Would NPC Commerce provide semi-permanent bounties as well or not really because the faction already do that?
To encourage the “fight the symptoms” approach, the Commerce industry adds a semi-permanent bounty to all of your systems, once the impact gets high enough – posted by the independent commercial interests that are operating in your systems. This both makes Commerce a more interesting pick (and, working on a few other things in that direction, but mum’s the word) and shows how other mechanics can tie into this system.
Huh we were all just discussing stuff like this! Sounds pretty nice, looks like it'll tie in nicely with the contact and bar mission system as well.
Event Progress: By your actions of excavating, assembling the blueprints for, and building - a Domain Era Star Siphon, +50 points added to the Event "The Stars go Dim."
Great to see more hooks for mods to add ways to interact with their content that aren't just hostiling them. Also I'm personally a fan of more menus to traverse, but woe betide the average starsector player who's going to encounter more dreaded Reading. I also don't envy when you get back to setting up new player onboarding Alex, with how people prefer to click past tutorial popups.
Isn't a 40% accessibility penalty much harsher than the current pirate/luddic activity modifiers?
Oh this sounds really cool, much more interesting and interactable than current super random "you'll be getting a visit from x in y days". Which brings me to a question, does this replace faction expeditions? It looks like only pirates and Pathers are currently involved in the system, with no mention of expeditions. And what about Hegemony AI inspections?
Btw reading this, I got the feeling "oh there will be so much new stuff to learn in the next update". Don't know why, but my first reaction was being overwhelmed and confused. Then having looked and screenshots it seemed much more simpler than it first appeared. Later explanations helped out as well.
And daaaamn those multiple teases!
i think i'd kinda want to see faction hostilities reworked into these events too, but with the possibility to fizzle out naturally... or bc of player actions. Something where conflicts start as small skirmishes, escalates into some light raiding and then can build to a major raid, fizzle out, or just keep smoldering... either through "natural causes" or bc the player decided to steer the conflict one way or another
Current faction hostilities are just mostly nothing unless the factions share a system
Are there any plans for this system affecting non-player colonies? More specifically, could a player get "Events" like these affecting the colonies of a faction they're commisioned for, maybe with a slightly changed up set of options to reflect the fact? If not, could something like that be feasibly modded into the game?
Maybe I am alone on this, but I personally make a point to *not* build commerce, I just don't like the idea of private businesses running much of anything, it's fun headcanon. Anyway, it would be cool if there were some kind of tradeoffs to having commerce and not having commerce.
(I apologize if there already are; it has been a while since I have actually played Starsector, I just follow development nowadays)
Hi! Well, Commerce takes up an industry slot, so there's already a tradeoff there. I'd imagine that making that tradeoff bigger would involve making the impact of those industries bigger and more interesting, sort of how Commerce gets this "permanent bounty" benefit.I missed this - I'm a big enough fan of this kind of approach to industries to make a separate post about it. Currently, almost all industries are about making money and >only< about making money - save for Heavy Industry, which you want to get and upgrade perhaps sooner than other industries, because it doesn't just earn you money, it makes ships and weapons and fighters you can have way more fun with, than just money! I know it's unreasonable to expect all the industries to have the same impact as Heavy Industry, but something will definitely be better than nothing.
there’s a further event stage – at around the halfway mark – where “increased defenses” further slow event progress.
i think i'd kinda want to see faction hostilities reworked into these events too, but with the possibility to fizzle out naturally... or bc of player actions. Something where conflicts start as small skirmishes, escalates into some light raiding and then can build to a major raid, fizzle out, or just keep smoldering... either through "natural causes" or bc the player decided to steer the conflict one way or another
Current faction hostilities are just mostly nothing unless the factions share a system
Hmm, possibly? Though I'm not immediately seeing how a web of faction relationships/hostilities would get mapped onto an event progress bar.
This is an upgrade over the current "you just get attacked lmao" system, but at the same time I can't say it has bothered me much anyway.
"Does this unit have a soul?"
"Yes 03, we all have souls. You ask me every Monday morning..."
I missed this - I'm a big enough fan of this kind of approach to industries to make a separate post about it. Currently, almost all industries are about making money and >only< about making money - save for Heavy Industry, which you want to get and upgrade perhaps sooner than other industries, because it doesn't just earn you money, it makes ships and weapons and fighters you can have way more fun with, than just money! I know it's unreasonable to expect all the industries to have the same impact as Heavy Industry, but something will definitely be better than nothing.
This is looking absolutely great - I'm looking forward to the way this is going to play out in the vanilla game, let alone that I'm slightly giddy at how much work it's going to save me on the backend with my planned mod content.
I'm also really looking forward to seeing what sorts of rich midgame content this can add - it seems like this is going to make the stretch of the game between establishing your first colony and hitting a big endgame fleet and a secure colony or group of colonies, really satisfying and challenging.
Quotethere’s a further event stage – at around the halfway mark – where “increased defenses” further slow event progress.
This is a clever use of the system.
i'd particulary like something that increases the amount and variety of inter faction combat, and thus the amount an variety of combat encounters the player can engage in. Plus some non combat interactions that could be enabled, like engaging in war profiteering or trying to avert a conflict to protect your financial interests (though that woukd maybe require being hostile with a faction to be a bigger deal that affects trade and marketshare more)
Definitely looks like an interesting system. My only question is how many knobs/buttons it has in the settings.json, say if I wanted to make Military Bases matter more or less. How easy would it be to do that (given that my modding skills...well, put politely "don't exist" ::))?
Are we getting closer to the implementation of function for the mysterious Orders tab?
Oh, this is interesting, yes!
...But also kindof weird. Pirate and Pather activity is all lumped together now? I can get Pather sabotage because I let a Pirate base operate for too long rather than because I'm using too many AI cores and domain artifacts? What happens when someone tries to mod in Remnant raids due to AI core use, or some other faction's raids due to specific mod-added industry items - how does that interact with the current possibilities?
I will note, though, that - at least for me - the current game has a very very strong impetus towards putting all of my colonies in a single star system (that has a gate*). The changes you've outlined here help mitigate some of that... but without faction expeditions and hegemony inspections getting similar treatment I'm still going to want to make sure that I have all of my proverbial eggs in a single convenient-to-reach-and-full-of-patrol-HQs basket.
* It's a bit tangential, but having the Hypershunt Tap (or even some new related item) create a connection to the gate network would be a really nice end-game option. I mean, the game lore outright tells us that the point of those things was to power the gates! Right now, a single extra industry on one planet is... not really worth the hassle. On the other hand, being able to connect your system to the gate network? That would open up a lot more freedom for the player in terms of having a convenient home base, being able to get back in time to deal with raids/expeditions... and make multi-system player factions a bit more practical with easy transit from one system to another.
It might be interesting to use this sort of thing for positive events too.
While I get this system is still in its infancy, the possibilities it opens up is breathtaking. I think I’m more excited about what it could be than what it is but I really like the idea your decisions, or lack thereof, have lasting consequences or making progress on an “event.”
Endgame stuff can be built off this and I would love to see multiple, mutually competing, trees or tracks you could start going down once you hit a certain level of development. Gaining progress in one event stifles the progress in another, etc. but all lead to some major Sector-spanning event in one form or another. But as you describe the system as it is, there are milestones that would tell you that you’re getting close to points of no return or you’re about to trigger something that will permanently impact future events. This keeps a player sandboxing from unintentionally going off the deep end.
I am excited to see the new pirate/pather interactions and where they take me. This does feel like more mid-game content, which I’m glad for. I’m afraid that if system is well-received, you’ll have a lot of people asking for punitive expeditions to get the same treatment. I hope you’re not a victim of your own success in this!
Could this system also encompass the "expeditionary fleets" sent because of your market share? Maybe stuff with AI core usage and [REDACTED]?
Hmmm, I guess I want to see this shiny new toy applied to many of encounters that result in someone wanting to do something to you. This gives the player a greater feeling of agency, great work Alex.
Seems like a bit of a disconnect between threat and impact.
Each system has a low danger rating, but colony impact is considered to be extreme?
And why would every colony need to have heightened security to mitigate Luddic Path attacks, when they're only targeting one colony?
Love the new feature.
Dont like how panther and pirate is going to be boundled up into one. They should be separate somehow.
You know, if I got my hands on this system, I'd be sorely tempted to map out a faction from it. You know, use the system to keep track of relationships with various NPCs until certain event thresholds are reached. It sounds like you could even add penalties for not doing certain things, like assisting in the defense of a planet. I might even be able to limit the effects to certain systems where the player has been industrious.
I would even have a set of final events that would start whenever the player reached the end of the progression, chosen procedurally. Some kind of narrative-defining event such as an AI Inspection of Culann or a titanic battle as Sindria raises some kind of slap-dash mega project that will turn Askonia into a mildly habital world after a couple hundred years of terraforming.
It's just a good concept. Can't wait to get a better look at it.
Does this mean the regular Pirate Activity condition with its -stab and -access is gone now, or at least no longer has that effects? What about the Pather cell's -1 stability passive?
Can a mod readily implement [a derivative of] the Hostile Activity intel item for NPC factions?
Now that I think about it, do NPC factions now suffer any consequences from pirate/Pather activity?
(Thinking of Megas's complaints about major factions doing nothing while -3/-50% pirates bleed them dry, and the feature I specifically implemented in Nex in response)
Interesting items along the progress bar. Number 1, 2 and 4 look like growing levels of harassment fleets in system; 5 is the faction-specific "special", and from the Kites leaving a planet, I'm guessing 3 is a raid.
Mods can stick whatever item thresholds they want on the bar, I assume? (Though it could get visually crowded pretty fast!)
Doesn't commerce also add the open market to the planet? That's a very useful tool when you're far away from the core and want to do trading. Admittedly this is significantly less important with gates, especially considering you don't gain access to the superior black market.
You know, if I got my hands on this system, I'd be sorely tempted to map out a faction from it. You know, use the system to keep track of relationships with various NPCs until certain event thresholds are reached. It sounds like you could even add penalties for not doing certain things, like assisting in the defense of a planet. I might even be able to limit the effects to certain systems where the player has been industrious.
I would even have a set of final events that would start whenever the player reached the end of the progression, chosen procedurally. Some kind of narrative-defining event such as an AI Inspection of Culann or a titanic battle as Sindria raises some kind of slap-dash mega project that will turn Askonia into a mildly habital world after a couple hundred years of terraforming.
It's just a good concept. Can't wait to get a better look at it.
Hmm, yeah - thinking about this a bit more, it could also make for an interesting commission mechanic, sort of progress that's parallel to your reputation with the faction, too. Lots of possibilities! Which also probably means lots of ways to overuse it; this'll be interesting to figure out :)
Honestly, I think the highest hostility Pather event would be an anti-matter containment breach at the space port. Nothing like a gamma-ray suntan to brighten your day.
It's very interesting, because this system can be used to aggregate numerous tiny events into a palatable progress bar.
Loved it, Alex!
What about letting players set different levels of regulation for Commerce, less regulation gives a higher boost to income and higher negative stability?
Also can we have some patch notes please? Especially where HBL and Cybernetic Augmentation are concerned. :P
MOST IMPORTANTLY, will the event system be reused for new Tech Mining?
I really love this as a way of abstracting faction relationships and tensions in general, not just hostile activity.
Have you thought about integrating this with some sort of espionage mechanic?
The player could put resources into discovering the relationship/tensions status between two AI factions or an AI factions stance towards the player, how close they might be to an event like war, or on the opposite end maybe even forming an alliance, and give the player options to affect that relationship and push it one direction or the other.
An espionage system could also be a fun way to generate events to thwart an upcoming raid, for example by scattering a minor mustering point or disrupt supply lines by taking out a smaller station. Giving the player options to deal with the threat without having to take on the main pirate station or pirate fleet directly if they’re not quite capable of taking on such large threats yet.
I wonder if this system will apply only to the player will there be global events that effect particular factions for various reasons? Such as the piracy and panther events?
Seems great, I'm really hoping this will provide a lot more different types of encounters during the mid/late game, as fighting a lot of pirates can get tiring.
including some one-off special ship modificationsI hope it doesn't mean what I think it means.
encountering the odd large Pather fleet in one of your systemsThis actually makes me a bit concerned - how is this going to interact with the existing trade shortage mechanics? Ever since the change to make trade shortages appear even when there wasn't an actual fleet lost, those have functioned as just a random un-mitigatable debuff that occasionally cripples important structures.
Explicitly lumping all hostilities into one event feels odd, but I guess it's less busywork the player this way. Are Hegemony inspections a part of this event too? The post makes it seem punitive expeditions are gone, but surely our orange heroes won't stop being the blight upon the sector?
I guess it's so you get them one at a time rather then being absolutely dog piled by half of the sector at once?
encountering the odd large Pather fleet in one of your systemsThis actually makes me a bit concerned - how is this going to interact with the existing trade shortage mechanics? Ever since the change to make trade shortages appear even when there wasn't an actual fleet lost, those have functioned as just a random un-mitigatable debuff that occasionally cripples important structures.
...
Adding extra hostile fleets in player systems seems like it would exacerbate this.
Honestly, I think the highest hostility Pather event would be an anti-matter containment breach at the space port. Nothing like a gamma-ray suntan to brighten your day.
Who's to say what that "spaceport operations disrupted for 180 days" doesn't mean they're just rebuilding it a couple of kilometers away from the crater? :)
Currently, almost all industries are about making money and >only< about making money - save for Heavy Industry, which you want to get and upgrade perhaps sooner than other industries, because it doesn't just earn you money, it makes ships and weapons and fighters you can have way more fun with, than just money!...
2 Will the new system take hegemony inspection fleets into account? Sometimes you want to break the laws and use the core of artificial intelligence. And with the new system, it will be possible to understand to what level of suspicion will be minimal.
I think it came up a couple of times in this thread already, but no, Hegemony inspections are not part of this :)
unlike AI colonies, you don't get a nice simple 'resolve shortage by selling 2000 supplies' option.You don't get one by default, but you do if you build Commerce.
So player needs to eat a -3 stability penalty, lose an industry slot, and have Open Market be the default screen instead of Storage (when viewing ships). That is kind of lame.unlike AI colonies, you don't get a nice simple 'resolve shortage by selling 2000 supplies' option.You don't get one by default, but you do if you build Commerce.
This is one of the reasons I'd prefer if colonies automatically just have a market on them, or Commerce is split like patrol bases and the market is a structure that upgrades into the commerce industry. Because having a market on your colony is just so darn useful.
Also your colonies with a market show up in the best buy/sell lists (if they qualify). Which is rad.
Not to get too testicle,wat
but almost all industries have a secondary or primary effect on centrally planning your economy.I think, given the industry limitations, almost any industry that isn't a profit center is inevitably going to be concerned with producing a commodity or item that has more than just exchange value - so what will fix a lot of the issues with industries is likely to be 'more stuff to do in the world with commodities' (IE, you can't just spend credits to fix a food shortage; you have to have, and supply, food)
(IE, you can't just spend credits to fix a food shortage; you have to have, and supply, food)Hmm.
have Open Market be the default screen instead of Storage (when viewing ships). That is kind of lame.
So player needs to eat a -3 stability penalty, lose an industry slot, and have Open Market be the default screen instead of Storage (when viewing ships). That is kind of lame.If the market was a 'default', it would just exist with no other effects beyond existing. The Commerce industry would then be solely for the extra income, and the player still controls whether they build it (and suffer its effects) or not.
Basically, my feeling is that this probably *could* be applied to a ton of things, but I want to be at least somewhat judicious regarding what exactly to apply it to, if you know what I mean. Suggestions/ideas are good, though, it helps think this through - so, thank you for that!I applaud this approach in the light of many suggestions that popped up around here. I'm not sure everyone posting here is familiar with how event tracks tend to play out in tabletop games and personally I can imagine getting quickly lost in too many of them, as pointed out in the blog. That said, unless I'm wrong, the only tracker available for the player to overview will be the Hostile Activity, which is meant to facilitate player choice. I'm looking forward to experience the ways you decided to employ the track mechanic, overtly or not :P
Yeah, it's odd that Pathers and Pirates are lumped together now. Terrorism is a fun idea that could be very different from trading lane and colony raids. Maybe an opportunity for the player to sink some of his cash flow into; paying informants, uprooting spies and keeping the colony safe with higher safety expenditures. This could help reduce the runaway income of the late game colony stage, esp. with players who do use AI cores liberally and generate the most cash.I'd disagree. If anything, threats to society tend to have a compound effect even in real life. It makes sense from a QoL viewpoint to have only a single tracker as Alex wrote. It also makes sense that internal security takes care of all threats regardless of their origin, even if methods of dealing with each differ case to case. I agree that the mechanic sounds like a fantastic potential lever to curb the runaway economy. At the same time, I'd dislike being overwhelmed by colony micromanagement unless I was actually asking for it.
But I still have a couple of questions:
1 I really like to create colonies in one system so that patrol fleets help each other. How will this new system work in such a case? Will the threat affect all colonies in the system at once?
The coming update just crossed the threshold where it is so much more awesome than the current release that I can't play the current release anymore.
It is like there is an additonal (hidden) money cost (beyond commodity drain) to use stockpiles to fix a shortage.
That said, unless I'm wrong, the only tracker available for the player to overview will be the Hostile Activity, which is meant to facilitate player choice. I'm looking forward to experience the ways you decided to employ the track mechanic, overtly or not :P
Regarding the 'Player Choices' paragraphs, I'm getting "iron triangle" vibes from the way you described them (i.e. causal X frequent X intermittent solution). I'm just afraid players might force themselves into the causal approach if it feels like it's the "correct" one. Also, I feel like I personally would quickly get tired of the causal one if it leans too heavily on narrative. Thinking of the more narrative-leaning Sebastyen repeat missions as an example.
Regarding different types of hostile activity, I think Hegemony and the Diktat are both poised for being represented by it in some way. I'm not sure how and if it would suit the League and the Church as well, at this point I'm thinking that not all factions would resort primarily to combat to resolve their issues.
Purely from a fun standpoint, it's always more fun for me to have rare but threatening events rather than having their frequency increase, for example when I have a bunch of colonies that require babysitting. There could be cases of pirate activity being coordinated by the same group of misfits so that effective counters also have an impact beyond a single system.
One more question.
If you improve relations with pirates and Luddics (well, for example, by trading or research tasks), will the raids continue? Or after the relationship becomes friendly, then there will be no attacks?
Methods, goals, threats are just vastly different. Pirates send raiding fleets, Pathers have sleeper terrorist cells. You don't fix both the same way. One is an issue of spy agencies, the other of military presence. Or more broadly, one is an issue of planetside security, the other of space superiority. Highlighting these differences to add variety is one way to go, merging everything into a single threat-o-meter is another. It depends on what that actually means and how we're dealing with it.
hm, idk about this... i kinda would just not colonize if it was suboptimal to have all my colonies in one system, but i also don't get more than 2-3 colonies...
Yeah, I get that. This is part of a general set of changes that should encourage spreading colonies around (in fact, working on another thing that contributes here) and I also have some notes on removing/mitigating current factors that encourage just-one-system; punitive expeditions feature in those. A bit outside the scope for this blog post, though.
Oh wow, that's not what I expected to hear from you :D I'm sure you just know it by a different name. But anyway, what I'm talking about is the "iron triangle" of project management: when balancing costs, speed and quality, at best one can usually secure two of these parameters, but almost never all three of them (e.g. you can have a well-built house made quickly, but it's likely gonna cost you a fortune).Regarding the 'Player Choices' paragraphs, I'm getting "iron triangle" vibes from the way you described them (i.e. causal X frequent X intermittent solution).
Ah, interesting - not familiar with the iron triangle idea.
Cool :D Love to hear that.Also, I feel like I personally would quickly get tired of the causal one if it leans too heavily on narrative. Thinking of the more narrative-leaning Sebastyen repeat missions as an example.
They're not too heavily narrative, btw - it's a cool kind of story thing, but it's not something where you need to run around a whole lot, and at least some of them involve some sort of challenge.
Another thing I wasn't expecting to hear. But I'm confident you will know when it's going to be worth it. At worst, the community will let you know ^^That said, unless I'm wrong, the only tracker available for the player to overview will be the Hostile Activity,
At the moment, but I'd imagine there will be more! Just... hopefully not like, 20 more - at least, not all at the same time :)
It'd be cool to see this system represent inter-faction hostilities. Obviously you don't wanna go overboard with events, but I think it can be covered with just two: one for hostility to the player, and one for war between all the factions.
You could use the current relationship system as the tool for filling up the "war" meter, so for each faction that has a hostile relationship with another it fills up the war event bar every month. This could eventually culminate in a war that engulfs the sector, with smaller skirmishes at lower levels. You would then have the option of causing trouble (false flag operations maybe?) if you want war, or mending the relationships between factions if you want peace.
The player one would fill up based on the number of factions that have a negative relationship with you (as well as some other market factors), and when it fills all the way up one of those factions sends an expedition at you.
hm, idk about this... i kinda would just not colonize if it was suboptimal to have all my colonies in one system, but i also don't get more than 2-3 colonies...
How would this affect things, would it encourage systems with just one colony or would it encourage having only a few colonies in a system instead of colonizing every single planet or what?
Oh wow, that's not what I expected to hear from you :D I'm sure you just know it by a different name. But anyway, what I'm talking about is the "iron triangle" of project management: when balancing costs, speed and quality, at best one can usually secure two of these parameters, but almost never all three of them (e.g. you can have a well-built house made quickly, but it's likely gonna cost you a fortune).
In Hostile Activity's case, the triangle might look like interaction, combat and longevity of the solution: Don't wanna fight? - Gotta interact with the threats often, if not lethally (trade? missions? securing merc contracts?); Solving stuff isn't your cup of tea? - Sure, I just hope you really like fighting, 'cause you're in for a lot (variable fights? variable locations? variable circumstances?); Wanna deal with the threats as little as possible? - Make sure to get to the core of the problem and strike where it hurts the most (investigation? securing allies? -> showdown?).
Looks very interesting! I like the idea of Tri-Tachyon in particular taking offense to my market share, seeing as they're a corporation.
Speaking of combat around planets, a bit of a pet peeve of mine is how lightly defended some of the major Core World systems seem to be. I would expect there to be fleets of capital ships patrolling around the Aztlan system, because it's the main system of the sector's dominant power. I'm fine with systems like Mayasura or Yma being lightly defended, but I think that Aztlan, Hybrasil, and maybe Samarra and Thule should be swarming with warfleets and should basically be immune to pirate raids. Askonia is actually in a good place in regards to defenses, in my opinion.
Anyways I always like reading your updates!
It's great that "Hostile Activities" are tracked through a report that's easily glanced through and dismissed, but I find it leaves something missing.
At the level of large interstellar business and/or empire, you would expect to have at least an adjutant with their own subordinates who handle the affairs of your organization - like your bridge officers, except on a larger scale. Ideally, a competent leader would manage those subordinates themselves, providing some much-needed flavor.
A human (or human-adjacent) theater makes a big difference, like a Commander Hayes, or the talking heads from Sim City 2. In fact, every instance of "SC 2" I can think of had talking heads that managed organizational affairs, and the benefit to the perspective of the player was significant, at the very least.
Food for thought.
Have there been changes to skills and industries to accommodate the new system?
It'd be cool to see this system represent inter-faction hostilities. Obviously you don't wanna go overboard with events, but I think it can be covered with just two: one for hostility to the player, and one for war between all the factions.
You could use the current relationship system as the tool for filling up the "war" meter, so for each faction that has a hostile relationship with another it fills up the war event bar every month. This could eventually culminate in a war that engulfs the sector, with smaller skirmishes at lower levels. You would then have the option of causing trouble (false flag operations maybe?) if you want war, or mending the relationships between factions if you want peace.
The player one would fill up based on the number of factions that have a negative relationship with you (as well as some other market factors), and when it fills all the way up one of those factions sends an expedition at you.
Yep, that sort of thing could definitely work, and combining it into a single bar (rather than per-faction-pairing) seems like it'd be a good idea. Same general comment re: trying to be judicious about where to actually employ this, but also appreciating the ideas - it's interesting to think about, and it definitely needs it, too!
It's great that "Hostile Activities" are tracked through a report that's easily glanced through and dismissed, but I find it leaves something missing.
At the level of large interstellar business and/or empire, you would expect to have at least an adjutant with their own subordinates who handle the affairs of your organization - like your bridge officers, except on a larger scale. Ideally, a competent leader would manage those subordinates themselves, providing some much-needed flavor.
A human (or human-adjacent) theater makes a big difference, like a Commander Hayes, or the talking heads from Sim City 2. In fact, every instance of "SC 2" I can think of had talking heads that managed organizational affairs, and the benefit to the perspective of the player was significant, at the very least.
Food for thought.
I've definitely thought about it! For better or worse, this just isn't the route the game has taken, and I don't want to try to just shoehorn it in somewhere. I mean, conceptually those subordinates are obviously there, given how the game *is*, I don't think sticking a portrait somewhere would do the job. It makes more sense - or at least seems accomplished more easily - in a game where there's a bunch of things that happen where you get interrupted by modal notifications and it's "ah, this person is letting me know about this" and it builds them up as a person in your mind. In Starsector, I try to avoid stuff that interrupts the game and requires a response/acknowledgement, and it makes this less of a natural fit. Still possible, if it was a core design element, but it isn't!
Basically, my feeling is that this probably *could* be applied to a ton of things, but I want to be at least somewhat judicious regarding what exactly to apply it to, if you know what I mean. Suggestions/ideas are good, though, it helps think this through - so, thank you for that!
I've often thought it would be pretty cool if the Character menu was replaced by a Crew menu, representing the disposition of your fleet. Instead of the main character having all the skills, you bring together several hires, either as ship officers or some other more civilian mode, and promote them to a position using story points. Like you can have a captain of a ship and his executive officer, and they each have three skills. The ship goes into combat with all three of the captain's skills, plus his one elite, and two of the XO's skills (poor sod can't get an elite skill until he's promoted!).
And then you have your quartermaster and head engineer for all the Industry skills and some of what are skills now can be built onto specific ships (like Phase Fleet) in such a way that combat can damage the work, forcing you to rebuild. Naturally, that wouldn't work with the way things are now. Largely replacing character points with story points to change the construction and operation of your fleet.
Just a thought.
Basically, my feeling is that this probably *could* be applied to a ton of things, but I want to be at least somewhat judicious regarding what exactly to apply it to, if you know what I mean. Suggestions/ideas are good, though, it helps think this through - so, thank you for that!
An event bar could add a lot to exploration, I think. I love that part of the game, but it feels a bit, well, undirected. You have to set your own goals and it tends to just... peter out in the end.
An event bar could help by setting clear objectives. You reach intermediate goals (salvage a research station, rescue a distress caller, fight a mothership, survey all of system x...) and then at the end something "happens". E.G. a new star system appears, the [redacted] try to expand to a new (your?) system, or maybe just that you get a mission that guarantees a colony item reward. Somehow I feel this might tie in well with the historian.
An event bar could add a lot to exploration, I think. I love that part of the game, but it feels a bit, well, undirected. You have to set your own goals and it tends to just... peter out in the end.
An event bar could help by setting clear objectives. You reach intermediate goals (salvage a research station, rescue a distress caller, fight a mothership, survey all of system x...) and then at the end something "happens". E.G. a new star system appears, the [redacted] try to expand to a new (your?) system, or maybe just that you get a mission that guarantees a colony item reward. Somehow I feel this might tie in well with the historian.
... but it's very interesting how it could look like.
Domain drone invasion! :P
Looks cool! Its a nice system that really could be applied to so many things (whether or not it would be worth/good doing that is another question). Currently things like bounties, derelicts, and remnants all scale based on how many have been done, so if any of them wanted a more complicated system they could be converted to this. Bounties in particular seem like something that could have cool twists and special events that happen - its essentially a reputation/hireability mechanic, so things like retributive raids, being sought out for special bounty hit jobs, etc.
Oh, yeah, I really wouldn't want it to amount to hand holding. I think the "what's over the next hill?" kind of feeling is elemental for fun exploration gameplay. My feeling is just that the game does too little to acknowledge the discoveries you make on your own. After you found all the hullmods and the colony items you want, which can often be the case after seeing 20-30% of star systems, there's little initiative to go on. The game is basically indifferent if you find your tenth research station by surfing between two neutron stars, your twentieth habitable planet with a de-civilized population and finally defeated that [redacted] station at the edge of the sector. You can only pad your own shoulder in these moments.Gotta second this. It currently feels weird to me that at the same time, Pirates integrate every blueprint they get their hands on into their fleets, while all factions ignore all the tech and planets you scan and survey on their own demand. I'd eventually love to see some kind of politics between factions concerning exploration, especially since we get tangible loot that the factions would realistically want to get their hands on. A faction sending expeditions to track down where you hid the nanoforge from the research station you scanned seems like an obvious start (abandoned stations don't seem so safe anymore, do they?). If NP faction expansion ever becomes a thing, influencing it by deciding who do you survey planets for and who do you sell the spare data to afterwards is another thing I'd love to see. Heck, I know Pirates are designed for it, but wouldn't other factions want to upgrade their fleets with select blueprints if they found out a spare one just arrived on some Independent market?
I wouldn't want NPC scavengers taking away opportunities that I could have grabbed if only I rushed exploration, because that's just going to lead to a feeling of needing to rush exploration ASAP to not lose out on potential loot. It makes sense, of course, but I don't think it makes for fun gameplay necessarily.Hey, I don't mean they should motivate you to rush exploration, only to make you consider whether you're fine losing on easy exploration grabs. Since comparatively, you'll be getting those easy grabs by trading, too, by getting easy money and having repeated access to various core markets. Nonetheless, I feel like there's potential fun coming from the opportunity to grab some fun loot (blueprints, perhaps even colony items) on its way to core by looking for tip-offs in bars and acting upon them.
Hypershunts are easy to find if you have the time, but Cryosleepers are 100% luck.Cryosleepers... should always spawn in regions with derelict probes, right? And show up on the Neutrino Detector?
Domain drone invasion! :P
HMMM
Domain invasion would be handy as another source of Ramparts (and other Derelicts if they were rebalanced to be usable at their DP costs) to recover for those with Automated Ships.Domain drone invasion! :P
HMMM
I think it would be a pretty great event because it stands on its own and gives an early look at the mechanics of other events. Spawning probes and survey ships, drone raids on shipping, factions sending expeditions to clear them out. All stuff that comes up later when the player has their own colonies.
Heck, the faction expeditions could resolve the event themselves if the player leaves it too long - bye-bye mothership loot.