hope it comes out soon tm
Arbalest Autocannon:This firmly plants the Arbalest into the 'niche but good' spot to me. It was already a decent budget weapon because of its efficiency, but now its penetration, efficiency, and dps are getting upgraded. Nice!
Increased damage to 200/shot (was: 150)
Increased flux/shot to 150 (was: 120)
Increased refire delay to 1.2 seconds (was: 1)
- Prometheus Mk.II:
- Reduced supply cost to 30 (was: 20)
Oh boy I am ready to mysteriously lose 100% of my free time in the coming weeks
Many interesting things!QuoteArbalest Autocannon:This firmly plants the Arbalest into the 'niche but good' spot to me. It was already a decent budget weapon because of its efficiency, but now its penetration, efficiency, and dps are getting upgraded. Nice!
Increased damage to 200/shot (was: 150)
Increased flux/shot to 150 (was: 120)
Increased refire delay to 1.2 seconds (was: 1)
[/li][li]Reduced supply cost to 30 (was: 20)[/li][/list]
Typo error or am I just reading it wrong?
Also looking forward to seeing the new low tech ships and to whatever the hell sensor ghosts are going to bring to the table.
I don't want to fill this up with kind of useless chat, but I'm actually excited to hear the lobster cargo sound
Neat stuff! This one reminds me, though - I had a bunch of trouble trying to mod in industry item upgrades, due to the vanilla upgrade options (corrupted nanoforge -> pristine nanoforge) being hard-coded into the industry. Had to implement my own entirely separate campaign listener to handle it, which seems... awkward. Any chance of getting a 'install-value' field for installable items, or maybe a getInstallValue() method (to allow for things like the cryoarithmetic engine whose value changes based on planetary conditions)?
- Special items sold to colonies that have a matching industry but do not meet the item's requirements will no longer install the item
Wow, there isn't a single thing in this patch that doesn't sound fantastic. Very nice work!
Neat stuff! This one reminds me, though - I had a bunch of trouble trying to mod in industry item upgrades, due to the vanilla upgrade options (corrupted nanoforge -> pristine nanoforge) being hard-coded into the industry. Had to implement my own entirely separate campaign listener to handle it, which seems... awkward. Any chance of getting a 'install-value' field for installable items, or maybe a getInstallValue() method (to allow for things like the cryoarithmetic engine whose value changes based on planetary conditions)?
"no_autofit" tag now also works when applied to variants
Fair enough! Figured I'd bring it up since I was thinking about it, though.
Does that mean they'll properly apply the smod from when variants have these tags now?
I noticed when no_autofit is on these ships (in 0.951), they'll ignore the smods indicated in these variants.
Skills:
- Removed Auxiliary Support
Weapons/fighters:
- Breach SRM:
- Increased anti-armor damage effect to 300 (was: 200)
- Increased range to 1500 (was: 1200)
- Heavy Needler: reduced range to 700, to match other needlers (was: 750, bothering me)
Quantum Disruptor: removed charges, now just has a 30 second cooldown
Interacting with abandoned stations (such as the one around Asharu) now plays the salvage/survey music
Phase Anchor:So... if both sides have phase ships and an enemy phase ship dives first, does that mean none of the player's phase ships can dive if one of them gets defeated later?
One ship *per battle* can execute an "emergency dive" maneuver instead of being destroyed
Counts as retreated instead and loses an extra deployment's worth of CR
Hm, that's an interesting point - my first thought is "Oh, clearly that should be per side", but then you run into the same problem if you have an allied fleet in the battle that has a phase ship...QuotePhase Anchor:So... if both sides have phase ships and an enemy phase ship dives first, does that mean none of the player's phase ships can dive if one of them gets defeated later?
One ship *per battle* can execute an "emergency dive" maneuver instead of being destroyed
Counts as retreated instead and loses an extra deployment's worth of CR
That change makes me sad, actually. I would love for different admins to be, well, different, so there's some excitement in finding particularly good ones. But that means having lots of different skills (less powerful and more specific than current ones). Going to no skills except one is a bit disappointing, so all admins are totally generic.
Heavy Mauler:
Now fires bursts of 3 shots with a long cooldown
Overall slightly lower DPS than before
Reduced flux/shot to 200 (was: 225)
Significantly increased accuracy
Wow, that is a long list of changes! Looking forward:)
Noooooooo But I like Aux support, It's fun skill for making ships like the venture actually useful in combat, the skill just needed some tweaks. Will the 2 Packages at least be buffed at least in exchanged?
I believe the problem with the breach srm is that "CONSERVE_FOR_ANTI_ARMOR" tag on it messes with the ai so it will only use it ever to strip armor and not to actually hurt things. Causing it to ignore an exposed hull for an area with armor left.
Why not just increase the other needlers to 750 instead of bringing heavy needler down?
In general: pretty reasonable changes. The only thing i dont get: were energy weapons OP? Why so much buffs for ballistics? I mean: ok, plasma was good. But what else? I understand the asymmetric balance conception, but anyway...
Great stuff all over the board. One of my my favourite improved small detail being:QuoteInteracting with abandoned stations (such as the one around Asharu) now plays the salvage/survey music
Also all the deployment cost changes make sense to me. Especially the reduced cost for the lower-end pirate variants: nice incentive to use those less-than-ideal-but-still-serviceable ships early in a campaign.
Hyperion receives two serious nerfs: higher deployment cost + Wolfpack Tactic PPT tweak. Sounds reasonable, the ship should be less of a no brainer, but still a great option.
Additional music being added at some point or out of scope?
Hm, that's an interesting point - my first thought is "Oh, clearly that should be per side", but then you run into the same problem if you have an allied fleet in the battle that has a phase ship...QuotePhase Anchor:So... if both sides have phase ships and an enemy phase ship dives first, does that mean none of the player's phase ships can dive if one of them gets defeated later?
One ship *per battle* can execute an "emergency dive" maneuver instead of being destroyed
Counts as retreated instead and loses an extra deployment's worth of CR
I hope combat is playable in my Vega 11... Being limited to only exploration killed 0.95a for me.
To clarify: both Polarized Armor and Impact Mitigation (Elite) increase armor reduction to 90%. Did you just want to give two opportunities to get this effect or is this a typo? Getting both wouldn't have any additional effect, would it?
"Substantially increased" is kind of vague when you were specific with other stats. What's the Dominator at now, 15000 HP? Legion roughly equivalent to an Onslaught now?
I'm on the fence with the Hyperion cost increase: the non-SO version is not remotely as versatile because of how SO interacts with the Teleporter. With SO, absolutely worth 20 DP. Without...eh, I think 15 is about right. I'd daresay Hyperion benefits from SO more than any other ship to the point where it is fundamentally a different ship under SO versus without. Even without, you have to have Helmsmanship Elite to kind of make it work under fire (drop shields and hold fire). Dangerous precedent, I know, but could SO add +5 DP/supplies per month to the Hyperion rather than bumping the base model to 20 (or come up with a more clever way of handling that)?
Tons of QoL improvements, new ships, skill overhaul, slipstreams, and some interesting weapon adjustments...this is a heck of a "minor" patch! Very much looking forward to it :D
That change makes me sad, actually. I would love for different admins to be, well, different, so there's some excitement in finding particularly good ones. But that means having lots of different skills (less powerful and more specific than current ones). Going to no skills except one is a bit disappointing, so all admins are totally generic.
Obviously I don't know, but this could just be placeholder until some more interesting Admin skills are cooked up. Might not have been worth the Dev time this pass.
QuoteHeavy Mauler:
Now fires bursts of 3 shots with a long cooldown
Overall slightly lower DPS than before
Reduced flux/shot to 200 (was: 225)
Significantly increased accuracy
This change doesn't make much sense to me - Mauler felt fine to me the way it was. With this change, it feels like it doesn't synergise with Hypervelocity Driver and Heavy Autocannon both.
I'm on the fence with the Hyperion cost increase: the non-SO version is not remotely as versatile because of how SO interacts with the Teleporter. With SO, absolutely worth 20 DP. Without...eh, I think 15 is about right. I'd daresay Hyperion benefits from SO more than any other ship to the point where it is fundamentally a different ship under SO versus without. Even without, you have to have Helmsmanship Elite to kind of make it work under fire (drop shields and hold fire). Dangerous precedent, I know, but could SO add +5 DP/supplies per month to the Hyperion rather than bumping the base model to 20 (or come up with a more clever way of handling that)?Even at 15 DP, I think Hyperion is impractical without SO and a specific skill combo (to reduce teleport delay and raise PPT). SO is good for making Hyperion fight like it did before 0.95. Without SO, it can jump in, but it cannot jump out easily. However, even with SO, if player did not have PPT up skills (from Leadership), Hyperion had way too low PPT to be practical. It also needed Systems Expertise so that the teleport did not take ages to recharge.
Why not just increase the other needlers to 750 instead of bringing heavy needler down?Might as well be 700 to match light and storm needlers. It could not combo very well except with 700 energy weapons like plasma cannon (on Paragon and Ziggurat). 800 range needler would combo well with 900 range ballistics on something like Conquest, but not 750 range needlers - not enough range.
Ah - I don't think buffing the Light Needler to 750 would be a good idea, as it's already quite good, whereas the slight range nerf to Heavy Needler feels just about warranted.
With the caveat that I don't know exactly which changes you mean, and so my answer might be off-base: generally, these are buffs to specific weapons to take them from "generally pretty bad" to "useful". So I don't think it makes sense to consider this as a buff to ballistics in general. It's about opening up more options/giving more purpose to things that already exist but don't see much use, rather than, say, a buff to the top-tier performers in the ballistic lineup, if that makes sense.I m talking about new hullmod and new skill replacing Ranged spec. Looks a little bit too much...
Mine Strike: reduced range to 1000 (was: 1500)Does this affect Star Fortresses that attack with mines?
Improved how the omni shield AI prioritizes mines
No changes to Carrier Group?
I m talking about new hullmod and new skill replacing Ranged spec. Looks a little bit too much...
Bulk Transport: burn bonus increased to +2 (was: +1)Doesn't this make militarizing a freighter (or for that matter something like Atlas Mk.II) strongly negative? Unless half the bonus still applies to such ships, so final burn remains the same.
Quantum Disruptor: removed charges, now just has a 30 second cooldownWoah, wrecked it (although SysExp will still help)
Heavy Needler: reduced range to 700, to match other needlers (was: 750, bothering me)I feel like this wasn't really needed balance-wise, but maybe it'll help draw a specialization line between Heavy AC (longer range) and heavy needler (better for knife fighters).
TextFieldAPIText input fields?!
createCheckboxI'm guessing this is a 'real' checkbox as distinct from the existing area checkboxes that cover the whole button?
Fixed issue where "order a full retreat dialog?" was persistently shown in a battle with allies when none of your own ships were deployed; now it will only be shown once unless the player deploys some shipsWow this was bothering me so much the last couple of days, great to hear it's fixed!
QuoteHeavy Mauler:
Now fires bursts of 3 shots with a long cooldown
Overall slightly lower DPS than before
Reduced flux/shot to 200 (was: 225)
Significantly increased accuracy
This change doesn't make much sense to me - Mauler felt fine to me the way it was. With this change, it feels like it doesn't synergise with Hypervelocity Driver and Heavy Autocannon both.
Hmm, you mean as far as it having reduced ability to put on sustained pressure, forcing shields to stay up more? My impression of the Mauler doesn't match yours, though; I could be off about it but it didn't seem like it was actually all that useful. This version is more about having some ability to burst down armor, at long range and with good accuracy, which feels like it might be more of a niche. But, open to being wrong about that.
have there been any changes to the Contacts so far? Cross-mod contact compatibility seems to be quite an issue such as...
- disabling certain missions from appearing in other factions' bar events.
- enabling certain missions from appearing in other factions' bar events.
- missions not allowing certain factions (only luddic church, path, and hegemony can give you remnant military bounties but what about the other factions?)
and so much more in the later era which I will clarify later in a future thread.
Otherwise, it's a cool mod feature so far, just afraid this problem will come up later on. I've been using it with partial success.
apogee no longer available from high tech blueprint, but why?
QuoteBulk Transport: burn bonus increased to +2 (was: +1)Doesn't this make militarizing a freighter (or for that matter something like Atlas Mk.II) strongly negative? Unless half the bonus still applies to such ships, so final burn remains the same.
QuoteQuantum Disruptor: removed charges, now just has a 30 second cooldownWoah, wrecked it (although SysExp will still help)
Is AI smart enough to use it, now that it can't just use the ability a few times for a wider effective overload window? Maybe overload duration could be longer.
QuoteHeavy Needler: reduced range to 700, to match other needlers (was: 750, bothering me)I feel like this wasn't really needed balance-wise, but maybe it'll help draw a specialization line between Heavy AC (longer range) and heavy needler (better for knife fighters).
- Mauler changes
Nice, maybe it'll know its old glory again. (In recent versions I'd stopped using it since it just recoils too much after a while)
QuoteTextFieldAPIText input fields?!
QuotecreateCheckboxI'm guessing this is a 'real' checkbox as distinct from the existing area checkboxes that cover the whole button?
Is this being used in vanilla GUI too?
QuoteFixed issue where "order a full retreat dialog?" was persistently shown in a battle with allies when none of your own ships were deployed; now it will only be shown once unless the player deploys some shipsWow this was bothering me so much the last couple of days, great to hear it's fixed!
I thought it was an intentional balance point for it - as long range constant pressure weapon, it matched Hypervelocity Driver in that range bracket. Also kept it from being oppressive due to how common medium slots are - if Mauler will be very accurate, doesn't it sort of nullify purpose of Heavy Mortar too? They will be very similar, only difference being that Mauler has way better accuracy, better damage, more range... making it so much more AI-friendly and usable in general despite higher cost. If anything, in my opnion, maybe Heavy Mortar could use some love or something?
I will note that previously, you could run a Heavy Mauler and use it as sustained pressure to overwhelm shields over a longer period of time. When combined with an HVD, due to it's reasonable refire rate, it can force shields to be up at 1000 SU, and apply a fair amount of pressure to ships at long range.
Sustained HE weapons are generally in a weird niche, yes, but they do work. Leaning more heavily into HE weapons rather than Kinetic weapons shortens your TTK once you do overwhelm shields.
This is visible in both the Hephaestus Assault Gun and the Heavy Mauler. I'm generally a fan of the Heavy Mauler being high-ish sustained output, premium long range HE.
The Heavy Mortar being HE burst would also be reasonable and make an amount of sense. It's currently... not used all that much?
Noooooooo But I like Aux support, It's fun skill for making ships like the venture actually useful in combat, the skill just needed some tweaks. Will the 2 Packages at least be buffed at least in exchanged?
:( They won't. I like the concept too, but I don't think it works out well in practice, unfortunately.I believe the problem with the breach srm is that "CONSERVE_FOR_ANTI_ARMOR" tag on it messes with the ai so it will only use it ever to strip armor and not to actually hurt things. Causing it to ignore an exposed hull for an area with armor left.
It will occasionally fire at hull, but generally speaking that's the intended behavior - the missile does a lot of work vs armor and it doesn't make a lot of sense to "waste" it doing what's often relatively minimal hull damageWhy not just increase the other needlers to 750 instead of bringing heavy needler down?
Ah - I don't think buffing the Light Needler to 750 would be a good idea, as it's already quite good, whereas the slight range nerf to Heavy Needler feels just about warranted.
Might as well be 700 to match light and storm needlers. It could not combo very well except with 700 energy weapons like plasma cannon (on Paragon and Ziggurat). 800 range needler would combo well with 900 range ballistics on something like Conquest, but not 750 range needlers - not enough range.
Will there be more API(s) exposed in following days' development/adjustments?
And, I just can't understand why Breach SRM got such a *huge* buff, it performs very well in detaching armor that Harpoon(even Atropos sometimes) can't handle.
So What happens to the packages then? Are they removed or untouched then? If the latter, that would make them only slightly more useful than something like recovery shuttles.
eh but the problem is at that point, swarmers do the same job as breachers but better since they have way more ammo and do pretty decent dmg to both hull and armor compared to the breach. Especially when you take into account missile specialization/EMR
The only thing i dont get: were energy weapons OP? Why so much buffs for ballistics? I mean: ok, plasma was good. But what else? I understand the asymmetric balance conception, but anyway...The changes to High Scatter Amplifier have plenty of new ramifications to energy weapons. I think both weapon types were buffed and it will take a lot of data to show which came out on top. Even missiles got a teeny buff with the elite MS skill.
Will the legendary "Map Pin" mod ever be made? Tune in next time, true believers!Yes!QuoteTextFieldAPIText input fields?!
Hmm. I feel like with poor accuracy, the Mauler is hard to make useful - but if it's accurate and sustained, it's too oppressive. And likewise if it just has enough output for its (in)accuracy to matter less. For the Hephaestus, this seems more ok because it requires a large slot.
The Heavy Mortar... my impression is (and person experience seems to support it) that it's pretty useful. If it's not the go-to medium HE option, then what is?
Mauler is. It pairs well with both HVD due to range-matching and similar constant pressure and HAC due to equally benefiting from Gunnery Implants. I really don't see any need to change the Mauler at all, it's a great gun thanks to excellent range, decent enough accuracy and solid HE alpha. It can be on a long range pressure loadout with HVDs or a mid-range loadout with HACs where it's accuracy is improved due to shorter engagement range.
Your suggested Mauler change also sounds a lot like a 3-round burst HE medium I have in one of my mods and for that thing to be balanced I had to give it worse recoil than the HAC. That gun actually has less alpha than the proposed Mauler change which just seems laughably OP with good accuracy and 1k range (Mine is 800 range and horrendous recoil)
Star system that becomes permanently inaccessible REDACTED will now become accessible again after around a cycle... this a reference to something new or something already in the game?
StarOld, story stuff.farersector patch notes are the best notes. Everything looks awesome, but is....QuoteStar system that becomes permanently inaccessible REDACTED will now become accessible again after around a cycle... this a reference to something new or something already in the game?
That change makes me sad, actually. I would love for different admins to be, well, different, so there's some excitement in finding particularly good ones. But that means having lots of different skills (less powerful and more specific than current ones). Going to no skills except one is a bit disappointing, so all admins are totally generic.
Obviously I don't know, but this could just be placeholder until some more interesting Admin skills are cooked up. Might not have been worth the Dev time this pass.
I'll just say that this is something we've talked about internally - but, don't want to go into details in case nothing comes of it. But I also don't think that having a 3 skills total is *that* much more interesting, given that the skills are all fairly general-purpose boosts anyway.
Does any here believe that fighter/carriers will be less viable than before?
The only thing i dont get: were energy weapons OP? Why so much buffs for ballistics? I mean: ok, plasma was good. But what else? I understand the asymmetric balance conception, but anyway...The changes to High Scatter Amplifier have plenty of new ramifications to energy weapons. I think both weapon types were buffed and it will take a lot of data to show which came out on top. Even missiles got a teeny buff with the elite MS skill.SpoilerNEW High Scatter AmplifierIt perfectly synergizes with EWM skill now.
- Reduces the base range of beam weapons to 500/600/700 on frigates/destroyers/larger ships.
- Beams deal +10% damage.
- Beams deal hard flux damage to shields.
On paper, it terrifies me to think about an SO Sunder with HSA, 2 Graviton Beams and a HIL[close]
So What happens to the packages then? Are they removed or untouched then? If the latter, that would make them only slightly more useful than something like recovery shuttles.
They're technically still in the game (for save compatibility) but there's no way to actually get them in a new game.
Aptitudes whose skill has an "npc_only" tag will no longer be shown in the character screenOh no, is it possible for you to add another type of tag that allows a custom skill to be shown in character screen? I've made several obtainable unique skills from a quest and it would be great if custom skills can still be viewed in character screen. Thank you!
Mauler is. It pairs well with both HVD due to range-matching and similar constant pressure and HAC due to equally benefiting from Gunnery Implants. I really don't see any need to change the Mauler at all, it's a great gun thanks to excellent range, decent enough accuracy and solid HE alpha. It can be on a long range pressure loadout with HVDs or a mid-range loadout with HACs where it's accuracy is improved due to shorter engagement range.
Your suggested Mauler change also sounds a lot like a 3-round burst HE medium I have in one of my mods and for that thing to be balanced I had to give it worse recoil than the HAC. That gun actually has less alpha than the proposed Mauler change which just seems laughably OP with good accuracy and 1k range (Mine is 800 range and horrendous recoil)
Hmm - did your HE have really poor DPS and a high cycle time, as well? Right now the Mauler is at 120 dps and 5 seconds total per burst, which goes a long way to not making it feel overpowered, at least so far. But maybe I'm missing some combination where it really shines? In testing so far it just feels solid - hurts when it hits, but there's ample opportunity to avoid getting hit, too.
Yes, needlers and mortars combo alright on the ships that would use it, although such ships (destroyers, falcon) do not have much OP to spare for heavy needlers. The bigger ships with heavy and medium mounts were what I had in mind because they do not have 800 or 900 range medium HE to mix with inaccurate Mark IX. (I tend to use Arbalest or Railguns on the smaller ships because they are relatively cheap and disposable.)
Might as well be 700 to match light and storm needlers. It could not combo very well except with 700 energy weapons like plasma cannon (on Paragon and Ziggurat). 800 range needler would combo well with 900 range ballistics on something like Conquest, but not 750 range needlers - not enough range.
I heavily disagree, the heavy needler combos well with heavy mortars and Light assault guns in addition to 600-700 range energies. The 150 range gap is not big enough of a deal breaker to not use it in combination with a hellbore. If anything, the problem is a lack of another 700-800 anti armor ballistic medium. So it just makes you go "Why dont I just get the op and just combo this 900 range large with an HVD/Heavy mauler instead". Which actually begs a question about range hullmods in the future
Apogee seems too powerful to be a "specialized exploration ship". If anything, it feels more like a mini-Paragon or a Sunder with a much stronger shield. It is a great bargain as a full-blown combat ship at 18 DP.apogee no longer available from high tech blueprint, but why?
It's replaced there by the Fury; I think it makes more sense to have a general-purpose combat cruiser in the package than a more specialized exploration ship.
StarThe point in the Galatia quest line when you nuke a gate with the prototype device?farersector patch notes are the best notes. Everything looks awesome, but is....QuoteStar system that becomes permanently inaccessible REDACTED will now become accessible again after around a cycle... this a reference to something new or something already in the game?
"It's replaced there by the Fury; I think it makes more sense to have a general-purpose combat cruiser in the package than a more specialized exploration ship."
the thing is tho, the apogee is the only high tech cruiser with staying power, taking that out would make the whole skirmishing of high tech fleets alot less... well, effective, since without an anchor to bind the enemy fleets you really cant flank them with other ships
not to mention the apogee being the only reliable high tech missile plattform... and that large energy slot really should not be underestimated
even as a "specialized" exlporation cruiser the apogee is anything but a halpless science vessel, and has very strong damage output while still being exceptionally tanky, so arguably the apogee is exactly that, a general purpose combat ship that can be specialized in many diffrent ways
meanwhile, the fury is just a light version of the aurora
Apogee seems too powerful to be a "specialized exploration ship". If anything, it feels more like a mini-Paragon or a Sunder with a much stronger shield. It is a great bargain as a full-blown combat ship at 18 DP.Problem could be solved by giving HT pack a new fleet anchor ship; high tech currently doesn't have any of those other than Paragon and the hybrid Apogee.
Be nice if high-tech pack had more ships like the low-tech and midline packs. High-tech pack is a bit of a letdown. I hoped the pack would get more ships. Even four (with Wolf, Shrike, Apogee, and Fury) is less than the other two packs, and still no carriers in the pack.
That said, Fury seems to be a more typical specimen of high-tech than Apogee.
Secound, carriers are really in a bad place right now, and with the ballistic weapon buff they are getting even worse by comparison. Some drastic changes are needed. (Personally i would like if we could control the attack craft more directly, but if thats too much...) Just some upgrade statwise would be nice as well.Alex, how do you feel about me bringing up officer skills for carriers again? (I drafted a post some time back, but didn't submit it because meh)
Yes, needlers and mortars combo alright on the ships that would use it, although such ships (destroyers, falcon) do not have much OP to spare for heavy needlers. The bigger ships with heavy and medium mounts were what I had in mind because they do not have 800 or 900 range medium HE to mix with inaccurate Mark IX. (I tend to use Arbalest or Railguns on the smaller ships because they are relatively cheap and disposable.)
Might as well be 700 to match light and storm needlers. It could not combo very well except with 700 energy weapons like plasma cannon (on Paragon and Ziggurat). 800 range needler would combo well with 900 range ballistics on something like Conquest, but not 750 range needlers - not enough range.
I heavily disagree, the heavy needler combos well with heavy mortars and Light assault guns in addition to 600-700 range energies. The 150 range gap is not big enough of a deal breaker to not use it in combination with a hellbore. If anything, the problem is a lack of another 700-800 anti armor ballistic medium. So it just makes you go "Why dont I just get the op and just combo this 900 range large with an HVD/Heavy mauler instead". Which actually begs a question about range hullmods in the future
150 range gap (between heavy needler and large ballistics) breaks Steady Conquest. 100 range did not. I tried. I replaced the needlers with heavy ACs to make the older loadouts with 800 range kinetics and 900 range heavy weapons work. (And such a Conquest needs Gunnery Implants so that the ACs are accurate enough.)
Forgot to mention earlier: Now that there's precedent for vanilla planets having the new industry items, I expect mods will use them on their own markets too. I'll probably have Nex scatter some around the vanilla worlds.I would like most or all of the items scattered around in the core worlds, so you could raid for them, instead of exploration being your only option.
Alex, how do you feel about me bringing up officer skills for carriers again? (I drafted a post some time back, but didn't submit it because meh)Especially now that you don't need to pick any of them, if you don't want to, if they're tier 1 combat skills.
Weapons/fighters:
- Resonator MRM:
- Increased damage to 250 (was: 200)
- Reduced flux per missile to 50 (was: 200)
- Increased starting ammo to 8 (was: 4)
- Can now fire a full burst every 2 seconds (was: every 5)
- Ammo regeneration rate still the same; 10 seconds for a full burst's worth
- Shock Repeater: reduced flux/shot to 25 (was: 75)
Try a reckless/Aggressive officer. Idk why you’re using steady when reckless/aggressive are easily the best personalities for combat ships. Especially for a ship with bad ai like the conquest due to its broadsider nature. Even then, I would consider the conquest the exception rather than the rule due to its said broadside nature.I do not like the more aggressive officers unless I plan to use mostly short-range weapons (which I am generally not fond of). I would use Aggressive if I planned on a bumper car or melee fleet. If I used Aggressive on Conquest, I would swap out AC/MarkIX/Mjolnir for Storm Needlers and Mortars (because it gets too close for other weapons).
I also want to say that I think story points are too easy to get, I think they should be a harder to come by. That, or the more useful uses of story points should be more expensive. Right now it feels like a get out of jail free card/ limitless credit card that I have basically infinite of because of the refund system.No thank you. Colonies and historian have an insatiable appetite for story points. Exploding 2^n costs are crazy. They eat far more story points than anything else. I need all the story points I can get to feed those hungry monsters.
I hope combat is playable in my Vega 11... Being limited to only exploration killed 0.95a for me.
Was combat performance in 0.95a worse for you than from 0.9.1a? It's hard to see why that might be; it should've improved if anything. Hmm. But performance with 0.95.1 should be about the same as 0.95, regardless.
I'm getting terror images in my head, of Heavy Mauler spam... And every time a ship overloads or vents, it instantly gets tens of shells dumped at it at long range and armor stripped instantly. And unlike missiles, or say Hellbores, good luck really even trying doing anything about it during the moment.
I was going to make basically this exact point, but it would appear that others have beaten me to it. However, it does beg a few further questions regarding implementation/patching. Is the current code/colony skills going to be kept in the code as legacy in case someone wants to mod admin skills back in for admins while waiting for whatever the eventual decision is/next patch?
Also, how is/which current admins will get/keep the only skill (Industrial Planning) still available? Admins that already have the skill, or just any two skill admin? I only ask 'cuz I recently started a new run to hopefully update to the new patch with no/few issues, and am already dragging around some found admins while looking for that optimal colony location, need to decide which ones to fire and which to keep... and I double-checked your July blog post regarding this, it seems pretty ambiguous regarding who keeps what (maybe it was answered in the blog forum thread somewhere, not gonna reread that entire thing if I can just ask here).
Finally, I will say that the changes to the High Scatter Amplifier are extremely interesting, basically splits energy weapons into two categories via absence or presence of a single hull mod (beams doing hard vs soft flux damage to shields, but basically inversely proportional to energy weapon range). Are there a bunch of code tags/hints to modify ships AI behavior when High Scatter Amplifier present/used vs. when not? Seems like ship/energy weapon AI might still end up being too timid otherwise (although this prolly also may vary due to officer temperament).
I had runs where I purchased Assault/Escort Packages from the markets and used them with no problems even before I could invest into/when I ignored the Auxiliary Support skill (Could have been a mod, though?), so why not let them to be purchased and usable, even if they would not be as effective?
You know, now that I actively think about starting a new game soon, I kinda wish there were a random starter frigate option. The random fleet option is fun, but it's also always a fast start with lots of playstile options. Having a single random frigate would force you to adapt to its specific strenghts and get to know it like you never could in a fleet context.
QuoteAptitudes whose skill has an "npc_only" tag will no longer be shown in the character screenOh no, is it possible for you to add another type of tag that allows a custom skill to be shown in character screen? I've made several obtainable unique skills from a quest and it would be great if custom skills can still be viewed in character screen. Thank you!
the thing is tho, the apogee is the only high tech cruiser with staying power, taking that out would make the whole skirmishing of high tech fleets alot less... well, effective, since without an anchor to bind the enemy fleets you really cant flank them with other ships
not to mention the apogee being the only reliable high tech missile plattform... and that large energy slot really should not be underestimated
even as a "specialized" exlporation cruiser the apogee is anything but a halpless science vessel, and has very strong damage output while still being exceptionally tanky, so arguably the apogee is exactly that, a general purpose combat ship that can be specialized in many diffrent ways
meanwhile, the fury is just a light version of the aurora
Are there any plans on releasing a CrewAPI/MarinesAPI in the next update?
First, a nerf/rebalance is long overdue for the Safety Override hullmod. It just gives you too much extra flux and the extra speed you get totally offsets the drawbacks of the range reduction. Please please change it.
Secound, carriers are really in a bad place right now, and with the ballistic weapon buff they are getting even worse by comparison. Some drastic changes are needed. (Personally i would like if we could control the attack craft more directly, but if thats too much...) Just some upgrade statwise would be nice as well.
Fair, that is a considerably slower burst burst than I expected with 2.5s between shots, so it's barely even a burst from the sound of it. Or do you mean time between bursts here?
Be nice if high-tech pack had more ships like the low-tech and midline packs. High-tech pack is a bit of a letdown. I hoped the pack would get more ships. Even four (with Wolf, Shrike, Apogee, and Fury) is less than the other two packs, and still no carriers in the pack.
RELEASE NOW!
or elseSpoilerI will be very sad[close]
The point in the Galatia quest line when you nuke a gate with the prototype device?
If so, that is great! No more exploring the entire sector looking for all of the gates first to find the one gate/system that is least painful to destroy or seal off. It was definitely a point of decision paralysis.
Alex, how do you feel about me bringing up officer skills for carriers again? (I drafted a post some time back, but didn't submit it because meh)
If you don't my asking, will the Remnant roster ever be expanded? (whether that is in scope at all or just very far away). Such as a larger droneship than the feeble scintilla or even a drone phaseship.
... Would you consider there to be an implicit reason a drone phaseship doesn't exist? Tri-Tachyon, which has a history in developing phase warships and AI, don't seem to have developed the ultimate weapon. Considering AI don't really physically age much (see remnants) and would theoretically not be vulnerable to the psychological effects of phase... depending on the vector that effect takes hold, the combination would make the ultimate killing machine.
That or Tri-Tachyon would have lore reason to strap AI cores to phase coils and have them perform research at 3x the speed and save themselves some time. And the cores would be held hostage in case they tried anything as turning the phase coil off would cause them to be lost forever, no?
Unless AI cores are averse to phase space directly by knowing something about it that every human in the Persean Sector doesn't know. The... thing and its special event implies a fear of the specific technology developed for it and not inherently phase itself, so I cannot be sure there.
Whether or not you would entertain this idea, there are some of us who wouldn't mind seeing a ship other than Brilliants or Radiants for cruiser and capital slots in remnant fleets. Potentially add a little more variety to their fleets and more toys for the player on the Automated Ships skill end.
Anyways, to go back on the discussion of the packages, Alex, what was your idea behind them/the skill? The problem with them was the fact that you set the cap for the skill too low, meaning only one frigate size ship could effectively benefit from it’s full effect. Was the goal for it to allow the player to have like a fleet of civilian ships combat ready? Or was it only for ships that were technically combat ready but could use a boost to make them more on par with military standard ships like the venture or the Prom/Atlas mk2s? If it was a matter of not enough ships to really justify it, could it not have been merged into a different skill? Or making some new pirate convertions of say the fuel tankers like the Dram/Phaeton? You could have also retroactively apply it to other ships like the Mule or the Buffalo Mk2s or the Colossus Mk2/3s.
Basically in what way did they not work out?
And thank youu!!! Thank you for making converted pirate and Ludd capitals actually usable with burn 7. As soon as I start a new game I'm getting a Prometheus MkII to be my flagship.
Glad to see these changes (making the shock repeater a premium PD/EMP assault combo is great), but as noted by others here and on the discord, you might also consider taking a look at the reality disruptor. (https://i.imgur.com/KLGh0S0.png)
Also, I'd never heard of the bug where returning the ISS Hamatsu could leave you without a ship... lol!
I also want to say that I think story points are too easy to get, I think they should be a harder to come by. That, or the more useful uses of story points should be more expensive. Right now it feels like a get out of jail free card/ limitless credit card that I have basically infinite of because of the refund system.
I used my early 0.95a benchmarks for that coment, I just tested the new drivers, and they work significantly better even if they run at 200Mhz insted of 300-500Mhz, the only problem I have now is the fact that Heron's Targeting Feed kills performace
Alex, how do you feel about me bringing up officer skills for carriers again? (I drafted a post some time back, but didn't submit it because meh)
Well, you're always welcome to bring stuff up! But as far as likelihood-of-me-doing-something, it's fairly low, though it depends on the specifics. I'm not a fan of bringing back carrier-only skills; the new skill system (for 0.95.1a) is a deliberate step away from skills locking the player into a too-small set of ships. Yeah, ballistic and energy masteries do that to some extent, but the range of interesting ships that these benefit is broad.
Carrier skills, there aren't that many interesting ships to pilot - Astral, Legion, Heron. Maybe the Odyssey. But combining carrier skill effects with non-carrier effects seems like it would still incentivize you to pilot a subset of these ships due to them benefitting from both the carrier and combat aspects of the hypothetical skill. So it seems like a tricky design problem. That would be less of an issue for officer skill picks - if you have a dedicated carrier officer, that's fine - but since those come from the same skill pool...
Overall, I'm happier with the skill system now that it doesn't have these (well, almost - Point Defense, still) and the carrier effects are fleetwides-only.
So besides leaving them in the rut, that leaves either designing a whole separate (sub)-system for the Carriers/Fighters (And if the debacle behind the Colony system is any indication, this is not your preference)... or removing them all together to prevent obviously inferior newbie trap options.There is buffing unskilled fighter use good enough to be worth using, or at least sturdy enough to last at least as long as Locusts with Expanded Missile Racks. Right now, Locusts and ECCM'ed MIRVs do a better job of fighter-ing than fighters, and the mothership with Locusts and MIRV
Ah - the reality disruptor is seen widely as an enormous waste of OP and a valuable energy slot - the bolts it fires are just the equivalent of launching an omen overtop something, and besides the enormously undercosted radiant, I'm not aware of any ship where that's a DP efficient use of a large energy, much better to just have the actual tanky omen to soak more attention and flux from things, while the energy mount is put to better use with a tach lance, plasma cannon, rift torpedo, or whatever.Speaking of Omega weapons... kind of disappointed Rift Cascade Emitter has not been changed. Maybe it will be a killer weapon with High Scatter Amplifer (or not, just get Plasma Cannon), but as it is, RCE is just an overpriced and inefficient lance knockoff with conflicting design goals.
I guess there's a few people who enjoy it as is - but I don't believe I've ever seen anyone use them more than once.
I think you're really overestimating things here.
Only the small minority of min-maxers would agonize over wasted bonuses.
Besides, what options do you have? You have said that Carrier exclusive skills are not an option, and yet at the same time you consider adding carrier/fighter bonuses to existing skills as some kind of design sin that will ruin everything.
So besides leaving them in the rut, that leaves either designing a whole separate (sub)-system for the Carriers/Fighters (And if the debacle behind the Colony system is any indication, this is not your preference)... or removing them all together to prevent obviously inferior newbie trap options.
Ah - the reality disruptor is seen widely as an enormous waste of OP and a valuable energy slot - the bolts it fires are just the equivalent of launching an omen overtop something, and besides the enormously undercosted radiant, I'm not aware of any ship where that's a DP efficient use of a large energy, much better to just have the actual tanky omen to soak more attention and flux from things, while the energy mount is put to better use with a tach lance, plasma cannon, rift torpedo, or whatever.
I guess there's a few people who enjoy it as is - but I don't believe I've ever seen anyone use them more than once.
Speaking of Omega weapons... kind of disappointed Rift Cascade Emitter has not been changed. Maybe it will be a killer weapon with High Scatter Amplifer (or not, just get Plasma Cannon), but as it is, RCE is just an overpriced and inefficient lance knockoff with conflicting design goals.
Carrier skills, there aren't that many interesting ships to pilot - Astral, Legion, Heron.To me this feels like confirmation that Converted Hangers is in need of a buff, TBH. I'd like to use it, but I've yet to find a ship where the OP cost is worth the investment.
At the ranges where RCE might outperform Tachyon Lance, plasma cannon beats both, and since RCE has no significant special abilities (the explosions rarely sidestep around shields to hit unshielded sections), I want plasma cannon every time I want a high-end medium-range brawling energy weapon (unless I want to stack a bunch of autopulses for some reason). I want to mount RCE because (at its 30 OP) I expected it to be a super Tachyon Lance, trading efficiency and (shield-piercing) EMP for more long-range damage, like various overpowered beam weapons from something like Knights Templar or old Neutrino mods. But it does not do that. RCE has no niche where I want it over either plasma cannon or tachyon lance.Speaking of Omega weapons... kind of disappointed Rift Cascade Emitter has not been changed. Maybe it will be a killer weapon with High Scatter Amplifer (or not, just get Plasma Cannon), but as it is, RCE is just an overpriced and inefficient lance knockoff with conflicting design goals.
I think comparing RCE to the Tachyon Lance (if that's what you meant by "lance knockoff"?) misses the point - it's supposed to be largely a short-range weapon. There are no conflicting design goals there, the design is explicitly and intentionally a weapon that's more and more effective at shorter ranges. That said, it might still be a bit weak - in fact, it likely is.
I wonder if making the rifts stronger at shorter ranger might not be a fun way to address this, as well as make its design intentions more clear.
RCE is not a bad weapon per se, just underperforming for the OP and flux cost my ship pays to use it (not to mention rarity), when compared to more common alternatives.
I actually think the hyperion might be back to unusable status particularly because of the wolf pack changes in addition to the hefty DP nerf. It really needs SO to be good (I think non-SO builds are mediocre at best currently, even with officer skill support) and the wolf pack change loses 40 seconds of PPT on the SO build which is really painful, plus it costs an extra 5 DP which means an extra 10 supplies per month with higher maintenance. It costs as many supplies as a capital ship now... I really can't imagine using it when the best build is nerfed and the logistics are much worse, not to mention all the other changes that aren't really huge, but mostly stack up against it. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't use non-SO hyperion on the current patch with just the +5 DP nerf, and there are so many other factors that pile up on top of that.
Glad to see these changes (making the shock repeater a premium PD/EMP assault combo is great), but as noted by others here and on the discord, you might also consider taking a look at the reality disruptor. (https://i.imgur.com/KLGh0S0.png)
I guess since it's my discord post being quoted I'll pitch in that I actually do like the Reality Disruptor a lot, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone else praise it ever. I guess most people strongly disagree with the thought of paying premium OP for support weapons, however specialized (I imagine the same line of thinking is part of what leads people to dismiss the Proximity Charge Launcher).Ah - the reality disruptor is seen widely as an enormous waste of OP and a valuable energy slot - the bolts it fires are just the equivalent of launching an omen overtop something, and besides the enormously undercosted radiant, I'm not aware of any ship where that's a DP efficient use of a large energy, much better to just have the actual tanky omen to soak more attention and flux from things, while the energy mount is put to better use with a tach lance, plasma cannon, rift torpedo, or whatever.
I guess there's a few people who enjoy it as is - but I don't believe I've ever seen anyone use them more than once.
Hmm, interesting - thank you for the info! I'll have to have another look at it and maybe try out some more builds.
(... I mean, being able to launch an Omen at something seems like it'd be worth a large energy slot, no? ... hm.)
Oh wow just because they're a different colour smh some people nowadays...
But for real now the comparison is fair, they're both heavy cruisers (different role tho obviously).
QuoteCarrier skills, there aren't that many interesting ships to pilot - Astral, Legion, Heron.To me this feels like confirmation that Converted Hangers is in need of a buff, TBH. I'd like to use it, but I've yet to find a ship where the OP cost is worth the investment.
Maybe not a buff, but perhaps instead a companion hull-mod that reduces Converted Hanger penalties butI think a hullmod that only modifies another hullmod might be a bit too niche. I can get behind more carrier options than Expanded Deck crew, though.wastestaxes OP. Like maybe reduces size of fighter wing but also reduces penalties and/or OP cost of fighter wing. Actually, having a hull mod in general that reduces OP cost of fighters would be a very interesting addition to carriers in general, although likely would need some sort of tax/debuff for balance...
Just can't make any changes too good, otherwise players will just stick Converted Hangers onto everything! Although I basically never use it, I actually maybe should try it out a little more now that Xyphos has 0 range... but I agree, it mostly seems like an OP sink for OP that could better be used for anything else, unless player has no choice but to field a cargo ship with Converted Hangars for some reason (masochism?).
My commentary on recently-discussed omega weaponry:I ought to try Reality Disruptor. It did not drop in the game I played, so I have no idea of its effectiveness.
The Reality Disruptor is actually pretty good! It's not main armament, so you don't want it on a Sunder, Gryphon, or in the large energy slots of an Odyssey or Apogee, and it's not capable of off-bore fire which makes it awkward to use in the large-missile-capable slots of the Apogee, Odyssey, or Conquest, but installing one (and only one) is a pretty decent choice for anything else that can mount large energy or large missile weapons.
As for the Rift Cascade Emitter... Mechanically, I don't have any issues with it - it pairs well with the Tachyon Lance, adding extra short-range punch and a touch of hard-flux at extreme ranges, while the TL contributes EMP and superior armor penetration. Sure, if you look exclusively at "how does this perform at extreme range" or "how does this perform at point-blank range", then it's not an optimal choice... but the fact that it's decent in both of those niches is definitely worth something.
Visually, though, I'd be happier if installing two of them would have the rifts arc in opposite directions around the target, rather than both going in the same direction.
Anyways, to go back on the discussion of the packages, Alex, what was your idea behind them/the skill? The problem with them was the fact that you set the cap for the skill too low, meaning only one frigate size ship could effectively benefit from it’s full effect. Was the goal for it to allow the player to have like a fleet of civilian ships combat ready? Or was it only for ships that were technically combat ready but could use a boost to make them more on par with military standard ships like the venture or the Prom/Atlas mk2s? If it was a matter of not enough ships to really justify it, could it not have been merged into a different skill? Or making some new pirate convertions of say the fuel tankers like the Dram/Phaeton? You could have also retroactively apply it to other ships like the Mule or the Buffalo Mk2s or the Colossus Mk2/3s.
Basically in what way did they not work out?
The idea was that you could have a very limited set of civ-grade ships boosted to a high level. The cap was deliberately low so that you couldn't, say, get the full effect on an Atlas Mk.II or a Venture, but the effect was high enough that it would have, hopefully, made some actually-civilian-ships (say, the Tarsus) more combat-capable, since they'd get the full bonus.
But that didn't really work out, and instead it was functionally *only* a buff to the already-combat-capable conversions, which in turn made those trickier to buff directly. If you'll note, the Prometheus Mk.II and the Atlas Mk.II have both received significant improvements, which I felt freer to make now that I didn't have to worry about how those might combine with the package mods.
Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.
I think if you wanted to benefit true civilian ships more than things like Atlas2/Prom2, any bonuses the ship involved receives would have to be based on their cargo/fuel capacity. So the ship sacrifices some transport functionality for combat strength – in place of the hullmod costing OP, which it can't spare, it already has too little for vents/caps and guns as it is. Like how combat freighters are less efficient at freighting than civilian ones. Atlas Mk.II and Prometheus Mk.II wouldn't benefit as much from the conversion (but also need less of it) since they already lost most of their cargo/fuel capacity (though the Prom2 still can carry 800 fuel...)The idea was that you could have a very limited set of civ-grade ships boosted to a high level. The cap was deliberately low so that you couldn't, say, get the full effect on an Atlas Mk.II or a Venture, but the effect was high enough that it would have, hopefully, made some actually-civilian-ships (say, the Tarsus) more combat-capable, since they'd get the full bonus.
But that didn't really work out, and instead it was functionally *only* a buff to the already-combat-capable conversions, which in turn made those trickier to buff directly. If you'll note, the Prometheus Mk.II and the Atlas Mk.II have both received significant improvements, which I felt freer to make now that I didn't have to worry about how those might combine with the package mods.
Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.
In that case, yeah it was kinda flawed from the start, the true civilian ships like the tarsus even taking into account smodding in hullmods to save op just don't have good weapon layout or the op to really take advantage or consider using themselves in place of actual combat ships or even the more combatable ones like the venture and stuff. You would have to had to redesign them to have more weapon slots/OP for the packages to have been considered which prob would have been more work than it was prob worth so I can see why you didn't want to keep it around.
Also on the topic of Omega Weapons: is there any plans for more ballistics focused ones?Yeah, I kinda find it odd that all the hybrid Omega weapons are basically "energy but fits in a ballistic slot". Including the ones that feel like they ought to be 'ballistic at heart', like Volatile Particle Driver (compare with Mjolnir Cannon).
So, the post!I'm not a fan of bringing back carrier-only skills; the new skill system (for 0.95.1a) is a deliberate step away from skills locking the player into a too-small set of ships. Yeah, ballistic and energy masteries do that to some extent, but the range of interesting ships that these benefit is broad.I think you're really overestimating things here.
Carrier skills, there aren't that many interesting ships to pilot - Astral, Legion, Heron. Maybe the Odyssey. But combining carrier skill effects with non-carrier effects seems like it would still incentivize you to pilot a subset of these ships due to them benefitting from both the carrier and combat aspects of the hypothetical skill. So it seems like a tricky design problem. That would be less of an issue for officer skill picks - if you have a dedicated carrier officer, that's fine - but since those come from the same skill pool...
Overall, I'm happier with the skill system now that it doesn't have these (well, almost - Point Defense, still) and the carrier effects are fleetwides-only.
Only the small minority of min-maxers would agonize over wasted bonuses. The non-carrier players (or at least those who don't personally pilot them) would simply ignore them either because it is irrelevant to their play-style or found that trying to squeeze fighters into non-carrier ships for the sake of utilizing those bonuses more trouble than it was worth.
Meanwhile, giving carrier/fighter exclusive bonuses to existing skills would help the Carriers get out of their current bad standing.
Besides, what options do you have? You have said that Carrier exclusive skills are not an option, and yet at the same time you consider adding carrier/fighter bonuses to existing skills as some kind of design sin that will ruin everything.
So besides leaving them in the rut, that leaves either designing a whole separate (sub)-system for the Carriers/Fighters (And if the debacle behind the Colony system is any indication, this is not your preference)... or removing them all together to prevent obviously inferior newbie trap options.
Maybe im off base here but i have strong opinions on this:The problem is not avoiding combat, but randomly losing ships in low-risk fights (due to AI stupidity) or taking on high-risk, high-reward fights, like boss fights (Ziggurat, Tesseracts), Ordos with Radiants, or even endgame bounties when player is just not quite strong enough to steamroll them (ten or more capitals and twenty or so cruisers is a lot to chew through)... without losing a single ship.
On the Hull Restoration skill and similar effects: To me, this just seems way too stacked in terms of usefulness, it basically nullifies ship losses, removes d mods on obtained ships and even gives you a significant CR boost. With how easy it is to also scoop up salvageable ships thanks to story points, overall i feel like its too easy and cheap to obtain and repair ships compared to 0.91 which was the polar opposite.
Overall IMO, combat not in your favor is nearly free to avoid with a single story point with some CR loss, actual combat loses outside of supplies/crew are negligible, d mods dont really exist because you would just fly around a bit and passively repair, while your CR on most ships with the combination of skills(officers) and Hull restoration will be 100%.
Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.
New Heavy Mauler seems extremely weak, it's too easy to shield flicker against and AI already can exploit this weakness somewhat decently when at high flux (but doesn't try to apply this tactic to conserve flux for offense, the way a player would).I feel similarly, I was surprised that people were worried about it being too good. My biggest issue with the current mauler was the low DPS and that got even worse. The AI also loves to fire HE into shields so I'm imagining a world where the AI just fires the mauler into shields constantly and the long cool down means it does even less armor/hull damage. I like the concept of making it more bursty, but the numbers seem pretty bad to me.
I suspect that an Eagle with it will just get cornered and slaughtered in AI vs AI sim fight by almost same build, but using Heavy Mortars instead.
I feel similarly, I was surprised that people were worried about it being too good. My biggest issue with the current mauler was the low DPS and that got even worse.Not to mention recoil after sustained fire, so it cannot snipe well after a few shots, unlike HVD.
Number of weapon slots isn't even the issue... well, okay, excluding some outliers like the Buffalo, with its single energy mount, or the Colossus, whose small mounts simply don't have the firing arcs to be relevant, or the Phantom, or the... okay, number of weapon slots is sometimes the issue.Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.
You've designed yourself into a corner, there. Civilian ships simply don't have enough weapon slots to compete.
I feel similarly, I was surprised that people were worried about it being too good. My biggest issue with the current mauler was the low DPS and that got even worse. The AI also loves to fire HE into shields so I'm imagining a world where the AI just fires the mauler into shields constantly and the long cool down means it does even less armor/hull damage. I like the concept of making it more bursty, but the numbers seem pretty bad to me.
Number of weapon slots isn't even the issue... well, okay, excluding some outliers like the Buffalo, with its single energy mount, or the Colossus, whose small mounts simply don't have the firing arcs to be relevant, or the Phantom, or the... okay, number of weapon slots is sometimes the issue.Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.
You've designed yourself into a corner, there. Civilian ships simply don't have enough weapon slots to compete.
But the thing that puts the nails in the coffin of civilian ships in battle is the basic stats of the ships - speed, flux stats, ordnance points. And there's no way to trade off cargo/fuel capacity for any of those things. Imagine, for a moment, a Buffalo with the speed and flux capacity of a Medusa, a wing of broadswords in close escort, and a Rift Lance. That would be worth deploying! But you can't get even close to the sort of base stats it needs to have a place on the battlefield.
I suppose 600 flux might not be a big deal for one mauler, although multiple maulers could be mounted.Set them on alternating, that would even out the flux and damage over time.
Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.
You've designed yourself into a corner, there. Civilian ships simply don't have enough weapon slots to compete. The only role I have figured without redoing all the sprites is to let civ ships become bricks: can't really deal damage, but able to soak lots of damage to take pressure off of the real combat ships.
I suggest replacing Assault Package with 2 hullmods: one super-buffs flux capacity, the other super-buffs hull. In exchange they neuter all of the ship's logistics stats and have a high enough OP cost that most civilian ships can't fit both.
(Escort Package should be rebranded as a normal hullmod bc it is cool. Militarized Subsystems should not make a civilian ship count as a combat ship for skill buffs.)
New Heavy Mauler seems extremely weak, it's too easy to shield flicker against and AI already can exploit this weakness somewhat decently when at high flux (but doesn't try to apply this tactic to conserve flux for offense, the way a player would).I feel similarly, I was surprised that people were worried about it being too good. My biggest issue with the current mauler was the low DPS and that got even worse. The AI also loves to fire HE into shields so I'm imagining a world where the AI just fires the mauler into shields constantly and the long cool down means it does even less armor/hull damage. I like the concept of making it more bursty, but the numbers seem pretty bad to me.
I suspect that an Eagle with it will just get cornered and slaughtered in AI vs AI sim fight by almost same build, but using Heavy Mortars instead.
Maybe im off base here but i have strong opinions on this:As far as I am concerned, this is easy: the cost of Hull Restoration is not getting the skills that actually improve your fleet's performance. In a choice between, say, Automated Ships and Hull Restoration, I will definitely go with Automated Ships.
On the Hull Restoration skill and similar effects: To me, this just seems way too stacked in terms of usefulness, it basically nullifies ship losses, removes d mods on obtained ships and even gives you a significant CR boost. With how easy it is to also scoop up salvageable ships thanks to story points, overall i feel like its too easy and cheap to obtain and repair ships compared to 0.91 which was the polar opposite.
Sometimes? As far as I am concerned, all dedicated freighters have not enough mounts or mounts not good enough (or both), and so do all liners, and so do Dram and Phaeton. That leaves combat freighters (which, as the name suggests, are meant to do some combat anyway and sometimes get deployed for a good reason) and Prometheus. And even Prometheus's weaponry is destroyer-grade...Number of weapon slots isn't even the issue... well, okay, excluding some outliers like the Buffalo, with its single energy mount, or the Colossus, whose small mounts simply don't have the firing arcs to be relevant, or the Phantom, or the... okay, number of weapon slots is sometimes the issue.Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.You've designed yourself into a corner, there. Civilian ships simply don't have enough weapon slots to compete.
It was budget choice for (P) themed fleetsBudget? Falcon (P) is basically an elite pirate ship and the best ship in their roster.
Yeah, I kinda find it odd that all the hybrid Omega weapons are basically "energy but fits in a ballistic slot". Including the ones that feel like they ought to be 'ballistic at heart', like Volatile Particle Driver (compare with Mjolnir Cannon).It's very simple: high-tech ships are balanced by having crap weapons, so if it fits in an energy slot, it has to compete with energy weapons. Hybrid and synergy weapons can't outcompete energy weapons as much as ballistics do, so you don't get Cabal Auroras and Odysseys in vanilla. Even composite weapons can't be allowed to fully pick between two good weapon types, because if you made it sort of ballistic-like, high-tech ships with all their missile slots compatible with composite weapons are going to love it.
And AI treats everything as pressure weapons...Alex, where is my perfect play AI?
I'll just say that this is something we've talked about internally - but, don't want to go into details in case nothing comes of it. But I also don't think that having a 3 skills total is *that* much more interesting, given that the skills are all fairly general-purpose boosts anyway.
And AI treats everything as pressure weapons...Alex, where is my perfect play AI?
I'll just say that this is something we've talked about internally - but, don't want to go into details in case nothing comes of it. But I also don't think that having a 3 skills total is *that* much more interesting, given that the skills are all fairly general-purpose boosts anyway.
They interesting thing would be to expand the list. Have administrators with specific abilities, like boosted volatiles production specifically, or something that reduces specific penalties, or similar. Basically, just more specific, so you're trying to find the right administrator for each of your worlds.
Auxiliary Support: removed
Set them on alternating, that would even out the flux and damage over time.Not helpful on a big ship, like on Onslaught or Conquest, where I have one mauler pointed left and another pointed right.
Classic case of QoL vs. combat power, like taking Navigation or Sensors instead of another combat skill the player wants more and gives up QoL because he does not have enough points for both QoL and combat power.Maybe im off base here but i have strong opinions on this:As far as I am concerned, this is easy: the cost of Hull Restoration is not getting the skills that actually improve your fleet's performance. In a choice between, say, Automated Ships and Hull Restoration, I will definitely go with Automated Ships.
On the Hull Restoration skill and similar effects: To me, this just seems way too stacked in terms of usefulness, it basically nullifies ship losses, removes d mods on obtained ships and even gives you a significant CR boost. With how easy it is to also scoop up salvageable ships thanks to story points, overall i feel like its too easy and cheap to obtain and repair ships compared to 0.91 which was the polar opposite.
Basically, the goal was to see some more true-civilian ships in battle, and that didn't work out at all.
I think it would be more worthwhile to simply get rid of such a thing as a "dedicated logistic ship" and make all of them like current combat freighters. If all ships are meant to participate in combat, they have to be built for it.
If you are deploying civ ships with the expectation of losing some, you are already desperate - losing extra supplies after the battle seems irrelevant.
have there been any changes to the Contacts so far? Cross-mod contact compatibility seems to be quite an issue such as...
- disabling certain missions from appearing in other factions' bar events.
- enabling certain missions from appearing in other factions' bar events.
- missions not allowing certain factions (only luddic church, path, and hegemony can give you remnant military bounties but what about the other factions?)
and so much more in the later era which I will clarify later in a future thread.
Otherwise, it's a cool mod feature so far, just afraid this problem will come up later on. I've been using it with partial success.
It seems like much of that should be doable by adjusting the mission spec tags; SettingsAPI.getAllMissionSpecs() gives you access to all the mission specs. Or by putting the right tags into person_missions.csv, if the only missions one wants to change are from their mod.
Perhaps worth noting: the various "tag" columns in person_missions can accept a faction id. So if "tagsNotAny" contains "hegemony", that mission won't be offered by a hegemony contact, etc.
I agree that dedicated carrier skills are not a good idea. My issue is that it rarely feels worth having an officered carrier because they don't really leverage skills very well IMO, and the officers would just do more on a combat ship. Unofficered carriers however feel really weak/squishy like every unofficered ship, so I end up in a place where I just don't want to use carriers. It would be nice if there were carrier specific buffs built into existing skills similar to how phase skills were reworked, so that I could build a good carrier officer. Something like adding bomber damage boosts to missile spec, fighter damage buffs to some existing damage skills, fighter survivability buffs to existing survivability skills etc.
QuoteCarrier skills, there aren't that many interesting ships to pilot - Astral, Legion, Heron.To me this feels like confirmation that Converted Hangers is in need of a buff, TBH. I'd like to use it, but I've yet to find a ship where the OP cost is worth the investment.
Now if RCE has a significant special ability, like its explosions partially ignoring shields
I guess since it's my discord post being quoted I'll pitch in that I actually do like the Reality Disruptor a lot, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone else praise it ever. I guess most people strongly disagree with the thought of paying premium OP for support weapons, however specialized (I imagine the same line of thinking is part of what leads people to dismiss the Proximity Charge Launcher).
Anyways, despite me liking it lots, I guess it could use some buffs to make it more attractive to use - any combination of lower OP, slightly higher range, perhaps even shield piercing arcs so it has non-zero utility against 360 degree shields.
I feel like bumping the Hyperion up to 20 DP hurts the non-SO variant excessively, which feels acceptable at its current cost. An SO-specific nerf like giving Phase Teleporter a cooldown/charges would be far more preferable, even if it'd look less awesome for the gifs :p
(also would make SO Hyperions less annoying to fight, which a DP shift doesn't do, if that's a consideration)
Also I guess the elephant in the room when it comes to weapon balance is still Sabots; the Pods in particular are still far and away the best medium missile (and probably best non-Omega weapon in general). Penny for your thoughts on its current state? I still find suggested changes like removing the arcing effect or the EMP effect entirely to be pertinent.
Just to jump in about sabots, they are still the best missile, and it's been said a million times, the situation is damned if you shield damned if you don't. So I agree with rubi, nerf it's effectiveness against armor/hull. If you want a good anti shield missile, then it also shouldn't be great against not-shields
Edit: also I forgot to mention, but I see that Ordnance Expertise got its effect slashed in half. Was it really excessive in testing? The Elite effect especially seems extremely underwhelming, probably amounting to less than 2000 additional capacity on even an Onslaught.
Visually, though, I'd be happier if installing two of them would have the rifts arc in opposite directions around the target, rather than both going in the same direction.
No, the only other Omega weapon that I think needs a buff is the Rift Beam - there are some setups where you can get it to actually perform its job as a point-defense weapon... but there aren't very many of them, it doesn't fill any roles other than point-defense, and even as point-defense you're probably better off with a regular Heavy Burst Laser. At a minimum I'd suggest increasing its range to somewhere around 600-800; make it capable of doing its job without needing to be in a turret slot right at the very front edge of the ship it's mounted on.
Giving them some benefit from the skills of the carrier's captain makes as much sense as having a single "Field Modulation" skill that provides benefits to both shields and phase cloaks ...
So, the post!
My complaint is about the value of having carriers vs. just getting more combat ships. They're already seen as underperforming right now, and officers not being worth putting on them means they'll fall off even harder than now. Also it makes carriers seem like they're just less important. Second-class. Filler. Those kind of adjectives.
I don't think more fighter-specific skills are really desirable, for the same reason that the phase and shield skills were merged. But it'd be nice if they got a partial benefit from the existing combat skills.
In the scenario where 'normal' combat skills also benefit fighters, I don't think the notion that players would feel compelled to use fleet or battle carriers checks out. Consider: when a skill gives bonuses for both ballistic and energy weapons, we don't say the player feels compelled to use midline ships. The carriers would be trading off combat ship traits (guns, but also things like making use of its personal armor, shields and speed) that benefit from skills, for fighters that benefit from the same skills.
The only thing I had to presume was perfect accuracy (like the HVD) but the rest of the stats are known. I really like the sound of the triple shot: it sounds like a true cannon.
I suggest replacing Assault Package with 2 hullmods: one super-buffs flux capacity, the other super-buffs hull. In exchange they neuter all of the ship's logistics stats and have a high enough OP cost that most civilian ships can't fit both.
First, Alex this update looks amazing and almost a major update in it’s own right.
The skill rework looks *mwah* magnificent, the less variable weapons load out for all ships will be great if it works like it did for redacted.
The new low tech ship and rugged constructed hullmod is exactly what low tech frigates have been missing.
Max level officer retraining, cheaper cargo pod stabilisation, patrol distractions, defend assignments, thumper burst changes, HSA rework are all awesome and amazing and aren’t the only small but great changes so thank you.
Question, why Scarab OP reduced?
With carriers, I actually think how they are is pretty good. They’re frankly, boring to use, they can be fun to watch but I don’t think personal skills are necessary for that. I suspect why some people really want them is because they used to be really strong and they have fundamental advantages over weapons with much longer ranges and don’t produce flux or have limited missiles.
Not really having any reason to add officers to them is a bit of a problem though. A possible idea is a officer only skill that gives the fleet wide skill effects onto just their ship and remove that ship’s fighter bays from the fleet wide skill count. That will also help if we just want 1 carrier or all carriers. Which could actually be fine if the reduce weapon variability means more consistent point defence. Then 4 other skills can then be filled by the likes of system expertise, helmsmanship and ballistic mastery.
Otherwise I think if someone wants to focus on fighters that may be better suited for mods.
Maybe im off base here but i have strong opinions on this:As far as I am concerned, this is easy: the cost of Hull Restoration is not getting the skills that actually improve your fleet's performance. In a choice between, say, Automated Ships and Hull Restoration, I will definitely go with Automated Ships.
On the Hull Restoration skill and similar effects: To me, this just seems way too stacked in terms of usefulness, it basically nullifies ship losses, removes d mods on obtained ships and even gives you a significant CR boost. With how easy it is to also scoop up salvageable ships thanks to story points, overall i feel like its too easy and cheap to obtain and repair ships compared to 0.91 which was the polar opposite.
Alex, where is my perfect play AI?
They interesting thing would be to expand the list. Have administrators with specific abilities, like boosted volatiles production specifically, or something that reduces specific penalties, or similar. Basically, just more specific, so you're trying to find the right administrator for each of your worlds.
QuoteAuxiliary Support: removed
Boooooooo.
Maybe the assault/escort package could be preserved to change their role to an emergency option by increasing deployment cost. For me civilian ships never really made sense as part of my regular combat force. But I have sometimes resorted to deploying them when I'm about to lose a fight, as distractions. That was actually fun, it felt like a "really giving it my all" sort of thing. Hullmods that support and expand that would be great. Maybe they increase deployment cost so much you can only deploy a civ ships once, in an emergency, but then in acts like an SO ship.
Radical idea: Turn all the dedicated logistics ships into carriers and greatly expand cargo for current carriers that are expected to spend most OP on good fighters and deck crew. Currently, most carriers feel like dedicated logistics/civilian ships that haul fighters instead of cargo.
While we're on the same step here what does bar_events.csv's tags imply? Can I enter in faction id to make them require certain faction id just like the person_missions.csv?
But a skill that adds bonus damage to both shipboard weapons and fighter weapons is exactly the same there: one bonus or the other applies, but never both at once. I mean, if we go by that logic, the existing "Target Analysis" skill is triple-dipping! After all, its bonus applies to ballistic weapons and energy weapons and missile weapons, and there are ships that can use all three of those at the same time!Giving them some benefit from the skills of the carrier's captain makes as much sense as having a single "Field Modulation" skill that provides benefits to both shields and phase cloaks ...
The key difference being that it's impossible to make use of both shields and phase cloak bonuses (some kind of mod-ship excepted, perhaps).
The problem with wrap-around is it needs to wrap-around a lot to even have a chance to blast targets around the shields. There were multiple times when it would appear the explosions snaked around the shield, but the shield still managed to absorb it. It was rare for a blast to snake around shields of even weaker ships with junk shields. Explosions wrapping around shields enough to bypass them happened rarely enough that it simply could not be counted on. And at the range when it would have a chance to do it, I would be better off simply outgunning the enemy (and max their flux) with non-stop plasma cannon barrages.Now if RCE has a significant special ability, like its explosions partially ignoring shields
It kind of does, though! By wrapping around the target. That gives me an idea; perhaps making the additional explosions progressively stronger could be good - both to emphasize the short-range preference for this weapon, and to improve its "going around shields" aspect.
No longer a perma fuel shortage at Syndria.My game had perma-volatile shortage at Sindria, and making volatile runs from Umbra to Sindria was almost as profitable as drug or supply runs with various black markets elsewhere.
But a skill that adds bonus damage to both shipboard weapons and fighter weapons is exactly the same there: one bonus or the other applies, but never both at once. I mean, if we go by that logic, the existing "Target Analysis" skill is triple-dipping! After all, its bonus applies to ballistic weapons and energy weapons and missile weapons, and there are ships that can use all three of those at the same time!
Say you have a HSCV (Hypothetical Spherical-Cow-in-a-Vacuum) battlecarrier that gets half its firepower from directly mounted guns, and half its firepower from fighters. With no officers involved, this is great! With officers involved, suddenly it needs to be re-balanced, because the officer skills are boosting just the 'guns' half of that, and now you have to choose 'what level of officer do I balance this ship around?'
...Now, the argument you've made about concentration of firepower being an issue. That one I can understand, even if I don't use fighters that way, and if that pushes towards keeping fighters as more of a fleet asset than a ship asset... well, then I'm not entirely happy with having to spend carrier OP on them, but so be it.
Hm, maybe what the HSCV needs is a built-in hullmod that reduces fighter roam range by... let's say 50%, and then also makes (some) officer skill bonuses apply to its fighters?
No longer a perma fuel shortage at Syndria.My game had perma-volatile shortage at Sindria, and making volatile runs from Umbra to Sindria was almost as profitable as drug or supply runs with various black markets elsewhere.
Same thing about concentration of fighters can be said for homing missiles. It is a reason why I have been writing that, as of 0.95, some missiles are being better fighters than real fighters, in part because of longevity (four minutes of continuous firing of missiles instead of one or two minutes of unskilled fighter spam) and in part because the motherships (like Apogee or Conquest) are still generally armed warships with stats of their weight class, more than a dedicated carrier (or carrier-wannabe Gryphon) with stats comparable to a civilian minus the civilian debuff hullmod.But a skill that adds bonus damage to both shipboard weapons and fighter weapons is exactly the same there: one bonus or the other applies, but never both at once. I mean, if we go by that logic, the existing "Target Analysis" skill is triple-dipping! After all, its bonus applies to ballistic weapons and energy weapons and missile weapons, and there are ships that can use all three of those at the same time!Giving them some benefit from the skills of the carrier's captain makes as much sense as having a single "Field Modulation" skill that provides benefits to both shields and phase cloaks ...
The key difference being that it's impossible to make use of both shields and phase cloak bonuses (some kind of mod-ship excepted, perhaps).
Say you have a HSCV (Hypothetical Spherical-Cow-in-a-Vacuum) battlecarrier that gets half its firepower from directly mounted guns, and half its firepower from fighters. With no officers involved, this is great! With officers involved, suddenly it needs to be re-balanced, because the officer skills are boosting just the 'guns' half of that, and now you have to choose 'what level of officer do I balance this ship around?'
...Now, the argument you've made about concentration of firepower being an issue. That one I can understand, even if I don't use fighters that way, and if that pushes towards keeping fighters as more of a fleet asset than a ship asset... well, then I'm not entirely happy with having to spend carrier OP on them, but so be it.
Hm, maybe what the HSCV needs is a built-in hullmod that reduces fighter roam range by... let's say 50%, and then also makes (some) officer skill bonuses apply to its fighters?
(Per the patch notes, this is resolved by adding the Fullerne Spool at Eventide.)What happens after the player steals it? I have been playing kleptomaniacs and stealing rare items as soon as my fleet is able to (a bit late in a game).
And, the idea about a hullmod reducing roam range and making some bonuses apply to fighters - I think that's a very interesting idea. It seems like it'd be tough to make it come out right, though, given the possible range of effects skills can have. And having to flag certain skill effects as "fighter-applicable for this hullmod" and others as not, and conveying this information somehow... that seems awfully messy for essentially implementing a hullmod. But the general concept - trading off roam range for power - I think is good.
And, the idea about a hullmod reducing roam range and making some bonuses apply to fighters - I think that's a very interesting idea. It seems like it'd be tough to make it come out right, though, given the possible range of effects skills can have. And having to flag certain skill effects as "fighter-applicable for this hullmod" and others as not, and conveying this information somehow... that seems awfully messy for essentially implementing a hullmod. But the general concept - trading off roam range for power - I think is good.Make the carrier skills reduce roaming range. Explain that it's because the officer is taking a hands-on approach and you can't really do that without any communications, now can you? Well, assuming you're going back to carrier skills. If not, make it a part of "affects ships with officers" skill? Making it a hullmod is also an option, but possibly less desirable.
Well if that shortage I mean would have been created by a volatile shortage, I wouldn't have complained about it in first place, I caused by an high command consuming more fuel then a fuel production with synchrotron can produce, without admin boost.No longer a perma fuel shortage at Syndria.My game had perma-volatile shortage at Sindria, and making volatile runs from Umbra to Sindria was almost as profitable as drug or supply runs with various black markets elsewhere.
(Per the patch notes, this is resolved by adding the Fullerne Spool at Eventide.)
Same thing about concentration of fighters can be said for homing missiles.
What happens after the player steals it?to (a bit late in a game).
Make the carrier skills reduce roaming range. Explain that it's because the officer is taking a hands-on approach and you can't really do that without any communications, now can you? Well, assuming you're going back to carrier skills. If not, make it a part of "affects ships with officers" skill? Making it a hullmod is also an option, but possibly less desirable.
Well if that shortage I mean would have been created by a volatile shortage, I wouldn't have complained about it in first place, I caused by an high command consuming more fuel then a fuel production with synchrotron can produce, without admin boost.
Basically you'd be creating 2 categories: fleet carriers and officer carriers. Maybe go the other way? Slash all fighter roam ranges and add a "Fleet Carrier" hullmod that puts them back to long range? Hrmm, that seems sketchy, too.
Back to square one and perma-shortage for profit, if nothing else changed. But given the difficulty of raiding big heavily defended worlds (I do not remember if Eventide has a battlestation or star fortress), it is something that probably does not happen until player can do worse at that time of the game.What happens after the player steals it?to (a bit late in a game).What you'd expect!
I avoided old shield skill at level 3 (that had both shield and phase buffs) for officers because 4x time shift to phase ship was a major debuff to effective PPT (given how much time AI wasted while phased), even if hard flux dissipation to shields was good for those ships. Similarly, old Gunnery Implants 10 because the faster fire rate made it easier for AI (or even playership if relying on autofire) to flux themselves to death with loadouts that were relatively flux neutral at normal fire rate.Make the carrier skills reduce roaming range. Explain that it's because the officer is taking a hands-on approach and you can't really do that without any communications, now can you? Well, assuming you're going back to carrier skills. If not, make it a part of "affects ships with officers" skill? Making it a hullmod is also an option, but possibly less desirable.
Hmm, I don't think skills giving an unavoidable debuff to something is great.
Maybe the assault/escort package could be preserved to change their role to an emergency option by increasing deployment cost. For me civilian ships never really made sense as part of my regular combat force. But I have sometimes resorted to deploying them when I'm about to lose a fight, as distractions. That was actually fun, it felt like a "really giving it my all" sort of thing. Hullmods that support and expand that would be great. Maybe they increase deployment cost so much you can only deploy a civ ships once, in an emergency, but then in acts like an SO ship.
Hmm - I'm not sure that this is a case that it works to design something like this around. If a battle's gone so far off the rails that you're about to bring in civilians... chances are this isn't a case you've specifically outfitted them for, at the expense of logistics hullmods, right?
As I mentioned earlier, fleetwide fighter bonuses seem like the only way to go for fighters. But what if *those* were, say, doubled by the presence of an officer on the ship? That'd certainly make you feel like putting an officer on a carrier was worthwhile, without getting into all the problems of personal skills boosting them. Really liking this, actually! Would have to tweak the specific skill numbers some, of course.
I like the idea of simply the presence of an officer in a carrier does *something*. Even if officer skills become somewhat tangential to how the carrier operates, the fact they do improve fighter performance makes me want to put them in a carrier.
In regards to trading fighter range for some sort of fighter buff, I would love that for ships like the Legion, Mora, and to a lesser extent something like an Odyssey. I typically run these ships without ever using "Engage" and allow the fighters to simply be another form of damage. A way to improve that would be stellar, though I'd want to it to be heavily incentivized to pair with an Officer and work with global skills. Something like a "Battle Carrier Retrofit" hullmod that, on its own, adds 5% damage/HP/accuracy to fighters at the cost of some OP and -50% fighter range (and is mutually exclusive with Expanded Deck Crews). However, global fighter skills would directly tie into this that also adds a variable flat amount of damage/hp, etc. based on total # of flight decks. An officer adds some multiplier to this number. Maxed out, maybe a 20-25% increase? Of course, the global skill that boosts these attributes would be like the Phase Cloak/Shields skill: if a ship doesn't have the Battle Carrier hullmod, it gets the normal fighter bonuses but if it does have the Battle Carrier hullmod, it gets this set of buffs. That way you're not having to choose at the fleet level but at the individual ship level. There's probably a way more elegant way of doing this but I think a distinction between battle carrier and fleet carrier would be kind of cool.
Mh, interesting, but it seems like that would favor battlecarriers a lot, which can profit way more from officer skills than stand-off carriers, while benefiting equally from the fleetwide fighter bonus boost.
Haha, kinda coming full circle here - or maybe it's an upwards spiral? :)
In regards to trading fighter range for some sort of fighter buff, I would love that for ships like the Legion, Mora, and to a lesser extent something like an Odyssey. I typically run these ships without ever using "Engage" and allow the fighters to simply be another form of damage. A way to improve that would be stellar, though I'd want to it to be heavily incentivized to pair with an Officer and work with global skills. Something like a "Battle Carrier Retrofit" hullmod that, on its own, adds 5% damage/HP/accuracy to fighters at the cost of some OP and -50% fighter range (and is mutually exclusive with Expanded Deck Crews). However, global fighter skills would directly tie into this that also adds a variable flat amount of damage/hp, etc. based on total # of flight decks. An officer adds some multiplier to this number. Maxed out, maybe a 20-25% increase? Of course, the global skill that boosts these attributes would be like the Phase Cloak/Shields skill: if a ship doesn't have the Battle Carrier hullmod, it gets the normal fighter bonuses but if it does have the Battle Carrier hullmod, it gets this set of buffs. That way you're not having to choose at the fleet level but at the individual ship level. There's probably a way more elegant way of doing this but I think a distinction between battle carrier and fleet carrier would be kind of cool.
Set them on alternating, that would even out the flux and damage over time.Not helpful on a big ship, like on Onslaught or Conquest, where I have one mauler pointed left and another pointed right.
Also, AI does not always maintain alternating perfectly (like if it wants to spam its missiles, it will fire them one-two-three and mostly override alternating). I find alternating useful mostly for manual control of missiles. Alternating is a pain to use on guns meant to fire automatically.Classic case of QoL vs. combat power, like taking Navigation or Sensors instead of another combat skill the player wants more and gives up QoL because he does not have enough points for both QoL and combat power.Maybe im off base here but i have strong opinions on this:As far as I am concerned, this is easy: the cost of Hull Restoration is not getting the skills that actually improve your fleet's performance. In a choice between, say, Automated Ships and Hull Restoration, I will definitely go with Automated Ships.
On the Hull Restoration skill and similar effects: To me, this just seems way too stacked in terms of usefulness, it basically nullifies ship losses, removes d mods on obtained ships and even gives you a significant CR boost. With how easy it is to also scoop up salvageable ships thanks to story points, overall i feel like its too easy and cheap to obtain and repair ships compared to 0.91 which was the polar opposite.
In my case, I probably take Hull Restoration because it gets tiring reloading the game after a single mistake, and reloading is faster than grinding a few hours to recover money and progress lost to the rust monsters in a game with combat rewards balanced mostly on flawless victories. And the AI is incompetent enough and/or player does not have enough control to prevent all casualties, except in fights where player can auto-resolve them away in a pursuit battle (which do not need combat ships to get free kills, just send in the barely armed civvies and clunkers to do it).
That said, getting Hull Restoration would interfere with getting Tech 8 and enough combat skills to dominate with Radiant flagship.
P.S. With Hull Restoration, fixing Remnants, Ziggurat, and other ships acquired only by looting them (after battle) cheap is nice. Fixing ships is bloody expensive, especially capitals. Ziggurat is especially pricey with its restoration being close to two million credits, and the restoration skill removing the d-mods from it (and other capitals with repair bills close to a million a pop) is especially nice. Endgame bounties only give about 300k per bounty, and the loot goes toward replacing what the player's fleet consumed on the trip. This is why I write the game's rewards assume flawless victories, and the hull restoration skill extend that threshold from flawless victory to lose a few ships. (Field Repairs was good only for one or two ships, including those looted from battle, which can send threshold back to flawless victory so player can fix the new former enemy ships in his lifetime.)
- New technology skill, top tier: Neural Link
- Allows rapid transfer between two ships with the Neural Interface hullmod
- Transfer is instant if combined DP is 50 or below
- Uses "switch view to target" key for transfer
- Both ships benefit from the player's personal combat skills at all times
Should Cybernetic Augmentation give bonuses to raids/marines?I'm with you there! Makes sense.
Andrada has Industrial Planning now? Huh.Well if that shortage I mean would have been created by a volatile shortage, I wouldn't have complained about it in first place, I caused by an high command consuming more fuel then a fuel production with synchrotron can produce, without admin boost.
Ah - does Andrada not have Industrial Planning in 0.95a? He does now, so that'd explain that aspect of it.
Beyond that, Sabots still only do mostly temporary damage, and e.g. removing the EMP component would make it possible to make firing them mostly a waste by just turning shields off.HE missiles can just as easily be wasted into PD or shields. I think that sabots are the outlier in that they are very difficult to waste.
I agree that scarab is currently slightly too strong, but I think that there are enough factors (multiple hullmods and skills (flux and shield stuff) it disproportionally benefits from being nerfed, lots of things that compete with it being buffed, so that it will already be a bit worse next patch. I also would argue the loss of 5 OP = 50 dissipation will really hurt since any excess weapon flux generation is effectively tripled by its system (e.g. firing 30 flux/sec over dissipation will generate 90 flux/sec while system is active and you will overload faster). I already struggle to have enough OP/vents, even when I am leaving half of its slots empty.Question, why Scarab OP reduced?It felt a little too strong to me. I don't think it's a major change; we're talking -50 flux dissipation - which, ok, it matters, but its base dissipation is so high that it's not going to feel that nearly as much as most frigates.
I completely agree with inrinsic here, firing almost any HE missile (besides reapers) into shields has barely any effect unless you shoot a lot of missiles, or you're shooting a frigate. On the other hand, sabots either raise flux by a large margin, or emp all the weapons, because they are impossible to shoot down! The main annoying part of sabots is that they hit the ship they are fired at 90% of the time! Lowering the range where they split and increasing the spread of the pellets would be a step in the right direction I think.Beyond that, Sabots still only do mostly temporary damage, and e.g. removing the EMP component would make it possible to make firing them mostly a waste by just turning shields off.HE missiles can just as easily be wasted into PD or shields. I think that sabots are the outlier in that they are very difficult to waste.
I forgot to ask this earlier, but when using this skill, does it still cost a CP to make your companion ship attack stuff, or is it free? Because that would suddenly and very seriously change the possible uses for this skill... but seems kinda like rule of cool would override some of the concern...
Because fighters consume the same OP budget as weapons and flux, I think having a pilot skill that boosts both guns and fighters in some way would work well! Its kind of like a single budget boosted, rather than just one aspect of it boosted.
Should Cybernetic Augmentation give bonuses to raids/marines?
The idea to use officers to enhance carrier fleetwide skills is pretty nice! It does have some odd effects (in the naive implementation the carrier officer's specific skillset and even level don't matter, could even leave them at level 1 to save on the salary), but I think it'll do the job.
Andrada has Industrial Planning now? Huh.
That highlights one (minor) side effect of the admin skills removal; the loss of characterization among the unique admins (and arguably procgen admins for high-tier markets in general). Kanta and Sun have all three skills because they're skilled leaders of their respective political organizations (despite Kanta's questionable sanity), Daud has them too because he could have been the player character in another timeline. Andrada only has Space Operations and Ground Operations; he's an excellent military leader but has no particular talent in civilian administration, and it shows in the polity he's created. Rao and Ibrahim have no admin skills, perhaps because one's a worn out old soldier and the other's a (likable) fraudster.
Might be cool if some of the named admins got the alpha cores' Hypercognition, or even unique admin skills that exist nowhere else in the game.
(Incidentally, Nexerelin fixes Sindria's High Command being an absurd fuel hog by putting a gamma core on it. Although why do Military Base and HC have such high resource demand (size+2 and +3 respectively, anyway?))
I agree that scarab is currently slightly too strong, but I think that there are enough factors (multiple hullmods and skills (flux and shield stuff) it disproportionally benefits from being nerfed, lots of things that compete with it being buffed, so that it will already be a bit worse next patch. I also would argue the loss of 5 OP = 50 dissipation will really hurt since any excess weapon flux generation is effectively tripled by its system (e.g. firing 30 flux/sec over dissipation will generate 90 flux/sec while system is active and you will overload faster). I already struggle to have enough OP/vents, even when I am leaving half of its slots empty.Question, why Scarab OP reduced?It felt a little too strong to me. I don't think it's a major change; we're talking -50 flux dissipation - which, ok, it matters, but its base dissipation is so high that it's not going to feel that nearly as much as most frigates.
I completely agree with inrinsic here, firing almost any HE missile (besides reapers) into shields has barely any effect unless you shoot a lot of missiles, or you're shooting a frigate. On the other hand, sabots either raise flux by a large margin, or emp all the weapons, because they are impossible to shoot down! The main annoying part of sabots is that they hit the ship they are fired at 90% of the time! Lowering the range where they split and increasing the spread of the pellets would be a step in the right direction I think.Beyond that, Sabots still only do mostly temporary damage, and e.g. removing the EMP component would make it possible to make firing them mostly a waste by just turning shields off.HE missiles can just as easily be wasted into PD or shields. I think that sabots are the outlier in that they are very difficult to waste.
Lowering the range where they split and increasing the spread of the pellets would be a step in the right direction I think.
Yes :PShould Cybernetic Augmentation give bonuses to raids/marines?
Should it? :)
Perhaps i overvalue the QOL and repairs, but to me the d mod repairs along with how easy it is to salvage ships will net you overall more combat power vs dedicated combat skills. Automated ships is likely equally as good, simply because the radiant is absurdly strong. In the current build even with AI mistakes etc, you still almost never actually lose a ship, especially because any time you get intercepted and think you cant reasonably win, you just press your 1 sp get out of jail button. Even if you lose a ship, you likely already have something to replace it anyways. IMO, just mothballing a ship as it repairs as you fly around and do everything else seems way to easy, id like to see a middle ground between this and the absurd credit cost of normal restoration.In early 0.9, when there was Loadout Design 3 and no s-mods, the middle ground was simply building a new ship with Orbital Works at relatively cheap credit cost, but that does not work now in 0.95 because the new ship does not have the s-mods the old ship had. If you rebuild the ship (or buy a new one from the core worlds), you pay story points to replace the s-mods to old ship had. If you restore the ship, you keep the s-mods and remove the d-mods, but you pay way too much money to do it. That leaves Field Repairs, but it takes two months to remove a d-mod. That is slow when your fleet (and any new enemy ships you loot) have multiple d-mods each. Still, Field Repairs is the only cheap option we have.
Perhaps i overvalue the QOL and repairs, but to me the d mod repairs along with how easy it is to salvage ships will net you overall more combat power vs dedicated combat skills.There is a trope for that: Boring but Practical.
Lowering the range where they split and increasing the spread of the pellets would be a step in the right direction I think.This was tried in the second version of the sabot years ago, and enemy ships dropped shields and armor tanked about half of the sabot (with the rest completely missing off to the side) for minimal damage every time, making the Sabot useless except against an incompetent playership.
(Incidentally, Nexerelin fixes Sindria's High Command being an absurd fuel hog by putting a gamma core on it. Although why do Military Base and HC have such high resource demand (size+2 and +3 respectively), anyway?)I tried to build colonies that would not rely on nanoforge and synchrotron, but the requirements of Military Base make that impossible. There may be one other building that also has crazy high supply and/or fuel requirements, I guess either Megaport or Waystation. Player must have synchrotron and nanoforge (ideally pristine) to be self-sufficient.
I completely agree with inrinsic here, firing almost any HE missile (besides reapers) into shields has barely any effect unless you shoot a lot of missiles, or you're shooting a frigate. On the other hand, sabots either raise flux by a large margin, or emp all the weapons, because they are impossible to shoot down! The main annoying part of sabots is that they hit the ship they are fired at 90% of the time! Lowering the range where they split and increasing the spread of the pellets would be a step in the right direction I think.Beyond that, Sabots still only do mostly temporary damage, and e.g. removing the EMP component would make it possible to make firing them mostly a waste by just turning shields off.HE missiles can just as easily be wasted into PD or shields. I think that sabots are the outlier in that they are very difficult to waste.
I had a feeling someone would mention this :)
The thing is, firing HE missiles like this into shields or PD is a piloting error. Except for when it's not, i.e. when you're trying to achieve an overload by forcing shields to stay up, let's say. And in that scenario, maybe they'll be shot down (though Sabots also face that possibility vs at least *some* PD), but it's not as trivial to nullify as it with Sabots.
With Sabots, a primary use case is firing it into the shields of a relatively fresh, and almost certainly not overloaded, opponent. If they can be almost completely neutralized in that case by simply turning the shields off, that's a much, much different situation from that which HE missiles face.
HE, you're either firing enough to overwhelm PD with acceptable missile losses, or you're firing at an overloaded/venting target. Or you messed up. With Sabots, instead of "you messed up" it'd very often just be "opponent right-clicked when you were hoping they wouldn't". There'd be some window of opportunity to use Sabots, still - paired with HE damage to keep shields up, perhaps? But it feels like it would be quite narrow. On the other hand, with EMP damage, they generate *some* kind of opening regardless.
SpoilerAs a mostly low-tech player, very glad to see the Legion and Dominator both get some buffs. I was going to write a longer post on the Dominator, as it's been my main ship to pilot for most of my time playing and I have some thoughts, but I didn't do so in time to beat all this patch.
All the buffs it gets are great, but I don't normally have issues with the Dominator on OP, dissipation, or longevity. The fact that the two large ballistic weapon slots are hardpoints and spaced widely, coupled with its low maneuverability, really defines the ship and provides some challenges in how to outfit it and use it. I found that for normal enemies all the way through high level bounties, it was a good ship and grew well along with the rest of the fleet. It's usefulness fell off pretty hard with [Redacted], though, and I think point out two issues that plague the ship most.
First, it normally shines when duking it out with capitals. The Dominator can't rotate quickly and its main damage dealers (missiles and large ballistics) are hardpoints, so something that is large or moves slowly will stay in its crosshairs. It can't win a solo flux war with a capital, but it can with some help, and then pound in some damage as the ship tries to retreat. Against a Radiant, though, the Dominator can not take much of the damage to shields, and has to armor tank pretty quickly. That's fine, it's made for that, but its main weapons are routinely knocked out of commission as it does that, so then it can't fight back. I think this is a general weakness of armor tanking vs. shield tanking, but I suspect the Dominator struggles with that more than a Legion or Onslaught as its main weapons are all along its front and located close together. When fighting a Radiant, I find my normal role is to take that damage and let the other ships take the Radiant down. It works, but not a lot of enjoyment in it. What fun is it to get hammered on with no chance of launching a reaper (or three!) in something's face when it gets fluxed out?
Second, the Dominator does not excel close-in fighting with even semi-agile opponents, which the [Redacted] very much try to utilize (specifically, groups of Fulgents/Glimmers). Their typical style is to pelt you from a few angles, swooping into and out of range as they take shield damage. I can pressure one of their shields with the turreted mediums (H Needlers) and sabots, but it's tough to convert that pressure to hull damage as I normally can't spin fast enough to use the larges to hit them. Also, even if I can turn fast enough to hit that weakened ship, the close range will make only one of the two large hardpoints usable...the other is firing into space. Again, I can tie up a decent number of enemies for a while, enough time for the rest of the fleet take things down, but I take damage and don't do much in return.
I'd humbly request two things. First, some kind of way to make the impact of damage to weapons less brutal. Losing most of your DPS in a few moments is tough to plan around, and not much fun for a low-tech fleet relying on armor tanking. Perhaps a Hullmod where instead of a weapon becoming unusable when it runs out of HP, it just reduces to 50% of normal rate of fire? Or maybe a 50% chance to become unusable instead of 100% when it runs out of HP?
Second, I really think the ship needs some way to deal damage at brawler range, either by converting the fixed missiles and LB to turrets (even a small amount of movement would provide a lot of good), or perhaps with another turreted medium ballistic (with no additional dissipation to power it) if the fixed nature of the craft is an important point. With its crazy-low speed and maneuvering, the Dominator cannot dictate terms for exchanges...it's got to have a way to be effective at multiple ranges. It's too easy to just rush it down and make the LB's and missiles semi-useless, and the two mediums just are not enough. The Enforcer has more than that.[close]
The thing that makes sabots so good (imo) is how unlike HE missiles, if you have no chance to dodge or intercept the shot, then there is no "good" option on how to take the hit.
Taking it on shield will build up a bunch of flux, and taking it on armour will still cause a significant EMP impact that will likely disable something.
Speaking from personal experience, if it's not enough to overload me, I will in 95% of instances prefer to take a Sabot on shields rather than hull, because that sudden spike of EMP will more than likely disable a not insignificant portion of my weapons.
The sudden loss of player agency from having a bunch if weapons disabled is not fun and in my opinion is worse (both in feel and practical terms) than having to cope with a higher flux level.
Personally, I don't think that sabots need any adjustments.I wouldn't mind the trade of Harpoon pods having a smaller throw (three missiles per volley instead of four) in exchange for a significantly deeper magazine. Would make them last longer while also being less 'force-feed an overloaded target 12 Harpoons at once and make it explode'.
What I would like to see, though, is better endurance from harpoon pods. Three shots is just... well. That's what you get for spending a small slot on harpoons. I actually liked harpoon pods better at two missiles per salvo. If they're not going to go back to that... give them a few more missiles, please? >.>
The fact that the two large ballistic weapon slots are hardpoints and spaced widely, coupled with its low maneuverability, really defines the ship and provides some challenges in how to outfit it and use it.Dominator is designed around overwhelming frontal firepower that isn't actually overwhelming enough to justify the frontal focus. As an AI ship, it's more often a time waster than anything, and as a player ship, it's too cumbersome to bother. Just use a Champion that not only is more manoeuvrable, its design is also less dependent on its mobility in the first place.
For engagement range, the changes to Burn Drive should help it be able to dictate range more. But the trouble it has with faster attackers that get close is very much part of its intended design, a weakness that's meant to be compensated for with allies on its flanks.Majority of the time it's keeping the enemy at bay that's the issue, not closing in, though burn drive not being a trap is a positive change anyway.
Cybernetics are rarely used on healthy humans, but make a great way to extend the careers of casualties. It may be cool to have a simple reduction in the number of marines lost in raids. Tactical drills could lose the casualty bonus, and instead get a marine XP buff (which makes more sense for intense training imo).Yes :PShould Cybernetic Augmentation give bonuses to raids/marines?
Should it? :)
No need to be major bonuses
SpoilerAs a mostly low-tech player, very glad to see the Legion and Dominator both get some buffs. I was going to write a longer post on the Dominator, as it's been my main ship to pilot for most of my time playing and I have some thoughts, but I didn't do so in time to beat all this patch.
All the buffs it gets are great, but I don't normally have issues with the Dominator on OP, dissipation, or longevity. The fact that the two large ballistic weapon slots are hardpoints and spaced widely, coupled with its low maneuverability, really defines the ship and provides some challenges in how to outfit it and use it. I found that for normal enemies all the way through high level bounties, it was a good ship and grew well along with the rest of the fleet. It's usefulness fell off pretty hard with [Redacted], though, and I think point out two issues that plague the ship most.
First, it normally shines when duking it out with capitals. The Dominator can't rotate quickly and its main damage dealers (missiles and large ballistics) are hardpoints, so something that is large or moves slowly will stay in its crosshairs. It can't win a solo flux war with a capital, but it can with some help, and then pound in some damage as the ship tries to retreat. Against a Radiant, though, the Dominator can not take much of the damage to shields, and has to armor tank pretty quickly. That's fine, it's made for that, but its main weapons are routinely knocked out of commission as it does that, so then it can't fight back. I think this is a general weakness of armor tanking vs. shield tanking, but I suspect the Dominator struggles with that more than a Legion or Onslaught as its main weapons are all along its front and located close together. When fighting a Radiant, I find my normal role is to take that damage and let the other ships take the Radiant down. It works, but not a lot of enjoyment in it. What fun is it to get hammered on with no chance of launching a reaper (or three!) in something's face when it gets fluxed out?
Second, the Dominator does not excel close-in fighting with even semi-agile opponents, which the [Redacted] very much try to utilize (specifically, groups of Fulgents/Glimmers). Their typical style is to pelt you from a few angles, swooping into and out of range as they take shield damage. I can pressure one of their shields with the turreted mediums (H Needlers) and sabots, but it's tough to convert that pressure to hull damage as I normally can't spin fast enough to use the larges to hit them. Also, even if I can turn fast enough to hit that weakened ship, the close range will make only one of the two large hardpoints usable...the other is firing into space. Again, I can tie up a decent number of enemies for a while, enough time for the rest of the fleet take things down, but I take damage and don't do much in return.
I'd humbly request two things. First, some kind of way to make the impact of damage to weapons less brutal. Losing most of your DPS in a few moments is tough to plan around, and not much fun for a low-tech fleet relying on armor tanking. Perhaps a Hullmod where instead of a weapon becoming unusable when it runs out of HP, it just reduces to 50% of normal rate of fire? Or maybe a 50% chance to become unusable instead of 100% when it runs out of HP?
Second, I really think the ship needs some way to deal damage at brawler range, either by converting the fixed missiles and LB to turrets (even a small amount of movement would provide a lot of good), or perhaps with another turreted medium ballistic (with no additional dissipation to power it) if the fixed nature of the craft is an important point. With its crazy-low speed and maneuvering, the Dominator cannot dictate terms for exchanges...it's got to have a way to be effective at multiple ranges. It's too easy to just rush it down and make the LB's and missiles semi-useless, and the two mediums just are not enough. The Enforcer has more than that.[close]
I appreciate the detailed write-up! Hmm. Impact Mitigation, Damage Control, and Automated Repair Unit (and Armored Weapon Mounts!) are all intended means to counteract weapons getting disabled, and to bring them back online faster. Resistant Flux Conduits also help reduce EMP damage taken. In the next release, Polarized Armor will also help by reducing EMP damage by up to 50% when flux levels are high, and having a bit more ordnance points will let you take advantage of more of the other options, too. It feels like there is a large number of options here, and they'll be broadened somewhat. You're right that due to how the ship is, its weapons are more exposed (though the larges can actually avoid a lot of fire due to being offset, it's really the medium missiles that suffer the brunt), but I think that's just the breaks for this specific ship.
For engagement range, the changes to Burn Drive should help it be able to dictate range more. But the trouble it has with faster attackers that get close is very much part of its intended design, a weakness that's meant to be compensated for with allies on its flanks.
I think if it ends up brawling with a Radiant... you just kind of have to expect that it'll have some trouble. That *is* a battleship, after all! But, just trying it for a bit now, with a focus on using these options, its weapons get remarkably resilient.
That said, though, if someone has a loadout in mind that demonstrates how the Sabot is much too strong that isn't a Falcon (P) (or, I suppose, a Gryphon, though that's a different ball of wax), then I'd love to have a closer look!I'll go with this video, wherein a player easily takes the Tesseract fight in a pure Low Tech fleet with mass Sabots and a few complimentary Harpoons:
Cybernetics are rarely used on healthy humans, but make a great way to extend the careers of casualties. It may be cool to have a simple reduction in the number of marines lost in raids. Tactical drills could lose the casualty bonus, and instead get a marine XP buff (which makes more sense for intense training imo).This is a good suggestion! I like it! ;D
Cybernetics are rarely used on healthy humans, but make a great way to extend the careers of casualties. It may be cool to have a simple reduction in the number of marines lost in raids. Tactical drills could lose the casualty bonus, and instead get a marine XP buff (which makes more sense for intense training imo).This is a good suggestion! I like it! ;D
What I would like to see, though, is better endurance from harpoon pods. Three shots is just... well. That's what you get for spending a small slot on harpoons. I actually liked harpoon pods better at two missiles per salvo. If they're not going to go back to that... give them a few more missiles, please? >.>
I don't think Sabot is necessarily mega OP or anything. It's just the default choice because it's always useful and "always works"
I wouldn't mind the trade of Harpoon pods having a smaller throw (three missiles per volley instead of four) in exchange for a significantly deeper magazine. Would make them last longer while also being less 'force-feed an overloaded target 12 Harpoons at once and make it explode'.
Operations center kite is on the menu, boys!
Sorry about the wall of text, it swear it didn't appear as long when I wrote it.
I currently use IM, DC, and armored mounts (along with solar shielding), so I'm trying to keep the guns firing with the tools that are available. My experience has not been the same as what you are describing, and I do find it's difficult to keep the mounts working well (in particular the missiles which often have only a limited time to use). I appreciate you trying it out.
To be clear on the close range weakness, my issue isn't that close-range flanking won't be painful...it is and that feels fair. It's that the fixed nature of the weapons really limits the damage you can deal back in those cases. That's true even if you have a partner to avoid flanking; if your target moves laterally at close range, it will really reduce your effectiveness. The best counterexample is the Legion XIV, which I found to be surprisingly strong in my LT fleet. With 5 turreted heavy needlers and two hurricanes, it can flux out attackers from a number of angles and then pursue them with missiles, all while being slower than the Dom.
Related to the various comments on Radiants and close attackers, I think you are hinting at what I see as the Dom's identity crisis. Against those end-game enemies, what is it supposed to be good at? Not really tackling a Radiant when it is the target, and not attacking faster-moving enemies that close distance. I find it's just got a small list of cases where it works well against Redacted. It's a shame, as it's a pretty decent ship against non-Redacted fleets that respect range a little more, but struggles with the transition to the major leagues.
I'll go with this video, wherein a player easily takes the Tesseract fight in a pure Low Tech fleet with mass Sabots and a few complimentary Harpoons:
e.g. you can see off screen that three Enforcers and a Mora wipe the strongest ship in the game effortlessly. This course of events pretty much generalizes to any encounter in the game. Tesseracts aren't the tankiest ship around, but they aren't push-overs and they have built-in RFC so they're also far from the most vulnerable to Sabots. And you're not going to get comparable performance with any other missile + accompanying loadout.
I also hesitate to use Redacted as the ultimate measuring stick long term; as you say they have some specific behaviors that might not carry over to every endgame threat (or, indeed, to high-level bounties, which can be pretty close to on par with them.)Ordos with Radiants make every other recurring fight look like midgame chumps, even named bounties that are worth about 350k. (It was less extreme before 0.95, the gameplay changes really benefitted the Remnants.)
While we're on the subject: any missiles that stand out as particularly bad?
While we're on the subject: any missiles that stand out as particularly bad?Hm. Here's a question: does anyone actually use the large-slot Reaper? I've found myself considering it a few times - but every time I do, I end up deciding that the Hammer Barrage actually does the job better - less ammo, yes, but much cheaper to mount, higher DPS, and four small torpedos are harder to shoot down than two large torpedos.
(This reminds me, I've been wanting to tweak the Tesseract fight. It's *supposed* to get harder once you destroy one of them, but that doesn't seem like it's holding up at all.)In my experience, it really does work that way - the worst thing to do against the Tesseracts is to just kill both of them at once, and taking out all the shards is where the meat of the fight is. My most successful fights against these things typically involve using my flagship to lure one of them away and keep it busy while the rest of my fleet deals with the other, just to avoid killing the second one off until the first one's shards have been at least mostly finished off.
Pilums are absolutely useless and a waste of OP unless you spam a bazillion of them, or if you get off of breaking AI behaviour. I remember back when they costed 10 OP but were a bit faster, they had a use at least. Now I just leave empty if I can't afford or put literally anything else.I actually enjoyed using pilums on the DOOM in older versions. The slow missiles act as a defensive screen, absorbing hits and protecting precious phase ship armor. When they do hit, it's a big punch. Phase ships have increased fire rate and recharge thanks to cloaking, which counters the weakest aspect of the missile pack.
(Every time I hear "X is back on the menu", I wonder what kind of society the Uruk-Hai had that made this a common turn of phrase among them. Do they have sit-down restaurants? Like... "yes, sparkling water, please, and I'll have the Leg of Guy-I-Killed-the-Other-Day... but I digress.)Or perhaps it's a mangled westron idiom.
I also hesitate to use Redacted as the ultimate measuring stick long term; as you say they have some specific behaviors that might not carry over to every endgame threat (or, indeed, to high-level bounties, which can be pretty close to on par with them.)If you think top of the line human fleets should match Remnants in difficulty, please consider making that so. Currently Remnants demand noticeably more than even toughest mercenaries. Mostly because of how many officers they get and Radiants.
And from experience, Harpoons and Reapers seem very, very good in vs-Ordo fights; the number of times that a Radiant - or even a Brilliant - has managed to back off after getting over-fluxed, for lack of finisher-type weapons... that seems to happen a lot.Now that's a straight up lie. I used harpoons and reapers against Remnants and unless I overloaded their ships already, missiles would not score hits on the hull. And if you need to overload their ships, you must bring either bring double the missiles to force overloads for high-flux Remnants through sheer ordnance avalanche, or by bringing some sabots anyway.
That said, still, something for me to think about and keep an eye on, and I appreciate the video and the thoughts. While we're on the subject: any missiles that stand out as particularly bad?Besides everything that isn't sabots, Pilum and Proximity Charge Launcher don't find use in my fleets much. At least the latter is being taken care of, though, so that's nice.
(This reminds me, I've been wanting to tweak the Tesseract fight. It's *supposed* to get harder once you destroy one of them, but that doesn't seem like it's holding up at all.)Tessaract is a big slippery bugger. They are the biggest hurdle to overcome. All the refactors are also slippery, but aren't as big, so stuff that works against Tessaract works even better against them. Except for Facet, but it never seems to be an issue to deal with.
Would something like a simple 10% more real armor, or +75/150/200/250 (tweak numbers as needed) real extra armor based on size, repaired instantly at the end of every engagement work? Where "repaired" is just the has an elite Impact Mitigation officer piloting it at deployment time, so it adds say +250 to whatever the armor was there as the ship is deployed into the fight. At the end, if it's over normal maximum in any cell, just remove excess.I would prefer it to have a bonus that's useful in combat, unless it's a campaign bonus that activates in between rounds in combat as well, like Field Repairs 2 and Damage Control 2 used to. Something like weapon and engine repairs not being interrupted by damage, merely slowed, or being resistant to EMP arcs.
Hm. Here's a question: does anyone actually use the large-slot Reaper? I've found myself considering it a few times - but every time I do, I end up deciding that the Hammer Barrage actually does the job better - less ammo, yes, but much cheaper to mount, higher DPS, and four small torpedos are harder to shoot down than two large torpedos.It's an alright option for Radiant and Champion, but with Missile Spec I prefer to use Hammer Barrage for reasons you mentioned. It's less reliable, less damaging and more expensive.
Would something like a simple 10% more real armor, or +75/150/200/250 (tweak numbers as needed) real extra armor based on size, repaired instantly at the end of every engagement work? Where "repaired" is just the has an elite Impact Mitigation officer piloting it at deployment time, so it adds say +250 to whatever the armor was there as the ship is deployed into the fight. At the end, if it's over normal maximum in any cell, just remove excess.I would prefer it to have a bonus that's useful in combat, unless it's a campaign bonus that activates in between rounds in combat as well, like Field Repairs 2 and Damage Control 2 used to. Something like weapon and engine repairs not being interrupted by damage, merely slowed, or being resistant to EMP arcs.
Yeah, I wish I had better footage on hand :(. It's sort of a popular enough opinion on the Discord that no one's felt the need to do a dedicated showcase for it, I suppose.I'll go with this video, wherein a player easily takes the Tesseract fight in a pure Low Tech fleet with mass Sabots and a few complimentary Harpoons:
e.g. you can see off screen that three Enforcers and a Mora wipe the strongest ship in the game effortlessly. This course of events pretty much generalizes to any encounter in the game. Tesseracts aren't the tankiest ship around, but they aren't push-overs and they have built-in RFC so they're also far from the most vulnerable to Sabots. And you're not going to get comparable performance with any other missile + accompanying loadout.
Thank you, I appreciate it! It's unfortunate that the most interesting bit happened offscreen :) The Tesseracts can be surprisingly easy to burst down, provided they overload at the wrong time (for them), and I've seen it happen in some kind of unexpected cases - but that's luck based, and not seeing this, it's impossible to say what happened there.
And as far as generalizing - quite seriously, does it? The Tesseracts are heavily outnumbered and can't use allies to back off and recover behind. They also have "fearless" AI and so get into more trouble trying to tank Sabots on shields while hanging around. It's really the perfect storm of being susceptible to Sabots. RFC probably doesn't matter too much here; the bigger problem is how much they shield-tank and what it does to their flux, I think.
I have a feeling that even just changing their personality to "steady" could cut down on the effectiveness of Sabots against them a lot.
And whether this really generalizes to a fight when this fleet is outnumbered - I'd imagine it *can* beat a high-level Ordo, probably without too much trouble, because it looks like a high-end fleet. But would it be a much harder - or at all harder - fight with the Sabots either partially or fully replaced by something else? That seems much harder to say. At least, it does not appear to be self-evident to me just from watching this video. And from experience, Harpoons and Reapers seem very, very good in vs-Ordo fights; the number of times that a Radiant - or even a Brilliant - has managed to back off after getting over-fluxed, for lack of finisher-type weapons... that seems to happen a lot.
That said, still, something for me to think about and keep an eye on, and I appreciate the video and the thoughts. While we're on the subject: any missiles that stand out as particularly bad?Honestly I'm reasonably happy with the current state of things (despite what my post may imply I actually don't like sweeping balance changes too much :p). If I have to be nitpicky:
(This reminds me, I've been wanting to tweak the Tesseract fight. It's *supposed* to get harder once you destroy one of them, but that doesn't seem like it's holding up at all.)o-oh. (I think this was the case when people were still learning the fight at the start of the patch, but Facets and Shards aren't too threatening compared to a Time Dilation Cruiser and Point Defense trivializes all fighters - thankfully that's being nerfed :p)
Hm. Here's a question: does anyone actually use the large-slot Reaper? I've found myself considering it a few times - but every time I do, I end up deciding that the Hammer Barrage actually does the job better - less ammo, yes, but much cheaper to mount, higher DPS, and four small torpedos are harder to shoot down than two large torpedos.Recently, no. The problem is recent releases made Reapers fragile, and like MIRVs, not useful enough without buffs from missile skills or hullmods to make Reapers fast and/or sturdy enough. It is too easy (for PD) to shoot down unboosted Reapers, and it does not help there are not many ships who could use Cyclone well in the first place. 0.95 added Champion and made Legion14 a viable option (thanks historian). Gryphon does not count for being too fragile at near frontline combat. AI is too conservative with Reapers, so larger Reapers are mostly playership weapons.
It is easier for me to list missiles I use than missiles I do not want to use because they lack ammo and/or reliability.That said, still, something for me to think about and keep an eye on, and I appreciate the video and the thoughts. While we're on the subject: any missiles that stand out as particularly bad?Besides everything that isn't sabots, Pilum and Proximity Charge Launcher don't find use in my fleets much. At least the latter is being taken care of, though, so that's nice.
The binary nature of pilums kind of ruins them as a weapon. It's not effective to only use some pilums; they pay off when everything has a pilum and you reach critical mass. And even then they primarily work because mass pilums screws up the enemy AI. So you don't use them at all or you use them everywhere. Since the latter option is only nice for one whole playthrough, no one really touches pilums ever again.I agree, against larger fleets pilums are not very helpful, unless you have a massive amount. Though in smaller fleets, I think pilums are pretty good. The lack of PD makes pilums much more scary.
While we're on the subject: any missiles that stand out as particularly bad?Leaving aside prox charge and breaches as they are (hopefully) going to be good with the upcoming changes.
Yes. The main thing that makes Ordos hard is 1) Radiant; it is a bonafide SNK boss that is highly overpowered (and the only thing that makes Automated Ships worthwhile instead of getting Spec.Mods.), and 2) officer power (and DP pools vary solely on officer power instead of ships). They get lots of alpha officers (level 7s with all elite skills), possibly on every ship, such that fights will have the player at -10% shot range unless the player min-maxes for ECM, and 40% deployment (and if Remnants take the points, or take them later and you cannot reinforce, you basically lose the fight). Meanwhile, human NPC fleets have more reasonable limits on officers, and Electronic Warfare sometimes helps instead of never.I also hesitate to use Redacted as the ultimate measuring stick long term; as you say they have some specific behaviors that might not carry over to every endgame threat (or, indeed, to high-level bounties, which can be pretty close to on par with them.)If you think top of the line human fleets should match Remnants in difficulty, please consider making that so. Currently Remnants demand noticeably more than even toughest mercenaries. Mostly because of how many officers they get and Radiants.And from experience, Harpoons and Reapers seem very, very good in vs-Ordo fights; the number of times that a Radiant - or even a Brilliant - has managed to back off after getting over-fluxed, for lack of finisher-type weapons... that seems to happen a lot.Now that's a straight up lie. I used harpoons and reapers against Remnants and unless I overloaded their ships already, missiles would not score hits on the hull. And if you need to overload their ships, you must bring either bring double the missiles to force overloads for high-flux Remnants through sheer ordnance avalanche, or by bringing some sabots anyway.
Fixed issue that could cause the AI to fire too many HE missiles at an overloaded target despite being aware that it was overkill
...Personally I'd have uncoupled story points from levels completely right from the beginning, to remove the problem of getting a lot at the start but only a few in the late game (ie getting them every fixed amount of experience regardless of level). However, it's still an improvement.....
- Uncoupled story point gain rate after reaching maximum level from what the actual maximum level is
- Only matters if the maximum level is increased beyond the vanilla maxium
- Before this change, doing this would make story point gain at max level significantly slower
Ironman mode is trivialized by story points, mainly due to being able to escape from bad fights without consequences. The other uses of story points also help make things easier.As opposed to manual save-copying?
Ironman mode is trivialized by story points, mainly due to being able to escape from bad fights without consequences. The other uses of story points also help make things easier.As opposed to manual save-copying?
I think the main issue with missiles isn't that Sabot's are too strong.For me,the main issue is that shields are just too damn important,so anything that reliably overwhelms them is bound to be too good.Challenge accepted, Alex will now introduce a new end game enemy that won't even use shields :)
Shields are the first defense that any ship has,and for the endgame threats(Ordos) its the main defense and largely the only one that matters,their armor is really weak.Exactly the same applies on the Tesseracts.Couple that with the fact that without shields,ships are open to all kinds of debuffs(overloading,weapons/engines disabled) and it's easy to see why Sabots are that good.
Not to mention,even without shields,Sabots overload massively,so they are always useful,unlike an Atropos,that just does a bit of damage on shields and nothing else.
For me,the solution is either reworking how shields work or changing Sabots to have a more long term effect.Instant bursts are always a weakness of shields,especially if the alternative is a massive overload.Also,Pilums are just too slow and fragile to do their work without spamming them,which feels unsatisfying.
Challenge accepted, Alex will now introduce a new end game enemy that won't even use shields :)Is it time for the return of derelict contingent zombie fleets? ;D
As opposed to just getting wiped, I'd say. My issue with story points to escape a tough battle is that you can only do it before even trying. When you try to win against superior enemy (which I do most of the time, because those are the most interesting fights) but the battle goes badly, story points won't save you, and you will still be tempted to alt+f4. I'd be really cool if you could use a story point during a fight to instantly escape.Well Story Points are supposed to be some sort of cinematic event, which helps make your run interesting. So I don't have a problem with using them to avoid fights (you may have never been in a place where the enemy fleet was faster than you, I must've burned five points just getting out of the system, or how risky things feel once you run out), but their nature as a safety net makes you want to hoard them rather than spend them on the multitude of other uses (ships, colonies, etc). Which is why I suggested doling out a small bonus a month if you're too low (they are fun to use, not having any feels like you're missing an aspect of the game) and a maximum for how many you can have at a given time (having a couple in reserve for emergencies is a good idea, but it'd remove the reluctance to use them if you're near the maximum amount). It'd make people less reluctant (at least from my own experience, maybe I'm too cautious) to spend story points improving ships. Even ones ones they don't plan to keep until the end game... they'd have to make limit for how high those options that increase costs go though.
As opposed to just getting wiped, I'd say. My issue with story points to escape a tough battle is that you can only do it before even trying. When you try to win against superior enemy (which I do most of the time, because those are the most interesting fights) but the battle goes badly, story points won't save you, and you will still be tempted to alt+f4. I'd be really cool if you could use a story point during a fight to instantly escape.Hmm... maybe make avoiding the fight entirely more expensive, but escaping mid fight costs only one? Call it the "Emergency Retreat" button that doubles your speed to give your ships a better chance of reaching the border but can only be used after the fight's gone on for a while?
I would not want a story point maximum as long as story points scale 2^n for colony improvements and historian use. If I can have twelve buildings, I would want to be able to save up and improve all twelve of them if I grind long enough.As opposed to just getting wiped, I'd say. My issue with story points to escape a tough battle is that you can only do it before even trying. When you try to win against superior enemy (which I do most of the time, because those are the most interesting fights) but the battle goes badly, story points won't save you, and you will still be tempted to alt+f4. I'd be really cool if you could use a story point during a fight to instantly escape.Well Story Points are supposed to be some sort of cinematic event, which helps make your run interesting. So I don't have a problem with using them to avoid fights (you may have never been in a place where the enemy fleet was faster than you, I must've burned five points just getting out of the system, or how risky things feel once you run out), but their nature as a safety net makes you want to hoard them rather than spend them on the multitude of other uses (ships, colonies, etc). Which is why I suggested doling out a small bonus a month if you're too low (they are fun to use, not having any feels like you're missing an aspect of the game) and a maximum for how many you can have at a given time (having a couple in reserve for emergencies is a good idea, but it'd remove the reluctance to use them if you're near the maximum amount). It'd make people less reluctant (at least from my own experience, maybe I'm too cautious) to spend story points improving ships. Even ones ones they don't plan to keep until the end game... they'd have to make limit for how high those options that increase costs go though.
Which is why I suggested doling out a small bonus a month if you're too low (they are fun to use, not having any feels like you're missing an aspect of the game) and a maximum for how many you can have at a given time (having a couple in reserve for emergencies is a good idea, but it'd remove the reluctance to use them if you're near the maximum amount).
As opposed to just getting wiped, I'd say. My issue with story points to escape a tough battle is that you can only do it before even trying. When you try to win against superior enemy (which I do most of the time, because those are the most interesting fights) but the battle goes badly, story points won't save you, and you will still be tempted to alt+f4. I'd be really cool if you could use a story point during a fight to instantly escape.
I would also like to see end game low-tech enemy.
I am a bit curious where your ideas for the elite Impact Mitigation effect are going, given the 90% max mitigation being duplicated in Polarized armor. Where you looking for something that helps at high armor levels and or small weapon hits (which is what the 85%-90% does), but doesn't quite stack so much (1/3 less damage during the maximum mitigation period extends it by a factor of 1.5,.e. 50% more, while 2/3 extends it by by a factor of 3).
...
Would something like a simple 10% more real armor, or +75/150/200/250 (tweak numbers as needed) real extra armor based on size, repaired instantly at the end of every engagement work? Where "repaired" is just the has an elite Impact Mitigation officer piloting it at deployment time, so it adds say +250 to whatever the armor was there as the ship is deployed into the fight. At the end, if it's over normal maximum in any cell, just remove excess.
I do really like the idea of linking officers to fleet wide carrier bonuses. Which in some way lets you say "These fighter bays are more important than those fighter bays". This is perhaps a silly question, but would it be simpler to tie "fleet wide" fighter bonuses to the presence of an officer on the ship just like how Wolf pack tactics works? As opposed to the more complicated double the bonus if officer is present interaction?
Ordos with Radiants make every other recurring fight look like midgame chumps, even named bounties that are worth about 350k. (It was less extreme before 0.95, the gameplay changes really benefitted the Remnants.)
Though I do have a question. With the Elite effect of damage control, does this apply to beam weapons like the Tachyon lance that do more than 500 damage, but not in a singular hit?
(This reminds me, I've been wanting to tweak the Tesseract fight. It's *supposed* to get harder once you destroy one of them, but that doesn't seem like it's holding up at all.)In my experience, it really does work that way - the worst thing to do against the Tesseracts is to just kill both of them at once, and taking out all the shards is where the meat of the fight is. My most successful fights against these things typically involve using my flagship to lure one of them away and keep it busy while the rest of my fleet deals with the other, just to avoid killing the second one off until the first one's shards have been at least mostly finished off.
I agree with Wyvern re: tesseracts. A whole one with an aggressive loadout has more danger of just singling out and popping a destroyer (or sometimes cruiser if the AI drops its shield at the wrong time), but once one splits things get very hectic and ships get flanked badly. I also try to stall one while mopping up another.
Yeah, I wish I had better footage on hand :(. It's sort of a popular enough opinion on the Discord that no one's felt the need to do a dedicated showcase for it, I suppose.
I'd still say that yes, it generalizes. The point about not having allies to retreat behind is valid, but in fleet scenarios you could similarly have cases where a ship is blocked from behind by its allies. And PD grids are a thing, but even then it doesn't take many Harpoons to knock out any overloaded ship on the front-line before it can retreat (excepting solid interceptor / Paladin PD coverage).
Steady/Timid Tesseracts would be nightmarish, but they have a combination of speed and tanki-ness that is unmatched excepting Radiants (kind of, and they're Fearless as well anyways), Auroras, Hyperions and maaybe Medusas. I doubt that personality changes would save any other ship. Fair point regarding RFC here; I wanted to make a more general point that even armor-tanking the Sabots wouldn't be great here despite the EMP damage reduction, but it's a rather clumsy exhibit for that.
I would wager that the nature of Sabots providing extremely easy overloads (or, while not particularly relevant in this instance, shutting down the entirety of a ship's weaponry and easily winning the flux war) compared to needing a sustained combination of various weapons does make this fight significantly harder than without them.
(I guess it's not super helpful since I'm arguing the opposite side, but I would not be excited to have to try to win this same fight refitted without Sabots (half is still probably reasonably doable but honestly I'd doubt it'd outperform Vlad's current loadouts), and I love a challenge :p)
Do NPC fleets get access to player skills? There are quite a few skills that provide major boosts to a fleet and could dramatically impact its combat doctrine. If human fleets seem lacking, maybe that's the extra edge they need?
What factions will have access to the new ships, aside from pirates as it's obvious from the patch notes? I'd take a guess and say Hegemony will at least have some but I hope other factions get a bit more distinguished from the rest. For example I don't know if Luddic Church has anything unique in their roster. Sorry if I'm mistaken or if this was already answered somewhere.
As opposed to just getting wiped, I'd say. My issue with story points to escape a tough battle is that you can only do it before even trying. When you try to win against superior enemy (which I do most of the time, because those are the most interesting fights) but the battle goes badly, story points won't save you, and you will still be tempted to alt+f4. I'd be really cool if you could use a story point during a fight to instantly escape.
The issue with +X armor (not effective, just at the start) is that it wouldn't apply once command is transferred. Generally, the goal of the design is to have skill effects transfer over - although a couple do break that rule; most notably Missile Specialization. I kind of wonder - is "giving your intended flagship to an officer with Missile Spec, and probably Reliability Engineering, and then transferring command to it after deployment to benefit from about an extra skill's worth of stuff" at all a thing? I'd guess it's probably not quite worth it, but if we pile on more bonuses that work like this...I tried this before but it is not worth it, especially in more recent releases. It is annoying to exploit and not worth the hassle. Even in previous releases that had stronger skills and more solo-friendly, it still was annoying enough that I did not want to do it every fight.
Hm. Just from a 'what does it sound like the skill should do' perspective, I'd think that Damage Control's chance to reduce damage from high-impact hits would fit well here instead.I am a bit curious where your ideas for the elite Impact Mitigation effect are going, given the 90% max mitigation being duplicated in Polarized armor. Where you looking for something that helps at high armor levels and or small weapon hits (which is what the 85%-90% does), but doesn't quite stack so much (1/3 less damage during the maximum mitigation period extends it by a factor of 1.5,.e. 50% more, while 2/3 extends it by by a factor of 3).
...
Would something like a simple 10% more real armor, or +75/150/200/250 (tweak numbers as needed) real extra armor based on size, repaired instantly at the end of every engagement work? Where "repaired" is just the has an elite Impact Mitigation officer piloting it at deployment time, so it adds say +250 to whatever the armor was there as the ship is deployed into the fight. At the end, if it's over normal maximum in any cell, just remove excess.
I'm actually pretty open to what the effect might be - ideally it'd be something that's at least semi-interesting gameplay-wise, and also doesn't come with the problem of, for example, making most kinetics near-useless vs hull, like +150 effective armor did.
Is "giving your intended flagship to an officer with Missile Spec, and probably Reliability Engineering, and then transferring command to it after deployment to benefit from about an extra skill's worth of stuff" at all a thing? I'd guess it's probably not quite worth it, but if we pile on more bonuses that work like this...I will absolutely stick an officer with +15% CR on a ship that I use as a 'secondary flagship'... but that only really comes up when my 'primary flagship' is a mod-added super-frigate that's great for most fights but just doesn't quite have the durability to face up to capital-heavy enemy fleets.
As opposed to just getting wiped, I'd say. My issue with story points to escape a tough battle is that you can only do it before even trying. When you try to win against superior enemy (which I do most of the time, because those are the most interesting fights) but the battle goes badly, story points won't save you, and you will still be tempted to alt+f4. I'd be really cool if you could use a story point during a fight to instantly escape.
Hmm - interesting idea - let me make a note to have a quick look! (And a bit of a think, too...)
Oh, how's this for a thought: damage to armor reduced based on current ship speed. The faster you're going, the more shots 'glance off'!Yes. I like this one.
Oh, how's this for a thought: damage to armor reduced based on current ship speed. The faster you're going, the more shots 'glance off'!
Balancing could be tricky, and might require scaling differently for different ship classes... but at least the notion of it seems good: a small benefit for slow, high-armor ships, a larger benefit for faster, less-armored ships, and a hopefully-noticeable boost to durability while Burn Drive is active.
Oh, how's this for a thought: damage to armor reduced based on current ship speed. The faster you're going, the more shots 'glance off'!
Balancing could be tricky, and might require scaling differently for different ship classes... but at least the notion of it seems good: a small benefit for slow, high-armor ships, a larger benefit for faster, less-armored ships, and a hopefully-noticeable boost to durability while Burn Drive is active.
Dunno, depending as much on how as where you get hit, more shots would be 'absorbed,' not necessarily 'glance off.' If you punch me in the chin, the difference between a KO, a broken jaw and sore jaw are like a few cm, but also generally dependent on how you punched me; an uppercut might KO, but a jab likely would end skidding off to the side as landing squarely. And that's not even accounting for strong vs weak chins! Maybe not the best example, but you get the idea.
Put another way, flying straight into a projectile (ie, exactly opposite vector), stuff isn't likely to glance off unless the surface it hits is angled as opposed to perpendicular (straight hit) or parallel (straight miss). But game already uses polar geometry for tracking threat vectors/evasion of a ship in battle, so math/code already exists in game for basically doing this. But definitely would require some sort of scaling for different ship classes, and prolly a second scaling parameter regarding any arbitrary ship's level of armor (since theoretically stuff more likely to ricochet off of armor, I guess).
But this is the kinda change that would require A LOT of simulation to verify balance, so maybe in the next update...
I am a bit curious where your ideas for the elite Impact Mitigation effect are going, given the 90% max mitigation being duplicated in Polarized armor. Where you looking for something that helps at high armor levels and or small weapon hits (which is what the 85%-90% does), but doesn't quite stack so much (1/3 less damage during the maximum mitigation period extends it by a factor of 1.5,.e. 50% more, while 2/3 extends it by by a factor of 3).
...
Would something like a simple 10% more real armor, or +75/150/200/250 (tweak numbers as needed) real extra armor based on size, repaired instantly at the end of every engagement work? Where "repaired" is just the has an elite Impact Mitigation officer piloting it at deployment time, so it adds say +250 to whatever the armor was there as the ship is deployed into the fight. At the end, if it's over normal maximum in any cell, just remove excess.
I'm actually pretty open to what the effect might be - ideally it'd be something that's at least semi-interesting gameplay-wise, and also doesn't come with the problem of, for example, making most kinetics near-useless vs hull, like +150 effective armor did.
The issue with +X armor (not effective, just at the start) is that it wouldn't apply once command is transferred. Generally, the goal of the design is to have skill effects transfer over - although a couple do break that rule; most notably Missile Specialization. I kind of wonder - is "giving your intended flagship to an officer with Missile Spec, and probably Reliability Engineering, and then transferring command to it after deployment to benefit from about an extra skill's worth of stuff" at all a thing? I'd guess it's probably not quite worth it, but if we pile on more bonuses that work like this...
Oh, how's this for a thought: damage to armor reduced based on current ship speed. The faster you're going, the more shots 'glance off'!
Balancing could be tricky, and might require scaling differently for different ship classes... but at least the notion of it seems good: a small benefit for slow, high-armor ships, a larger benefit for faster, less-armored ships, and a hopefully-noticeable boost to durability while Burn Drive is active.
- "Defend" assignment can now be placed on friendly ships
- Right-clicking a powerful group of ships onto a friendly will also create this assignment
Oh, how's this for a thought: damage to armor reduced based on current ship speed. The faster you're going, the more shots 'glance off'!
Balancing could be tricky, and might require scaling differently for different ship classes... but at least the notion of it seems good: a small benefit for slow, high-armor ships, a larger benefit for faster, less-armored ships, and a hopefully-noticeable boost to durability while Burn Drive is active.
Another thing: If fights against human fleets become even larger because they get more ships to close the gap with Ordos with Radiants, then map size needs to be bigger too. Having and fighting a fleet with ten capitals and twenty cruisers is lame when both sides can deploy only a quarter or third of their fleet at time due to DP limits even at max size. (I still miss 500 map size.)
What is the point of big fleets when we cannot use them (because over half of our fleet is stuck on the sidelines like lazy bums)? And backup ships to replace those lost in battle is not a good idea for the player's fleet when rewards are calibrated toward flawless victory. Meanwhile, the enemy is expected to run through all of their ships in waves and do not care if they lose because they have unlimited fleets and resources. If I lose one of my capitals, I pay more than my bounty reward to replace it. Meanwhile, I am expected to chew through about ten capitals and twenty cruisers of a human enemy endgame fleet without losing a ship. If I can do this, my fleet is highly overpowered, but I need to be overpowered if I want to make money instead of losing it. Otherwise, I am better off avoiding combat altogether and abuse trade or raid exploits to make money.
Hopefully, 60 DP Radiant will shrink Ordos fleets, and the gap between humans and Ordos, enough.
How much were the substantial HP and armor buffs for Legion and Dominator?
- "Defend" assignment can now be placed on friendly ships
- Right-clicking a powerful group of ships onto a friendly will also create this assignment
I assume this only refers to the default behavior - will the player be able to manually toggle between Escort or Defend regardless of group size of assigned ships?
I'm late to post this reply, but I just wanted to say:
Alex, the sheer number of AI improvements on this changelog are absolutely beautiful.
AI is the one aspect of the game that you can't trumpet as "NEW SHINY CONTENT!!1!ONE" but it is absolutely one of the most important parts of the core gameplay and I am really, really happy to see how much work you've put into it. Not just bugfixing, but flat-out improvements. Bravo sir.
Release the update right now.
So we can test it and put real feedback, no some speculations.
ALEX
RELEASE IT NOW
or I will find your KOT andI will show no mercy!Spoilerpet him and rub his belly.[close]
It might be nice for bounty fleets to have fewer d-mods than average, especially for the flagship and select officers. A bounty captain with field repairs will definitely have higher quality ships than the faction standard. Better quality ships are more dangerous, and are also more juicy picks for the loot screen.
If a pristine 70% CR Onslaught goes down, you are out 233 supplies for CR recovery. That is 7.8% of a 300k bounty payout instead of 1.3%.
(I am not sure how much supply cost the hull/armor repairs add.)
If you are willing to suck the d-mods, which are usually not crippling, I think the cost is acceptable. Bad, but acceptable.
I aim for flawless victories every time in bounty fights, and generally consider any losses to be significant failures, although typically some failure can be tolerated without the bounty becoming unprofitable.
I might consider trying to take the new Hull Restoration skill early to build my fleet though, it sounds like a good way to get ships via recovery without the downside of d-mods, and it can be re-specced late game once I have the ships I want. I will have to see what skills I need to take get there though.
I will just restore everything. I would much rather pay more up front for a pristine ship that will not die and will have better combat power per deployment point.If I think casualties is likely, and the only significant reward is money, then it is better to avoid the fight in the first place and run drugs or otherwise cheese trading exploits - much safer!
Does it even work like that though? To me it sounds like the chance to avoid D-mods completely only applies to your own ships, not enemy ships you recover. Those only get a chance at -1 d-mod at most, and even pristine ships get at least 2 when destroyed.With Field Repairs and other Industry skills, I sometimes see formerly pristine enemy ships with a single d-mod. They are worth recovering. I obtained most of my capitals by recovering and fixing them with Field Repairs. By the time I raided for all the blueprints, I already obtained most of my endgame fleet by recovering them from the enemy. It was also nice recovering spare Radiants with one d-mod and field repairing them for later.
I agree that it's unclear whether you will avoid new d-mods on enemy ships, but even if that bit doesn't apply, you also remove 1 d-mod per month from your fleet like the current industry skill. So the skill means that I am now seeing mostly 1-2-3 dmod ships rather than 2-3-4 and I am much more likely to hit reasonable d-mods on ships and I also need to wait less time for them to become usable/better/pristine. I will have to see how well it works but it seems like it could be good enough that I would no longer bother buying ships except maybe very early on to get the ball rolling, or rare ships I don't fight much. The max CR per S-mod is also really good IMO.I might consider trying to take the new Hull Restoration skill early to build my fleet though, it sounds like a good way to get ships via recovery without the downside of d-mods, and it can be re-specced late game once I have the ships I want. I will have to see what skills I need to take get there though.
Does it even work like that though? To me it sounds like the chance to avoid D-mods completely only applies to your own ships, not enemy ships you recover. Those only get a chance at -1 d-mod at most, and even pristine ships get at least 2 when destroyed.
Hmm, gotta say that I'd be wary of the hull/armor creep that low tech seems to have going on these days (previously it was Enforcer that benefited). At some point, ships that don't die when the player shoots them (a lot) are just annoying to deal with.How much were the substantial HP and armor buffs for Legion and Dominator?14k is the new value for the Dominator, and 18k for the Legion. The Legion's new armor is 1750; I forget what the original value was.
Hmm, gotta say that I'd be wary of the hull/armor creep that low tech seems to have going on these days (previously it was Enforcer that benefited). At some point, ships that don't die when the player shoots them (a lot) are just annoying to deal with.
I know this more of a fine tune patch, but I was curious when more permanent terraforming will arrive in the game?
Thank you all for the suggestions about Impact Mitigation! That got me thinking outside the box a bit, and I've just about settled on "+50% maneuverability for cruisers/capitals, +25% if smaller". It makes sense for the theme of the skill, (after all, turning the ship to avoid/distribute/dare I say mitigate the incoming damage is a thing), and it should be a useful bonus for heavily armored ships that's not just another "damage number is lower".Hm. +Maneuverability is great for ships like the Onslaught or Dominator. It's very nearly worthless for frigates, though. Hm...
Extra armor durability during Burn drive would be amusing, I admit, and potentially really useful. It does make it fairly niche though. There is quite a large range in speeds in each ship class, say from 25 of the Onslaught to the 70 of the Odyssey. Not to mention plasma burn drive. It also ties into gameplay.SpoilerI am a bit curious where your ideas for the elite Impact Mitigation effect are going, given the 90% max mitigation being duplicated in Polarized armor. Where you looking for something that helps at high armor levels and or small weapon hits (which is what the 85%-90% does), but doesn't quite stack so much (1/3 less damage during the maximum mitigation period extends it by a factor of 1.5,.e. 50% more, while 2/3 extends it by by a factor of 3).
...
Would something like a simple 10% more real armor, or +75/150/200/250 (tweak numbers as needed) real extra armor based on size, repaired instantly at the end of every engagement work? Where "repaired" is just the has an elite Impact Mitigation officer piloting it at deployment time, so it adds say +250 to whatever the armor was there as the ship is deployed into the fight. At the end, if it's over normal maximum in any cell, just remove excess.
I'm actually pretty open to what the effect might be - ideally it'd be something that's at least semi-interesting gameplay-wise, and also doesn't come with the problem of, for example, making most kinetics near-useless vs hull, like +150 effective armor did.
The issue with +X armor (not effective, just at the start) is that it wouldn't apply once command is transferred. Generally, the goal of the design is to have skill effects transfer over - although a couple do break that rule; most notably Missile Specialization. I kind of wonder - is "giving your intended flagship to an officer with Missile Spec, and probably Reliability Engineering, and then transferring command to it after deployment to benefit from about an extra skill's worth of stuff" at all a thing? I'd guess it's probably not quite worth it, but if we pile on more bonuses that work like this...
That is a fair point. Stack enough bonuses and some min-maxer some where will take advantage of it. I will admit if I'm pulling solo Odyssey shenanigans, I'll load it up with a missile expertise officer and switch into it, since my officers have nothing better to do in that scenario.
Interesting gameplay-wise is perhaps a bit tough given it has traditionally I simply take more shots to die kind of skill, which definitely makes the character or officer stronger, but doesn't feel like it changes the ship fundamentally.Oh, how's this for a thought: damage to armor reduced based on current ship speed. The faster you're going, the more shots 'glance off'!
Balancing could be tricky, and might require scaling differently for different ship classes... but at least the notion of it seems good: a small benefit for slow, high-armor ships, a larger benefit for faster, less-armored ships, and a hopefully-noticeable boost to durability while Burn Drive is active.[close]
What are mechanics and behavior we can tie into? Maneuverability, speed. Either modifying those numbers, or basing it off what you're doing (i.e. the proportional bonus to speed suggestion). There's weapons fire state, although that doesn't make much sense. There's shield state and flux levels. Polarized armor already has stuff proportional to flux level though. There's shield state though. Your armor could become better if you have no shields up (which would indirectly make damping field better). Reinforcing internal structures in a powered way somehow.
You could make the armor trade for winning the flux war explicit. You reduce your current flux levels by real armor lost. I.e. take a hit that make you lose X armor, reduce your built up hard flux by Y. If no armor was lost (i.e. it was all already destroyed in that cell) then no benefit. It does mean if an Onslaught eats a Reaper, it suddenly perhaps drops it's flux level by a few thousand. You're essentially storing waste flux in the armor sections, and if it get's blown off, it takes the flux with it.
Alternatively, increase flux dissipation while shields are down is perhaps simpler to communicate, and incentives actually armor tanking more.
Some crazier ideas: Ramming bonus when impacting on the ship sprite instead of shields, and reduced or completely negated damage from ship explosions.
Actually, for unshielded ships like Ramparts, or phase ships like the afflictor, being immune to ship/station explosions would be a fairly big quality of life improvement. You could alternatively simply limit how much damage AoE effects do to armor cells in total, so that things like Reapers still make holes, but they are smaller holes.
I aim for flawless victories every time in bounty fights, and generally consider any losses to be significant failures, although typically some failure can be tolerated without the bounty becoming unprofitable.Normally I wouldn't care as much, and it would break the game for basically any regular battle, but for bounties... adding a premium for leaving derelict ships to be "recovered" might be an interesting addition (although game would have to give player an option to choose breaking ships down now or not, and maybe only pays extra later based on valid "recovery," which is to say sometimes there is loss due to poaching by pirates or indys). I almost feel like perhaps this would be better to post in the Suggestions forum, but since this kinda already came up... I'll drop it here. Maybe someone will move it. It also is partially mitigated by the fact that a player has no control over which ships are normally disabled/recoverable (as in, not recovering via SP), but seems like an interesting alternative to just always breaking stuff down. Food for thought.SpoilerRegarding bounty profitability, I kinda have a bone to pick here. Since this game is to some degree basically just the Golden Age of Piracy in space, a significant amount of monies from bounty hunting (ie, letters of marque/commissions) awards back then was predicated on bringing back prize ships fo' dat cash, but in this game, it's (understandably) different. Since the fleet limit is vanilla maxed at 30, a player has little to no incentive to recover an enemy ship (ie, one that doesn't keep SP hull mods) unless they want/need the underlying hull. I understand this is necessary as much for stabilizing gameplay (ie, player can't cheese game design with a free money generator) as it is realism (rehabilitating a vacuum proof ship vs keeping a wooden boat afloat), but when a player decides not to recover ships, is the ship truly broken down into the equivalent value of ALL commodity goods, or is it the goods minus some loss for some (metal...) and normal for others (fuel)? I guess I can always just crack open the code and look for myself, since initial bounty valuation seems primarily predicated on ship class and quality as much as fleet size for payout size calculations, but the previous statement is necessary for the following chain of thought.[close]
Alternatively, increase flux dissipation while shields are down is perhaps simpler to communicate, and incentives actually armor tanking more.
Hm. +Maneuverability is great for ships like the Onslaught or Dominator. It's very nearly worthless for frigates, though. Hm...
Would it be reasonable to add a second elite effect that, for frigates (and maybe to a lesser degree destroyers) just... increases the resolution of the armor grid? Make it more feasible for small ships to actually get some benefit from turning to take hits on different sides, rather than the armor grid being low enough resolution that hits to one side still damage armor on the other?
I mean, that... was kindof the point of the suggestion? For a player-facing description it'd be something like "reduces the spread of enemy weapon impacts on armor", so reduced impact area would be expected.Hm. +Maneuverability is great for ships like the Onslaught or Dominator. It's very nearly worthless for frigates, though. Hm...
Would it be reasonable to add a second elite effect that, for frigates (and maybe to a lesser degree destroyers) just... increases the resolution of the armor grid? Make it more feasible for small ships to actually get some benefit from turning to take hits on different sides, rather than the armor grid being low enough resolution that hits to one side still damage armor on the other?
Ah - it's not really reasonable on the backend, plus I think things have the potential to get weird if the armor grid resolution changes too much. After all, hits are spread on a fixed number of cells, so if it's enough to visibly change the impact area of a torpedo, say, I think that'd start to feel odd.
I mean, that... was kindof the point of the suggestion? For a player-facing description it'd be something like "reduces the spread of enemy weapon impacts on armor", so reduced impact area would be expected.
Hmm, gotta say that I'd be wary of the hull/armor creep that low tech seems to have going on these days (previously it was Enforcer that benefited). At some point, ships that don't die when the player shoots them (a lot) are just annoying to deal with.It reminds me of one fight in the middle of the game, against Hegemony with lots of cruisers. My Champions and Dominators were winning the fight ever so slowly, but even they simply run out of PPT. This was before the Impact Mitigation nerf, though.
Hmm, gotta say that I'd be wary of the hull/armor creep that low tech seems to have going on these days (previously it was Enforcer that benefited). At some point, ships that don't die when the player shoots them (a lot) are just annoying to deal with.How much were the substantial HP and armor buffs for Legion and Dominator?14k is the new value for the Dominator, and 18k for the Legion. The Legion's new armor is 1750; I forget what the original value was.
- Light Assault Gun: increased range to 700 (was 600)
- Light Autocannon, Light Dual Autocannon
- Increased range to 700 (was 600)
- Reduced flux/shot to 40 (was: 50)
- Arbalest Autocannon
- Increased damage to 200/shot (was: 150)
- Increased flux/shot to 150 (was: 120)
- Increased refire delay to 1.2 seconds (was: 1)
With the Light Assault Gun being much faster and having less OP cost as well similar flux DPS to the Heavy Mortar, what's going to incentivize me to use the Heavy Mortar instead of downgrading to the Light Assault Gun? The only big difference now is the damage/shot and projectile speed (which the AI would much rather prefer the Light Assault Gun)Because the LAG does basically nothing to decent armour? Hell take a single Enforcer and it would take a long time to take down with only LAGs. Damage/shot is the most important stat for HE weapons.
I wonder if part of it is once a ship's shields are down or it's overloaded, it's weapons are no longer firing being disabled, it feels more like a chore than a fight, despite perhaps taking an equal amount of time compared to a more mobile and/or shielded enemy. It's like the Monitor - next to impossible to kill, but unable to actually do any harm, and thus can be considered annoying in the opposing fleet.
Someone suggested disabled weapons still being able to fire at half rate or whatever. I think that would help a lot both for fighting tough ships and to make it suck less when your own weapons get disabled.
Engines could probably do with a similar thing - flamed out ships still having a few engines.
2) Cryoblaster: Reduced damage to 1250 (was: 1600)
I don't see the reason behind this either. Before it was a 4 OP more expensive, rare weapon that was a bit more flux efficient than the Heavy Blaster (1.25 Flux/Damage for anything that is not stripped armor versus 1.44 F/D for the HB) with the minor bonus effect of doing more damage to the enemy as their armor wore down. With the changes, it puts this well below the the HB in efficiency (1.6 vs. 1.44 for the HB) and the "effect" is too rare to happen in my mind that it would make any difference. Combine that with the fact that this is a limited amount, "you might not get any at all or only one" kind of weapon and you have something that was alright if not a bit good to get, to something that is pretty much trash in my mind.
1) Commerce: reduced base income bonus to 25% (was: 50%)
Please, PLEASE tell me that this includes a shift from it being an industry to a structure. This nerf in combination of the already severe -3 stability, all to gain access to some income and a place to sell seems way WAY too much! What was the reasoning behind this? This is already considered one of, if not the worst industries in the game due to the current stats.
In my mind, I would have it so that it was +25%, a structure and at MOST -1 stability. Something that takes up such a precious slot should not be so punishing to the player.
Better than +1 stability it originally gave, at least for the player's colonies.As for commerce, have you missed the big fat "+50% money" modifier it slaps on your colony?No, I didn't miss that, I had just assumed it was a placeholder for a better system to come later. Seems a pretty lazy bonus to tack onto an entire industry slot, no?
The main problems with Commerce today is...
1) Went from terrible (+1 stability) to must-have (+50% or more income), especially with items that boost income from Commerce more.
2) Kills stability (-3). Really hurts some core worlds (those with both Free Port and Commerce), and player cannot fix those worlds he does not own. Player needs two colony improvements to partially offset the stability tax (+2 vs. -3) from the Commerce industry tax for his worlds. Player still wants 10 stability for fleet quality and size (to hopefully avoid babysitting his colonies personally).
Someone suggested disabled weapons still being able to fire at half rate or whatever. I think that would help a lot both for fighting tough ships and to make it suck less when your own weapons get disabled.I suggested for elite IM effect that weapons and engine repairs should never stop, only maybe do so at half rate when attacked, to make it harder for weapons to go out from just fighting. EMP and damage spikes would still work.
Engines could probably do with a similar thing - flamed out ships still having a few engines.
This is already considered one of, if not the worst industries in the game due to the current stats.If anything, I've seen most often people call it the best building and sometimes even mandatory. If it was called the worst, it's probably because of how obviously good it is, so much it's too good.
2) Cryoblaster: Reduced damage to 1250 (was: 1600)
I don't see the reason behind this either. Before it was a 4 OP more expensive, rare weapon that was a bit more flux efficient than the Heavy Blaster (1.25 Flux/Damage for anything that is not stripped armor versus 1.44 F/D for the HB) with the minor bonus effect of doing more damage to the enemy as their armor wore down. With the changes, it puts this well below the the HB in efficiency (1.6 vs. 1.44 for the HB) and the "effect" is too rare to happen in my mind that it would make any difference. Combine that with the fact that this is a limited amount, "you might not get any at all or only one" kind of weapon and you have something that was alright if not a bit good to get, to something that is pretty much trash in my mind.
So I've only read about 9 pages worth of posts but I'm surprised two changes didn't get more attention.
1) Commerce: reduced base income bonus to 25% (was: 50%)
Please, PLEASE tell me that this includes a shift from it being an industry to a structure. This nerf in combination of the already severe -3 stability, all to gain access to some income and a place to sell seems way WAY too much! What was the reasoning behind this? This is already considered one of, if not the worst industries in the game due to the current stats.
In my mind, I would have it so that it was +25%, a structure and at MOST -1 stability. Something that takes up such a precious slot should not be so punishing to the player.
2) Cryoblaster: Reduced damage to 1250 (was: 1600)
I don't see the reason behind this either. Before it was a 4 OP more expensive, rare weapon that was a bit more flux efficient than the Heavy Blaster (1.25 Flux/Damage for anything that is not stripped armor versus 1.44 F/D for the HB) with the minor bonus effect of doing more damage to the enemy as their armor wore down. With the changes, it puts this well below the the HB in efficiency (1.6 vs. 1.44 for the HB) and the "effect" is too rare to happen in my mind that it would make any difference. Combine that with the fact that this is a limited amount, "you might not get any at all or only one" kind of weapon and you have something that was alright if not a bit good to get, to something that is pretty much trash in my mind.
2) Cryoblaster: Reduced damage to 1250 (was: 1600)
I don't see the reason behind this either. Before it was a 4 OP more expensive, rare weapon that was a bit more flux efficient than the Heavy Blaster (1.25 Flux/Damage for anything that is not stripped armor versus 1.44 F/D for the HB) with the minor bonus effect of doing more damage to the enemy as their armor wore down. With the changes, it puts this well below the the HB in efficiency (1.6 vs. 1.44 for the HB) and the "effect" is too rare to happen in my mind that it would make any difference. Combine that with the fact that this is a limited amount, "you might not get any at all or only one" kind of weapon and you have something that was alright if not a bit good to get, to something that is pretty much trash in my mind.
In my mind it was already the only omega weapon worth using, won't be after the nerf. Super-special limited edition endgame weapons are supposed to be gimmicky downgrades to market ones, I guess.
Minipulse? Rift Lance? Anti matter SRM? Cyroflamer? Disintegrator? Particle Driver? Cascade Beam? Rift Torpedo?There's maybe 2 good weapons there, everything else is "oh cool, this has a neat effect / visuals" and then go back to using standard weapons. I agree that Omega weapons shouldn't be brokenly good so that they're always the best choice in every scenario but come on, so much are downright detrimental to your ships unless you pilot it yourself.
Are we just ignoring those Good Omega weapons?
1) Commerce: reduced base income bonus to 25% (was: 50%)
Please, PLEASE tell me that this includes a shift from it being an industry to a structure. This nerf in combination of the already severe -3 stability, all to gain access to some income and a place to sell seems way WAY too much! What was the reasoning behind this? This is already considered one of, if not the worst industries in the game due to the current stats.
In my mind, I would have it so that it was +25%, a structure and at MOST -1 stability. Something that takes up such a precious slot should not be so punishing to the player.
So I've only read about 9 pages worth of posts but I'm surprised two changes didn't get more attention.I would not mind less income provided there are other tweaks (like less stability penalty). If not, all this means is player needs to spend SP to improve it, then look for the Dealmaker item to crank it up high. If player does not care about cells and H, the alpha core for more income.
1) Commerce: reduced base income bonus to 25% (was: 50%)
Please, PLEASE tell me that this includes a shift from it being an industry to a structure. This nerf in combination of the already severe -3 stability, all to gain access to some income and a place to sell seems way WAY too much! What was the reasoning behind this? This is already considered one of, if not the worst industries in the game due to the current stats.
In my mind, I would have it so that it was +25%, a structure and at MOST -1 stability. Something that takes up such a precious slot should not be so punishing to the player.
Minipulse? Rift Lance? Anti matter SRM? Cyroflamer? Disintegrator? Particle Driver? Cascade Beam? Rift Torpedo?Rift Lance is mediocre, inferior to Tachyon Lance except maybe at ranges where it is better to use plasma cannon. If Rift Lance cost 20-22 OP and/or was more efficient than Tachyon Lance, it would be good. As it is, it is more of a flux hog than lance and costs more OP, all for a weapon that might do a bit more damage up close. Alex mentioned he wanted a weapon that gets better at close range, but it is beyond me why he chose to put it on a tachyon lance clone - a sniper weapon!
Are we just ignoring those Good Omega weapons?
No mentions about the lack of Atropos buffs?They were okay when they did 1200 damage, but (and this is a guess) because of Daggers and Tridents that use it and Atropos being too strong for them, the damage is lower and they feel too weak. It does not help that they are short-ranged and cannot be used point-blank, which gives them an annoyingly narrow effective range for lackluster performance. I rarely use Atropos.
commerce is far an away the best industry in the game, this nerf is deservedI rather see the +100% bonus from other effects tweaked and not the base effect. +25% instead of +50% is a big deal. +125% instead of +150%? Not so much. Rather see the range tightened, not screw over those limited to the stock industry.
being able to pull from 50% to 150% extra income out of nowhere is insane and actively removes choice (by being the best 4th industry pick a solid 90% of the time) from the already incredibly boring vanilla colony gameplay loop (seriously, you just sit on a box until you suddenly have more money than god)
You're joking?! Right?! This is a typo??
- New industry skill, personal: Ordnance Expertise
- +2 flux dissipation per ordnance point spent on weapons
- Elite: +20 flux capacity per ordnance point spent on weapons
Dunno man. Hard to tell.You're joking?! Right?! This is a typo??
- New industry skill, personal: Ordnance Expertise
- +2 flux dissipation per ordnance point spent on weapons
- Elite: +20 flux capacity per ordnance point spent on weapons
Uran92 also agrees with me here... (https://youtu.be/uIFdOpVmNL4?t=375)
Unless, this doesn't affect the fleet but only the piloted ship? Its important to say which it is.
Commerce was the best industry slot for making money by a factor of 2.5 or more, but it doesn't supply any goods for reducing maintenance and has that stability penalty. I'm not sure if 25% is too harsh or not, it depends on how the item and upgrades are changed as well.It would still be worth it if you could get more stability by other means, I want a system wide stability boust by military bases, as they project major forces system wide and offer enough capacity to help with difficulties on nearby planets.
Sitting at 8 or 9 stability is pretty tolerable for a big income boost.For income alone, 8 is enough to take the occasional -3/-50% from pirates. But high stability is important for things aside from income, especially since colony size is capped for the player.
It would still be worth it if you could get more stability by other means, I want a system wide stability boust by military bases, as they project major forces system wide and offer enough capacity to help with difficulties on nearby planets.Currently, for player colonies, we have a net stability change of -1 from last release. Commerce for -3, and +2 from the two colony improvements that add +1 to stability. NPC core worlds with Commerce get shafted and may be prone to decivilization if they take further penalties to stability, like pirate activity and raids.
My 2 cents on a few raised points:Atropos is lame for brawling in part because it cannot be used point-blank - they bounce. Would be fine if they hit hard, but they are barely better than a Harpoon. Also, I may not want to use Reapers (because too slow or easy to shoot down without boosts), but I may take Hammer rack instead. I can hit one out of two and still do better than Atropos. If Atropos had more range, I might consider the homing a plus, but its range is too short to help much.
Commerce was the best industry slot for making money by a factor of 2.5 or more, but it doesn't supply any goods for reducing maintenance and has that stability penalty. I'm not sure if 25% is too harsh or not, it depends on how the item and upgrades are changed as well.
Atropos is a sidegrade to the harpoon but a useful one: it does slightly less theoretical damage per magazine (2000 vs 2250) in a shorter time and more reliably, with better tracking, slightly faster speed, higher projectile hitpoints, and better penetration value. Its main downside is being shorter ranged so you can't stack backline ships' Atropos from 2000 units away together, which is a big factor, but for brawlers its a superior missile (if you want to use missiles and not reapers).
That's harsh, man. You could have simply said that I overlooked the word "personal" in the first line.Dunno man. Hard to tell.You're joking?! Right?! This is a typo??
- New industry skill, personal: Ordnance Expertise
- +2 flux dissipation per ordnance point spent on weapons
- Elite: +20 flux capacity per ordnance point spent on weapons
Uran92 also agrees with me here... (https://youtu.be/uIFdOpVmNL4?t=375)
Unless, this doesn't affect the fleet but only the piloted ship? Its important to say which it is.
commerce is far an away the best industry in the game, this nerf is deservedI rather see the +100% bonus from other effects tweaked and not the base effect. +25% instead of +50% is a big deal. +125% instead of +150%? Not so much. Rather see the range tightened, not screw over those limited to the stock industry.
being able to pull from 50% to 150% extra income out of nowhere is insane and actively removes choice (by being the best 4th industry pick a solid 90% of the time) from the already incredibly boring vanilla colony gameplay loop (seriously, you just sit on a box until you suddenly have more money than god)
Now that's a straight up lie.
Dunno man. Hard to tell.
Hmm, I'll have another look at the Cryoblaster numbers. I do think it's a mistake to entirely dismiss the absolutely ridiculous damage it does to hull, though; the difference in TTK that makes is just about qualitative. Still!I think even like 450 flux/sec would be much better. It would give cryoblaster the same shield damage efficiency as the HB, while leaving it noticeable behind in armor DPS/efficiency and still far ahead in hull DPS.
Harpoon (Single), Sabot (Single):
Changed to (Double)
Ammo increased to 2, with a 10 second reload delay
OP cost increased to 2
Longbow Bomber retains the single-shot version
Also, just for fun (coupled with some other missile adjustments):So long, Atropos!Harpoon (Single), Sabot (Single):
Changed to (Double)
Ammo increased to 2, with a 10 second reload delay
OP cost increased to 2
Longbow Bomber retains the single-shot version
So long, Atropos!
Posted one Dealmaker nerf idea elsewhere: Instead of adding to income, the Dealmaker can remove all tariffs from the player's colony. (That way, player will not need to visit pirates next door to buy or sell stuff for the best prices.)
If a core world has it, tariffs are higher, maybe 50%. Or it does nothing?
Hmm, interesting! Will keep that in mind. On the other hand, it'd probably make you feel like you had to sell stuff at your home colony only - to get full credits and to avoid any black market consequences, even if they're relatively minor.It is more for QoL. I already take a slight detour to the nearby pirate planet (especially the -1/-10% next to my system) just to do tariff-free trade.
Now, the real question is the Hypervelocity Driver. I'm not sure I'll end up touching it for this update, but it does feel like it needs to be adjusted *somehow*, at some point.I'd suggest add an ammo count to it. Keep the current DPS for a few seconds then let it fall off under sustained fire. It will make the other choices stronger by comparison and increase the scrutiny of Expanded Magazines hullmod.
Towards IonDragon, I was being facetious.Now that's a straight up lie.Dunno man. Hard to tell.
(I feel like maybe you mean these in a kind of jokey/bantering sort of way, but if that's the case, at least IMO - it's the internet, and it doesn't come across very well.)
Posted one Dealmaker nerf idea elsewhere: Instead of adding to income, the Dealmaker can remove all tariffs from the player's colony. (That way, player will not need to visit pirates next door to buy or sell stuff for the best prices.)As far as I am concerned, Commerce-as-industry exists only to boost the income. If it does not perform any income-boosting function, it is not worth the industry slot and a place in my colony, like in 0.9.1. If dealmaker nerf will result in Commerce having fewer drawbacks, then it's acceptable. Otherwise, if commerce's +25% income (I don't use SPs on colonies) is less of an income increase than what a regular industry would do, it has no place in my colonies.
If a core world has it, tariffs are higher, maybe 50%. Or it does nothing?
Towards IonDragon, I was being facetious.
As for harpoons and reapers and Remnants, I felt significantly negatively with how most missiles that weren't sabots were useless at best, harmful-if-taken (in the sense they took OP that could have been spent on something else had any impact) at best and it does show. I shouldn't have called you a liar, and I did not think that perhaps in-dev changes (most significantly, Shield Modulation losing HE resistance) made it different for you, but in the version I get to play, yeah you just don't take anything but sabots in smalls and mediums, and hurricanes and hammer barrages in larges (if you can support them with sabots, of course) and you can see it does not make me happy.
I did, actually, edit my game files to the new Cryoblaster damage - without changing its flux cost - and it seems to be at least mostly fine?
Usable, definitely. Optimal... Maybe not? I'll admit to primarily using it on Tempests, which will be losing HEF next patch... but even on non-HEF ships it performed acceptably.
I think the Atropos was originally intended to be between the Harpoon and Reaper (wasn't it 2000 damage?) but 2000 damage Atropos on Daggers/Tridents would be insane. I'd prefer ship-mounted Atropos be 2000 damage and Fighter-mounted Atropos stay as-is but the game would have to tell you that somehow and that's more effort than it's worth. However, at the end of the day, we're talking about a missile system confined to Small Mounts. It's a blip on the balance radar, all things considered. If there were Medium Atropos pods or Hurricanes fired Atropos at the split, maybe it'd be worth debating but as it is, it's no big deal to me.The fast 2k damage Atropos from 0.7.2 was the best Atropos (even at 3 and 6 OP), and one of the few that did not need old Missile Specialization 10 to be good, and that old overpowered version of Missile Specialization 10 has been gone for a long time.
I'd suggest add an ammo count to it. Keep the current DPS for a few seconds then let it fall off under sustained fire. It will make the other choices stronger by comparison and increase the scrutiny of Expanded Magazines hullmod.
Keep in mind that due to Cryoblaster's particular damage profile, even with no direct nerfs in 0.951 it'd still be losing 40% off of most of its hull damage against Al-core Remnants with Elite Damage Control ("hull damage over 500 points in a single hit has the portion above 500 reduced by 40%"), so Cryoblasters might become relegated to taking out non-Remnant trash such as human faction fleets.
Elite damage control doesn't seem that bad for cryoblaster. Still double the DPS of heavy blaster into hull even in the worst case. It has the same efficiency as the HB into shields so I think it's pretty much a wash there, I wouldn't say the HB or cryoblaster are really going to be effective against remnant shields. I want to test it, but I think 1600->1400 will be pretty reasonable.
Is HVD really a problem? I understand it's a comfortable pick on most setups and safe for AI but I really don't think it outshines other options. It takes a long time to do meaningful damage to shields compared to any other kinetic gun. I mean the Mauler changes might make it even more feasible but if it gets nerfed what are we supposed to use at long range? The primary reason I use HVDs is because of AI, not because it's overperforming or something.
Why does anyone think HVD should be nerfed? ??? I have never seen a super-strong build that spams HVDs.I only use them on four lance Paragon, which is not good enough against Radiants. Against Ordos, DPS of HVDs are too low, and I use heavy needlers instead. And since Ordos-and-Radiant killing is the bar to aim for, loadouts that do not work well against them get phased out in the end.
Why does anyone think HVD should be nerfed? ??? I have never seen a super-strong build that spams HVDs.Well I would have spammed them on some ships but they are OP expensive.
I use HVD on Ventures, as the need to stay out of reach, but it just feels too weak to be on any useful frontline ship.Venture does not seem like endgame material. Venture feels like entry-level cruiser for the early-game.
sadly there is no reliable strong medium anti armor option for either Energy or Ballistics with a range of 700 to 800.
I think the Atropos was originally intended to be between the Harpoon and Reaper (wasn't it 2000 damage?) but 2000 damage Atropos on Daggers/Tridents would be insane. I'd prefer ship-mounted Atropos be 2000 damage and Fighter-mounted Atropos stay as-is but the game would have to tell you that somehow and that's more effort than it's worth. However, at the end of the day, we're talking about a missile system confined to Small Mounts. It's a blip on the balance radar, all things considered. If there were Medium Atropos pods or Hurricanes fired Atropos at the split, maybe it'd be worth debating but as it is, it's no big deal to me.
Huh didn't expect those missile changes. Seems cool but it's kinda funny to me that there now exists two versions of the same missile, with one having a literal one missile more, I understand why for gameplay reasons and bonuses but still.
Glad for Atropos changes, still sad there's not a medium version that fires two at once. There's so many options for small slots, but then you get to larger options and you only have Reapers as torpedoes.
I felt the same way about the mauler though, so there's obviously some major disconnect on the topic of long range ballistics here.
I'm generally not a fan of "same thing but bigger" weapons - or, at least, that's not the first place I want to go. I mean, it's hard to avoid to a certain extent, especially for certain weapon types that are pretty core to the game - the autocannon line comes to mind here.Oh yeah I'm well aware of that, we're pretty much on the same page. I'd take a new unique weapon over double barrelled anything, any day. Atropos just came to mind because I barely ever use it on ships which is a shame because it looks cool, hopefully I'll start using them more with the new changes.
High ammo low ROF medium HE missile sounds really nice tbh. HE Missiles right now are all insta delete one or two ships and then do nothing for the rest of combat type weapons.Breach sort of does this, but it is not very useful because of its weaknesses. They seem like beefier and more sluggish Swarmers, but they last longer.
suddenly noticed a bug in 0.95:
picking skills for admin in OfficerManagerEvent.createAdmin() doesn't check skills' "player_only" tag, will it be fixed in 0.951?
The lack of Energy missiles in the game is...disturbing. Just sayin' :P You really could go wild with them: disablers, slow-moving death balls, chain-effects...the sky is the limit. Even more traditional Energy missiles pose an interesting dilemma: a 2000 damage Energy missile is a moderate hit against both shields and hull but if it also was an Ion hit, I really don't want to get disabled! At least something like that would give the Sabot some competition: depending on ammo, OP, etc.
Any chance the player won't be able to personally govern colonies?
Or piggybacking colony-related benefits onto non-colony skills?
Any chance the player won't be able to personally govern colonies?
Or piggybacking colony-related benefits onto non-colony skills?
wat? Why would you want this?
I wonder if part of it is once a ship's shields are down or it's overloaded, it's weapons are no longer firing being disabled, it feels more like a chore than a fight, despite perhaps taking an equal amount of time compared to a more mobile and/or shielded enemy. It's like the Monitor - next to impossible to kill, but unable to actually do any harm, and thus can be considered annoying in the opposing fleet.
Someone suggested disabled weapons still being able to fire at half rate or whatever. I think that would help a lot both for fighting tough ships and to make it suck less when your own weapons get disabled.
Engines could probably do with a similar thing - flamed out ships still having a few engines.
The lack of Energy missiles in the game is...disturbing. Just sayin' :P You really could go wild with them: disablers, slow-moving death balls, chain-effects...the sky is the limit. Even more traditional Energy missiles pose an interesting dilemma: a 2000 damage Energy missile is a moderate hit against both shields and hull but if it also was an Ion hit, I really don't want to get disabled! At least something like that would give the Sabot some competition: depending on ammo, OP, etc.
In my experience from playing with mods torpedoes with an energy damage type are very difficult from a balance perspective because large shot size energy has no weaknesses, and torpedoes are by nature very large impacts. Something like a 2000 damage energy missile will strip the armor of cruisers in a single shot: the only effective defense against them is shields, no ship in the game wants to take that kind of hit to armor! But they do double the damage the damage vs shields than an HE torpedo does, so blocking them with shields is half as effective.
The lack of Energy missiles in the game is...disturbing. Just sayin' :P You really could go wild with them: disablers, slow-moving death balls, chain-effects...the sky is the limit. Even more traditional Energy missiles pose an interesting dilemma: a 2000 damage Energy missile is a moderate hit against both shields and hull but if it also was an Ion hit, I really don't want to get disabled! At least something like that would give the Sabot some competition: depending on ammo, OP, etc.
In my experience from playing with mods torpedoes with an energy damage type are very difficult from a balance perspective because large shot size energy has no weaknesses, and torpedoes are by nature very large impacts. Something like a 2000 damage energy missile will strip the armor of cruisers in a single shot: the only effective defense against them is shields, no ship in the game wants to take that kind of hit to armor! But they do double the damage the damage vs shields than an HE torpedo does, so blocking them with shields is half as effective.
My 2 cents on a few raised points:My guess, too harsh on its own without upgrades, but not harsh enough after it is thrice upgraded with SP, Dealmaker, and Alpha Core.
Commerce was the best industry slot for making money by a factor of 2.5 or more, but it doesn't supply any goods for reducing maintenance and has that stability penalty. I'm not sure if 25% is too harsh or not, it depends on how the item and upgrades are changed as well.
All true. But a hypothetical 2000 damage energy torpedo is half as powerful as a Reaper against armor and twice as good against shields, and we deal with Reapers all the time. The balancing levers you pull are ammo, OP cost, delivery methods, ease to shoot down, etc. The damage itself isn’t the only factor to consider. Honestly, if you do take a hit on hull, this torpedo does less damage than any other finisher except a Harpoon. So, even when it does hit, you’re not getting the same “oomph” as the others. The trade off is that the shield hit might cause an overload.
As long as the other balance levers are in place, an energy torpedo (to me) is no better or worse than an HE one: it has its own pros and cons.
All the changes are interesting and can't wait to try it out. Is there a chance that the update will be released before the new year?I mean there's a chance but that's not really saying anything. If it's any consolation this should be the majority of patch notes, and since Alex has entered the playtesting phase, it should be pretty Soon™-ish. I'd say there's a 80% chance of the release happening this year.
Added slipstreams to hyperspace
New slipstream systems form in hyperspace twice per cycle
Can drastically speed up travel and cut fuel use
Loosely follow certain patterns that can be figured out
Will slipstreams affect colony accessibility? I mean, if you get favorable slipstreams it seems like our accessibility bonus for "proximity to other colonies" should go up, and if the slipstreams are useless the bonus/penalty should remain as is now.
Thoughts?
Will slipstreams affect colony accessibility? I mean, if you get favorable slipstreams it seems like our accessibility bonus for "proximity to other colonies" should go up, and if the slipstreams are useless the bonus/penalty should remain as is now.
In-universe, maybe explain it as traders being skittish about using slipstreams because they're frequently used by pirates to set ambushes, something the player might have personal experience with at that point?Will slipstreams affect colony accessibility? I mean, if you get favorable slipstreams it seems like our accessibility bonus for "proximity to other colonies" should go up, and if the slipstreams are useless the bonus/penalty should remain as is now.
They won't! They're too transient and I think that'd just amount to a random, unpredictable-feeling boost that complicates things without a good reason for it.
Removed Colony Mangement, Space Operations, Planetary Operations
All the changes are interesting and can't wait to try it out. Is there a chance that the update will be released before the new year?I mean there's a chance but that's not really saying anything. If it's any consolation this should be the majority of patch notes, and since Alex has entered the playtesting phase, it should be pretty Soon™-ish. I'd say there's a 80% chance of the release happening this year.
- Point Defense:
- Reduced bonus damage to fighters to +50% (was: 100%)
- Elite effect: increased PD range bonus to 200 (was: 100)
- Hybrid (and other multi-type) weapons can now also be placed in a one-size-larger slot of their type like other weapons
- For example, a small hybrid weapon can be placed in a medium hybrid slot (but not in a medium energy slot)
- High Scatter Amplifier:
- Added 10% damage bonus
- Now reduces base beam range to 500/600/700 on frigates/destroyers/larger ships
- (Previously: reduced range by half)
Ship AI:
- Fixed issues with Hyperion's phase teleporter AI that:
- Could cause it to teleport to unsafe locations
- Could cause it to teleport away from danger too conservatively
- Point Defense:
- Reduced bonus damage to fighters to +50% (was: 100%)
- Elite effect: increased PD range bonus to 200 (was: 100)
Hmm does this affect the base range of PD weapons (i.e. thus affected by ITU etc.)?
- High Scatter Amplifier:
- Added 10% damage bonus
- Now reduces base beam range to 500/600/700 on frigates/destroyers/larger ships
- (Previously: reduced range by half)
Similar question here as the PD one: Does this also affect Advanced Optics?
I swear every time I read these changelogs, it's such a difference from other development group. I read a line and think "Yup, that's an improvement that makes sense".
So many low hanging fruit are ignored by many game companies, it's really great that Alex seems capable of actually understanding the game he create, and how it feels to play it.
Just feels really good to see something like that.
Hmm does this affect the base range of PD weapons (i.e. thus affected by ITU etc.)? Thinking this means Devastator would have a base range of 1100 and Heavy Machine Gun would have a base range of 650 (almost that of Heavy Needler), plus the light (dual) machine guns would have their base range increased to 500, which makes them almost useful as just regular weapons in their own right (albeit still short-ranged)...spicy.
Just wanted to note, small hybrids (like the minipulser) can already be placed into medium energy slots, and same with medium hybrids (like cryoblaster) into large energy slots. They can't be placed into ballistic slots of a larger size though. Not sure if that was intentional or not (though they say they count as energy in terms of stat modifiers).
Generally what the player would like the AI to do (at least for front-line ships) is if it's at low flux, it should run in and fight, while if it's at high flux, it should back off and vent. But when a ship gets into trouble i.e. at high flux, I'll often see nearby ships at low flux continue to hang back. That's very much undesirable behavior.
There seems to be something in the AI's "fight or flight" decision-making that says if it's close to an enemy ship, it'll rush in to get even closer (such as a Fury doing plasma burn to go nose-to-nose even though it's already in range of its shortest-ranged weapon), but if it's far enough away, it'll just hang back even at low flux -- even though other ships near it are rushing in. So I end up with ships basically nose-to-nose at high flux in the front, while ships in the back will be at low flux but make no move to head in and fight; the forward ships commit "too much" while the rearward ships commit "not enough".
I don't know if it's missiles or something else that cause this sort of behavior. It's basically unreproducible, but it happens fairly frequently -- I can give plenty of screenshots of it happening, but it's hard to tell when it's going to happen in advance to document it to diagnose what went wrong with the AI.
Something else that is fairly reproducible though is that apparently, if an Odyssey has the plasma cannon equipped, it'll be less likely to go in and fight, and prefer to just stay away. Again, this is opposite of desirable behavior (a ship with more weapons should be more willing to fight, not less). I'm not sure if it's a quirk with broadside behavior, or if it has something to do with the AI script you fixed up (about large ships not chasing after small ships). But this is pretty repeatable.
I posted a video of this behavior here:
What you can see is that if the Odyssey has a plasma cannon, it'll stay away. But if I remove the plasma cannon, making no other changes (leaving the weapon slot empty and the 30 OP unused), it'll go in and fight. This is with reckless officers, under full assault, so they are supposed to be as aggressive as possible.
An example of the "closer ships rush in to fight, farther ships stay away" AI behavior can be found here:
I can send you a save file if it'll help you see what's going on, although the videos show the complete fleet setup. Hope the AI can be improved to not have these sorts of issues.
Looking very forward to playing the next patch and thanks a lot.
-Ships' fighter bay(s) with built-in wings but removed by converted fighter bay still count towards number-based skills
-objects(supply cages, probes, etc) occasionally spawn at center of stars
-objects(primarily pirate and pather bases) spawn in orbit of one star in a binary/trinary system can "fall into" the other star
After a few investigation further into it I realized it was a mod compatibility problem and didn't exists in vanilla plz forgive me and just forget it.-Ships' fighter bay(s) with built-in wings but removed by converted fighter bay still count towards number-based skills
Are you sure? I don't remember this being an issue, and testing this just now it seems to work fine - I put that hullmod on a Tempest and its bays are then not counted.
Not quite, I believe it's that the object had an orbit intersecting with other stars. I think preventing the station spawning at the orbit of ONE OF the stars of a binary/trinary system (with 2 or more stars at center) and only allow it to spawn farther away orbiting the center of mass can eliminate the problem and also prevent it being in between the stars which can be very hard to reach. ps. [REDECATED]-objects(primarily pirate and pather bases) spawn in orbit of one star in a binary/trinary system can "fall into" the other star
Hmm, haven't seen this one - unless it's a sub-case of the previous one, in which case I *have* seen it and it's not fixed.
After a few investigation further into it I realized it was a mod compatibility problem and didn't exists in vanilla plz forgive me and just forget it.
Not quite, I believe it's that the object had an orbit intersecting with other stars. I think preventing the station spawning at the orbit of ONE OF the stars of a binary/trinary system (with 2 or more stars at center) and only allow it to spawn farther away orbiting the center of mass can eliminate the problem and also prevent it being in between the stars which can be very hard to reach. ps. [REDECATED]can also have a similar problemSpoilerRemnant stations and Hyper Shut[close]
Almost certainly not - I believe nothing modifies base range unless it says so explicitly, and so far the only examples are Ballistic Rangefinder and new-HSA. I believe Elite Point Defense is more like "Advanced Optics for PD", where it's a flat bonus added after multiplicative bonuses to base range.
Unless something explicitly says "base range" it does not affect the base range.
Unassigning skills that boosted officer level/elite skills will result in either the officer becoming a mercenary on a new contract, or losing excess skills
I should say, though, before going further: in the videos you've posted, the AI behavior, specifically for the Odysseys, looks strange. Maybe it's something broadside-ship specific, though I haven't seen anything even similar to what you're observing. It's possible that a mod you're using is factoring in somehow, too. The Odyssey hanging back due to a plasma cannon being installed doesn't make any sense, and I'm not seeing it on my end, hmm.
I haven't looked at every post here, but I wanted to know what happens if you hit an enemy fleet(thats entering) in the slipstream, or you hit one while going out.Yes.
Or is it unlikely? I dont wanna hit a massive fleet by accident xD
Can they even use it?
I did always feel like Falcon (P) was one of the better cruiser hulls but 33% increase is pretty harsh...
Are Falcon(P)s even impressive as AI ships for campaign use? I mean, as player ships - sure, for tournaments against equal DP - sure. But against overwhelming numbers we have to fight in campaign? - I don't see how.
Nitpick: Support Doctrine not listed in the changelog.
Also Alex, how do you feel about far more colony bonuses from (primarily non-colony) skills but most of the bonuses dropping off with increasing Colony Size/number of Colonies?
Doesn't the +5 DP for the Falcon (P) mean they are 33% stronger in auto-resolve battle?Considering that DP doesn't get used in autoresolve, no.
Doesn't the +5 DP for the Falcon (P) mean they are 33% stronger in auto-resolve battle?Considering that DP doesn't get used in autoresolve, no.
Even 20 DP is a bargain for how many Sabots you can pack into a Falcon (P) using EMR and Missile Spec, and Sabot spam is one of the most DP-efficient tactics vs [REDACTED] given how strong Sabots currently are.
Even 20 DP is a bargain for how many Sabots you can pack into a Falcon (P) using EMR and Missile Spec, and Sabot spam is one of the most DP-efficient tactics vs [REDACTED] given how strong Sabots currently are.
That sounds more like a reason to nerf sabots than to nerf Falcon (P).
Towards IonDragon, I was being facetious.Now that's a straight up lie.Dunno man. Hard to tell.
(I feel like maybe you mean these in a kind of jokey/bantering sort of way, but if that's the case, at least IMO - it's the internet, and it doesn't come across very well.)
As for harpoons and reapers and Remnants, I felt significantly negatively with how most missiles that weren't sabots were useless at best, harmful-if-taken (in the sense they took OP that could have been spent on something else had any impact) at best and it does show. I shouldn't have called you a liar, and I did not think that perhaps in-dev changes (most significantly, Shield Modulation losing HE resistance) made it different for you, but in the version I get to play, yeah you just don't take anything but sabots in smalls and mediums, and hurricanes and hammer barrages in larges (if you can support them with sabots, of course) and you can see it does not make me happy.Posted one Dealmaker nerf idea elsewhere: Instead of adding to income, the Dealmaker can remove all tariffs from the player's colony. (That way, player will not need to visit pirates next door to buy or sell stuff for the best prices.)As far as I am concerned, Commerce-as-industry exists only to boost the income. If it does not perform any income-boosting function, it is not worth the industry slot and a place in my colony, like in 0.9.1. If dealmaker nerf will result in Commerce having fewer drawbacks, then it's acceptable. Otherwise, if commerce's +25% income (I don't use SPs on colonies) is less of an income increase than what a regular industry would do, it has no place in my colonies.
If a core world has it, tariffs are higher, maybe 50%. Or it does nothing?
So what's the plan with the colony system? Nerf it to the point that it's no longer worth the hefty financial investment? Why completely remove the colony skills? We can't just ad a new skill tree that's all about colonies?Colonies are only big money makers late. Early on, they are money pits. The base 50% is not a big deal given the -3 stability. Commerce gets crazy after player boosts it with SP and items. Rather see the boosters nerfed (like SP improvement and alpha core improving stability instead of income, and dealmaker removing tariffs) instead of the core industry nerfed, unless the -3 stability penalty is nerfed too. Probably a good idea to tone down the stability penalty anyway for the sake of NPC core worlds that cannot absorb stability penalties from pirates and raids without decivilizing. If Commerce adds less income, then the stability should be less, like -1.
Seriously, it already takes a ton of cash to invest and grow a colony... which already takes forever to grow.... and we get all sorts of caps to what we can build... so why the nerf to commerce and removal of skills? How does nerfing one building make any of the others more viable?
Well, that's not all (Atropi buffs would also be good) but it would be pretty nice. :PAlex buffed them by making them cost less OP. Also, single Harpoons will cost more since they carry two missiles instead of one (and get long reload delay).
So what's the plan with the colony system? Nerf it to the point that it's no longer worth the hefty financial investment? Why completely remove the colony skills? We can't just ad a new skill tree that's all about colonies?Colonies are only big money makers late. Early on, they are money pits. The base 50% is not a big deal given the -3 stability. Commerce gets crazy after player boosts it with SP and items. Rather see the boosters nerfed (like SP improvement and alpha core improving stability instead of income, and dealmaker removing tariffs) instead of the core industry nerfed, unless the -3 stability penalty is nerfed too. Probably a good idea to tone down the stability penalty anyway for the sake of NPC core worlds that cannot absorb stability penalties from pirates and raids without decivilizing. If Commerce adds less income, then the stability should be less, like -1.
Seriously, it already takes a ton of cash to invest and grow a colony... which already takes forever to grow.... and we get all sorts of caps to what we can build... so why the nerf to commerce and removal of skills? How does nerfing one building make any of the others more viable?
Also, the admin cap will be raised from two to three, so player will get half of Colony Management for free.Well, that's not all (Atropi buffs would also be good) but it would be pretty nice. :PAlex buffed them by making them cost less OP. Also, single Harpoons will cost more since they carry two missiles instead of one (and get long reload delay).
Apologies if this has been asked before or if it's a dumb question, but isn't the 80% nerf to raiding overtuned? I've mostly raided just for supplies and fuel, to keep my fleet going without having to deal with markets, and while it was good if carried out in the right worlds, this feels like an extreme measure because of one specific scenario, a feedback loop. It feels more like a problem of this particular interaction than with the fantasy and base gameplay of raiding.
Thematically, raiding should give some measure of reward even if the raided commodity's not in excess. Otherwise, you wouldn't see pirates raiding in and around systems except for very specific planets (those with an excess of supplies and/or fuel). Not only that, but it adds another layer of logistics to the problem. Now when you want to raid, you not only need to check if the planet produces the commodity you desire and if it's a viable raid target (as in, it has defenses you can penetrate), but now you also need to make sure it's in excess (and that it remains in excess by the time you reach the system, or you've been burning fuel pointlessly). While before you could resupply anywhere and mostly raid anywhere for supplies/fuel, now you might need to ping-pong across the entire core-worlds for a haul you could possibly get off a singular planet.
Anyway, sorry for the rant and any gramatical mistakes. What are your thoughts on this? Just lifting some concerns, based on what it might hypothetically end up looking like. If it ends up becoming too punishing or otherwise too much of a chore to be worth the trouble, raiding commodities is a cool mechanic that could end up going unused. Except for blueprints or industry items, but that's not the mechanic being changed.
That's not entirely accurate - they double nerfed it by removing all skills. AND then doubled down by removing skills on the administrators.You pay a salary to an admin to hold the planet at all beyond the two you can rule yourself, unless you use alpha cores as admins. Without admins, you can only hold two planets, which is likely not enough to produce all resources yourself.
Why would I bother with paying a salary when they literally don't buff my colonies at all?
Im sorry, but this move is an extremely one dimensional solution - there are those of use who don't want to spend weeks getting the resources to set up planets. By the time I have them up and running, my fleets are expensive. By killing the income, they're killing the incentive for the late game. The point is that planets are supposed to make this easier once developed - it shouldn't be a pointless grindfest for mediocre results.
So essentially you're forced to play the markets now for money so you HAVE to be a trader and switch out fleets for cargo carrying.
Hey @Alex, can you buff omishield conversion? I find I never use it with vanilla or modded ships, probably because front shield is usually not worth changing, because of the shield angle shrinking when you install the hullmod. Maybe give it some other benefit, or remove the downsides of it?
Apologies if this has been asked before or if it's a dumb question, but isn't the 80% nerf to raiding overtuned? I've mostly raided just for supplies and fuel, to keep my fleet going without having to deal with markets, and while it was good if carried out in the right worlds, this feels like an extreme measure because of one specific scenario: a feedback loop. It feels more like a problem of this particular interaction than with the fantasy and base gameplay of raiding.
Thematically, raiding should give some measure of reward even if the raided commodity's not in excess. Otherwise, you wouldn't see pirates raiding in and around systems except for very specific planets (those with an excess of supplies and/or fuel). Not only that, but it adds another layer of logistics to the problem. Now when you want to raid, you not only need to check if the planet produces the commodity you desire and if it's a viable raid target (as in, it has defenses you can penetrate), but now you also need to make sure it's in excess (and that it remains in excess by the time you reach the system, or you've been burning fuel pointlessly). While before you could resupply anywhere and mostly raid anywhere for supplies/fuel, now you might need to ping-pong across the entire core-worlds for a haul you could possibly get off a singular planet.
Anyway, sorry for the rant and any grammatical mistakes. What are your thoughts on this? Just lifting some concerns, based on what it might hypothetically end up looking like. If it ends up becoming too punishing or otherwise too much of a chore to be worth the trouble, raiding is a cool feature that could end up going unused. Except for blueprints or industry items, but that's not the mechanic being changed.
quick bug report:
If 2 Galatia missions both involve an option to launch a raid to acquire the objective (artifact, prisoned researcher, etc) happened to point towards the same planet, it is possible that when you try to raid for the 2nd objective after raiding for the 1st already, in the raid panel the 1st objective is still there. I didn't try if I raid for the 1st again but I'm pretty sure something worse than being wrong could happen.
Thank you - this is actually fixed for the next release! It's the "Fixed issue where multiple custom raid objectives would show up when only one of them should have given the context" item in the patch notes.
Light-years map legend no longer shown in star system map view, only in hyperspace
I just realized that the hyperspace terrain tooltip claiming about legend had wrongly labeled 1 grid = 1 light-year which is the case in system view, in hyperspace view one "big" grid is no longer further segmented into 9 smaller grids and one "grid" should equals to 3 light-years. Although the vanilla auto-pilot clearly labels the distance to target but I believe people would like to calculate distances to estimate their supply and fuel costs exploring multiple outer systems in series.
Also a few thoughts about the skill system remake, first of all there is no better word than "stunningly awesome" I could think about to describe the new mechanism. I believe the "Industry" could be renamed as "Engineering" as it will no longer have much to do with "Large scale industrial planning and production" but fairly amount about "Repair and maintenance skills practical applications and field creative solutions", also a few re-location of skills between "Technology" and "Industry" can be made as I believe Tech leans more to "Theocratical" and Indus can be more "Practical". For example moving "Automated ships" to Indus as more practical applications nowhere to find in any manual are applied to "tame" a rouge ai ship (and also solve the "neural link - auto ship" problem mentioned in blog as a side-effect).
Hmm - it's definitely 1 light year per smaller cell side. The bigger 3x3 cells are 3 light-years a side.
Glad you're into the skill changes overall, though, thank you!
Sorry I didn't make it clear, I was trying to say that the hyperspace map did not segment the bigger "should be 3x3"cell like how it did in "in system" map and just look like "a" cell and can cause confusions.
I would wager that the nature of Sabots providing extremely easy overloads (or, while not particularly relevant in this instance, shutting down the entirety of a ship's weaponry and easily winning the flux war) compared to needing a sustained combination of various weapons does make this fight significantly harder than without them.
Hmm. I wonder if maybe halving the EMP damage on the Sabots would put them in a better place, then. I still think they need to have an effect when armor-tanked, but the specific numbers on it, on the other hand...
And, hm, just making the AI better about armor-tanking Sabots could make a big difference here, though that's tricky.
colony wishlist:
adminstartor cap -> soft cap any further admin gets 5 times the payment or something like this.
military base give system wide stability bonus
upgrade for way station to stockpile resources
item for aquaculture similar to the one for farming + adds lobster.
colony wishlist:These are great suggestions. Would support.
adminstartor cap -> soft cap any further admin gets 5 times the payment or something like this.
military base give system wide stability bonus
upgrade for way station to stockpile resources
item for aquaculture similar to the one for farming + adds lobster.
For high tech ships, especially ships like Aurora and Fury with multiple medium missiles, Sabot pods in 0.95a provide much more sustained shield breaking than in 0.91 due to increased max ammo per pod from 24 (+100%) to 36 (+200%), especially since it's even easier to reach now with build-in s-mod and officer skills without being forced to spend a huge pile of OP. In fact, currently many (most?) builds w/ Sabot pods no longer need to allocate other resources against shields. Rather than reducing the Sabot's impactfulness via reducing EMP damage, perhaps it makes more sense to return the sustainability of Sabot pods back closer to the 0.91 value of 24 max per pod. Either:What other resources against shields? Without heavy mounts, there are no other good options! They get stuck with energy weapons that are not very efficient compared to ballistics. If they use blasters, they are inefficient. If they use pulse lasers, they cannot hit-and-run and need time to drill armor, and they are probably need Energy Mastery to be efficient enough (which prevents getting Gunnery Implants, which is good for everyone.)
Sabots are the only kinetic missile in both small and medium mounts, they're always going to be an easy choice on high tech ships. You can nerf them as much as you like and people will continue to spam them, up until the point when they get so nerfed they'll never be worth using. It's a nightmare of a weapon to balance properly purely because there's no alternative. Kinetic burst damages that costs no flux will be crazy good in all scenarios, that's just the nature of the game.And the second iteration with wide spread and AI always dropping shields to eat no more than half of the spread was a "so nerfed" moment.
I do have a question about core worlds. I may have missed it in the thread, but are NPC administrators losing access to ground operations and space operations as well as the player? If so, are core worlds being modified to take into account a loss of up to 30% accessibility and -2 stability? That strikes me as a pretty big hit for a number of worlds which typically are on the edge of just enough accessibility and/or stability with administrators.
Take Culann for instance. In a brand new game, it sits at 86% accessibility (hostile with Hegemony, Church, Pathers, and Pirates does that). If I edit the administrator to only have Industrial planning, the planet starts the game in shortage of supplies and ship hulls (due to it's military base), and surplus of metals, crew, and marines. Given Culann is essentially the Tri-tach manufacturing world, it seems a bit odd for it's default state being insufficient access.
item for aquaculture similar to the one for farming + adds lobster.
(The other stuff: thoughts noted! Definitely too late in the release cycle to want to be messing with anything like this now, though.)
Make sure you all cancel your important meetings and travels for the next too weeks, 'cause you can't afford to miss the first shuttle to .1 release!
Culann is actually fine - its admin, which is *totally* not a front for an Alpha Core, has the new Hypercognition skill. I haven't noticed any other problems, though it's possible I might have missed something. Happy to double-check anything else specific!
colony wishlist:
adminstartor cap -> soft cap any further admin gets 5 times the payment or something like this.
military base give system wide stability bonus
upgrade for way station to stockpile resources
item for aquaculture similar to the one for farming + adds lobster.
Colonies are only big money makers late. Early on, they are money pits.But that's not true. All a colony needs to turn a profit is a handful of resources and a mining industry. Everything else is a bigger investment with a longer period of debt for a bigger payoff, which is perfectly fine. You don't NEED a level 3 alpha core starbase, marines and 600% nanoforge fleets to start colonizing.
Paying for fleet upkeep IS a profit, when the alternative is having no passive income at all. Setting up a starter colony is incredibly easy as well, the most difficult part is getting enough colonists in one spot at the same time. That obstacle can be cheesed a bit by taking multiple trips and freeze drying colonists in orbit, and maybe there are other tricks I don't know about.
Covering the cost of fleet upkeep IS a profit, when the alternative is having no passive income at all. Setting up a starter colony is incredibly easy as well, the most difficult part is getting enough colonists in one spot at the same time. That obstacle can be cheesed a bit by taking multiple trips and freeze drying colonists in orbit, and maybe there are other tricks I don't know about. The colony can definitely be set up before getting a single capital ship, or even having enough money for one, and it certainly takes some pressure off by covering the costs of one.Not when compared to pre-colony releases when personnel and officers did not drain income per month.
If the colony is making net money over its own upkeep, it is not a money pit. Your fleet is the money pit, and the colony is helping to mitigate that.
Colonies only become money pits when you are paying hazard pay and also trying to build/upgrade lots of industries at the same time. You can play things more slowly to avoid that, but it will take a lot longer.
If the colony is making net money over its own upkeep, it is not a money pit. Your fleet is the money pit, and the colony is helping to mitigate that.There is the initial cost of building up a colony. Colonies are a money pit in that it costs nearly or about as much as a capital to build a structure or industry. With up to about 100k income per month (from small early colonies), it would take years to pay off the costs of building up one colony with several structures with colony income alone. Colony takes millions of credits to build.
Colonies only become money pits when you are paying hazard pay and also trying to build/upgrade lots of industries at the same time. You can play things more slowly to avoid that, but it will take a lot longer.
Small mining colonies only pay for themselves in reasonable time if you don't grow them. It's a pick your poison situation - either you lose money for a long, long time; or your colony never grows and its meagre income becomes meaningless compared to your fleet expenses.
Making millions eventually is exactly the problem. Colonies are a net loss of money early, when money matter the most, and only start giving profits when the game is already over because you have nothing else to do. The investment is too long term. It's like pouring all your money into stocks that will only start paying off when you are 80.
Small mining colonies only pay for themselves in reasonable time if you don't grow them. It's a pick your poison situation - either you lose money for a long, long time; or your colony never grows and its meagre income becomes meaningless compared to your fleet expenses.In my experience, pretty much every colony will make it to at least size 4 without hazard pay, and I think low-hazard habitable worlds will usually be able to make it to size 5 or 6 (albeit very slowly). Of course you will likely to want to spend money to speed up the process at some point, but I don't think it's at all required early on. You can definitely ride some passive income from a nice Terran world with farming through midgame and then turn on hazard pay later on when you're ready to scale up/invest. You certainly wouldn't end up behind where you would be if you waited to colonize until you were ready to invest IMO.
There's no point in balancing income in a way that makes colonies useful only if you "max" them out, it's tedious.That is my skepticism of the Commerce nerf. It does nothing to the items that raise it to ridiculous levels. I suspect Commerce will not be worth it unless player scores a Dealmaker.
This is just another example of people crying too much about something, then nerf batting that part when it's just the vocal minority that happened to get lucky. Yes I saw your 500k income colony with 10 Alpha cores, all colony skills and exploration items, very nice. But now we all suffer.
Weird how different people seem to have wildly different experiences with the current colony system...Heavy industry is the only (non-defense) industry that does anything more than making money, and commerce as the third industry with any boost (cores, items, story points) already makes more than any other industries. If you don't care about money, then I guess you just spam heavy industries? Nothing else would do anything.
For me, for example, Commerce is already not worth it - it's literally the last industry I build, and only if there's nothing more important and the colony can afford the stability hit.
Then again, I'm not looking at colonies as a primary cash supply - which, I mean, they do supply some if you haven't messed things up too much, and that's useful, but the primary purpose for colonies for me is to keep my stuff, and to allow production of things I've got the blueprints for. Income is a nice bonus, but not a priority.
@Hiruma Kai
Early-game colonies (what are we defining as "early?") would only work if they funneled combat to the player and generated income. I would love for starter colonies to be especially "ripe" for pirate activity but likewise, a system bounty would just perpetually be in effect until the colony hit a certain size or or other conditions were met. That would make starting a colony a bit of a defense game but also generate income and funnel the player into combat.
I think people are expecting colonies to be a quick and easy cash-out button without really considering the "fantasy" of what they're doing. They're settling worlds and building and raising infrastructure on a huge scale, with a living population that will then grow organically. Of course it's going to cost a lot of money. Of course a bad rock to colonize is going to cost more than it's worth.
... Having a colony without defense anchors you to it.
This is one of the reasons I consider having a gate in-system to be mandatory for any colony I make: it vastly simplifies getting back there to deal with whatever incoming problem needs dealing with.... Having a colony without defense anchors you to it.Kind of yes, but also kind of no
Are early colonies a good investment? Let's see. Pick a low-hazard world with farming and mining opportunities. These are the expenses you will want to make:
- ~100k for crew, supplies and other materials to colonize and build a comm relay
- ~100k to buy ships to transport the above (pair of nebula's and a freighter)
- 75k to build Farming
- 100k to build Mining
- 100k to build Waystation, so you can resupply at the colony.
- 250k to build an Orbital station, the most effective defense.
- 150k to build Ground Defenses, for the stability bonus.
- 300k for Patrol HQ, so you spawn some ships to deal with straggler pirate fleets, etc.
- 5k/month for an Administrator with Industrial Planning. Pays for itself so it's a no-brainer.
- 5-10k/month for Hazard Pay to grow to size 4.
Total: roughly 1.3 million credits all told.
and oftentimes not a waystation either (this depends a bit if I'm doing lots of missions in the area of the colony/treating it as a home base - if yes then waystation, if no no need).
We need ways to deal with Recreational Drugs and Harvested Organs demands without going Free Port.What. Are you telling me you believe it should be legal to trade in Recreational Drugs and Harvested Organs? Those are banned in most of the system. Free port is basically saying "You can trave whatever you want here". Of course your need Free port to trade those (which imply you need free port to supply those needs).
We need ways to deal with Recreational Drugs and Harvested Organs demands without going Free Port.
We need ways to deal with Recreational Drugs and Harvested Organs demands without going Free Port.What. Are you telling me you believe it should be legal to trade in Recreational Drugs and Harvested Organs? Those are banned in most of the system. Free port is basically saying "You can trave whatever you want here". Of course your need Free port to trade those (which imply you need free port to supply those needs).
We need ways to deal with Recreational Drugs and Harvested Organs demands without going Free Port.
I've actually been thinking about this, the fact that light industry doesn't have an upgrade seems ripe for change. But can't think of a decent upgrade for allowing for Recreational Drug production without requiring free port...
I was thinking of demand elimination than legal production, some sort of Medical System industry which removes RD&HO demands from other industries, or some sort of Augmentary industry which replaces RD&HO demands with Supplies demand.
- Fighter Uplink: moved to Leadership, added 50% target leading accuracy bonus
Strike Commander got dropped.
Trading normally illegal commodities between your own planets and exporting them to other factions are different things, yet the game treats it the same. If my planet A makes drugs and sells them to my planet B, what the hell does Hegemony care?We need ways to deal with Recreational Drugs and Harvested Organs demands without going Free Port.What. Are you telling me you believe it should be legal to trade in Recreational Drugs and Harvested Organs? Those are banned in most of the system. Free port is basically saying "You can trave whatever you want here". Of course your need Free port to trade those (which imply you need free port to supply those needs).
Trading normally illegal commodities between your own planets and exporting them to other factions are different things, yet the game treats it the same. If my planet A makes drugs and sells them to my planet B, what the hell does Hegemony care?
only when a total idiot is in charge would any government ignore a potential source of instabilityWhich they do! So many low-hanging pirate and indie worlds Hegemony and Church could rough up and decivilize, but they do not. They attack only the player's worlds, even after the player's faction has grown to major faction size.
Quoteonly when a total idiot is in charge would any government ignore a potential source of instabilityWhich they do! So many low-hanging pirate and indie worlds Hegemony and Church could rough up and decivilize, but they do not. They attack only the player's worlds, even after the player's faction has grown to major faction size.
The point is Hegemony and Church single out the player and attack him over and over again just for Free Port, regardless if he is yet another indie-like or a major faction equivalent. They do not attack anyone else, whether small independent (and possibly pirate) worlds, isolated worlds of their enemies, or even major worlds. If they can send big fleets at the player just for using Free Port, they should be sending them to several other worlds at the same time, and not just at Free Ports, but also at pirate bases and especially Pather bases (instead of waiting for the player who to do their work like ungrateful beggars then thank him by stabbing him in the back).
Game is still single player, not a sci-fi socioeconomic simulator.
Hence why I pointed out that dropping indies, pirates, and L Path as factions might actually be a better choice in the long run, instead making all their planets just as generically "unaffiliated" (although unlikely to occur until a more complex political system can backstop such changes to game loops, whether for player to have option to turn their unfactioned personal colonies into a single faction, or for a pirate king to arise). Kind of a delicate balance, can't make the game too much like Stellaris!Seems like the question would still be "why do major factions not send expeditions at these unaffiliated free ports, only the player?" and the answer is ultimately the same, the gamey "because we didn't bother making them do so, which in turn is because it doesn't affect (as much) the player actions and gameplay experience".
I think it's something like a mix of grandfather clause and funding the terrorists. Some colonies were independent for a long time and people are just used to them. They might not be a threat, or no faction can take it over without angering another, so there's an unspoken agreement that colony is ok. For pirates and pathers, factions might be using them to do things they aren't officially allowed to do. Plausible deniability is a nice thing to have.Still, other factions should know when to back down.
It's the sort of unfair treatment you see in real life. Better the debil you know. The player is new and unknown and that makes him dangerous.
Honestly wanting every game I play to be a socioeconomic simulator is probably my biggest issue. I'm still working on modeling faction relations in my fantasy trading sim...
Alex, how close is the second batch of patch notes? :P
Ships:
Updated older sprites for several ships
Can we know which ships plz?
Well the new Pilums seem interesting ... wonder if they will be able to hit frigates (with ECCM).
That are the kind of weapon changes i realy like: unique (and hopefull usefull) weapons.
and changes that all seem fine, though polarised armour looks like it's gonna make already tanky ships (mora and venture mainly) downright impossible to kill and it's a shame you cant stack it with shield shunt :'(
You can combine it with shield shunt - the skill treats shieldless ships as having 50% hard flux; this is mentioned in the skill tooltip.
And, for the change from 50% to 100% armor strength, keep in mind that it'd basically never get the full 100% since that'd require the ship to be at 100% hard flux. Even if you're forced to bring down shields, chances are there's still a bunch of soft flux from weapons fire, so you're really going to be seeing a fraction of the bonus most of the time.
Can we know which ships plz?
All of these appear to be better balanced, guess I have less of a reason to just jam sabots onto whatever I can't think of something better for!
- Sabot SRM: reduced EMP damage to 200 (was: 400)
- Hurricane MIRV: reduced number of submunitions to 9 (was: 11)
- Squall MRLS: increased ammo to 160 (was: 100)
- Swarmer SRM: increased ammo to 80 (was: 60)
Sabot (Single):Interesting tradeoff, maybe I will still jam smaller sabots on instead.
- Changed to (Double)
- Ammo increased to 2, with a 10 second reload delay
- OP cost increased to 2
The meat and potatoes of the missile changes, tradeoffs appear to make Pilums better but not like when they were the God of missiles. Still would be interesting to add a cheaper second Pirate (or maybe LPath, but pirates just seem more missile happy) version of Pilums that keeps old/current range of 10000, but worse stats than current version of Pilum. Just my opinion, but should balance benefits of being "fielded in huge numbers."
- Pilum LRM:
- Range reduced to 4000 (was: 10000)
- Damaged changed to 500 fragmentation plus 500 EMP (was: 500 HE)
- Added a second stage that's faster (Harpoon-level speed) and triggers on approach
- Increased hitpoints to 150 (was: 50)
- Has a chance to fire off a shield-piercing EMP arc dealing 500 EMP damage
- Chance based on target's hard flux, same as for other shield-piercing effects
- Other stats mostly unchanged - still very slow (except for 2nd stage), low OP cost, ammo regen
- Overall goals:
- Make it into a useful very-long-range support weapon
- But not one that benefits excessively from being fielded in huge numbers
So does this mean that only Resistant Flux Conduits Hullmod is only EMP resistance HullMod now? No armor-related version, just flux related? I smell another new low tech HullMod! But maybe not, I guess it depends on how balanced this works out to be. But would have to wait for 2023 update anyway, way too late currently.
- Shield Shunt:
- Removed EMP resistance bonus
- Now increases armor by 25%
I've been meaning to ask about some of the GA quests lacking time limits in general, but this answers at least one of the questions. Still, wouldn't the hostage negotiation mission also have a time limit? IIRC, it does not... unlike the "buy tech from LPath" mission, that appears less in need of a time limit (although still maybe needs one, just with a much longer time limit. Seller holding an illegal item and all). Alternatively, if player takes too long for buyer, maybe the price change isn't so unreasonable after all (as in, if player shows up within time limit, buyer won't always ask for more money).
- Fixed issue with "deliver VIP" mission at the Galatia Academy not having a time limit
- Rift Cascade Emitter:
- Significantly increased rift damage
- Successive rifts are bigger and deal more than the initial ones in the chain
Interesting tradeoff, maybe I will still jam smaller sabots on instead.
Still would be interesting to add a cheaper second Pirate (or maybe LPath, but pirates just seem more missile happy) version of Pilums that keeps old/current range of 10000, but worse stats than current version of Pilum. Just my opinion, but should balance benefits of being "fielded in huge numbers."
So does this mean that only Resistant Flux Conduits Hullmod is only EMP resistance HullMod now?
I've been meaning to ask about some of the GA quests lacking time limits in general, but this answers at least one of the questions. Still, wouldn't the hostage negotiation mission also have a time limit? IIRC, it does not... unlike the "buy tech from LPath" mission, that appears less in need of a time limit (although still maybe needs one, just with a much longer time limit. Seller holding an illegal item and all). Alternatively, if player takes too long for buyer, maybe the price change isn't so unreasonable after all (as in, if player shows up within time limit, buyer won't always ask for more money).
Just out of curiosity: what do the new rift numbers look like compared to the current 1000 per rift?
Can we know which ships plz?
Uhhhhh let'see.
Valkyrie, Vigilance, Buffalo, Mule, Hermes, Wolf, Shrike, Revenant, and some weapon slots on others (Falcon, Eagle, Apogee).
Some weapons got touch-ups too; Autopulse, HIL, ... etc? And added a new Pilum stage, of course.
Uhhhhh let'see.I think somewhere the Graviton Beam was one of those sprites, right?
Valkyrie, Vigilance, Buffalo, Mule, Hermes, Wolf, Shrike, Revenant, and some weapon slots on others (Falcon, Eagle, Apogee).
Some weapons got touch-ups too; Autopulse, HIL, ... etc? And added a new Pilum stage, of course.
Any theories as to when this will be released?Well, last time it was 6 months from patchnotes to release, so... :D
Any theories as to when this will be released?Hopefully this month :P
Updated older sprites for several ships
(...)
Updated older sprites for some weapons
Valkyrie, Vigilance, Buffalo, Mule, Hermes, Wolf, Shrike, Revenant, and some weapon slots on others (Falcon, Eagle, Apogee).
Some weapons got touch-ups too; Autopulse, HIL, ... etc? And added a new Pilum stage, of course.
Hyperion:
- Phase Teleporter cooldown increased to 10 seconds
- Changed deployment/base maintenance cost back to 15
Squall MRLS: increased ammo to 160 (was: 100)
- Atropos (Single): reduced OP cost to 1 (was: 2)
- Atropos Rack: reduced OP cost to 3 (was: 4)
- Harpoon (Single), Sabot (Single):
- Changed to (Double)
- Ammo increased to 2, with a 10 second reload delay
- OP cost increased to 2
- Longbow Bomber retains the single-shot version
Pilum LRM:
Perdition Bomber:
- Increased wing size to 3 (was: 2)
- Increased OP cost to 20 (was: 15)
Any theories as to when this will be released?
Fighter Uplink/Carrier Group: increased by 1.5x if the carrier has an officer in command
increased by 1.5x?
meanwhile...250% effect?
Me: Hey I think Mora doesn't have enough OP for its armaments
Alex 24 hours later in patch notes: "Mora OP increased haha"
You never cease to amaze me damn, but also glad that Wayfarer got a nice nudge.
Really excited about all the missile changes, looks like you really listened to the feedback about which were underperforming. I assume one reason for double variants, except that no one used singles, is that some tend to leave small missile mounts empty in the campaign in favour of more hullmods or flux stats. But now we have some nice lucrative options to fill in. And not going to lie, out of all these listed things, I can't wait to see all those updated sprites ;D
Pilums are salamanders now. Nice.
So now there are small missiles options at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 OP, right?
I suspect the Atropos (Single) at 1 OP and the new Harpoon/Sabot (Double) at 2 OP are going to be my most-used missiles on frigates. Also nice options on larger ships for OP-padding.
My initial reaction was: unpractical, cost too much! Then i realised that 2 new Perdition wings for 40 OP gives the same firepower as the old Perdition wings for 45 OP. So, on Mora/Heron, just put 2 of those new wings, and mix with 1 cheaper option. Though comparison with Dagger wings is inevitable.
I'll admit that I'm pretty curious what the reasoning was for the Pilum gaining a second stage for the final sprint compared to making it a bit faster in general - and even more curious why the change from HE. It seems less like an adjustment to the pilum, and more like a missile with a completely different role and use case sharing only name and a generally supportive role.
Which isn't necessarily a complaint, but it seems like it'd have been about as effective to just make this as a separate missile entirely, so I guess I'm asking why not do that?
(And while I'm here, question we were discussing over on discord - is the temporal shell understood to be related to phase technology, or is the description of the scarab merely using phase as a different example of TT pushing the boundaries?)
The pilum suffers from severe snowball syndrome. It's nearly useless in small numbers, but once it overwhelms enemy defenses it starts breaking things. Part of this is due to the extreme range (every ship on the map can focus the same target), low health(easy to stop, until you can't), and high damage(OW).
Looks like the intent is to flatten that curve. Make the pilum more useful in small numbers, but less useful as a map sweeping weapon. The weapon appears a lot more defensive now, being able to annoy ships rather than outright kill them, which is fine. The damage change may be worrisome(frag damage has half the value of other types due to it being 25/25/100), but it seems good enough to start testing it and see what really happens.
Dang, solid changes across the board! Hoping patch notes part two means we're going to get a release soon. :)
- Defective Manufactory, Converted Hangar:
- Fighter damage taken penalty reduced to 25% (was: 50%)
- Fighter speed penalty reduced to 25% (was: 33%)
My suggestion is to remove EMP damage from sabots, it's a good weapon in its role (burst KE damage, nobody uses it for EMP), so it won't ovelap with salamander and new pilum. It will help gameplay too, armor tanking sabots (correct play from player and AI) now will not result in punishmet from EMP disabling weapons (punishment for correct play), so now everyone will need to time their attacks better to overload ships.Well now you've just made it useless. I know Sabots are hated but come on you can't expect a kinetic missile like this to do literally nothing if you drop shields. AI would never do anything with it, ever. It's not the fact that people use it for EMP, it's to have some effect if you tank it on armour.
Well now you've just made it useless. I know Sabots are hated but come on you can't expect a kinetic missile like this to do literally nothing if you drop shields. AI would never do anything with it, ever. It's not the fact that people use it for EMP, it's to have some effect if you tank it on armour.
Wait until this guy hears about Harpoon spam...
But seriously do you then want HE missiles to do zero damage to shields? Because that's pretty much what you're asking for here. You CAN'T remove the EMP component unless you completely redesign Sabots from ground up (and they were already reworked bunch of times).
And if you have free time, make a fleet full of Harpoon missiles with Expanded missile racks and ECCM for hullmods, and then come back here to say Sabots are broken.
Most weapons don't have very limited ammo?
Because they still generate flux if you hit shields, so you can overload someone on high flux to punish them for not dropping shields. Sabots as openers do literally nothing without EMP. I mean just config the files and give them 0 EMP damage if you're so sure they won't be useless. And before using the "just combine them with other weapons lol" argument, you get that the AI is capable of flickering shields right. So if there's a burst coming you're telling me the point of the missile is to use that 0.2 second frame when shields are down to punish the enemy with a weapon that doesn't even exist with that sort of projectile speed. I honestly don't get what you're arguing for here.Most weapons don't have very limited ammo?
Most weapons don't do insane burst damage and cost flux to fire, so it's balanced that way. Still don't understand how it will make sabots useless, why hammers are not useless when you can easily block them by shield?
Because they still generate flux if you hit shields, so you can overload someone on high flux to punish them for not dropping shields.
Sabots spread into smaller munitions at second stage so they don't do what you described. But sure you could unload 6 Sabots into a single frigate if that's your thing, my my truly broken.
Sabots have EMP because kinetic-only sabots have been tried and they didn't work well.
That's fair. I have to wonder, any plans to make another missile oriented at massing them, pushing toward that goal from a different direction? Or is it a niche you think just won't really work in vanilla?snip
First up: it's definitely a different missile. But, as you noted, what it retains is the general idea of the Pilum, which is a long-range support missile. (Plus, for fun, it functions more like its ancient namesake now, what with punching holes in shields and all.)
A support missile generally means it's not going to be synched up well with whatever its supporting, so unlimited ammo is a desired quality. But this means that you have to be careful that it doesn't out-compete non-support missiles in their roles. For example, even a modest speed boost lets the old Pilum function pretty well as an unlimited-ammo medium range finisher missile, and that really steps on the Harpoon. The fast second stage is a way to let it have reasonable anti-PD performance while ... bascially not suppressing venting in an overly-large area simply by existing. Plus, this second stage means that there's less accomulation of Pilums from multiple salvoes following a target around - they'll get used up (by getting close enough and engaging the second stage) at about the rate they're fired.
The idea is to let it support another ship, and shield-piercing EMP damage should accomplish that. With HE damage, it's easier to get into trouble with it being too good as a short-range finisher instead of support, hence frag damage.
As for why not make it another missile - I don't think the original Pilum concept worked out, ultimately, and I was just done trying to salvage it in anything like its original form.
Interesting, if a little suspicious. I appreciate the answer!(And while I'm here, question we were discussing over on discord - is the temporal shell understood to be related to phase technology, or is the description of the scarab merely using phase as a different example of TT pushing the boundaries?)
I'd say it's probably related, though to what degree is extremely fluid.
Because they still generate flux if you hit shields, so you can overload someone on high flux to punish them for not dropping shields. Sabots as openers do literally nothing without EMP. I mean just config the files and give them 0 EMP damage if you're so sure they won't be useless. And before using the "just combine them with other weapons lol" argument, you get that the AI is capable of flickering shields right. So if there's a burst coming you're telling me the point of the missile is to use that 0.2 second frame when shields are down to punish the enemy with a weapon that doesn't even exist with that sort of projectile speed. I honestly don't get what you're arguing for here.I tried that with Sabot v2 (wide shotgun spray), when AI always dropped shields to incoming Sabot. Using Sabot just to force the enemy to drop shields so I can hit with the likes of plasma cannon or AMBs (no missiles because they are taken by Sabots that create the opening) was underwhelming for the effort. I was better off with Harpoon (or Reaper) strikes at point-blank. (Back then, Reapers could hit point-blank, although splash damage could hurt the attacker.)
This was something I've wanted to suggest for a year or so, but never thought it would pick up any traction! Very cool, I like Converted Hanger and experiment with it all the time. It was simply laughably bad (in a funny, facepalming way) at times with how easily strikecraft were wiped out.
I look forward to trying this out in the future and seeing if Converted Hanger is in a good spot now.
The converted hangar buff is something I was pretty happy to see on the new patch notes. I don't use them much any more, but I still love equipping them on my Apogee's (I've since downgraded from Xyphos wings to Wasp's). Of questionable benefit alone, they seem to survive a bit longer when fielding 4 or so Apogee's in my end game exploration fleet, so they should be even better now.
I noticed that the art on the fighter wings look broken down when using a converted hangar (well they aren't a proper hangar I guess). I don't think I noticed it much on wasps, but the Xyphos looked pretty derelict and ready for the scrap yard...is that still the case with the new update? (wasn't a fan of that, but I guess it was used to distinguish them between normal hangars; maybe they could look a little less beat up with the buff?).
Imgur isn't working right now so I attached a comparison between a converted hangar (left) and normal hangar (right)
That's fair. I have to wonder, any plans to make another missile oriented at massing them, pushing toward that goal from a different direction? Or is it a niche you think just won't really work in vanilla?
Man you're so lucky that Thaago The missile connoisseur is asleep now, this is just too big of a boss fight for us.
I find the discussion about Sabot 2nd stage as something inevitable misplaced.
The best counter to sabots is to just back off a bit. 1st stage is very slow and doesn't travel that far. Unless launched point blank by a faster attacker, backing off is always an option.
Sure, if enemy was just trying to buy time with Sabot, then they succeeded. So it IS useful even then. But as an actual threat to targeted ship? It's only dangerous because AI doesn't do anything about incoming Sabots.
That's fair. I have to wonder, any plans to make another missile oriented at massing them, pushing toward that goal from a different direction? Or is it a niche you think just won't really work in vanilla?
Let me flip the question around - why would a missile like that be good for gameplay?
(I don't immediately see that it would be - it seems like it'd actually be bad, if we're talking about encouraging a "mass this fairly non-interactive thing until you win" strategy, but if you have ideas...!)
Hurrican is getting nerfed? why?No clue as well. The base missile isn't even strong, it's too spread out without ECCM, and with ECCM and missile skills it become too good. The progression should be a bit less severe imo.
The Hurricane is very strong currentlyIt better be very strong after all of the OP I pay, 25 OP for MIRV AND more OP for ECCM. Even then, it shoots slow and smaller targets can still dodge them. I have to give up something to get everything MIRVs need to work, and even then, MIRVs are mostly good against large targets instead of everything. (Small ships dodge them too easily.)
Locusts are pretty good anti-small ship (fighters, frigates), but against larger targets its a mildly useful pressure weapon to tickle hull/shields and thats it.But against hull, it takes a huge chunk off. Or it did before officers with defense skills became commonplace in 0.95.
After a lot of testing, I found having accelerated shields greatly helped in catching shots when the Medusa teleported in to attack. Adding accelerated shields as a standard built-in hullmod to the Medusa would really help its survivability. And maybe a small increase in armor by 50 and hull by 500 for the occasional shots that do make it through.
Faction-specific ship, common in Tri-Tachyon shops. And yes compared to Sunder or Hammerhead it's underwhelming and lucks considerable firepower and shield coverage for a long fight. Build-in accelerated shields wouldn't solve this, ship needs hardpoints changed (for example all weapons slots universal) or something like that, another problem is its shield coverage, even with forward shield and shield size hull mods it cannot get even close to 360 shield coverage so it's super vulnerable in late-game fights.After a lot of testing, I found having accelerated shields greatly helped in catching shots when the Medusa teleported in to attack. Adding accelerated shields as a standard built-in hullmod to the Medusa would really help its survivability. And maybe a small increase in armor by 50 and hull by 500 for the occasional shots that do make it through.
I love the idea to buff the Medusa by giving it accelerated shields as a built-in hullmod !
Also I feel like it is too rare. This patch, I barley saw it, have never used it and I cant remember fighting against it.
I love the idea to buff the Medusa by giving it accelerated shields as a built-in hullmod !
Aaand you have a Legion with 4 Mining pods, and 0 capacitors. Cool idea on paper but I still say Hurricanes need too much to make them good. They turn from "decent HE long range pressure with low ammo" to "pinpoint accurate HE slap of god".It is like this already with Hammer Barrage on Legion14.
I agree that MIRVs cost too much to be useful (ECCM and Expanded Missile Racks, though nearly all missiles need Missile Racks). MIRVs in early releases did not need ECCM to work fully. They were weaker and more easily stopped, but at least they worked out-of-the-box back in the day.
Added new mission that takes the player to the Galatia AcademyWell, that one mission in particular is not new story. It is a hook to get the player to start the Academy mission line. It needed to be added because some (especially new) players that haven't watched or read any spoilers might not go to GA during their normal play and never realize that the storyline starts there.Code:OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO?Added new mission that takes the player to the Galatia Academy
More story? do we get more story!? I want more story XD
pwease
Well, that one mission in particular is not new story. It is a hook to get the player to start the Academy mission line. It needed to be added because some (especially new) players that haven't watched or read any spoilers might not go to GA during their normal play and never realize that the storyline starts there.
hope it comes out soon tm
The one thing you can absolutely count on :D
This year or next? :-*
Aaand you have a Legion with 4 Mining pods, and 0 capacitors. Cool idea on paper but I still say Hurricanes need too much to make them good. They turn from "decent HE long range pressure with low ammo" to "pinpoint accurate HE slap of god".
i am once again asking you to tell me what RESET_BARREL_INDEX_ON_BURST will doit'll make a burst fire weapon always fire from barrel 1, no matter where it last shot from (from what i can remember of nia's tweet asking for it)
It's out (https://fractalsoftworks.com/2021/12/10/starsector-0-95-1a-release/)!
Ah, I see obsessively checking the forums has borne fruit!I just subscribed to the Fractal Softworks blog with RSS and I'm pretty fast, too.
This is very convenient as I literally just took my last college final early today and was wondering what to do now.
I am going to assume that it is likely incompatible with most of the mods right now?
So now that we can get 800 base range light needlers and railguns and light autocannons on ships... What's the point of arbalest again?Budget low range kinetic damage that actually packs a punch. It was buffed so each shot does 200 dmg, that's not bad for a 8 OP weapon. Recoil could be less severe though, both on it and Heavy mortar imo.
So now that we can get 800 base range light needlers and railguns and light autocannons on ships... What's the point of arbalest again?
So now that we can get 800 base range light needlers and railguns and light autocannons on ships... What's the point of arbalest again?Budget low range kinetic damage that actually packs a punch. It was buffed so each shot does 200 dmg, that's not bad for a 8 OP weapon. Recoil could be less severe though, both on it and Heavy mortar imo.
Me: takes first trip in 3 years that will last more than the weekend.
Alex: Release time!
This is very convenient as I literally just took my last college final early today and was wondering what to do now.
I am going to assume that it is likely incompatible with most of the mods right now?
I suspect it should be mod-compatible, even though it'll warn it might not be. I'm not 100% sure on that, though.
- Reduced OP cost of Converted Fighter Bay to 2/4/6/10 (was: 3/6/9/15)
"no_autofit" tag now also works when applied to variants
Code"no_autofit" tag now also works when applied to variants
This doesn't seem to be the case... :-[
S-mods still aren't preserved in the variants and the game still autofits them if you exceed their "cap."
I realize because I'm generating the fleet via
FleetFactoryV3 and that script doesn't seem to make any mention on no_autofit.
...
I love how effectively this fits into the old Domain battle-line doctrine; it's the PERFECT compliment to the Dominator. You put this bad boy on the wings to smack flankers and perform flanking attacks of their own. Preferring AAF over Burn Drive on this hull makes perfect sense in that regard; esp. given its already high (for low-tech) base speed.
I set them generating a fleet normally via the Lion Guard's HQ and then have a special indication to make all their flagships have a no_autofit variant to which they still autofit them weirdly.Code"no_autofit" tag now also works when applied to variants
This doesn't seem to be the case... :-[
S-mods still aren't preserved in the variants and the game still autofits them if you exceed their "cap."
I realize because I'm generating the fleet via
FleetFactoryV3 and that script doesn't seem to make any mention on no_autofit.
Hmm - do you perhaps have MemFlags.MEMORY_KEY_FORCE_AUTOFIT_ON_NO_AUTOFIT_SHIPS set in the fleet's memory? Or a custom inflater set for the fleet? Because it's checked in the same place as "no_autofit" on the hull spec is checked (see: line 326 in DefaultFleetInflater) and unless I'm just missing something obvious, it's hard for me to see how this might *not* work.
fleet.getFlagship().setVariant(Global.getSettings().getVariant("eis_legion_xiv_Elite"), false, true);Hmph since I can't find anyone else reporting it here yet. Something is causing the dev mode options ">>> dumb memory" to appear in dialog even with devmode being false in settings.json.
I set them generating a fleet normally via the Lion Guard's HQ and then have a special indication to make all their flagships have a no_autofit variant to which they still autofit them weirdly.
This is perfect, today was my last work day for the year. Thanks for the early x-mas gift, Alex ;D
Hmph since I can't find anyone else reporting it here yet. Something is causing the dev mode options ">>> dumb memory" to appear in dialog even with devmode being false in settings.json.
SpoilerOk...
I've only played around for a little bit but holy $***
Skills
What a game changer the new layout is. I haven't even gotten to the top-tier ones to see how much I can break the game over my leg (looking at you Neural Link) but just having all those Combat skills at my fingertips at start is awesome. Yet, I keep eying Leadership and Tech longingly and Industry doesn't look bad either. Every starting skill is viable for a number of reasons and I don't feel like I'm starved for choice or forced into something I don't want. Far more usable and elegant than before.
Ships
I currently have two Vanguards in my fleet: one bought and and one found (which was prestine with a Skill Point). These are little monsters I love them. They feel like souped-up Lashers (which by the way, are actually really good with the built-in Ballistics Rangefinder. Paired with AAF and the new ranges on Small Ballistics, they have a niche again as a speedy little gunboat) but with a ton of versatility. Note: I thought the Small Composites were Missile slots and I totally missed the Composite on the "nose." The fact that I could put 3 more guns on is hilarious but the dissipation on it pretty terrible. Fortunately 100% of capacity goes toward offense!
I have encountered the Manticore in a Pirate fleet once. Also a fun ship (to fight against). It had a Mk. IX and it was brutalizing my allied Hammerhead until the rest of the fleet came to take it down. It seemed to take a pounding too. I do not compare this to a Sunder: this is more like the Champion in terms of distilling down to its purest essence what the doctrine of Low-Tech should be (as the Champion is the Platonic Ideal of a Midline Cruiser). I can't wait to get one but it gives Pirates a lot more "oomph" now and a much more stark silhouette.
Slip Streams
I left a trinary system and saw an eruption of sensor pings flying around like fairies and finally figured out what the "sensor ghosts" were. First time experiencing them I thought that my raiding of a Research Station caused a swarm of [REDACTED] to jump into hyperspace (it was a Low-Warning system). Then I noticed the Slip Stream to my "north." These things are awesome! First off, it was going vaguely in the direction I wanted so I jumped in and rode the wave. It wasn't too long but it took me through a deep hyperspace pocket I would have liked to avoid. Second, 3 other fleets joined me, two prospector types and a 3rd I couldn't make out. I don't know if you can fight in a slip stream but I saw an explosion when two fleets bumped into each other and a derelict Condor popped out.
These are such a nice addition to the hyperspace landscape.
Art
I haven't been paying too much attention but a lot the art looks more polished, shinier, and I saw some new art when hitting the bar in Jangala (I think). The Autopulse is new, too. It made me do a double-take. These relatively small additions did not slip my notice and kudos to David for sprucing things up.
Every change/addition I've personally touched has been for the better and I'm very pleased thus far. I still can't wait to see Phase ship changes and dive into the skills.[close]
Thank you for the write-up! Reading this made me happy :D
The "raid" option comes up through the conversation with the pirate (or Pather?) contact, not the normal raiding options - maybe that's what you're seeing?My only options were to pay or use a story point. Not sure if I was missing something, or there was someone else to talk to that I missed. Although I did just have a similar mission for pirates where the raid option was there, but it wasn't there the first time when it was a ludic world.
I think I know why it's because when the fleet begins "despawning or docking" to rest at its planet it gets autofitted.I set them generating a fleet normally via the Lion Guard's HQ and then have a special indication to make all their flagships have a no_autofit variant to which they still autofit them weirdly.
This might more properly belong in a question under modding, then. Would need too much extra info for this thread. I do think the code that's the should work, though, so if you're able to point as to *why* it might not be working in your case, that would be extremely helpful.
Hmm, I'm not sure how that'd have anything to do with it, the inflater doesn't know or care about whether the fleet is "docking" - it's just another assignment.Could be the wings and average smod, I'm not entirely sure. It's fine for the time being.
Ah - off the top of my head, I don't think that one (when you're talking to a Knight of Ludd) has a "raid" option.Oh, maybe you shouldn't get the dialogue with Sebastian where you ask if you can keep the money if you get the researcher back anyway then.
Oh, maybe you shouldn't get the dialogue with Sebastian where you ask if you can keep the money if you get the researcher back anyway then.
SpoilerIs this an actual fencing minigame??[close]
<c z="59788" id="p_27b3ca" pid="aggressive" spr="graphics/portraits/portrait_d1.png" rnk="spaceLieutenant" pst="officer" wTCRC="0" cW="1.0" fid="player" a="true" im="MEDIUM">
(stuff)
<stats z="59792" x2="0" xp="9999000" bx="0" db="0" l="1" pt="0" sp="0"> (xp used to be 168000, l used to be 6)
<s>{"target_analysis":1}</s> (used to be a full set of 6 skills)
<c z="59917" id="p_765563" pid="aggressive" spr="graphics/portraits/portrait_d2.png" rnk="spaceLieutenant" pst="officer" wTCRC="0" cW="1.0" fid="player" a="true" im="MEDIUM">
(stuff)
<stats z="59921" x2="0" xp="9999000" bx="2038500" db="0" l="1" pt="0" sp="0"> (xp used to be 168000, l used to be 6)
<s>{"target_analysis":1}</s> (used to be a full set of 6 skills)
<c z="60049" id="p_191165" pid="aggressive" spr="graphics/portraits/portrait_d3.png" rnk="spaceLieutenant" pst="officer" wTCRC="0" cW="1.0" fid="player" a="true" im="MEDIUM">
(stuff)
<stats z="60053" x2="0" xp="9999000" bx="2038500" db="0" l="1" pt="0" sp="0"> (xp used to be 168000, l used to be 6)
<s>{"target_analysis":1}</s> (used to be a full set of 6 skills)
Custom weapon production is offering standard bomb bays -- is this intended?
Huh. Some of the newly adjusted d-mods reduce maximum combat readiness. The tutorial restores ships to 70% CR when you bring the hulks back regardless.
It seems the new DAMPER_FIELD type of AI can not use any type of statsScript
Was short on fuel and used distress signal(have fleet - 1 destroyer+tanker and like 6 frigates). The hegemony patrol offered 3(three) fuel. Could thank them with 20k credits. Not amused.
Well, about modding...
can dependencies mods have a setting like >=1.0.0, not completely equals 1.0.0
Enjoying the new update a lot except for a few things. The new skills and a lot of the new features are good but I get this weird sound glitch when in battle where if too many ships are all firing at once or you use the ammo loader ability to increase rapid fire, the sound kind of strobes and glitches out. It's like really rapid stuttering.
I also have the devmode options on jumping in and out of systems but that's not a massive issue.
The only thing I'm not enjoying is the weird sound glitch.
Thanks so much for the new features! Slipstreams are interesting 8)
https://mega.nz/file/Qbw3QKiL#gSkrS7pNJKVvxNNVTsyU5bF8_PstXaZRgjlplaP83Lw
Here is a vid showing the issue. I have no mods installed, this is a continuation of a save from previous version. It happens in all battles, I'll have to rollback to previous version to continue my save, but I love the new skills. :'(
Sorry, I should have put it in the right place, my mistake!
The new spooky stuff and slipstreams does a lot to make hyperspace feel more mysterious and alive, I love it.
And the Manticore and Vanguard turned out really great ;D
4. I seem to have an odd issue, in that 2 of my 9 officers can still choose the old skills (such as Ranged Specialization).
Ah, the different version of OpenAL must explain why the spatiality of the audio this version was a lot more distinct compared to 0.95a, not necessarily for better or worse. I might miss it if it goes!Oh so this is why I frequently hear guns spewing only on one ear when I move my camera even a little. Can't speak for others obviously but I really don't dig it, this ain't no first person shooter lol.
I suspect the Enforcer and Onslaught will feel much better too.IMHO, I feel Onslaught was buffed
Hotfix is up! Full list of changes in the OP.Such a fast hotfix! Thank you from all of us who have sensitive ears! ;D
Oh noes the HSA+AO combo. Can't have *** in hightech. (That combo was pretty silly on some ships, understandable).
That combo would have been one I would have tried out as soon as I got all of the components, especially with Phase Lances.Oh noes the HSA+AO combo. Can't have *** in hightech. (That combo was pretty silly on some ships, understandable).
(I'm not sure exactly what I was thinking - either I just somehow forgot that AO existed, or just goofed. But thinking about it now, that combo just seems like a real bad idea - it goes right against the new HSA's design which is "match the normal hard flux range that's likely to be available on that ship". And with AO that goes right out the window.)
Debug interactions are active.
Now that I've had a chance to ride the Slipstreams for a few cycles, I gotta say that I love the way it turned out. Sometimes it's a minor hazard requiring a moment's forethought, and sometimes it's a big convenience. I really like the measure of control I have for traveling along it, it feels a lot like a racing game where it's best to take a certain line to maintain top speed.
Popping out in sustained burn aimed at your destination is satisfying in a way that's superior to catching a patch of hyperstorm strikes.
I also made some friends, but they seem shy. Maybe that's for the best?
Really loving the new ships, and I expect the Pirates love them even more. Sometimes bounties get their hands on a few with some high level officers, then suddenly the outlaws have some big teeth. A lot of fun early on in small engagements where you can see some tough fights if you're redlining your fleet. Just fun in general.
As expected, the changes to Converted Hanger have led to more interesting combinations of mixed roles in my fleet. Looking forward to seeing what sort of trouble I can click myself into.
It's a small thing, but the extra OP from Converted Fighter Bay is nice, too. I can weasel out a little extra performance from certain ships now where it counts.
I have yet to do more than dip my toes into the new Phase Ship environment, but from what I can tell fighting them it's probably for the best that the Salamander didn't become dual purpose. It'd feel bad being hounded by them at lower speeds.
The poor Gremlin... it really is a total death trap. I know it's supposed to be a real POS, but it is agonizingly slow even while cloaked. Maybe buff the speed a little? 25 SU? Or maybe set it apart a little and her OG prototype phase coils have a 1x better multiplier? It would kill base PPT, but if you really want to use it for some reason, there are plenty of skills that really push frigate PPT.
Have missed it, now I'm on RC4.
System extertise could use two more points:
- If the system has a limited use duration +x%duration
- If the system only as a passive upkeep while active (toggle able systems e.g. fortress shield) -x%upkeet
I found both neural link hullmod samples as loot, this doesn't make sense, as they don't function without the skill.
False sensor readings should vanish if the get close enough to be identified.
So I looked in the thread starting from the release point and didn't see it, asking here:
What exactly are the features that I'd be missing out on when porting over an 0.95a save over to 0.95.1a? Things like slipstreams I'd get, since they might have to do with sector generation, but any 'main' campaign/plot missions, l o r e, etc.?
- Fixed issue with things (such as gates and research stations) occasionally being found inside stars
- This fix requires a new save
Command transfer shuttle pod no longer available for custom production orders
Ah! I suspect officers that were ready to level up at the time of save conversion would be affected by this, since they already had their potential skill selections "locked in".
<OfficerData z="62405">
<person ref="59802"></person>
<skillPicks z="62406">
<st>helmsmanship</st>
<st>strike_commander</st>
<st>impact_mitigation</st>
<st>ranged_specialization</st>
<st>systems_expertise</st>
<st>damage_control</st>
</skillPicks>
<madePicks>true</madePicks>
</OfficerData>
<OfficerData z="62407">
<person ref="59931"></person>
<skillPicks z="62408">
<st>impact_mitigation</st>
<st>ranged_specialization</st>
<st>helmsmanship</st>
<st>strike_commander</st>
<st>systems_expertise</st>
<st>phase_mastery</st>
</skillPicks>
<madePicks>true</madePicks>
</OfficerData>
<OfficerData z="62409">
<person ref="60063"></person>
<skillPicks z="62410"></skillPicks>
<madePicks>false</madePicks>
</OfficerData>
Latest Slipstream shenanigans:
Found a very long slip stream in the "south" of the sector and rode for a good long while before it dumped me into...
...a massive Luddic Path Holy Armada. Yes, I was able to buy my way out with a tithe but this fleet was strong enough (after a quick reload and baiting) to take out Citadel Arcadia that had a few patrol fleets. It was like plowing into Godzilla at 38 burn.
Do not misunderstand me: I enjoyed this thoroughly and am glad such a thing exists. We need more unexpected "oh crap" moments.
Sorry, to clarify, does this mean new saves for everyone (ie, including older, pre-patch saves) or just new saves for anyone who has started a new run since the first patch drop yesterday?
ROFLOL!! Still, would be kinda cool to get different versions of the command shuttle (or at least a few different skins), but new neural link skill partially moots this possibility. But definitely a 1.1 sorta improvement!
So for the next hotfix, it should be easy enough, in the conversion subroutine for a previous version save, to just set all OfficerData madePicks to "false" and remove the list of skills if one is present, to remove this potential issue. Cheers!
This is a small thing, and maybe I was just unlucky, but it doesn't look like the new hulls are in the pool for the random battle mission. I wanted to test them out, but a few minutes of rerolling the fleets never hit any of them.
Still very excited to try more of the patch later, even if every slipstream I've come across so far has managed to be perpendicular to my intended direction of travel!
I've only just begun my game so I'm still in the tutorial, but I noticed the changes in the video feed. My initial impression was confusion as to why "F" was toggling on and off the view feed instead of cycling between ships, only to remember that I forgot about the changes to the video feed in the patch notes. It seems I need to go into the command map, select the ship and then press "Q" to get a video feed. It doesn't seem too bad, but it is a bit slower to switch between ships since you seem to need to go back into the command map then select the ship, rather then just pressing "F" as before (maybe there is another way I'm not aware of that will cycle the feed without jumping back to the command map?).
Would you perhaps consider allowing "F" to work as before but only while "Q" is pressed, ie "Q"(HELD)+"F" will switch between the ships in the video feed without having to exit back to the command map (for reverse cycling maybe something like "Q"(HELD)+"SHIFT"+"F"?).
Perhaps I'm jumping the gun here a little since I've only just started and these changes were necessary for that new neural link skill that I'll probably be some time from testing (perhaps I'll see later that what I'm suggesting won't work with that?).
Really like the Mission Map that is provided prior to accepting a mission. Especially useful for some of the Galatia Academy missions where you can see the mission location (sure you could look up the star system to find it before accepting it, but having a map is so much better).
I noticed though that it doesn't seem to work for the Technology Cache mission where you need to mail the scientist the Alpha core (I think that was a one off mission wasn't it?).
Oh, realized that I never replied here! Basically the idea is you press F if you want to stick with one quick for a while, and if you want to rapidly switch between feeds, you can press-release Q (while left-clicking different ships) to get an overview of the battlefield quickly. I'm not a fan of F cycling since it's near impossible to know which ship it's going to jump to next, and you can't go back if you overshoot, so it's just clunky.I think I'm still getting used to it, so perhaps I'll come to prefer this method over time. Thanks for responding to that reply as well!
Oh noes the HSA+AO combo. Can't have *** in hightech. (That combo was pretty silly on some ships, understandable).
(I'm not sure exactly what I was thinking - either I just somehow forgot that AO existed, or just goofed. But thinking about it now, that combo just seems like a real bad idea - it goes right against the new HSA's design which is "match the normal hard flux range that's likely to be available on that ship". And with AO that goes right out the window.)
I'm on RC4 and the squall seems to be firing when the ship has already died.That's been a thing for a long time, I specifically reported the Squall for it but it seems it's intentional.
This seems to be consistent with most weapons that are on burst.. huh they're not canceling out when dead.
Haha - true. But also: Safety Overrides, Expanded Missile Racks, and an officer with Missile Spec. It's not *good* by a long shot, but it packs a surprising punch.
System extertise could use two more points:
- If the system has a limited use duration +x%duration
- If the system only as a passive upkeep while active (toggle able systems e.g. fortress shield) -x%upkeet
(Ah - I specifically didn't want to extend duration because that could be a bad thing for some systems, and I'd like the bonuses from Systems Expertise to be universally good.)
Can we expect a new incarnation of "Colony Management" skill later?(like more fitting for the current state of those) or just overall possibility to manage more without resorting to AI coresI'm going to predict 'no'. I have the feeling that the main character is supposed to be part Han Solo and part Captain Kirk. Sitting in one place running a colony doesn't fit the trope.
I noticed that it was possible to pick up more additional crew then I have capacity for while out exploring. It seems a lot of the time I don't normally exceed my crew capacity with new crew I find, but there was one instance where I found another 39 additional Marines while already full and had to head back to civilization to drop some off (sure I could air lock them, but that seems a tad harsh).It would be very nice to put some crew in cryopods so they take cargo space instead of hab space. Why isn't that a thing? Its got to be a thing, somehow.
Unfortunately i think mass transfer (holding down ALT to move the item currently under your cursor) has been broken D:Mine seems to work fine. However, instead of modifying the original Settings file, I made a mod that changes when the mods load.
Unfortunately i think mass transfer (holding down ALT to move the item currently under your cursor) has been broken D:Mine seems to work fine. However, instead of modifying the original Settings file, I made a mod that changes when the mods load.
This is the standard way to do it:Oh, any clue how i could re-enable it?Unfortunately i think mass transfer (holding down ALT to move the item currently under your cursor) has been broken D:Mine seems to work fine. However, instead of modifying the original Settings file, I made a mod that changes when the mods load.
Just a thought, what about omitting the need to left-click different ships from the command map; just mouse over the ship you want to look at and press "Q" ? (You could still use the left-click to set a default feed when you aren't moused over any other ship).
I love the new skillsets, the SlipStream and boy was I smiling when I saw the Pilums now have a second stage that actually makes them useful again. Keep up the great work! Big Love!
I can understand the design intent to keep AO and HSA mutually exclusive and the initial cost reduction to HSA is a reasonable gesture, but HSA still feels too expensive if HSA beams can't be extended via AO and are thus directly comparable rangewise with other energy weapons. For example, comparing OP costs and DPS of Plasma Cannon vs Tach Lance + HSA, or Heavy Blaster vs Phase Lance + HSA, and the additional HSA OP tax feels a bit high even if amortized across multiple beams.
Alternately, perhaps the damage bonus could be buffed a bit in lieu of an OP decrease?
First Impression: Slipstreams are a realy nice change of pace in hyperspace and do improve the travel-feeling. Thanks for that, Alex.
Also, I haven't played much with the old skill-tree, but the new one looks interesting for sure.
is Salamander now without emp?
somehow are Salamander and Pillum switched, usually I use both anyway^^
> Somewhat less funny: Elite Combat Endurance. "When below 25% hull..." yeah you can stop it right there. My ships will not get to 25% hull very often. If that happens something has gone horribly wrong, and that ship should retreat immediately before it gets itself killed. If it even manages that - situations that get a ship to low hull tend to be situations that get a ship killed ery soon afterwards. So this Elite skill is looking kind of useless.
> Ballistic Rangefinder is awesome, but I feel it lets down Medium Ballistic weapons, specifically the Arbalest, Heavy Mortar and Thumper. I was really hoping for 800 range Heavy Mortars, which have an important role to fill as high-DPS anti-armor against big targets, for which 700 base range isn't enough. But it turns out only ships with a Large ballistic mount get to have that. you know, the ships with access to Hellbore Cannon and Hephaestus Assault Gun which completely outclass the Heavy Mortar regardless of its range. Meanwhile, the many Cruisers and Destroyers who desperately want good medium ballistic weapons find these weapons don't benefit at all from the hullmod. The Enforcer is particularly a victim of this. One of its key advantages is having many turreted medium weapon slots. But Ballistic Rangefinder does nothing for these medium weapons! And then there's the fact that small Ballistics do always benefit, so weapons like Railgun and Light Assault Gun end up having 100 more range than the abovementioned medium weapons.
My conclusion is one of two things should happen: either let Ballistic Rangefinder buff Medium weapons to 800 range max in the absence of a large mount; or outright buff the Arbalest Cannon, Heavy Mortar and Thumper to 800 base range.
When I started the game I noticed that the pirate planet umbra in the askonia system required heavy amount of resources like supplies, fuel, drugs.
I went there and pretty much by running back and forth from that planet and the other stations in the same system I quickly reached over 1.5 millions credits plus an atlas and a prometheus. I feel like I pretty much skipped the whole struggle that I'm supposed to have at the start. Why do any mission at all if I can get this much money in so little time?
Can we expect a new incarnation of "Colony Management" skill later?(like more fitting for the current state of those) or just overall possibility to manage more without resorting to AI cores
just not really found of using AI cores/administrators earlier,before first 3 colonies were usualy under own hand until like level 4-5,and while yes, i am not being exactly fair by usualy not sticking to vanilla lvl 15 cap, i still liked having that one in late game when i came to find colonies
I noticed that it was possible to pick up more additional crew then I have capacity for while out exploring. It seems a lot of the time I don't normally exceed my crew capacity with new crew I find, but there was one instance where I found another 39 additional Marines while already full and had to head back to civilization to drop some off (sure I could air lock them, but that seems a tad harsh). If this is intended just ignore this, it just appeared to me that when I get additional crew while near capacity it tends to fill it up, not normally exceed it.
On a related note, the penalty seems pretty harsh. From memory (so some details may not be quite right) my entire fleet with ~800 crew was only consuming ~1.8 supplies/month while those additional 39 personnel were consuming 3.9 supplies/month. I'm wondering whether something like an "Emergency Berthing" hull-mod could be set up while in deep space to deal with these situations; even if it was only half as effective and the 50% maintenance penalty applied to any ship it was installed on I think it would still be preferable to the massive drain in supplies for being slightly over crew capacity.
I understand why it might be a bad idea to extend duration for certain ship systems since that can just feel like always having the system on. That said, a nice middle ground could be buffing systems expertise to upgrade cooldown based skills to have charges instead; like charges-based maneuvering thrusters or charges based accelerated ammo feeder (eg. changes ship systems with cooldowns to have an additional +1 charge that can be activated instantly again; charges have the same cooldown recharge timer). This way, the player has charges at their discretion to have a system on for a really long time, but the cooldown to be able to do that is also twice as long.
Derelict operations seems potentially quite good in terms of getting an advantage in deployed ships but I'm a bit neurotic about wanting all my ships to be shiny and running their best.
Currently driving an Eradicator. I'm always at a loss when it comes to fitting missiles in the base game, tbh, so those five slots are vexing me a bit, but no doubt it's great at bullying destroyers with the fast movement, very much feels like a budget Aurora. Although I did get a rude surprise burn driving in on one of those [REDACTED] destroyers from the side, I didn't realize their reaper mounts were turreted and could fire 90 degrees off center, lol.
I'm thinking the Tech tree feels like the odd man out, now. Between ECM nerf, flux dispersion nerf, and 3rd built-in mod moving to green tree there's a lot less reason to move past gunnery implants / energy mastery.
Leveling up is definitely a lot slower now compared to in 0.95a, doubly so for officers.
One of the (intended? unintended?) consequences of this is that I'm feeling very SP starved. In my playthrough I haven't spent any SP on get-out-of-jail-free cards like disengaging or emergency repairs, purchased the location of one blueprint and one colony item, haven't made any colony improvements, and am even using my own mod that negates the SP cost of building in hull mods (this is the only mod I'm using). Yet I'm level 13 and somehow only have 4 SP to spend, whereas in 0.95 at this point I'd have 30-something SP floating around. If I had spent SP building in hull mods I'd be at about -6 SP.
So where is all this SP going? The major culprit is... a skill. Cybernetic augmentation. This skill is completely useless unless you spend story points, and maximizing its value costs 24-30 SP. This feels off -- a skill shouldn't require spending such an inordinate amount of SP just to have any effect at all.
With SP gain being so much slower while SP use cases just keep increasing, I feel like it would be a good idea to make a balancing pass on SP usage. For example, do colony item locations and colony improvements really need to double in SP cost each time they're used? This seems like it was to balance against having lots of spare SP, which was the case in 0.95 but, at least for me, isn't any longer. Another suggestion -- remove the SP cost on giving officers elite skills and grant them as a bonus upon reaching max officer level. Or at least remove the SP cost of the extra elite skills that cybernetic augmentation offers, so that that skill is actually useful (+2 elite officer skills is great but, let's be honest, not worth a 16-20 SP investment).
yeah with mods theres quite a bit to do with colonies,but that sounds better to go for quality over quantity,i would like to see where it can go laterCan we expect a new incarnation of "Colony Management" skill later?(like more fitting for the current state of those) or just overall possibility to manage more without resorting to AI cores
just not really found of using AI cores/administrators earlier,before first 3 colonies were usualy under own hand until like level 4-5,and while yes, i am not being exactly fair by usualy not sticking to vanilla lvl 15 cap, i still liked having that one in late game when i came to find colonies
I wouldn't think so, no. I don't find the concept of "more colonies" to be particularly interesting (which, if you do - fair enough! but, mods), and the direction the game is more likely to go in would be making colonies more interesting, not making more colonies.
Told you about CA needing to give some sort of fleetwide bonus :PI'm thinking the Tech tree feels like the odd man out, now. Between ECM nerf, flux dispersion nerf, and 3rd built-in mod moving to green tree there's a lot less reason to move past gunnery implants / energy mastery.
I can see that, yeah; I'm definitely keeping an eye on some of the skills in the second-to-last tier in Tech. On the other hand, the top-tier in Tech is really, really good.
Thank you for the amazing update. really loving it
But i think i have a problem in my game, and i don't know if i am going crazy or because it is a 1.5.1 save something is wrong.
Can anyone confirm if the "hull restoration" is actually removing D mods per month, because i think i did play a entire year and did not got a single one removed
Absolutely love the slipstreams! Really adds a lot to the hyperspace navigation aspect of the game which (to me) was always a bit dry.
Been following this game since like... 2011? Crazy! Thanks for all of the hard work over the years, you've really put something special together here!
i do have a few ideas for that but pretty sure its better to hold and refine them for later as seems like your busy with other things
Told you about CA needing to give some sort of fleetwide bonus :P
Got d-modded ships from custom production with orbital works and pristine forge, is this intended?
Leadership could use some more general skills, feels to focussed on Frigates and Carriers.
Cybernetic Augmentation would hurt a little less to use if elite-ing an officer skill gave some bonus XP, at least after the first skill.
Cybernetic Augmentation should give something (minor) that does not require SP to gain the benefits. So far, Cybernetic Augmentation gives nothing if player does not spend SP.
Though - Officer Training requires 8 SP to fully utilize, and if you go in for Best of the Best as well, then you're looking at a large chunk of SP from Leadership, too. Where for Tech you're looking at, at most, +5 (or +10) from cyberaug, and then +whatever for fully integrating AI cores.
Quick question, why only +5 or +10 for Cyberaugmentation? Shouldn't it be twice Officer training to fully utilize, 8 officers baseline times 2, for +16?
I think the idea of dropping it to +1 elite skill plus something else is reasonable, as then it seems more in line with typical amount of story points used by Officer Training and Best of the Best. I'd be amused if you somehow combined the AI core selection screens with the officer selection screens. A literal combination of AI cores augmenting officers.
Though - Officer Training requires 8 SP to fully utilize, and if you go in for Best of the Best as well, then you're looking at a large chunk of SP from Leadership, too. Where for Tech you're looking at, at most, +5 (or +10) from cyberaug, and then +whatever for fully integrating AI cores.At least BotB gives something that does not use SP. Current Cyber Augmentation does not.
Just a thought but why not make a Gamma or Beta core "augment" a human pilot, in addition to traditional story points? If you add a Gamma Core to a human pilot, you get an extra elite skill and if you plug in a Beta, you get 2 extra elite skills. I mean, I'm usually floating in Gamma Cores even by mid-game if I do exploration. This side-steps some of the SP-burden of the skill.
So, basically, best of both worlds: you can just use SP, just use Cores, or do a combination of Gamma+SP to achieve +2 Elite skills.
Coordinated Manoeuvrers is too Frigate Focussed to be considered a general skill, a frigate costs only a few DP and give high boni, destroyers give something everything else abyssal, a light cruiser fleet e.g. mostly falcons should get a decent buff from it.Leadership could use some more general skills, feels to focussed on Frigates and Carriers.
Hmm - there's Tactical Drills, Crew Training, and Coordinated Maneuvers for the most "general-purpose" way to get up to the next tier. I understand what you mean, though, but there's only so many slots for skills. I felt like these three were reasonable-enough picks for someone that doesn't want to specialize into one of the other options.
Coordinated Manoeuvrers is too Frigate Focussed to be considered a general skill, a frigate costs only a few DP and give high boni, destroyers give something everything else abyssal, a light cruiser fleet e.g. mostly falcons should get a decent buff from it.Nav rating is fleet wide, every ship benefits from the speed boost equally. The skill basically says if you deploy a few smaller ships, your entire fleet gets a speed boost. You don't need to focus on frigates at all, literally just deploy 2-3 omens and set them to escort stuff, and then deploy whatever else you want and you will probably get the full 20% boost.
Greetings all,On the other hand, you can use your piloting to make exploration more efficient (if you replace multiple ships with just your flagship) and you can use your fleetwide skills to make fighting more efficient (by mitigating losses or making your whole fleet better). You can do just fine without personal skills, though, and you don't have to set your flagship to a combat ship or deploy it to all fights, either.
As a new player, I have noticed one thing that probably should be changed.
There are two kinds of players: one which prefers to personally fly the ship in fights and the one which never does that.
This means, that players who prefer to explore rather than fight, have no use for the first tier of skills (mostly) because the emphasis is on fleet properties and feats.
In short: the pool of experience for "fighters" should gather experience from directly fighting and then being applied on skills which only affect player's ship.
As an "explorer" I almost never pick personal skills because they are useless for fleet activity.
This is why I think the two kinds of experience should be almost completely calculated and applied differently and separately.
Did you build an extra heavy industry to get a higher production cap? There's a "officially not a bug" where doing that can crash your production quality.
+25% raid effectiveness because +100% from old Ground Operations got reduced to Tacticall Drills' +50%. Maybe even +50%? It is thematically appropriate.Told you about CA needing to give some sort of fleetwide bonus :P
You might've mentioned it giving bonuses to marines once or twice :) As I think I've mentioned, though, suggestions without laying out your reasoning behind the idea are not, to be perfectly honest, very useful. 99% of the time, the thinking behind it is more interesting and valuable than the actual idea, and it's more likely to spawn a discussion that something else might come out of, too. For example, if you just say, "I think X", there's not much of a conversation to have, is there? But if you say "I think X because Y", then there's more there to engage with.
I just noticed ill-advised modifications can be removed now, is this a bug? How long have you been able to do this? If it stays this way, I'll absolutely use some LP ships now!
float quality = 0f;
for (MarketAPI market : Global.getSector().getEconomy().getMarketsCopy()) {
if (!market.isPlayerOwned()) continue;
quality = market.getStats().getDynamic().getMod(Stats.PRODUCTION_QUALITY_MOD).computeEffective(0f);
quality += market.getStats().getDynamic().getMod(Stats.FLEET_QUALITY_MOD).computeEffective(0f);
}
quality -= Global.getSector().getFaction(Factions.PLAYER).getDoctrine().getShipQualityContribution();
quality += 4f * Global.getSettings().getFloat("doctrineFleetQualityPerPoint");
float quality = 0f;
for (MarketAPI market : Global.getSector().getEconomy().getMarketsCopy()) {
if (!market.isPlayerOwned()) continue;
quality = Math.max(quality, ShipQuality.getShipQuality(market, Factions.PLAYER));
}
quality -= Global.getSector().getFaction(Factions.PLAYER).getDoctrine().getShipQualityContribution();
quality += 4f * Global.getSettings().getFloat("doctrineFleetQualityPerPoint");
Well I have like 30 fuel and the 3 more fuel wasn't making any difference.Was short on fuel and used distress signal(have fleet - 1 destroyer+tanker and like 6 frigates). The hegemony patrol offered 3(three) fuel. Could thank them with 20k credits. Not amused.
Hmm, nothing changed there, so I suspect you probably had barely enough fuel to get back - iirc how much you get offered depends on how much fuel you need (considering what you already have) to get back to the nearest core world.
Well, about modding...
can dependencies mods have a setting like >=1.0.0, not completely equals 1.0.0
I don't think that'd make sense, since that'd be saying that no future version of the dependency could possibly break this mod, and that's not something the mod can guarantee. (Regardless, not something I'd want to touch for a hotfix...)
i find passing through slipstreams when not aligned with my destination rather annoying, since autopilot handles it wierd, and i got to use eburn. Even if it doesnt make much sense, could "moving slow" allow you to pass through? Mostly QoL perspective
But i think i have a problem in my game, and i don't know if i am going crazy or because it is a 1.5.1 save something is wrong.
Can anyone confirm if the "hull restoration" is actually removing D mods per month, because i think i did play a entire year and did not got a single one removed
i find passing through slipstreams when not aligned with my destination rather annoying, since autopilot handles it wierd, and i got to use eburn. Even if it doesnt make much sense, could "moving slow" allow you to pass through? Mostly QoL perspective
First I thought the same thing, but now with 10 hours in the new update, it looks a bit different:
A "you have to slow down"-obstacle already exists with the hyperstorms. Changing the slipstreams that way, would make hyperspace-travel a bit more boring again.
In it's current state it surely is a more difficult obstacle, but because of that it gives you a different and interesting challenge, with several ways to tackle it:
1. Using eburn, as you mentioned it.
2. Using an S-turn to get a bit of it's speedboost and passing it.
3. Checking for a system in it's way, because there are breaks in the slipstream and you can pass it without any problem.
Unfortunately this isn't the case as I only have one colony with an orbital works.
Actually, it looks like custom production code is in the api. Here is the relevant code for 0.95.1a:So whereas 0.95a was taking the maximum ship quality out of all player-owned markets, if I'm reading this correctly, 0.95.1a is just using the ship quality info of whatever happens to be the last player-owned market in the market list. Makes sense then, since my last colony is a throwaway tech-mining colony, but it doesn't seem like this was intended.SpoilerCode
float quality = 0f;
for (MarketAPI market : Global.getSector().getEconomy().getMarketsCopy()) {
if (!market.isPlayerOwned()) continue;
quality = market.getStats().getDynamic().getMod(Stats.PRODUCTION_QUALITY_MOD).computeEffective(0f);
quality += market.getStats().getDynamic().getMod(Stats.FLEET_QUALITY_MOD).computeEffective(0f);
}
quality -= Global.getSector().getFaction(Factions.PLAYER).getDoctrine().getShipQualityContribution();
quality += 4f * Global.getSettings().getFloat("doctrineFleetQualityPerPoint");
And here is the ship quality code from 0.95a-RC15:Codefloat quality = 0f;
for (MarketAPI market : Global.getSector().getEconomy().getMarketsCopy()) {
if (!market.isPlayerOwned()) continue;
quality = Math.max(quality, ShipQuality.getShipQuality(market, Factions.PLAYER));
}
quality -= Global.getSector().getFaction(Factions.PLAYER).getDoctrine().getShipQualityContribution();
quality += 4f * Global.getSettings().getFloat("doctrineFleetQualityPerPoint");[close]
I just noticed ill-advised modifications can be removed now, is this a bug? How long have you been able to do this? If it stays this way, I'll absolutely use some LP ships now!
I'm having a lot of fun with the new phase ship. The last update, phase ships were so fragile, you could only sneak attack. The new penalties make it much more of a brawl, and I like it like that. My Shade hardly ever comes back in without its armor completely shredded.
Phase Anchor is near broken. It's kind of like SO for phase ships. I can use the cooldown reduction to push ridiculous amounts of damage with a basic set of weapons. Just try a Harbinger with two phase lances and an ion pulser. It hasn't lost any power after the quantum disrupter nerf.
I mean, have you seen how fast phase anchor adds charges to an ion pulser? That's going to be absolutely broken once I get [REDACTED]
i find passing through slipstreams when not aligned with my destination rather annoying, since autopilot handles it wierd, and i got to use eburn. Even if it doesnt make much sense, could "moving slow" allow you to pass through? Mostly QoL perspective
But in the opposite, the mods use new feature of the dependency mod won't warn the player if the dependency mod is old...
*thumbs up* (Going to keep an eye on Phase Anchor, of course, but just vis a vis phase ships being more fun!)All I can tell you at the moment is that it doesn't let Doom solo doritos...
Anyone else finding that arms dealers are still kind of meh; I've only gotten 5 in my playthrough so far and they've all offered rather subpar purchases. And by the time I was able to find one that actually contained a Medusa - I had already found and bought a medusa from the black market rendering the arms dealer purposeless.Agreed. Still haven't found one which makes Hypervelocity Drivers.
Maybe a solution should be that arms dealers should be like any other type of contacts that you can develop and hold on to. This way, there's a more consistent way of accessing high-end gear without having to search the whole inner core for it.
Apologies for badgering you Alex, but when is RC6 coming? I'd like to buy an Apogee as well as use the new Cybernetic Augmentation.Anyone else finding that arms dealers are still kind of meh; I've only gotten 5 in my playthrough so far and they've all offered rather subpar purchases. And by the time I was able to find one that actually contained a Medusa - I had already found and bought a medusa from the black market rendering the arms dealer purposeless.Agreed. Still haven't found one which makes Hypervelocity Drivers.
Maybe a solution should be that arms dealers should be like any other type of contacts that you can develop and hold on to. This way, there's a more consistent way of accessing high-end gear without having to search the whole inner core for it.
Anyone else finding that arms dealers are still kind of meh; I've only gotten 5 in my playthrough so far and they've all offered rather subpar purchases. And by the time I was able to find one that actually contained a Medusa - I had already found and bought a medusa from the black market rendering the arms dealer purposeless.I got lucky and got the Illegal arms merchant @ 200% markup with up to 1,000,000 credit worth of production when I happened to have cash (I swear they pop up more often when you are broke!), so bought 3 Apogee's. On another note Apogee's seem super rare; I don't think I've ever seen one on the market or elsewhere (so it was very fortuitous that the illegal arms merchant happened to be selling production slots and providing the blueprints as I still haven't ever seen any yet).
Maybe a solution should be that arms dealers should be like any other type of contacts that you can develop and hold on to. This way, there's a more consistent way of accessing high-end gear without having to search the whole inner core for it.
Bug, fixed next hotfix.Anyone else finding that arms dealers are still kind of meh; I've only gotten 5 in my playthrough so far and they've all offered rather subpar purchases. And by the time I was able to find one that actually contained a Medusa - I had already found and bought a medusa from the black market rendering the arms dealer purposeless.I got lucky and got the Illegal arms merchant @ 200% markup with up to 1,000,000 credit worth of production when I happened to have cash (I swear they pop up more often when you are broke!), so bought 3 Apogee's. On another note Apogee's seem super rare; I don't think I've ever seen one on the market or elsewhere (so it was very fortuitous that the illegal arms merchant happened to be selling production slots and providing the blueprints as I still haven't ever seen any yet).
Maybe a solution should be that arms dealers should be like any other type of contacts that you can develop and hold on to. This way, there's a more consistent way of accessing high-end gear without having to search the whole inner core for it.
I do like the idea of having an illegal arms contact (though I haven't been using contacts at all in this play through), though it may end up making your own Heavy Industries a little redundant as 200% markup is still better than not being in possession of a desired blueprint.
Bug, fixed next hotfix.I didn't realize it was a bug, so that's good to know, thanks.
Ah, to be honest, I'm not liking the "benefit to probability of causing another problem" ratio on this one. Hotfixes don't get much testing, so they're either for things that are vitally important, or extremely unlikely to cause a problem - ideally, both. And this one's, sadly, neither.
Anyone else finding that arms dealers are still kind of meh; I've only gotten 5 in my playthrough so far and they've all offered rather subpar purchases. And by the time I was able to find one that actually contained a Medusa - I had already found and bought a medusa from the black market rendering the arms dealer purposeless.
Maybe a solution should be that arms dealers should be like any other type of contacts that you can develop and hold on to. This way, there's a more consistent way of accessing high-end gear without having to search the whole inner core for it.
After playing more than i should be allowed to, I came to this conclusion: Although slipstreams are incredibly fun and gorgeous in theory, they are about the worst thing in practice. I don't think I've EVER found a single slipstream that helped me reach a destination. It's always like, "I want to go UP"->random slipstream appears: "No. Now you go all the way left".i just wish they were easier to pass through when they dont align with your destination, and that autopilot could more or less do it
I have to constantly monitor that I'm not caught into one because if i don't manually get out i waste precious fuel and could end up stranded.
I can't go to the toilet while the ship autopilots to the destination like I did before, and again, played for hours and pretty much reached the end game while still having to ride a single slipstream on purpose because it went in the direction i wanted to go.
My suggestion? lower the randomness, make them more likely to go from the core systems outwards or from outward to inward, like an asterisk *. Not all of them of course, but just increasing the likelihood of them being useful instead of a roadblock 99% of the times.
But other than that, they are amazing, and they look amazing, really good job on that!
the cones on your fleet that appear when you hit a hyperstorm seem to be backwards
Couple unrelated things:Can you launch proximity charges with burn drive? That sounds fun.
Proximity Charges are useful now. They act like variant Annihilators, but easier to use and last just as long in a fight. Shoots slower than Annihilators, but the shots are like purple fireballs. If I have OP to spare, I might take Proximity Charges instead of Annihilator Pods.
Without Civilian Hull, Warfarer can easily get Expanded Cargo Holds (without needing Military Subsystems) and get just short of 200 cargo capacity in a frigate.
Can you launch proximity charges with burn drive? That sounds fun.I do not remember. I tried it on a Dominator, and it did inherit velocity (but I do not remember if I used burn drive). Even without velocity, they are faster than before. Using proximity charges today kind of feels like using a Fireball sorceress from Diablo 2... or any small AoE weapon in a shoot-em-up.
Can you launch proximity charges with burn drive? That sounds fun.Yes, but it's 1 bomb per second, so you won't be getting a lot of benefit. Yeeting a proximity charge at a million miles per second with a Shrike feels fun, though.
And i will deploy 7 radiant with alpha core officers
And i will deploy 7 radiant with alpha core officerscan u share some screens?
So adding a random start option with 1 or 2 ships or maybe a faction-start, where you can choose a faction and then get one of their ships, those would be my hopes for the future.
I picked that one actually when the update dropped and got a Drover, Mule, and a Condor, along with 2 logistic ships. That starting fleet caused me more troubles than help so I had to get rid of some and get actual combat frigates.So adding a random start option with 1 or 2 ships or maybe a faction-start, where you can choose a faction and then get one of their ships, those would be my hopes for the future.
The last vanilla start option is a random start.
It is only half the rate of Annihilator Pod. On the ships with multiple medium mounts, they can be used as bigger Annihilators with a fatter hitbox. It is easier to hit things with charges than with annihilators.Can you launch proximity charges with burn drive? That sounds fun.Yes, but it's 1 bomb per second, so you won't be getting a lot of benefit. Yeeting a proximity charge at a million miles per second with a Shrike feels fun, though.
Alex, how do you feel about making some existing skills have secondary colony effects?I already suggested this to him multiple times and every time at was a no.
Like Bulk Transport would increase accessibility, Field Repairs Salvaging reduces resource demand (something something recycling), Tactical Drills increases ground defense...
(This is kinda a suggestion for the game, but also I was thinking of doing this in Nex as a way to buff the named NPC admins, and was wondering if there's a reason I shouldn't)
Without Civilian Hull, Warfarer can easily get Expanded Cargo Holds (without needing Military Subsystems) and get just short of 200 cargo capacity in a frigate.30% of 150 is 45, and since 45 is greater than 30, Warfarer gets 195 cargo, not 180 as I expected, since most frigates do not have that much cargo to trigger the 30% cargo part.
So adding a random start option with 1 or 2 ships or maybe a faction-start, where you can choose a faction and then get one of their ships, those would be my hopes for the future.
The last vanilla start option is a random start.
...choosing the quick start ... gives me too many ships with which I don't know and don't understand what to do with.
(https://i.postimg.cc/YGzkCgzy/2.jpg)And i will deploy 7 radiant with alpha core officerscan u share some screens?
Hello! Alex
Thanks for the cool updates! ;D
I found i can retain radiant and the other automated ships CR with no officer
So i can keep at least 7 Radiant-class in about 29% CR (by Support Doctrine
Before the battles, i can install alpha cores temporary. And i will deploy 7 radiant with alpha core officers in about 29% cr because cr lose 1.5%/days
Out of curiosity does windows defender still flag the game?
Do ships with S-Mods have higher FP in autoresolve?
Alex, how do you feel about making some existing skills have secondary colony effects?
Like Bulk Transport would increase accessibility, Field Repairs Salvaging reduces resource demand (something something recycling), Tactical Drills increases ground defense...
(This is kinda a suggestion for the game, but also I was thinking of doing this in Nex as a way to buff the named NPC admins, and was wondering if there's a reason I shouldn't)
Is another RC (hotfix/fix) planed for near future or is this it?
Is it intended that you can stick cores in at the last moment to circumvent the core CR modifier stuff? Feels like maybe the CR should immediately drop to what it should be when you put the cores in.Hello! Alex
Thanks for the cool updates! ;D
I found i can retain radiant and the other automated ships CR with no officer
So i can keep at least 7 Radiant-class in about 29% CR (by Support Doctrine
Before the battles, i can install alpha cores temporary. And i will deploy 7 radiant with alpha core officers in about 29% cr because cr lose 1.5%/days
Haha, *thumbs up*
You really, really underestimate how important officers are. Support Doctrine only gives the 3 least important skills to ships. It's much better to just field larger ships and fill all your DP with officered ships. Support doctrine is only good for full degen spam strategies, in which case you will combine it with Derelict Ops and enjoy your 50% discount on fighter bays and missile slots.
I'm not sure where 48 is coming from. If I have 240 points, and my ships go from costing 20 to 16 (20*0.8 ), I go from 12 to 15 ships on the field. 15*20 = 300. So I'm curious, is it necessary for a player to get a full +60 DP bonus, for the skill to be worth a skill point? Having not played around with uneven deployments all that much, I'm not actually sure. It seems really strong to me though.
Is being able to deploy, say, 255 (+15 DP) already a sufficient benefit for a tier 5? +15 would be like a straight up 6% fleet strength buff, plus additional skills on more ships. A 25% overall fleet strength buff 60/240) for 1 skill point (even as a tier 5) sounds like too much. I don't think any of the other tier 5s really come close to that, do they?
As a more concrete example, I could imagine an 8 officer build (with the +1 to officer level skill) running 9 Furies (8+player), for 180 DP, then still having 60 DP more for frigates without officers. That would be an example of Thaago's "wide" build. I feel going from 7 Scarab/Tempests to 10 is a non-trivial bump, plus also adding peak performance and speed to each of those frigates is a non-trivial bonus. All it takes is a little bit of out numbering for the AI the start having problems with being able to back off and vent.
How much a fleet multiplier would one expect from a tier 5 skill, and how does that compare to the currently existing ones? Neural Link is like +1 officer. That's maybe a 12% increase in officered ships, which doesn't quite translate to raw fleet power? Automated ships perhaps gets you a 60 DP ship really worth, say, 75? A Radiant certainly isn't worth 100 DP, for example. Best of the Best is perhaps an 8% OP buff (imagine 315 OP capital, getting two s-mods worth 30, then another worth 30, so 30/375 = 0.08), which doesn't equate to a raw 25% stronger fleet. Hull Restoration is +10 to +15% CR, so a +5% multiplier perhaps? Derelict operations is a bit harder to estimate since you need to include a bunch of d-mods decreasing individual ship effectiveness.
Support Doctrine does synergize well... with Wolfpack Tactics :PDoesn't WT require an officer in the ship for bonuses to apply?
The exact amount of flagship skills you can get doesn't really matter - the point remains that it is way better than simply +1 officer.
You really, really underestimate how important officers are. Support Doctrine only gives the 3 least important skills to ships. It's much better to just field larger ships and fill all your DP with officered ships. Support doctrine is only good for full degen spam strategies, in which case you will combine it with Derelict Ops and enjoy your 50% discount on fighter bays and missile slots.
That's the point, you put all your officers in frigates/destroyers for massive damage.Support Doctrine does synergize well... with Wolfpack Tactics :PDoesn't WT require an officer in the ship for bonuses to apply?
The idea is you put all your officers on frigates, and then you are left with a huge amount of DP that have to be filled with unofficered ships.Support Doctrine does synergize well... with Wolfpack Tactics :PDoesn't WT require an officer in the ship for bonuses to apply?
Support Doctrine does synergize well... with Wolfpack Tactics :P
On a more serious note, I'd like to hear your opinion if 8 skillpoints (5 in tech, 3 in combat) is considered too costly for one additional non-automated ship with the performance of a level 5 officer.
The idea is you put all your officers on frigates, and then you are left with a huge amount of DP that have to be filled with unofficered ships.Support Doctrine does synergize well... with Wolfpack Tactics :PDoesn't WT require an officer in the ship for bonuses to apply?
...Except in this use case, support doctrine is simply worse than automated ships with a bunch of gamma core remnant frigates. Same 3 skills, but you get to choose the right ones and they are all elite.
Plus you don't have to have your unofficered ships be small frigates. Its a remarkably flexible skill where you can cheaply extract a lot of value from nearly any strategy that uses more than 9/11 ships.Same can be said about automated ships. There are destroyers and cruisers available.
Plus you don't have to have your unofficered ships be small frigates. Its a remarkably flexible skill where you can cheaply extract a lot of value from nearly any strategy that uses more than 9/11 ships.Same can be said about automated ships. There are destroyers and cruisers available.
And the thing is that you don't need a skill to boost your ships without human officer. You simply buy those officers. And place them in said ships. That's all.
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=20836.0
You don't need more than 10 officers before getting into end-game full deployment battles.
Just out of curiosity, which mod is that interface from?
The Phase ship sensor profile reduction applies inconsistently; sometimes it's on, and sometimes it's off. It still works if you have your transponder on, when it does work.
Yeah, I did the support + derelict Mora spam. It's "good", but not at all satisfying to play. Pure cheese strat.
2^13-1 is 8191 story points for one colony.
Just as a quick note, after playing with the numbers a bit: the fleetwide carrier skills probably need to be made officers-only like Wolfpack Tactics (instead of the current officer-bonus) to limit the power of DP-reduced officerless carrier spam, because it's still very worthwhile to take carrier skills even when significantly exceeding the skills' fighter bay softcap. This compounds how easy it is to achieve fighter critical mass with DP reduction skills.I didn't even pick the carrier skills. You don't need them when you have
Alternately: some minor fighter-impacting side effects could be added to existing d-mods, since it's very easy to stack a lot of non-fighter affecting d-mods on carriers for Derelict Operations.
I only ask in a half-joking manner, not entirely clear how XP scaling works once a player gets to 15, since newest patch just listed assorted "fixes" to SP generation after player gets to 15... anyone check the new code yet?I think it is a flat 1,000,000 XP per Story Point after reaching level 15 (progress bar counts up 1/4's as before and then just resets back to the start every 4 story points, or 4,000,000 XP). This is just from observing the experience bar in my own game, so I haven't looked at the code.
Did you take a look the cones that happen in hyperstorms and in slipstreams? They look backwards
may be bug report.
use CombatEntityAPI spawnProjectile(ShipAPI ship, WeaponAPI weapon, String weaponId, Vector2f point, float angle, Vector2f shipVelocity) to spawn a non-missile proj with null "weapon" parm passed will cause a Exception, concerning something about "getMoveSpeed", is this a feature or a bug?
... plus an enemy Gryphon with a single d-mod.
I need to revise my opinion on Field Repairs. While I miss Bulk Transport buffing capacities and civilian's burn speed (which is handy when recovering slow poke freighters), Field Repairs setting CR and hull nearly out of the yellow is very handy for saving supplies and getting them ready to fight again soon.
In this hotfix 2, RC5 version, I killed a Pirate base (in Duzahk) pillaging (-1 stability) my system (Penelope's), then immediately went to a system a bit N from Westernesse. When I reached that system ... lo and behold, a new Pirate base starts pillaging my bases (-2 stability now) I don't think more than 10 days passed ...
So, this bug is not fixed yet?!?
I have already overwritten that save. Indeed, it was another pirate base. I took it out.In this hotfix 2, RC5 version, I killed a Pirate base (in Duzahk) pillaging (-1 stability) my system (Penelope's), then immediately went to a system a bit N from Westernesse. When I reached that system ... lo and behold, a new Pirate base starts pillaging my bases (-2 stability now) I don't think more than 10 days passed ...
So, this bug is not fixed yet?!?
Hmm. I suspect the bug is indeed fixed - that is, a new base isn't immediately spawning - but what happened is you got targeted by another, already existing base. And taking *that* one out should take care of it (well, unless there are more bases yet, and you get unlucky with their target selection again). If you wouldn't mind emailing me your save, though, I'd love to take a look and make sure this is actually the case! fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com
15. Lasher is easily my favorite frigate at this point. It kind of already was, but even more so now :pRestored ones with free SO? They are such nasty little ships and so cheap! Crank the fleet aggression all the way up and just slam into things :D
Also as a small QOL change, could you adjust the chargeup stat from 0.33 to the Pulse Laser's 0.333333? 150 dps and 120 flux/sec look nicer than the current 152 / 121 :P
3. Looks like irpulse_fighter still uses 50 flux per shot rather than 40. Also as a small QOL change, could you adjust the chargeup stat from 0.33 to the Pulse Laser's 0.333333? 150 dps and 120 flux/sec look nicer than the current 152 / 121 :P
4. I still haven't played around too much with the new (Double) versions of Harpoon and Sabots, but at a glance I feel like it'd be nice to reduce the 10s refire delay to like 6 or so. Minor, gut feeling sorta thing.
13. New Burn Drive feels really, really nice, but it'd be good if there was a slight delay before it could be cancelled, so that double tapping it doesn't just waste the system. Definitely helps make the Legion and Onslaught a joy to pilot now.
22. Some of the "Affects: " strings seem a bit off now, like the nav rating Coordinated Maneuvers affects officered cruisers and capitals, and the difference between "fleet" (in Hull Restoration) and "all ships" (in Derelict Operations) is lost on me.
(I note that CR increases the base speed of a ship on the ship screen - does that mean its multiplied by the 30% in combat from nav and helm? If so then thats a bit more, 32%/43% speed boost).
My unofficered Hammerheads and Enforcers can go toe to toe with alpha core remnant destroyers, and my unofficered Omens/Tempests can last multi-capital fight without having CR problems - often without ticking down at all (and are _so_ fast as I put unstable injector on them too. I think my Omens and Tempests (without UI) are going ~325 with the 0 flux bonus). A pristine Enforcer for 7DP with damage control and combat endurance is a hell of a support ship.
I recovered a Conquest with 1 D mod and am now piloting it: unfortunately the D mod is faulty power systems, which is bad enough I'm thinking about docking the thing and fishing for a new one with more D mods that aren't that. -20% flux (and sensor penalties) is so rough! Degraded engines is no longer a dealbreaker as it doesn't lower cruise speed.
[edit] Oh right, termination sequence! I know you're already looking at it so I'll just add that the AI occasionally fires it from really far away so that they self destruct before impact. Maybe because the enemy is fleeing?
I think the Scintilla should have a different ship system. Recall device doesn't work particularly well with any of the drone fighters, not even the Flash. It could have Targeting Feed instead, or even Fortress Shield to make it really hard to kill. I'm using use five gamma-cored Spark Scintillas as a way to get officered interceptor carriers without actually spending officers on them, and they're acceptable enough, but not really tier 5 skill material like an alpha core Radiant or 10 gamma core Glimmers is. They're not really doing anything that 5 Drovers couldn't.
Dual Flak could also do with this treatment.
Ah, ok - thank you for confirming! (I realize the actual behavior of this isn't the best; will think about this! Just, not something I want to muck with for the hotfix.)
In previous versions of the game there was an option in 'config/settings.json' to enable/disable the large flash on ship death, I think it was called 'enableWhiteout' or something like that but I can't find it in this version. Did it get removed or renamed?
In previous versions of the game there was an option in 'config/settings.json' to enable/disable the large flash on ship death, I think it was called 'enableWhiteout' or something like that but I can't find it in this version. Did it get removed or renamed?
In config/settings.json, search for:
"enableShipExplosionWhiteout":true,
Shield Shunt:Whats the point of those changes?
Reduced armor bonus to 15% (was: 25%)
Can no longer be built into a ship as an s-mod
High Scatter Amplifier:
Now reduces base beam range past 200 units by 50%, e.g. 600 -> 400 and 1000 -> 600
Ballistic Rangefinder: increased cost to 10/15/25 (was: 6/9/15)
QuoteShield Shunt:Whats the point of those changes?
Reduced armor bonus to 15% (was: 25%)
Can no longer be built into a ship as an s-mod
High Scatter Amplifier:
Now reduces base beam range past 200 units by 50%, e.g. 600 -> 400 and 1000 -> 600
Ballistic Rangefinder: increased cost to 10/15/25 (was: 6/9/15)
Hotfix #3 -RC6 (December 20, 2021, 5:15pm EST)
Balance/other changes:
- Shield Shunt:
- Reduced armor bonus to 15% (was: 25%)
- Can no longer be built into a ship as an s-mod
- High Scatter Amplifier:
- Now reduces base beam range past 200 units by 50%, e.g. 600 -> 400 and 1000 -> 600
- Breach SRM: reduced armor damage to 250 (was: 300 in -RC5, 200 in 0.95a)
QuoteShield Shunt:Whats the point of those changes?
Reduced armor bonus to 15% (was: 25%)
Can no longer be built into a ship as an s-mod
High Scatter Amplifier:
Now reduces base beam range past 200 units by 50%, e.g. 600 -> 400 and 1000 -> 600
Ballistic Rangefinder: increased cost to 10/15/25 (was: 6/9/15)
seconding the shield shunt question in particular - it wasn't particularly good at 25% (although i get why building in was blocked), why nerf it to 15%?
HSA idc about because I never used it & rangefinder was definitely too good for it's cost, but shunt is confusing me here
QuoteShield Shunt:Whats the point of those changes?
Reduced armor bonus to 15% (was: 25%)
Can no longer be built into a ship as an s-mod
High Scatter Amplifier:
Now reduces base beam range past 200 units by 50%, e.g. 600 -> 400 and 1000 -> 600
Ballistic Rangefinder: increased cost to 10/15/25 (was: 6/9/15)
seconding the shield shunt question in particular - it wasn't particularly good at 25% (although i get why building in was blocked), why nerf it to 15%?
HSA idc about because I never used it & rangefinder was definitely too good for it's cost, but shunt is confusing me here
I honestly don't get why you'd block building it in. It's not like the situation with SO where it is such a massively larger OP cost than all other hull mods. Shield shunt is a very cheap hullmod that basically in no case you'd build in anyways, since in basically all builds that would use it you have more expensive hullmods in the build (like heavy armour).
I honestly don't get why you'd block building it in. It's not like the situation with SO where it is such a massively larger OP cost than all other hull mods. Shield shunt is a very cheap hullmod that basically in no case you'd build in anyways, since in basically all builds that would use it you have more expensive hullmods in the build (like heavy armour).
-snip-
No it's because you could apply makeshift shield to a shiedless ship, apply shield shunt, build it in and then remove makeshift for free armor. That's why he blocked building it in.
Now whether or not that was worth fixing is a different question
Well, guess HSA is useless again. Oh well, too bad.+
seconding the shield shunt question in particular - it wasn't particularly good at 25% (although i get why building in was blocked), why nerf it to 15%?
Why the HSA changes?
Why the breach srm changes? they didnt feel op at all
Feel like a better way to do that would have been to have it simply such that makeshift shield generator and shield shunt cannot be installed at the same time
About Shield shunt: imo it should give 25%, as it was, and cost 0 OP. It looked like finally good enough in theory, but i used it 70% of my playthrough with every damn armor buff we have in this game, and it was kinda meh... And when i removed it and added hardened shileds and Filed modulation the game became 400% easier.
seconding the shield shunt question in particular - it wasn't particularly good at 25% (although i get why building in was blocked), why nerf it to 15%?
Mainly because it had the possibility of being too good, and the problem with something like this - which cuts a lot of gameplay out of the game by making a ship which is fairly one-dimensional to pilot - is if it's too strong, it really damages the game. I'll keep an eye on it, though.
If HSA was a bad idea then just get rid of it. It's better then having it be useless except for niche situations where it's maybe overpowered. Is 10 Glimmers with HSA and full beams broken right now, will it be broken in a future patch, will any new beams be broken with HSA in the future? Leaving a potential landmine lying around for the sake of keeping a bad idea is bad praxis, imo.
Is the update compatible with saves from the previous most recent hotfix?
huh, I'm kinda surprised that you thought it could end up too good - even the best build I came up with would've probably been improved by dropping shunt in favour of having shields at all, they just improve performance in sustained engagements that much
(although it's not the final build, i later built in RBH and swapped the broadswords for xyphoses) here's the ship in question - it's pretty good at duelling other caps, but without support it'll just die to smaller ships dealing chip damage / sneaking the occasional torpedo inSpoiler(https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/304690022299336705/920415309679194112/screenshot1335.png)[close]
and as for taking a dimension out of gameplay - imo it was much more interesting, having no shields punishes overextension & bad positioning far more than i would've expected (especially when fighting low tech, piranhas are an actual threat when you can't shield their mines) so most of my battles in this bad boy were much more thoughtful than my usual "playing frigate-snooker with an odyssey's shield"
BRF turned out to be too much of a no-brainer IMO.seconding the shield shunt question in particular - it wasn't particularly good at 25% (although i get why building in was blocked), why nerf it to 15%?
Mainly because it had the possibility of being too good, and the problem with something like this - which cuts a lot of gameplay out of the game by making a ship which is fairly one-dimensional to pilot - is if it's too strong, it really damages the game. I'll keep an eye on it, though.
And, yeah, the "can't s-mod it" change is because the main reason you'd want to is so you can remove makeshift shield generator afterwards and keep it. It's otherwise too cheap to want to s-mod it in so it shouldn't have much of an effect otherwise.Why the HSA changes?
Because, frankly, I think HSA was a bad idea in the first place and it's a tough one to work with. Some beam weapons are in a place where if you turn them into hard flux dealers without a penalty, the become absolute monsters. The Phase Lance, for example - HSA + Phase Lance basically makes Heavy Blasters entirely obsolete. Reducing range is just about the only way to generically (that is, not on a per-weapon basis) adjust it so that it doesn't end up making a bunch of other stuff useless, and it's far better for it to be extremely situational than it is for it to be too good and therefore the only good choice in many situations.
Shield shunt: One Dimensional gameplay? If anything, it gets harder since armor dont regen and the game has 50 million ways of killing you through your armor thanks to 75% of missiles being HE. If you really dont want to give it any more armor (even tho it's not really a issue) why not replace the shield with a damper field instead? Or Give it back its EMP dmg reduction on top.
I just installed the game over the top of RC5, but I had this super weird issue where loading my game actually loaded my old save from 0.95a (which is in another folder). I was extremely confused for a while and thought it had erased my save, though on reloading the same save again it then correctly loaded the actual save.
Maybe I loaded the older version of the game previously and when I hit continue on the newer version of the game (I can't remember if I hit continue or selected the save game) it may of tried to load that game save instead?
HSA: I guess but then at that point, it's about as useful as advanced turret gyros or recovery shuttles (Which is to say, not very useful at all, Those 2 also could use a Complete rework)
Shield shunt: One Dimensional gameplay? If anything, it gets harder since armor dont regen and the game has 50 million ways of killing you through your armor thanks to 75% of missiles being HE. If you really dont want to give it any more armor (even tho it's not really a issue) why not replace the shield with a damper field instead? Or Give it back its EMP dmg reduction on top.
I'd definitely agree with giving Shield Shunt its EMP reduction back - EMP damage is honestly (at least on lighter ships) an even bigger threat for a shieldless ship than missiles, since missiles can often just be shot down or dodged.
...HSA: I guess but then at that point, it's about as useful as advanced turret gyros or recovery shuttles (Which is to say, not very useful at all, Those 2 also could use a Complete rework)
The shuttles are very situationally alright, but yeah, kind of in the same place as far as if they're too good they're mandatory and carriers don't need that kind of required OP sink. Gyros are just... kind of there because it feels like there ought to be something that boosts turret turn rate, but yeah, they're very marginal too.
I mean, I see what you're saying, but I'm not sure those need to be redesigned into powerhouse hullmods, either. HSA was meant to be something more special, but I don't think the concept as it is works for that.
...
Xyphos now 18 OP? I’ve never thought they were in need a nerf. You’re trading actual damage for utility and if you put it on a capital, they’re typically outranged. I don’t understand this at all.Xyphos on capitals are... usually not a good idea, yeah, since they don't inherit range boosts from capital-grade ITU. Cruisers it's a bit more of a toss-up. Where they were arguably too good was in converted hangars on destroyers - nearly all of my most effective destroyer variants prior to this version used a Xyphos wing.
...Huh. I always figured that Recovery Shuttles was there just as a setting-theme thing, a sort of a reminder that yes, life is cheap, and no, you're going to pick the option that gives you more combat power over the option that preserves the lives of your pilots. (This is one reason that I vastly prefer to deploy drone fighters when I can. It just feels better.)I just installed the game over the top of RC5, but I had this super weird issue where loading my game actually loaded my old save from 0.95a (which is in another folder). I was extremely confused for a while and thought it had erased my save, though on reloading the same save again it then correctly loaded the actual save.
Maybe I loaded the older version of the game previously and when I hit continue on the newer version of the game (I can't remember if I hit continue or selected the save game) it may of tried to load that game save instead?
That sounds like it might be some kind of windows filesystem caching weirdness or some such. That's just... strange.HSA: I guess but then at that point, it's about as useful as advanced turret gyros or recovery shuttles (Which is to say, not very useful at all, Those 2 also could use a Complete rework)
The shuttles are very situationally alright, but yeah, kind of in the same place as far as if they're too good they're mandatory and carriers don't need that kind of required OP sink. Gyros are just... kind of there because it feels like there ought to be something that boosts turret turn rate, but yeah, they're very marginal too.
I mean, I see what you're saying, but I'm not sure those need to be redesigned into powerhouse hullmods, either. HSA was meant to be something more special, but I don't think the concept as it is works for that.
...Huh. I always figured that Recovery Shuttles was there just as a setting-theme thing, a sort of a reminder that yes, life is cheap, and no, you're going to pick the option that gives you more combat power over the option that preserves the lives of your pilots. (This is one reason that I vastly prefer to deploy drone fighters when I can. It just feels better.)
HSA: Even with previous stats it never felt overpowered. I was using an Odyssey with HSA and 2x HIL and found it underwhelming. I ended up swapping it out for Plasma and Autopulse. It was ok but barely competitive. Even Tach Lance and HIL didn’t impress me that much. Losing the range kinda of defeated the purpose. Another head-scratcher to me.HIL is like the worst possible weapon to use it with. HE means you still suck against shields so the hard flux is much less impactful (you're still gonna lose the flux war trading 1:2), but you lost a bunch of range. Feels like you really want it when using graviton beams primarily, and maybe tac lasers or tach lances/phase lances would also benefit somewhat, but at the end of the day, none of those have stunning efficiency. Probably doesn't belong on an odyssey at all TBH.
...Huh. I always figured that Recovery Shuttles was there just as a setting-theme thing, a sort of a reminder that yes, life is cheap, and no, you're going to pick the option that gives you more combat power over the option that preserves the lives of your pilots. (This is one reason that I vastly prefer to deploy drone fighters when I can. It just feels better.)I pretty much install Blast Doors everywhere to lower casualty count...never mind if I wasn't so reckless and a little more smarter with how I play the game I wouldn't have those casualties to begin with. I do prefer to use drones myself and my Apogee's have now migrated away from the Xyphos to the Lux Heavy Fighters.
And turret gyros? Those are useful! I mean, okay, not something I install everywhere - but they're good on anything with wide turret arcs, and especially necessary for, say, turreted HILs, or ships using armored weapon mounts.
HSA is absurdly overpowered on phase ships, and slightly less so on ships with mobility systems who at least usually take fire on approach.SpoilerYou can solo endgame fleets with the Ziggy, HSA, and Tachyon Beams. You're not literally unstoppable, but you might as well be. Granted, that's an extreme edge case.[close]
Why even add unconventional stuff into the game if you are going to remove it if it ever becomes competitive with the "intended" strategies?
It seems to me that the "can't s-mod it" was very forceful, very heavy-handed to fix it. You already have a precedent of mutually exclusive hullmods. AO & HSA are now mutually exclusive. ITU & DTC always were. Technically, Phase Field(the hullmod) & CH always were. Assault Package & Support Package were.seconding the shield shunt question in particular - it wasn't particularly good at 25% (although i get why building in was blocked), why nerf it to 15%?Mainly because it had the possibility of being too good, and the problem with something like this - which cuts a lot of gameplay out of the game by making a ship which is fairly one-dimensional to pilot - is if it's too strong, it really damages the game. I'll keep an eye on it, though.
And, yeah, the "can't s-mod it" change is because the main reason you'd want to is so you can remove makeshift shield generator afterwards and keep it. It's otherwise too cheap to want to s-mod it in so it shouldn't have much of an effect otherwise.
It seems to me that the "can't s-mod it" was very forceful, very heavy-handed to fix it. You already have a precedent of mutually exclusive hullmods. AO & HSA are now mutually exclusive. ITU & DTC always were. Technically, Phase Field(the hullmod) & CH always were. Assault Package & Support Package were.
So why not make Shield Shunt & MSG mutually exclusive instead of banning one of them from S-mods?
Can we have a new non-roaming support fighter now that both of them suck? It's either 0 dp for a mining pod, or 18 for a xyphos. Would be nice to have something at around 9.
It seems to me that the "can't s-mod it" was very forceful, very heavy-handed to fix it. You already have a precedent of mutually exclusive hullmods. AO & HSA are now mutually exclusive. ITU & DTC always were. Technically, Phase Field(the hullmod) & CH always were. Assault Package & Support Package were.
So why not make Shield Shunt & MSG mutually exclusive instead of banning one of them from S-mods?
Agreed, this seems reasonable on its face (put another way, I didn't feel like thinking about it too much). Adding more illogical kludge fixes instead of addressing the underlying problem is just another paved road to hell. Don't get me wrong, it's easier than fixing the underlying problem... it's just also subject to compounding said problem/issue in the long run. Only downside is that there prolly isn't necessarily a simple and easy solution to fix said underlying problem. Either allow s-modding for every hull mod and adjust benefits for hull mods to balance system (tedious), or ditch system entirely and live with your wasted life (prolly shoulda thought this one through slightly more!).
Really? I don't agree with this assessment? HB still has double the DPS, and phase lances 1.2 efficiency isn't even very good against shields. Plus Phase lance + HSA costs a ton of OP and is pretty hard to fit on a lot of ships at all. I really didn't feel that I was restricted in that way.Why even add unconventional stuff into the game if you are going to remove it if it ever becomes competitive with the "intended" strategies?
There's "competitive" and there's "makes the normal stuff bad". HSA was squarely in the latter category with some weapons - most notably phase lances, yes, though I'd imagine it would also make trouble with some modded weapons, too. The problem isn't the HSA was "competitive", it's the (at least) the Heavy Blaster just about stopped being competitive, and I'd expect some other weapons got stepped on some, too. So: with the previous HSA, we had fewer useful weapons in the pool than we do after the change.
My phase (flag)ship is the Doom, outfitted with 6 antimatter SRM missiles for massive alpha and 2 cryoblasters for mop-up. If HSA is overpowered on phase ships, how do you make a HSA loadout that's better than that for a Doom?
I just feel like calling the "can't build it in" approach "heavy handed" is making a mountain out of a a molehill - like... it's not something you were going to do anyway, except to accomplish the thing the change is explicitly meant to prevent.I get that. I was just expressing my feeling too. The other guy who was replying to my post doesn't represent the way I feel so I'd rather have debate about it without being combined to him, please.
I get that. I was just expressing my feeling too. The other guy who was replying to my post doesn't represent the way I feel so I'd rather have debate about it without being combined to him, please.
Banning SO from S-mods is the precedent, sure. However, that was for the general purposes of "its to strong to be allowed". Banning Shield Shunt from S-mods is not about the strength of the choice, its about blocking an exploit. Thwarting the Spiffing Brit as it were.
I'd prefer the mutually exclusive route because I can see it in context of the game world.SpoilerPlayer Character: "I want you to put a MSG into that Hound"
Chief Engineer: "Sure boss."
PC: "And then rip it off to slap Shield Shunt on it."
CE: "Howhat now? But why?"
PC: "For the extra armor."
CE: "Why didn't you ask for Heavy Armor in the first place?"
PC: "Not Heavy Armor, the Shield Shunt armor. Like what you did with the Enforcer."
CE: "No, Boss... you're getting it twisted. The Enforcer's shield has external emitter nodes that are replaced with reinforced plating so you don't leave vulnerabilities to Target Analysis. The Hound doesn't have external emitter nodes. The MSG is basically a crude emitter node that we weld on the top of the thing."
PC: "Right. So we slap on the MSG to pull it back off and add the reinforced plating!"
CE: "That's Heavy Armor, Boss..."[close]
My apologies; I should've split things out more properly.Thank you for your consideration. It genuinely makes me feel better. :)Haha, I love it! That makes a lot of sense, yeah. I can see converting it over to that if I get a chance :)SpoilerPlayer Character: "I want you to put a MSG into that Hound"
Chief Engineer: "Sure boss."
PC: "And then rip it off to slap Shield Shunt on it."
CE: "Howhat now? But why?"
PC: "For the extra armor."
CE: "Why didn't you ask for Heavy Armor in the first place?"
PC: "Not Heavy Armor, the Shield Shunt armor. Like what you did with the Enforcer."
CE: "No, Boss... you're getting it twisted. The Enforcer's shield has external emitter nodes that are replaced with reinforced plating so you don't leave vulnerabilities to Target Analysis. The Hound doesn't have external emitter nodes. The MSG is basically a crude emitter node that we weld on the top of the thing."
PC: "Right. So we slap on the MSG to pull it back off and add the reinforced plating!"
CE: "That's Heavy Armor, Boss..."[close]
Thank you for your consideration. It genuinely makes me feel better. :)
Hmm - I mean, fair enough! But it did feel that way to me. Heavy Blaster DPS is just paper DPS most of the time, right - most ships can't support it, which isn't the case for the PL. And then the PL is considerably better DPS-wise in short engagements than the raw numbers seem because it does front-loaded burst damage - e.g. the DPS is almost double if you hang around just long enough for two bursts. And since the flux cost is so much lower, you don't need quite as much in the way of vents/caps, which offsets the cost of HSA, etc. I'm not saying I'm 100% right on this, but just that, yeah, it felt too strong to me. It's much easier to make a flux-light loadout on a hit-and-run high-tech ship with basically all the benefits of having a Heavy Blaster.
I get that. I was just expressing my feeling too. The other guy who was replying to my post doesn't represent the way I feel so I'd rather have debate about it without being combined to him, please.
My apologies; I should've split things out more properly.
Now you can deal hard flux damage to shields at terribly efficiency!... Kinda defeats the purpose.Hmm - I mean, fair enough! But it did feel that way to me. Heavy Blaster DPS is just paper DPS most of the time, right - most ships can't support it, which isn't the case for the PL. And then the PL is considerably better DPS-wise in short engagements than the raw numbers seem because it does front-loaded burst damage - e.g. the DPS is almost double if you hang around just long enough for two bursts. And since the flux cost is so much lower, you don't need quite as much in the way of vents/caps, which offsets the cost of HSA, etc. I'm not saying I'm 100% right on this, but just that, yeah, it felt too strong to me. It's much easier to make a flux-light loadout on a hit-and-run high-tech ship with basically all the benefits of having a Heavy Blaster.
Sound like a better nerf for HSA would be to increase the flux consumption of beam weapons, maybe by 100%?
So now you need to make exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions to the exceptions...In addition to so many special cases being extremely difficult to follow (F the new player, right?), this only covers the issues you know about (have documented). Even looking at the complexity of "only" vanilla Starsector, you can be 100% sure you have not -- and will never -- recognise all such special cases.
Xyphos now 18 OP? I’ve never thought they were in need a nerf. You’re trading actual damage for utility and if you put it on a capital, they’re typically outranged. I don’t understand this at all.
It's much easier to make a flux-light loadout on a hit-and-run high-tech ship with basically all the benefits of having a Heavy Blaster.
Equip your Doom with a Phase Anchor, HSA, 2x Phase Lances and 4x Rift Lances. If the enemy is clustered, you will destroy them far more quickly. It's clearly dependent on the situation, but the advantage here is that you don't need to wait for the SRMs to reload. Not nearly as safe, though.
What's the idea behind HSA, anyway? To make beams into hardflux weapons? Just use weapons that are already hard flux.
To give ships with energy weapons another way to use beams.A way to use beams in a manner identical to weapons you already have. It seems redundant to me.
To give ships with energy weapons another way to use beams.A way to use beams in a manner identical to weapons you already have. It seems redundant to me.
About shield shunt makeshift shield situation, imo banning shield shunt from being S-modded is preferable way, shield shunt + makeshift shield is interesting combo (even if not very useful one) and removing it coz S-mod exploit is bad idea, shield shunt is extremely cheap Hmod i don't see point in ever S-modding it
What's the idea behind HSA, anyway? To make beams into hardflux weapons? Just use weapons that are already hard flux.
Then SS lost it's EMP resistance and got 25% armor bonus. And it was still not that bad, 'cause it let me drop Heavy Armor mod and spent OP on something, that compensates weapon's vulnerability.
That's beginning to look interesting... I might try it out now.
- Combat Endurance: increased hull regen level to 50% (was: 25%)
Every time I try using shield shunt I end up in a situation where a shield would be really useful. Enemies with HIL for instance will hard counter a shieldless ship. Shield Shunt feels like a blunt instrument to fix AI behavior in heavily-armored ships. Directly changing the AI to be more willing to armor-tank light hits would be infinitely better. Though I understand how incredibly difficult AI programming can be, and how fine the line is between 'good armor tanking' and 'taking unnecessary damage'.
- Shield Shunt:
- Reduced armor bonus to 15% (was: 25%)
- Can no longer be built into a ship as an s-mod
Yup. Breach SRM is the most consistently useful small missile. Good range, good HP, good ammo capacity, and the AI isn't as wasteful with these as it sometimes is with Harpoons.
- Breach SRM: reduced armor damage to 250 (was: 300 in -RC5, 200 in 0.95a)
Reasonable enough.
- Light Dual AC: reduced range to 600 (was: 700)
- Range of Light AC remains at 700
- Railgun: reduced ordnance point cost to 7 (was: 8)
- Ballistic Rangefinder: increased cost to 10/15/25 (was: 6/9/15)
RIP Mjolnir Manticore lol. It makes sense though.
- Manticore: reduced flux dissipation to 250 (was: 300)
THANK YOU!
- Falcon:
- Increased top speed to 80 (was: 75), improved acceleration/deceleration substantially
- Reduced supplies/recover and supplies/month to 14 (was: 15)
- Increased flux dissipation to 400 (was: 350)
- Eagle:
- Increased flux dissipation to 600 (was: 525)
- Increased flux capacity to 11000 (was: 10000)
Good. Now we can finally play a proper game of 0.95.1 :)
- Fixed issue with gas giants not getting the "High Gravity" conditions as they should (fix only affects new games)
Because, frankly, I think HSA was a bad idea in the first place and it's a tough one to work with. Some beam weapons are in a place where if you turn them into hard flux dealers without a penalty, the become absolute monsters. The Phase Lance, for example - HSA + Phase Lance basically makes Heavy Blasters entirely obsolete. Reducing range is just about the only way to generically (that is, not on a per-weapon basis) adjust it so that it doesn't end up making a bunch of other stuff useless, and it's far better for it to be extremely situational than it is for it to be too good and therefore the only good choice in many situations.Hmm.
I love the idea behind slipstreams and I want to love them in practice, but as-is they've been almost entirely a nuisance so far. Maybe it's different if you're just cruising around surveying and scavenging and don't much mind where, but if you're taking missions and heading for a specific destination the odds have so far been exceptionally low of a slipstream spawning as anything other than an obstacle. I'm on board with the general goal of making hyperspace interactive and this was supposed to be the carrot to the stick of hyperspace storms, but so far they've been another way to get punished for not paying attention to the mundane part of the game.
This moment was the breaking point that made me tab out to make this post:
-snip-
(and this was after following parallel to the SW Slipstream for an in-game month, with several reloads when cutting too close to a storm or failing to hit S in time got me booped into the stream and blasted downriver)
You just know these jerks are gonna have reversed polarity by the time I finish my mission and try to go home, too.
Is it a bug if you have the Hull Restoration skill, but your one lost ship in a fight, a Kite (A), ends up requiring a story point to recover? I didn't bother spending the story point, but was just curious if it's intended?That happened to me once, with a high-tech cruiser. At least it is +100% XP (on something that normally gives less if recovered from the enemy), so it is acceptable (and useful if I am not max level - gotta keep the xp bar green).
Sound like a better nerf for HSA would be to increase the flux consumption of beam weapons, maybe by 100%?
Also, just to Alex's points: HB does full DPS upfront until you get high on flux, so it ends up being 'bursty' in a similar way to PL and thus still does much more upfront DPS IMO. I generally value HB most for its performance chewing through hull, and use it mostly on ships like fury/aurora/doom that can support it pretty well anyway, so I kinda expect the full DPS most of the time.
Didn't work. It simply lacks the punch. A single AMSRM+cryoblaster burst can one-shot a Fulgent (assuming mines successfully re-oriented their shields) -- that's 6000 energy damage at 1000 hit strength, plus an additional 2800 frag damage at 1400 hit strength (which really becomes 350 to armor/hull). Usually a second dual Cryoblaster burst gets fired before the Doom can phase again. 2 Phase Lances and 4 Rift Lances comes out to a 5500 energy damage burst at 550 hit strength (since it has HSA), then a weaker 2750 energy damage burst (while the Phase Lances are on cooldown). You'd need to do 2 bursts (a strong and a weak), and even if you flicker into phase in between, it's less efficient (a smaller fraction of your cycle time is spent in phase, since you're on unphase cooldown more often), and sticking around for the 2nd burst makes it more dangerous. Even 6 rift lances wasn't as good.
Just wanted to ask about the rationale behind the extreme resource demands (10 volatiles / transplutonics) of the Fusion lamp and Hypershunt tap items. By the time they can be met the bonuses given by the items barely matter, so why not let us actually use them in the early/midgame phase when they'd be useful? Maybe lower the costs significantly but make it so that it has to be met by in-faction imports (something something safe use requires non-standard exotic componds mixed in the supply due to copyright issues or whatever)? For the Hypershunt tap the player has to beat one of the most difficult combat encounters AND fork over a fortune's worth of materials to fix the Hypershunt, isn't that enough?
About shield shunt makeshift shield situation, imo banning shield shunt from being S-modded is preferable way, shield shunt + makeshift shield is interesting combo (even if not very useful one) and removing it coz S-mod exploit is bad idea, shield shunt is extremely cheap Hmod i don't see point in ever S-modding it
It's not quite clear enough to me how polarized armor and shield shunt work now, so ill ask here.
Is it that it gets upto 50% increase at 50% hardflux, or is it 50% increase at 100% hardflux?
As conseqence to this, is shunt with polarized armor still getting 50% increase, or is it only getting 25%?
I can't speak for Alex's vision for HSA, but to my eyes HSA could be a way to turn 1000 range beams from long-range pressure weapons into proper hard flux support weapons for large energies, similar to Ballistic Rangefinder for small ballistics. The problem is that hard flux also makes short burst beams (Phase/Rift Lance) too much of generalist weapons.
The answer I think is to make HSA's penalty disproportionately impact short burst beams: flat -300 to base range, does not affect PD (similar to Ballistic Rangefinder). This way:
I love the idea behind slipstreams and I want to love them in practice, but as-is they've been almost entirely a nuisance so far. Maybe it's different if you're just cruising around surveying and scavenging and don't much mind where, but if you're taking missions and heading for a specific destination the odds have so far been exceptionally low of a slipstream spawning as anything other than an obstacle. I'm on board with the general goal of making hyperspace interactive and this was supposed to be the carrot to the stick of hyperspace storms, but so far they've been another way to get punished for not paying attention to the mundane part of the game.
This moment was the breaking point that made me tab out to make this post:
(and this was after following parallel to the SW Slipstream for an in-game month, with several reloads when cutting too close to a storm or failing to hit S in time got me booped into the stream and blasted downriver)
You just know these jerks are gonna have reversed polarity by the time I finish my mission and try to go home, too.
That's an impressively good hotfix. I love it :)
Funny thing about Ballistic Rangefinder: when combined with IPDAI it no longer buffs small ballistics, as IPDAI changes those to PD. At the same time, IPDAI + Elite Point Defense gives +200 range to all small ballistics, which is a bigger bonus than BRF on ships without Large mounts. Now that BRF is more expensive than IPDAI, and given how important PD is for Low Tech IMO, I can see myself preferring IPDAI + Elite Point Defense over Ballistic Rangefinder in like 90% of cases.
I suppose making it look good with an arbitrary beam turret might be impossible, though.
Is it a bug if you have the Hull Restoration skill, but your one lost ship in a fight, a Kite (A), ends up requiring a story point to recover? I didn't bother spending the story point, but was just curious if it's intended?
I've been toggling dev mode for full slipstream visibility every time I got out for a mission to see if there is a convenient slipstream that I might just be missing otherwise, but I'm just not finding any useful lines very often at all.
Hmm - that's an interesting idea, and frag damage for "high scatter" is thematic! The thing with beams keeping their regular range, though - imagine something like the Odyssey vs an Onslaught. You could outrange it and deal hard flux safely (with some allowances for burn drive, but that could be managed).
Or, heck, for a better example - a beam Aurora could kite almost any other cruiser all day with zero risk and with nothing they could do about it. I'm not offhand sure if "beams + optics + cruiser-level ITU" outranges "large non-Gauss ballistic + capital-level ITU"... so that's 1000 * 1.4 + 200 = 1600 for the beams, and 900 * 1.6 = 1440 for the ballistics, right? With skills - most notably Ballistic Mastery - mixing things up a bit, but not enough. So that same Aurora could kite and take down almost any capital ship with impunity, too, the only possible exception being the Paragon. It just gets very non-interactive and boring - I'm not sure you can combine "better mobility" with "better weapon range with hard flux damage" and get good results.
Hmm - that's an interesting idea, and frag damage for "high scatter" is thematic! The thing with beams keeping their regular range, though - imagine something like the Odyssey vs an Onslaught. You could outrange it and deal hard flux safely (with some allowances for burn drive, but that could be managed).
Or, heck, for a better example - a beam Aurora could kite almost any other cruiser all day with zero risk and with nothing they could do about it. I'm not offhand sure if "beams + optics + cruiser-level ITU" outranges "large non-Gauss ballistic + capital-level ITU"... so that's 1000 * 1.4 + 200 = 1600 for the beams, and 900 * 1.6 = 1440 for the ballistics, right? With skills - most notably Ballistic Mastery - mixing things up a bit, but not enough. So that same Aurora could kite and take down almost any capital ship with impunity, too, the only possible exception being the Paragon. It just gets very non-interactive and boring - I'm not sure you can combine "better mobility" with "better weapon range with hard flux damage" and get good results.
Makes sense, what about still reducing the range, but maintaining it in a sweet spot where it's higher than other energy weapon, but can't get high enough to outrange everything else? Or maybe just make it so shooting the beams completely stops your engine or heavily slows you down, so while you would outrange another capital, you wouldn't be able to keep it at range anymore while still inflicting hard flux. Maybe in the lore the modification would also reroute some power from the engines to the weapon system, to explain this.
Because, frankly, I think HSA was a bad idea in the first place and it's a tough one to work with. Some beam weapons are in a place where if you turn them into hard flux dealers without a penalty, the become absolute monsters. The Phase Lance, for example - HSA + Phase Lance basically makes Heavy Blasters entirely obsolete. Reducing range is just about the only way to generically (that is, not on a per-weapon basis) adjust it so that it doesn't end up making a bunch of other stuff useless, and it's far better for it to be extremely situational than it is for it to be too good and therefore the only good choice in many situations.IMO best solution would be to simply remove HSA, duds happen and it prevents lots of headaches trying to get it into a good place in the middle.
The order confirmation audio bleep seems to have disappeared. I don't get any audio feedback when I order ships to escort, or to capture a control point.
I'm not quite sure exactly when this happened
Reinstalling the game fixed the audio issue, false alarm.
Didn't work. It simply lacks the punch.
Hmm - that's an interesting idea, and frag damage for "high scatter" is thematic! The thing with beams keeping their regular range, though - imagine something like the Odyssey vs an Onslaught. You could outrange it and deal hard flux safely (with some allowances for burn drive, but that could be managed).
It's not quite clear enough to me how polarized armor and shield shunt work now, so ill ask here.
Is it that it gets upto 50% increase at 50% hardflux, or is it 50% increase at 100% hardflux?
As conseqence to this, is shunt with polarized armor still getting 50% increase, or is it only getting 25%?
It's 50% at 100% hard flux, so shunt with polarized armor would get a permanent +25% armor strength from Polarized Armor.
"Wouldn't hampering your own mobility make it so smaller ships could kite you with impunity?", yeah, that's the point. You gain hard flux damage on regular range beams, and in return you give up mobility so that you can't kite enemy capital ships with impunity, and enemy frigates can harrass you more easily. It's something you give up in exchange of getting the range back and getting the beam to feel "unique" again. making them slow enemy ships would just buff them even more which was not the point anyway, since the buffing part was the hard flux damage.Hmm - that's an interesting idea, and frag damage for "high scatter" is thematic! The thing with beams keeping their regular range, though - imagine something like the Odyssey vs an Onslaught. You could outrange it and deal hard flux safely (with some allowances for burn drive, but that could be managed).
Or, heck, for a better example - a beam Aurora could kite almost any other cruiser all day with zero risk and with nothing they could do about it. I'm not offhand sure if "beams + optics + cruiser-level ITU" outranges "large non-Gauss ballistic + capital-level ITU"... so that's 1000 * 1.4 + 200 = 1600 for the beams, and 900 * 1.6 = 1440 for the ballistics, right? With skills - most notably Ballistic Mastery - mixing things up a bit, but not enough. So that same Aurora could kite and take down almost any capital ship with impunity, too, the only possible exception being the Paragon. It just gets very non-interactive and boring - I'm not sure you can combine "better mobility" with "better weapon range with hard flux damage" and get good results.
Makes sense, what about still reducing the range, but maintaining it in a sweet spot where it's higher than other energy weapon, but can't get high enough to outrange everything else? Or maybe just make it so shooting the beams completely stops your engine or heavily slows you down, so while you would outrange another capital, you wouldn't be able to keep it at range anymore while still inflicting hard flux. Maybe in the lore the modification would also reroute some power from the engines to the weapon system, to explain this.
Wouldn't hampering your own mobility make it so smaller ships could kite you with impunity?
I do like having HSA affect movement but why not have it affect enemy movement by creating particles that produce drag on the target. Coding it should be easy, copy the rifts from the rift lance set damage to zero on the rifts but have them be high gravity like a giant star or black hole. Since the rifts don't last long to pin down a ship you have to keep hitting them and naturally the strength of those artificial gravity wells would scale with the damage of the beam so a tactical lasers gravity well would be tiny compared to a tachyon lance's as far as intensity goes. Also the larger the ship the more resistant it would be to those effects so more beams would be needed to achieve the same slowdown.
Would probably want to make sure it didn't hamper turning though to prevent being able to lock down a target in a spot where none of it's firing arcs can reach you. But I Don't think high gravity affects turning.
Could rig the effects to only apply while shields are up so the hard counter is to drop shields which is what the goal of HSA is anyways. Keep shields up and end up slowed or drop shields and take hits to armor and hull. Assuming you can't escape while keeping shields up. But that would be a bit more complex to code.
"Wouldn't hampering your own mobility make it so smaller ships could kite you with impunity?", yeah, that's the point. You gain hard flux damage on regular range beams, and in return you give up mobility so that you can't kite enemy capital ships with impunity, and enemy frigates can harrass you more easily. It's something you give up in exchange of getting the range back and getting the beam to feel "unique" again. making them slow enemy ships would just buff them even more which was not the point anyway, since the buffing part was the hard flux damage.Hmm - that's an interesting idea, and frag damage for "high scatter" is thematic! The thing with beams keeping their regular range, though - imagine something like the Odyssey vs an Onslaught. You could outrange it and deal hard flux safely (with some allowances for burn drive, but that could be managed).
Or, heck, for a better example - a beam Aurora could kite almost any other cruiser all day with zero risk and with nothing they could do about it. I'm not offhand sure if "beams + optics + cruiser-level ITU" outranges "large non-Gauss ballistic + capital-level ITU"... so that's 1000 * 1.4 + 200 = 1600 for the beams, and 900 * 1.6 = 1440 for the ballistics, right? With skills - most notably Ballistic Mastery - mixing things up a bit, but not enough. So that same Aurora could kite and take down almost any capital ship with impunity, too, the only possible exception being the Paragon. It just gets very non-interactive and boring - I'm not sure you can combine "better mobility" with "better weapon range with hard flux damage" and get good results.
Makes sense, what about still reducing the range, but maintaining it in a sweet spot where it's higher than other energy weapon, but can't get high enough to outrange everything else? Or maybe just make it so shooting the beams completely stops your engine or heavily slows you down, so while you would outrange another capital, you wouldn't be able to keep it at range anymore while still inflicting hard flux. Maybe in the lore the modification would also reroute some power from the engines to the weapon system, to explain this.
Wouldn't hampering your own mobility make it so smaller ships could kite you with impunity?
I do like having HSA affect movement but why not have it affect enemy movement by creating particles that produce drag on the target. Coding it should be easy, copy the rifts from the rift lance set damage to zero on the rifts but have them be high gravity like a giant star or black hole. Since the rifts don't last long to pin down a ship you have to keep hitting them and naturally the strength of those artificial gravity wells would scale with the damage of the beam so a tactical lasers gravity well would be tiny compared to a tachyon lance's as far as intensity goes. Also the larger the ship the more resistant it would be to those effects so more beams would be needed to achieve the same slowdown.
Would probably want to make sure it didn't hamper turning though to prevent being able to lock down a target in a spot where none of it's firing arcs can reach you. But I Don't think high gravity affects turning.
Could rig the effects to only apply while shields are up so the hard counter is to drop shields which is what the goal of HSA is anyways. Keep shields up and end up slowed or drop shields and take hits to armor and hull. Assuming you can't escape while keeping shields up. But that would be a bit more complex to code.
It also could be interesting build wise as it would push you towards not going full beam build, as shooting them always slows you down to a crawl, you might want at least a couple of weapons that you can use on the move to deal with escaping frigates or faster ships.
A way to use beams in a manner identical to weapons you already have. It seems redundant to me.
Right now HSA is a hull mod with a strong benefit and a drawback to balance it out, and the game is to find the right level of drawback. What if it instead got a less strong buff, but with no drawback (or at least a much less game-changing one)? Something like, deals x% hard flux damage based on distance to target, from 0% at max range to 100% at point blank, and reduces range by 10%.
At the same time, IPDAI + Elite Point Defense gives +200 range to all small ballistics, which is a bigger bonus than BRF on ships without Large mounts. Now that BRF is more expensive than IPDAI, and given how important PD is for Low Tech IMO, I can see myself preferring IPDAI + Elite Point Defense over Ballistic Rangefinder in like 90% of cases.
I haven't been playing the game for that long, so I can't claim any great insight or expertise, but might something like inflicting the Paladin PD's multi-beam effect work as an alternative? If I understand how that impacts armor penetration correctly, it would make beams much less effective versus armor in exchange for being much better versus shields.
It didn't work? You couldn't kill the Fulgent? That's a bit disingenuous. The HSA strategy is more dangerous, yes. I realized *and* recognized that a full loadout of ASM would be safer in my post, there's no need to make such a sweeping generalization. At least you were willing to try it, I guess.
is "asking for APIs" still welcomed now? or some days later?only in the super duper secret api request thread
Maybe the existence of "Makeshift Damper Field" would make Shield Shunt more atractive, even if Shield Shunt became somewhat weaker.
Somehow I got a lvl. 6 officer from cryopod in a derelict ship during exploring, but I believe that only lvl. 5 or lvl.7 officers can be obtained and all my enabled mods should not change that. Sorry I couldn't provide a save bc I had terrible saving habit and didn't save for past 2 hours :P
So while running a new spacer start game in RC6, I came across a Terran Eccentric habitable world in Duzahk, moon of Kusa, a Gas giant. So, it still looks like life finds a way in Duzahk.
Vanilla seed: MN-1657971263117500316
(I've also got a TODO item to make Duzahk and Penelope's Star be "claimed" by an appropriate nearby faction; really, colonizing in core doesn't make a lot of sense for the game. It's a bit of a blind spot for me because I never do it myself since it just seems so wrong!)
I have not colonized Duzahk (yet) because the seeds I played gave me junk in every game. Not one good planet (and either one moon or none). I have seen how good they can be using seeds posted by other people, but not arbitrary seeds that I chose or were randomly generated by the game.I should mention that I found decent non-habitable worlds once that would have been a good place for several industries (like Fuel Production), except having only a single world in a system is no good when expeditions come along, and it is made worse by less time to respond to an alert because the hostiles' systems are so close to Duzahk. It would have been a babysitting nightmare.
While I love exploring and finding a cool system, I hate being so far away from the core worlds, where all the action is at...sometimes I just want a colony in the middle of everything
With the player having the Combat Endurance elite skill, in some battles the hull repair seems to get stuck and stops working for the rest of the battle.
It works fine the next battle though.
And hull repair only take effects when your hull points are below half and stop at half, to add to the note.With the player having the Combat Endurance elite skill, in some battles the hull repair seems to get stuck and stops working for the rest of the battle.
It works fine the next battle though.
Hull repair isn't infinite - it'll stop repairing once it's recovered 2000 points or 50% of max hull (whichever is greater) during each battle. It's effectively akin to a more active version of the hull boost from Reinforced Bulkheads.
The lvl cap needs to either be raised to 20 or there needs to be a fusion of the fuel/supplies skill into 1.They are just too good to pass up and honestly make the game more hassle free/way less tedious.
The lvl cap needs to either be raised to 20 or there needs to be a fusion of the fuel/supplies skill into 1.They are just too good to pass up and honestly make the game more hassle free/way less tedious.
I actually agree that the level cap could prolly go up a little in the current configuration (for which of course any player can mod it in themselves, but I'm saying vanilla should prolly be 16 as max level).
Nah level 15 was on purpose, basically so you can get up to 3 top-tier skills in 3 different trees, or 2 top-tier skills in one tree and 1 in another tree, but that there would be no way to get 4 top-tier skills. Limited to max of 3 in the base vanilla game.
The lvl cap needs to either be raised to 20 or there needs to be a fusion of the fuel/supplies skill into 1.They are just too good to pass up and honestly make the game more hassle free/way less tedious.
TBH I believe the supply skill needs a nerf, it doubles almost any non-capital mass fleets' operational time between docking ports
I would like to see one or few extra skill points granted by completing quests, independent of leveling up, like clearing the Den of Evil in Diablo 2.
First thing I thought of was Radament or the first boss in the town sewers of Act 2, but that is a bit more obscure. Den of Evil was the next thing I thought of, and that is the first, intro quest everyone who loaded Diablo 2 does. The other quest is the Black Book in Act 3, which is at least halfway through.I would like to see one or few extra skill points granted by completing quests, independent of leveling up, like clearing the Den of Evil in Diablo 2.
I thought of the Den of Evil about 5 words into that sentence and was pleasantly surprised when you said it. ;D A point for finishing a quest line would be a pretty good reward.
The lvl cap needs to either be raised to 20 or there needs to be a fusion of the fuel/supplies skill into 1.They are just too good to pass up and honestly make the game more hassle free/way less tedious.
There are players who do pass them up on some runs. For me, the end game can be reached and beaten on an Industry 5 + 10 other skills build. The level cap is mostly an arbitrary limit to make different campaign runs feel different. If you run the same campaign with essentially the same skills every time, I find them less interesting to replay. Typically, the argument to raise the level cap would be that the end game is too hard on a 15 skill point budget. It doesn't help you early or mid-game, but comes into play only for the hardest challenges at the end.
I think 16-19 is a bad number of skill points since it makes getting 4 level 5's in two trees possible (8+8+extra), but not 4 level 5's in 4 different trees (which requires a full 20). Right now, doing 3 different trees seems reasonable. 16-19 suddenly means taking top skills from only two trees is far more attractive, in some sense reducing diversity due to efficiency of getting four tier 5 skills instead of only 3.
Are people finding end game threats such as <Redacted> and <Super Redacted> too hard to deal with such that 1-5 more skills would be the deciding factor in success? That would be a stronger argument, at least to me.
As for merging, if the skills already are too good, then merging them to make them better makes them would seem to make that skill even more mandatory. Which seems counter to what an interesting and diverse skill tree should provide. If the game is too tedious (which is not clear to me that it is, but certainly different players will have different tolerances and likes in their campaign layer), then I'd suggest advocating that the tedium be addressed at the root cause, as opposed to making mandatory quality of life skills.
On the other hand, arguing the skills are too weak might justify their merger. As it is, you can get roughly the same fleet performance by adding an additional two destroyer tankers and a cargo cruiser to your fleet line up. So in the end, it saves you credits, both in initial outlay and over time, but it doesn't strike me as game breaking savings.TBH I believe the supply skill needs a nerf, it doubles almost any non-capital mass fleets' operational time between docking ports
That does assume you're not engaging in combat, recovering ships, or getting hit by hyperspace storms. CR restoration from 0% is unaffected by Makeshift Equipment for example, and can be multiple months equivalent. At the end of the day, for a 100 DP fleet, you're talking about a difference of 50 supplies per month between having the skill or not. So lets say my typical exploration fleet is 100 DP, and I expect to stay out for a full cycle. My monthly costs (ignoring all CR restoration) will add up to either 1200 (no skill) or 600 supplies (with skill). The difference is a little more than a single destroyer's cargo capacity. A single Buffalo can provide 400*1.3=520 cargo capacity at an additional cost of 3 supplies per month. Adding a single Colossus potentially adds 1170 cargo capacity. So in terms of operational time between docking ports, a Colossus might be considered about twice as good as the skill, assuming you typically stay out for a full cycle between stopping at ports.
What it does do is save you probably 5,000 credits plus whatever fuel, crew, and supplies costs for the additional logistic ship. Call it 10,000 difference a month, plus the initial ship cost of 25,000-60,000 depending on which ship and how you buy it, or potentially 0 if you scavenge it. It's nice, but nothing that strikes me as game breaking or absolutely must have.
while in your fleet they're tightly constrained by automated limiters (likely with human overseers in the loop, too) to make sure they can't decide to start shooting you.
Ship captains are visible during the encounter menu. I suppose this goes both ways, meaning NPC fleets should see core captains in your automated ships immediately. The only way I can see player getting away with automated ships without hurting relations is to not have cores in them, in case of Neural Link shenanigans.
Besides, somehow totally not Alpha AI cores seem to be able to convince people they are totally not running some Tri-tachyon planets. If they can do that for a planetary administration interacting potentially hundreds of people daily, doing the same for a single, isolated ship that gets interacted with once in passing would seem even easier.The +10 to Pather interest is a dead giveaway Culann is run by an alpha core. The zombie Pathers simply know and helpfully broadcast the knowledge to the player. Of course, everyone else ignores the incontrovertible evidence staring right at the faces, even after Pathers try to wreck the blueprint factory over and over again.
Besides, somehow totally not Alpha AI cores seem to be able to convince people they are totally not running some Tri-tachyon planets. If they can do that for a planetary administration interacting potentially hundreds of people daily, doing the same for a single, isolated ship that gets interacted with once in passing would seem even easier.
The +10 to Pather interest is a dead giveaway Culann is run by an alpha core.And the administrator has this told explicitly in his skill interface: "hypercognition". LMAO
I think the Pather interest text was recently changed to "Suspected AI core admin", which is pretty funny next to the newly added Hypercognition skill.We all know that "suspected" really means "confirmed" if we only ever see that hint when said core admin is in use.
Look, maybe the admin just takes study drugs to improve their focus, ok;D ;D
I think the Pather interest text was recently changed to "Suspected AI core admin", which is pretty funny next to the newly added Hypercognition skill.We all know that "suspected" really means "confirmed" if we only ever see that hint when said core admin is in use.
Look, maybe the admin just takes study drugs to improve their focus, okVery convincible. Maybe we can have this tip added into the game lol
Hmm - was the save started prior to -RC6? This change would not have any effect on officers generated prior to that point.
... pretty much what you said, yeah. It's also possible that the "not noticing" is either simple self-preservation or the result of you pulling some strings behind the scenes. Btw - once you recover the Ziggurat, there are a number of core world encounters that are basically what you describe - so I at least at this point, the Ziggurat is a bridge too far when it comes to being ignored, while the other stuff isn't.
I'm not sure why you've been assuming there would be another hotfix. Generally speaking, a hotfix happens when there are major issues that require fixing, such as for example a not-extremely-uncommon crash.There hasn't been a single hotfix or patch this whooole year, cmon, he's not that unreasonable.
I would like to see one or few extra skill points granted by completing quests, independent of leveling up, like clearing the Den of Evil in Diablo 2.
Relatedly, there could be special skills which aren't learned by spending skill points through the character screen, but using an item, completing a quest, or some other method.
This should already be possible with how the Galatia academy chain can grant traverse jump if you don't get it via skill point spending, although the text when they react to you already having the skill is amusing.Hypercognition, for begineers.
But that does mean the code to add a skill is already in game. The question would be what skill/ability should a quest unlock that a skill point shouldn't?
This should already be possible with how the Galatia academy chain can grant traverse jump if you don't get it via skill point spending, although the text when they react to you already having the skill is amusing.Hypercognition, for begineers.
But that does mean the code to add a skill is already in game. The question would be what skill/ability should a quest unlock that a skill point shouldn't?
It would probably reveal that our captain is an Alpha-Cored android all along or something.
It would probably reveal that our captain is an Alpha-Cored android all along or something.
If we were Alpha core androids we'd try to destroy the Ziggy... But it would explain how the Automated ships skill works.. we simply let them in on the secret...
Maybe we're really the Omega core as an android and thus pull a Honey Badger on the Ziggy... We just don't care cause we are the Omega.... And it isn't. :P
Okay, in all seriousness Hypercogniton would be good. Another possibility would be a skill that let's us build domain era satellites instead of makeshift ones. Or maybe a colony structure that detects random caches in the sector for us to go out and find... Although those cashes might not be unguarded...equipment caches, weapon caches, etc....and unlike tech mining no depletion, but you have to go out and retrieve the caches instead of freely dropped into storage.
Saw this game on YT, saw what I liked, tried the game out. Just now bought the game and madly in love with this expertly and passionately crafted creative game which I will believe, be placed in the pantheon of legendary games.ONE OF US! ONE OF US!
Just my opinion and showing the love, thanks all!
I think it would be cool if destroying domain satelite
Is it just me or is this version way more unstable with mods? Constant bugs and low FPS.
Is it just me or is this version way more unstable with mods? Constant bugs and low FPS.
Have you checked again, that Starsector is using the right graphics card, and not an internal one?
I'm sure I've changed it in the past, but when I first started GraphicsLib with the new version, fps got down to 30 already in the Main Menu. Reassigning the graphcis card fixed it.
Is it just me or is this version way more unstable with mods? Constant bugs and low FPS.
Have you checked again, that Starsector is using the right graphics card, and not an internal one?
I'm sure I've changed it in the past, but when I first started GraphicsLib with the new version, fps got down to 30 already in the Main Menu. Reassigning the graphcis card fixed it.
May I ask how can I check that and reassign the graphics card?
What I learned from sinking yet another coupld dozen hours into this now is that I really really hope we get a way to command our fleet to attack individual sections of large stations next time. That's what made me stop playing this time. Though I did want to keep going with the story.
Or a 'don't shoot at parts that don't take damage/don't fire back' would be nice as well.
Or a 'don't shoot at parts that don't take damage/don't fire back' would be nice as well.
(Those are never targeted, btw - well, not ones that can't take damage, anyway. Any time those are hit it's because it's trying to shoot something else.)
The AI will cheerfully target whatever destructible bits come into range first - like those armor spars on the midline station - and then won't re-target until it's dead or out of range.Or a 'don't shoot at parts that don't take damage/don't fire back' would be nice as well.
(Those are never targeted, btw - well, not ones that can't take damage, anyway. Any time those are hit it's because it's trying to shoot something else.)
Thats good to know! Does the AI target structural spars and their like? It seems that whenever I'm fighting mid tech stations that they draw a lot (the majority) of fire, but that could be confirmation bias of the AI just shooting at the main modules and missing.
Both hypershunts and cryosleepers are mediocre.
I was about to build a cyrorevival only to see 10 demand for organics. No way I can meet that. Although if the only penalty is half bonus, maybe I can use another +3 to my population growth instead +6 or whatever I got.
Hello, long time no see! Just wanted to say that I love what you've done with the Ordnance Expertise skill - it has always been my go-to skill in previous Starsector versions, yet it's still a top-tier skill in this update. Getting extra flux dissipation and capacity per OP spent is a really great idea, and I love that you've reshuffled some of the skills around to make the Industry tree a more viable pick when selecting which combat/survivability skills to learn. Cheers and thank you for everything you're doing with the game! Bought it in 2016 and still playing to this day <3
Yeah my biggest irritation with the 95a build was skills, but it's so much nicer with the 95.1 build. I recently convinced a few people that never game to try Starsector, I was afraid they'd all find it too hard or they'd get frustrated instead they have all become addicts and are asking me for other things like it. Sadly there's not much that fits the perfect niche it occupies but I hope they enjoy some other indy work as much as they've enjoyed this. this build in particular and the story being developed have made this yet again one of my favorite games of all time. Thanks for keeping up with it! So interested to see what comes next.
I just found out about MemFlags.PATROL_EXTRA_SUSPICION. For some reason, the only thing that sets it normally is... the hand-me-down freighter hub mission. Why??Guess one more gotcha encounter I ought to avoid, which I do anyway because the ship offered by "hard drinking" spacer has lots of d-mods. If I want a multi d-mod freighter that badly, I can recover something out there.
EDIT: To clarify, should an innocuous off-the-books transaction with a civilian (as opposed to any of the underworld contact dealings you can have) cause smuggling suspicion? None of the other mostly-legitimate bar encounters do this.
I just found out about MemFlags.PATROL_EXTRA_SUSPICION. For some reason, the only thing that sets it normally is... the hand-me-down freighter hub mission. Why??
EDIT: To clarify, should an innocuous off-the-books transaction with a civilian (as opposed to any of the underworld contact dealings you can have) cause smuggling suspicion? None of the other mostly-legitimate bar encounters do this.
How much damage are we talking for the new beam torpedo? 2000? 2500?
I distinctly remember getting to just walk away (albeit at the cost of being harried, so leaveAlwaysAvailable doesn't sound like the right tag now) in my first ever 0.95 playthrough, although maybe I was just below the disengage threshold without realizing it.If I understand things correctly, if you attempt to retreat from a hostile fleet when every one of the ships in your fleet has higher burn than every ship in the enemy fleet, they'll always harass instead of forcing an engagement.
Is there any plans on making the Odyssey show up in TT fleets?I think I saw similar issue about Odyssey not showing up been reported somewhere, so I made some dig into files of my copy. Hope that's not a violation to any agreement.
Seems odd that one of the more unique TT ships doesn't ever ever get used in game.
Also noticing the Tempest system is still used horribly, there's gotta be a less AI failure prone system it could have.
I just started playing again after a year long break. Why was the heavy mauler changed?
Good day.
Will there be a continuation of the story in the upcoming update? Or secret locations?
Ironically, phase frigates who were always the worst offenders in that they were basically untouchable and uncatchable, are hurt by the nerf the least. They lose their speed much slower during phase, they are already very fast & they can vent quickly too.
Yeah. Even all variables being positive; i.e. having the phase fleet skill, using APC and speed hullmods, using speedy officers and reducing the DP of phase ships in your fleet to maximize the use of the fleet skill, that still makes phase ships destroyer size and up "usable" at best and "bricks" at worst.It's not that hard to tweak the phase cloak script to use a hull-size-specific speed malus; seems to me that making larger ships suffer less would be an elegant way to handle that.
Ironically, phase frigates who were always the worst offenders in that they were basically untouchable and uncatchable, are hurt by the nerf the least. They lose their speed much slower during phase, they are already very fast & they can vent quickly too.
There's lots of things to try without making phase ships a total bummer to play.Yep! I might even take a crack at it myself later, just to see if it works as well as I think it does in practice.
Alex, David, a question that came up when I was working on the wiki:
Can we make "the Starfarer" be the official byname of the player character? (like the Warden in Dragon Age: Origins or the Courier in Fallout: New Vegas)
It'd certainly sound nicer/more impressive/less fourth-wall-holey than "the player character".
Alex, David, a question that came up when I was working on the wiki:
Can we make "the Starfarer" be the official byname of the player character? (like the Warden in Dragon Age: Origins or the Courier in Fallout: New Vegas)
It'd certainly sound nicer/more impressive/less fourth-wall-holey than "the player character".
"The Starfarer" does sound really cool, but it lends the player a more mythic-heroic aura than we'd ever intend. Like, you're not the Chosen One in a fantasy game, you're just some person and what happens in the Persean Sector is what you make of it.
So I'd never call the player that, but hey, the wiki can do whatever it wants. We don't make the rules there!
"The Starfarer" does sound really cool, but it lends the player a more mythic-heroic aura than we'd ever intend. Like, you're not the Chosen One in a fantasy game, you're just some person and what happens in the Persean Sector is what you make of it.
So I'd never call the player that, but hey, the wiki can do whatever it wants. We don't make the rules there!
I'm not opposed to this notion, but the narrative of the game doesn't support it in any consistent fashion. The Player is special, is important. You would need to have examples of characters who could do what the Player does, and they do it, setting the status quo. Instead of society being a static, unreachable entity, have it embodied in characters.
As it stands, the wiki would be best off referring to the player as Valued Non-specified Customer.
I'm not opposed to this notion, but the narrative of the game doesn't support it in any consistent fashion. The Player is special, is important. You would need to have examples of characters who could do what the Player does, and they do it, setting the status quo. Instead of society being a static, unreachable entity, have it embodied in characters.
As it stands, the wiki would be best off referring to the player as Valued Non-specified Customer.
To my own knowledge, the player indeed is special, but the player's character isn't. Although we do know exactly who is the special guy that ended up ruling a gigantic empire and dominated the sector, the people in the game doesn't until it happens. It could be anyone, like how "Ludd" is in the church's book. The player didn't choose who will be the guy, the game world will still have that guy even if we didn't, we "found" that guy.