc. so this ignoreAllMaluses":false setting must be set like true ?No, that will make it so your ships only ever get good traits. It sounds like you want to change "traitChanceMultForCivilianShips" to 0. That will prevent civilian ships from gaining traits from experience earned outside of battle. Hyperspace storms and travel have no influence on traits.
Why was it made this way in first place? This honestly just makes running fleet with civilian ships not very efficient in long run as you will have to replace your civilian ships eventually due to them amassing bad reputation. Or at least storing them at your colony for some time.I chose a default of a 50% chance for new traits for civilian ships being negative because I try to prevent this mod (with default settings) from changing the overall difficulty of the game more than absolutely necessary. I think it's rude to publish mods that change the difficulty of games unless it's obvious or explicitly stated that it does so. So I put a lot of effort into trying to maintain balance. In spite of that, traits for civilian ships still make the game slightly easier, because you can choose to keep the ones with traits you like and sell or reset the ones with traits you dislike.
Yeah, that's not ideal. Sounds like a lot of your ships are stuck in a kind of mediocrity limbo: they can't get new negative traits because they never suffer damage in battle, and they can't get new positive ones because their ratings aren't high enough to justify having 100% good traits (this only kicks in after the first three traits). I expect that this situation would be common for skilled players who are very careful to protect their ships.
Not sure I'd call this a bug, but it's certainly not ideal. I think I'll change it so that instead of allowing the first three traits to ignore the need for a suitable rating there will be a chance to allow it that diminishes based on the number of traits. That will allow ships like yours to continue to improve their perfect reputations, just at a reduced rate.
There are ways to get around it by editing the settings file, but there's no setting that allows you to only prevent this specific behavior. You might want to just increase baseRating or choose one of the "recommended option presets" from the OP.The only way they get more than that is if they pick up a negative trait which then can get flipped to a positive one.Flipped? Not sure what you mean.
Yes, that's normal. By default there's a flat 50% chance for new traits to be negative for civilian ships. The option to change it is "bonusChanceForCivilianShips"Arbitrary, doesn't make sense from gameplay perspective, not very engaging or fun; just automatic debuff on civilian ships and you can't even influence it through gameplay. I'm glad this can be turned off.
Hello, cool mod you have here.Glad you think so! ;D
Personally, I don't think your crew loyalty should be able to decrease if your crew was never in danger. Why would they get upset that they didn't die, the ship remained unharmed, and you won the battle? I think there should be an equilibrium point at around 60% combat rating, and as long as your ship isn't getting its hull breached every battle, it should tend towards that point. If you do high damage / killing blows / whatever, then you tend above the equilibrium line.It basically already works this way. With default settings ships can't lose rating unless they take hull damage, and if they only get scratched their rating reductions will be proportionally insignificant.
My flagship can't climb above 48%, even if I put it solo vs 4 or 5 small pirate scum constantly.Yeah, the combat rating system is BS because it punishes inexperienced players and makes the game even easier for vets. The idea is for people to adjust the settings to suit their desired difficulty, but people shouldn't have to much about in settings files. I want this mod to work well "out of the box" for everyone, but I've got a lot of work to do before that's feasible. At this point I'm pretty sure I'm just going to retire this version, call it legacy, and rebuild the mod in a way that doesn't require a combat rating system.
Hello Sundog! Just dropping by to say I just grabbed the new update (works like a charm) and that I've been enthustiastically slapping this mod of yours into my modded campaigns every time I finished the obligatory vanilla campaigns after every patch!;D
Have you thought about the concept of giving AI fleets (could only be done for Bounties and/or significantly sizeable fleets their very own Commander, with a number of skills ranging from 5 to 15 to match the player?Doesn't vanilla already do this? I'm honestly not entirely sure specifically how commanders work under the hood. Either way, it seems like something like this is a bit outside the purview of this mod, although I do like the idea of further differentiating factions.
Hello Sundog! Just dropping by to say I just grabbed the new update (works like a charm) and that I've been enthustiastically slapping this mod of yours into my modded campaigns every time I finished the obligatory vanilla campaigns after every patch!;DHave you thought about the concept of giving AI fleets (could only be done for Bounties and/or significantly sizeable fleets their very own Commander, with a number of skills ranging from 5 to 15 to match the player?Doesn't vanilla already do this? I'm honestly not entirely sure specifically how commanders work under the hood. Either way, it seems like something like this is a bit outside the purview of this mod, although I do like the idea of further differentiating factions.
I would be careful of doing this. AI fleets can already field tons of officers (much more than the player), and it seems like the AI officer level is usually 7, where as the player can only create level 5 officers by default. I've seen over 20 officers in an AI fleet before. Adding a lot of fleet skills on top of officers who are already better and more numerous than the player would quickly make every battle feel like david v goliath.
At least contact bounties can have fleet skills, since they always have derelict contingent.
I'm starting to think that integrating (most of the) Commander Skills (for AI fleets to use) into an already wonderfully functional mod like this one may be too much meat on the fire. It would honestly work better as a mod of its own.That's basically how I feel about it.
Forgive me for suggesting it in the first place, this suggestion would be like trying to staple a rocket launcher or a machinegun in the back of a toyota pickup truck...no wait that's already happening...uh...it would be like bolting an anti tank howitzer to a young, beautiful and incredibly graceful stallion!Hah! Great analogies, but there's nothing to forgive. Further differentiating factions is a worthy goal, and feedback/suggestions are almost always useful, even when they don't result in direct changes. In this case it's just a lot more complex than it seems on the surface, especially when mod factions are taken into consideration.
Sounds like you'll want to reduce "globalEffectMult" below 1 and increase "baseRating." Not sure what you mean about just flying around the sector. You mean civilian ships earning traits from non-combat XP? I disabled that entirely in the last patch, but you can set "bonusChanceForCivilianShips" to 1 to only get good traits from peaceful XP.Thanks, Dude! Much appreciated!
It seems crew loyalty can still go down even though a ship was not hurt hull wise in a fight if they didnt do much and got a below 0.5 combat rating, which seems completely wrong to me.That's no good. Unfortunately that can't be fixed by editing settings. I'll make sure it's not a problem in the next patch.
Is it possible to make this mod less powerful percentage-wise but almost always positive? Other than have a defeat or a ship destroyed, I'd like to cut out the setbacks that 'feel' undeserved just for flying around the sector.Sounds like you'll want to reduce "globalEffectMult" below 1 and increase "baseRating." Not sure what you mean about just flying around the sector. You mean civilian ships earning traits from non-combat XP? I disabled that entirely in the last patch, but you can set "bonusChanceForCivilianShips" to 1 to only get good traits from peaceful XP.
"ignoreAllMaluses":false,to this:
"ignoreAllMaluses":true,
is there any way to apply this mod to enemy ships?It already does this, unless you turn it off in the settings.
the Evans-Zhao score (whatever it's called) has an effect on how powerful each trait is. If you wanted the +10% armor trait, adding eight traits to a ship that has never seen combat will not give you that 10%; it will be at 7% or 8%. This has been my experience with manually adjusting traits.Hey, thanks for helping Havoc! This part, though, is incorrect. The effect of traits are adjusted only by tier and loyalty, never combat rating. By default, notable, well-known, famous, and legendary traits multiply effects by 5, 6, 7, and 8, respectively. Loyalty can worsen or improve those multipliers by up to 2.
edit - although, that none of the ships i scavenged had famous or noteworthy is kinda why i made this post.The only way to salvage ships with pre-existing reputations is through the famous flagship/derelict events. I may add similar events in the future, but I don't plan on adding notable ships to enemy fleets without a narrative reason to do so (and a way to inform players about what the ship's traits are)
as an aside, mebbe give yer legendary ships a chance to have 1-3 built in mods. make them a bit more... novel.You're referring to the ships you can get from famous derelict/flagship missions? If so, it's on my to-do list :)
hey sundog, would adding the notable changes, or a link to the battle report, to the status screen after a battle? or is that something that would require a lot more effort than it could be worth?Not sure what you mean by status screen. The encounter dialog screen?
Hi, I'm interested in using the mod but I have a few questions:Hey, sounds like you want the "better immersion" settings, except without changing "showCombatRatings" to false. Ratings will be tracked and displayed, but they won't influence your ships in any way. By default, the reputation of civilian ships has a chance to grow whenever you earn XP from anything other than battle, so you shouldn't need to worry about anything there (although there's a 50% chance to get a bad trait this way, which a lot of people hate. "bonusChanceForCivilianShips" can be edited to change this)
- I would like it to be more dependent on the ships' performance in battles without removing the combat rating system (as I assume that's what the Better Immersion settings do) while also allowing civilian ships to get reputation changes without needing to enter battle.
- Can I change the config settings without breaking my save file? I'd be fine with just fine-tuning the settings over time as I don't entirely understand the config values yet.
I don't think ships with High Intensity Lasers are calculating their combat contribution correctly (and/or the Diable Avionics Maelstrom isn't calculating it right).I can't think of a way calculation could be broken by the HIL or Maelstrom. I tried fighting a battle with a HIL equiped Maelstrom and got the kind of results I'd expect. The rating system often doesn't work the way people expect and/or want it to, so I suspect this is just another case of that.
Does Starship Legends still use a special .ini Configuration file for when you're also using Ruthless Sector?Nope
Do you think it would be possible to add an optional formula for calculating Combat Rating and Crew Loyalty that is based on Crew deaths instead of Hull damage?Crew deaths are based on hull damage, so that would just result in a more complicated version of the same calculation. The only way to fix the combat rating system is to remove it.
Crew deaths are based on hull damage, so that would just result in a more complicated version of the same calculation. The only way to fix the combat rating system is to remove it.Yeah, that much I figured, but there are certain Skills (Salvaging, Damage Control) and Hullmods (Blast Doors, Recovery Shuttles, etc.) that directly help reduce Crew Deaths regardless of Hull Damage sustained during Combat and non-combat operations, which I think makes sense would directly affect Crew Morale much more than just the ship being damaged.
I must admit I don't know how Automated Ships with AI captains behave with the mod. Do they still get Crew Morale and Specializations regardless of their non-human nature, or are these things disabled for them?It works the same way, functionally. The only difference is that traits are renamed for crewless ships.
Thanks for your quick response either way.Sure :)
My flagship has a hullmod that regenerates HP during battle. The ship took major pounding but emerged victorious. After battle StarshipLegends decided it took over 100% of damage and surely performed badly, thus negative combat rating. Clearly it was the other way around and the ship performed admirably. I understand it treated the ship as if destroyed, counting HP lost, and ignoring regained.There's a list for ships that regenerate hull that reduces effects of hull damage by a specific percentage for each ship. Sometimes ships aren't included, or their reduction isn't enough because each ship needs to be evaluated and added to the list on a case-by-case basis. Unfortunately, that's the best solution I've managed to come up with. The only real solution (as with most complaints about this mod) is to remove the combat rating system entirely.
I hope you will deem it worth fixing. Thank you
Hey, welcome to the forum! We can talk about it here. Or Discord (Sundog#3161). I only really use github when I create a new release for something.
@hickok: Are you seeing that bug in a new save, or a save that previously didn't have starship legends running? It looks like this problem only occurs in games where no player ship has ever gained reputation. Could you confirm that that is the case on your end as well?
"Please in form the mod author" ... so here you go.
These are parts of a ship from HMI mod, I think the core or front is covered and works as it should. Seems weird for each part to have an effect but I personally think it is cool if it did because well, how often would get to use a lot of effects on one ship for each part.
Hull ID:
hmi locomative fighter left Ship ID: 27185
hmi locomative gun left Ship ID: 2714b
hmi locomative fighter right Ship ID: 271af
hmi locomative gun right Ship ID: 271dd
hmi locomative fighter rear Ship ID: 2720f
(ID seems to change? I don't know... but I think they randomly changed for some reason. It was confusing to get them all)
Registered: False (for all)
There are other parts that I am not sure about mentioned in the game, these are the ones I found in the HMI game folder.
hmi_locomotive_core
hmi_locomotive_front
hmi_locomotive_under