Changed starting Wolf variant to have the Pulse Laser on autofire (thanks, ZiggyD!)
Changes as of February 01, 2023
- Fixed screen scaling issue with TOP SECRET minigame
Added Venture (P)
Replaced mining drone with large missile slot pointing backwards
Medium missile slots changed to ballistic
So there's a buffer now for activating shields/phase after overload. Likewise it would be really nice if there was a small delay for Burn drive, since if you spam F it immediately cancels it.
...
Changes as of February 01, 2023
- Fixed screen scaling issue with TOP SECRET minigame
Ummmmm... whaaaaaaaaaaaaat???
>Command points are no longer refunded when the last order given during a pause is cancelled
Now, unless I am reading this incorrectly, does it mean that misclicks during pause will always result in command point loss? As someone who misclicks pretty often, I might need a mod that reverts this change
- Squall MLRS:
- Reduced base damage to 100 (was: 250)
- Base damage increased to 300 when impacting shields (this then gets doubled by the kinetic damage multiplier)
var test = Global.getSettings().getAllSpecs(ShipSystemSpecAPI::class.java)
- Fixed issue that sometimes caused ships to vent while under actually-significant fire
Persean League now has its own musicAre you entertained now, the guy who complained about PL not having its own theme?
Ship recovery dialog now shows normal and story point recovery in the same screenOh neat, the good display is now default.
Bonus experience quadruples XP gains at max level instead of doubling them as normalThat's big. Thank you! I might finally stop having that permanent green bar. Maybe.
When the ship is overloaded or venting, the raise shields/phase cloak command will be buffered if it was issued within 0.2 seconds of the overload/vent endingI would have preferred not to have any time limit, but I will take it anyway.
Eagle changesOh, it's slightly faster now, too? Sweet.
Gemini: Removed built-in Civilian-grade HullJust don't remember to add it back in next release, so the confusion continues.
Phase Teleporter changesFifteen seconds... But at least Hyperion isn't a whole different ship when you put SO on it, I guess?
Added Pilum LRM Catapult (large missile)The forum said "No, Alex. You are the modders."
Added Jackhammer (medium missile)
Heavy Burst Laser:Was it too good, when it had these buffs and ignored decoys? What ships did you test it on?
- Remomved ability to ignore decoy flares
Integrated Point Defense AI:That's an unexpected change. Did you change it to avoid interaction with elite Point Defence? Because you felt it was too strong anyway?
- Converting small weapons to PD is now the s-mod effect bonus
Speaking of AI venting, how about making AI vent in situations where it have high flux, but cannot withdraw to safety since enemy is simply faster? In such situation AI usually just sits with full flux, and cannot attack much or cover since it already at verge being overloaded, and just eats alot of damage until its got overloaded or killed, or vents, but at that point it takes much more damage compared to situation if it immediately vented.Usually AI is not as brave as the player, buuuut you can make it vent more often by maxing vents and putting Resistant Flux Conduits on. Even then, venting in open tends to bait out missile strikes, which is why the AI is scared. It could become smarter, but I'm not really sure how without making it frustrating in another way.
Also another good idea, is add Force Vent order, which tells AI immediately vent, it would help in such situations.Probably too micro-ey for this game.
Another issue with AI, it often tries dodge low damaging missiles unless it have Eradicate order, even if shield nicely absorbs them, and this impairs it ability to attack, like SO Aurora refuses to attack derelict frigate with Annihilators or Swarmers just because it circles around trying to avoid these missiles, and they still hit the shield, and it will do it until it overloads or player orders it to Eradicate.Put PD on your ships, AI derps out when it can't deal with a single missile.
Squall really did not need a boost to anti-shield performance, it was already generally considered a very strong weapon.
Interesting, going by story mission names, they all seem like branches or sidequests rather than a direct continuation of Galatia.
QuoteAdded Venture (P)
Replaced mining drone with large missile slot pointing backwards
Medium missile slots changed to ballistic
Thematically it's both hilarious and completely on brand that the pirates ripped out the mining pods to just chuck missiles out of the back. If the flux can be managed, and if it can turn fast enough to point at a target, the ship now has a great spread of mounts too.
So there's a buffer now for activating shields/phase after overload. Likewise it would be really nice if there was a small delay for Burn drive, since if you spam F it immediately cancels it.
...
Seconded! I am guilty of canceling my burn drives by accident with a double press sometimes.
>Command points are no longer refunded when the last order given during a pause is cancelled
Now, unless I am reading this incorrectly, does it mean that misclicks during pause will always result in command point loss? As someone who misclicks pretty often, I might need a mod that reverts this change
Actually kind of the same for me - I've been playing on a touchpad recently (new laptop must have SS on it) and right clicking is a two finger tap, which I'm still pretty unreliable with. Also I've bound shields to the 'q' key which is not ideal, but better than not having a reliable right click!
Squall really did not need a boost to anti-shield performance, it was already generally considered a very strong weapon.
I read up on it a bit and it seemed like another user had a similar issue, and appearently putSpec only works on a certain group of Obfuscated Spec-Implementations? (i.e BaseWeaponSpec instead of WeaponSpecAPI). Would be nice if those were fixed so that we can make even more use of the new Spec methods.
I prefer to simply give myself infinite command points as I don't see a reason for this mechanic to exist in the first place.
... and hephaestus gets a completely inconsequential buff
Speaking of AI venting, how about making AI vent in situations where it have high flux, but cannot withdraw to safety since enemy is simply faster? In such situation AI usually just sits with full flux, and cannot attack much or cover since it already at verge being overloaded, and just eats alot of damage until its got overloaded or killed, or vents, but at that point it takes much more damage compared to situation if it immediately vented.Usually AI is not as brave as the player, buuuut you can make it vent more often by maxing vents and putting Resistant Flux Conduits on. Even then, venting in open tends to bait out missile strikes, which is why the AI is scared. It could become smarter, but I'm not really sure how without making it frustrating in another way.
Heavy Burst Laser:Was it too good, when it had these buffs and ignored decoys? What ships did you test it on?
- Remomved ability to ignore decoy flares
QuoteIntegrated Point Defense AI:That's an unexpected change. Did you change it to avoid interaction with elite Point Defence? Because you felt it was too strong anyway?
- Converting small weapons to PD is now the s-mod effect bonus
The Fury got mega bonked by the nerf hammer last patch, could the DP nerf 15->20 be partly reversed since 20DP for a Fury feels really bad, what about 18?
Speaking of AI venting, how about making AI vent in situations where it have high flux, but cannot withdraw to safety since enemy is simply faster? In such situation AI usually just sits with full flux, and cannot attack much or cover since it already at verge being overloaded, and just eats alot of damage until its got overloaded or killed, or vents, but at that point it takes much more damage compared to situation if it immediately vented.Usually AI is not as brave as the player, buuuut you can make it vent more often by maxing vents and putting Resistant Flux Conduits on. Even then, venting in open tends to bait out missile strikes, which is why the AI is scared. It could become smarter, but I'm not really sure how without making it frustrating in another way.
Yeah - I did this for phase ships specifically (mentioned in the notes). For other ships, it's more risky, since they're not also slowed by having high flux and *generally* have a better chance to escape behind some allies etc. It's definitely a decision that can go very, very, bad so I don't want to do it across the board.
Also I'd like to have Guardian as capturable ship too, maybe rebalanced for player use if needed, or keep both boss and player-balanced versions like with Ziggy. It would give the player another choice of 60dp Capital Ship to accompany Paragon and Radiant which is good for variety.
I found lack of ability to capture Guardian strange from logic perspective, like why you can capture any other AI ship, but not this one exactly?
Imo: The firepower for 20DP feels lacking, the ship just feels very inefficient for 20DP. Sure, it is fast, can engage, disengage, pounce, punch down and possibly take punishment with the good shields but the firepower is just kinda meh for 20 dp. Maybe I am doing it wrong but if I focus on the 3 medium slots I get like 2 heavy blasters and medium missles for 20 dp, that ain't much I fear.The Fury got mega bonked by the nerf hammer last patch, could the DP nerf 15->20 be partly reversed since 20DP for a Fury feels really bad, what about 18?Hmm, does it feel bad? I'll keep an eye on that during playtesting; right now I'm thinking that it's in an ok place. Further feedback welcome, though!
- Added "no_autofit_unless_player" tag to hulls and variants
Imo: The firepower for 20DP feels lacking, the ship just feels very inefficient for 20DP. Sure, it is fast, can engage, disengage, pounce, punch down and possibly take punishment with the good shields but the firepower is just kinda meh for 20 dp. Maybe I am doing it wrong but if I focus on the 3 medium slots I get like 2 heavy blasters and medium missles for 20 dp, that ain't much I fear.
- Added "no_autofit_unless_player" tag to hulls and variants
Does this go directly into the variant file? Like is it possible to easily make variants with s-mods now?
can we get a sample of the new exploration music please?
however I can see how problematic it would be to have that many missile mounts when you are not using pilums but actual strong missiles
Two questions though, does this fix the slowdown associated with battles when you have modded ships installed
and if not is the process for upgrading this new version to Java 8 the same process?
I don't think the squall change really does anything. The power of the weapon is 2500 range zero flux kinetic pressure (that can fire over allies and is high volume with decent missile HP so moderate PD is not super effective). None of the things that make it strong are reduced at all. Honestly, even the EMP damage is more significant than the damage to hull/armor.
i'm kinda curious about WeaponSlotAPI createWeaponSlot(
what is it for?
could it be for spawning weapon without an existing ship? cause i notice it doesn't have any ShipAPI input
the Pegasus, since it has 4 large missile slotsYou mean I can fire 24 pilums at once!?
The Hephaestus is really really good at punching down; it'll maul destroyers and frigates no problem.... and hephaestus gets a completely inconsequential buff
I'm just going to say it: the Hephaestus is underrated.
One question: Does the Hostile Activity event change/get different modifiers/something when you accept a commission and start a small mining colony (most likely) in an existing core system, rather than out in the middle of space? I feel like it's something that should have some kind of impact, even if it ultimately isn't major.
the Pegasus, since it has 4 large missile slotsYou mean I can fire 24 pilums at once!?
Will anything be done about Doom mines? AI deems it as harmless so friendly ships get hurt even if it's easy to avoid them.
Will anything be done about Doom mines? AI deems it as harmless so friendly ships get hurt even if it's easy to avoid them.excerpt from the changelog:
It can also flank well with all dat speed! :D Well yeah, sure, it would be far too much if it could do all that and have heavy firepower, I just feel that DP wise for a military cruiser.... It feels like a poor choice for 20DP and I personally don't like a punch-down cruiser for 20DP. I also have to admit that everything being "balanced" might influence flavour and choices, sooo... Well, the energy weapon buffs sound juicy. :D All the new stuff looks awesome. :DImo: The firepower for 20DP feels lacking, the ship just feels very inefficient for 20DP. Sure, it is fast, can engage, disengage, pounce, punch down and possibly take punishment with the good shields but the firepower is just kinda meh for 20 dp. Maybe I am doing it wrong but if I focus on the 3 medium slots I get like 2 heavy blasters and medium missles for 20 dp, that ain't much I fear.
Hmm - possible counter point, if it could do all that *and* had heavy firepower, that'd be a bit much, wouldn't it? Also worth keeping in mind that the buffs to some energy weapons are possible indirect buffs to the Fury, too. Still, I'll definitely have another look at it.
QuoteChanged starting Wolf variant to have the Pulse Laser on autofire (thanks, ZiggyD!)
The hero we need, but don't deserve.
Regarding the Hephaestus and high armor: just did a quick test vs a simulation Onslaught...As you said, this is without skills / armour hullmods / cr bonuses, and i think those might bias things towards the hellbore some more.
...The flux cost is a factor here - it's around 2x the DPS for proportionally more flux...
I think any direct anti-armor improvement to the Hephaestus risks sidelining the Hellbore, except as a budget option.
- Added "no_autofit_unless_player" tag to hulls and variants
Does this go directly into the variant file? Like is it possible to easily make variants with s-mods now?
It can, yes. Or via variant.addTag(). I'm not sure what the connection is about variants with s-mods - you can already do that, yes? With an "sMods" JSON array. (Unless this is new in 0.96a...)
While heph got some improvement on its recoil, there's still too few ships that can wheel it due to its high flux requirement. 120 is not enough to penetrate heavy armor well, and won't be dramatic if we talk about its hull burning capability. While yes hellbore cannot work alone on hull burning and require other meaning to finish off heavy targets, heph is not enough to be installed on a large ballistic and sacrifice hellbore's anti-armor. It needs more than just improving its recoil.Let's wait until you try Atlas Mk.II with the reduced recoil :)
Two questions though, does this fix the slowdown associated with battles when you have modded ships installed
I'm not sure exactly what you mean. There's a campaign after-battle slowdown with heavily modded games? I'm not actually 100% on what causes that, though.
Would it be possible for the drover to receive a minor DP rollback? Between the dp nerf, RD getting stomped on, and fighter skill limits, paying 15 dp for the drover is just gross. I think it learned its lesson now. One wonders when reading the drover description why the Domain didn't quietly cancel the production contract for it.
HAG: "Halved recoil" Does this mean spread/shot, max spread, spread decay...? Max spread at 900 range (more likely 1260 or 1,440 with range extenders) can still get pretty inaccurate. I don't think it should be super-accurate at max range but I don't see the Mjolnir missing a lot of shots at equal range. Though, Mjolnir shot speed is 900 vs. the HAG's 800. I wonder if a bump in projectile speed would make any sort of difference. Either way, like I said earlier, the effective DPS of the weapon should go up significantly if it can put more rounds on target. It's not the best weapon against the heaviest armor but its way more versatile than the Hellbore.
Jackhammer: Not gonna lie, that's pretty awesome but it looks like it will have low ammo.
Are skill changes still being considered? Mainly asking for CA and NL, even if EWM won't be simplified.
Loving both BPL and HBL changes, by the way.
I get that there are certain weapons that would be OP and only work because they are in a small slot for example, but what about only selected weapons? maybe just the ones that are the "low cost" option since they are usually weaker.
As you said, this is without skills / armour hullmods / cr bonuses, and i think those might bias things towards the hellbore some more.
Although, maybe the Invictus/Retribution could be ships that can get good use out of the Hephaestus?
- Invictus using it's ability to be effective when "punching down" as a "defensive" anti-flanking gun in some of the side turrets.
- Retribution being able to exploit the high DPS by using it's generous selection of missiles to compensate for any loss in armour-cracking potential over the hellbore.
That thing never worked for me unless i added the ''no_autofit'' tag to a faction, they would still autofit the ships which seemed to remove the s-mods for some reason?
I had heard some modders were thinking that it could be caused by modded assets not being unloaded after combat but unfortunately I have zero programming knowledge so I can't really contribute. Many players seem to attest that when they've upgraded the game to Java 8 it has somehow alleviated the slowdown but I haven't yet tried to upgrade my game yet.
As long as I've had the flux, the heph has always been my choice over the hellbore. Hellbore rounds miss a lot. Its just that first part! Luckily with ordinance expertise big ships really can afford 480 flux for HE.
Modding:Thanks, Alex!
[snip]
Ah, ty! The game doesn't do that (unloading assets) at any point. It could be that past a certain amount of stuff loaded, it runs into GC limitations for Java 7, though honestly that seems unlikely - at least, in the absence of some other problems. It makes sense that the default GC for Java 8 might work around it, though.
Wait so I'm a bit confused. The description of the changes for reserve deployment make it sound like the changes to reduced fighter replacement rate only applies to ships with one fighter bay (Gemini). Yet there's no mention of reserve deployment in the bug fixes section of the patch notes, unless crtl+f failed me. Does reserve deployment now reduce replacement rate by 15% for all ships now?Would it be possible for the drover to receive a minor DP rollback? Between the dp nerf, RD getting stomped on, and fighter skill limits, paying 15 dp for the drover is just gross. I think it learned its lesson now. One wonders when reading the drover description why the Domain didn't quietly cancel the production contract for it.I think with the fixes to bugs for Reserve Deployment it might be in a better place. Might still be overpriced, but at least it should be better than it is now.
Thank you everyone!
...QuoteIntegrated Point Defense AI:That's an unexpected change. Did you change it to avoid interaction with elite Point Defence? Because you felt it was too strong anyway?
- Converting small weapons to PD is now the s-mod effect bonus
The idea is that there are times when you *don't* want the "turns smalls into PD" effect of the hullmod, while the other - now baseline - effects of it are always good. So now you can make that choice.
Waystations now pull in a small quantity of Volatiles and TransplutonicsWonder what's the reason and or explanation behind this one
Very excited for the new update, especially for new Music and Arts (with that distinct Starsector style) ;DGame-mechanics, it makes it a one-stop shop for "This is everything an exploring player needs". Lore-wise... probably about the same: "Yeah, we don't use this stuff locally, but it's good to have on hand for exploration fleets that come by, so we keep a bit of stock."
One thing that got me curious isQuoteWaystations now pull in a small quantity of Volatiles and TransplutonicsWonder what's the reason and or explanation behind this one
Okay, this new Hullmod is listed in the Ships section but not the Hullmods section. Is it unavailable to the player?
- Fulgent: added built-in Energy Bolt Coherer (increases base non-beam energy/hybrid weapon range)
Are they salvageable by the player?
- Added two new weapons (Kinetic Blaster and Gigacannon), only available to/from the Lion's Guard
Medusa getting a small buff woohooo.2 Medium & 5 Small energy slots means all the Energy weapon buffs are good for Medusa. Needs testing.
Thematically it's both hilarious and completely on brand that the pirates ripped out the mining pods to just chuck missiles out of the back. If the flux can be managed, and if it can turn fast enough to point at a target, the ship now has a great spread of mounts too.Locusts, Pilum LRM Catapult and (I think) Squalls can handle the U-turn.
NO SAFETY OVERRIDE REWORK REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!Oh. Don't assume that the patch notes will not change...
I just read the whole changelog... Woah, awesome! :DThere are other indirect buffs for it, too. Reapers+Missile Autoloader+AI improved for off-center missiles seem almost custom made for Eagle.
Eagle mega buffed (22->18DP, 600->700 dissipation and 50->60 speed)? Nice.
"Our missiles will blot out the Sun""Then we shall flak in the shade."
- Manticore LP, Venture P
... you know, I don't remember. This was probably a modding request from someone; vanilla doesn't use it.please please please add function to change weapon slot coordinates in ShipAPI or cloned HullSpec
Reserve Deployment, for ships with only one fighter bay, now:
At least doubles wing size (minimum +2 craft)
Fighter replacement rate reduction is 15% instead of 25%
Added Manticore (LP)
Brilliant:
Changed system to Plasma Burn
Reduced shield upkeep to 0.4 (was: 0.5)
Hurricane MIRV:
Increased submunition accuracy
Reduced number of submunitions by to 7 (was: 9)
Logistics hullmods have a significant bonus regardless of their cost (since it's still a sacrifice in combat power)
@BCSWut? I thought it'd be a new capital so 20DP cannot be?!...
...and Apex 20.
@BCS
Ah yes you reminded me, Drover is currently overpriced and it seems none of the changes really help it.
Apex is a cruiser built around Terminator Drones and Energy Bolt Coherer. Nova is the battlecruiser.@BCSWut? I thought it'd be a new capital so 20DP cannot be?!...
...and Apex 20.
Also: More threads about the Fury: https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=22611.0
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=24932.0
- Cheap commodity mission: remote pickup of legal goods variation now requires other colony to not be hostile to the player
Added message explaining what's going on and what to do when there's no flagship deployed and the player starts in the command shuttleDoes this mean that the player always starts in the command shuttle if you dont deploy your flagship? - that would be ( / sounds ) annoying
Command points are no longer refunded when the last order given during a pause is cancelledOn the topic of command frequency: Why does the command frequency get closed, if you exit the map?
(Fundamental problem in that the same sequence of orders and a cancel could be a legitimate order or a "never mind")
Ordering an individual ship to retreat no longer requires a command point or opens the command frequency if that ship is out of peak timethats good
Many hullmods now have special effects when built into the hull using a story point
Would it be possible for the drover to receive a minor DP rollback? Between the dp nerf, RD getting stomped on, and fighter skill limits, paying 15 dp for the drover is just gross. I think it learned its lesson now. One wonders when reading the drover description why the Domain didn't quietly cancel the production contract for it.
I think with the fixes to bugs for Reserve Deployment it might be in a better place. Might still be overpriced, but at least it should be better than it is now.
- Proxmimity Charge Launcher:
- Added some inaccuracy to the direction of the launch
- No longer affected by missile flight time and speed/acceleration modifiers
- (Previously, ECCM Package would actually reduce its range)
- Removed point-defense flag from Proximity Charge Launcher; will no longer auto-target missiles
For real this time. I remember that there was a lengthy discussion in general about SO nerf and Alex agreed that something has to be done. Next patch maybe?Until the actual .96a is released, these patch note can be changed. It's happened before.
Combat:
- Added option to disable screen whiteout for large ship explosions
- Whiteout no longer obscures the command UI (still obscures ship combat UI)
- Improved ship explosion visual effect
Combat:
- Reserve Deployment, for ships with only one fighter bay, now:
- At least doubles wing size (minimum +2 craft)
- Fighter replacement rate reduction is 15% instead of 25%
QuotePersean League now has its own musicAre you entertained now, the guy who complained about PL not having its own theme?
Hehehe... I thought reapers on the Harbinger was hilarious. Now we have BAM - Big Ass Missiles!
- Added Venture (P)
- Replaced mining drone with large missile slot pointing backwards
- Medium missile slots changed to ballistic
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
Great! So, are there any functions that could change UI interface?
Or something like CampaignUIPlugin that only for additional UI rendering? Currently I use everyframeplugin which I think is somewhat unstrict
Will Tech-Mining be using Event System for .96?
Wait so I'm a bit confused. The description of the changes for reserve deployment make it sound like the changes to reduced fighter replacement rate only applies to ships with one fighter bay (Gemini). Yet there's no mention of reserve deployment in the bug fixes section of the patch notes, unless crtl+f failed me. Does reserve deployment now reduce replacement rate by 15% for all ships now?
any details on how much armor does smodded shield shunt provide?
This is really going to hurt every variant and ship that relies on that for PD for the AI though - and I never put on IPDAI for anything but turning smalls into PD. Have you considered making non-PD smalls PD, PD_ALSO instead unless s-modded, to avoid the potential effects of smalls prioritizing missiles but still allowing them to help when lacking other targets?
One thing that got me curious isGame-mechanics, it makes it a one-stop shop for "This is everything an exploring player needs". Lore-wise... probably about the same: "Yeah, we don't use this stuff locally, but it's good to have on hand for exploration fleets that come by, so we keep a bit of stock."QuoteWaystations now pull in a small quantity of Volatiles and TransplutonicsWonder what's the reason and or explanation behind this one
May I ask what faction has access to
Defensive Targeting Array
and
Missile Autoloader
or if it's already available to the player (which can mean everyone can use it)?
Gotta ask though, is there any REDACTED stuff you didn't include in the patch notes? Hehe
Okay, this new Hullmod is listed in the Ships section but not the Hullmods section. Is it unavailable to the player?
- Fulgent: added built-in Energy Bolt Coherer (increases base non-beam energy/hybrid weapon range)
Are they salvageable by the player?
please please please add function to change weapon slot coordinates in ShipAPI or cloned HullSpec
without the weird french magik, i mean
Typhoons and Jackhammers can give it serious firepower but Falcon(P) exists which has DOUBLE the missile potency and the exact same DP cost.
Does this mean that the Gemini now deploys THREE Cobra bombers?
QuoteBrilliant:
Changed system to Plasma Burn
Reduced shield upkeep to 0.4 (was: 0.5)
Is that shield upkeep or shield efficiency?
QuoteHurricane MIRV:
Increased submunition accuracy
Reduced number of submunitions by to 7 (was: 9)
Does that mean it now does 23% less damage? Or was the damage of submunitions increased to compensate?
QuoteLogistics hullmods have a significant bonus regardless of their cost (since it's still a sacrifice in combat power)
It's not a sacrifice on civilian ships though.
@BCS
You could go to the blog posts and look at the screenshots, not all ships are there but there is enough info. DP costs we currently know are Invictus (60), Retribution (35), oh wait that's actually all. Well we can be sure that the faction variants will have identical costs. Pegasus is also likely 55-60 DP along with Executor. Nova is probably 40 and Apex 20.
Suggestion: with the faction flavor focus of this patch, please consider making Thule system a little more interesting.
It's the largest Persean League military market so the league commissioned player will have to visit it often for military hardware, but it just does not feel like a capital system.
There is no ancillary league market there like in all the other capital systems, so there is very little in-system transit.
I think it's also a combination of Kazeron texture not giving the feel of a size 7 market, the dark background, asteroid fields and white star giving it an even starker and emptier look.
Does this mean you can pick up the goods, as long as your standing with the colony is above -50 or does the mission won't be offered, if your standing with the colony is too low?
(Right now this mission can always be offered but you can't pick up the goods, if your standing with the faction is at -25 or below.)
ShipEngineControllerAPI.ShipEngineAPI.repair() please, since .disable() already exists in the API
QuoteAdded message explaining what's going on and what to do when there's no flagship deployed and the player starts in the command shuttleDoes this mean that the player always starts in the command shuttle if you dont deploy your flagship? - that would be ( / sounds ) annoying
On the topic of command frequency: Why does the command frequency get closed, if you exit the map?
As in, you open the map, give an order, then control you flagship for a few seconds and observe the effects of your order and then want to use the command frequency to possibly change these orders. Right noch you can only use the observe modus to view the effects, but need to hope that you flagship does not get reapered
Is Sarissa low_tech_bp or rare_bp?
Thanks for the patch notes. Now that we're getting close to the finish line of this update, can you tell us how impactful it will be for most mods in general? As in if they will break or not. Besides balancing issues and some quirks I'm not seeing anything that would necessarily break them, except maybe Nex since that's a really big one.
For example making safety overrides only give the baseline speed buff by default, & give the zero flux boost & all of the other stuff only if you build it in? Or the omni shield conversion only makes the shield omni, & you only get the shield upkeep buff & shield size debuff if you build it in? There's a lot of ships I'd love to put that onto but never will bc I find the smaller shield to be a dealbreaker -- the option to accept an effective 25% debuff to shield upkeep in order to keep the shield the size it is would be an attractive prospect. same with armored turret mounts, I'd use it just for the increased weapon health but don't bc of the rest of it
It's an interesting ship that has design considerations that make it distinct from other carriers, it's one of the first dedicated carriers the player can access, and it's a shame to see it go unused for so long.
Also in regards to new medium sized hammer... I cant not post this
Like in 3 days? Or 2 weeks?
Or we should expect another 1 year wait?
- Removed point-defense flag from Proximity Charge Launcher; will no longer auto-target missiles
oh god no!
I suppose this does fix the "problem" of it being a player-only weapon, but imo at this point it should just be entirely reworked; either drop the idea of it being PD entirely or make it a PD weapon that's worth being in a medium missile slot.
On the topic of command frequency: Why does the command frequency get closed, if you exit the map?
As in, you open the map, give an order, then control you flagship for a few seconds and observe the effects of your order and then want to use the command frequency to possibly change these orders. Right noch you can only use the observe modus to view the effects, but need to hope that you flagship does not get reapered
IIRC primarily so that you aren't incentivized to do exactly what you're describing.
- When the ship is overloaded or venting, the raise shields/phase cloak command will be buffered if it was issued within 0.2 seconds of the overload/vent ending
- Added Planetkiller and "Hostile Activity" related mission
While Pirate Falcon is on the strongish side at 20 DP, if that level already needs a nerf Gryphon/Monitor/LP Brawler could definitely take a bit of a beating IMO.Typhoons and Jackhammers can give it serious firepower but Falcon(P) exists which has DOUBLE the missile potency and the exact same DP cost.
(OK, but the Falcon(P) occupies the same space in my mind as SO when it comes to balance discussions :P It's a ship I know I need to nerf at some point but I just kind of don't *want* to, for some reason.)
...? The point is to make it an effective anti-fighter weapon that can also be used in an assault role. I think it suffers from prioritizing missiles in some cases. (Edit: I think this might come off a little rude; what I meant was that I'm confused about what you mean re: the "problem" etc)
(The "soloing the Ziggurat" case is pretty fun, btw, and should I think still be doable.)
There aren't, no. I assumed this was a solved problem since mods seem to do this (e.g. radar) - hmm. How are you currently doing it?Radar? You mean that combat radar? But it's in the combat engine, not the campaign layer...
QuoteBrilliant:
Changed system to Plasma Burn
Reduced shield upkeep to 0.4 (was: 0.5)
Is that shield upkeep or shield efficiency?
Upkeep - 0.4 efficiency would really be something!
It's an interesting ship that has design considerations that make it distinct from other carriers, it's one of the first dedicated carriers the player can access, and it's a shame to see it go unused for so long.
Hmm. Is it, honestly? It's really tricky to balance, it feels like the sort of ship that very easily tips over into "and now massing it is the absolute best strategy". The Mora at least has some interesting battlecarrier-type things going for it.
(Yep, exactly!)One thing that got me curious isGame-mechanics, it makes it a one-stop shop for "This is everything an exploring player needs". Lore-wise... probably about the same: "Yeah, we don't use this stuff locally, but it's good to have on hand for exploration fleets that come by, so we keep a bit of stock."QuoteWaystations now pull in a small quantity of Volatiles and TransplutonicsWonder what's the reason and or explanation behind this one
Ah, so shield upkeep is actually defined as fraction of flux dissipation, got it.Ship_data.csv is a pathway to many properties some consider to be unintuitive.
Will any of the new mission grant Hypercognition (or new special skills) as rewards?All derelicts already have rugged construction far as i know.
Has Rugged Construction been added to every Derelict?
I don't see it getting stronger than it currently isFury is one of the best CH platforms to use Sarissa. I expect both Fury and Shrike to be noticeably better simply because they get easy access to kinetic damage without missiles.
Silly me.Will any of the new mission grant Hypercognition (or new special skills) as rewards?All derelicts already have rugged construction far as i know.
Has Rugged Construction been added to every Derelict?
Again, indirect buffs help all ships similar to it.No, indirect buffs help all ships to different extents. CH Sarissa on Fury is much better that on Aurora, for example, because of the OP/DP ratio and the number of weapon slots.
By that logic I'll simply get 2 Shrikes and a frigate. We could go in circles like this forever, just mark my words that it will remain a weak ship if nothing else changes.Again, indirect buffs help all ships similar to it.No, indirect buffs help all ships to different extents. CH Sarissa on Fury is much better that on Aurora, for example, because of the OP/DP ratio and the number of weapon slots.
How dare my lovely Galaxy-class--- errrr, I mean Apogee--- flagship of every game I've ever played get a nerf!!!Yeah, going from 18 to 20 is justified IMO (update might even be an overall buff).
Oh, it's just 2 OP? Doesn't matter... I'll keep shield-tanking everything while getting cheap planet scans and sniping with a Tachyon Lance and overwhelming PD and fighters with Locust SRMs.
Kidding aside the Apogee is a beast and just paying a bit more to field it is appropriate, but not enough to take its personality away.
And I'll still keep saying Fury is overcosted, especially with AI that dies more often with it than with frigates. I don't see it getting stronger than it currently is so the only path to redemption is having its DP cost down to 18 or so.Or more OP (about +5 or +10). It is mildly OP starved.
A likely unpopular opinion, but I wish the Fury never moved off its 15 DP cost and was balanced around that niche. High Tech needs its own Light Cruise and the Fury is well beyond the Falcon, in my book. Personally, there are too many 20 DP Cruisers out there vying for the same spot.I'd prefer that over the current situation. Just make it cheaper and less tanky. Like you said, there's a spot for a cruiser that's not expensive. No need to try and make Aurora-lite.
I'd prefer that over the current situation. Just make it cheaper and less tanky. Like you said, there's a spot for a cruiser that's not expensive. No need to try and make Aurora-lite.
snipHey can you not use colours in your text? If you want to emphasize something there is a "bold" option. Or just write things in a cohesive way with clear indications on important bits.
I like my colors.snipHey can you not use colours in your text? If you want to emphasize something there is a "bold" option. Or just write things in a cohesive way with clear indications on important bits.
Especially don't use blue text since that is how moderation text looks like.
A likely unpopular opinion, but I wish the Fury never moved off its 15 DP cost and was balanced around that niche. High Tech needs its own Light Cruise and the Fury is well beyond the Falcon, in my book. Personally, there are too many 20 DP Cruisers out there vying for the same spot.
If you are right, then why I can use blue without moderator privilege ?
Integrated Point Defense AI:My question to Alex is if the maximum target leading is basic or s-mod/elite only?
Cost reduced to 3/6/9/15 (was: 4/8/12/20)
Gives abilty to ignore decoy flares and +50% damage to missiles
Converting small weapons to PD is now the s-mod effect bonus[/color]
Good improvement.
" ignore decoy flares and +50% damage to missiles" sounds more of system feeature, than weapon (large burst PD laser)
Converting small weapons to PD is great to have as option. Probably best case of usage of the new side effect of hulmodes. Althou I would prefer a system where certain hullmodes / weapons have alternative functionality which is set in the weapon fittig screen.
Shield Shunt can be built in (and has an extra armor bonus effect when built in with a story point)This is what I do not want to see/kind of feared for s-mods. Probably makes BotB even more important.
Shield Shunt need a buff. It is interesting option but totaly suboptimal in any battle situation. I have found just one occasion, Shunted Eradicator for 17DP as punch down fast capture point cruiser. Althou requirement to grow a one-trick-pony pilot with special set of skill makes is niche in the niche >>> therefore not using shield shunt anyway.
This change means, that much needed buff of shield shunt hullmode available only as s-smode means, in fact no buff.
It is (probably) the worst example of the new side effects of hullmodes where SIDE effect is extension of the MAIN effect.
However, I’d be curious how many players compare a Falcon to a Medusa to a Hyperion (I.e. across hull sizes). That’s not immediately intuitive. Or perhaps it’s better to ask, what is the most common way folks compare ships? Is it hull size, DP, burn speed, etc?I compare Medusa to Falcon because they have similar enough mounts and play similarly (or at least the AI does). I consider standard Falcon the midline Medusa.
I’m inclined to agree with Grievous69 when comparing it against a Heron, Gryphon, Mora, Apogee or the now cheaper Eagle: is it on par with these other 20ish DP ships? Maybe it should be 18 like the Eagle.I picked Apogee over Fury because it was cheaper and AI can use it better. I picked Fury only because it was cheaper than 22 DP Eagle (and much less than Aurora's 30), but I usually took Eradicator or another Gryphon instead.
Apogee is the best "all in one" ship in the game, that's probably why so many like it. Not to mention the unique design. I've seen before some comments saying how the ship is slow to be a real combat cruiser, and to this day I want to know the number of their dealer.
This is what I do not want to see/kind of feared for s-mods. Probably makes BotB even more important.The side effect of hulmods in s-mode is sick idea in general and very easy can slip into unpredictable results. Like Shield shunt now.
Shield Shunt (after the nerf to 15%) was weak to being with, and with s-mod making it stronger, it will likely be an automatic s-mod for would-be shunted ships. Just give Shield Shunt the full bonus and raise the OP cost to ITU levels.
I often encounter it because I give an order, tab out of the map (muscle memory), then realize I missed something and have to use another command point even though it has been less than a second or I never even unpaused. It is my main frustration with the CP mechanic.
add portraits that have moustaches so I can feel like a 18th century admiral and I will be happy.
I would like more details about this.
While Pirate Falcon is on the strongish side at 20 DP, if that level already needs a nerf Gryphon/Monitor/LP Brawler could definitely take a bit of a beating IMO.
(LP Brawler going up to 6 DP seems smallish but might be enough)
Radar? You mean that combat radar? But it's in the combat engine, not the campaign layer...
What I referred to is the UI like the left corner credits
I'm also looking forward to the lore expansion of the Luddic Church
Ah, so shield upkeep is actually defined as fraction of flux dissipation, got it.
You've already got diminishing returns built into fighter spam with the new soft cap on skills and the Drover has been very far from good, so I don't feel like it's on the edge of overtaking the game again. It's definitely more powerful than the Condor, sure, but is it really 1.5 Condors?
Oh wow I genuinely forgot Neutrino Detector exists after multiple experiences with how unreliable it is (no offense btw) so I don't bother bringing Violatiles anymore, guess I'll give it another try with an easily accessible supply for it, thanks guys ;D
And I'll still keep saying Fury is overcosted, especially with AI that dies more often with it than with frigates. I don't see it getting stronger than it currently is so the only path to redemption is having its DP cost down to 18 or so.
EDIT: I forgot to comment on the DP costs, wow I would've never guessed only 50 DP for a capital that seems so insane. 30 DP for Apex makes sense now that I looked back on the screenshot. It has a ton of firepower plus free PD with Terminator drones.
Will any of the new mission grant Hypercognition (or new special skills) as rewards?All derelicts already have rugged construction far as i know.
Has Rugged Construction been added to every Derelict?
A likely unpopular opinion, but I wish the Fury never moved off its 15 DP cost and was balanced around that niche. High Tech needs its own Light Cruise and the Fury is well beyond the Falcon, in my book. Personally, there are too many 20 DP Cruisers out there vying for the same spot.I'd prefer that over the current situation. Just make it cheaper and less tanky. Like you said, there's a spot for a cruiser that's not expensive. No need to try and make Aurora-lite.
Just looking at the distribution DP costs for ships which meet a hypothetical high tech doctrine: fast, maneuverability System, shield tank, primary energy weapons:
Shrike 8 DP
Medusa 12 DP
Hyperion 15 DP
Fury 20 DP or 15 DP
Aurora 30 DP
Odyssey 45 DP
I certainly think the Fury looks better at the 20 DP in that lineup, given you've already got the Medusa at 12 DP and the Hyperion at 15 DP. I'd much rather see the Fury balanced at the 20 DP level as that looks like an easier to distinguish progression. Dropping it to 15 DP means competing in the Medusa and Hyperion space, which would feel really overcrowded to be honest. Then there's nothing in that doctrine between 15 DP to 30 DP, which feels like a pretty big gap.
There is also the problem that the Eagle and to a lesser extent the Falcon design kind of fight itself. Fury's design actually works together (and synergizes strongly with safety overrides, but that's a separate point). To get to 15 DP, you'd essentially have to make it barely stronger than a Medusa, and on par with the Hyperion, the latter of which is already a fast, shield tanking, 3 medium mount, maneuverability system using ship. For example, Medusa and Hyperion already have 600 flux dissipation max, compared to the Falcon's 700, as well as 16,667 max effective shield capacity compared to the Falcon's max capacity of 16,250.
Or in other words, the high tech doctrine simply uses high end destroyers and frigates to fill the light cruiser niche better than a midline light cruiser. Keep in mind, non-beam energy weapons (the bread and butter of a Fury) don't get as much benefit from a Dedicated Targeting Core as a ballistics ship would, so I don't see a need for a 15 DP high tech doctrine ship in the cruiser format. I'll also note, Heavy blasters will cover a multitude of sins in terms of making up for DPS with only a few mounts. If people feel the Fury isn't worth DP, then I'd rather see it buffed than drop down to the DP range of two other already existing high tech doctrine ships.
I am missing skill update, will it come ?
My question to Alex is if the maximum target leading is basic or s-mod/elite only?
Oh right I forgot to ask another thing, is the LP Manticore also 12 DP? Because that franky seems busted for a faction that's already harder than every other faction in the game (excluding exploration stuff ofc).
Maybe there are more cases of S-Mods that have become only good IF S-modded instead of being buffed to be worth using normally and the S-Mod being a pretty nice extra.
It could just be an outlier for all i know but better safe than sorry yes?
Oh right I forgot to ask another thing, is the LP Manticore also 12 DP? Because that franky seems busted for a faction that's already harder than every other faction in the game (excluding exploration stuff ofc).
Yeah it's 12 DP. I mean, large missile slot, yes, but it's not a very tanky ship and it has built-in SO so it's kind of an awkward one. Though, yeah, Hammer Barrage plus a bunch of machine guns...
LP manticore running around with SO, cyclone and double HMG :)Improved reaper looks nastier, with officer skipping racks is an option and there'll still be OP to spare.
I mean when you put it like that it does look nicer in that 20 DP spot. But the important part is to take a look at its role and how the ship is meant to be used. Fury is basically a bigger Shrike, not much science there. So as Shrike, it's also a fast flanker/harasser that can zoom into a battle an unleash a burst of missiles and energy weapons. Everyone here knows AI doesn't really do flanking maneuvers nor it has perfect timing to strike (also sometimes hesitant to pull off and active vent), which is why people call such ships "punch down" ships. 8 DP for a punch down ship makes sense, since frigates don't cost a lot less, only tiny less. Fury on the other hand costs 20 DP and ships which it can reliably kill are much cheaper than itself. Which is why I hate that the bloody thing occupies the same points in your fleet as Gryphon does.
You could sugarcoat this role all day long, I just don't have the need to spend 20 DP (the cost of an average cruiser) for a ship that can handle base Falcons at best.
@Hiruma Kai
A convincing argument. I was looking at the Fury from the lens of the Cruiser line up rather than the High Tech. From that perspective, you’re right: it would bump into the Medusa, though I feel the Hyperion is sort of an outlier and not a a “mainline” ship.
However, I’d be curious how many players compare a Falcon to a Medusa to a Hyperion (I.e. across hull sizes). That’s not immediately intuitive. Or perhaps it’s better to ask, what is the most common way folks compare ships? Is it hull size, DP, burn speed, role, etc?
I’m inclined to agree with Grievous69 when comparing it against a Heron, Gryphon, Mora, Apogee or the now cheaper Eagle: is it on par with these other 20ish DP ships? Maybe it should be 18 like the Eagle.
Squall damage remained the same, it got fixed (typo I guess). The part of the damage is just scripted now not to ravage hull.Yeah, that was cleared up earlier so now only the builtin SO Manticore stands out :)
Will the Lion's Guard ships be better than their standard counterparts?
If you're saying the Fury isn't worth 20 DP, then I'd advocate that it be buffed until it's worth 20 DP. Dropping to 18-19 DP is another option, with or without buffs. But I feel 15 DP is really too close to two other already existing ships with nearly the same doctrine and access to nearly the same weapons. You can put a Medium missile (or two small missiles), a Heavy Blaster and an Ion Pulser on a Medusa, on a Hyperion, or on a Fury.Don't have a strong opinion about Fury either way, just wanted to note that I don't feel the Hyperion is a very good comparison point for "standard" ships around ~15 DP.
Not even hammers:LP manticore running around with SO, cyclone and double HMG :)Improved reaper looks nastier, with officer skipping racks is an option and there'll still be OP to spare.
Squall damage going up and that were the 2 things that looked far out of line when first reading the notes.
Is the lp manticore's system still the cannister flak? It would be interesting to change that to burn drive for maximum in your face torpedo strikes! Probably objectively worse in terms of performance but also terrifying stacked on top of SO.
As I'm in the camp that Fury seems to work Okay at 20 DP for me, I haven't been presented evidence that a buff is absolutely necessary. However, something small on the scale of an OP bump like Grievous69 suggests or a universal mount addition like Foof suggests sounds reasonable to me and doesn't shake things up too much. If the Medusa is getting a 5 OP bump at 12 DP, maybe the Fury should get a 10 OP bump at 20 DP. A large buff like the Eagle got would be way too much I think.
Is the lp manticore's system still the cannister flak? It would be interesting to change that to burn drive for maximum in your face torpedo strikes! Probably objectively worse in terms of performance but also terrifying stacked on top of SO.Colossus already has both the hammer barrage and the burn drive.
Shield shunt is very cheap so it's on a fairly short list of hullmods whose build-in effect is quite high (but still aligns with the base effect, either in stats or at least in spirit.)I see. Although the issue is less about the bonus and more about that current shield shunt is weaker than it probably should (No shield for 15% armor feels eeeeeh) but then when you S-Mod it it jumps to 30% and that is way better. So there is this situation where shield shunt is either too weak to consider or now a viable choice at a premium.
been chomping at the bitt for this update ever sense the aprilGood news, you can keep doing that for another 3-12 months :D
Would you mind sharing a good build or two?
Why not try the Legion with its buffs instead of calling for nerfs before it even out the door? The Legion is a Hegemony ship is it not? It and the Onslaught need to stand tall as two big reasons why the Hegemony is still in power.
The XIV always have more OP than the base. By not giving the XIV its additional OP, that's a nerf to that variant.Why not try the Legion with its buffs instead of calling for nerfs before it even out the door? The Legion is a Hegemony ship is it not? It and the Onslaught need to stand tall as two big reasons why the Hegemony is still in power.
I do not see any call for nerfing Legion. Only for not buffing the already strong Legion XIV.
Players will always find ways to exploit game mechanics, and I do understand it's generally difficult to balance player-piloted phase ships, but can anything reasonably be done to make this sort of loadout less of a fleet deleter? I don't know what to suggest.You're using sim, so the enemy ships have no officers. (i also think ships might behave a little bit differently in sim than they would in normal battles)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ifxXOTpozg
You're using sim, so the enemy ships have no officers. (i also think ships might behave a little bit differently in sim than they would in normal battles)I've raised my concern with this issue in a few places and this is always the sort of reply I get... "It's not an problem because under specific circumstances that rarely occur, it might be a little less effective."
You have a level 31 officer in the ship.
You're using a bunch of the (D) variants, which are worse than standard variants.
In both tests only 3 of the deployed ships have the ability to shield their rears.
Most if not all of the ships have little-no rear facing weapons that are not PD.
You have no carrier representation in either test.
All told, this is quite the biased example.
"It's not an issue because under specific circumstances that rarely occur, it might be a little less effective."It's the opposite case, you're the one showing highly specific circumstances that would never really occur in normal combat.
Respec your captain, assign no skill points, give every reasonable benefit to the AI.
If you can see the chaos caused by *one* lone 8DP ship, imagine that one ship accompanied by a proper fleet... and you're saying the video is an example biased in favor of the player? For real? 8 deployment points versus 200, and the one that's getting a raw deal here is the AI? Not the player, with 29 endgame ships they're choosing not to deploy?
Support doctrineI am missing skill update, will it come ?Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
I've raised my concern with this issue in a few places and this is always the sort of reply I get... "It's not an problem because under specific circumstances that rarely occur, it might be a little less effective."
What would your current thoughts be on reducing the OP on the Legion XIV back to what it currently is? I ask because currently, though this is subject to change depending on the new caps, the Legion XIV is considered one of the stronger capitals largely because, unlike its base counterpart, its a capable long range support with its two large missiles and 4 fighter bays while also capable of being a strong front-liner with its tougher armor and 5 medium ballistics for only 40 DP and my main concern is that between the increased number and types of missiles and the +40 OP the XIV Legion has the potential to become even more oppressive compared to its peers. I'd understand if you'd not want to due to Legion XIV's rarity, because its only available to the player, and because it would be weird to not have XIV be a straight upgrade to its non-XIV version, but to that third I'd argue that its weird that the weapon mounts are different compared to its base version in the first place and the lower OP could just be the tradeoff of the conversion to Large missiles over ballistics from base.XIV legion and regular legion get the same buff though?
currently the Legion XIV is considered one of the stronger capitalsConsidered by whom? I don't think this is the majority opinion at all.
- Irrelevant; campaign ships commonly have d-mods and those present in this battle didn't determine the outcomeDepends on what you're fighting. Expdrones, pathers, Luddic Church and (sometimes) pirates will have lots of d-mods, but what about everyone else?
If you can see the chaos caused by *one* lone 8DP ship, imagine that one ship accompanied by a proper fleet... and you're saying the video is an example biased in favor of the player? For real? 8 deployment points versus 200, and the one that's getting a raw deal here is the AI? Not the player, with 29 endgame ships they're choosing not to deploy?Yeah, those aren't situations you encounter in campaign. Rarely ever will you fight 200 (and at some point, just 200) DP worth of ships that has d-mods, has no officers and no commander. That's why others don't find this demonstration relevant: it's not what you encounter in the game.
I generally like a Heavy Blaster + Ion Pulsar + Sabot as the primary loadout, although I've also used a Converted Hangar + Xyphos + Heavy Blaster + double missile pods of some flavor with s-mods. Hullmods will depend on s-mods or not as well. But some mixture of Front Shields, ITU, Expanded Missile Racks, and Hardened Shields typically. Converted Hangar if Xyphos. Add in ion cannons (if no other source of ion damage), point defense, or IR pulse lasers as needed, although typically I only throw on a 2 or 3 small weapons. Bump vents as needed to match needs (or max), and the rest into capacitors.
just stop using colors at all its pain to readSupport doctrineI am missing skill update, will it come ?Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25923.0
Energy Weapon Mastery
Energy Weapon Mastery
(for colour police - Which shade of blue is reserved by moderators ?)
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25832.0
There are also very weak skills which needs buff or polishing like:
All shield shunt (armor tanking skills) becouse Shield Shnt hullmode is suboptimal in any combat situation even with full specced pilot. Especially Damage Control Elite - total waste of point.
Regarding Pilots&skills :
Pilots need an option how to be more flexible and change their skills faster. For example, let pilots acquire skill points even after their max level is reached (same as main character), those extra points can be used to swap skill for other skill (same as main character). So when pilot reach the max level he can still evolve. Adapt to new challenges. Player can keep pilots whole game, and retrain to new needs, rather than:" fire old >> hire new "mechanic. (well, personally I use edit save because of no support in game)
My flagship Fury (when it just came out) looked pretty much the same, just swap one Typhoon for Sabots. And yeah I also thought Typhoons are great even now. AI often wastes them and fires on shields but it's like that with every unguided missile.I generally like a Heavy Blaster + Ion Pulsar + Sabot as the primary loadout, although I've also used a Converted Hangar + Xyphos + Heavy Blaster + double missile pods of some flavor with s-mods. Hullmods will depend on s-mods or not as well. But some mixture of Front Shields, ITU, Expanded Missile Racks, and Hardened Shields typically. Converted Hangar if Xyphos. Add in ion cannons (if no other source of ion damage), point defense, or IR pulse lasers as needed, although typically I only throw on a 2 or 3 small weapons. Bump vents as needed to match needs (or max), and the rest into capacitors.
Yeah, don't think Fury has much room for experiments. Safety overrides or not, converted hangars or not, what missiles, that's the bulk of the choices.
What I liked the most:
(https://i.imgur.com/7uEpyVKm.jpg) (https://i.imgur.com/7uEpyVK.jpg)
Probably in the minority but I think M reapers at 5 a pop were already good, especially on a faster ship like this.
Caps over vents so it has more time to get out when it gets caught, some nominal PD because it seems like that helps staying on target, reapers because it's always paired with some form of long range kinetic (mostly squalls).
(for colour police - Which shade of blue is reserved by moderators ?)
Check this topic.
(for colour police - Which shade of blue is reserved by moderators ?)
You could of course consider just not using colors since that's what one of the developers/moderators asked.
Maybe use the time you spare by not using colors to tidy up your spelling so your posts stop being 90% auto skip.
that is not a normal post but an index that uses colors to highlight which mods are upto dateCheck this topic.
(for colour police - Which shade of blue is reserved by moderators ?)
You could of course consider just not using colors since that's what one of the developers/moderators asked.
Maybe use the time you spare by not using colors to tidy up your spelling so your posts stop being 90% auto skip.
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=177.0
Then explain to Mr. Alex that because of colours, his posts are being 90% auto skip.
If you manage that, I'll fallow suit. 8)
that is not a normal post but an index that uses colors to highlight which mods are upto dateMore importantly, that's Alex's post anyway...
not a good line of defense
I feel like the Medium Energy has to be a an assault weapon (and HB is generally optimal). The two Small Energies up front are a bit of an afterthought.I've frequently played around with 2x Pulse Laser and 2x Antimatter Blaster. The incoming Pulse Laser buff will make that a much cheaper and more effective build than it was.
The brighter blue is the mod blue i think so avoid using that one.Support doctrineI am missing skill update, will it come ?Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25923.0
Energy Weapon Mastery
Energy Weapon Mastery
(for colour police - Which shade of blue is reserved by moderators ?)
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25832.0
There are also very weak skills which needs buff or polishing like:
All shield shunt (armor tanking skills) becouse Shield Shnt hullmode is suboptimal in any combat situation even with full specced pilot. Especially Damage Control Elite - total waste of point.
Regarding Pilots&skills :
Pilots need an option how to be more flexible and change their skills faster. For example, let pilots acquire skill points even after their max level is reached (same as main character), those extra points can be used to swap skill for other skill (same as main character). So when pilot reach the max level he can still evolve. Adapt to new challenges. Player can keep pilots whole game, and retrain to new needs, rather than:" fire old >> hire new "mechanic. (well, personally I use edit save because of no support in game)
The addition of the Energy Bolt Coherer hullmod and the upgrade to Pulse Lasers are pretty big game changers.Energy Bolt Coherer may not be freely available and just limited to ships with it builtin.
Keep in mind you are using 38 OP in the 2 S and M slots and dedicate 600 flux/s to something that won't be that good against medium-heavy hulls.I feel like the Medium Energy has to be a an assault weapon (and HB is generally optimal). The two Small Energies up front are a bit of an afterthought.I've frequently played around with 2x Pulse Laser and 2x Antimatter Blaster. The incoming Pulse Laser buff will make that a much cheaper and more effective build than it was.
That would be a shame.The addition of the Energy Bolt Coherer hullmod and the upgrade to Pulse Lasers are pretty big game changers.Energy Bolt Coherer may not be freely available and just limited to ships with it builtin.
That would be a shame.The addition of the Energy Bolt Coherer hullmod and the upgrade to Pulse Lasers are pretty big game changers.Energy Bolt Coherer may not be freely available and just limited to ships with it builtin.
Eh, I dunno? Is beam weapon balance broken because of Advanced Optics?
Colossus already has both the hammer barrage and the burn drive.
I see. Although the issue is less about the bonus and more about that current shield shunt is weaker than it probably should (No shield for 15% armor feels eeeeeh) but then when you S-Mod it it jumps to 30% and that is way better. So there is this situation where shield shunt is either too weak to consider or now a viable choice at a premium.
In short in the current state shield shunt more or less comes with a tax for it to work at a level that is worth the mechanical shift that it comes with.
Or something like that. I am not good at words.
Well that aside can i pry you about the s-mod effects of converted hangar and defensive targeting array?
I can't wait to continue the main story line. Still amazing just how good the writing is in Starsector.
There are LOADS of open world (or open galaxy, if you will) games that excel at the open thing and games, that have absolutely incredible story lines.
Starsector is the only game that i know of, that can pull both of those off this brilliantly.
I gotta emphasize the writing again. It keeps you hooked once you get into it. Especially with all the teasers along the way.
Pretty sure the moment this update releases, I'm gotta get a spontaneos case of... something and unfortunately have to take a week off of work.
Regarding the Fury tangent discussion,
Sabot-based build for my AI-controlled Fury, in current campaign:
Vanshilar's got some data and a build in a couple threads, one is:
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25686.msg383303#msg383303
That compares some kill times of mono cruiser fleets + player Onslaught vs double Ordo.
I thought he did a 15 DP vs 20 DP comparison as well against Ordos but can't find it. I think the variation he used for that was something like:
...
Last thing that I really liked and worked well vs various opponents is Ion Pulser + Phase Lance, then pick a missile of your choice (I'd use Breaches if AI wasn't scared to fire them), AM Blaster and IR Pulse Laser in those 2 smalls that can fire forward. Two Burst PDs in the back mounts and Front shield conversion, max vents and rest into caps. I like this build since it doesn't require many hullmods. Obviously when you invest story points you can get ITU and something else.
What would your current thoughts be on reducing the OP on the Legion XIV back to what it currently is? I ask because currently, though this is subject to change depending on the new caps, the Legion XIV is considered one of the stronger capitals largely because, unlike its base counterpart, its a capable long range support with its two large missiles and 4 fighter bays while also capable of being a strong front-liner with its tougher armor and 5 medium ballistics for only 40 DP and my main concern is that between the increased number and types of missiles and the +40 OP the XIV Legion has the potential to become even more oppressive compared to its peers. I'd understand if you'd not want to due to Legion XIV's rarity, because its only available to the player, and because it would be weird to not have XIV be a straight upgrade to its non-XIV version, but to that third I'd argue that its weird that the weapon mounts are different compared to its base version in the first place and the lower OP could just be the tradeoff of the conversion to Large missiles over ballistics from base.
I've read my way through the patch notes and I generally like the ideas proposed in the coming patch. Frankly, adding new music and a bunch of side story quests is the breathe of fresh air I have been wanting as a longtime player of the game. I'm really looking forward to seeing how the new weapons perform as well as I, too, have a love of insanely overbuilt mega-weapons that are just too powerful for their own good.
Now, I have an idea and a personal request combined for something to spice up exploration. Ruined world lore bits. Basically, when tech mining and to a far lesser extent doing your initial salvaging pass of a world with ruins on it, I think some generic lore bits about what kind of colony or outpost was there and what happened to it would be a fascinating way to add depth to the ruined sector and give you more of a feel of just how BAD things got post-collapse. For a while, at least. Doesn't have to be colony specific (although having special ruined colonies with special lore attached to them spawn would also be fun). Just a thought and my two cents.
I bet they will be the best fighters ever and not because they have cool name(which they have of course, very cool name).
after going through the patch notes id like to make 2 small suggestions
1_ wouldnt it make more sense for the cyclone reaper launcher to launch both torpedoes at the same time since theres 2 tubes? it would also change how you use them because right now the target ship can shoot down both at the same time with a well placed shot or just shoot down the second because of the delay but when they are shot together its more risky and rewarding
2_ i think the hammer barrage has too much spread even at close range you cant land more than 2 of the 4. maybe decrease that a little?
also i remember a thread about medium ballistic weapons and how they dont synergize with each other after some of them changed(range and burst fire accuracy) is that left for the next update or did you forget about it?
Check this topic.
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=177.0
Then explain to Mr. Alex that because of colours, his posts are being 90% auto skip.
If you manage that, I'll fallow suit. 8)
i might be wrong but i think i saw a Lion Guard ship having energy bolt coherer.
Sort of the old Tempest-solos-everything situation, just with more skill and less time (so, not *as* bad!).Hey! It never was that bad! Cruisers that weren't terminally backstabbable were a no-go, so you'd have to whip out another ship to deal with them anyway (since, similarly to the Shade, butting your head against the shield is pointless).
(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)For Converted Hangar, does that mean...
I remember soloing the Hegemony Systems Defense Fleet with Tempest armed with two Heavy Blasters. It was hard, but it was doable. Had to vent spam every other shot. Might have had Hegemony kill themselves from a burn-in accident. Skills were much stronger, some exploits were not yet addressed (like fading shots hitting for hard flux among others), and the enemy did not have skills at the time.Sort of the old Tempest-solos-everything situation, just with more skill and less time (so, not *as* bad!).Hey! It never was that bad! Cruisers that weren't terminally backstabbable were a no-go, so you'd have to whip out another ship to deal with them anyway (since, similarly to the Shade, butting your head against the shield is pointless).
(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)I don't know why but the fact that the effect of CH S-Mod feels so obvious gets me. DTA sounds pretty neato range is range and all that.
Some of them do, yes. It has a modified effect on crewed ships, but still does boost non-beam energy range.A modified effect? Interesting.
(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)Finally, my precious Xyphos, without the D-mod visual overlay. Assuming it doesn't get nerfed before the patch releases, that is.
Wasn't DTA the cheapest hullmod in the game? +100 range seems like a fairly minor upside then.A lot of fighter weaponry is short-range point defense guns. +100 range is especially noticeable on those.
+100 range is especially noticeable on thoseArguably, the opposite. Machine guns are going to be shorter range than anything you are fighting regardless of the bonus. Range extenders are most meaningful when they bring you above the average range for the weapon size class.
Make sure to enjoy your mining auroras while you can. Our beloved mining arrays will be hybrid weapons soon so you won't be able to do this anymore :-[why not?RIP Mining Aurora(https://i.imgur.com/Hjl4XRT.png)[close]
Make sure to enjoy your mining auroras while you can. Our beloved mining arrays will be hybrid weapons soon so you won't be able to do this anymore :-[why not?RIP Mining Aurora(https://i.imgur.com/Hjl4XRT.png)[close]
In regards to the fury, I tried it out with the upcoming changes to burst pds and typhoons in this layout:
(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)For Converted Hangar, does that mean...
* Fighters cost normal OP?
* Expanded Deck Crew can be added?
Wasn't DTA the cheapest hullmod in the game? +100 range seems like a fairly minor upside then.
Make sure to enjoy your mining auroras while you can. Our beloved mining arrays will be hybrid weapons soon so you won't be able to do this anymore :-[
This is out of left field but have you ever had to use yer data backup service to recover Starsector's source code? Could we have lost Starsector forever because of a power outage or hard drive failure?
Also, is this patch further along than when you normally post patch notes or do we still have a couple months of additional tweaks and play testing?
(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)
I'm not married about having its OP be higher than the base variants, and you make a good point about feel/large slots/etc. On the other hand, I'm entirely unsold on the idea that the Legion XIV is one of the stronger capital. I think the idea of coordination via fighters and missiles is true in a somewhat more theoretical than practical way - like, if the Legions are able to coordinate vs a single target, it's either the start of a fight, or you've already started winning it; otherwise they've likely got their own problems to deal with. And if they're in the back rank and have the luxury of coordinating like this, then dedicated carriers would do better - e.g. the Astral.
I think more OP basically just gives it more hullmods - I think it can already get whatever fighters and weapons it really wants, and is a tad more limited on hullmods than I'd perhaps like. That said, I could see giving it +20 instead of +40, or some such. I'll definitely keep an eye on it.
I still find it kindof weird how much more people like the XIV Legion; for most contexts, I actually prefer the weapon layout of the regular Legion. XIV one is definitely better as a specialized anti-battlestation ship, but it's not the version I'd rather take for general-purpose use.
Astral can't handle a real fight and can only stay in the back. For Squall spam it's probably better but on a XIV Legion you shouldn't be using 2500 range weapons in the first place. 4 fighter wings that provide pressure + medium ballistic and big torpedoes on top is the devastating combo why the ship is liked by many.I still find it kindof weird how much more people like the XIV Legion; for most contexts, I actually prefer the weapon layout of the regular Legion. XIV one is definitely better as a specialized anti-battlestation ship, but it's not the version I'd rather take for general-purpose use.
Same for me. I value those large ballistics a lot in terms of making a battlecarrier. The XIV is better for long range squall spam, but if that is the desired role than an Astral has the same missile load and better fighters.
Would you mind sharing a good build or two?
Huh, i didn't know hybrid slots were incompatible to hybrid weapons. It was something that never came up during my runs.Make sure to enjoy your mining auroras while you can. Our beloved mining arrays will be hybrid weapons soon so you won't be able to do this anymore :-[why not?RIP Mining Aurora(https://i.imgur.com/Hjl4XRT.png)[close]
Because those are Synergy slots, Mining Blasters and Lasers can't be put on the hardpoints anymore because they will be Hybrids, which can only be put on pure energy, pure ballistic, or other hybrid slots and 'not' synergy. They can still be put on the energy turret slots of the Aurora, however, and since there's two mediums...
I never found much use for the Fury in AI control though, it simply can't play it tactically the way a player can. Which is fine and all, not all ships and tactics are feasible to implement an AI capable of playing properly, just... The discrepancy between AI and player performance makes it kind of feelsbad to see the AI:s limitations so clearly. I'm not sure what stance you have on the notion of "this is mostly for the AI" vs "this is mostly for the player" types of ships respectively. To me the Fury feels solidly in the latter camp, either way.I'm with you, half of the high tech roster are player ships which are inferior AI ships. I'm fine with something being "not perfect" when given to AI, and if a ship is truly balanced around the player, then that balance should be compared to other player ships. But it still has to be DP efficient enough to warrant AI use even though you could do much more with it yourself. Take Medusa for example, a player can be a serious threat with it you'd be surprised it's only 12 DP. When you give it to AI, it's noticeably less powerful, but you'll still look at the number and go "eh this is fine". Such balance should be the ideal sweet spot.
Oh no! BRB rolling back changes.
Hey everyone,
Excuse me - I'm new here. Is there a way to play 0.96a game version? Or do I need to wait for a release?
Cheers
Astral is 50 DP vs Legion's 40 for the 2 squalls, better fighters but worse missiles.I still find it kindof weird how much more people like the XIV Legion; for most contexts, I actually prefer the weapon layout of the regular Legion. XIV one is definitely better as a specialized anti-battlestation ship, but it's not the version I'd rather take for general-purpose use.
Same for me. I value those large ballistics a lot in terms of making a battlecarrier. The XIV is better for long range squall spam, but if that is the desired role than an Astral has the same missile load and better fighters.
I still find it kindof weird how much more people like the XIV Legion; for most contexts, I actually prefer the weapon layout of the regular Legion. XIV one is definitely better as a specialized anti-battlestation ship, but it's not the version I'd rather take for general-purpose use.Personally i feel like the Legion XIV is "special". It is unique in the sense that you can only (ignoring historian blueprint location) find it wrecked and abandoned somewhere outside the core worlds (Was also my first capital ship). It also comes with the special hullmod found in all XIVs and a small sprinkle of extra OP, It is nothing really amazing that makes the regular legion objectively inferior at all but i dunno it is nice little extra. But honestly one of the most important parts of the legion XIV that has over the regular legion is that using burn drive and charging into the frontlines with two cyclone reapers just feels amazing, but maybe i should try two hammer barrages or those DEMs because they are very cool some day.
honestly one of the most important parts of the legion XIV that has over the regular legion is that using burn drive and charging into the frontlines with two cyclone reapers just feels amazingRegular legion can burn in with reapers too, and it gets 5 per volley instead of 4.
Since we're randomly talking about Legions let me say this: I can't imagine myself ever putting one in my fleet simply because their absurd fuel use. Onslaught is the same way, it uses 50% more fuel than the Paragon and that's with it being 50% cheaper SP-wise, so per-SP it actually uses 125% more fuel(Two Paragons - 120 SP, 20 fuel; three Onslaughts/Legions - 120 SP, 45 fuel)Thankfully efficiency overhaul and containment procedures help a bunch. If that fails then bring a prometheus or two full of fuel.
I know that "low tech ships use more fuel" is a theme but I don't think the differences need to be that extreme, especially since you get almost nothing in return(slightly faster CR recovery doesn't matter 99.9% of the time)
Regular legion can burn in with reapers too, and it gets 5 per volley instead of 4.Huh. Well, two cyclone reapers tend to last me for the entire fight more often than not. On your case how does that go?
Now with the new patch, you will have 15 hammer burst instead...
Since we're randomly talking about Legions let me say this: I can't imagine myself ever putting one in my fleet simply because their absurd fuel use. Onslaught is the same way, it uses 50% more fuel than the Paragon and that's with it being 50% cheaper SP-wise, so per-SP it actually uses 125% more fuel(Two Paragons - 120 SP, 20 fuel; three Onslaughts/Legions - 120 SP, 45 fuel)Onslaught is actually more expensive per month than a Paragon, even without considering the fuel (40 supply = 4000 credits, 750 crew = 7500 in salaries, total 11500. Paragon has 60 supply and 500 crew, 6000 + 5000 = 11000. It's certainly workable, since people do use them, but it still bothers me. Also, I think you meant DP (Deployment Points), not SP.
Thankfully efficiency overhaul and containment procedures help a bunch. If that fails then bring a prometheus or two full of fuel.Cyclone ammo is very generous, it's one of the missiles that rarely uses everything in a single battle.Regular legion can burn in with reapers too, and it gets 5 per volley instead of 4.Huh. Well, two cyclone reapers tend to last me for the entire fight more often than not. On your case how does that go?
Now with the new patch, you will have 15 hammer burst instead...
... and hephaestus gets a completely inconsequential buffI'm just going to say it: the Hephaestus is underrated.
Not that I was the one asked but given the Fury rapidly became my favourite ship by far to fly when introduced and stuck there even through that tooootally cruel and unusual and unnecessary DP increase (:D) I felt the urge to comment on this at least. I have had a lot of fun and success with an Ion Pulser, Heavy Blaster, and Reapers for the missiles as the main armaments. ITU, Unstable Injector and Expanded Magazines for notable augments. It's been a while since I played now and I forgot the name but there was also a [SUPER REDACTED] weapon with ammo charges I used for a small and PD to taste around that (mostly burst lasers to get more perceived worth out of Magazines), supported by EWM and Systems Expertise/Mastery I forgot the skill name to get the extra charge and recharge rate on the Plasma Burn, plus maneuverability buffs from other combat skills to allow quick turns to send the Reapers properly. Play it as a broadside ship moving up the enemy line's right flank and fly around behind to poke at engines and make the AI panic at being flanked/pick off smaller escort ships, keep 1 or 2 charges of Burn to make a quick escape to let flux cool/the Pulser recharge to full when necessary. I never found much use for the Fury in AI control though, it simply can't play it tactically the way a player can. Which is fine and all, not all ships and tactics are feasible to implement an AI capable of playing properly, just... The discrepancy between AI and player performance makes it kind of feelsbad to see the AI:s limitations so clearly. I'm not sure what stance you have on the notion of "this is mostly for the AI" vs "this is mostly for the player" types of ships respectively. To me the Fury feels solidly in the latter camp, either way.
Small question
Do issue where game with hidden UI(F12) run much better than the one with UI on top was addressed?
Very hyped for the incoming update. Couple questions about the eagle changes :Safe to say the diktat is going to be fine on terms of their lion guard ships as it is confirmed by alex that some of them have energy bolt coherers (that are somewhat different from the [REDACTED] version?) so others might have other nice stuff. I assume that solar shielding is still a given too.
1) will the other variants of the eagle ( the XIV and the upcomming sindrian diktat variant ) also get a buff ?
2) will the falcon get a buff at some point too ?
But most importantly:
3) will the eagle get a graphical redisign ? I don't think its a very pretty ship, the falcon looks much better
thanks for the hard work as always !
1) will the other variants of the eagle ( the XIV and the upcomming sindrian diktat variant ) also get a buff ?
2) will the falcon get a buff at some point too ?
Very curious what the combat buffs are for S-modded campaign hullmods are (like Augmented Drive Field, Efficiency Overhaul, Expanded Cargo Hold, etc). Since they have no base combat bonuses, but can still cost a lot of OP, it makes it hard to balance them based off of "What it does already but makes it a bit better" or "give it a combat bonus that makes up for the OP difference". In this case, they'd need to have an entirely new effect (for combat) that would have to be worth the average hullmod OP cost (or perhaps slightly lower, campaign buffs gotta count for something right?).
I wonder if we'll see proper combat builds with Augmented Drive Field built in for its combat bonuses :o
I kind of assumed that logistics s-mods would provide extra non-combat bonuses, but I could be wrong here.The logistic sensor mod gives a combat benefit even if it is a weird one.
I'm interested in what that S-mod can do on a high speed Frigate. Having visual range over the enemy is an advantage for very long range weapons like Pilon spam.I kind of assumed that logistics s-mods would provide extra non-combat bonuses, but I could be wrong here.The logistic sensor mod gives a combat benefit even if it is a weird one.
Not that I was the one asked but given the Fury rapidly became my favourite ship by far to fly when introduced and stuck there even through that tooootally cruel and unusual and unnecessary DP increase (:D) I felt the urge to comment on this at least. I have had a lot of fun and success with an Ion Pulser, Heavy Blaster, and Reapers for the missiles as the main armaments. ITU, Unstable Injector and Expanded Magazines for notable augments. It's been a while since I played now and I forgot the name but there was also a [SUPER REDACTED] weapon with ammo charges I used for a small and PD to taste around that (mostly burst lasers to get more perceived worth out of Magazines), supported by EWM and Systems Expertise/Mastery I forgot the skill name to get the extra charge and recharge rate on the Plasma Burn, plus maneuverability buffs from other combat skills to allow quick turns to send the Reapers properly. Play it as a broadside ship moving up the enemy line's right flank and fly around behind to poke at engines and make the AI panic at being flanked/pick off smaller escort ships, keep 1 or 2 charges of Burn to make a quick escape to let flux cool/the Pulser recharge to full when necessary. I never found much use for the Fury in AI control though, it simply can't play it tactically the way a player can. Which is fine and all, not all ships and tactics are feasible to implement an AI capable of playing properly, just... The discrepancy between AI and player performance makes it kind of feelsbad to see the AI:s limitations so clearly. I'm not sure what stance you have on the notion of "this is mostly for the AI" vs "this is mostly for the player" types of ships respectively. To me the Fury feels solidly in the latter camp, either way.
Thank you for the writeup! Some ships are just naturally going to have more for a player to leverage, yeah, but the discrepancy in this case is a fair point.
Cheap commodity mission: remote pickup of legal goods variation now requires other colony to not be hostile to the playerUmm, I didn't know I can remotely pick up those goods before. Gotta try it out.
I think Alex just means the normal pick up from a station, doesn't he?Cheap commodity mission: remote pickup of legal goods variation now requires other colony to not be hostile to the playerUmm, I didn't know I can remotely pick up those goods before. Gotta try it out.
Cheers
Any chance for Makeshift Shield generator getting any buffs? Currently its in really bad shape.
>90 degree arc, 1.2 efficiency, it saps 20% of your speed, and its upkeep is half your flux. It's also massively overpriced.
The speed penalty and OP cost far exceed any gains.
And yes I get that its suppose to be weak but now its not really worth.
Cheers
Any chance for Makeshift Shield generator getting any buffs? Currently its in really bad shape.
>90 degree arc, 1.2 efficiency, it saps 20% of your speed, and its upkeep is half your flux. It's also massively overpriced.
The speed penalty and OP cost far exceed any gains.
And yes I get that its suppose to be weak but now its not really worth.
I'm surprised the small burst pd laser got buffed, I felt it has always been the best small energy pd system and that the PD and the LRPD laser needed a buff more.
I'm surprised the small burst pd laser got buffed, I felt it has always been the best small energy pd system and that the PD and the LRPD laser needed a buff more.
Best for the slot, sure. But when also taking the OP cost into account i could only very rarely justify using it to myself, and i've read on here that plenty of people felt the same as me. That's probably why it got buffed.
As for the other two, LRPD *is* getting a buff by having 1 OP slashed from it's cost, iirc? Think that's a pretty good buff myself since it's basically a side grade of normal/short range PD anyway. And now that'll be reflected in their cost.
Longer range?
Speaking of the upgraded campaign hullmods, what about giving combat ships one free campaign hullmod each? Maybe through a PC industry tree skill or something? Without something like that I would never take a non-combat hullmod on a combat ship. In fact I wouldn't even take a PC skill that gives a free campaign hullmod to combat ships, unless that same skill gives a combat-related bonus as well. I would take a few tugs with IEA before I give AFD to one of my cruisers or capitals.
There's something that always bothered my mind.Yes please!
I heard that Heavy Armor is now basically Increase the ship's armor. and its smod effect with Decrease maneuverability.
Could Heavy Armor increase the mass of the ship as well? It is heavier after all and should have more mass. :)
There's something that always bothered my mind.
I heard that Heavy Armor is now basically Increase the ship's armor. and its smod effect with Decrease maneuverability.
Could Heavy Armor increase the mass of the ship as well? It is heavier after all and should have more mass. :)
CheersI've always felt odd about broadsword being categorized as Low Tech despite having Midline color theme.
I just seen a Alex twitter message about fighters adopting tech colors of the carriers.
It disturbed me greatly and tbh I don't even really see a point in it.
Does it change fighters armament? Does it change anything?
What even point it is?
Sure putting Xypons on some jury rigged old cargo ship may look out of place but its fine because it should be that way.
ITBH I don't mind this being a optional feature.
Please Alex make it optional.
The only ship where makeshift shields was decent on was Rampart (Derelict ship), but even then, Rampart all-in on armor still did better.Cheers
Any chance for Makeshift Shield generator getting any buffs? Currently its in really bad shape.
>90 degree arc, 1.2 efficiency, it saps 20% of your speed, and its upkeep is half your flux. It's also massively overpriced.
The speed penalty and OP cost far exceed any gains.
And yes I get that its suppose to be weak but now its not really worth.
Tried to play around it on LP Cerberus yesterday. Unfortunately in it's current state this hullmod is just useless. Without it Cerberus was able to take down an Eagle, but with it it can't beat even a frigate, 4000 flux, 1.2 (less with HS hullmod), and 20% speed loss is just too much.
Also i think it would be fun to have an alternative in the form of a Damper Field.
Exactly what I meant.The only ship where makeshift shields was decent on was Rampart (Derelict ship), but even then, Rampart all-in on armor still did better.Cheers
Any chance for Makeshift Shield generator getting any buffs? Currently its in really bad shape.
>90 degree arc, 1.2 efficiency, it saps 20% of your speed, and its upkeep is half your flux. It's also massively overpriced.
The speed penalty and OP cost far exceed any gains.
And yes I get that its suppose to be weak but now its not really worth.
Tried to play around it on LP Cerberus yesterday. Unfortunately in it's current state this hullmod is just useless. Without it Cerberus was able to take down an Eagle, but with it it can't beat even a frigate, 4000 flux, 1.2 (less with HS hullmod), and 20% speed loss is just too much.
Also i think it would be fun to have an alternative in the form of a Damper Field.
On human ships, makeshift shields seem to make them weaker and/or more vulnerable, not to mention make the ship more cowardly. (Ships with shields and high-flux will cower, which hurts those with bad shot range or speed.)
Exactly what I meant.The only ship where makeshift shields was decent on was Rampart (Derelict ship), but even then, Rampart all-in on armor still did better.Cheers
Any chance for Makeshift Shield generator getting any buffs? Currently its in really bad shape.
>90 degree arc, 1.2 efficiency, it saps 20% of your speed, and its upkeep is half your flux. It's also massively overpriced.
The speed penalty and OP cost far exceed any gains.
And yes I get that its suppose to be weak but now its not really worth.
Tried to play around it on LP Cerberus yesterday. Unfortunately in it's current state this hullmod is just useless. Without it Cerberus was able to take down an Eagle, but with it it can't beat even a frigate, 4000 flux, 1.2 (less with HS hullmod), and 20% speed loss is just too much.
Also i think it would be fun to have an alternative in the form of a Damper Field.
On human ships, makeshift shields seem to make them weaker and/or more vulnerable, not to mention make the ship more cowardly. (Ships with shields and high-flux will cower, which hurts those with bad shot range or speed.)
Ships without shield usually have poor flux anyway but at last they can shoot their guns all the time. With MSG they are useless. No OP, no flux, can't shoot guns because flux choke them.
Cheers
I just seen a Alex twitter message about fighters adopting tech colors of the carriers.
It disturbed me greatly and tbh I don't even really see a point in it.
Does it change fighters armament? Does it change anything?
What even point it is?
Sure putting Xypons on some jury rigged old cargo ship may look out of place but its fine because it should be that way.
ITBH I don't mind this being a optional feature.
Please Alex make it optional.
I've thought about this for a bit... is the s-mod bonus going to be the same on every hull size? The ITU is only 4/8 on frigates and destroyers putting it under the "default" but for cruisers and caps it's 15/25. Do frigates and destroyers get an s-mod bonus while larger ships don't?The difference is that Frigate might have 60 OP, so s-modding a 4 OP hullmod gives it "more" 7% OP, while a capital ship might have 360 OP, so s-modding a 25 hullmod gives it... also 7% OP more. Well, 6,67% vs 6,94%, but those are details.
On a related note, the bonus for turret gyros looks cool, but 25% extra damage to frigates is a lot.It got changed kinda recently, the screenshot from twitter is outdated. I was hoping he'd forget and leave it in, sounded really fun. ;)
(What I've changed it to is +25% to missiles/fighters, and 5% per size class difference to anything smaller than the ship.)
Exactly that's why putting it on the Buffalo Mark II is a good idea! It's a missile boat that tends to be cowardly.
Exactly that's why putting it on the Buffalo Mark II is a good idea! It's a missile boat that tends to be cowardly.
Missile boats are NOT cowardly. They will happily dive into the front and then die instantly because they have no tank. This applies to Buffalo MkII, Gryphon, etc. As far as I know only carriers have distinct AI that actually keeps them safe.
Very excited for that tech-matching support fighters skin, now we can have them blend in with the main shipI mean the broadsword looks pretty midline-y
As someone else already mentioned, should Broadsword be reclassified as Midline and is there any chance we could get Hullmods in the Codex?
It would make sense for Broadswords to be midline, since many low-tech ships didn't have shields by default. Why make an anti-shield fighter before there were shields?But low-tech is also the poster child for heavy armour and ballistics. As far as fighters go, that's the broadsword. Even if it does have a midline paint job.
It would make sense for Broadswords to be midline, since many low-tech ships didn't have shields by default. Why make an anti-shield fighter before there were shields?But low-tech is also the poster child for heavy armour and ballistics. As far as fighters go, that's the broadsword. Even if it does have a midline paint job.
I'm sure the domain was using kinetic weapons before the invention of shields given that we do today and we don't have shields.
- Habringer:
- Increased top speed to 100 (was: 80)
- Reduced maintenance and deployment supply costs to 18 (was: 20)
Can we have both medium flaks go back to being HE?But why?
Because between they aren't much better than the Thumper now that they're all Frags.Can we have both medium flaks go back to being HE?But why?
Can we have both medium flaks go back to being HE?Go back? I can't remember them ever being HE, but I've only been playing for a decade.
*Insert Starsector develop cycle joke*Can we have both medium flaks go back to being HE?Go back? I can't remember them ever being HE, but I've only been playing for a decade.
Because between they aren't much better than the Thumper now that they're all Frags.Can you share your builds that use Thumper as PD?
Kind of late feedback but:
- Habringer:
- Increased top speed to 100 (was: 80)
- Reduced maintenance and deployment supply costs to 18 (was: 20)
A speed buff to the Harby is most welcome, but given how Phase Coil Tuning skill works the DP reduction is basically completely meaningless as there's no combination of Phase ships that can add up to 22 anyway(So that with a +18 Harbinger you're still at 40 or less)
If you feel that it needs a bit more oomph than just the speed buff, how about swapping the middle medium energy for medium universal?
Modding:
- Fixed issue where a torpedo impacting a module's shield could damage the body of the ship
Can you send out an email please when the new version comes out, thanks!There is a mailing list sign up for just that on the main website. Just look at the sidebar on the right!
... can't help but wonder - why does this have such a complex system of breakpoints? Like why come destroyers with 2 small missiles get the same amount of reloads as a frigate with 2, ...
Changes as of February 01, 2023
Campaign:
- Added "The Usurpers" story mission
- Added "Knight Errant" story mission
- Added "The Pilgrim's Path" story mission
- Added "major events" system
- Each event tracks progress, from player actions and other wise
- Various things happen as the event progresses
- Added Hostile Activity "major event"
- Handles various hostile fleets found in systems with your colonies
- Multiple causes for hostile activity (use of AI cores, presence of a pirate base nearby, etc)
- Different causes have different resolutions
- If hostile activity is unchecked, colonies suffer penalties and eventually a major negative outcome of some sort (e.g. a raid or an act of Pather sabotage), after which there is a lull
- Goal is to give the player more of a warning before major negative events, and a choice in whether they want to handle the resolve the causes individually to avert the negative outcomes, or to just fight hostile fleets and get it under control that way, without addressing the causes
- Added "Hyperspace Topography" major event
- Various player actions improve their knowledge of hyperspace, unlocking new bonuses
- Slipstream detection around colonies
- Much more efficient slipstream travel
- Increased speed in hyperspace
- Added Planetkiller and "Hostile Activity" related mission
- Adjusted the compositions of most faction fleets
- Factions now generally have capital ship(s) unique to them
- And a more well-defined feel to the faction's fleets, overall
- Specific weapons are now reliably found at specific faction markets/black markets
- For example, the new directed-energy missiles can be found on Persean League colonies
I hope this means that the burn speed wont be capped at 20 anymore when my ships have a normal speed of 14 due to enhanced drives. I wish exploration at burn speed 28 would be possible.[/li][/list]
- Increased speed in hyperspace
Could you add a display of final, modified range of weapons on the refit screen? There's a lot of hullmods and skills that modify weapon range, and it's not at all clear how they interact with one another so it would be helpful to see the end result.TIMID's mod "Too much info" helps you.
Could you add a display of final, modified range of weapons on the refit screen? There's a lot of hullmods and skills that modify weapon range, and it's not at all clear how they interact with one another so it would be helpful to see the end result.TIMID's mod "Too much info" helps you more. I admit it is not so easy to use it.
Sorry if its annoying. But can i get a aprocsimate date for the update? Doset have to be on the dot. Jos about when it should come out.
I'm a little worried that with all the large missile changes to accommodate the addition of the pegasus you're indirectly penalizing a lot of ships that generally relied on these weapons but aren't getting any changes (Gryphon, Conquest, Astral, Apogee, to some degree the Legion XIV). Indirect changes compounding in order to make ships rather poor performing can sneak up on you (like the previous patch removing a lot of the power from the Drovers ship system, then adding the DP, then removing officer carrier skills all compounding to make that ship highly undesirable).
Now the legion getting the OP point increase and the cyclone improvement probably means it'll not have much issue in the new patch. But the other ships could have their use case hampered by quite a bit, and I am concerned these aren't getting enough consideration while trying to make the Pegasus fit into the battlespace.
What changes are you concerned about? Seemed like most changes will benefit most of those ships also.
What changes are you concerned about? Seemed like most changes will benefit most of those ships also.
Well, I'm not him but the one change I don't understand is the Hurricane nerf.
Sorry if its annoying. But can i get a aprocsimate date for the update? Doset have to be on the dot. Jos about when it should come out.
The update comes out when it's ready, which may or may not be between 3 weeks and 9 months.
I'm a little worried that with all the large missile changes to accommodate the addition of the pegasus you're indirectly penalizing a lot of ships that generally relied on these weapons but aren't getting any changes (Gryphon, Conquest, Astral, Apogee, to some degree the Legion XIV). Indirect changes compounding in order to make ships rather poor performing can sneak up on you (like the previous patch removing a lot of the power from the Drovers ship system, then adding the DP, then removing officer carrier skills all compounding to make that ship highly undesirable).
Now the legion getting the OP point increase and the cyclone improvement probably means it'll not have much issue in the new patch. But the other ships could have their use case hampered by quite a bit, and I am concerned these aren't getting enough consideration while trying to make the Pegasus fit into the battlespace.
I'm a little worried that with all the large missile changes to accommodate the addition of the pegasus you're indirectly penalizing a lot of ships that generally relied on these weapons but aren't getting any changes (Gryphon, Conquest, Astral, Apogee, to some degree the Legion XIV). Indirect changes compounding in order to make ships rather poor performing can sneak up on you (like the previous patch removing a lot of the power from the Drovers ship system, then adding the DP, then removing officer carrier skills all compounding to make that ship highly undesirable).
Now the legion getting the OP point increase and the cyclone improvement probably means it'll not have much issue in the new patch. But the other ships could have their use case hampered by quite a bit, and I am concerned these aren't getting enough consideration while trying to make the Pegasus fit into the battlespace.
What change(s) exactly are you referring to? I didn't have the idea that any of the changes were made specifically to accomodate the Pegasus, but that they were all (mostly) made to adress the current balance.
The Squall changes were mostly made for the Pegasus. I don’t think it’s a bad change at all. Doesn’t really make it weaker and it’s not weaker at all in its intended role. I still think it’s going to be one of the stronger if not strongest large missiles. Kinetic missiles are just so good.I thought the changes were because Squalls are OP and overshadow any other Large Missiles?
It's the only large kinetic missile in the game. It's overshadowing other missile purely because of the type of enemies players face at current end game.The Squall changes were mostly made for the Pegasus. I don’t think it’s a bad change at all. Doesn’t really make it weaker and it’s not weaker at all in its intended role. I still think it’s going to be one of the stronger if not strongest large missiles. Kinetic missiles are just so good.I thought the changes were because Squalls are OP and overshadow any other Large Missiles?
I spent a pretty good amount of time playtesting this ship, with the main concern being just how much four large missile slots – backed up by rapid-reload – could do. A few problems came up, but I think they more highlighted issues with some of the large missiles than a problem with the ship.
For example, the Squall MRLS fires a stream of kinetic missiles – the missiles are difficult to shoot down, it has lots of ammo, and each burst lasts for a long time. It’s designed to suppress shields and create a window of opportunity (much like the Gazer DEM, in that sense), but each individual missile packs enough punch that it can do appreciable damage vs armor, too. With a smaller number of mounts, it’s not a big deal – but combine four of these, and eliminate the cooldown, and it overwhelms the shields of any enemy, and eventually pounds them into scrap.
It's the only large kinetic missile in the game. It's overshadowing other missile purely because of the type of enemies players face at current end game.
Tbf fighting shield shunted Onslaughts sounds even worse than Ordos. At least now you need both damage types. Versus a shunted low tech fleet, all of your kinetic weapons would be useless. I don't like when games throw you enemies or challenges that can only be beaten in a single way.It's the only large kinetic missile in the game. It's overshadowing other missile purely because of the type of enemies players face at current end game.
Correct. Squalls just so happen to be one of the best ways to take on Ordos so they naturally get brought up a lot. Against a 2500 armor Shield Shunted Onslaught, Squalls are practically useless but we don’t fight those a lot (but maybe we should?)
i havent followed this thread for a while so i didn't see this... halving all reacoil values is more impactful than what i thought was going to happen... but still, i think it should get something more, like a flux buffHAG: "Halved recoil" Does this mean spread/shot, max spread, spread decay...? Max spread at 900 range (more likely 1260 or 1,440 with range extenders) can still get pretty inaccurate. I don't think it should be super-accurate at max range but I don't see the Mjolnir missing a lot of shots at equal range. Though, Mjolnir shot speed is 900 vs. the HAG's 800. I wonder if a bump in projectile speed would make any sort of difference. Either way, like I said earlier, the effective DPS of the weapon should go up significantly if it can put more rounds on target. It's not the best weapon against the heaviest armor but its way more versatile than the Hellbore.
Halved all of these - just halving the per-shot wouldn't do much, I don't think.
Do my current save work with 0.96a?0.96 isn't out yet and probably won't be for months, so nobody knows i guess
Updated the OP and unlocked the thread! This should be the last update prior to the release; up next is a bunch of playtesting. That's already been ongoing to a large extent, but: more.
Hull-standard built-in hullmods that have an s-mod bonus can now be "enhanced" to unlock that bonus (...) Does *not* count against the maximum number of s-mods per ship
Squall: removed EMP damage
Militarized Subsystems: no longer provides the minor armor/flux bonus
Huzzah!
- Fleets supporting a station will not "harry" your fleet (causing a CR loss) when you disengage
- Newly learned hullmods with new tags will have those tags enabled by default in the "add hullmod" dialog
- Reduced occurrence of faster ships not letting quite all of their flux dissipate before re-engaging
Hm, not a fan of this one. I used to use front shield conversion regularly, but it's less valuable in the current version of the game than it used to be (due to the change to elite helmsmanship no longer allowing zero flux speed boost with shields up, which means you can't pre-activate your shields and start combat with them fully unfolded), and this will make it less valuable again. I might still use it for ships that can get to full 360 degree shields with it... but probably not outside of that.
- Shield Conversion - Front:
- Removed shield upkeep reduction
- Reduced cost from 3/6/10/18 to 3/6/9/15
QuoteMilitarized Subsystems: no longer provides the minor armor/flux bonus
So a straight-up nerf?
Hmm there was some talk of Gryphons losing Expanded Missile Racks as a built-in and getting some OP instead, so that it's not too strong with the new s-mod changes (i.e. force the player to either spend the actual OP on EMR, or take the s-mod penalty if they want to s-mod it). Was that put in as well?
The Converted Hangar change is going to be interesting. I've been messing around with it and there are some combinations that seem to work really well. Broadswords (and probably the new Sarissa) with high-tech ships like the Apogee for example, or Flash with Eradicator, because those will only cost +2 DP to the ship but provide pretty good functionality for that ship (hard flux for the Apogee, massive strike damage for the Eradicator). Whereas expensive stuff like Xyphos and Daggers will more likely be put on ships that already have bays, i.e. "true" carriers, because they would add so much more DP otherwise, which seems like that's how it should be. In the end it did seem like FooF's suggestion of putting the DP cost as OP cost/5 was pretty much on the money balance-wise, from testing various ship configurations with and without CH against double Ordos. In some situations it'll lead to interesting considerations as well; for example, Gladius (6 OP) would only cost 1 DP while Broadsword (8 OP) would cost 2 DP, if the player is trying to manage the fleet's DP.
Hm, not a fan of this one. I used to use front shield conversion regularly, but it's less valuable in the current version of the game than it used to be (due to the change to elite helmsmanship no longer allowing zero flux speed boost with shields up, which means you can't pre-activate your shields and start combat with them fully unfolded), and this will make it less valuable again. I might still use it for ships that can get to full 360 degree shields with it... but probably not outside of that.
- Shield Conversion - Front:
- Removed shield upkeep reduction
- Reduced cost from 3/6/10/18 to 3/6/9/15
Still, I guess we'll see what it looks like with playtesting?
Is the Plasma Cannon deliberatly excluded from this list?
Seeing how it got the "pass-through-missile" treatment in 0.95a and would fit right in with the other "big-damage-projectile-weapons" in that list
That's kindof fair? ...But only kindof, because for almost all ships it did feel like a playstyle choice: if I wanted the cost reduction, I'd install stabilized shields or front shield emitter, but not both.Hm, not a fan of this one. I used to use front shield conversion regularly, but it's less valuable in the current version of the game than it used to be (due to the change to elite helmsmanship no longer allowing zero flux speed boost with shields up, which means you can't pre-activate your shields and start combat with them fully unfolded), and this will make it less valuable again. I might still use it for ships that can get to full 360 degree shields with it... but probably not outside of that.
- Shield Conversion - Front:
- Removed shield upkeep reduction
- Reduced cost from 3/6/10/18 to 3/6/9/15
Still, I guess we'll see what it looks like with playtesting?
Honestly? That feels about right to me. What didn't feel right is taking the front shield conversion - and changing the nature of the ship - for the "side" benefit of the hullmod. Like, if you're taking the conversion, it ought to be because you want front shields, and not in large part because you want the shields to generate less flux, you know?
(What the OP cost of this should be is, of course, debatable!)
Edit: Or, maybe better: make both shield conversion hullmods cheap at 2/4/6/10 and remove omni conversion's upkeep discount.
Mm. Yeah, I can see that being "playtesting required".Edit: Or, maybe better: make both shield conversion hullmods cheap at 2/4/6/10 and remove omni conversion's upkeep discount.
... that makes a lot of sense, I actually kind of forgot that the omni conversion had an upkeep discount. Not sure about the cost, though, 2/4/6/10 feels awfully low. (Not sure as in "actually not sure", not "I actively disagree about it".)
Hull-standard built-in hullmods that have an s-mod bonus can now be "enhanced" to unlock that bonusSo you have to spend 6 story points to get fully polished ship ?
Costs 1 story point, grants 100% bonus XP
Does *not* count against the maximum number of s-mods per ship
Fighters with hull damage will land for repairs
I didn't end up putting that in, no. Didn't really seem necessary, given how minor the EMR build-in penalty ended up being.
Interesting, glad to hear it's working out at least in the initial testing! One detail: the +DP is rounded up, not rounded, so e.g. Gladius/Broadsword are both +2, while Flash is +3.
Modding:
- Made it possible to add custom UI to the title screen
- See TestCombatPlugin.renderInUICoords() and .processInputPreCoreControls() for an example
- This is not currently structured in a way that makes it easy for multiple mods doing this to coexist, it's just *possible*
- (A framework could be built on top of this, however)
QuoteHull-standard built-in hullmods that have an s-mod bonus can now be "enhanced" to unlock that bonusSo you have to spend 6 story points to get fully polished ship ?
Costs 1 story point, grants 100% bonus XP
Does *not* count against the maximum number of s-mods per ship
Mm. Yeah, I can see that being "playtesting required".
On the other hand, I don't personally feel that front shield conversion is a strict upgrade: sure, sometimes it's nice from a personal playstyle perspective, because I don't have to manage shield angles on top of every other piloting task... but then again, salamanders exist, as do phase frigates. Even for ships that can get to 360 shields, you're trading off being able to quickly bring up shields where needed, since you do lose the zero flux boost for just having shields up and can't leave them on all the time like I used to.
Omni shields are a bit more arguable as being an upgrade - I do remember back in early Starfarer days where I considered the omni shield conversion to be near-mandatory for AI-controlled ships - but the AI is a lot better these days, and I don't find myself using it much in the current Starsector version.
Let me guess, s-mod bonus gives it cost reduction?
You say it feels wrong to grab a hullmod for the side effect, and let me tell you there's a huge amount of people who put RFC on almost every ship purely for faster vent speed (especially on flagships). I feel that's fine if the player really wants to maximize one part, or just enable his comfort playstyle.
EDIT: Also how did no one mention that Apogee now has a medium energy actually pointing forwards, that's big.
BTW: I have noticed a small detail, Afflictor uses Entropy at fighters even other adult ship is in range (the other ship istarget of ally) Probably polished logic for Entropy debuff use in priority >> First check all adult ships in range in given order >> Own target, Ally own fleet target (if more targets available then de-buff the one who is most damaged), Ally target, . If nothing fit, then use same order for fighters. This way, de buffing should be a bit more efficient.
QuoteFighters with hull damage will land for repairs
Silly me, that's my favorite change. It was always bugging me that fighters didn't do that.
Really looking forward to the update and getting back into the game:)
Ahh okay. Not sure if it'd make it too overpowered, but how about reducing the Gladius to 5 OP so that it's only 1 DP instead of 2 DP? Looking through the fighter list, it's the only one that is "1 more OP" than OP/5, and this would provide a bit of differentiation between it and the Broadsword. Not sure if this would make it too powerful for CH or if it would step on the toes too much of other 1 DP fighters. (Or how it'd relate to the upcoming Sarissa.)
As a side thought I just noticed, the Colossus Mk III has the Converted Cargo Bay built-in hullmod. Does that interact in any way with the Converted Hangar or s-mod bonus/penalty changes? Or is that basically just a debuff applied to that particular ship?
Completely unrelated to the above, an issue I've noticed with the AI for Plasma Burn is that it'll still run into hulks and such quite frequently, making it flame out and sending it careening into the enemy fleet. That makes it always a bit chancy to have AI Odysseys or Furies in the fleet. Was there any changes to the AI for Plasma Burn, i.e. check if there are any big hulks or other ships in its path before deciding to Plasma Burn? I don't know if it was brought up in the forums before so...it may have to wait until after the next update heh.
(I know I certainly find them incredibly hard to use without something like PureTilt's QoL Pack (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=23652.0)).
Anyway, pilgrim transport, eh? I just get curiouser and curiouser about the new campaign content... :D
Modding:
- Made it possible to add custom UI to the title screen
- See TestCombatPlugin.renderInUICoords() and .processInputPreCoreControls() for an example
- This is not currently structured in a way that makes it easy for multiple mods doing this to coexist, it's just *possible*
- (A framework could be built on top of this, however)
oh_no.gif
Hull-standard built-in hullmods that have an s-mod bonus can now be "enhanced" to unlock that bonusDo we know the s-mod bonus for insulated engines yet? Brawler (TT) is going to be meta as hell.
Costs 1 story point, grants 100% bonus XP
Does *not* count against the maximum number of s-mods per ship
when the feature i request makes it in hehe.
still very thankful for it.
when the feature i request makes it in hehe.
still very thankful for it.
Oh, it's rad as hell, don't get me wrong, I'm just bracing for this bold new era of mods trying to mod the title screen and making each other explode. (https://i.imgur.com/kcBTfAR.gif)
Hmm - technically, I suppose? I'm not sure anyone gets it for that, and it's a remnant of when Escort/Assault Package were in the game, so it's really just cleanup.
(Militarized Subsystems) Well, now it's an expensive hullmod that feels like it "doesn't do anything" - and if you have Bulk Transport skill, it actually makes the ship slower. Maybe it could be cheaper since it comes with its own drawbacks anyway.
Yeah, about the Apogee?Don't forget that medium energy also has a large energy weapon for double flux cost in it. Makes Apogee a very good brawler.
Well, de-buff fighters is useful. Afflictor carry light weapons only, when no other target is in range of Entropy system, then use the ship system at fighters is perfectly fine. This way, Afflictor can be more usefull for holding far beacons. Alone ship can handle a fleet of fighteers easy. Disabling debuf fighters totaly feels wrong.BTW: I have noticed a small detail, Afflictor uses Entropy at fighters even other adult ship is in range (the other ship istarget of ally) Probably polished logic for Entropy debuff use in priority >> First check all adult ships in range in given order >> Own target, Ally own fleet target (if more targets available then de-buff the one who is most damaged), Ally target, . If nothing fit, then use same order for fighters. This way, de buffing should be a bit more efficient.
Ahh, that's a bug! It's not supposed do target fighters at all, but taking a look at the code, I think I see how it might happen. *Should* be fixed, thank you.
The only loadout that works perfectly with 3 sizes of energy hardpoints is Beams, and on the Apogee that was bad before and now it's passable. Plasma Cannon build doesn't profit because that works better leaving the other two empty. It's not that big a buff.Maybe the Squalls perform much worse now so you need a Graviton in front to knock shields down easier. That's the first thing I thought when I read the change. Ion Beam isn't a big help since the target will either have shields up, or die from HIL.
Does this mean you can pick up the goods, as long as your standing with the colony is above -50 or does the mission won't be offered, if your standing with the colony is too low?
(Right now this mission can always be offered but you can't pick up the goods, if your standing with the faction is at -25 or below.)
Ahh, thank you - I'll take a look and make sure it's doing the right thing. Good chance it might not be.
It is one of very few ships where dmg is not the main focus. For sake of diversity, ... keep Entropy usage on fighters.
The needler has been king for flux and OP efficiency, and everything that can’t get it feels a bit hampered.I believe Auto cannons had and will done a good job as an alternative after buff.
There's no way Front Shield Conversion is getting nerfed... I'm not sure I ever caught myself thinking "man, this hullmod is bonkers". Let me guess, s-mod bonus gives it cost reduction?
I believe Auto cannons had and will done a good job as an alternative after buff.
Eagle:Nice
Reverted part of deployment/maintenance cost change, up to 20 (originally: 22)
Reverted speed increase (back to 50 from 60); left increased acceleration
May still be too strong at that cost, but we'll see
Fury:
Increased ordnance points to 130 (was: 120)
Increased top speed to 95 (was: 90)
Aurora:I did not feel like the Aurora needed any buffs... I take it -- as a high tech enjoyer and Aurora lover. :D
Improved shield efficiency to 0.6 (was: 0.8 )
Nice. :DCompletely unrelated to the above, an issue I've noticed with the AI for Plasma Burn is that it'll still run into hulks and such quite frequently, making it flame out and sending it careening into the enemy fleet. That makes it always a bit chancy to have AI Odysseys or Furies in the fleet. Was there any changes to the AI for Plasma Burn, i.e. check if there are any big hulks or other ships in its path before deciding to Plasma Burn? I don't know if it was brought up in the forums before so...it may have to wait until after the next update heh.
It's possible that there are AI changes pertaining to this; I've certainly touched the code there and I remember fixing this - though with things like this, it could've been "fixed one of like 3 different causes". I'll keep an eye out!
I believe Auto cannons had and will done a good job as an alternative after buff.
Not really. Ships that use dual acs won’t dump soft flux when engaged, leaving even a tactical laser as a significant threat once the flux builds up.
So is Armoured Weapon Mounts also a broken hullmod? Or Expanded Missile Racks? I can go on like this but my point is it's wrong to balance hullmods just because specific ships really utilize them well. We then end up with mediocre stuff no one will bother to install save for a handful of ships.There's no way Front Shield Conversion is getting nerfed... I'm not sure I ever caught myself thinking "man, this hullmod is bonkers". Let me guess, s-mod bonus gives it cost reduction?
By the way, I found FSC to be the most bonkers hullmod because of how well it worked with specific high-tech ships, removing their blind spot and mitigating their expensive shields.
I’d like it if adding a shield conversion plus stabilized cost five OP total much like advanced gyros and armored weapon mounts does now. Or maybe the s-mod bonus gives you the flux reduction of stabilized shields?
Either way, FSC was almost a requirement on some ships.
Don't think there is a bad choice between ion beam/graviton beam/pulse laser in the frontal M (all work with either HIL or plasma, plasma doesn't need empty front mounts with Apogee flux stats).The only loadout that works perfectly with 3 sizes of energy hardpoints is Beams, and on the Apogee that was bad before and now it's passable. Plasma Cannon build doesn't profit because that works better leaving the other two empty. It's not that big a buff.Maybe the Squalls perform much worse now so you need a Graviton in front to knock shields down easier. That's the first thing I thought when I read the change. Ion Beam isn't a big help since the target will either have shields up, or die from HIL.
Don't forget that medium energy also has a large energy weapon for double flux cost in it. Makes Apogee a very good brawler.No reason to use heavy blaster if you can get plasma, or plasma+0.8 pulse laser.
Range of a capital(thanks to Advanced Optics), 20k flux capacity, <0.5 shield efficiency... I'd say it starts to rival the Champion for 20% less DP.It doesn't have the range of a capital, why would it? 1400/980 beam/plasma base with ITU, vs 1600/1120 on a capital.
It doesn't have the range of a capital, why would it?
DP Ship Base Eff. Shield Max Caps Flux Dissipation Time to vent
5 Wolf 0.95.1a 2,812 5,312 150-250 4.5-14.1 sec
5 Wolf 0.96a 3,214 6,071 150-250 4.5-14.1 sec
8 Scarab 4,166 7,000 250-350 3.5-9 sec
8 Shrike 7,714 13,428 350-550 4.9-13.4 sec
12 Medusa 10,000 16,666 400-600 5-12.5 sec
20 Fury 12,857 21,428 600-900 5-12.5 sec
30 Aurora 0.95.1a 13,750 21,250 800-1100 5-10.6 sec
30 Aurora 0.96a 18,333 28,333 800-1100 5-10.6 sec
45 Odyssey 15,000 25,000 1000-1500 5-12.5 sec
It can be better to have two plasma guns rather than one. :pDon't forget that medium energy also has a large energy weapon for double flux cost in it. Makes Apogee a very good brawler.No reason to use heavy blaster if you can get plasma, or plasma+0.8 pulse laser.
Heavy blaster's 500 range also sucks super hard with 60 base speed for a main weapon.
Something must have happened to the Eagle if playtesting is reverting the most important change: speed. I was excited to try the faster Eagle because that was my #1 complaint. I figured the 18 DP would be the first thing to go if it needed walked back but I didn't expect the speed change. I'm sure the meta game has changed with new weapons and hullmod options but it being nearly "too strong" at 20 DP is kind of surprising.
Apogee change is actually quite a shock. It's still in a hardpoint and the Large and Medium won't really converge but that's a lot more potential firepower vs. current.
"Medusa: adjusted misaligned engine nozzle" - truly the unheralded diamond in the rough. :D
you should probably check the code for shipEngineAPI.disable(boolean permanent)
if there's only one engine left, it won't disable the engine, not even permanently
Do we know the s-mod bonus for insulated engines yet? Brawler (TT) is going to be meta as hell.
Oh wow heavy ballistic integration can get a bonus ;D
(Militarized Subsystems) Well, now it's an expensive hullmod that feels like it "doesn't do anything" - and if you have Bulk Transport skill, it actually makes the ship slower. Maybe it could be cheaper since it comes with its own drawbacks anyway.
CampaignUIRenderingListener is very nice, but i can't help but think the only use for it is drawing overlays, as you don't ever know if you have the panel you want to edit up and where.
Does this mean you can pick up the goods, as long as your standing with the colony is above -50 or does the mission won't be offered, if your standing with the colony is too low?
(Right now this mission can always be offered but you can't pick up the goods, if your standing with the faction is at -25 or below.)
Ahh, thank you - I'll take a look and make sure it's doing the right thing. Good chance it might not be.
That is still on the list for the playtesting? (Or is it done and not worth mentioning?)
I’m curious to know if the new autoloader plus sabots is going to be a viable alternative to the needler for frigates.
The needler has been king for flux and OP efficiency, and everything that can’t get it feels a bit hampered.
Two fullerene spools now, but shouldn't some of the other colony items appear in the core worlds as well?
(Well I guess accessibility boosters to prevent permanent shipping shortages are needed more)
Just taking a look at the "fast ships with systems that make the ship go faster" high tech roster, the new Aurora seems to look better. Prior to the buff, Aurora and Fury had basically the same shield capacity with a 50% DP difference in between. Now Aurora is about 50% more shield base, and 33% at max vents, for that extra 50% DP.
At this point, the only one that really stands out to me is the Odyssey, in terms of following a progression in terms of defensive stats. On the other hand, it is a capital with large mounts and 2 fighter wings - but these defensive statistics look to me like the Odyssey is meant to be a stand off ship and not get in close, when compared to ships in the smaller classes. It's slower (70 vs 80, can't back off as well), bigger and easier to hit, so it needs to rely on its range more if it has worse defensive stats than the Aurora.
Aurora is arguably significantly stronger defensively than its capital counterpart now. Aurora has 8000 hull and 800 armor backing its shields up, while the Odyssey only has 10,000 and 1000 armor at a 50% increase in DP. It is also kind of weird that the true standoff high tech ship, the Astral, has the same hull as the Odyssey, only 100 less armor, but 20,000 effective shields base (and 36,666 max vents). Admittedly, Odyssey is speed 70 while the Astral is only speed 30.
Is it normal for carriers to be tankier than their brawling ship counterparts? I know that is not true in the Onslaught/Legion comparison. Doesn't seem true in Eagle/Heron comparison (if they are both 20 DP now). Depending on if you count Damper Field or not, Mora may or may not be tankier than a Dominator though. Hammerhead is tankier than a Drover. Condor isn't as tanky as an Enforcer.
Anyways, just food for thought.
At this point, the only one that really stands out to me is the Odyssey, in terms of following a progression in terms of defensive stats. On the other hand, it is a capital with large mounts and 2 fighter wings - but these defensive statistics look to me like the Odyssey is meant to be a stand off ship and not get in close, when compared to ships in the smaller classes. It's slower (70 vs 80, can't back off as well), bigger and easier to hit, so it needs to rely on its range more if it has worse defensive stats than the Aurora.
Capitals can also get advanced optics.It doesn't have the range of a capital, why would it?Advanced Optics.
An extra 100% engine health and the sensor profile reduction is changed to 90% (from 50%).Ah well, basically nothing. Even with 300% durability a single salamander will disable any engine below capital-sized ones.
...Huh, my reaction was pretty much exactly the opposite: "oh, good, near-immunity to salamanders and extreme stealth? This might actually be competitive with s-modding things like ITU."An extra 100% engine health and the sensor profile reduction is changed to 90% (from 50%).Ah well, basically nothing. Even with 300% durability a single salamander will disable any engine below capital-sized ones.
Capitals can also get advanced optics.
...Huh, my reaction was pretty much exactly the opposite: "oh, good, near-immunity to salamanders and extreme stealth? This might actually be competitive with s-modding things like ITU."Guess you didn't do the math. Salamander is 1500 EMP damage (more with skills). Engines have 200/400/600/800 health (+-25% based on plume size). So unless you are a cruiser with SO / plasma burn active, or a capital, 300% health is still not good enough.
I'm sorry, did I miss something? Since when do we judge hullmods by their usefulness against the Circus Missile?A single circus missile can and will eventually lose you an entire fleet against a late-game ordo fight.
I don't particularly want the core to provide *all* the items; that steals some thunder from exploration. I could even see removing the spool from Umbra and replacing it with story-point "improvements" at the spaceport. Hmm.For what it's worth I do think this is a good idea. Giving a few core world industries story point improvements would give the player a chance to see their effects/the mechanic in action before building their own colonies, whereas relying on colony items to shore up shortcomings just leaves the colony open to having those items stolen and being right back at square 1.
(Yeah, exactly.)
Ah well, basically nothing. Even with 300% durability a single salamander will disable any engine below capital-sized ones.
By this argument, engine hitpoints don't matter at allI do kinda feel that way though. Stray shots don't cause flameouts, with or without durability boosts. And when something deliberately targets engines, it tends to overkill by a ludicrous amount. Salamanders, claws/thunders, shades, doom mines - they all overkill by a lot.
I do kinda feel that way though. Stray shots don't cause flameouts, with or without durability boosts. And when something deliberately targets engines, it tends to overkill by a ludicrous amount. Salamanders, claws/thunders, shades, doom mines - they all overkill by a lot.
Alex, is there a plan to add more factions in the future? Or the factions we have now is final?
Hmm - in practical use, my experience is that RFC alone leads to a lot fewer flameouts. Some things still get through, of course. Maybe it's a difference in how piloting style or some suchMost likely a difference in ships being used for these estimations. Capitals, especially low-tech ones that stack multiple anti-EMP measures naturally, tend to do well. But these are also the ships that care the least about engines to begin with. They can take a beating even if caught in a bad spot and wait for help. The ships that need flameout protetion the most are flanking destroyers and fast cruisers that rely on speed for survival. And those have too little base engine health (and engines in general) to benefit from multiplicative bonuses.
For me arcing EMP or medium/small enemies getting behind seems to be the main source of flameouts.By this argument, engine hitpoints don't matter at allI do kinda feel that way though. Stray shots don't cause flameouts, with or without durability boosts. And when something deliberately targets engines, it tends to overkill by a ludicrous amount. Salamanders, claws/thunders, shades, doom mines - they all overkill by a lot.
Most likely a difference in ships being used for these estimations. Capitals, especially low-tech ones that stack multiple anti-EMP measures naturally, tend to do well. But these are also the ships that care the least about engines to begin with. They can take a beating even if caught in a bad spot and wait for help. The ships that need flameout protetion the most are flanking destroyers and fast cruisers that rely on speed for survival. And those have too little base engine health (and engines in general) to benefit from multiplicative bonuses.
Guess you didn't do the math. Salamander is 1500 EMP damage (more with skills). Engines have 200/400/600/800 health (+-25% based on plume size). So unless you are a cruiser with SO / plasma burn active, or a capital, 300% health is still not good enough.There's "do the math", and there's "actually test it in-game", and when they disagree, you're clearly missing something in your math.
A single circus missile can and will eventually lose you an entire fleet against a late-game ordo fight.
Specific weapons are now reliably found at specific faction markets/black markets
For example, the new directed-energy missiles can be found on Persean League colonies
There's no way Front Shield Conversion is getting nerfed... I'm not sure I ever caught myself thinking "man, this hullmod is bonkers". Let me guess, s-mod bonus gives it cost reduction?
Not liking this change mainly because I hate flying with Omni shields on 95% of the ships. I get that it's cheaper now but I don't see myself using this as often as before.
You say it feels wrong to grab a hullmod for the side effect, and let me tell you there's a huge amount of people who put RFC on almost every ship purely for faster vent speed (especially on flagships). I feel that's fine if the player really wants to maximize one part, or just enable his comfort playstyle.
You say it feels wrong to grab a hullmod for the side effect, and let me tell you there's a huge amount of people who put RFC on almost every ship purely for faster vent speed (especially on flagships). I feel that's fine if the player really wants to maximize one part, or just enable his comfort playstyle.
It's not a matter of being underrated (Odyssey is definitely not underrated lol), I think the majority just prefers frontal shields for comfort. Juggling weapons and managing flux is already a big task on some ships, now having to steer your shield to block shots while doing all of that gets hectic quite fast. And the fact that it's impossible to rotate your shield without the camera also following your mouse. It's just a hassle for me, unless the ship has such a simple loadout, I don't need to manage anything (or where the majority of firepower is on hardpoints).
Frontal shields are not always better. The AI is notoriously careless about flicking shields on and off; taking hits on armor when it doesn't have to and not accounting for the time it takes for a frontal shield to fully envelop the ship. Assume it's got bombers incoming on the side and it takes 3 seconds for the shield to cover the side. It's not calculating that or see it as a risk, at least not as far as I can see. Omni shields don't have that issue. Unless the conversion results in 360° coverage I'll usually not bother.In my experience the AI is more likely to keep frontal shields up, that paired with the increased extension speed is also very good.
I really think a lot of it is that it feels useful to manually aim a primary ballistic/energy weapon even if autofire will usually do a better job with max target leading accuracy from skills. That cripples your ability to use omni shields and therefore omni shields are seen as something that's good for the AI but bad for players.I rarely use anything but burst weapons on manual, and have a setup to autofire weapons on group 2 while holding a button.
I haven't seen many people using the Odyssey and it typically gets rated under the Onslaught or Paragon as a player piloted ship.70 base speed capital with plasma burn and double L energy+lots of missiles screams high impact player ship.
Mining Pods: will now try to stay in front of the carrierDoes "in front" here mean "between the ship and its closest enemy" or "opposite from the engines"? Asking about broadside ships, like Odyssey.
Frontal shields are not always better. The AI is notoriously careless about flicking shields on and off; taking hits on armor when it doesn't have to and not accounting for the time it takes for a frontal shield to fully envelop the ship. Assume it's got bombers incoming on the side and it takes 3 seconds for the shield to cover the side. It's not calculating that or see it as a risk, at least not as far as I can see. Omni shields don't have that issue. Unless the conversion results in 360° coverage I'll usually not bother.
Accelerated shields help, and previously with upkeep cost reduction for free you'd consider slapping Accelerated on, too. Now it may be more of a Tough Decision.
Specific weapons are now reliably found at specific faction markets/black markets
For example, the new directed-energy missiles can be found on Persean League colonies
Does this extend to ships too? Will it be finally possible to buy Apogees?
Assume it's got bombers incoming on the side and it takes 3 seconds for the shield to cover the side. It's not calculating that or see it as a risk, at least not as far as I can see.
Something like Odyssey also really doesn't need omni, frontal gives full coverage and you'll mostly have enemies on the left/front left.
Basically never have defend both sides where I can't just keep 360° up.
I will also second the argument that, at least in player hands, omni-shield Odyssey is much stronger than front shield conversion Odyssey. Given the relatively shallow flux capacity it has compared to its peers, a common usage I have is to engage at 90 to 135 degrees (left side or left rear towards enemy), burn perpendicular or not quite directly away, and then vent for ~2 seconds. Unfortunately, the AI isn't quite sophisticated enough to approach in that way.And if you are not soloing you can use front left and M reaper some fools :)
(Militarized Subsystems) Well, now it's an expensive hullmod that feels like it "doesn't do anything" - and if you have Bulk Transport skill, it actually makes the ship slower. Maybe it could be cheaper since it comes with its own drawbacks anyway.
I mean, this is something I've wanted to harp on for a bit anyway - while I love the speed boost from a purely objective point of view (I have a lot of things to say about going slower than Burn 20 on a practical, gameplay level), Bulk Transport is outrageously overpowered in its current form and especially skill slot. It more or less trivializes carrying capacity, it makes Colossi Burn 20 on skills alone when combined with Navigation (another must-have skill), and it's just absurdly more impactful than the other two skills that occupy its slot.
How much of a benefit MilSub gives is definitely a consideration, but Bulk Transport is kind of a problem skill that impacts a lot of things. (That said, if left unchanged, then yes, MilSub is a straight downgrade unless you build without BT for some reason.)
An extra 100% engine health and the sensor profile reduction is changed to 90% (from 50%).
I’m curious to know if the new autoloader plus sabots is going to be a viable alternative to the needler for frigates.
The needler has been king for flux and OP efficiency, and everything that can’t get it feels a bit hampered.
That will be interesting to see, though even with the Autoloader, you've got, what, 9 Sabots? Nothing to sneeze at, but not something that couldn't get spent in a hurry, either. With Missile Spec and EMR you'd get up to 15 but that's a *lot* of investment for - at that point - diminishing returns.
Not a replacement for the needler, but something better tuned for a hyper-aggressive ship that could engage and destroy another equivalent ship in one or two passes. Like a Vanguard with two LAGs, a light autocannon, two vulcans, a sabot, a hammer, and a swarmer.
Ah! The Vanguard is actually not affected by the autoloader - it doesn't have any missile slots, they're composite. Even if they were, there's 3 of them, which would make the autoloader less inefficient than EMR.
Transverse jump is convenient for using any planet as a jump point (I typically don't use it, though), but there are people who use Bulk Transport? Just buy more freighters and you get the same thing.Bulk Transport is outrageously overpowered in its current form and especially skill slot.idk if this has been addressed since u posted this but i dont think this game actually intends you to play it any way you want -- at least not in the skills, it seems clear that a number of the skills are supposed to be more or less mandatory (eventually). the big example being transverse jump
The skills that feel most mandatory to me are tier 4 leadership ones. Officers are way too important in the current system.Probably because there's 2-3 times more of them than previously (0.9.1 and earlier), on both sides.
Ah! The Vanguard is actually not affected by the autoloader - it doesn't have any missile slots, they're composite. Even if they were, there's 3 of them, which would make the autoloader less inefficient than EMR.Inefficiency of 0% means efficiency of 100%! Alex, how could you deprive Vanguard of such a crucial hullmod? Stone-cold.
So release when?I am dying to play this update. I am willing to playtest a build even if it is made out of duct tape and razorblades. Pleasse Alex! I need iiiiiiiittttt! How much longer can we wait?
or its another tease and playtests gonna take another year?
I've been thinking about Gladiuses recently, why not reduce their cost by one for them able to fit in +1 CH cost? Then they will be able to fill the niche of light fighters in converted hangars. Otherwise, they occupy too indefinite place.That is serious concern.
Converted hangars introduces sort of Tiers.In one spot, where you would ever only put interceptors.
It would also worth considering better readability, fighters make distinct naming convention which is related to task.There is already a distinct naming convention. It has an unfortunate part where the game calls one of them "fighters" (they're, essentially, a space equivalent of attack aircraft, or gunships), but they are distinct.
Bombers or Fighters could use flare at will. Decoy is not weapon.Ah yes, let's make one of the best bombers cheaper and give it better screening. That'll make it balanced.
Example:
Fighter Bomber : Longbow current cost 12 OP need change to 10OP to fit Tier 2
- PD replace by Decoy Flare Launcher
So release when?Forum tradition: If anyone asks this question, release date will delay by one extra week per person per time.
Thet sucks. Well on a another note, at least he has more time to make the upate even beater. Allways look on the bright side :DSo release when?Forum tradition: If anyone asks this question, release date will delay by one extra week per person per time.
I don't think that creating a tier system overlaying the OP system is a sensible idea. Also you would have to rebalance all fighters to fit the 5/10/15 values and that sounds like a pain and very frustrating to build for and that's without saying the massive nerfs that would have to be doled out to any fighters that are worth more than 15I've been thinking about Gladiuses recently, why not reduce their cost by one for them able to fit in +1 CH cost? Then they will be able to fill the niche of light fighters in converted hangars. Otherwise, they occupy too indefinite place.That is serious concern.
The new fighter mechanic bring new player behaviour, the new ship builds.
Here is suggestion how to polish a rough edge:
Converted hangars introduces sort of Tiers.
Becouse of OP >> DP conversion rounding mechanic means poison ship build :
>> more rounding down less suitable for converted hangar. (because you get less punch for buck)
>> more rounding up more suitable for converted hangar. (because you get more punch for buck)
That is unfortunate game design.
I suggest make Tiers for Fighters official.
Make changes to Fighter's numbers such way they OP fit directly to DP.
Make T1 fighters cost ALWAYS 5OP
Make T2 fighters cost ALWAYS 10OP
Make T3 fighters cost ALWAYS 15OP
and so on
It will be some work, but definitely worth it, for much better gameplay experience.
It also add positive mechanic, where new player could easer recognize that T2 fighter is better than T1 without deep dive into sea of numbers.
It would also worth considering better readability, fighters make distinct naming convention which is related to task.
Fighter >> any small ship
Bomber >> a small ship which can attack adult ships but has no weapons to attack other fighters e.i. Bomber could use Harpoon but can not use Swarmers.
Interceptor >> a small ship which can use weapons which can aim fighters. e.i. Interceptor could use Swarmers but can not use Harpoon.
Bombers or Fighters could use flare at will. Decoy is not weapon.
Example:
Fighter Bomber : Longbow current cost 12 OP need change to 10OP to fit Tier 2
- PD replace by Decoy Flare Launcher
You suffered some kind of short-circuit issue.Converted hangars introduces sort of Tiers.I don't think that creating a tier system overlaying the OP system is a sensible idea. Also you would have to rebalance all fighters to fit the 5/10/15 values and that sounds like a pain and very frustrating to build for and that's without saying the massive nerfs that would have to be doled out to any fighters that are worth more than 15
Becouse of OP >> DP conversion rounding mechanic means poison ship build :
I suggest make Tiers for Fighters official.
Sometimes i feel like my brain has been hit by salamanders not gonna lie.Agree, It is very possible.
Oh. Well still i am not quite convinced. You do have a point but i dunno.You suffered some kind of short-circuit issue.Converted hangars introduces sort of Tiers.I don't think that creating a tier system overlaying the OP system is a sensible idea. Also you would have to rebalance all fighters to fit the 5/10/15 values and that sounds like a pain and very frustrating to build for and that's without saying the massive nerfs that would have to be doled out to any fighters that are worth more than 15
Becouse of OP >> DP conversion rounding mechanic means poison ship build :
I suggest make Tiers for Fighters official.Sometimes i feel like my brain has been hit by salamanders not gonna lie.Agree, It is very possible.
Check this:
1. If current rounding system come into release stage, it means that every player have to make its own re-evaluation and deep dive into sea of numbers to pick only those few fighters which are worth for converted hangar. >> very unfortunate game design.
2. Proposed Tiers spread over whole OP spectrum. e.i. Fighter for 25OP is Tier 5. No "massive nerf" exist.
3. what proposed Tiers do, is >>> Slight change performance of Fighters to fit an OP number which divided by 5 gives MODULO=0
Got it ?
...Or just multiply ALL DP by 5.
Come on guys the solution is obvious, we will introduce decimal DP points.
...
I sure wish there was a Patreon or something to play all those "in Development" versions. I would gladly pay to support the development of this game.
- Added Luddic pilgrim transport bar mission
Player ship autopilot behavior will now take into account the faction doctrine aggression settingSound like improvement but isnt.
It would be an improvement for some things like Neural Linked brawling ships like two Onslaughts, where the linked ship seems to inherit flagship behavior, which is locked at Steady today, which is not ideal for most conventional warships.QuotePlayer ship autopilot behavior will now take into account the faction doctrine aggression settingSound like improvement but isnt.
EDIT: So uh is the Invictus Vast hangar going to nullify the new maluses for converted hangar? I am concerned specifically about the DP one because if i remember right the invictus is already pretty expensive DP wise. Also oof for militarized subsystems. Can it get a little OP cost reduction to compensate?
I sure wish there was a Patreon or something to play all those "in Development" versions. I would gladly pay to support the development of this game.
mfw hephag still gets only recoil buffs
Quote
- Added Luddic pilgrim transport bar mission
Will this also include Luddic "pilgrims" of the more questionable variety? Add a bit of variety to the bar missions, especially if something like this would impact the target market.
More seriously, though, have you considered that you might be underestimating the HAG?... ...(in this case, using it on the new Invictus.)I forget where i said it, but i the HAG is a weapon i can see being really good on both of the new luddic capitals.
Who else is checking this thread every day (Ludd forgive me) to see when Alex posts a preview link? Just in case he does it before he posts it on the blog. I mean, it could happen.Everyone is waiting on Alex to finish playtesting. I imagine David is also doing a run of the game? Maybe some of the moderators like Thaago? Whatever the case...just need them to finish up their runs.
Who else is checking this thread every day (Ludd forgive me) to see when Alex posts a preview link? Just in case he does it before he posts it on the blog. I mean, it could happen.You could only check once every 7 days. Alex seems to be working in weekly cycles, based on the previous release and patch note dates.
More seriously, though, have you considered that you might be underestimating the HAG?... ...(in this case, using it on the new Invictus.)I forget where i said it, but i the HAG is a weapon i can see being really good on both of the new luddic capitals.
They have the flux to handle it, and the loss in DPS from taking a hellbore could be more of an issue for them with their slot options. eg:
- Invictus with a mix of HAG/mark9 would be very unpleasant if it get you in its sights, a solid consistent mix of kinetic/he damge being sent downrange. (there's also the option of using a HAG or two in side slots to deter flanking)
- Retribution could run say... 3 HAG, 6 sabot pods, 2 HAC and then vulcans for PD. (and unless stats have changed since the blog post, then by my math it could be flux neutral with that loadout!) and that would be terrifying to have boost in on you.
You could only check once every 7 days. Alex seems to be working in weekly cycles, based on the previous release and patch note dates.
The Retribution's missile complement has been... reined in a bit, shall we say. It's still an awesome ship, but 6 medium missile slots was definitely way too much given its many other excellent qualities.
Everyone is waiting on Alex to finish playtesting. I imagine David is also doing a run of the game? Maybe some of the moderators like Thaago? Whatever the case...just need them to finish up their runs.
Everyone is waiting on Alex to finish playtesting. I imagine David is also doing a run of the game? Maybe some of the moderators like Thaago? Whatever the case...just need them to finish up their runs.
David has very obviously been doing playthroughs of the game, and specifically the new quest content, while it is in development. This is why he posts very regular game screenshots on his Twitter.
That's interesting, my initial impression of Retribution based on what I've seen was "no shield tank, no armor tank, no range, and has a system that gets it into trouble but not out of it". But if you say it kicks ass then that's great, you can never have too many BCs.
Is the Invictus a threat when controlled by AI or is it also another player focused ship? Seems like their particular weakness would be very easy for player to exploit when fighting against them so I wonder if they are largely ineffective in enemy fleets.
Whereas the Mk. IX is probably more useful as a generalist weapon (it does have decent damage/shot),
The Retribution's missile complement has been... reined in a bit, shall we say. It's still an awesome ship, but 6 medium missile slots was definitely way too much given its many other excellent qualities.
maybe it just has less missile turrets instead of all the turrets being gone?The Retribution's missile complement has been... reined in a bit, shall we say. It's still an awesome ship, but 6 medium missile slots was definitely way too much given its many other excellent qualities.
awww, that's a shame (though tbh I was concerned by the fact that it had 6 meds). I'm guessing the turrets got turned into pure ballistics, that seems like it'd cut off most of the possible busted-ness.
though it's still the bit of the update I'm anticipating most, getting a properly fast capital is gonna be a lot of fun
Has the OP cost of the Sarissa been settled on yet?
maybe it just has less missile turrets instead of all the turrets being gone?
The Retribution's missile complement has been... reined in a bit, shall we say. It's still an awesome ship, but 6 medium missile slots was definitely way too much given its many other excellent qualities.
awww, that's a shame (though tbh I was concerned by the fact that it had 6 meds). I'm guessing the turrets got turned into pure ballistics, that seems like it'd cut off most of the possible busted-ness.
though it's still the bit of the update I'm anticipating most, getting a properly fast capital is gonna be a lot of fun
- Converted Hangar:
- Reduced cost to 10 OP across the board (still can't be mounted on frigates)
- Removed fighter speed/damage taken penalties and ordnance point cost increase
- Increases the ship's deployment points and supply cost to recover from deployment by 1 per 5 OP spent on fighters, minimum of +1
- Fighter replacement is 1.5x slower, in all aspects
- Returning bombers take an extra 40% of the base refit time to relaunch (normally, it's <1 second)
Stop staying that or Alex will nerf Mk. IX lol
That's not how it works and if it was OP someone other than you would surely notice, it's up to Alex to listen to the feedback and judge whether to fix it, also if you think it's actually OP, you can revert it yourself easily with a few number tweaks, pretending you are "gaming for fun" by keeping broken stuff in is fine, but making everyone else deal with it is a silly idea.
I don't know what is the official stance on this but I was always of the opinion that ships should never be balanced around what the player is able to do with them, only around what the AI can do with them.Amen, I always keep repeating this as it would be a sad day to have such a great game with so many pretty ships, only to have half of them be "trap" choices for your fleet just because AI is incapable of utilising them. It's fine that some are stronger in player's hands, that's natural but it should always be balanced around AI in the seat. I very much look forward to seeing how the AI will fly ships with Plasma Burn now, as there have been some improvements (that was my biggest gripe with AI currently).
Amen, I always keep repeating this as it would be a sad day to have such a great game with so many pretty ships, only to have half of them be "trap" choices for your fleet just because AI is incapable of utilising them. It's fine that some are stronger in player's hands, that's natural but it should always be balanced around AI in the seat. I very much look forward to seeing how the AI will fly ships with Plasma Burn now, as there have been some improvements (that was my biggest gripe with AI currently).Ziggurat in AI hands feels like a total waste, unable to take advantage of Phase Anchor (that makes Ziggurat overpowered with lances and Omega missiles) among other things. Not worth the 75 DP and other downsides in its hands. As a flagship with Phase Anchor, Ziggurat is overpowered, and 75 DP would be too low if not for the major campaign downsides (hangar queen, auto-ID).
Lot's of talk of balance, IMO this game is remarkably well balanced and realistic when not and most of us are down right horrible at combat and using ships till the learning curve is over (I still end up doing dumb stuff the AI knows not to do). Changing the curve makes it harder for you guys but just changes the counters for new players and it becomes a loop till the loudest person is happy. I haven't seen one ship that is better in every way that doesn't deserve it or makes up for it with fleet composition. I think the better issue is that other captains don't use S-mods (Or I haven't found any) so it gives any player ship a unique advantage that may make things even more OP for the ship they are using and that is good/smart tactics not balance issues. The balance issue is the AI has a disadvantage?There was that one Tri-Tach kill squad that had them if i remember well. Nobody else uses them though.
There was that one Tri-Tach kill squad that had them if i remember well. Nobody else uses them though.Some of the bounties you can get from contacts will put you up against ships with s-mods, too.
There are a lot of changes I like, and definitely too much to say for certain without hands on, but this really drew my attention. Really looking forward to toying with this to see what kind of horrific chimeras I can regurgitate into an early game hobo fleet and onto some poor feller's tactical display. Gotta show the Pirates how it's done.
Maybe all game. Some things never change.
Cutting edge no-loss meta is nice for a zen-like rhythm, but it's fun to switch it up and make something just way too stupid to die, too.
The cherry on top is that with a bit of care you can return strikecraft for repairs. Human life doesn't really have much value in the Persean Sector, and the fleet doesn't mind whether or not you take care of them (no mechanic for it), but I like to bring as many of my guys home as possible. Always felt bad for the pilots who never had the opportunity to retreat.
Anyways, good luck on the update!
mfw hephag still gets only recoil buffsIf you keep making that face, it's going to get stuck that way!
More seriously, though, have you considered that you might be underestimating the HAG? I say this both having recently tested it vs high armor (surprisingly close to the Hellbore in time-to-break, possibly even better under some practical circumstances) and having used it as a key, build-enabling, best-in-slot weapon in an Ordo hunting fleet (in this case, using it on the new Invictus.)
My main problem with HAG is the meta - all endgame fights are against heavily shielded ships, and even against regular enemies anti-shield weapons are preferred to win the flux battle quicker, so in my builds every large ballistic mount automatically goes to a kinetic weapon(or in case of Conquest a Mjolnir) Explosive weapons are "support".For me, it depends on the ship. I prefer a bunch of light kinetics with Rangefinder or ePD+IPDAI (because they have better accuracy and efficiency) and use heavier weapons for anti-armor (because they have better range or armor penetration).
The HAG is why I loved the “Give the Eagle a Large Ballistic turret” idea back awhile ago. It went perfectly with Heavy ACs up front and beam PD in the Energies on a platform that wasn’t too fast or slow. It made the Eagle a kind of slippery generalist that could hurt you if you let it just plink away.
hm, the problem with adding a large ballistic to the eagle is that then the falcon is less similar to it...Just make it a variant available to one faction, like
It's worth noting that a new point-defense fighter is planned to be added, and a hull-mod that gives fighters the behavior of the Xyphos, so there will be a lot of interesting new builds in the next patch.
Personally, most of my logisitics ships will probably have converted hangar and insulted engine mods built in.
Where do I go to play this version of the game?
- Planetary Shield now protects the colony from the Meteor Impacts condition
Well if it doesn't release today, then it will release tomorrow, and if it doesn't release tomorrow, then it will release the day after that, and if it...Also if I keep checking hourly it will release faster, it's science.
Considering that I built the mod to function as a suggestion backed by a "here's a working example of how this would play out", I'd be all for that.
- Planetary Shield now protects the colony from the Meteor Impacts condition
Just realized this is just like the Planetary Shield: Access Control mod, any chance we can get the ground defense rework and Pather interest reduction too? (Like fully integrate the mod, if the Author allows it ofc)
One thing for QOL... Please put some kind of indikator for when you go in a neutron star system, thet you can know if you will got directly in a quasar or not... I hate to have to save scum the whole time when i wana go to a neutron system and loose a ton of suply becose of it.A QoL Suggestion: An indicator for when one goes into a neutron star system, informing you of if you will be directly in a quasar or where... I hate to have to save scum every time I wanna go into a neutron system and lose a ton of supplies because of it. (I'm not being a grammar Nazi, I want to clarify in case English isn't your first language and maybe help your issue)
One thing for QOL... Please put some kind of indikator for when you go in a neutron star system, thet you can know if you will got directly in a quasar or not... I hate to have to save scum the whole time when i wana go to a neutron system and loose a ton of suply becose of it.A QoL Suggestion: An indicator for when one goes into a neutron star system, informing you of if you will be directly in a quasar or where... I hate to have to save scum every time I wanna go into a neutron system and lose a ton of supplies because of it. (I'm not being a grammar Nazi, I want to clarify in case English isn't your first language and maybe help your issue)
There is a way to sort of tell where you will jump in. There are sometimes many wormholes you can pick from with small visual ques. Also you can transverse jump near them, other then that I agree it would be nice if every wormhole had a little more info as to what to expect in the crazy sectors.
I don't think you were *** as I only speak one language fluently enough to talk in forums and wish people would correct me without being rude in the ones that I try to learn, I'm sorry if it came off in any bad way. I agree with you on what you meant, the probes could be added for more detailed info/exploration. Maybe like a preview or a cooldown on needing supplies to warp back out of like 10 seconds.One thing for QOL... Please put some kind of indikator for when you go in a neutron star system, thet you can know if you will got directly in a quasar or not... I hate to have to save scum the whole time when i wana go to a neutron system and loose a ton of suply becose of it.A QoL Suggestion: An indicator for when one goes into a neutron star system, informing you of if you will be directly in a quasar or where... I hate to have to save scum every time I wanna go into a neutron system and lose a ton of supplies because of it. (I'm not being a grammar Nazi, I want to clarify in case English isn't your first language and maybe help your issue)
There is a way to sort of tell where you will jump in. There are sometimes many wormholes you can pick from with small visual ques. Also you can transverse jump near them, other then that I agree it would be nice if every wormhole had a little more info as to what to expect in the crazy sectors.
My good sir. You are correct thet english is not my first language, and its more like i was *** cos i got blasted like a MF and did a rant. Thanks for the correction and have a good one.
I don't think you were *** as I only speak one language fluently enough to talk in forums and wish people would correct me without being rude in the ones that I try to learn, I'm sorry if it came off in any bad way. I agree with you on what you meant, the probes could be added for more detailed info/exploration. Maybe like a preview or a cooldown on needing supplies to warp back out of like 10 seconds.One thing for QOL... Please put some kind of indikator for when you go in a neutron star system, thet you can know if you will got directly in a quasar or not... I hate to have to save scum the whole time when i wana go to a neutron system and loose a ton of suply becose of it.A QoL Suggestion: An indicator for when one goes into a neutron star system, informing you of if you will be directly in a quasar or where... I hate to have to save scum every time I wanna go into a neutron system and lose a ton of supplies because of it. (I'm not being a grammar Nazi, I want to clarify in case English isn't your first language and maybe help your issue)
There is a way to sort of tell where you will jump in. There are sometimes many wormholes you can pick from with small visual ques. Also you can transverse jump near them, other then that I agree it would be nice if every wormhole had a little more info as to what to expect in the crazy sectors.
My good sir. You are correct thet english is not my first language, and its more like i was *** cos i got blasted like a MF and did a rant. Thanks for the correction and have a good one.
Jumping blind into a pulsar beam is lame. I have save-scummed before entering neutron stars because of pulsar beams.
But the reload option is there, and there is every incentive to reload to undo that cheap shot.Jumping blind into a pulsar beam is lame. I have save-scummed before entering neutron stars because of pulsar beams.
No one forced you to save scum.
I have no problem living with that particular consequence of space exploration. It's hardly game-over and you are given tools to escape scenarios like jumping into a Pulsar.
While I agree that there does not NEED to be a warning as there is plenty of ways to work around it, it would be nice if one was added.
what with an RC already having been built (that I already know isn't quite "it", but still!)Praise the maker
However, if you intend to enter a neutron star system, and don't actually use one of the ways to mitigate the danger on enter that already exist, then the gameplay loop with the neutron star is click on the jump point, pause game with text warning, click don't jump, wait some guessed amount of time, click on the jump point, pause game with text warning, click don't jump, wait, etc. It's entirely possible if you wait the wrong amount of time, to miss the opening and get the opposite beam, or alternatively you click too often and now you've clicked 10 or more times just to enter one system safely. The game flow is just kind of terrible.The beam rotates slow enough (and the gate slowing rotating with the beam) that it might as well be like waiting for hostiles to clear a gate in another system. If I got warned that a beam is over a gate, I am not waiting in-game days for the beam to clear the gate, I will jump through the star or gas giant if I want in now for the likely research station waiting for me.
Jumping through a gate, gas giant, or star is faster than T-jumping (and costs no CR).... You're aware that T-jumping INTO a system doesn't cost CR, right? Only jumping OUT does.
what with an RC already having been built (that I already know isn't quite "it", but still!)Praise the maker
Amen to that.what with an RC already having been built (that I already know isn't quite "it", but still!)Praise the maker
what with an RC already having been built
So only one more week?You never know. Some horrible game-crashing bug that absolutely must be fixed first could turn up.
I'm curious about the version numbering... Should we draw any conclusions from the fact that this next update is only 0.96?
Do you feel like you'll soon be in a position where you can talk about a roadmap moving forward, in terms of an official release on Steam?
You know what the worst thing is? I cant decide if i should start a new game or wait to start it latre after the update and all mods update... T.Tyou could do both, nothing says you have to stop playing your current game if the update comes out and you arent finished yet. Even moreso if you have mods you wanna use, since those might take a while to update.
You know what the worst thing is? I cant decide if i should start a new game or wait to start it latre after the update and all mods update... T.T
You know what the worst thing is? I cant decide if i should start a new game or wait to start it latre after the update and all mods update... T.T
Also @Alex, a QOL improvement request. When transporting things, like when moving all my weapons from one place to another, sometimes I wish I had a move all feature instead of ctrl clicking everything, a minor QOL request if it's not to hard to implement, and certainly don't delay this release over it.
Briefly thought that this introduced a contradiction due to thinking phase field was kinda needed for phasing ability. But now instead Gremlin's like the first phase ship to not have delicate machinery/phase field? Might actually make it a bit of a threat instead of just a nuisance you have to chase off.
- Gremlin (all versions):
- Removed Delicated Machinery and Phase Field
- Added Rugged Construction
- Increased hitpoints to 2500 (was: 2000)
- Increased armor to 450 (was: 350)
- Changed system from Flare Launcher to Decoy Flare Launcher
- Adjusted flare port placement
- Adjusted misaligned engine glows
- Changed phase coil glow to better indicate which way the ship is facing while phased
Also @Alex, a QOL improvement request. When transporting things, like when moving all my weapons from one place to another, sometimes I wish I had a move all feature instead of ctrl clicking everything, a minor QOL request if it's not to hard to implement, and certainly don't delay this release over it.
Enable "altMouseMoveToMassTransfer" in settings.json
Basically I see your Drover nerf and the Gremlin buff and I am going to make you a counter offer:I like the idea A_A
Please add rugged construction to the Mora!
It is already basically an ancient rust bucket so it would fit I think thematically, and it also behaves like a brick in combat which is surprisingly cool, so giving it rugged construction would only reinforce the "tough" gameplay identity it already has!
While I am at it I must also beg you to consider adding a cool-down to the Drover's B-Deck hullmod.I like the idea.
As it currently stands I already think that all the other carriers suck compared to spamming bombers/torpedo-bombers with Astrals;I strongly disagree, the Heron (as) you mentioned is excellent, I can effectively use it with bombers, fighters or a mix of 'em, probably my favourite carrier.
Astral has a massive OP issue, so you're actually better off with two herons/moras sometimes. At least these two can be filled with good fighters and some PD to support them (not to mention that they can actually equip good PD, unlike Astral, which doesn't have OP or any ballistic slots).
I strongly disagree, the Heron (as) you mentioned is excellent, I can effectively use it with bombers, fighters or a mix of 'em, probably my favourite carrier.I found that mixing bombers with fighters (outside of the [marginal] utility of a single flare launcher armed Lux or something) to be completely pointless. Ideally you would have all your fighters as either interceptors (I'm calling them that for ease of explanation) or bombers so that your carriers can immediately swap to fighter recall once ordinance has been expended so that they can be replaced/re-armed faster. Even in the ideal circumstance of hypothetically your interceptors remaining combat effective after your bombers have gone live, keeping the interceptors on engage command will ruin your bomber replacement; plus you are splitting you're effectiveness when enemy PD highly encourages you to perform coordinated alpha-strikes to punch through the PD coverage, rather than trickle in interceptors/bombers one at a time to be shot down.
Astral has a massive OP issue, so you're actually better off with two herons/moras sometimes. At least these two can be filled with good fighters and some PD to support them (not to mention that they can actually equip good PD, unlike Astral, which doesn't have OP or any ballistic slots).I literally couldn't disagree more. Astral is pound-for-pound one of if not the best ship in the game. 2 Astrals can duo the very-redacted Doritos. Yes OP is a little tight but if you aren't building in S-mod's on this ship then on what ship are you gonna do it? I have tried every permutation on the Astral loadout and settled on 2xLongbow 2xPerdition 2xCobra as the best. the Hammer torpedo highly encourage enemies to keep their shield up and despite the Longbow having a faster flight time, the sabot pods themselves are quite slow, and the Hammers quite fast so at reasonable engagement ranges the Hammer launched from the perdition will actually catch up to the sabot and both with land at about the same time. This overloads most enemies or at least pushes so much pressure on them that the 2 Reapers that arrive moments later secure a kill on virtually everything.
Personally i don't see the drover change as a nerf considering they would just nuke their redeployment into nothingness so they would have zero staying power4 Reaper torpedoes would beg to differ (15 second replacement time btw).
If Astral goes down to 40 points its gonna be really brokenI agree, I think the ship is fine the way it is.
5 Heavy Burst Lasers and 8 PD Lasers is bad PD?Yes, five overcosted Burst PD lasers is bad PD. It actually works really well on the Astral, since it has a very good reactor and can take most missiles on its shield, and only care about fighters; but on a ship as OP-starved as Astral, i would much rather just have normal BPD in oversized slots.
The thing about Astral is that it can actually do something other than launch fighter wings since it has two large missile slots. It's also easily the best carrier to flagship.Two large missile slots are almost enough to make a pile of rusty scrap that is Atlas mk.II into a very good ship.
E3: I love how everyone plays differently, I'd never install logistics mods on my warships or recovery shuttles on carriers, I like the converted hangar beam shrike with rocket oomp and the wolf, I tend to build them with much closer range in mind, cool stuff. :o ;D 8)
What PotatoFarmer1 writes is true. My current playthrough is based on a mainly Astral fleet. I intentionally tried to play only with high-tech fighters, but ran into serious problems vs tough armor, so I had to add a few bombers.Wow @Iceforce I love your build! Fellow Converted hanger enjoying Chad detected! Shame it's also getting nerfed in the upcoming update.
Fleet compostion (see attachment for skills, officers and ships) - 240DP:
Modding:
- Added ShipEngineAPI.repair()
- Added "graphics" -> "fighterSkinsPlayerAndNPC" and "fighterSkinsPlayerOnly" sections to settings.json
- Key format is: <fighter hull id>_<hull style ID>
- For example: xyphos_LOW_TECH
- If match for carrier's hull style is found, that sprite replaces the fighter's normal sprite
- Otherwise, picks the one with the closest SpriteAPI.getAverageBrightColor() to the ship's sprite
- Keys also added to "graphics" -> "fighterSkinsExcludeFromSharing" are excluded from this and only ever apply to that specific hull style
This is pretty cool, and I'm eager to see what shiny high tech mining drones might look like, but is there any chance we'll get a way to apply "faction" skins to them as well?
Like if they're launched from a diable avionics ship for example they could have the associated livery applied to it?
QuoteModding:
- Added ShipEngineAPI.repair()
- Added "graphics" -> "fighterSkinsPlayerAndNPC" and "fighterSkinsPlayerOnly" sections to settings.json
- Key format is: <fighter hull id>_<hull style ID>
- For example: xyphos_LOW_TECH
- If match for carrier's hull style is found, that sprite replaces the fighter's normal sprite
- Otherwise, picks the one with the closest SpriteAPI.getAverageBrightColor() to the ship's sprite
- Keys also added to "graphics" -> "fighterSkinsExcludeFromSharing" are excluded from this and only ever apply to that specific hull style
(hopefully I did the quote thing properly)
This is pretty cool, and I'm eager to see what shiny high tech mining drones might look like, but is there any chance we'll get a way to apply "faction" skins to them as well?
Like if they're launched from a diable avionics ship for example they could have the associated livery applied to it?
Like if they're launched from a diable avionics ship for example they could have the associated livery applied to it?I assume it's as simple as drawing the sprites, putting them in the right place, and giving all diable ships the right tag.
Should be noted that Gremlin losing Delicate Machinery means it can now sanely fit Safety Overrides, which will be quite a lot of fun.Could you imagine if the LP gremlin came with SO built in? Scary.
Should be noted that Gremlin losing Delicate Machinery means it can now sanely fit Safety Overrides, which will be quite a lot of fun.Should also be noted Gremlin has a grand total of 2 small ballistic slots after the missiles run out.
Yep, two annihilator pods will get you at least two destroyer kills, and that’s before expanded missile racks or the auto-loader.Small Annihilators have the shotgun spread, it's not that easy to get kills that way unless you're sniffing the engines.
Yep, two annihilator pods will get you at least two destroyer kills, and that’s before expanded missile racks or the auto-loader.Yeah, right. You need to be unphased for long periods of time to fire those, so you will eat a phase lance and implode. Besides, annihilators run out pretty fast, so the extra PPT doesn't matter there.
And, it's out! See OP for blog post link.
EDIT: @Alex
The 0.96 update is not listed under "Releases" on the official site, I've had the use the link from here.
01:00 AM releaseShould have gone to sleep so I didn't see this...
Thanks for listening to feedback about the Executor!
Very excited to start a new game in the new version. Anyone know how to get the "hyperspace exploration" event to show up in your intel screen? I've been running around riding slipstreams but it hasn't popped up yet.
Ahhhh!!!! I have 4 more hours of work…
So excited though. Like, giddy as a toddler excited.
And, it's out! See OP for blog post link.A-starfaring we shall go!
Glad to see Eagle getting 60 speed in the end, gives slightly more space for experimenting with short-medium range weapons.
IMO it needs the M energies to pull their weight, beam only setup is a bit anemic.
If it's too strong this way DP can always go up.
And, it's out! See OP for blog post link.
Wait why are d-mods now so dimmed and at the top of the hullmod list. They look exactly the same as built-ins, which is definitely weird. I liked how they had unique orange text, since it clearly showed what ships have been beaten up.
Error when checking out the missions Sinking the Bismar:
Fatal: Ship hull [hyperion] variant [mission_sinkingthebismarck_ship_0]: slot id
[WS 005] not found for weapon [atropos]
Error when checking out the missions Sinking the Bismar:This is almost certainly the result of a saved mission variant from 0.9.1 or earlier. Open up your saves folder, find the 'missions' folder under that, and delete it.
Fatal: Ship hull [hyperion] variant [mission_sinkingthebismarck_ship_0]: slot id
[WS 005] not found for weapon [atropos]
Not sure if anyone else mentioned it yet but the nova burst ship system description doesn't show up because the "nova_burst" text is listed under "nova_device".
Relatedly, just a reminder that you CAN have multiple versions of Starsector installed next to one another. There's no problem, beyond storage, with leaving your .95.1 install in place next to your .96.
Relatedly, just a reminder that you CAN have multiple versions of Starsector installed next to one another. There's no problem, beyond storage, with leaving your .95.1 install in place next to your .96.
How would you do this?
This is almost certainly the result of a saved mission variant from 0.9.1 or earlier. Open up your saves folder, find the 'missions' folder under that, and delete it.
Relatedly, just a reminder that you CAN have multiple versions of Starsector installed next to one another. There's no problem, beyond storage, with leaving your .95.1 install in place next to your .96.
How would you do this?
Was JackHammer nerfed during playtesting? I remember reading somewhere it has 9 ammo, but now I see 6 in total. Was probably too potent, I'm just curious.
Combat
Added option to make strafe key a toggle; added UI element to show "strafe lock" status
Edit: Also, quite important:
My current save is quite advanced and going rather well, I'd rather not start again.
Can I continue my save with this patch or am I forced to start over?
Thank you for your replies.
Where does it say I can't continue it? I read the previous page but didn't find anything like that. Alex said to install the game "fresh", but I didn't think it would mean losing my save. :-\Just saw Alex says that in a bug report thread. He got so used to saying that for patches he thought it was common sense. Guess it's still worth repeating.
I have a question regarding the Ballistic Rangefinder. It's supposed to boost hybrid weapons but I fail to see any changes when mounting the now hybrid Mining Blasters or any other hybrid weapon. Is there something odd going on?I think it's only effective if the hybrid weapons are mounted in Ballistic-only slots. Last I recall, it's the SLOT TYPE that's factored into whether the weapon is affected or not.
I do have a minor complain: the planet displayed when surveying can have a large / bright / in your face purple corona-something-something (that's probably the way planet's magnetic field is displayed), it is too much in my opinion. Could be more subtle with, say, reduced opacity or a darker tone.
Are you sure about the invictus alex ? it seems incredibly unbalanced and i don't like where this is going
in the sim i lasted 5 mins without shooting or moving, against a paragon, an astral , 2 onslaughts, and a conquest without shooting back or moving
I do believe the "Old Man" mission might be ... repeating? Though, perhaps something got gummed up in the works when I reloaded a save at some point or another, but I'm fairy certain I delivered that man already and yet he's popped up again.
That's what I've been trying out, tried with any ship with a large and medium ballistic and Rangefinder, Mining Blaster in medium ballistic, expecting range boost to 700u.I have a question regarding the Ballistic Rangefinder. It's supposed to boost hybrid weapons but I fail to see any changes when mounting the now hybrid Mining Blasters or any other hybrid weapon. Is there something odd going on?I think it's only effective if the hybrid weapons are mounted in Ballistic-only slots. Last I recall, it's the SLOT TYPE that's factored into whether the weapon is affected or not.
Are you sure about the invictus alex ? it seems incredibly unbalanced and i don't like where this is going
in the sim i lasted 5 mins without shooting or moving, against a paragon, an astral , 2 onslaughts, and a conquest without shooting back or moving
I'm of course not sure of anything, and am going to keep an eye on it! That said, the Paragon alone takes it out in ~200 seconds (compared to about 50 seconds to take down an Onslaught), and the 5 ships combined do it in under 100. And if you're talking with skills, that's not a very useful reference point.
That's what I've been trying out, tried with any ship with a large and medium ballistic and Rangefinder, Mining Blaster in medium ballistic, expecting range boost to 700u.I have a question regarding the Ballistic Rangefinder. It's supposed to boost hybrid weapons but I fail to see any changes when mounting the now hybrid Mining Blasters or any other hybrid weapon. Is there something odd going on?I think it's only effective if the hybrid weapons are mounted in Ballistic-only slots. Last I recall, it's the SLOT TYPE that's factored into whether the weapon is affected or not.
Is smuggling changed in some way? it feels like i always get suspicion even when i buy high quantities of the same commodity in the open market, and the suspicion level seems to go up way faster.
The servers seem to be pretty overloaded.
@Alex, do you mind if I create a torrent and host it?
Interaction dialog: added scroller to option area; only of interest for modded games*thumbsup*
Also uhhh, Centurion (LG) appears to have AAF while not having any energy mounts. Intentional bad diktat engineering moment?
Update when?Gave me a darn good chuckle.
Are you sure about the invictus alex ? it seems incredibly unbalanced and i don't like where this is goingHave you tried shooting at it yourself to see what it takes to fold one? I assume that if you are geared for armor busting it might crumble easier.
in the sim i lasted 5 mins without shooting or moving, against a paragon, an astral , 2 onslaughts, and a conquest without shooting back or moving
Any ship with a d-mod is excluded from the Codex, hence why most LP ships and all the LG ships don't show up.So it could be unintentional...
swapping Java 8
Is there is a new Java 8 for 0.96 already, or is it version agnostic?Don't need a new version of Java 8 for 0.96 yeah, you can just use/redownload the existing one.
It’s not getting an update anytime soon, that’s for sure!swapping Java 8
Is there is a new Java 8 for 0.96 already, or is it version agnostic?
The Invictus doesn't appear to generate in the "Random Battle" mission. I've probably refreshed it 50x. The Retribution and Pegasus do but not the Invictus. I think all the new Capitals need to be in the Simulator. To be frank, every hull (minus REDACTED) should be represented. It's missing most of the staple Cruisers now, too.I've been saying we need actual opponents in the sim but no one seems to care. Thank god we have 3 different loadouts for Dominator, don't know how I would test my ships without that.
The Invictus doesn't appear to generate in the "Random Battle" mission. I've probably refreshed it 50x. The Retribution and Pegasus do but not the Invictus. I think all the new Capitals need to be in the Simulator. To be frank, every hull (minus REDACTED) should be represented. It's missing most of the staple Cruisers now, too.I've been saying we need actual opponents in the sim but no one seems to care. Thank god we have 3 different loadouts for Dominator, don't know how I would test my ships without that.
TBH, rather than adding more regular ships, I'd prefer there be some point where the REDACTED did appear in the simulator. Maybe some mini-quest about the origins of the AI war or something, and then they show up in the simulator and codex.Just add variants as the player finds them. Gotta catch 'em all.
I do believe the "Old Man" mission might be ... repeating? Though, perhaps something got gummed up in the works when I reloaded a save at some point or another, but I'm fairy certain I delivered that man already and yet he's popped up again.
Is it just me or do the laser missiles overall feel a bit underwhelming? The dragonfire large for example has 5 ammo and each deal 3000 energy damage, the missile says its fast and prevents pd but from playtesting the missile seems to die really fast when its hit with pd, and costs 28 op, the cyclone reaper launcher has 20 ammo(fires 10 times, 2 reapers at a time) and deals 8000 total HE damage for 26 op.Still a bit early to tell but I share your sentiments for now. It's just a question are you willing to trade a lot of potential damage for a higher chance of hitting the target. It's ok for AI ships at the end of the day.
You could argue that the reaper is much harder to hit but the payoff is much greater imo, specially now that the reaper shoots faster and the fact that the dragonfire deals soft flux.
What do you guys think?
Stupid question. The hotfix can be installed over the previous install or need to uninstall previous version first?
beamWeaponSpecProxy.setDamagePerSecond(float damagePerSecond);
beamWeaponSpecProxy.setEmpPerSecond(float empPerSecond);
But the real victim here is the poor gutted Hurricane. It got nerfed way too many times.I tried MIRV, and while it has better maneuverability than last release, it is not enough, about half the warheads miss a medium-sized target moving about, and I feel like I still need ECCM to use it effectively. I prefer the MIRV from the previous release (because I need ECCM either way). If MIRV will keep seven warheads, it needs to be like its incarnation from early releases (up to 0.65a), perhaps with regeneration like in 0.65a.
Wanted to pop in and comment on hyperspace topography real quick.
Additions are fantastic. Before it was a mix of intuition, experience, and luck to find a solid slipstream. Now I can scan as I please and unlock benefits for doing it, and it feels quite natural as part of the exploration ecosystem. I don't feel an immediate urge to:Spoilerunlock gate travel ASAP[close]
Nice work.
Wasn't Breach supposed to get a new "high tech" sprite?
Wasn't Breach supposed to get a new "high tech" sprite?The sprites did get tweaked, the formerly-grey sections on the launcher and rear half of the missiles now have a blue hue to them. Visually fits a lot better on most of the vanilla Midline and High Tech ships IMO.
I noticed the Executor is listed as a Midline ship even though the description and sprite both point to it being a Lion's Guard ship. Also none of the Lion's Guard ships including the Executor are showing up in the codex.
Will doing a fresh install to take advantage of the hotfixes mess up my save? My .95 save got borked going to .96 which I suspected, but my latest save is from Friday when the new version dropped.
Energy Bolt Coherer is called exactly the same on both Apex and LG ships, yet it's not the same buff for all.
Right, the hullmod has different effects on automated ships vs not; the tooltip explains it.Oooh, I apologize then. Mods have taught me that if a tooltip is very long, I skip straight to the highlighted part that matters.
29169362 [Thread-3] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
at org.dark.graphics.plugins.LightInjector.advance(LightInjector.java:111)
at com.fs.starfarer.title.C.OO0O$Oo.o00000(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.oOOO.B.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advanceInner(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.traverse(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.state.AppDriver.begin(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain.main(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)
at org.dark.graphics.plugins.LightInjector.advance(LightInjector.java:111)
Hmm, I don't think that checks out from my experience. You can basically ignore hostile activity and a colony can do fine; even the highest level penalties aren't that bad.
What kind of monthly points gain are you seeing? There's one likely raid at 75 points and it's non-repeatable, and after that building up to 500 points takes a while. You're unlikely to have more than... not an exact number, but like +15/20 per month from pirates alone? So you're looking at over 1.5 cycles between raids at worst, and killing a few fleets now and again sets it back a lot. And the bonus from increased defenses/a military base is going to drag this time out *a lot*, possibly stalling it out completely. This just doesn't add up; you're not going to be seeing pirate raids all that often unless there's a bug.
And there are options for dealing with each of the hostile activity factors individually; the tooltips offer some information as to how you might do that.
I mean, if you install a ton of AI cores and event progress ramps up more quickly because of that, then yeah - but then that would be entirely on you, right? And at worst the core bonuses should more than cancel out the penalties from high hostile activity levels.
I'd love to see what you're actually seeing; this doesn't make a lot of sense to me and it's possible there may be a bug somewhere.
I unfortunately find slipstreams extremely annoying...they always act as a wall between me and where I want to be, sometimes taking me far enough from my destination that I get stranded out of fuel...
I've never found myself making good use of them and It's making me hate exploring...I wish there was an option to disable both slipstreams and storms...maybe automatically moving slower but letting me accelerate time more? I just want to go from A to B in a straight line taking as few time as possible as i just don't enjoy the travel...it looks gorgeous and It's fine at frst, but it becomes a chore pretty quickly. I've been speeding up ignoring everything so far, trading supplies for speed because avoiding storms takes way too long, same as slowing to a crawl.
If I could replace travel for a loading screen, I would do it. Right now I'm just taking extreme amount of fuel and supplies, plotting a course and alt-tabbing, letting it take whatever detour the slipstreams want it to take, then I check back after 5 minutes and deal with whatever happened. This is how much I hate traveling.
There are many design choices like every battle having pretty much a countdown timer as cr degrades, that are a huge turn off for many players, even if it rarely comes in effect...just knowing that you have x seconds to finish the fight before your ships start to malfunction, causes huge anxiety in tons of players that might otherwise be very interested in the game. Missiles being a limited resource making tons of players not equipping them altogether, or equipping them and never using them for the "too good to be used" or the "I might need them later" syndrome.
having some buttons in the options or at the start of a run to turn on or off these things without relying on mods would be amazing. Sorry If I may seem harsh, I love the game and 95% of what you have done with it. I convinced 3 of my friends to buy it, 1 of them refuses to install mods and time limits give him crippling anxiety, so he stopped playing, the other 2 installed the mod that makes the missiles infinite but with a cooldown.
TL;DR: Please consider adding some toggles to personalize the gameplay experience in certain key aspects of the game that can be HUGE turnoffs for lots of players. I'm aware that everyone here will probably say that everything is fine and fantastic, but those who agree with me are out there, they stopped playing the game because of these problems or were turned off before buying it.
Turn devmode on in setting.json in starsector-core/data/config (set "devmode":true,), then use ctrl + left click to teleport on the big map. No mod is technically needed, although having just that one feature enabled by a mod, rather than all the devmode stuff would probably be more what you're looking for.I can use dev-mode, I can use the console, I can mod the game...but what about everyone else? what about vanilla only players? "cheat adverse" players? they'd rather stop playing than learn how to mod or than use cheats. I don't think these toggles would require insane amount of testing every time, as there are mods for each of these problems. would adding a slider in the options that makes you choose X2-X4-X8 game speed during normal travel/warp travel be such a big thing?
My guess is that for every possible combination of potential on/off personal settings means an additional round of testing for bugs though, for each release.
Personally, I just e-burn or turn off sustained and plow through while constantly giving direction input via mouse. Only way I'd get blown of course so badly by a slipstream as to run out of fuel is if I'm AFK.
I unfortunately find slipstreams extremely annoying...they always act as a wall between me and where I want to be, sometimes taking me far enough from my destination that I get stranded out of fuel...
I'm seeing substantial pirate activity regardless of point total; in a system with a size 4 colony with Heavy industry and high command, and three size 3s that just had tech mining for two and farming for the third, no AIs, no 'raid', I was getting full-sized maxed-out pirate fleets sometimes, maybe once every couple of months, and there are always some of the smaller ones; if I leave the system, go to the next one over to reach a distress call, and come back, there will be a few more of the smaller fleets; . The maxed-out fleets drop the progress by 16, the smaller ones by 1; and I get the stability/accessibility penalty for intercepted fleets regardless.
Once I had the system's 4 worlds all colonized and I nabbed a Hegemony commission, I ended up abandoning the main quest; and just constantly chasing down pirate fleets and checking nearby systems for bases. With two worlds for tech-mining, one with farming, and another that, initially, just had heavy industry and a patrol base, the point total was rising faster than it would fall by constantly killing pirates. As the first one reached size 4 and became a high command/orbital works, the second one reached size 4 and grew mining/refining, the third one mining/fuel, and the fourth ended up as mining/light industry.
At this point, I was tracking down and killing pirate fleets constantly, and making good money collecting bounties from Hegemony just for defending the colony; and still getting penalties for pirates intercepting fleets, as well as the one for -2 stability; then the one for -3.
At no point, base or not, did pirate fleets stop appearing with at most 2-3 days between them, and the point total never started going down; I'm not sure if there was ever a point without a pirate fleet in the system, they might have just been out of scan range at some times.
On the one hand, this was a good income/xp source; I was constantly collecting pirate bounties and salvage, and had a maxed-out pirate fleet really quickly; steadily scrapping the ships with the most D-mods to keep newer, better ones. Just an absolute constant stream of fights, often enough I usually had to dock and repair between, but most of them low-grade enough that they immediately tried to flee and I could just let it auto-resolve. On the other hand, colonizing the system basically immediately left me stuck in the system to try, and fail, to keep the 'Hostile Activity' bar down.
Honestly, it doesn't make sense for pirates to instantly show-up in-system this quickly, or to keep spawning like this. There should be a point, after enough thousands of pirates have died trying to raid a system, that the pirates just flag it as a 'don't go here' option, and no more pirates try to raid until you've left a base alone for a few months.
ahh. thank you. disabled it o7at org.dark.graphics.plugins.LightInjector.advance(LightInjector.java:111)
Hey! This crash is in GraphicsLib.
I'd like to see a 5x speed-up option for hyperspace, too.
I think there is a feeling for many players, that if you have to adjust the settings in the files manually, that's cheating. It would be nice to add this into the settings in-game. Btw I'm a programmer, so I have no problem with changing stuff. But it "feels" wrong. Everything not strictly part of the in-game settings "feels" like cheating. You can laugh at me of course, but I can assure you, a large part of players share this view to some degree.Messing with "settings.json" feels dirty to me. I reluctantly edit combat speed from 1f to 2f because I would not play the game otherwise (because gameplay is miserably too slow at 1f, and even 2f feels a bit slow to me.) Also, I have considered editing max map size back up to 500 used in previous releases, but I do not because it feels like cheating.
I think there is a feeling for many players, that if you have to adjust the settings in the files manually, that's cheating. It would be nice to add this into the settings in-game. Btw I'm a programmer, so I have no problem with changing stuff. But it "feels" wrong. Everything not strictly part of the in-game settings "feels" like cheating. You can laugh at me of course, but I can assure you, a large part of players share this view to some degree.
I happily edit my config file so that my max player level is 30 and my max battle size is 500 because I enjoy the game more that way, but in my opinion it is absolutely cheating. I figure, I'm a dirty rotten cheater but so what, I'm cheating for my own enjoyment in a single-player offline sandbox game, is the machine going to go on strike over unfair working conditions?
Eh, I think it's silly to cast moral aspersions (i.e. calling it cheating) on changing a game's parameters based solely on whether those parameters are accessible via the game's built-in UI or via an external UI (i.e. the computer's operating system).Silly or not, these are real mental struggles players go through, and you can't just ignore them or play them down.
Ok this is turning into a weird discussion but my counter question is, so what? Someone might feel bad about a certain mechanic that they feel the need to change some of the game files, then they also feel bad about it. What are we supposed to do lol, change the game to fit everyone (which is impossible), or introduce a million of separate options to the point no one will even notice them all...
You just can't please every single user and that's fine. Some options are always good to have (rebinding keys, turning off graphical setting that induce medical conditions or are just uncomfortable, adjusting the volume of separate sources, etc.), while some would bload the setting screen too much. This is precisely what mods do for single player games, they let each player specificaly curate the game the way they want, without impacting anyone else. Thankfully Starsector has an insanely rich modding scene.
Btw it's also super easy to mod some things yourself if you find parts of the game tedious.
Eh, I think it's silly to cast moral aspersions (i.e. calling it cheating) on changing a game's parameters based solely on whether those parameters are accessible via the game's built-in UI or via an external UI (i.e. the computer's operating system).Silly or not, these are real mental struggles players go through, and you can't just ignore them or play them down.
Sure you can. As a dev, you chose to implement input from some players and ignore others. Choosing who to ignore is a critical part of development. There are consequences of course. But, speaking as a dev myself, I would never get a release out if I didn't consciously ignore a not insignificant number of people's suggestions.As a dev myself, i've learned to ignore actual suggestions, but read between the lines. And the fact of it is, hyperspace travel is boring and annoying and adding a UI setting is an easy way to add a layer of duct tape to it.
And the fact of it is, hyperspace travel is boring and annoying
And the fact of it is, hyperspace travel is boring and annoying...
I remember seeing a mod before that gave the ability to teleport a fleet in the direction it was moving proportionally to its speed and that autopilot would get the exact speed needed to land on your destination.It's called Hyperdrive, or something like that.
I can’t remember what it was called as I never used it. I like travelling through hyperspace most of the time. But it sounds perfect for you people that don’t enjoy it.
Granted some of the parameters are for game balance reasons and shouldn't really be changed, but I think making the campaign speed advance more quickly to save the player some time doesn't qualify as changing the game balance.
Ran into a bug on the Knight Errant quest, hitting the same option a couple times seems to have fixed it (mild spoilers so I just linked it):
https://i.imgur.com/jnRCkqM.png
Hey Alex, poking through the codex some more I noticed the Venture (P) isn't showing up either. Neither are the various (LP) ships but I think that's a bug (feature?) going back to previous versions. For some reason a lot of .skin variants aren't showing up in the codex despite lacking the HIDE_IN_CODEX hint.I noticed the Executor is listed as a Midline ship even though the description and sprite both point to it being a Lion's Guard ship. Also none of the Lion's Guard ships including the Executor are showing up in the codex.Thank you, fixed!
... what if at some point we could unlock something(repeatable like the item we sell) to change the direction of a slipstream, or maybe to spawn a slipstream in the direction we want(like those small temporary ones that appear sometimes in the campaign), would that be difficult to implement or is it something that wouldn't make sense lorewise?
Regarding Hyperspace Topography, when I mouse over my Spaceport, I don't see any bonuses listed from my three nearby sensor arrays. I'm curious if the bonus is still being applied anyway - and the bonus simply isn't listed - or if they aren't doing anything at all. It's a little hard to tell, since there's no circle of "slipstream detection range" in intel or on the map.
Speaking of which, a slim circle that denoted detection range would be quite handy.
I know it's in the config file to increase the dimensions but I think most peoples PC's these days could handle a bigger official sector size and star population. Adjusted Sectors mod proved it works, I may just be delusional (or missing something) but would that even be hard to add to this update if not possible could it just be added to the config file easily or already there and I'm missing it?
Do you have a Megaport? There's a bug (fixed in dev, and there'll be another hot/warm fix at some point) where most of the bonuses only apply to Spaceport, not Megaport.
So the apparent(?) behavior is that the invictus is acting like it has 11,000 * 0.05 armor when all armor is stripped in a damage area, and not 11,000 * 0.05 *.1
Is that intended? I tried doing a forum search on this topic and didn’t see any. Hopefully I didn’t miss any.
Just cross at the thinnest part and turn off sustained burn, you don't even need to E-burn. I'm starting to think people are just lazy and they want to look at their phones while they travel.While the hyperspace travel is so boring that I want to alt tab and do other things, as I said in my post, quote: "Sure I can emergency burn and get there eventually, but it's just an annoyance."
I'm literally telling you that emergency burn isn't even necessary. And as another comment said in another thread, it's impossible they're always an annoyance. By pure statistics you're going to have same helpful ones, some less so. Unless you deliberately go against them each half of the cycle.I've literally never found a single one of them that went in the same direction I was going, except once, but it overshoot my destination and got me somewhere where there was another stream wall.....
I'm literally telling you that emergency burn isn't even necessary. And as another comment said in another thread, it's impossible they're always an annoyance. By pure statistics you're going to have same helpful ones, some less so. Unless you deliberately go against them each half of the cycle.There are four directions you can encounter slipstreams in: same as travel, which is good; opposite, which is a bit annoying, but fixable with just taking a slightly different angle; left, which means crossing it and losing a bunch of time; and right, which is the same as left but reflected.
... As a utility, though, I think they'd be much more meaningful for me at least if, for example, slipstreams were visible on the star map within a certain radius around your position, ideally a radius a few times larger than the maximum amount the camera can zoom out.
...
I'm literally telling you that emergency burn isn't even necessary. And as another comment said in another thread, it's impossible they're always an annoyance. By pure statistics you're going to have same helpful ones, some less so. Unless you deliberately go against them each half of the cycle.
@Alex
Mini suggestion, how about making the default hyperspace view one that has actual useful information?
I'm literally telling you that emergency burn isn't even necessary. And as another comment said in another thread, it's impossible they're always an annoyance. By pure statistics you're going to have same helpful ones, some less so. Unless you deliberately go against them each half of the cycle.
Here is the actual map. Assuming that player is in the core worlds. Unless you are going exactly into south-western direction you will have to cross some slipstreams. However, players normally tend to avoid furthest corners and pick missions in the closer regions. This way, most of the time slipstreams will be the hindrance and only on rare occasions they will be of use. Needless to say that to get this map I had to go into two pirate base systems to use their sensor arrays to gather this data. Also I had to remember that some while ago Alex did a blog post about slipstreams changing directions on a regular basis. And I still don't know exact timeframe for that so on average I have roughly two month without slipstreams, 5 months for the eastbound structure and 5 months for the westbound one. And to get a map while maximizing useful time I need to be in any of this base systems, waiting. And, while we at it, as a mean of slipstream navigation Neutrino detector just sucks. Why would I need to know a vector to nearest slipstream? I need a map.
The whole system is too complex and with so little key information available in the game its just opaque. Why, just why it was so difficult to create a sector wide message that hints about slipstreams going away and coming back!? And put the quote from the blog right in the Hyperspace Topography screen? Why, instead of useless Neutrino detector feature we didn't get some means to actually chart the hyperspace maps? It costs freaking skill point after all. Like the ability to control most powerful battleship in the game. Also the detection range from the arrays is a joke. Apart from Samarra, core systems can be completely or partially out of range.
And this is coming from the player who actually read that blog post about slipstreams. I'm afraid to think about someone's else experience who don't.Spoiler
(https://i.imgur.com/UNGr3cc.png)[close]
... As a utility, though, I think they'd be much more meaningful for me at least if, for example, slipstreams were visible on the star map within a certain radius around your position, ideally a radius a few times larger than the maximum amount the camera can zoom out.
...
But you do know that, if you deactivate "Starscape [1]" on the sector-map, you do see slipstreams you have already discovered and thus can atleast plan you way back accordingly?
(Sure, it's not really helpful that Starscape is set on by default, so I'm not sure how many people, who complain about the slipstream, do know that little trick.)
I'm literally telling you that emergency burn isn't even necessary. And as another comment said in another thread, it's impossible they're always an annoyance. By pure statistics you're going to have same helpful ones, some less so. Unless you deliberately go against them each half of the cycle.
Here is the actual map. Assuming that player is in the core worlds. Unless you are going exactly into south-western direction you will have to cross some slipstreams. However, players normally tend to avoid furthest corners and pick missions in the closer regions. This way, most of the time slipstreams will be the hindrance and only on rare occasions they will be of use. Needless to say that to get this map I had to go into two pirate base systems to use their sensor arrays to gather this data. Also I had to remember that some while ago Alex did a blog post about slipstreams changing directions on a regular basis. And I still don't know exact timeframe for that so on average I have roughly two month without slipstreams, 5 months for the eastbound structure and 5 months for the westbound one. And to get a map while maximizing useful time I need to be in any of this base systems, waiting. And, while we at it, as a mean of slipstream navigation Neutrino detector just sucks. Why would I need to know a vector to nearest slipstream? I need a map.
The whole system is too complex and with so little key information available in the game its just opaque. Why, just why it was so difficult to create a sector wide message that hints about slipstreams going away and coming back!? And put the quote from the blog right in the Hyperspace Topography screen? Why, instead of useless Neutrino detector feature we didn't get some means to actually chart the hyperspace maps? It costs freaking skill point after all. Like the ability to control most powerful battleship in the game. Also the detection range from the arrays is a joke. Apart from Samarra, core systems can be completely or partially out of range.
And this is coming from the player who actually read that blog post about slipstreams. I'm afraid to think about someone's else experience who don't.Spoiler
(https://i.imgur.com/UNGr3cc.png)[close]
If it helps, they change direction every half a cycle. I forgot which half goes which way, but the streams should change at the start of and in the middle of a cycle, which'd help you plan your trips at least a bit.
Found a pretty big bug:
i completed the planet killer quest by giving it back to the pather, however it had no effects whatsoever. Maybe because the starting quest was a pather base that spawned?
- Are black holes supposed to not give hyperspace topography points, or is it maybe some kind of weird bug I've been having? Or have I just not gone close enough somehow? It feels to me like if gas giants and nebulas are then black holes should definitely be major topographical features worth checking up.
"can we pay you 6k to stay right here?
(yes, i am on gilead)
One bug I noticed is the Revenant and Phantom both get the +2 burn from Bulk Transport despite not having the Civilian Grade mod.This is not a bug; neither of those is a military (read: usable-in-combat) ship.
One bug I noticed is the Revenant and Phantom both get the +2 burn from Bulk Transport despite not having the Civilian Grade mod.
Not to be one of *those* people... But is there any timeline on when the next hotfix is dropping? There still seem to be a few bugs to quash until it reaches 0.95.1a-rc15 levels of polish.
Why would Rev and Phan have Civ-grade?They don't have Civ-Grade Hull. They do, on the other hand, have the [Civilian] tag, which matters for a bunch of skills, not just Bulk Transport.
The Automated ships from the planet killer mission don't seem to contribute to your automated ships count. That doesn't seem intentional.
The Automated ships from the planet killer mission don't seem to contribute to your automated ships count. That doesn't seem intentional.
It is, actually, since the tech involved is different and they don't require the Automated Ships skill to use! But there's a bug where I think they get listed for automated points in the fleet screen.
i think this could be indicated more clearly in their automated ship hullmod
It is, actually, since the tech involved is different and they don't require the Automated Ships skill to use! But there's a bug where I think they get listed for automated points in the fleet screen.
What the hell happened to Ordinance Expertise?!?umm... nothing?
Like anyone can explain?
This is not a bug; neither of those is a military (read: usable-in-combat) ship.Bulk Transport specifically references the Civilian Grade hull mod. Not a bug, just an error.
This is not a bug; neither of those is a military (read: usable-in-combat) ship.Bulk Transport specifically references the Civilian Grade hull mod. Not a bug, just an error.
Ships with "Civilian" tag counts as civilian, but the tags of ships are not shown in game, you can only precisely determine if a ship is civilian by either looking up the custom production/doctrine civilian options or look into ships.csv file. An in-game indicator is well appreciated.This is not a bug; neither of those is a military (read: usable-in-combat) ship.Bulk Transport specifically references the Civilian Grade hull mod. Not a bug, just an error.
Unless the wiki is outdated (which is entirely possible), it simply mentions 'non-militarized civilian grade ships'. Whilst it is easy to assume this refers to the civilian-grade hull hullmod, there is a distinct difference between the two as is shown by the two ships in question. Perhaps it could somehow be clarified in the game which ships are affected by this? Currently it seems that a ship has to either have no weapon mounts or the civ grade hullmod in order to be classed as civilian... though now I am curious what happens if you fit them with a fighter bay, will that still make them eligible because at that point they are TECHNICALLY usable as carriers. Would you want to? Absolutely not. Still fun to think about though...
Yeah Ordinance Expertise is unchanged afaik?Exactly!!!!!!
though now I am curious what happens if you fit them with a fighter bay, will that still make them eligible because at that point they are TECHNICALLY usable as carriers.As phase ships, the Phantom and Revenant can't be fitted with a fighter bay.
One thing I noticed about the Proximity Charge Launcher: it does NOT auto-fire against enemy fighters. Even the AI doesn't actively shoot them at fighters. Sim a Legion with 5x PCL and no other weapons against the three SIM Condors, activate autopilot, and watch the Legion die helplessly while barely firing any charges. For a weapon tagged "Anti-Fighter" that is kind of disappointing.
Oh and I think the DPS of the Sarissa fighters is a bit overtuned, though that's just my first impression.
Personally, I think the problem with the Sarissa is the damage type more than anything else. Replace the light autocannons with light assault guns, and it's suddenly better at fending off fighters and less problematic in terms of supporting high-tech ships with kinetic damage.Oh and I think the DPS of the Sarissa fighters is a bit overtuned, though that's just my first impression.
Inclined to agree, yeah!
Personally, I think the problem with the Sarissa is the damage type more than anything else. Replace the light autocannons with light assault guns, and it's suddenly better at fending off fighters and less problematic in terms of supporting high-tech ships with kinetic damage.
Huh, really? I'd been under the impression its core design was anti-missile and anti-fighter; its description reads to me like that's the primary purpose, and the light autocannons are just kindof an extra bonus rather than the main point of the things.Personally, I think the problem with the Sarissa is the damage type more than anything else. Replace the light autocannons with light assault guns, and it's suddenly better at fending off fighters and less problematic in terms of supporting high-tech ships with kinetic damage.
Definitely true! But it's very much intended as a kinetic support fighter, that's its core design.
Huh, really? I'd been under the impression its core design was anti-missile and anti-fighter; its description reads to me like that's the primary purpose, and the light autocannons are just kindof an extra bonus rather than the main point of the things.Sarissa reminds me of the '80s options or bits in shmups like Gradius or R-Type.
Huh, really? I'd been under the impression its core design was anti-missile and anti-fighter; its description reads to me like that's the primary purpose, and the light autocannons are just kindof an extra bonus rather than the main point of the things.
I need help with something for the new update. while I was lurking around for some good map seeds I came across one that had a unique event happen when I started a survey of a tundra world. Had an old lady who was a descendant of a crew from the 1st AI war. to sum it up you had to report it to the hegemony and they get happy about it then the fun part begins. a short way from the tundra planet you came across a hidden cache surrounded by derelict ships but weirdly enough the cache was protected by Hegemony ships but are commanded by AI cores. After dealing with that I got into the cache and got something called the planet killer device. I do not know what it does and need help figuring out what to do with it. So far you can sell it for 500,000 credits but need to know if you can activate it.
Here is the seed if you want to try it out: AN-4336596315484825804
the planet is located in the Mam Star in the east of the Sector. It is near a black hole and blue Giant
Hi! Nope, this is a bug; fixed for the upcoming hot/warm fix.
Ballistic rangefinder's tooltip didn't light up the +100 range text for medium/large hybrid weapon when on ship with largest ballistic mount being medium. Test results indicates the bonus is still there, but tooltip was grey.
When the ship is overloaded or venting, the raise shields/phase cloak command will be buffered if it was issued within 0.2 seconds of the overload/vent ending
Found a rather interesting bug: S-modding hullmods that are built into the ship will also S-mod them to all other versions of the ship you have.
You do understand that the Invictus is literally not functioning correctly in RC8?Yes, of course fix the bug, but don't go hacking tons of armor off it and making it slower, and reducing its OP and...you get the point.
We can re-evaluate it when its armor is actually functioning as intended.
the Gigacannon with its 10 seconds cooldown makes it borderline useless
6-7 seconds, maybe. Tach lance is notoriously weak to shields.
An interesting thought about Heavy Armor - what if it increased ship armor on percentage beyond a certain point, the same way storage enhancements work? Give it a right percentage so that it only gets buffed to percentage if it's applied to a 2k+ armor brick (on capitals).
To be honest I'm fine with the "bugged" invictus, I feel like a ship that size and without a shield has to be that tanky or it quickly becomes useless. If "fixed", I'm afraid this ship will become irrelevant...
Yeah Invictus feels as it should. I now have one in my campaign and it is pretty much a low tech Paragon. Curious to see how will it fare after it's less stupidly hard to kill. Although campaign stats are really bonkers, I never even had remotely this much crew. And I'm running Efficiency Overhaul on every cruiser and up.I tried turning my very first Invictus into a campaing ship by not using the CH and building in the Drive Field and the Overhaul. I must say I was not disappointed, the extra crew logistics become more of a perk than a burden, the extra cargo capacity means I'm saving on a Colossus, and the ship fights well even without combat S-mods or PD fighters.
High tech ships are actually way cheaper to run, they burn less fuel and rarely take hull damage. I have 3 low tech ships in my fleet and oh boy when a fight isn't flawless I just cut through so much supplies.Actually looked stuff up and you're right! Can't believe I got bamboozled by flavor ^^ Whether that's intended I leave to the designer.
High tech ships are actually way cheaper to run, they burn less fuel and rarely take hull damage. I have 3 low tech ships in my fleet and oh boy when a fight isn't flawless I just cut through so much supplies.Actually looked stuff up and you're right! Can't believe I got bamboozled by flavor ^^ Whether that's intended I leave to the designer.
I tried turning my very first Invictus into a campaing ship by not using the CH and building in the Drive Field and the Overhaul. I must say I was not disappointed, the extra crew logistics become more of a perk than a burden, the extra cargo capacity means I'm saving on a Colossus, and the ship fights well even without combat S-mods or PD fighters.I have considered using Invictus as a colony ship and a marine transport for raids. Not at that stage yet.
Because of this undocumented feature, I leave all six large ballistic turrets empty since Lidar shuts them off when I need them.
In the game, for those who missed the post. It is vital information that should be in the game. It is odd considering other features tend to have detailed information on how they work, but Lidar shutting off ballistic weapons (but not missiles) is critical information that is not mentioned in the game but should be available somewhere, whether codex or on the hud with the other boosts.
In the game, for those who missed the post. It is vital information that should be in the game. It is odd considering other features tend to have detailed information on how they work, but Lidar shutting off ballistic weapons (but not missiles) is critical information that is not mentioned in the game but should be available somewhere, whether codex or on the hud with the other boosts.
In the game, for those who missed the post. It is vital information that should be in the game. It is odd considering other features tend to have detailed information on how they work, but Lidar shutting off ballistic weapons (but not missiles) is critical information that is not mentioned in the game but should be available somewhere, whether codex or on the hud with the other boosts.I have a feeling it says somewhere what it does but I just can't put my finger on where exactly.
No ITU but the ship still does receive a small range boost (hate that it doesn't say how much).25% - not enough for a relatively slow clumsy ship that competes with other battleships that get 60% or even cruisers with 40%. (Paragon gets 100%, but that is not much better than ballistics' 60%.)
Pegasus: front-facing missile hardpoints are now medium instead of largewat
Niiiice, thank you, this solved a ton of bugs. Cool changes all around, but didn't expect the Invictus nerf on top of the bug fix with armour. Guess we'll see how it goes since I have one in my fleet currently.
QuotePegasus: front-facing missile hardpoints are now medium instead of largewat
I mean I guess that works but feels real ugly/boring/annoying/some other adjectives, could've just as easily replaced FMR with a system that doesn't let it throw unlimited missiles at things.
I mean I guess that works but feels real ugly/boring/annoying/some other adjectives, could've just as easily replaced FMR with a system that doesn't let it throw unlimited missiles at things.
Gigacannon and Kinetic Blaster should no longer be found in weapon caches etc during exploration
I agree, and it feels wrong somehow that it has the exact same missile hardpoints as the other midline capital. Even though replacing FMR with a more standard system would be more homogenising in a way.
what? Why did Pegasus make this change?
It supposed to have 4 large missiles! It's the feature! Its characteristic! Why not just tweak the combat system or lower the basic attributes like flux, mobilty or shield effciency?
I see the system as more the defining feature/characteristic, since it's a more active thing you do, and one of those two things had to go.But, like I said, nerf its attributes is also a choice!
But, like I said, nerf its attributes is also a choice!
Hopefully, Pegasus will not lose max OP from the mount downgrade.
It is, but I don't think it can do very much by itself without dropping to absurd levels. If a ship can pump out like 20 Reapers - or 20 Hurricanes at range - the base stats just don't affect that very much. And I don't want to make it too slow; a slow capital without a mobility system is something I want to be sparing with.
Medium missles on hardpoints look ugly as hell. Couldn't it at least be the other way around, with large hardpoints and rear mediums?
One thing I might need to do is re-implement the Executor as a separate ship rather than a Pegasus skin; that's making some things unnecessarily complicated.[/quote[
(That said, 2 large forward-facing mounts + FMR is just a no-go, unfortunately. Not sure why I hadn't considered it during the initial design. And yeah, you can try to nerf FMR, but either you make in uninteresting, or it still gets + charges from Systems Expertise etc... I mean, an option, for sure, but with some downsides, too.)
If I were to try changing the Pegasus for more balance, I probably would have leaned on the DP lever rather than the missile lever. Making it 60 DP might have been worth trying, and clearly signals it as in the Radiant and Paragon tier. Radiants can basically go in and kill anything they want, and then get out, while under player control.
With the changes to Squalls and Hurricanes already in 0.96, a 60 DP price point might work (20% increase), although I'm going to need to do some testing. As noted by others, I don't think the AI is nearly as good as a player at using Fast Missile Racks, or at least ruthless as a player can be, so I think you're potentially nerfing the AI ship in order to reign in potential player uses.One thing I might need to do is re-implement the Executor as a separate ship rather than a Pegasus skin; that's making some things unnecessarily complicated.[/quote[
(That said, 2 large forward-facing mounts + FMR is just a no-go, unfortunately. Not sure why I hadn't considered it during the initial design. And yeah, you can try to nerf FMR, but either you make in uninteresting, or it still gets + charges from Systems Expertise etc... I mean, an option, for sure, but with some downsides, too.)
I think separating from the Executor is a good idea. If forward facing firepower is the problem (are we mostly talking unguided torpedoes here?), the alternative to forward mediums is angled larges. If it's OK on the back side, then rotating the forward missile rack outwards by 45 degrees. So instead of 0 degrees, 45 and -45 degrees, so all the missiles are in an X pattern. Limits you to the guided large missile options, or only a single unguided option at a time. This of course would only work by breaking the link to the Executor of course.
I think separating from the Executor is a good idea. If forward facing firepower is the problem (are we mostly talking unguided torpedoes here?), the alternative to forward mediums is angled larges. If it's OK on the back side, then rotating the forward missile rack outwards by 45 degrees.
...which should be enough as the big problem it seemed was just spamming enough hurricanes to overwhelm shields and then kill. So halving the volley should be enough to curb that.Not just hurricanes, but reapers too.
That might look pretty cool.I think separating from the Executor is a good idea. If forward facing firepower is the problem (are we mostly talking unguided torpedoes here?), the alternative to forward mediums is angled larges. If it's OK on the back side, then rotating the forward missile rack outwards by 45 degrees.
Or put the front larges on the back as well for a more "winged" look.
Alex sends a mail when he feels the current version reached a stable point, so after the initial hotfixes that fix crashes and other important bugs.
+1 for the Pegaus losing FMR, not because I prefer the 4 L missile version but because the AI basically can't use that system.Basically AI does not exploit the system as it should, whenever I swap to Pegasus in mid-fight, I see 2 or 3 charges and I proceed to use all the charges and launch MIRVs as quickly as possible and something dies.
Right, so that explains today's email given the large list of fixes in RC 9. But we may still get more hot-fixes before it gets lock down till 0.97?
I'll miss my 4 pilum LRM boat....it wasn't op at all with them , life is unfair.Pilum flood is ded ;_;
Oh, so a reversal on the Pegasus is not on the cards this patch?
Well, RIP Pegasus 2023-2023, you were too beautiful for this world :'( you will live on in my sig I guess.
By the way Alex, despite griping about this change I still absolutely love what you've done with the game in .96, literally every part of it - Hostile Activity, the new stories (especially getting closer to Diktat and Luddics!) and the new ships. Very awesome. Just wanted to say that again. Even having the Pegasus around is still nice even though I think it won't be a particularly interesting ship anymore.
One idea for Pegasus is a built-in hullmod to add +100% to medium missiles or a medium version of the Missile Autoloader.
Ships:
Pegasus: front-facing missile hardpoints are now medium instead of large
Executor is unaffected
My idea for an alternative Pegasus shipsystem (under the 4 large design) would be launching decoy flares (the ones fighters have that distract PD) at the selected target.
By the way, isn't Dragonfire amount in mediums are just too low for what it does? Or is it just me? Like, 7 Reapers against 2 Dragonfire?Yes. Typhoon has enough shots (except for FMR ships like nu-Pegasus) that I do not always put Missile Racks (although I will like the hullmod to have an endurance option). Also, Reapers are like an unguided mini-Sabot because they do enough hard flux damage to overload ships despite being HE. Meawhile, Dragonfire is partially dodgeable during its burst, and the damage while not too bad, is not very high for the shots it has.
Clearly the way to go with the pegasus is to bring back the 4 large missiles and give it HEF like its brother ;DWould not mind a system to buff the non-missile weapons to bring them up to snuff for a while.
Clearly the way to go with the pegasus is to bring back the 4 large missiles and give it HEF like its brother ;D
My idea for an alternative Pegasus shipsystem (under the 4 large design) would be launching decoy flares (the ones fighters have that distract PD) at the selected target.
Hmm. It'd probably be too short-range but as-is but jeez, that could be fun.
Clearly the way to go with the pegasus is to bring back the 4 large missiles and give it HEF like its brother ;D
What if it had a HEF that only affected DEM missiles?
I mean, we've already got a ship that literally teleports mines into place near a target. Teleporting a bunch of flares seems like it'd be easier to manage...My idea for an alternative Pegasus shipsystem (under the 4 large design) would be launching decoy flares (the ones fighters have that distract PD) at the selected target.
Hmm. It'd probably be too short-range but as-is but jeez, that could be fun.
I spent *a while* trying to come up with an interesting missile-related ship system, let me tell you! IIRC none of the ideas made, falling either into the "hilariously overpowered" or "just a more complicated way to spell fast missile racks" categories, with a smattering of "how would the AI even"... Not to say that it's not possible, but it's tricky - though in all honesty, I don't remember many details now.How about going the opposite way? make a hullmod built in the ship that makes all the missiles regenerating like pilums, but with only 1 charge and a HUGE cooldown, and a ship system that speeds up that cooldown time in exchange for flux?
I spent *a while* trying to come up with an interesting missile-related ship system, let me tell you! IIRC none of the ideas made, falling either into the "hilariously overpowered" or "just a more complicated way to spell fast missile racks" categories, with a smattering of "how would the AI even"... Not to say that it's not possible, but it's tricky - though in all honesty, I don't remember many details now.
How about an ''Anti-Flare'' as a system for the pegasus? As in you shoot a thing that sticks to a ship that makes the pegasus missiles follow it faster and better (and try to go for specifically that spot if possible)
One thing I might need to do is re-implement the Executor as a separate ship rather than a Pegasus skin; that's making some things unnecessarily complicated.Could you please elaborate on this? Because from a thematic perspective the current design does a lot of storytelling work, I think it would be a shame to see it go. I'd prefer SD getting another, more straightforward capital design. Sure, it might be a small faction, but one that plays a central role in the current setting, one that's really focused on warfare to boot. I'm sure at least SD fanboys would appreciate it. Would that be too much unnecessary work for you?
Something like that yeah, my idea was for the thing to be some sort of projectile shot from the ship rather than a zap like the [HYPER REDACTED] And that it only affects missiles shot by the pegasus itself. Now that i think about it shields might complicate things though.How about an ''Anti-Flare'' as a system for the pegasus? As in you shoot a thing that sticks to a ship that makes the pegasus missiles follow it faster and better (and try to go for specifically that spot if possible)
Kinda like the mote attractor on the [redacted]? That is a cool idea. Zap a target and missiles in flight just beeline to it at insane speed and tracking with better damage, as a bonus lets also make it ignore intervening ships as well.
Making a deal with a pirate king at a nearby station
Reaching an understanding with the Luddic Path reduces progress by 30 points; 100 points if the understanding is permanent
Increased immediate effect of gaining Kanta's Protection to 100 points (was: 50)
25% of base flux capacity when the ship sports a single Medium Missile or something is fine, but too low of a cost when the ship has 4 Large MissilesIt's less about the number of missiles, and more about the proportion of base flux to total flux. Pegasus has very high shield efficiency with a very low base flux pool. This means most of its flux ends up being from capacitors/hullmods/skills, so 25% base flux ends up being a rather small number.
Oh, good point, it is weird that the Pegasus has Paragon/Radiant -level shields! Why?So it can have a lot of shield HP without having much flux/dissipation for guns.
Oh, good point, it is weird that the Pegasus has Paragon/Radiant -level shields! Why?So it can have a lot of shield HP without having much flux/dissipation for guns.
Oh, good point, it is weird that the Pegasus has Paragon/Radiant -level shields! Why?
So, we now have 5 pages of sadness about the Pegasus from different posters and I don't think there has been a single post expressing satisfaction with the change. Has anybody found that they like it?
I respectfully disagree. The AI is really bad at using FMR. With a weak shield this ship would fall fast against Ordos under AI control.Or enemy Pegasus dying to player's fleet after a prompt Eliminate order. Pegasus is easier to kill than other battleships. It has relatively weak firepower when the ship does not use all the missiles.
a better identity in keeping with the original design would be a relatively vulnerable missile battleship with great offensive potential.That's a Conquest, innit?
Simply cut FMR to one charge as multiple people suggested already. It's the most obvious solution to excessive burst and it would work. Why overcomplicate things?Only if applied to capitals, if the system must be different among sizes like 3/3/2/1. Do not want another Damper Field incident where it guts the original users of the system (Vigilance, Condor, and Venture). Even then, that might push people to get Systems Expertise on officers if they truly do not use FMR enough to matter.
Yes, I meant changing the system for Pegasus only. It could get a different name too if needed, and also be changed to a purely cooldown-based one, so SysExp doesn't grant an extra use.Simply cut FMR to one charge as multiple people suggested already. It's the most obvious solution to excessive burst and it would work. Why overcomplicate things?Only if applied to capitals. Do not want another Damper Field incident where it guts the original users of the system (Vigilance, Condor, and Venture).
It's less about the number of missiles, and more about the proportion of base flux to total flux. Pegasus has very high shield efficiency with a very low base flux pool. This means most of its flux ends up being from capacitors/hullmods/skills, so 25% base flux ends up being a rather small number.
Now, Conquest is a better battleship than Pegasus. Conquest in recent releases already blurred the line between battlecruiser and battleship.
Pegasus should live up to the name of battleship, not just firepower (whether missiles or big guns) but durability too.
Simply cut FMR to one charge as multiple people suggested already. It's the most obvious solution to excessive burst and it would work. Why overcomplicate things?
Yes, I meant changing the system for Pegasus only. It could get a different name too if needed, and also be changed to a purely cooldown-based one, so SysExp doesn't grant an extra use.Just make it a different system without charges.
For the record I would be happy with both making its shield 1.0 or 1.2 efficiency and armor 1200 or 1000 and switching the system to Active Flare Launcher. 4x Large missile would still make it interesting and unique.
Conquest can support more firepower (Pegasus has smaller guns and weak dissipation) and could stand up to stock classic Onslaught of similar skill power (like unskilled vs. unskilled) limited to SIM-like loadouts that was used for so long. Pegasus without super missiles does not have battleship firepower, given the mount types and dissipation. Granted, this is not the same as fighting Onslaught with better-than-SIM loadout and maybe better skills.Now, Conquest is a better battleship than Pegasus. Conquest in recent releases already blurred the line between battlecruiser and battleship.
Nah Conquest is most likely much easier to kill than Pegasus. Its shields are much worse, along with armor and hull befitting a battlecruiser.
and it has better armor/hull than every non-Automated ship except the Onslaught, Legion, Invictus, and the Paragon (which has same armor but 1k more hull)I would compare Pegasus to Onslaught and Paragon (them being called battleships), maybe Legion too (being the Galactica expy). Pegasus does not have Onslaught's/Legion's armor or Paragon's shields. When I send my fleet after Pegasus, it dies faster than Onslaught since Pegasus has less armor, and firepower without the missiles is much less scary (and enemy Pegasus uses DEMs, being a League ship). I do not know how it compares to Paragon. (I fought one this release, but do not remember exactly how the fight went.) Attacking Pegasus feels a bit like attacking an Atlas II.
I can tell you having played both ships extensively I would pick the Conquest over the Pegasus as it is now and I would pick the Pegasus over the Conquest if the Pegasus had the above-mentioned defensive attributes and Active Flare Launcher, but its old missile layout.¿Por qué no los dos? *Cue Salamancans cheering*
One thing I might need to do is re-implement the Executor as a separate ship rather than a Pegasus skin; that's making some things unnecessarily complicated.Could you please elaborate on this? Because from a thematic perspective the current design does a lot of storytelling work, I think it would be a shame to see it go.
The point is, a better balance lever would be to reduce its ridiculous defensive potential rather than remove its identity and make it a slow worse Conquest. In its current state it can tank hits from a Radiant; a better identity in keeping with the original design would be a relatively vulnerable missile battleship with great offensive potential.
To illustrate just how good the shield is, my anti-Ordo build had 25k flux capacity with a .4 efficiency shield on the Pegasus with the appropriate hullmods and officer. And that wasn't even using all caps or all available shield bonuses, just hardened shields, 30 caps and Field Modulation. That is insanely good defense for any ship, let alone a supposed missile ship. The shield has almost full coverage, too.
The AI is really bad at using FMR.
Thank you for all the ideas re: missiles/Pegasus/and so on!The point is, a better balance lever would be to reduce its ridiculous defensive potential rather than remove its identity and make it a slow worse Conquest. In its current state it can tank hits from a Radiant; a better identity in keeping with the original design would be a relatively vulnerable missile battleship with great offensive potential.
To illustrate just how good the shield is, my anti-Ordo build had 25k flux capacity with a .4 efficiency shield on the Pegasus with the appropriate hullmods and officer. And that wasn't even using all caps or all available shield bonuses, just hardened shields, 30 caps and Field Modulation. That is insanely good defense for any ship, let alone a supposed missile ship. The shield has almost full coverage, too.
Hmm. How much does its tankiness matter if it's putting out overwhelming missile fire? I guess it matters some, but e.g. it has no immediate effect on something like dumping out 20 Hurricanes from beyond engagement range; that still seems... off.
The result is quite different as the Brilliants and Nova-class drone battlecruisers drive in and crush this fleet, ending in a full defeat.
This is an expected result based on using this ship a lot. The tankiness does matter.
Personally, I think you should return the Pegasus to the way it was, and buff the Point Defense skill and Integrated Point Defense hullmod. At least double their effectiveness against missiles. That way, there will be a modest percentage of ships out there that are actually very good at intercepting missiles, and missile spam won't always be the answer.Doubling? That's bold. It might end up with missiles becoming useless because none of then can ever get close.
The result is quite different as the Brilliants and Nova-class drone battlecruisers drive in and crush this fleet, ending in a full defeat.
This is an expected result based on using this ship a lot. The tankiness does matter.
I mean, that makes sense! I think you'd expect it to in a nearly mono-fleet. But with something else to do the tanking... still, hmm.
Thanks! So can we have 4 Large Missiles back now? ;D
We used to have +100% PD skill. It was nerfed to 50%.Personally, I think you should return the Pegasus to the way it was, and buff the Point Defense skill and Integrated Point Defense hullmod. At least double their effectiveness against missiles. That way, there will be a modest percentage of ships out there that are actually very good at intercepting missiles, and missile spam won't always be the answer.Doubling? That's bold. It might end up with missiles becoming useless because none of then can ever get close.
Huh. So, how it was like before?We used to have +100% PD skill. It was nerfed to 50%.Personally, I think you should return the Pegasus to the way it was, and buff the Point Defense skill and Integrated Point Defense hullmod. At least double their effectiveness against missiles. That way, there will be a modest percentage of ships out there that are actually very good at intercepting missiles, and missile spam won't always be the answer.Doubling? That's bold. It might end up with missiles becoming useless because none of then can ever get close.
Yeah, I was just being cheeky, I'm fine with Alex keeping it as it is too and taking time to figure it out. It's a wonderful game either way and I'll reiterate that despite this Pegasus remembrance, Alex, you are doing a more than wonderful job and I would rate my satisfaction as 100%, I just liked the ship.Thanks! So can we have 4 Large Missiles back now? ;D
IF Pegasus gets four large missiles back I'd expect it to be a 0.97 thing now.
We used to have +100% PD skill. It was nerfed to 50%.Personally, I think you should return the Pegasus to the way it was, and buff the Point Defense skill and Integrated Point Defense hullmod. At least double their effectiveness against missiles. That way, there will be a modest percentage of ships out there that are actually very good at intercepting missiles, and missile spam won't always be the answer.Doubling? That's bold. It might end up with missiles becoming useless because none of then can ever get close.
Huh. So, how it was like before?You put sabots in your missile slots.
Huh. So, how it was like before?I do not remember well enough why it was changed. I think it was during early 0.9a when skills were mutually exclusive and wrapped around after getting a capstone.
I see, thank you for the answer. Interesting to see the Executor develop from an advanced variant into an individual hull behind the scenes when overtly story-wise it's a tweaked copy posing as it's own thing.Could you please elaborate on this? Because from a thematic perspective the current design does a lot of storytelling work, I think it would be a shame to see it go.This change would be an entirely behind-the-scenes implementation detail that would just make tweaking certain numbers easier.
Funny you say that, because the Hurricane was nerfed specifically since the Pegasus was introduced.
(100% unrelated, btw. Literally 100%. Edit: unless I'm ... misremembering very badly? I recall tweaking the Squall because I felt like the Pegasus made it clear that the Squall had an issue of being too good of a finisher - not just on the Pegasus, but overall - but the Hurricane I seem to remember tweaking before the Pegasus existed, and it was intended as not a nerf, but rather a tradeoff of reducing the warhead count but also reducing its reliance on ECCM.)I thought you wrote something like that.
Hurricane MIRV was not the only problematic missile with Pegasus. Cyclone Reaper on a fast enough Pegasus (from Combat skills) can drive up to a large target and spam Cyclones four at a time (two per launcher). And a pilot with 3x missiles has 60 of them per launcher.
At least you have to drive up to them, aim your large hard point launcher to fire, then awkwardly swing around to the other launcher and fire again. If you can do that reliably without risking withering enemy fire, then I think you're one hell of a marksman. And forget about hitting mobile targets at a safe range, they'll just move. It's not exactly fast moving, even with MS and ECCM.There is a range where torpedoes (and heavy energy weapons on Executor) will converge. With three FMR charges, Pegasus can dump up to 16 torpedoes in quick succession and aimed at desired targets in front of Pegasus without much difficulty. In the sim, I could snuff two SIM Onslaughts in a few seconds. If MIRV x8 is deadly enough, Reaper x16 is even more damage. Yes, Reapers are not as safe, but it could be necessary if player needs more firepower. I have run out of MIRVs in fights caused by excessive FMR use.
Funny you say that, because the Hurricane was nerfed specifically since the Pegasus was introduced. Now I find them meh, they were strong on one ship in total, now that ship is no more. So you can see the problem was Pegasus with FMR, not Hurricane. We can't keep nerfing homing miasiles just so one ship isn't insanely strong.Squall says she totally agree.
Agreement with pirate king from nearby hidden base automatically cease effects as soon as hostile activity progress reached 0, not sure if intended. However, I still wish to keep the agreement since shipment disruptions still occur from time to time even with 0 hostile progress, I'd rather profit 10% less in alternative to unreliable shipping. The dialog with the king is also kinda bugged when progress is 0, it keeps cycling dialog of "We have business to discuss".@Alex can we get any response to this please? Thanks a lot!
Yeah - I wonder if weaker defenses can compensate for the Cyclone issue or not.
A sim test, but still thought provoking. Some excellent points.
A clear, detailed experiment with pictures. (x2)
Currently doesn't really feel like much of a tradeoff, slight nerf maybe. But the way those two are connected in my head is because I remember a thread where people were scared of the 4 large missile ship and started theorycrafting builds. That's where you came in and said how the Hurricane got reduced burst size but better tracking. I don't know in which thread this happened, but it was for sure something related to missile spam.Funny you say that, because the Hurricane was nerfed specifically since the Pegasus was introduced.
(100% unrelated, btw. Literally 100%. Edit: unless I'm ... misremembering very badly? I recall tweaking the Squall because I felt like the Pegasus made it clear that the Squall had an issue of being too good of a finisher - not just on the Pegasus, but overall - but the Hurricane I seem to remember tweaking before the Pegasus existed, and it was intended as not a nerf, but rather a tradeoff of reducing the warhead count but also reducing its reliance on ECCM.)
Currently doesn't really feel like much of a tradeoff, slight nerf maybe.
My experience with Cyclone is that you don't use it, because Hammer Barrage has higher DPS and by the time you run out of ammo, the enemy runs out of ships.Also because Hammers are more reliable when Reapers out-of-the-box are easier to intercept and until this release were slow to accelerate. Reaper needs ECCM for more speed and Missile Spec for more durability (and more shots).
Everyone here realises Venture, a 14 DP civilian cruiser, can launch 4 reapers at once and reload with FMR? How many of you have abused this incredibly overpowered strategy over the decade it has been in the game?Not enough ammo. Also, Venture would need to be the flagship to use it like this, and I think someone would want a faster or stronger ship instead. Only one ship can be the flagship.
I do not remember posting this exact quote. Used search to find it but came up empty.A sim test, but still thought provoking. Some excellent points.
Not enough ammo.
I have run out of MIRVs, even with 30 from Missile Spec (stolen from an officer). Only large Reapers have as many shots as MIRVs (Cyclone launches twice as many at once). Smaller Reapers have less than MIRVs and would probably run out too fast, and they do not shoot two at a time for maximum alpha damage.Not enough ammo.
All of your(royal your) proposed extreme uses of Pegasus with FMR also would chew through ammo quickly.
What kind of a situation do you have in mind?
This is a ship that still has only 50 top speed and is a capital so is a large target and can't mount SO. Currently, it can fly up to a station and tank the damage, but with a Conquest's shields that would no longer be realistic. The Conquest can't despite better mobility and better flux stats. (It can fight stations but needs to use its mobility and range or needs support).
If you put unstable injector on it, you will lose long range firepower, which is a very significant tradeoff if it no longer has the defenses for close quarters combat that it does now. If it is more vulnerable to flanking and enemy fire then it is unrealistic to just fly it into an enemy fleet, too.
While doing early bounties (70-90K) I've noticed that very frequently (half the time and its clearly random) the resulting debris is of very low density. Like 0.2-0.3. Meaning that even with salvaging skill and two rigs I'm getting almost no resources. While in AI on AI fights I've never saw those low density debris fields. Is it a bug?
So what's the point of those bounties in current version?
Currently doesn't really feel like much of a tradeoff, slight nerf maybe. But the way those two are connected in my head is because I remember a thread where people were scared of the 4 large missile ship and started theorycrafting builds. That's where you came in and said how the Hurricane got reduced burst size but better tracking. I don't know in which thread this happened, but it was for sure something related to missile spam.
It looks like another hotfix is pretty likely, by the way, and I'd love to get another Pegasus adjustment into it. I tried improving the FMR AI - and did - but mostly what it does with a 2-large-slot-Pegasus is make it use the ammo faster; it's not as good as I thought it'd be.
I don't want to give it a really bad shield efficiency, though - it's still a battleship, and that starts to feel more like a battlecruiser philosophy or mobility and firepower rather than defenses and firepower. Right now I was thinking something like:
1) Back to 4 large missile slots
2) Remove the special ship flag that lets its missile slots turn (in retrospect, that's a no-brainer to rein in any Cyclone concerns, the ship *has a special flag* that makes these an issue in the first place)
3) Shield efficiency to 0.8, the midline standard (Not sure if the Executor should be affected here, too or not - my impression is that the Executor is in a good place right now)
4) Movement speed to 35 (the Executor keeps it 50 and gets larger engine glows)
5) Possibly DP to 60; not sure if that's needed or not
At least, that's what I'm thinking at the moment. Could very well change, I'm not settled on any of it.
Well, one thing I wouldn't want is to have Pegasus at 60 DP. I think it's cool that we have a battleship at almost every DP "tier"(35/40/45/50/60 so far)
Also, the missile mounts rotate? Wat
Sounds great! I would love to have the Pegasus back with those stats, including at 60 DP. It seems that lowering the top speed will also play into the vulnerability I mentioned without lowering shield efficiency, since essentially if you spend more time on the approach to target you are taking more incoming fire in the process.
You are the best <3
1) Back to 4 large missile slots
2) Remove the special ship flag that lets its missile slots turn (in retrospect, that's a no-brainer to rein in any Cyclone concerns, the ship *has a special flag* that makes these an issue in the first place)
3) Shield efficiency to 0.8, the midline standard (Not sure if the Executor should be affected here, too or not - my impression is that the Executor is in a good place right now)
4) Movement speed to 35 (the Executor keeps it 50 and gets larger engine glows)
5) Possibly DP to 60; not sure if that's needed or not
Also, was 10,000 flux off the Invictus really necessary? Wouldn't 5,000 been a more...reasonable cut to start with?
1) Back to 4 large missile slots
2) Remove the special ship flag that lets its missile slots turn (in retrospect, that's a no-brainer to rein in any Cyclone concerns, the ship *has a special flag* that makes these an issue in the first place)
3) Shield efficiency to 0.8, the midline standard (Not sure if the Executor should be affected here, too or not - my impression is that the Executor is in a good place right now)
4) Movement speed to 35 (the Executor keeps it 50 and gets larger engine glows)
5) Possibly DP to 60; not sure if that's needed or not
At least, that's what I'm thinking at the moment. Could very well change, I'm not settled on any of it.
While doing early bounties (70-90K) I've noticed that very frequently (half the time and its clearly random) the resulting debris is of very low density. Like 0.2-0.3. Meaning that even with salvaging skill and two rigs I'm getting almost no resources. While in AI on AI fights I've never saw those low density debris fields. Is it a bug?
Not 100% sure, but debris density does depend on the amount of ships destroyed.
Executor larger engine glows, I'm all for this oh yes.Not a bad idea, but the Executor definitely doesn't need a nerf (one that gives it nothing back). On a scale of 1 to 10 where 5 is perfectly balanced, Executor is on a comfortable 4 or 4.5. After all it costs 50 DP and Onslaught is 40.
I think the executor could be nerfed to 0.8 shield efficiency, but be given a higher flux capacity as a result. This way weapons like autopulse fit better on it, at the cost of capacitors being less effective use of OP on the executor. Overall I think it would be a nerf, and the executor seems good enough to be able to 'afford' a nice little nerf. I agree that the executor really should keep its current speed though, and that the executor is largely in a good place. It's probably imbalanced in that it has access to HEF on 2 large energies which the player can abuse like nuts, but that never stopped the Doom from staying in its current form despite being exceptionally powerful in player hands, right? Hehe.
EDIT: Previous comment was removed and now I look dumb.
I do not remember posting this exact quote. Used search to find it but came up empty.A sim test, but still thought provoking. Some excellent points.
My experience with Cyclone is that you don't use it, because Hammer Barrage has higher DPS and by the time you run out of ammo, the enemy runs out of ships.Also because Hammers are more reliable when Reapers out-of-the-box are easier to intercept and until this release were slow to accelerate. Reaper needs ECCM for more speed and Missile Spec for more durability (and more shots).
Did not help there are too many ships with angled mounts that making using Hammers and Reapers difficult, and Gryphon is too fragile. Only Champion is tanky enough and has the proper mount to use it, but even it needs mobility skills to get close to the enemy easily enough.
Is anyone using the Hephaestus Assault Gun on anything to good effect? Anything at all?Yes.
Is anyone using the Hephaestus Assault Gun on anything to good effect? Anything at all?i tried on dominator and onslaught, still not a good gun imo
Well, one thing I wouldn't want is to have Pegasus at 60 DP. I think it's cool that we have a battleship at almost every DP "tier"(35/40/45/50/60 so far)
Also, the missile mounts rotate? Wat
Missile hardpoints normally don't, but on the Pegasus they do, thanks to a MISSILE_HARDPOINTS_ROTATE flag in the csv. Which is specifically so that dumbfire missiles/torpedoes are more usable there, which is kind of a problem, so, uh. Very much self-inflicted.Sounds great! I would love to have the Pegasus back with those stats, including at 60 DP. It seems that lowering the top speed will also play into the vulnerability I mentioned without lowering shield efficiency, since essentially if you spend more time on the approach to target you are taking more incoming fire in the process.
You are the best <3
Glad nothing jumps out as being too "off" there! I'd like to avoid making it 60 dp if possible - it doesn't feel like that sort of ship to me, but, yeah. Alright. Let's see how this goes!
Thank you everyone for your feedback!Oh wow that was quick! :D I haven't gotten my hands on either the pegasus or the executor but those sound like nice changes. Not sure if the executor needs a nerf as for the most part i have heard it is fine. As for the DP increase of the pegasus i dunno what to feel about it (Obviously i would prefer for not have the DP cost up) but if that and the other nerfs are price it has to be paid for it for it getting the four large missiles back i am more than happy to take the deal to be honest.What kind of a situation do you have in mind?
This is a ship that still has only 50 top speed and is a capital so is a large target and can't mount SO. Currently, it can fly up to a station and tank the damage, but with a Conquest's shields that would no longer be realistic. The Conquest can't despite better mobility and better flux stats. (It can fight stations but needs to use its mobility and range or needs support).
If you put unstable injector on it, you will lose long range firepower, which is a very significant tradeoff if it no longer has the defenses for close quarters combat that it does now. If it is more vulnerable to flanking and enemy fire then it is unrealistic to just fly it into an enemy fleet, too.
I was thinking something along the lines of driving up to enemy battleships - while there's combat going on all around, more or less - and just deleting them one at a time. Or cruisers if they get in the way; I'm not picky :) It seems like it'd have enough mobility for that.
Thank you for doing all the tests, btw! I really appreciate it.
It looks like another hotfix is pretty likely, by the way, and I'd love to get another Pegasus adjustment into it. I tried improving the FMR AI - and did - but mostly what it does with a 2-large-slot-Pegasus is make it use the ammo faster; it's not as good as I thought it'd be.
I don't want to give it a really bad shield efficiency, though - it's still a battleship, and that starts to feel more like a battlecruiser philosophy or mobility and firepower rather than defenses and firepower. Right now I was thinking something like:
1) Back to 4 large missile slots
2) Remove the special ship flag that lets its missile slots turn (in retrospect, that's a no-brainer to rein in any Cyclone concerns, the ship *has a special flag* that makes these an issue in the first place)
3) Shield efficiency to 0.8, the midline standard (Not sure if the Executor should be affected here, too or not - my impression is that the Executor is in a good place right now)
4) Movement speed to 35 (the Executor keeps it 50 and gets larger engine glows)
5) Possibly DP to 60; not sure if that's needed or not
At least, that's what I'm thinking at the moment. Could very well change, I'm not settled on any of it.While doing early bounties (70-90K) I've noticed that very frequently (half the time and its clearly random) the resulting debris is of very low density. Like 0.2-0.3. Meaning that even with salvaging skill and two rigs I'm getting almost no resources. While in AI on AI fights I've never saw those low density debris fields. Is it a bug?
Not 100% sure, but debris density does depend on the amount of ships destroyed.So what's the point of those bounties in current version?
Those tend to show up in otherwise interesting (and profitable) systems, so it's good to think of them as signposts for where good salvage can be found.Currently doesn't really feel like much of a tradeoff, slight nerf maybe. But the way those two are connected in my head is because I remember a thread where people were scared of the 4 large missile ship and started theorycrafting builds. That's where you came in and said how the Hurricane got reduced burst size but better tracking. I don't know in which thread this happened, but it was for sure something related to missile spam.
Perhaps the submunitions could stand to be a bit more maneuverable, then. The idea being to increase its floor and reduce its ceiling so that ECCM is not almost a straight up requirement.
Ahhh, this rings a bell, I remember! The Hurricane was changed before that point and not because of the Pegasus, but yeah, I can see how this would make it connected in your mind.
Is anyone using the Hephaestus Assault Gun on anything to good effect? Anything at all?Dominator and Invictus really like it.
I think the problem with the executor is not that is weak or strong, but the extremely underwhelming flux dissipation makes it unfun to build.
Found a cryoblaster? "oh wow I can use it on the executor to take advantage of the extra range from the hullmod! how cool is tha....that's 500 flux, about half of the ship's entire vents"
So highly flux efficient beams here we go...
The gigacannons seems to be made for this ship, however the 10 seconds refire makes for a waste of large energy mounts, pushing us towards either tachyon or HIL.
Everything other than lasers is excruciatingly bad. I guess that's by design but a tiny bit of leeway wouldn't hurt imho...enough to maybe equip a slot or two with something else rather than the most flux efficient weapon in that category.
Is anyone using the Hephaestus Assault Gun on anything to good effect? Anything at all?I've been using one on a Retribution with a pair of Mk9s in the other Large Ballistics, and it works quite well at chewing up pirates (which I end up fighting at least as often as everyone else). Definitely not an all-comers fit because it's still horrendous against heavy armor, but the HAG doesn't let up when my flux is near maximum and the Orion Device lets me flag down the faster and more fragile ships the the gun seems to be meant to engage. Still wouldn't put one on anything I expect to primarily engage cruisers or capitals though.
Thank you everyone for your feedback!The changes feel right to me. Makes it about on par with the Paragon and Invictus while having a completely different identity. Gives each tech level a powerful but slow core ship for 60DP. I had not realized that the missile slots need a special flag to turn, removing that would curb the torpedo spam kills. If it's still a little too OP then reducing FMR charges would finish bringing it in line.What kind of a situation do you have in mind?
This is a ship that still has only 50 top speed and is a capital so is a large target and can't mount SO. Currently, it can fly up to a station and tank the damage, but with a Conquest's shields that would no longer be realistic. The Conquest can't despite better mobility and better flux stats. (It can fight stations but needs to use its mobility and range or needs support).
If you put unstable injector on it, you will lose long range firepower, which is a very significant tradeoff if it no longer has the defenses for close quarters combat that it does now. If it is more vulnerable to flanking and enemy fire then it is unrealistic to just fly it into an enemy fleet, too.
I was thinking something along the lines of driving up to enemy battleships - while there's combat going on all around, more or less - and just deleting them one at a time. Or cruisers if they get in the way; I'm not picky :) It seems like it'd have enough mobility for that.
Thank you for doing all the tests, btw! I really appreciate it.
It looks like another hotfix is pretty likely, by the way, and I'd love to get another Pegasus adjustment into it. I tried improving the FMR AI - and did - but mostly what it does with a 2-large-slot-Pegasus is make it use the ammo faster; it's not as good as I thought it'd be.
I don't want to give it a really bad shield efficiency, though - it's still a battleship, and that starts to feel more like a battlecruiser philosophy or mobility and firepower rather than defenses and firepower. Right now I was thinking something like:
1) Back to 4 large missile slots
2) Remove the special ship flag that lets its missile slots turn (in retrospect, that's a no-brainer to rein in any Cyclone concerns, the ship *has a special flag* that makes these an issue in the first place)
3) Shield efficiency to 0.8, the midline standard (Not sure if the Executor should be affected here, too or not - my impression is that the Executor is in a good place right now)
4) Movement speed to 35 (the Executor keeps it 50 and gets larger engine glows)
5) Possibly DP to 60; not sure if that's needed or not
At least, that's what I'm thinking at the moment. Could very well change, I'm not settled on any of it.
I think the problem of Pegasus is caused by its system. 4 large missile slots can deal too much effective (long range, low flux cost and high accuracy) damage in a short duration combined with Fast Missile Racks. Maybe change the Pegasus's system is also a method? Maneuvering Jets or Missile Autoforge can be suitable for Pegasus but not as strong as Fast Racks, or design a new System like the High Energy Focus for missile Weapons? It is unfair to Onslaught class if other battleships (not battle cruisers) are all 60dp :-\, if you want to make a larger difference between BC and BB, please don't forget to buff Onslaught and raise its dp (50 or 55?). I am a fan of Onslaught and feel sad to see one of my favorite ships becomes less and less powerful through updates of the game when fighting with other battleships (including drone battleships).Thank you everyone for your feedback!The changes feel right to me. Makes it about on par with the Paragon and Invictus while having a completely different identity. Gives each tech level a powerful but slow core ship for 60DP. I had not realized that the missile slots need a special flag to turn, removing that would curb the torpedo spam kills. If it's still a little too OP then reducing FMR charges would finish bringing it in line.What kind of a situation do you have in mind?
This is a ship that still has only 50 top speed and is a capital so is a large target and can't mount SO. Currently, it can fly up to a station and tank the damage, but with a Conquest's shields that would no longer be realistic. The Conquest can't despite better mobility and better flux stats. (It can fight stations but needs to use its mobility and range or needs support).
If you put unstable injector on it, you will lose long range firepower, which is a very significant tradeoff if it no longer has the defenses for close quarters combat that it does now. If it is more vulnerable to flanking and enemy fire then it is unrealistic to just fly it into an enemy fleet, too.
I was thinking something along the lines of driving up to enemy battleships - while there's combat going on all around, more or less - and just deleting them one at a time. Or cruisers if they get in the way; I'm not picky :) It seems like it'd have enough mobility for that.
Thank you for doing all the tests, btw! I really appreciate it.
It looks like another hotfix is pretty likely, by the way, and I'd love to get another Pegasus adjustment into it. I tried improving the FMR AI - and did - but mostly what it does with a 2-large-slot-Pegasus is make it use the ammo faster; it's not as good as I thought it'd be.
I don't want to give it a really bad shield efficiency, though - it's still a battleship, and that starts to feel more like a battlecruiser philosophy or mobility and firepower rather than defenses and firepower. Right now I was thinking something like:
1) Back to 4 large missile slots
2) Remove the special ship flag that lets its missile slots turn (in retrospect, that's a no-brainer to rein in any Cyclone concerns, the ship *has a special flag* that makes these an issue in the first place)
3) Shield efficiency to 0.8, the midline standard (Not sure if the Executor should be affected here, too or not - my impression is that the Executor is in a good place right now)
4) Movement speed to 35 (the Executor keeps it 50 and gets larger engine glows)
5) Possibly DP to 60; not sure if that's needed or not
At least, that's what I'm thinking at the moment. Could very well change, I'm not settled on any of it.
Keeping the executor as is (maybe add dissipation) sounds good and could be explained as the FMR system with 4 large missiles taking up huge space that when removed, leaves room for bigger engines, bigger shield generator, and everything else.
I just got my hands on an executor. I am probably going to be executed for doing thisAll Mining Blasters is a meme, but 4 Mining Blaster + 2 Autopulse Executor with S-mod Expanded Mags, some kinetic ballistics, and Squalls or Locusts is a very dangerous capital and not a meme build at all.but i have just put mining blasters on all the medium ballistic and hybrid slots because i thought it was funny
I think the problem of Pegasus is caused by its system. 4 large missile slots can deal too much effective (long range, low flux cost and high accuracy) damage in a short duration combined with Fast Missile Racks. Maybe change the Pegasus's system is also a method? Maneuvering Jets or Missile Autoforge can be suitable for Pegasus but not as strong as Fast Racks, or design a new System like the High Energy Focus for missile Weapons? It is unfair to Onslaught class if other battleships (not battle cruisers) are all 60dp :-\, if you want to make a larger difference between BC and BB, please don't forget to buff Onslaught and raise its dp (50 or 55?). I am a fan of Onslaught and feel sad to see one of my favorite ships becomes less and less powerful through updates of the game when fighting with other battleships (including drone battleships).
The Onslaught is still immensely powerful for 40DP and arguably the best playership in the game, even with Pegasus and even though I am a Conquest and Pegasus fan.
The Onslaught is still powerful enough for a 40 DP battleship. As you have mentioned, Onslaught is a golden standard for capital ships. I just want to express that it may be not good to add so many 60DP battleships (Paragon, Invictus, Radiant and the future Pegasus) to the game if the golden standard Onslaught is only 40 DP. I am more willing to see most battleships have 35 to 50 DP with some special ships having higher (drone battleships or boss ships like Ziggurat) or lower (pirate or luddic path's battleships) DP.
I think the problem of Pegasus is caused by its system. 4 large missile slots can deal too much effective (long range, low flux cost and high accuracy) damage in a short duration combined with Fast Missile Racks. Maybe change the Pegasus's system is also a method? Maneuvering Jets or Missile Autoforge can be suitable for Pegasus but not as strong as Fast Racks, or design a new System like the High Energy Focus for missile Weapons? It is unfair to Onslaught class if other battleships (not battle cruisers) are all 60dp :-\, if you want to make a larger difference between BC and BB, please don't forget to buff Onslaught and raise its dp (50 or 55?). I am a fan of Onslaught and feel sad to see one of my favorite ships becomes less and less powerful through updates of the game when fighting with other battleships (including drone battleships).
The Onslaught is still immensely powerful for 40DP and arguably the best playership in the game, even with Pegasus and even though I am a Conquest and Pegasus fan. You should check out the systematic testing done by user Vanshilar. Even though he optimizes his fleet carefully and searches for the best combinations using exacting tools to analyze damage output his playership Onslaught does a significant chunk of the total damage, for example one of his battle reports had his Onslaught XIV doing 34% of the damage done by his fleet and the rest of his fleet was 4 Conquests and 2 Gryphons with optimized layouts.
The Onslaught is simply put incredibly strong and will still be the golden standard for capital ships that others can only hope to measure up to.
That said if it is kept at 50 DP I think the Pegasus will be very strong, too. Which is good. Most capitals in this game are very strong ships and those that aren't (Prometheus MkII, Atlas MkII, Astral, arguably Odyssey) see very little play as a result.
Yeah, under AI control the Conquest was strongest capital last version according to Vanshilar, assuming player fields an Onslaught and does the tanking; whether it is still so in .96 remains to be seen because what made Conquest so strong was double Squall combined with large ballistics and the former were significantly (and deservedly imho) nerfed.
The Squalls were actually buffed in their anti-shield role, the damage increasing from 250 kinetic to 100+200 kinetic.
35 points for mine spawner which cant even get into position without being destroyed?
And that's even more unrealistic since you'll never have a Doom without any skills soloing another cruiser.Unskilled vs. unskilled in the SIM is handy to check what NPC ships can do. If Doom with a straightforward loadout cannot kill a cheaper cruiser (that is not overpowered) by itself the majority of the time, then it is too weak.
I just want to point out that while there are many good flagship capitals, when it comes to AI you're basically only looking at the Conquest 1st and Odyssey distant 2nd. For many different reasons Onsluaght, Legion, Retribution, Invictus and Astral are all poor(or at least "nowhere near as good as they should be") in AI hands.Onslaught was already great under AI control, something is wrong with your setup.
Yeah, under AI control the Conquest was strongest capital last version according to VanshilarThis is a pet peeve of mine, actual description would be "Strongest judged by a single, very narrow metric. Also not counting battles where something gets blown up ofc"
the Conquest was included as the AI capital ship in the strongest fleets that could fight multiple Remnant Ordos without losing ships, under the assumption that the player pilots an Onslaught in a tanking role and directs the combat, and where strength is measured by killing speed in victorious combat.Yeah, +once speed is not the only metric, or you don't have a player tank things also change a lot.
the Conquest was included as the AI capital ship in the strongest fleets that could fight multiple Remnant Ordos without losing ships, under the assumption that the player pilots an Onslaught in a tanking role and directs the combat, and where strength is measured by killing speed in victorious combat.+once speed is not the only metric, or you don't have a player tank things also change a lot.
Best case speed to kill middle-high strength remnant stacks does show something, but without the full context it leads to "AI conquest best, Onslaught bad" posts like the one above you.
Onslaught was already great under AI control, something is wrong with your setup.
The entire test can be thrown out once you allow mixed fleets with frigate hunters to help out the slow capitals/cruisers, or if you care about not retrying the same battle 20 times.
@Alex I re-ran the tests for you using the same saves, same layouts, identical everything vs. the same Ordo and Jangala station, but setting shield efficiency to 0.8, top speed to 35 and removing the missile hardpoints rotate flag.
...
I just checked the squall script, and actually it's 100+150.
Looks like alex just forgot to update the statcard when he changed from +200 to +150.
Im talking about base balance without skill stacking. Any ship will be much better with 3 s-mods and combat skills. Doom is totally wrecked in SIM battles by dominator at 25 DP points and dominator is the slowest ship with exposed rear armor.
- Sometimes they turn sideway while attempting to back-off from an engagement. They can do so when they still have shields and can even do so while they are still shooting (wasting their attack). Lost a few ships in fights they should have won but somehow they decided to expose their flank for no reason. It is much more apparent with maneuvrable ships but I seen capitals do so as well. Hammerheads are very prone to do this when backing off, but I also seen Wolfs do their same even when they were able to teleport away.
- Sometimes, as their try to get closer, ships forget to raise their shields when their are getting in range of their foes longest range beams or guns.
- IR autolance has funky behavior when left auto-firing; It fire at random interval and doesn't always spend all it's available charges when it does.
That does make it much better than what I expected from the patch notes, any chance the thumper could get something similar?- IR autolance has funky behavior when left auto-firing; It fire at random interval and doesn't always spend all it's available charges when it does.
It only fires a small portion of its charges at shields; the tooltip explains its behavior!
I think the design intention behind the Onslaught is to create the best CQB duelist in the game. Correct me @Alex if I'm wrong.Keep in mind it has 2 of the best energy weapons in the game (1000 range efficient hardflux, decent hit strength), +1 L and 5 M frontal ballistic turrets.
And I think that Onslaught is THE deadliest knife fighter. A well-built Onslaught can beat a Paragon or a Radiant or a Pegasus if it gets close and the opponent can't get out of range. Your job as a captain/commander of the fleet is to create a situation where you can maximize its advantage and minimize its weaknesses. But if you can create a situation that is advantageous for the Onslaught, nothing can escape it.
I didn't see much talk about this but I'm really happy how s-mod bonuses and penalties turned out. I was very negative initially, thinking it would either not change much, or introduce too many wacky bonus stats leading to unfun decisions. But it somehow ended up in the perfect middle, being interesting enough to make you think a bit, but not overwhelmingly important where you're paralyzed until you checked everything out. I'm always glad to be shown wrong in a positive way.Yeah, the 20% reload penalty on missile rax and 25% maneouverability on heavy armor is just enough to make you consider something else.
That said it did increase the need for variable weapon stats, as now we have even more ways to make them misleading due to various buffs. Although I'm sure that'll happen somewhere along the way to 1.0.
Missile hardpoints normally don't, but on the Pegasus they do, thanks to a MISSILE_HARDPOINTS_ROTATE flag in the csv. Which is specifically so that dumbfire missiles/torpedoes are more usable there, which is kind of a problem, so, uh. Very much self-inflicted.
Wasn't he entire "point" of LG ships is that they put energy mounts on ships that can't support them? If Executor is going to be its own thing then so should Brawler LG, Hammerhead LG, Falcon LG, Eagle LG...
Even though he optimizes his fleet carefully and searches for the best combinations using exacting tools to analyze damage output his playership Onslaught does a significant chunk of the total damage, for example one of his battle reports had his Onslaught XIV doing 34% of the damage done by his fleet and the rest of his fleet was 4 Conquests and 2 Gryphons with optimized layouts.
Yeah, under AI control the Conquest was strongest capital last version according to Vanshilar, assuming player fields an Onslaught and does the tanking; whether it is still so in .96 remains to be seen because what made Conquest so strong was double Squall combined with large ballistics and the former were significantly (and deservedly imho) nerfed.
I've been meaning to ask but when I see hullmods I noticed they had the term common as their type. Was their any plans to make rare or very experimental hullmods that players had to obtain?
The Squalls were actually buffed in their anti-shield role, the damage increasing from 250 kinetic to 100+200 kinetic.
- Sometimes they turn sideway while attempting to back-off from an engagement.
- IR autolance has funky behavior when left auto-firing;
This is a pet peeve of mine, actual description would be "Strongest judged by a single, very narrow metric.
Also not counting battles where something gets blown up ofc"
The entire test can be thrown out once you allow mixed fleets with frigate hunters to help out the slow capitals/cruisers,
or if you care about not retrying the same battle 20 times.
Conquest is certainly good, but saying it's objectively the strongest AI capital is just silly IMO.
Since AI is "dumb", can't plan far ahead, and mostly makes decisions based on ship positions and relative flux levels, ships with high speed and fast flux dissipation will always be easier for it. Conquest excels at those, with the only problem being the horrible shield, which is another thing AI can't manage well.
That does make it much better than what I expected from the patch notes, any chance the thumper could get something similar?
... any chance the thumper could get something similar?
I feel in the M ballistic slot there is too much competition for it in its current form, isn't very good against shields and by the time there would be a chance to shine it's usually out of charges.
I didn't see much talk about this but I'm really happy how s-mod bonuses and penalties turned out. I was very negative initially, thinking it would either not change much, or introduce too many wacky bonus stats leading to unfun decisions. But it somehow ended up in the perfect middle, being interesting enough to make you think a bit, but not overwhelmingly important where you're paralyzed until you checked everything out. I'm always glad to be shown wrong in a positive way.
That said it did increase the need for variable weapon stats, as now we have even more ways to make them misleading due to various buffs. Although I'm sure that'll happen somewhere along the way to 1.0.
Huh...how does that work? I console created myself a Pegasus and played around with it in the sim (about all I can do on this laptop) but can't seem to get the rear missiles to rotate, with Cyclones on them. This is trying both -RC8 and -RC9. Not sure if it being console-created instead of a "legitimate" one from a shop or something makes a difference, or if it doesn't work with the Cyclone or something.
It's more that currently, under the hood, the Executor is a skin of the Pegasus, which means "copy the base hull and then make the following changes" instead of being a base hull of its own. That means that changes to the Pegasus will automatically affect the Executor unless Alex remembers to "change it back" for the Executor, and also there are only a limited amount of types of changes you can make using the skin method. Making the Executor its own base hull means that their properties can go their own separate ways without Alex having to worry about keeping them compatible with each other via a skin. This is an under-the-hood change that won't affect us players directly, just Alex and modders.
It's not a decision under AI control, AI just dumps thumper at every opportunity :)... any chance the thumper could get something similar?
I feel in the M ballistic slot there is too much competition for it in its current form, isn't very good against shields and by the time there would be a chance to shine it's usually out of charges.
Hmm, I don't think that'd be a good idea - it *is* quite decent against shields; the high DPS and low flux cost make it so. For the autolance, it'd be an absolute waste, but for the Thumper it's more of a decision and it's something impactful enough to where e.g. you might keep the group on manual control. I realize it's a bit of a slippery slope but making weapon autofire "smart" is something I want to be *extremely* conservative with.
Since AI is "dumb", can't plan far ahead, and mostly makes decisions based on ship positions and relative flux levels, ships with high speed and fast flux dissipation will always be easier for it. Conquest excels at those, with the only problem being the horrible shield, which is another thing AI can't manage well.
Actually, the winning strategy seems to be to dump so much stuff at the enemy fleet that they can't mount a proper offensive at your fleet. Basically, if your ships are sitting there exchanging fire back and forth, then you've done something wrong or your fleet simply doesn't have enough offensive power. That's why the highest-DPS fleets ended up being the ones that can do the most long-range damage, like the Conquest, the Gryphon, and the Atlas 2. But yes, it also covers up that the AI is "dumb" in terms of positioning and flux management when the enemy is too busy dying from far away.
An addendum is that if you have one or two phase ships in your fleet, whether piloted by the player or not, the new AI behavior for clustering around one another as they "circle the wagons" cannot be underestimated for exploitation. They will voluntarily block one another's firing arcs in a large blob to better protect themselves against a phase ship.
- Sometimes, as their try to get closer, ships forget to raise their shields when their are getting in range of their foes longest range beams or guns.
This is probably intentional; the AI is willing to take some hits on armor for a flux advantage. At times this'll look "wrong" and like unnecessary damage, but there's basically some amount of damage it doesn't care very much about.
I have been messing around with the missile autoloader hullmod a bit but... Could it be a little bit more lenient? If you have more than 1 small missile slots more often than not chances are that you won't get a greater bang from your buck than by just picking EMR. And they cost the same.
In one of my tests, I was testing beams on a Sunder and the "victim ship" was an Hammerhead. Several times the hammerhead would take damage at long range only to raise shields once a bit closer. It wasn't effectively saving it's flux, it was just needlessly taking hull damage. I think it did not account for the actual range the beams had (advanced optics + Integraded targeting units).
In all honesty, that sounds like exactly where it's meant to fall, balance-wise related to EMR.It's a bit boring though. There are ships that use EMR, and ships that use autoloader. It's not a choice you make, one is always better for any given ship. Even more dull than "choosing" between hardened shields and more capacitors.
An addendum is that if you have one or two phase ships in your fleet, whether piloted by the player or not, the new AI behavior for clustering around one another as they "circle the wagons" cannot be underestimated for exploitation. They will voluntarily block one another's firing arcs in a large blob to better protect themselves against a phase ship.They should only do that when there isn't much else other than phase ships nearby, though - is that not what you're seeing?
In all honesty, that sounds like exactly where it's meant to fall, balance-wise related to EMR.I would argue that its use cases are so narrow that it is kind of a shame. There is very little ships that i know that have 1 small missile. Two small missile ships are more common but at that point all you get is either breaking even or lesser gains compared to EMR no matter how hard you try to squeeze those reload points.
Small bug:
Defective versions of a skin (such as Falcon(P)(D) ) bring up the base skins Autofit variants when you click the Autofit button.
They're definitely aware of the range. And the Hammerhead benefits from tanking a few hits by being able to get a little closer with its zero flux boost...
But that's not what it was doing, it was just near the max range of my Sunder's beams. It was trying to drop flux alright, but it wasn't trying to rush forward. It just not registring it was still in range of the beams. That hammerhead was destroyed after a few pass without doing any real damage.
But that's not what it was doing, it was just near the max range of my Sunder's beams. It was trying to drop flux alright, but it wasn't trying to rush forward. It just not registring it was still in range of the beams. That hammerhead was destroyed after a few pass without doing any real damage.
Hmm. Is there a simulator setup where this happens reasonably consistently that I might be able to take a look at?
Thanks for the report! Not a bug, though perhaps in this specific case it would take a bit more creative thinking than usual to explain the RNG's decisions to put these there :)I find another interesting thing. I do not learn the "Automated Ship" skill, but I can recover the automated XIV ships and then install AI cores into them. In addition, though these ships are captained by AI cores, they seem not to be considered when calculating the "automated ship points" and their CR is not affected by the limitation of the "Automated Ship" skill.
Well, a Sunder armed with 2 IR Autolance, with both mods to increase range and the extended magazines. Either a Kinetic blaster or a heavy blaster as it's main weapon to cause enough flux damage the target ship retreat. Other weapons installed are two dual machineguns, a vulcan in the rear and two swarmer missiles. The choice target I had was the Hammerhead with dual heavy Mortars. I just let the AI fly the ships and the issue should happen once the Hammerhead retreat to drop it's flux.
I also managed to make it happen with graviton beams but it's rare.
I find another interesting thing. I do not learn the "Automated Ship" skill, but I can recover the automated XIV ships and then install AI cores into them. In addition, though these ships are captained by AI cores, they seem not to be considered when calculating the "automated ship points" and their CR is not affected by the limitation of the "Automated Ship" skill.
I've been doing eagle gaming this patch since I've always liked the concept of the eagle but could never justify it in my fleets until now.
...
How is the Reload Cost for the Missile Autoloader calculated? Since it smoothly slots in modded missiles I assume that it's a set formula rather than a manual setting for each missile (at least as default) but I've been unable to figure out what that formula would be.
It's a lookup table on the weapon's base OP cost:Breach/swarmer reload costs 2, Atropos 3, single Atropos 1.5 so should be something else.
1 OP -> 1 point
2-3 OP -> 2 points
4 OP -> 3 points
5-6 OP -> 4 points
7+ OP -> 6 points
It really is a fascinating ship, with it's new mobility, shields, and armor all mixed in it's incredibly hard to pin down and kill. It can keep a unignorable pressure up on enemies perpetually to boot, though at first I had a very hard time chasing kills with it. Even with three heavy maulers it can't quite bite deep into near parity ships, but that's a fair balance for it's amazing support and durability I think.Spammed Eagles a lot in this update, damage output is on the low side but also like them a lot.
On the kinetic blaster as well, the eagle is a very strong choice for it's use. With just gravitons and HE weaponry the eagle can struggle to build hard flux, and normally the KB is very inefficient if you look at the numbers, the upside? For a single energy medium slot it's hard flux build up can't be beat. With two gravitons firing in tandem to disrupt shields it will singlehandedly pound the hard flux up of any ship that dares approach it, all while it's HE ballistics and torpedos lie in wait to obliterate the foolish vessel that thought it could approach the long range support ship...Didn't have much luck with short range weapons on Eagle, they seem to do less and die a lot when given mining blasters.
That being said, I feel like Alex made missile auto loader just for this ship, really, if you look at the numbers it feels like cruisers with 2 small missiles are the real winners. Two reapers on the eagle gets you nearly 4 reloads of show stopping firepower in addition to it's pressure, making ships completely unable to ignore the eagle in any capacity. You also have options like atropos for several reliable barrages or gorgons to shoo phase ships and frigates.Tried to make autoloader work for Eagle, but IMO it's basically useless.
Breach/swarmer reload costs 2, Atropos 3, single Atropos 1.5 so should be something else.
I mostly ran breaches since those can have pretty good hitrate without boost, and get 38 triple shots from autoloader. After a few battles IMO it's better to just leave the mounts empty.
Alex, if you want to look at the AI underestimating Tachyon Lances, you can just have a strong ship go against two Strike Radiants in the sim.
It certainly does not happen all the time but for example this Pegasus flickers its shields off occasionally even at low flux, which is just really silly, since it gets tach lanced instantly. I suppose it wants to dissipate flux marginally faster by dropping the shield and does not appreciate the danger.
...
It's not like you have to always keep shield up against TLs, but you do have to time drops to TL cooldowns, which AI doesn't consider.
And will it be save-compatible? RC9 breaks all of my saves (different mod setups each), even an old save from 0.95 that used to load in 0.96 all the way to RC8.
Has anyone done prince of persea recently? I get a consistent java freeze/crash if I win the duel, right after the event ends and I'm back on the planet screen. I'm on RC9, its the same save I've been using since .96 released so maybe some weirdness from dragging that save across versions
Anyone else feels like large missiles are a trap on Invictus? For everything else you get a huge benefit, and the total amount of OP is super small. So why spend precious OP on missiles when the whole purpose of the ship is pointing at another big thing and unleashing ballistic firepower, while at the same time having enough defensive hullmods so your weapons never stop firing and so you can vent in under 15 seconds.
Once I removed the missiles I never looked back.
Ugh! I've seen reports of this before, but have not been able to reproduce it. Do you happen to have a save handy where I can take a look? It seems not to happen on my PC, but maybe we'll get lucky.
Also, I'd appreciate any details you have about what exactly you did, and what you mean freeze/crash. Also: is there an hs_err_pidXXXX.log file somewhere in the game folder (or in starsector-core/), with the timestamp corresponding to the crashes? If so, seeing the contents would be useful. If it's a hang (requiring you to manually kill the app) rather than a crash, though, that wouldn't be present.
Also, if you're comfortable enough with computer stuff to use jvisualvm to try to get a thread dump when it hangs - assuming it's a hang rather than a crash - that could be very helpful, too.
(fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com for the save, if you don't mind, of course!)
Hi Alex,
i know i shouldn't ask something like that but do you think that most gamebreaking or missionbreaking bugs are fixed?
Or with different words: if there is another hotfix planned will it contain more of those kind of fixes?
Little more detail: Basically the duel ends in a victory (the defeats have not prompted this but I've only lost it twice) and once the dialogue ends with Rao and we are back on the planet screen, the freeze happens when clicking any of the options (have not tested them all). It's actually a freeze not a crash, so I do have to close it out manually.
I just ran through it 5 times; 3 successes and 2 freezes. S point option is taken each time. Based off that sample it seems like if I start the game fresh the event completes without issue, but when I reload the save to run it again it will freeze after event completion. I'll try and send the save
Anyone else feels like large missiles are a trap on Invictus? For everything else you get a huge benefit, and the total amount of OP is super small. So why spend precious OP on missiles when the whole purpose of the ship is pointing at another big thing and unleashing ballistic firepower, while at the same time having enough defensive hullmods so your weapons never stop firing and so you can vent in under 15 seconds.
Once I removed the missiles I never looked back.
Hi Alex,
i know i shouldn't ask something like that but do you think that most gamebreaking or missionbreaking bugs are fixed?
Or with different words: if there is another hotfix planned will it contain more of those kind of fixes?
There's another hotfix planned, definitely. The full list of bugs will be in the notes when it's found, but there's a few. E.G. there are situations where the Luddic Shrine on Hesperus becomes unvisitable, that sort of thing. Also some Pegasus changes :)
33711 [Thread-3] INFO com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager - Loading stage 2
33711 [Thread-3] INFO com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager - Loading stage 3
34284 [Thread-3] INFO com.fs.starfarer.loading.LoadingUtils - Loading JSON from [DIRECTORY: D:\Fractal Softworks\Starsector 96a-RC9\starsector-core\..\mods\Nexerelin (data/config/exerelin/milestoneDefs.json)]
35325 [Thread-3] INFO com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager - Error loading
35326 [Thread-3] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.CampaignGameManager -
---- Debugging information ----
cause-exception : com.thoughtworks.xstream.mapper.CannotResolveClassException
cause-message : com.fs.starfarer.loading.OOoO
class : java.util.ArrayList
required-type : java.util.ArrayList
converter-type : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.CollectionConverter
line number : 436116
class[1] : java.util.LinkedHashMap
converter-type[1] : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.collections.MapConverter
class[2] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.rules.Memory
converter-type[2] : com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.reflection.ReflectionConverter
class[3] : com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.missions.hub.BaseHubMission$VariableSet
class[4] : com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.missions.CommodityProductionMission
class[5] : com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.missions.PirateSystemBounty
class[6] : com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.missions.hub.MissionFleetAutoDespawn
class[7] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet
class[8] : com.fs.util.container.repo.ObjectRepository
class[9] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem
class[10] : com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.procgen.Constellation
class[11] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignPlanet
class[12] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CircularOrbit
class[13] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Market
class[14] : com.fs.starfarer.rpg.Person
class[15] : com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent$AvailableOfficer
class[16] : com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.events.OfficerManagerEvent
class[17] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CommDirectoryEntry
class[18] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CommDirectory
class[19] : java.util.HashMap
class[20] : exerelin.campaign.ColonyManager
class[21] : java.util.LinkedHashSet
class[22] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CircularOrbitPointDown
class[23] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CustomCampaignEntity
class[24] : com.fs.starfarer.loading.specs.FactionProduction
class[25] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.Faction
class[26] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Submarket
class[27] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.reach.ReachEconomy
class[28] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.reach.ReachEconomyStepper
class[29] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.econ.Economy
class[30] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.StarSystem$UpdateFromHyperspaceLocation
class[31] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.BaseLocation$LocationToken
class[32] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.Hyperspace
class[33] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine
converter-type[3] : com.fs.starfarer.campaign.save.oooO
version : not available
-------------------------------
com.thoughtworks.xstream.converters.ConversionException:
I think part of the problem is they shut off when using the system. I was under the impression that only the ballistic turrets would shut off so I tried pairing a pure kinetic barrage with hurricanes, but it doesn't work at all. Personally, I'd like to see this restriction removed; the turrets can still shut off but please let me use the missiles while Lidar is active.Guess you could throw pilum catapults on it? You should be able to deploy a barrage between lidar uses. Was going to suggest gazer DEM to help you add pressure but they only come on small and medium
Anyone else feels like large missiles are a trap on Invictus? For everything else you get a huge benefit, and the total amount of OP is super small. So why spend precious OP on missiles when the whole purpose of the ship is pointing at another big thing and unleashing ballistic firepower, while at the same time having enough defensive hullmods so your weapons never stop firing and so you can vent in under 15 seconds.
Once I removed the missiles I never looked back.
I think part of the problem is they shut off when using the system. I was under the impression that only the ballistic turrets would shut off so I tried pairing a pure kinetic barrage with hurricanes, but it doesn't work at all. Personally, I'd like to see this restriction removed; the turrets can still shut off but please let me use the missiles while Lidar is active.
Thank you for the save, got it! Aha!
It looks like a mod is putting stuff into the save, in a MemoryAPI, under a key of "$ST_enabledCommodities". And what it's putting there is references to obfuscated core classes, which it should not do. Both because 1) it will cause problems like you've run into, or worse and 2) it's inefficient, basically putting some static data that doesn't change into this memory, instead of using a commodity id and retrieving the details at runtime. I'm not sure what mod is the culprit, but perhaps the $ST_ prefix rings a bell?
Possible bug: The Hull Restoration skill might not be working on the AI-piloted XIV ships. The rest of the fleet has no more D-mods, but the AI ships are still stacking a whole bunch of them after a long time in the fleet.intended
Are there any plans to revert to the old large points of the pegasus? I find it not as fun as it used to be because of the recent patch and made it feel like a bigger version of gryphon now. wouldn't just reducing the charges while keeping the large hardpoints serve as a balance ?Yes in the next hotfix, but there will be some other changes to the ship as well.
Thank you for the save, got it! Aha!
It looks like a mod is putting stuff into the save, in a MemoryAPI, under a key of "$ST_enabledCommodities". And what it's putting there is references to obfuscated core classes, which it should not do. Both because 1) it will cause problems like you've run into, or worse and 2) it's inefficient, basically putting some static data that doesn't change into this memory, instead of using a commodity id and retrieving the details at runtime. I'm not sure what mod is the culprit, but perhaps the $ST_ prefix rings a bell?
An interesting interaction with looting remnant ships that I'm pretty sure isn't intended:Clearly the malevolent machines stole humans to do something unspeakable and unknowable to our minds.Spoiler(https://preview.redd.it/m47v8c6i5l0b1.png?width=1024&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=f81a892e5509574a574d2994cdd68596a4661dfc)[close]
I think prior to 0.96 there were no scenarios where the player could loot remnant drone ships except as the occasional floating wreck after combat. There were dormant ships you had to wake up and kill first in some systems, but no outright husks. With the new patch adding the droneship graveyard at the Sentinel jump point, we now have this interaction where you potentially run across some guy who's been hiding inside a droneship by himself for over a century.
Is it just me or did the Heron almost disappear? Haven't seen it outside mercenary fleets.
Sounds like Space Trucking to me.
ST and commodities... sounds like Space Trucking could be it. Thanks for the prompt reply again and for pointing me in the right direction, I'll take it to the relevant thread!
@ Alex : Had to re-read the Lidar Array tooltip and it does say that it disables turrets and beam weapons, so missile weapons should be firing while Lidar is active, which they don't.
An interesting interaction with looting remnant ships that I'm pretty sure isn't intended:
Why outermost slipstreams are not forming generally continuous structure? With gaps and intersection but nonetheless. It can be clockwise for some time period and counterclockwise for another but it will be actually not frustrating for the most of the time like the current one with horizontal and vertical intersections breaking the flow. When both horizontal routes and both vertical routes are going in the same direction this creates a situation with corners what always in the state when all routes are either outbound or inbound. If the whole structure is continuous (north route is eastbound, east vertical route is southbound, south route is westbound and west vertical route is northbound) it will make much more practical sense.
Why outermost slipstreams are not forming generally continuous structure? With gaps and intersection but nonetheless. It can be clockwise for some time period and counterclockwise for another but it will be actually not frustrating for the most of the time like the current one with horizontal and vertical intersections breaking the flow. When both horizontal routes and both vertical routes are going in the same direction this creates a situation with corners what always in the state when all routes are either outbound or inbound. If the whole structure is continuous (north route is eastbound, east vertical route is southbound, south route is westbound and west vertical route is northbound) it will make much more practical sense.
What is your question aiming at?
Do you want to a) add more slipstreams, so that there is always a continuous structure around the core-sector? In that case you would add a continuous wall between inner and outer sector, with easy passages only at a few spots. I think that would diminish the fun in the relaxed space-travell, if you know you're always forced to pass one of the streams to get in or out the core. (And regarding the already existing criticism about slipstreams, and I don't think a lot of people would like that.)
Or do you want to b) remove the slipstreams, which aren't part of the clockwise or counterclockwise structure (which already exists in the current state)? That would just be boring.
And if it is a) + b), I would bring both arguments to the table.
Why outermost slipstreams are not forming generally continuous structure? With gaps and intersection but nonetheless. It can be clockwise for some time period and counterclockwise for another but it will be actually not frustrating for the most of the time like the current one with horizontal and vertical intersections breaking the flow. When both horizontal routes and both vertical routes are going in the same direction this creates a situation with corners what always in the state when all routes are either outbound or inbound. If the whole structure is continuous (north route is eastbound, east vertical route is southbound, south route is westbound and west vertical route is northbound) it will make much more practical sense.
What is your question aiming at?
Do you want to a) add more slipstreams, so that there is always a continuous structure around the core-sector? In that case you would add a continuous wall between inner and outer sector, with easy passages only at a few spots. I think that would diminish the fun in the relaxed space-travell, if you know you're always forced to pass one of the streams to get in or out the core. (And regarding the already existing criticism about slipstreams, and I don't think a lot of people would like that.)
Or do you want to b) remove the slipstreams, which aren't part of the clockwise or counterclockwise structure (which already exists in the current state)? That would just be boring.
And if it is a) + b), I would bring both arguments to the table.
I'm aiming at making slipstreams less of a pain and of more use.
Addition or removal of slipstreams is not needed.
I said "outermost". It is clearly not between inner and outer sector.
Why outermost slipstreams are not forming generally continuous structure? With gaps and intersection but nonetheless. It can be clockwise for some time period and counterclockwise for another but it will be actually not frustrating for the most of the time like the current one with horizontal and vertical intersections breaking the flow. When both horizontal routes and both vertical routes are going in the same direction this creates a situation with corners what always in the state when all routes are either outbound or inbound. If the whole structure is continuous (north route is eastbound, east vertical route is southbound, south route is westbound and west vertical route is northbound) it will make much more practical sense.
What is your question aiming at?
Do you want to a) add more slipstreams, so that there is always a continuous structure around the core-sector? In that case you would add a continuous wall between inner and outer sector, with easy passages only at a few spots. I think that would diminish the fun in the relaxed space-travell, if you know you're always forced to pass one of the streams to get in or out the core. (And regarding the already existing criticism about slipstreams, and I don't think a lot of people would like that.)
Or do you want to b) remove the slipstreams, which aren't part of the clockwise or counterclockwise structure (which already exists in the current state)? That would just be boring.
And if it is a) + b), I would bring both arguments to the table.
I'm aiming at making slipstreams less of a pain and of more use.
Addition or removal of slipstreams is not needed.
So you want to reposition the weird slipstreams, to close the holes in the existing continous structure?
From my point of view that's a) + b) so I bring both arguments forth.
And if you want to neither add, nor remove, nor reposition any slipstreams, then everything stays the same and in fact you want to change nothing.I said "outermost". It is clearly not between inner and outer sector.
Either we're already talking about the same, because a partly/mostly continuous structure of slipstreams that encloses 3/4 of the Sector does already exist.
Or do you want to add an extra slipstream-highway at the borders of the map?
Why outermost slipstreams are not forming generally continuous structure? With gaps and intersection but nonetheless. It can be clockwise for some time period and counterclockwise for another but it will be actually not frustrating for the most of the time like the current one with horizontal and vertical intersections breaking the flow. When both horizontal routes and both vertical routes are going in the same direction this creates a situation with corners what always in the state when all routes are either outbound or inbound. If the whole structure is continuous (north route is eastbound, east vertical route is southbound, south route is westbound and west vertical route is northbound) it will make much more practical sense.
What is your question aiming at?
Do you want to a) add more slipstreams, so that there is always a continuous structure around the core-sector? In that case you would add a continuous wall between inner and outer sector, with easy passages only at a few spots. I think that would diminish the fun in the relaxed space-travell, if you know you're always forced to pass one of the streams to get in or out the core. (And regarding the already existing criticism about slipstreams, and I don't think a lot of people would like that.)
Or do you want to b) remove the slipstreams, which aren't part of the clockwise or counterclockwise structure (which already exists in the current state)? That would just be boring.
And if it is a) + b), I would bring both arguments to the table.
I'm aiming at making slipstreams less of a pain and of more use.
Addition or removal of slipstreams is not needed.
Edit, because I missed something:
So you just want to change the direction of half of the slipstreams, so that the one corner where they meet is removed?
(As seen here: Full map of slipstreams (https://fractalsoftworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/stream_full.jpg) )I said "outermost". It is clearly not between inner and outer sector.
Either we're already talking about the same, because a partly/mostly continuous structure of slipstreams that encloses 3/4 of the Sector does already exist.
Or do you want to add an extra slipstream-highway at the borders of the map?
Yo why is the s-mod bonus for Solar Shielding this bad compared to the rest? Other cheap hullmods get great things, Stabilized Shields, Armoured Weapon Mounts, Advanced Turret Gyros, Expanded Magazines, etc. And then you have this chump giving 25% more CR protection while in coronas and such terrain, when it already gave you 75%. That's so awful when you look at the rest, I don't even want to spend a story point on LG ships where it's technically free lol.
I'm honestly shocked how many people run Best of the best. So many comments, screenshots and video tend to have ships with 3 s-mods. Ever since the skill rework, I didn't touch Leadership much up until this run now, where I wanted to try out BotB and see how it goes. Guess it's even better now with the bonuses, but man do I miss having a bunch of combat skills.Yes. It makes BotB look overpowered, and more so with the advent of s-mod bonuses.
I'm honestly shocked how many people run Best of the best. So many comments, screenshots and video tend to have ships with 3 s-mods. Ever since the skill rework, I didn't touch Leadership much up until this run now, where I wanted to try out BotB and see how it goes. Guess it's even better now with the bonuses, but man do I miss having a bunch of combat skills.
One s-mod that is mostly lame to s-mod is High Scatter Amplifier. +5% damage for a hullmod that is hard to justify using in the first place.Yeah but HSA is not a very cheap hullmod. Generally the cheaper ones get better bonuses, and Solar Shielding is cheap.
Ok so my average run has these skills:
I am now vaguely curious as to what your typical skill spread looks like since Leadership 5 still leaves the possibility for up to 10 combat skills, or up to 8 if you want combat skills from Technology and Industry. Those numbers only sound low in comparison to the maximum of 13 combat skills (which I personally do when soloing with my flagship). I'll note even just Coordinated Maneuvers and Crew Training are solid bonuses to nearly any flagship (okay not so much Coordinated Maneuvers and an Onslaught, but still).
Several different ships were using quantum disruptor on same ship while the effect is still lasting. Is this fixed yet?
Finally checked out the old space wizard and his companions at Asharu. What a blatant Star Wars shout out, especially with the commander acting like a bit like Han Solo (when selecting the obvious choices). And the (!) quest patrol near Volturn was totally expected. Easily avoided him off with T-Jump (after luring the fleet away from the water world).
Several different ships were using quantum disruptor on same ship while the effect is still lasting. Is this fixed yet?
Oh, oops! Can't believe it wasn't checking for that; fixed.
On a related note: does Entropy Amplifier stack? The code looks like it does.
I am now vaguely curious as to what your typical skill spread looks like since Leadership 5 still leaves the possibility for up to 10 combat skills, or up to 8 if you want combat skills from Technology and Industry.
I even managed to reliably replicate this in the sim: take a Monitor, spawn a Paragon, move Monitor close then order either Retreat or Direct Retreat. The Monitor instantly drops shields. If it survives, then it will continue to raise shields only to immediately drop them when they're fully raised, over and over.
Now if some bright spark will just actually write Brother Cotton's book so I can read the whole thing twice and keep my promise to him...
This is a hotfix, so I should be able to move my current savefile over without causing new bugs, as long as the Red Planet didn't pick Sentinel, right?
Executor is called a "Missile Battleship" too, but unlike Pegasus, Executor does not have more (large) missile mounts than some other capitals.
All right, here's another little thing. I'm not sure if this message is supposed to be visible to the player or who "sc" is, if that's Sector Control or one of the dev team's initials.
https://i.imgur.com/MHkoORH.jpg
Is it really "stupid" if I am deliberately trying to cause the biggest possible disaster in Sindrian space that I can? Heh, you got me officer,I hacked the Hegemony comms relaywas trying to test the Janus Prototype in occupied space to see what happens.
By the way, I'm not sure what priority this is, but I sold the gamma core in the tutorial to the pirate station, and the Hegemony commander acted like I still had it. There's a few other things like this, I think. If it's useful, I can try to find them again.
Although that behaviour is understandable, it's a sad day for all scavenger players. Those battles would leave a nice amount of loot that could be really helpful in the early game, plus you didn't have to worry about being jumped while salvaging the left-overs.
- Trade fleets should in general not try to engage each other even if their factions are hostile
I'm again and again impressed how quick you fix even such small bugs.
- Fixed issue with patrol fleets "patrolling system" and then "preparing for patrol duty", in some circumstances
Also noticed this one in my current run and checked the save after updating to RC10: Both my Brawler (LP) and my Gremlin (P) still only show the base variants, when I check the autofit-options. Does this one also only work for new saves/new ships?
- Fixed issue that caused recovered ships with d-mods that were a modification of another hull - such as Falcon (P) or Brawler (TT) to show the base hull's variants in the autofit dialog
Also noticed this one in my current run and checked the save after updating to RC10: Both my Brawler (LP) and my Gremlin (P) still only show the base variants, when I check the autofit-options. Does this one also only work for new saves/new ships?
- Fixed issue that caused recovered ships with d-mods that were a modification of another hull - such as Falcon (P) or Brawler (TT) to show the base hull's variants in the autofit dialog
Also noticed this one in my current run and checked the save after updating to RC10: Both my Brawler (LP) and my Gremlin (P) still only show the base variants, when I check the autofit-options. Does this one also only work for new saves/new ships?
Part of the fix was in how such ships are recovered, so it wouldn't affect already-recovered ships, iirc.
Absolutely I have a save. You can even see the Independent fleet fighting the Den. Do I 7zip the whole save folder and send it to you via PM, or do I just need to send "campaign.xml" and "descriptor.xml"?
Executor.skin is lacking a hullDesignation so the new update to the Pegasus hull designation is making the Executor a Missile Battleship as well. Is this intended?
Tri-Tachyon scan fleet will not block you from using [thing] in "At The Gates" mission finale stage
I wish the executor went completely in the opposite direction of the pegasus, removing missiles entirely, even the slots in the back, maybe in exchange for a bit more flux dissipation? or maybe a another couple of medium energy slots pointing forwardsMissiles are always nice to have though.
I think you should make a special AI tweak to the Invictus that will make it much, much more likely to vent when near max flux even under heavy fire. I mean, what good does sitting around at near max flux do it when surrounded by enemies? Have it vent even under heavy fire so it can get off a few Lidars before it gets worn down.
As it stands now I see it simply hover at near max flux when ganged on, only squeezing off a few Devastator shots when its poor flux dissipation allows, which is of no threat to anything. Having the AI vent immediately upon reaching max flux is the logical thing to do for a ship with so much armor and hull.
So doing a quick fresh run through the campaign in the latest release checking for bugs, and ran into a similar issue to:Tri-Tachyon scan fleet will not block you from using [thing] in "At The Gates" mission finale stage
But instead of having run into the Tri-tach fleet in the Magec system earlier and just skipping it, I ran into the pirate fleet that pulses their drive, and skipped it and scanned 6 other gates. Now at the final stage of the story, I'm directed to take the gate, but cannot, getting the pulsing drive bubble description. And the prior pirate fleet from earlier in the storyline is not visible anywhere near.
Is this intended behavior, or was that supposed to have a similar fix like the Tri-tach fleet?
Fixed "protection from star corona" for certain structure not working for certain battle
The save folder would be ideal, fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com, if you don't mind - thank you!
All right, I don't know if it's this BS rural so-called Internet I've got or if Gmail just hates me uploading zip files, but it didn't work. I did, however, get a DropBox account to take the 7zipped version, so there's a DropBox link from me in your email now.
I even managed to reliably replicate this in the sim: take a Monitor, spawn a Paragon, move Monitor close then order either Retreat or Direct Retreat. The Monitor instantly drops shields. If it survives, then it will continue to raise shields only to immediately drop them when they're fully raised, over and over.
Hmm - I'm not able to reproduce this here; tried about 10 times. The only time that comes close is if the Paragon has its AI toggled off and no weapons pointing at the Monitor, but that doesn't seem like what you're talking about.
An RC version mismatch no longer flags mods as potentially incompatible with the game
Also, since the PD & LR PD lasers cost the same now, the LR PD seems like the better choice with it's superior range and decreased flux. Not to mention having 4 small pd energy is pointless. Why not remove one them since mining lasers fill the cheap option and burst lasers give the advanced option?
Will we get another hotfix or is .1 the next stop?
It's in the RC10 patch notes as fixed.The main thing standing in the way of an HMI update is a bug in current starsector. This essentially makes all custom encounters outside of a select few give the 'Safeguard' defense fleet. Which means a lot of HMI's exploration content is broken. Once the fix is out, HMI will surely follow.
I don't know what King Alfonzo's talking about or if he's even accurate, but I'm hoping this is fixable soon. I haven't seen him mention it either here or in the Bug Reports forum, so I have no idea if Alex knows about this or if it is even real. (Not that I'm calling his majesty a liar, if I knew enough to verify it I would fix it myself.)
Great news! Will .1 have skill changes (like for CA/NL)?Will we get another hotfix or is .1 the next stop?
Barring major crash-bugs or similar, it should be on to .1 from here! Fingers crossed.
- The special Sindrian Diktat weapons show up in ruins in the outer rim in large quantities. I think I read that they were recently invented.
Also, not a bug but something I like: The new unique faction descriptions at different relationship levels are really cool, especially how they respond to things in the story.
- If the player finds the ISS Hamatsu early, before meeting Callisto Ibrahim, the mission log updates with returning it to her for a payout, and mentions that she has an emotional attachment to it.Callisto Ibrahim is, I think, moderately famous in the Persean sector, as basically an independent space trucker who did good enough at the job to parley it into ruling a planet. Especially she should be famous among independent captains, i. e. the PC.
Callisto Ibrahim is, I think, moderately famous in the Persean sector, as basically an independent space trucker who did good enough at the job to parley it into ruling a planet. Especially she should be famous among independent captains, i. e. the PC.Assuming she is the administrator of the entire planet, and not just the person in charge of the port you docked to (since most often the first person in the contact list is a portmaster, base commander or station commander), then she probably holds a high position in the Ko Combine. I would expect the planet administrator to be a post separate from the CEO, though.
Assuming she is the administrator of the entire planet, and not just the person in charge of the port you docked toHer official rank is "Entrepreneur," but she's the one who pops up on the Administrator slot if you open Agreus' planetary data, yes.
Her official rank is "Entrepreneur," but she's the one who pops up on the Administrator slot if you open Agreus' planetary data, yes.You can also dock to many other planets and not see any administrator, but "base commanders", "station commanders" or "portmasters".
You can also dock to many other planets and not see any administrator, but "base commanders", "station commanders" or "portmasters".Conveniently, we know that Callisto isn't Agreus' port commander (on account of it already having one), station commander (on account of not being a station), or base commander (on account of not having a military base).
Nevermind, they are just further down the contact screen. Except for Ancyra, which has only the station commander, for whatever reason.You can also dock to many other planets and not see any administrator, but "base commanders", "station commanders" or "portmasters".
- The special Sindrian Diktat weapons show up in ruins in the outer rim in large quantities. I think I read that they were recently invented.
Hmm - are you on -RC10? This is supposed to be fixed there.
Noticed Executor is missing from Codex despite being "known" by and sold by (in Military Markets) the Sindrian Diktat.Executor is a skin of the Pegasus and the codex doesn’t show skins.
Intentional, or missed out? Or will it show up if my rep goes up with them (so I can access their Military Markets)? Or once I see it being flown? Just checking...
#makeCodexGreatAgain (and could we get D-Mods in the Codex as well? Would help new and old players, I bet).
- More severely, this mission will be broken - the player will be unable to make the exchange. An exclamation point will be next to her comm entry, but no dialogue option will appear.
Regarding an early finding of the Hamatsu & return to Ibrahim,I found the Hamatsu and returned it before starting up that section of the main plot, and it worked fine for me.- More severely, this mission will be broken - the player will be unable to make the exchange. An exclamation point will be next to her comm entry, but no dialogue option will appear.
Is anyone else seeing this, is there some condition I'm missing? It works just fine if I start a new game and try it out.
Is anyone else seeing this, is there some condition I'm missing? It works just fine if I start a new game and try it out.
Regarding an early finding of the Hamatsu & return to Ibrahim,- More severely, this mission will be broken - the player will be unable to make the exchange. An exclamation point will be next to her comm entry, but no dialogue option will appear.
Is anyone else seeing this, is there some condition I'm missing? It works just fine if I start a new game and try it out.
(lots of bug reports)
Second one: battered redacted fleets in hyperspace further away from the core are a vanilla feature, right?Wrong. (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15279.0)
Never used that mod.Second one: battered redacted fleets in hyperspace further away from the core are a vanilla feature, right?Wrong. (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=15279.0)
- (Intentional?) The player can't mention the planet-killer to any of the Persean League NPCs.This I guess but I did not check all Persean markets.
Second one: battered redacted fleets in hyperspace further away from the core are a vanilla feature, right? I encountered zero of them, so either they are not spawning or they are reaallly rare now.
Oh, those ones are vanilla, but I never had an idea distance was a factor there, besides the event not happening in the core worlds.Spoilerwhich initially are sensor ghosts before they hover in and reveal themselves[close]
I mean a hyperspace ghost resolving into a single random derelict ship is vanilla
Motes do unstoppable damage straight through shields, so anything that isn't low tech with heavy armor gets rekt instantly. You aren't really allowed to use a fleet you want against Zig, you have to play around the gimmick.
Motes do unstoppable damage straight through shields, so anything that isn't low tech with heavy armor gets rekt instantly. You aren't really allowed to use a fleet you want against Zig, you have to play around the gimmick.
I'm pretty sure that through shields motes do only EMP damage so they can't destroy a ship on their own.For you motes only do EMP damage (or rather, they do 1 energy damage on top). When you fight it, each EMP arc also deals 300 energy damage to armor/hull.
...and it had special text about automated something...That's the only thing that sounds like a bug to me afaik since ghosts turning derelict and hovering in/circling in did just that in 0.95.1 to me, but I think the remnant "scrap heap" fleet has a bigger unidentified blob, man I still flinch when a big ghost fleet burn drives into me but a little blob hovering in tells me it is a harmless derelict and if it is bigger blob hovering in its an redacted trash can fleet...
Does anyone think the Ziggurat fight has become way harder, somehow? It just phased inside of, and dumped lethal motes into, my executor, very very deliberately remaining atop him the whole time. After if stopped and phased back in, the Exec lasted like 10 seconds before being destroyed. If it had continued to do that after venting I don't know how many ships I would have lost. It might sound cool, but the high volition motes just **** you til you bleed, seemed very janky...the whole fight just seemed like an abortion from that horrible beginning
Also, it would be nice if we had contacts generated at all our colonies so there is some reason to regularily visit our colonies (outside maintenance and storage).It is possible to get pirate contacts (I got one from an arms dealer), just not those from your own faction (or at least I have not been able to get one no matter how many times I reload). I would like to have a Military contact in my faction so I do not need to waste time traveling to core worlds to pick up bounties, either for Derelicts or the special Omega one.
Got a bug. Somehow when a paragon uses the forward shield conversion hullmod it still behaves as if it still has an omni shield. had an incident where it turned off its shields to reduce flux right in beside a fulgent and 2 reapers.
Sounds similar to the Monitor shield conversion bug I reported few pages back. (that I think Alex missed)
Got a bug. Somehow when a paragon uses the forward shield conversion hullmod it still behaves as if it still has an omni shield. had an incident where it turned off its shields to reduce flux right in beside a fulgent and 2 reapers.
Yep. Thought the black market hulls could probably stand to be a bit less pristine.
If the ship's front armour is destroyed then the AI will turn it so fresh armor is facing the enemy.Yep. Thought the black market hulls could probably stand to be a bit less pristine.
Yeah, it should not be that easy for the black market to aquire prestine ships. Maybe black market could be reworked so prestine ships be sold at a premium price and be much rarer.
Btw, I figured out why ships often go sideway when under fire: they try to boost away... Problem is, many of the ships that attempt that either don't have the capability, or they don't have the charge to do it thus all they do is take more damage while turning their guns away from the enemy. At least that what I observed.
Global.getSettings(String path, boolean withMods)
final JSONArray weapon_data_csv, weapon_data_csv_vanilla;
try {
weapon_data_csv = Global.getSettings().loadCSV("data/weapons/weapon_data.csv",
true);
} catch (JSONException | IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); return; }
try {
weapon_data_csv_vanilla = Global.getSettings().loadCSV("data/weapons/weapon_data.csv",
false);
} catch (JSONException | IOException e) { e.printStackTrace(); return; }
for (int i = 0; i < weapon_data_csv_vanilla.length(); i++) {
final JSONObject row;
try { row = weapon_data_csv_vanilla.getJSONObject(i); }
catch (JSONException e) { e.printStackTrace(); return; }
final String weaponId;
try { weaponId = row.getString("id"); }
catch (JSONException e) { e.printStackTrace(); return; }
if (!weaponId.isEmpty())
try { weapon_data_csv.put(weapon_data_csv.length(), row); }
catch (JSONException e) { e.printStackTrace(); return; }
}
Global.getSettings().getMergedSpreadsheetData("id", "data/weapons/weapon_data.csv")
If the ship's front armour is destroyed then the AI will turn it so fresh armor is facing the enemy.Yep. Thought the black market hulls could probably stand to be a bit less pristine.
Yeah, it should not be that easy for the black market to aquire prestine ships. Maybe black market could be reworked so prestine ships be sold at a premium price and be much rarer.
Btw, I figured out why ships often go sideway when under fire: they try to boost away... Problem is, many of the ships that attempt that either don't have the capability, or they don't have the charge to do it thus all they do is take more damage while turning their guns away from the enemy. At least that what I observed.
There should be like two types of black markets. The cheap one run by poor people trying to avoid taxes and a rich black market run by professional smugglers trying to make money by getting around restrictions. Probably keep it all on the same page but have two different lists of ships to pick from.
If the ship's front armour is destroyed then the AI will turn it so fresh armor is facing the enemy.
Has anything changed in the AI when attacking stations? I feel like the ships are slightly more aggressive than before and end up taking some unnecessary damage.Hasn't that always been an issue? It is because stations always outrange ships so the AI gets really aggressive since staying at a distance doesn't really help.
Hasn't that always been an issue? It is because stations always outrange ships so the AI gets really aggressive since staying at a distance doesn't really help.
For the .1 patch it'd be nice to get a few more destroyers—we've only got a single midline combat destroyer for example and no "heavy" combat destroyer classes at all.
Don't get me wrong, more destroyers would be cool but we do already have a decent variety: 2 combat destroyers per tech level plus lowtech and midline carriers.Plus the semi-combatants; the Mule has never been terrible, and the Gemini exists, at least. Haven't actually played with it this update, but the buffs it got aren't nothing.
Has anything changed in the AI when attacking stations? I feel like the ships are slightly more aggressive than before and end up taking some unnecessary damage.
it'd be nice to get a few more destroyers1000 times this, it would be reaally nice to have more choice in the destroyer department with + 1-2 per doctrine and maybe an outlier with a different design or something, especially more combat destroyers as opposed to utility or carrier ones would be nice, and to a lesser degree I'd like 1-3 more cruisers...
I wouldn't be against some super-destroyer as player reward behind a quest chain. Or something like Blackrock Desdinova as reasonably common ship (pretty much inverse of Falcon: cruiser firepower and DP cost at DE size class + high speed, but so finicky only player can pilot it competently).That would be nice as a blueprint no one else has and enable the player faction to be a bit more distinct.
Hyperion is a frigate...It is an example of an elite ship for it's size where it hits more like a cruiser than a frigate. I didn't pick an elite destroyer because there aren't any really, Harbinger used to kinda be one but it got nerfed and medusa is not quite there. A elite destroyer would probably need to hit like a battlecruiser to be a destroyer version of a Hyperion.
Medusa is already a bit of a super-destroyer in player hands, especially if you put omega weapons on it.While I would pick a Hyperion over basically any destroyer, I would not pick a Medusa over quite a few cruisers. Champion, Eradicator and Aurora are all significantly better.
Medusa is fast and strongly benefits from player piloting, but it just doesn't hit hard enough to justify player piloting. You'll impact the fight much more with one of faster cruisers or capitals.
It's also rare. so you'll very likely find a Falcon(P) to pilot long before a Medusa. Since Medusa is 9 speed you have strong drawbacks from including one into early mostly frigate fleet, unlike Falcon(P).
It is an example of an elite ship for it's size where it hits more like a cruiser than a frigate. I didn't pick an elite destroyer because there aren't any really, Harbinger used to kinda be one but it got nerfed and medusa is not quite there. A elite destroyer would probably need to hit like a battlecruiser to be a destroyer version of a Hyperion.
it'd be nice to get a few more destroyers1000 times this, it would be reaally nice to have more choice in the destroyer department with + 1-2 per doctrine and maybe an outlier with a different design or something, especially more combat destroyers as opposed to utility or carrier ones would be nice, and to a lesser degree I'd like 1-3 more cruisers...
Without redacted and stuff we have like what, 7 or so base variants of combat destroyers plus 2 carriers and some freighters, and sure, we do have variants like LP or XIV or pirate which is awesome but I'd really like to have more new base variants. Moar please. ^^ Oh damn I feel like I am being sort of a nuisance with my request...
Manticore LP says hi.it'd be nice to get a few more destroyers1000 times this, it would be reaally nice to have more choice in the destroyer department with + 1-2 per doctrine and maybe an outlier with a different design or something, especially more combat destroyers as opposed to utility or carrier ones would be nice, and to a lesser degree I'd like 1-3 more cruisers...
Without redacted and stuff we have like what, 7 or so base variants of combat destroyers plus 2 carriers and some freighters, and sure, we do have variants like LP or XIV or pirate which is awesome but I'd really like to have more new base variants. Moar please. ^^ Oh damn I feel like I am being sort of a nuisance with my request...
Come to think of if we don't have a MISSILE destroyer yet, it would be nice to have one as such plus it would be nice to also have a support destroyer too. not like a point defense destroyer but a destroyer that can provide a short ranged anti ECM area of influence but has very few defensive measures. It would be a nice Idea to expand on the more economic side like adding science vessels or seeing a cruiser sized salvage rig or even some ships that are civilian class.
Wait, do mercs still have the Doom?Mercs are not quite the same as Independents. I meant true Independents, not other factions disguised as them like Mercenaries.
Question: Do the (non-merc) Independents use the Wolf in their fleets? If not, it looks like an oversight (or is the Wolf really too low-powered for the Indies to bother using).
I noticed that the Independents use nearly every sub-capital military ship that are not blatant faction specialties (like XIV ships), but I also noticed that Wolf is one of the few non-capital ships that do not have an independent related tag (merc does not count).
(Especially being the daughter of a VIP of an "explorer's guild".)
Seriously though, I think this mission helps to illustrate that most people in the sector never actually left their home planet. Being a starfarer is something special post-collapse, not the norm.
Scattered, sinking buoyant platforms dot the clouds of $planet, perchance holding last caches of valuable materials.A tiny bug, but a bug none-the-less.
Hey quick question, can you fix the AI XIV battlegroup using hull restoration skill or are those ships by default stuck like that due to balancing reasons?
Hope this is an acceptable place for bug reports- the Academy Ruins Data Recovery mission can send you to Gas Giants, that contain ruins.QuoteScattered, sinking buoyant platforms dot the clouds of $planet, perchance holding last caches of valuable materials.A tiny bug, but a bug none-the-less.
(Especially being the daughter of a VIP of an "explorer's guild".)
(One might easily imagine how an explorer is much more aware of all the dangers that are out there and takes pains to shelter their children from it...)
I'm in the main quest, found the Hamasu (Venture), but it only had D-mods (3 of them) but no S-Mod. Is it intended? I thought its engines had some modifications and is the best and favourite ship from the lady on Arcadia, which doesn't really fit with the garbage ship I found in-game. Or is it supposed to show the effect of radiation on the ship?The modifications gives the ship the ability to transverse jump. You know, the ability you have to have to find the ship in the first place.
Did these ghost ships ever go beyond the size of a legion? would be a whole lot better that it would be ships from the XIV as they could really give more of a mysterious vibe into it or would be very nice if there was a person still onboard the ship and they would ask us to find the rest of his flotilla.
Uh I found a bug. I have an SO scarab that somehow was able to push my flameout onslaught like it was nothing... isn't it strange that a small frigate was able to push something that big?The physics breaks a little during flameouts. Most notable is that because your acceleration is turned off, you don't slow down even if you are above your max speed but other odd things can happen sometimes.
Started a new game but contact Wrestling Sedge is still not giving any work. Was this bugfix referring to some other mission?
- Fixed issue with contacts gained in relation to certain mission not having any tags (and so not giving any missions), fix only applies in a new game
Found a bug when playing the open the gates questline. was trying to eliminate the hegemony special task force flying near the samarra gate but oddly enough they were able to identify me right away despite being in "go dark" mode(I went into the system with dark mode on). This has also happened with the luddic church holy vigil fleet. Still identified me with my transponder off. Is this a bug or is it part of the questline?Almost certainly neither: this will happen if you have the Ziggurat in your fleet.
Please add rugged construction to the Mora!
It is already basically an ancient rust bucket so it would fit I think thematically, and it also behaves like a brick in combat which is surprisingly cool, so giving it rugged construction would only reinforce the "tough" gameplay identity it already has!
As far as I am aware there are currently no carriers with the rugged construction hullmod, this would make the Mora a unique and interesting choice for derelict operations addicts such as myself. Please consider it!
Problem #1: about half of them don't even sell ships which makes me wonder what is the point considering EVERY non-Omega, non-LG weapon is already readily available on markets. So... why would I pay double price for something that is not rare and I can easily get myself at normal price?To be fair some weapons can be really elusive depending on your luck. In my experience Light Needlers and Sabot Pods are rarer than AI cores.
For example, about the only ship I'd be interested in buying from a 300k arms dealer is Buffalo (A) because it is actually quite hard to get normally and a large step up from regular Buffalo when you want a stealthy fleet.Even for a stealthy fleet, I see little good reason to prefer a Buffalo (A) over a regular Buffalo, or really any other freighter; Militarized Subsystems is only +30 sensor strength on a destroyer-scale civilian hull, the +1 maximum burn level from Militarized Subsystems is actually -1 maximum burn level if you took Bulk Transport and doesn't matter one way or the other if you put capital ships or typical cruisers in your fleet without fitting them with Augmented Engines, the effective sensor profile reduction from Militarized Subsystems is no better than the base sensor profile reduction of Insulated Engines, and the Buffalo hull is of such limited combat utility that saving half a dozen or so OP on a logistics hullmod doesn't really matter - the Buffalo's best combat fit is probably something like Converted Hangar + Talons, and it has plenty of OP for that plus a logistics hullmod and Unstable Injector to help it keep out of trouble, especially since it's unlikely to benefit much from additional vents or flux capacitors.
Military subsystems also removes the maintenance penalty for expanded cargo/fuel/crew storage.For example, about the only ship I'd be interested in buying from a 300k arms dealer is Buffalo (A) because it is actually quite hard to get normally and a large step up from regular Buffalo when you want a stealthy fleet.Even for a stealthy fleet, I see little good reason to prefer a Buffalo (A) over a regular Buffalo, or really any other freighter; Militarized Subsystems is only +30 sensor strength on a destroyer-scale civilian hull, the +1 maximum burn level from Militarized Subsystems is actually -1 maximum burn level if you took Bulk Transport and doesn't matter one way or the other if you put capital ships or typical cruisers in your fleet without fitting them with Augmented Engines, the effective sensor profile reduction from Militarized Subsystems is no better than the base sensor profile reduction of Insulated Engines, and the Buffalo hull is of such limited combat utility that saving half a dozen or so OP on a logistics hullmod doesn't really matter - the Buffalo's best combat fit is probably something like Converted Hangar + Talons, and it has plenty of OP for that plus a logistics hullmod and Unstable Injector to help it keep out of trouble, especially since it's unlikely to benefit much from additional vents or flux capacitors.
Also, Insulated Engines and a story point will reduce the sensor profile of a Colossus or even an Atlas enough that even in a stealth fleet there's little practical advantage to using a smaller freighter, especially when your fleet's maximum burn level is limited by something other than your choice of freighter, and by mid-game a stealth fleet probably has enough larger ships and gets enough sensor profile reduction from phase ships that sensor profile reduction via hullmods on destroyer-scale civilian ships often isn't going to make much of a difference.
Military subsystems also removes the maintenance penalty for expanded cargo/fuel/crew storage.So what? Even without Efficiency Overhaul or story point investment, Militarized Subsystems isn't saving you any meaningful amount - expanded storage is just 1.5 supplies per month on a Buffalo, or around an order of magnitude less supplies per month than a single destroyer or two to three frigates, so getting rid of that supply cost isn't going to have a meaningful impact on your fleet's logistical footprint unless you've gone very heavy on the noncombatants. On top of that, Militarized Subsystems costs you 10 extra crew regardless of whether we're looking at the in-built version on a Buffalo (A) or the one you can add to any other Buffalo, and since crew costs 10 credits per month while supplies can usually be had for around 100-150 credits per unit you're effectively paying 100 credits per month to save an average of 150 or 200 credits per month, which is basically nothing.
Though if you’re using story points that also doesn’t matter.Willingness to invest story points in an Atlas or even a Colossus does not imply a similar willingness to invest story points in a Buffalo.
Buffalo (A) is good because it can use Expanded Cargo Holds without penalty and without s-mod investment.Except that it's not really without penalty; assuming no story point investment, you're just shifting the penalty from the +1.2/+1.5 supplies/month for Expanded Cargo Holds to the +8/+10 crew for Militarized Subsystems with/without Efficiency Overhaul, and especially considering that an extra 1.2 or 1.5 supplies per month per Buffalo is unlikely to be significant compared to your overall fleet supply consumption that's as near enough the same cost as matters.
I haul far more crew than the combined minimum for the fleet because I expect to lose crew from combat. +10 crew is insignificant when I have about a dozen warships from frigates to cruisers (and maybe one capital) with higher minimum (and maximum) crew during the time of the game I would consider medium-sized haulers. Late-game, I would move on to bigger haulers like Colossus or bigger (or Revenant).Buffalo (A) is good because it can use Expanded Cargo Holds without penalty and without s-mod investment.Except that it's not really without penalty; assuming no story point investment, you're just shifting the penalty from the +1.2/+1.5 supplies/month for Expanded Cargo Holds to the +8/+10 crew for Militarized Subsystems with/without Efficiency Overhaul, and especially considering that an extra 1.2 or 1.5 supplies per month per Buffalo is unlikely to be significant compared to your overall fleet supply consumption that's as near enough the same cost as matters.
I haul far more crew than the combined minimum for the fleet because I expect to lose crew from combat. +10 crew is insignificant when I have about a dozen warships from frigates to cruisers (and maybe one capital) with higher minimum (and maximum) crew during the time of the game I would consider medium-sized haulers. Late-game, I would move on to bigger haulers like Colossus or bigger (or Revenant).You're acting like Militarized Subsystems is mandatory; it isn't.
The built-in Military Subsystems means I can slap Expanded Cargo Holds and one other dock-mod of my choice (Additional Berthing, Auxiliary Fuel Tanks, Efficiency Overhaul, Surveying Equipment, whatever) on it.
You can only have two logistical hullmods. If you care about sensor profile, one of them is going to be either Militarized Subsystems or Insulated Engine Assembly. Having MilSub built-in means you can get Expanded Cargo Holds and something else, like ISU for even lower sensor profile or Surveying Equipment for exploration.How often do you really need hullmod-based sensor profile reduction, Expanded Cargo Holds, and something else while off exploring, especially with a stealth fleet? Phase ships generally have higher-than-average fuel capacity for their size/fuel consumption, being stealthy means you can avoid most fights and so shouldn't particularly need to carry around large quantities of supplies and spare crew to cover combat, most of the stuff you can pick up while out exploring is low-value junk that's barely worth hauling back to the Core even when you were already about to go back, most worlds that don't have ruins on them aren't really worth surveying unless you're being paid to do it because it takes exceptional resources or a hypershunt to do much better than whatever you found in Penelope's Star or Duzahk when you're any significant distance away from the Core (and secondary industries don't actually care about local resources, so unless you can tap a hypershunt an airless rock with high accessibility, such as Dorus in Penelope's Star, is already about as good a location for most of the secondary industries as you'll ever find), hostile things can often be lured away and dodged/outrun even if you can't sneak past them, Pathers can be paid off, and pirates might even be nonhostile due to how often missions that actually benefit from a stealth fleet are offered by pirate-aligned contacts.
How often do you really need hullmod-based sensor profile reduction, Expanded Cargo Holds, and something else while off exploring, especially with a stealth fleet?
But please, do continue to write walls of text about how a free thing doesn't matter because [wild assumptions].
You're acting like Militarized Subsystems is mandatory; it isn't.Of course it is not.
The plan is to have a 0.96.1a, though that's shaping up to be fairly beefy (as in, more than just bugfixes/QoL stuff).Which comes as a surprise to absolutely no one on this forum lol. We're used to polish updates taking a bit longer but having some cool new nice things in addition. Although I'm curious, is there anything you can talk about or is it more spoilery stuff?
Currently working through significant changes to Hostile Activity, and adding more content there, so it's not just pirates and Pathers. It's supposed to be a way for you to fight more things just those two, and I really want to flesh that out. And David has been adding some fun exploration content, too!
The HA stuff ("Colony Crises", now) I'll probably want to dive into with a blog post once it's closer to done!
Currently working through significant changes to Hostile Activity, and adding more content there, so it's not just pirates and Pathers. It's supposed to be a way for you to fight more things just those two, and I really want to flesh that out. And David has been adding some fun exploration content, too!
The HA stuff ("Colony Crises", now) I'll probably want to dive into with a blog post once it's closer to done!
Just fought a Hypershunt where one Omega had a Reality Disruptor. That was... something. I am going to say it's been buffed a bit too much? Between more frequent and longer range arcs any ship without 360 degree shield is almost guaranteed to be completely disabled, so I don't think we also need 25-50% longer repair times on top of that.
Disintegrator is like poison in other games. No good for a player who wants fast kill times, but burns defenses or hp, which works fine for the enemy (and Omega weapons are used mostly by the enemy). Disintegrator's scripted damage bypasses armor and wrecks it, and it combos well with cryoblaster. All it takes is a scratch. That said, Disintegrator does feel like a lame weapon to loot (and I am not too fond of Cryoflamer either). Much rather have a Resonator, Cryoblaster, or even Rift Beam. Resonator is the one weapon I cannot get enough of.That's a great comparison, I often also say that the problem is not the weapon itself, the game just revolves around fighting increasingly bigger and harder fleets (endgame). In the vast majority of scenarios, you're the one being pushed by PPT times and CR. Enemy doesn't care much. So this is why I'd be very careful making any changes to it, as it may become too punishing for low tech ships. I'd rather have enemies that are satisfying to fight and not worry about every single Omega weapon being at least a 8/10 weapon.
Just fought a Hypershunt where one Omega had a Reality Disruptor. That was... something. I am going to say it's been buffed a bit too much? Between more frequent and longer range arcs any ship without 360 degree shield is almost guaranteed to be completely disabled, so I don't think we also need 25-50% longer repair times on top of that.
Alternatively, just make the minipulser and VPD pure energy-type weapons, rather than hybrid weapons.That could be a buff for ships with synergy mounts or other mounts that cannot take hybrid weapons. I would like liked to try minipulser on Ziggurat, but they do not fit in synergy mounts.
Is the Askonia System Defense Armada hard-coded to have extra D-mods, relative to generic Diktat fleets? I've always seen it with a lot more than the surrounding fleets.
Also, do these special fleets restore themselves over time? I spent early game doing other things, and both special fleets were just Drams when I encountered them, because of constant attrition from pirates.
Currently working through significant changes to Hostile Activity, and adding more content there, so it's not just pirates and Pathers. It's supposed to be a way for you to fight more things just those two, and I really want to flesh that out. And David has been adding some fun exploration content, too!
The HA stuff ("Colony Crises", now) I'll probably want to dive into with a blog post once it's closer to done!
I noticed that the "Hidden Cache" in system with Sentinel is not actually hidden, i.e. you can find and interact it even without visiting Sentinel at all. Is that intended?
That's great to hear! Say, will there be changes to how Pather interest and mitigation work?
The pathers, as a threat, scale linearly with every colony item and every AI-core you install in your planets. The potential for scaling is infinite, there's no hard cap and no diminishing returns.
... you obtain ai-cores and industry items, and get smacked worse and worse for trying to use this cool stuff you find and fight for.
Is the Askonia System Defense Armada hard-coded to have extra D-mods, relative to generic Diktat fleets? I've always seen it with a lot more than the surrounding fleets.
Also, do these special fleets restore themselves over time? I spent early game doing other things, and both special fleets were just Drams when I encountered them, because of constant attrition from pirates.
If you play the storyline the usurpers you can actually find out why the defense armada is like this lorewise but to answer your question its due to the lions guard taking the majority of the military funding to make its fancy ships(although they just parade around rather than protect) and it's also one of the reasons why the current defense director is purchasing illegal hardware off the black market to compensate for this event.
It seems strange for the "flagship" task force of the Diktat military to be worse than the generic Diktat fleets that spawn from their markets. I thought the representation of that difference was the different doctrines (1/5/1/5 for LG, in favor of bigger and high-quality ships, and something with lower ship quality and more ships for normal Diktat).Well, Macario isn't an idiot, it's not a surprise the worst of his sabotage would be targeted on his most plausible rival.
It seems strange for the "flagship" task force of the Diktat military to be worse than the generic Diktat fleets that spawn from their markets. I thought the representation of that difference was the different doctrines (1/5/1/5 for LG, in favor of bigger and high-quality ships, and something with lower ship quality and more ships for normal Diktat).Well, Macario isn't an idiot, it's not a surprise the worst of his sabotage would be targeted on his most plausible rival.
Completely off topic: doing a pirate run, have a 'high' importance pirate at Eochu Bres. I'm only level 5 with a staggering officer corp of a level 1, 1, and 2 officer... and they just offered me an odyssey for 100k (I think it needed some marines, but I have them). Yes please!! I'm thinking of totally changing my build plan and going high combat to get both system and missiles for this ship.
Funny, I consider the 'odd job' missions to be ideal starting missions. You get a decent payout and all you have to do is dodge one slow fleet you know is coming at some point. Normally I don't need any cargo capacity or surveying ships either.The thing about revenge fleet is it is relentless like the Terminator. You can run but cannot hide. It needs to be dealt with sooner or later, one way or another. Last thing I need to worry about is a persistent enemy ready to pounce after I forget about it while busy doing something else. My first experience was miserable (because my fleet was weaker), and I got rid of it by feeding it to my battlestation of my first colony where tac lance spam tore the enemy apart. If I want to fight a bounty, I fight a bounty, not get mixed up in bounty mission disguised as a low-paying hitjob or whatever. Even though bounties do not pay enough, the odd jobs pay even less (for the enemies that get in the way during or after the mission)!
Excuse me, they're called X teases now 8)Hah, watch everyone just keep on calling it Twitter. Screw Ol' Musky.
Two months with no blog post or even teasers on Twitter. Come on, man.Speaking on this topic seriously, I do hope to see teasers / insight on progress posted on a platform other than Twitter. It's incredibly inaccessible now unless you have an account, which I have no plans to make.
Agreed on the twitter thing. Post those to the forums or the game blog! Even if it's not a full blog post, just a line of text and some demo animation. Twitter does not have a monopoly on tweet-length things!Two months with no blog post or even teasers on Twitter. Come on, man.Speaking on this topic seriously, I do hope to see teasers / insight on progress posted on a platform other than Twitter. It's incredibly inaccessible now unless you have an account, which I have no plans to make.
Already made a discussion about it and it seems they're thinking where to post them alongside Twitter.Why not here? Look at early blogs here; they are rather short (unlike later blogs that are massive in comparison).
Two months with no blog post or even teasers on Twitter. Come on, man.Speaking on this topic seriously, I do hope to see teasers / insight on progress posted on a platform other than Twitter. It's incredibly inaccessible now unless you have an account, which I have no plans to make.
Don't bother making an account it's still limited. They added this nefarious rule where you can view only a few posts per day and then you are "Rate Limited". You can increase it but that means you have to subscribe to twitter for that. Let's hope there are other places to post upcoming blogs, would be a miracle to post it here or even a youtube channel
Don't bother making an account it's still limited. They added this nefarious rule where you can view only a few posts per day and then you are "Rate Limited". You can increase it but that means you have to subscribe to twitter for that.Except for the very first day when rate limiting was introduced, I didn't have an issue with it. My bigger issue is that Nitter doesn't work because of them, forcing me to use regular Twitter website.
Let's hope there are other places to post upcoming blogsThere always were...
I don't see how Twitter has anything over other sites.It has the userbase.
As opposed to Youtube? The thing about Twitter is that it has a ton of people on it since it's about everything, most people don't give a damn about games there, obviously. You could say the same about Youtube but there you're at least recommended new content and something that you could like. Twitter is a garbage disposal unless you know who to follow in the first place.I don't see how Twitter has anything over other sites.It has the userbase.
And this may be anectodal since I don't live in America, but in my whole circle of people who follow games, not even a quarter of them use Twitter. Literally everyone uses Youtube, and almost all use Discord. It could have a larger following in Poland but the people I know just view Twitter as a business site, place where you gain traction for your campaign/stream/product/celebrity mumbo jumbo or just plain ol' internet points. It's not seen as a place of useful information. I haven't found a single indie game from there (not that I use it much but still).As weird as it sounds, I think one of Twitter's strengths is that it has a reputation of being about quick to parse things (240 characters at best, short videos, at most 4 images), so people from other places are unlikely to ignore links to Twitter, because they don't want to spend more than a minute on another website checking something out.
FWIW, recording a gif for twitter takes a few minutes; I've got nice software (Honeycam) that lets me record and do some editing (it's surprisingly capable in that regard). Youtube... I don't know, these days, they've got some kind of "shorts" thing that's basically tiktok? But that feels like the wrong sort of format for Starsector stuff. And a video seems like it'd probably need to be a bit longer-form and I'm not really set up to record and edit and do all that stuff. I mean, that's *doable* but it's not at all in place.There is not, in fact, a minimum video length requirement on Youtube, as far as I am aware. As for posts on Youtube: you cannot embed a video directly, you can link it like so at best (https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxcB0Pm38x3DLFra8s9ci_U7ayQVje8Giy), but you can also upload posts with gifs of maximum size of 5 MB (https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxRF7QaOe6GuQJ9iPieeo8tfJ2Q8xMmaMW), which Youtube doesn't automatically rerender as videos like Twitter, and you can also post WebP animations that work like gifs and are of significantly better quality for the same (or even smaller) size (https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxdEYuJ3giyzyEvId-zK5hFZGNO87X9JFG).
I will say that, based on a sample size of one (1) tweet a couple of days ago
a few things (some pirates and some misc Pather fleets, NOT any mission complications etc) get stronger with time, maxing out at around 2 cycles into the game (1.5 if a fast start option was chosen)
say will there be an update to the start menu? Would like to see some the ships passing by shooting at eachotherThat would be amazing. I remember loving the menu in Weird Worlds: Return to infinite space as a kid and just watching the chaos unfold. Although not sure if it would be too hectic here since ships appear big in the menu and you don't really want explosions happening a lot.
Btw I'm quite new to the Starsector "scene". I've played two campaigns earlier this year, now after Starfield kinda failed to scratch a certain itch I'm thinking of a third campaign focused only on missile boats. But I'd hate to start a campaign only to see a new update come out a few days later lol. Does the game get like one update a year, and the next update won't be coming out until 2024?Based on past trends? Yes.
Btw I'm quite new to the Starsector "scene". I've played two campaigns earlier this year, now after Starfield kinda failed to scratch a certain itch I'm thinking of a third campaign focused only on missile boats. But I'd hate to start a campaign only to see a new update come out a few days later lol. Does the game get like one update a year, and the next update won't be coming out until 2024?A major update about every 12-18 months with a more minor update some months after the major update we are now waiting for the minor update so we might get an update this year.
hey are there any new updates for the game? been awhileThere was a blog post 3 weeks ago.
- Added Hostile Activity "major event"
- Handles various hostile fleets found in systems with your colonies
- Multiple causes for hostile activity (use of AI cores, presence of a pirate base nearby, etc)
- Different causes have different resolutions
- If hostile activity is unchecked, colonies suffer penalties and eventually a major negative outcome of some sort (e.g. a raid or an act of Pather sabotage), after which there is a lull
- Goal is to give the player more of a warning before major negative events, and a choice in whether they want to handle the resolve the causes individually to avert the negative outcomes, or to just fight hostile fleets and get it under control that way, without addressing the causes
I didnt pay You for turning good game into anoying chain of events where you can choose between ball kick and face slap. If You dont like AI cores - remoove them. Also new ships looks like someone payed to 10 YO modder. Most disapointing patch ive seen from You.
I didnt pay You for turning good game into anoying chain of events where you can choose between ball kick and face slap. If You dont like AI cores - remoove them. Also new ships looks like someone payed to 10 YO modder. Most disapointing patch ive seen from You.
Have you actually played with the new colony threats system though? Overall its pretty easy to manage.
Why is there an exit campaign button in the combat pause screen, that just lets you exit without a secondary warning?It does have a prompt window already.
I rolled it back to previous patch conditions after spending 5 mils on pirate raids and other "fun" stuff.
More focus on luddic faith, way more, make Jesus Christ the Son of God part of it in a meaningful way, more dialogue options even if they don't change anything, it sucks that the "faithful" lines are super generic all things considered. Not enough christ, or iconography to speak of. I doubt the luddics would be aniconic. Icons speakasy if you pray, you can hear them. I understand if the dev does not believe, but faith is something magical and it can really only be written by someone who is faithful. I want luddic icons i can design luddic icons if it is needed i just want a space game that does faith right.also "amen" should just be a generic end dialogue option for when you speak to anyone spiritually more uplifted
I prefer the Luddic Church to lean more toward the demonic cult of heretics that they are, so player can purge them like any other group of evil cultists elsewhere. Luddic Church is insidious (especially after I meet their Baird knockoff after the pilgrimage), while the Path is at least open about it.want to know how i can tell that you don't get it?
Fairly sure that lore-wise, all of the Luddic leaders are varying degrees of complete and utter fanatics.I prefer the Luddic Church to lean more toward the demonic cult of heretics that they are, so player can purge them like any other group of evil cultists elsewhere. Luddic Church is insidious (especially after I meet their Baird knockoff after the pilgrimage), while the Path is at least open about it.want to know how i can tell that you don't get it?
Luddics are NOT Christians. Nor are they any other modern or historic religion.yes they are. Ludd is the second coming of christ, it is organized like the catholic church, even has a papal states, preaches about the end times, and is populist. The whole thing is very much a christian denomination and if the dev has the same view as you then i weep for the wasted potential. The ludds should go full christ, have an actual connection to the past, be the exception in a society of confused vagabonds, thieves and fascists. I get a lot of you have hate-boners for the church and can't imagine a world without "religion le bad" but i am a man of faith and i see the great potential the luddics can have if only the dev stopped tip-toeing to appease people like you. Faith is so complex and faith is something people today are sleeping on, they just don't get it and refuse to get it and that's just a bummer cause open your eyes mannnn stop being a little kid about faith.
More focus on luddic faith, way more, make Jesus Christ the Son of God part of it in a meaningful way, more dialogue options even if they don't change anything, it sucks that the "faithful" lines are super generic all things considered. Not enough christ, or iconography to speak of.
yes they are. Ludd is the second coming of christ, it is organized like the catholic church, even has a papal states, preaches about the end times, and is populist. The whole thing is very much a christian denominationI don't know what kind of person looks at Standard SFF Knockoff Christianity and decides that it ought to be Literal Actual IRL Christianity. Well, I do know people like this exist and have encountered cases elsewhere, I just find them incomprehensible.
Luddics are NOT Christians. Nor are they any other modern or historic religion.This right here is why, if anything, I treat them as a sacrilegious demon cult led by a space witch (Baird #2) if I care to take it seriously. Otherwise, they are yet another annoying faction to rob blueprints from then either ignore them or wipe them - and the rest of the core worlds - off the map if I want to colonize the entire sector or get fed up with their backstabbing endless expedition spam.
All that said, the gaming audience traditionally comes from a certain viewpoint about religion that tends toward the negative and portrayals of religious factions in games tend toward the negative as well. The challenge I set out for myself several years ago was to offer a way for some (not all, obviously) people from that general audience to think about religion with a little more nuance. Is Starsector successful in this? I like to think it is, sometimes. I hope.
Yeah, you succeeded.