Fractal Softworks Forum

Starsector => Announcements => Topic started by: Alex on February 01, 2023, 12:48:34 PM

Title: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2023, 12:48:34 PM
Blog post here (https://fractalsoftworks.com/2023/05/05/starsector-0-96a-release/).

Hotfix: 0.96a-RC10, May 20, 2023

Ships:

Weapons:

Ship AI:

Miscellaneous:

Modding:

Bugfixing:


Hotfix: 0.96a-RC9, May 13, 2023

Hostile Activity:

Ships:

Fighters:

Miscellaneous:

Modding:

Bugfixing:


Hotfix: 0.96a-RC8, 5/6/2023

Miscellaneous:

Bugfixing:



Changes as of May 05, 2023

Campaign

Miscellaneous:

Combat

Ships:

Weapons:

Hullmods:

Ship AI:

Bugfixing:



Changes as of April 12, 2023

Campaign:

Combat:

Miscellaneous:

Ships:


Fighters:

Weapons:


Hullmods:


Ship AI:

Modding:


Bugfixing:



Changes as of February 01, 2023

Campaign:


Combat:

Miscellaneous:

Ships:


Fighters:

Weapons:


Hullmods:


Ship AI:

Modding:


Bugfixing:
[/list]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: robepriority on February 01, 2023, 12:54:39 PM
Interesting, going by story mission names, they all seem like branches or sidequests rather than a direct continuation of Galatia.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Yubbin on February 01, 2023, 12:59:27 PM
Looks great! I know this will probably take longer then I want to release, but it'll be out soon!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 01, 2023, 01:07:27 PM
Here we go…  ;D I’ll have to digest all this later but I like pretty much all the existing ship changes. I can’t wait to try the new ships too.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 01, 2023, 01:08:27 PM
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.

Didn't expect that Typhoon Reaper change, outta nowhere tbh. And now we have medium Hammers so maybe to make the competition more interesting.

Medusa getting a small buff woohooo. Honestly everything else is just perfect.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jonlissla on February 01, 2023, 01:09:14 PM
Quote
Changed starting Wolf variant to have the Pulse Laser on autofire (thanks, ZiggyD!)

The hero we need, but don't deserve.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TheDTYP on February 01, 2023, 01:09:50 PM
Changes as of February 01, 2023
  • Fixed screen scaling issue with TOP SECRET minigame

Ummmmm... whaaaaaaaaaaaaat???
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 01, 2023, 01:10:48 PM
There's tons of great stuff in here but this, this makes me happy:

Quote
Added 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.

Changes as of February 01, 2023
  • Fixed screen scaling issue with TOP SECRET minigame

Ummmmm... whaaaaaaaaaaaaat???

Have at you! * swish, swash, buckle! *
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Garafetdin on February 01, 2023, 01:13:04 PM
>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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 01, 2023, 01:14:44 PM
>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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amazigh on February 01, 2023, 01:16:38 PM
Overall, changes look really nice

But uh:
  • 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)

Squall really did not need a boost to anti-shield performance, it was already generally considered a very strong weapon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lukas04 on February 01, 2023, 01:17:16 PM
Nice stuff. Glad to see the UI Modding fixes/improvements in there.
On the note of all the Spec related modding stuff in this changelog, as far as i know SettingsAPI.putSpec() and SettingsAPI.getAllSpecs() seem to be broken at the moment. 

For example, this line of code returns an empty list (Kotlin)
Code
var test = Global.getSettings().getAllSpecs(ShipSystemSpecAPI::class.java)
Same when i tried it with a few other specs. I also failed to succesfuly have any Spec added with the putSpec() method. 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: IroncladLion on February 01, 2023, 01:25:51 PM
Good lord, there's a lot of tasty stuff in here.

Excited by all those new missiles getting added, that should be very nice. And lots of little quality of life bits are appreciate.

Good to see lots of nice things for modders as well. Overall this looks like it'll be an awesome update, looking forward to it!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bulletkin on February 01, 2023, 01:29:59 PM
Whole lot of changes I'm excited for - Medium hammers at long last, new story stuff, the friggin' orion device... I can hardly wait!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: StriderGunship on February 01, 2023, 01:38:08 PM
I don't think punishing players for missclicking is a good idea, as if the command point system isn't as bad as it is already. 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jackundor on February 01, 2023, 01:39:20 PM
alright, so squall get's it's shield damage buffed cyclone and typhoon get buffed, burstpd gets buffed but hurricane nerfed again and hephaestus gets a completely inconsequential buff
bruh
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 01, 2023, 01:43:49 PM
I'm betting 100% there's a typo somewhere since Alex had a whole part about how Squalls were OP in the blog post about DEM missiles.

Neither of the weapons you mentioned getting buffed were considered very strong, in fact Cyclones were avoided pretty much. Hurricane has less damage but now doesn't need ECCM nearly as much, which is a big positive in my eyes. Although it could stand to have more ammo.

HAG did get a pretty meh buff but at least it's now clear which role it has, and it's probably going to be that much better at it for me to hate it a tiny bit less.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BreenBB on February 01, 2023, 01:50:49 PM
  • Fixed issue that sometimes caused ships to vent while under actually-significant fire

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.

Also another good idea, is add Force Vent order, which tells AI immediately vent, it would help in such situations.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 01, 2023, 01:52:41 PM
I can't believe you missed a chance to call it 0.98. Do you even meme?
Quote
Persean League now has its own music
Are you entertained now, the guy who complained about PL not having its own theme?
Quote
Ship recovery dialog now shows normal and story point recovery in the same screen
Oh neat, the good display is now default.
Quote
Bonus experience quadruples XP gains at max level instead of doubling them as normal
That's big. Thank you! I might finally stop having that permanent green bar. Maybe.
Quote
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
I would have preferred not to have any time limit, but I will take it anyway.
Quote
Eagle changes
Oh, it's slightly faster now, too? Sweet.
Quote
Gemini: Removed built-in Civilian-grade Hull
Just don't remember to add it back in next release, so the confusion continues.
Quote
Phase Teleporter changes
Fifteen seconds... But at least Hyperion isn't a whole different ship when you put SO on it, I guess?
Quote
Added Pilum LRM Catapult (large missile)
Added Jackhammer (medium missile)
The forum said "No, Alex. You are the modders."
And then, Alex made an Onslaught reskin.
Quote
Heavy Burst Laser:
  • Remomved ability to ignore decoy flares
Was it too good, when it had these buffs and ignored decoys? What ships did you test it on?
Quote
Integrated Point Defense AI:
  • Converting small weapons to PD is now the s-mod effect bonus
That's an unexpected change. Did you change it to avoid interaction with elite Point Defence? Because you felt it was too strong anyway?

HAG's accuracy buff would make it a better general purpose HE weapon, better than Mjolnir is in that role. I like it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 01, 2023, 01:55:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: T3TOX on February 01, 2023, 01:56:33 PM
Som exciting new content to explore. Looking forward to the new Venture variants!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Drazan on February 01, 2023, 02:02:04 PM
Exciting features and great work as always.

NO SAFETY OVERRIDE REWORK REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SapphireSage on February 01, 2023, 02:02:25 PM
Squall really did not need a boost to anti-shield performance, it was already generally considered a very strong weapon.

A large part of why Squalls were so strong was because of their long reach, reliable penetrating of PD, and constant stream of high DPH rockets that could whittle down and overpower all but low-tech armor making so unless you were a Mora or tougher you'd be taking heavy armor/hull damage for the otherwise correct move of putting your shield down for it, same as old Sabot. Its stronger against AI's tendency to prefer shields, but now it will hopefully not be as oppressive to deal with if targeted by one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 01, 2023, 02:04:52 PM
HAG gets quite inaccurate at max range so accuracy buffs are indirect DPS buffs. Phase Teleporter will make non-SO Hyperion way better. Systems Expertise will be mandatory though.

The new Ventures are awesome. The Brave Little Toasters of SS.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 01, 2023, 02:14:26 PM
I agree on the HAG buff: thats actually quite nice. It's a pretty darn good hull+medium armor killer weapon and this is going to let it be quite a bit more efficient vs slightly smaller targets, and at clustering its shots to not spread its damage out over so many armor cells.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on February 01, 2023, 02:17:27 PM
I just read the whole changelog... Woah, awesome! :D
Eagle mega buffed (22->18DP, 600->700 dissipation and 50->60 speed)? Nice.

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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 01, 2023, 02:18:47 PM
New missiles, new ships, autolance, autoloader, lots to explore once the update is out.
Eagle really needed a buff, can't wait to give it a spin with M energy changes and autoloader.

Squall getting more shield damage is a bit surprising, that's the one thing that might be a little out there.
That, and LP manticore running around with SO, cyclone and double HMG :)
Like all the other changes, special mention for pulse and tac laser boost.

Was hoping for SO/Monitors getting a minor kicking and a buff to at least 1 low-tech/midline frigate so there is an  expensive option there, can't have everything.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2023, 02:20:44 PM
Thank you everyone!

A bunch of assorted responses below:

Interesting, going by story mission names, they all seem like branches or sidequests rather than a direct continuation of Galatia.

Nice catch - yeah, that's the case! They're quite meaty, however.

Quote
Added 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.

(Gotta give full credit to MesoTroniK for the idea!)


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.

I ought to take a look at that, yeah.


>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!

Ah, apologies! Just couldn't make it work out.


Squall really did not need a boost to anti-shield performance, it was already generally considered a very strong weapon.

To be perfectly honest, I'm a little surprised to see that in the notes; in my memory the scripted damage was just enough to bring it up to its original damage, not exceed it. I'm just going to... there.


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.

That's right, its usefulness is extremely limited right now.


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.

I mean, you can keep doing that, so *thumbs up* :)


... and hephaestus gets a completely inconsequential buff

I'm just going to say it: the Hephaestus is underrated.


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.


Heavy Burst Laser:
  • Remomved ability to ignore decoy flares
Was it too good, when it had these buffs and ignored decoys? What ships did you test it on?
[/quote]

It's more to avoid stepping on IPDAI's toes, and with the buffs I think it's fine. I was always a bit ambivalent about that aspect of it.

Quote
Integrated Point Defense AI:
  • Converting small weapons to PD is now the s-mod effect bonus
That's an unexpected change. Did you change it to avoid interaction with elite Point Defence? Because you felt it was too strong anyway?

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.

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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BreenBB on February 01, 2023, 02:26:44 PM
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.

Spoiler
And while lack of possibility to capture Tesseract looks logical, since it almost alien looking ship, which also get completely destroyed shard by shard in combat, 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?
[close]

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.

If you can add an order which can tell ship to force vent, it would be best solution, since you don't need to change the AI, and give player ability to control situation where ship needs to vent, but just refuses. It often happens when ship stray off from other allies and simply can't escape behind, and you miss that since you also control own flagship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2023, 02:32:19 PM
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'll keep that in mind! Probably not for this release, but still. The Guardian dates to before the "different version for player" idea so part of the answer is probably just "didn't think of it at that point".

It also does have some awkwardly placed weapons which may be more apparent/annoying if it's on the player side, with full freedom in what weapons to put on it...

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?

Perhaps a self-destruct in all critical systems? The actual provenance of the Guardian-type design is in some doubt, and it's not unreasonable that some effort was put forth to keep it that way.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on February 01, 2023, 02:45:53 PM
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!
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 Aurora on the other hand is a beast, sure, the different mobility system helps but so do more medium slots. One of my favourite ships. :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Buggie on February 01, 2023, 02:50:37 PM

  • 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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: blueberry on February 01, 2023, 02:52:32 PM
can we get a sample of the new exploration music please?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on February 01, 2023, 03:00:11 PM
As someone that doesn't use missiles if they are not infinite, I'm so happy to finally have something to mount on a large mount! 
Now I can have my salamander/medium pilum/large pilum ships! 
Especially liked the venture(P) change with the large missile slot on the back! perfect for a large pilum!...I only wish the 2 medium mounts were changed to composite(the one that can mount missiles and balistics, sorry If I remember it wrong, maybe hybrid?) so I could put more pilums in there and turn it into the perfect pilum boat, 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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Shogouki on February 01, 2023, 03:07:38 PM
Awesome!  Thanks so much for your work Alex!

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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: intrinsic_parity on February 01, 2023, 03:16:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: bananana on February 01, 2023, 03:25:53 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2023, 03:44:23 PM
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.

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.


  • 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...)


can we get a sample of the new exploration music please?

Ah, sorry - that'll have to wait for the release!


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

Hahah yes, exactly!


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.

and if not is the process for upgrading this new version to Java 8 the same process?

Yes.


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 get what you're saying, but from actual testing, there's more to it. Multiple Squalls hitting the same target are capable of doing far too much actual non-shield damage. An easy example in the dev build is the Pegasus, since it has 4 large missile slots - and with the old Squall, it was capable of absolutely dismantling a Paragon mostly just through Squall damage. This shows up with massed Squalls on separate ships as well, of course.

The point here is to reduce the impact of Squall saturation, so that there's such a thing as overkill, and there's more room for other missiles - without significantly nerfing the Squall when it's used in smaller numbers.

(I'm going to go ahead and remove the EMP damage, though; forgot it was there and its anti-shield role is clearer without it.)


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

... you know, I don't remember. This was probably a modding request from someone; vanilla doesn't use it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: AcaMetis on February 01, 2023, 03:45:17 PM
Looking forward to all of these new toys to play with ;D.

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. Maybe pirates are less willing to target a system with established major factions than an isolated one (unless said major factions are busy/distracted with hostile activities with other factions/there's a pirate market in the system?), or maybe said factional hostilities should have a positive/negative impact (depending on what the player does) which doesn't manifest (as much?) in isolated colonies. Something along those lines, I'm not sure if it's really appropriate/possible/worthwhile to implement. Just an idea to maybe make a strategy you wouldn't immediately think is possible a bit more unique.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Achi Cirno on February 01, 2023, 03:49:52 PM
In the light of new update I would like to talk about some changes and some suggestion.

here's a guide I've translated in hope to improve everyone's overall understanding of starsector's vanilla weapons, and for reference of things the team has concluded in version 0.95.

https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=25973.15

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.

I believe every 100 range has a price tag, but spending 1 more OP than light autocannon just for dual autocannon isn't worth it. Range is very precious, since you can shot the enemy before they shot them(and raise their flux level). Lower accuracy pushes it further into the grave.

I'm looking forward for the new update.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on February 01, 2023, 03:53:30 PM
the Pegasus, since it has 4 large missile slots
You mean I can fire 24 pilums at once!?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on February 01, 2023, 03:58:15 PM
... and hephaestus gets a completely inconsequential buff

I'm just going to say it: the Hephaestus is underrated.
The Hephaestus is really really good at punching down; it'll maul destroyers and frigates no problem.

...The problem is that 'punching down' is generally not what I want out of my large slot ballistics; combined with the HAG's high flux cost, it's a weapon that, in a vacuum, seems decent... but just doesn't have any ships where it shines. Now, if there were, say, a pirate Champion variant that boasted a large ballistic in place of the usual large energy? That might be a pretty good ship to put a HAG on. But for capital ships, I want guns that can deal with capital-grade armor, and for a Dominator, I don't want my hardpoints specialized as small-ship-killers, and for a Manticore... well, okay, it actually works decently on a Manticore; not great - a single HAG is over its dissipation limit (with max vents) on its own - but it's functional.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Üstad on February 01, 2023, 04:04:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2023, 04:23:46 PM
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.

I think it'll have a little impact just based on various pirate-base-proximity etc related factors.


the Pegasus, since it has 4 large missile slots
You mean I can fire 24 pilums at once!?

It has Fast Missile Racks, so you can do that 4 times in a row!


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.

See the Ship AI section of the patch notes! In brief: a bunch of different improvements there.


Regarding the Hephaestus and high armor: just did a quick test vs a simulation Onslaught (so, no Heavy Armor, but otherwise, that's still on the high end of armor you'll encounter) with its AI turned off, the measurements are all approximate, but anyway:
The Hephaestus takes around 12 seconds before it starts dealing hull damage.
The Hellbore takes around 8 seconds.

So, even on the high end, the difference - I mean, it's significant, but the Hellbore is a dedicated anti-armor gun while the Hephaestus is much more versatile. I don't think the difference is big enough that you can say it can't deal with high armor. The flux cost is a factor here - it's around 2x the DPS for proportionally more flux - so yeah, one might argue that it costs too much flux to deal with high armor, but deal with it it *can*. (Another "soft" factor is that if the Hellbore somehow misses, that really hurts it, while the Hephaestus is both less likely to miss and can afford to have a shot go stray since there are so many.)

I think any direct anti-armor improvement to the Hephaestus risks sidelining the Hellbore, except as a budget option. (Which is not an unreasonable niche. I'm just not sold on the Hephaestus being as bad as all that. E.G. I think you can very much put one on a Dominator, especially if the officer has Ordnance Expertise...)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: braciszek on February 01, 2023, 04:24:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 01, 2023, 04:31:35 PM
Now that I've had time to read these...

Squall stuff: I'm very much in favor of the change since anti-shield was what they were for and letting heavily armored ships just armor tank them seems ok. Was their targeting improved at all? ECCM package made them way better (though not quite as mandatory as the Hurricane).

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.

Eagle: The Eagle thread prevails! Less DP, more flux, more speed, Missile Autoloader, Graviton buffs, IR Autolance, Ion Beam buffs, Burst Laser Buffs... I don't think any other ship got as much as direct/indirect attention as this guy. (Still won't be a world-beater but I think it will feel "solid" for most situations)

Jackhammer: Not gonna lie, that's pretty awesome but it looks like it will have low ammo.

Cyclone Reaper Launcher: The Twitter post makes me a believer. It really did need help and as a Capital killer, I think it will cement it near the top of the list.

"Update Conquest Sprite" - hmm...

Re: the Fury - I think it's fine. It has a ridiculous shield and can reliably use a Heavy Blaster along with a Medium Missile. Indirect buffs to other Medium Energies will help it as well. I think it can force a draw against most Cruisers and can absolutely ruin Destroyers because they can't compete with the shield. I guess I don't expect my Furies to try to hang with Heavy Cruisers or Capitals but they sure can take out the rest of the small fry.

"Added Planetkiller mission" - The Ghost of Maxios still haunts us.

"The Usurpers" - Who's usurping who?

Can't wait to watch an Invictus trade shots with a Station, or heck, trade shots with a fleet of pirates. It will get hard-countered by Paragons and Radiants but I really like that it exists.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on February 01, 2023, 04:42:08 PM
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:
Spoiler
Improved danger detection from mines

    Added a little extra radius where the AI considers them "dangerous"
    Aware of the presence of nearby enemy fighters and asteroids that might trigger the mine early
    Fixed issue that caused the AI to actually just ignore own mines that triggered by proximity and not timeout
    Fixed issue that caused the AI to ignore own mines that were drifting even slightly away from it
    The Doom friendly fire (especially self-friendly-fire) issues *should* be resolved
    The issue where the AI would continue to shield towards a phased Doom while getting hit by mines from behind should be resolved, as well
[close]
Browser text search: Control+E or Control+F, also F3


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.

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.
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. :D

Welp, after the nerf 15->20DP in 0.95.1 I did a bit of testing with the fury, I do not remember the details but just found it to be very lackluster... Thank you for your replies.

>drover to receive a minor DP rollback?
This! +1
Well, yeah, there is the rework of reserve deployment...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Nick XR on February 01, 2023, 04:46:02 PM
Quote
Changed starting Wolf variant to have the Pulse Laser on autofire (thanks, ZiggyD!)

The hero we need, but don't deserve.

This will make a HUGE difference in new player experience.  I can still remember wondering how the heck to play this game while trying to kill stuff with the gravitron beam and not "getting" when to use missiles.

Looks amazing!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on February 01, 2023, 04:46:33 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on February 01, 2023, 04:57:29 PM
I really really like how some missile weapons have various sizes based on the mount. 
redundant as it may be, I think it would be amazing having some of the less "specialized" weapons have larger/smaller versions as well! 
a medium/large tactical laser comes to mind. 
Having different laser effects for different mount size is great and all, but sometimes I just need some fillers that don't consume much flux/points and don't look weird for that particular build. 
Maybe if not as a different weapons, how about enabling some weapons to receive some buffs when mounted on bigger mounts? maybe even scale up the sprite....For example I could be able to put a tac laser on the medium slot, then toggle a switch to enable it to perform as a medium sized weapon, paying increased points/flux in exchange of better stats. 
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.


Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amazigh on February 01, 2023, 05:06:59 PM
Regarding the Hephaestus and high armor: just did a quick test vs a simulation Onslaught...

...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.
As you said, this is without skills / armour hullmods / cr bonuses, and i think those might bias things towards the hellbore some more.
Maybe a small (5-10%) reduction in flux cost on the Heph would be good?

As things stand i see the hellbore as a nice cheap standard weapon, that i can use as my "standard" in my large ballistic slots, as nothing compares to it in anti-armour ability, and i can then quite easily use smaller mounts for anti-shield weapons / PD.
Then i can spend some more OP and swap the hellbore to something else if i want a different role (MKIX for shields, Devastator for PD, Gauss for sniping)
And when it comes to the hephaestus, i almost feel like in situations where i have the flux to spare and i'd think about using one... i'd rather take a Mjolnir, as despite the even higher flux cost, it offers better anti-shield performance as well as some nice EMP damage.


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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Buggie on February 01, 2023, 05:10:11 PM
  • 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...)


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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 01, 2023, 05:18:20 PM
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 :)
I think hellbore's silly slow projectiles and glacial turnrate (especially with armored weapon mounts) aren't considered with enough weight for these comparisons.
Been tinkering a lot with Atlas, Dominator and Onslaught mid hellbore vs heph. Overall heph always felt better, and the ships with heph usually did better based on the battle reports.
Having some reapers/hurricanes also changes a lot, the targets hellbore can consistently hit also hate both.

Let's wait and see what an accuracy increase does, I like that it leans into what makes heph different instead of just upping damage/hit.
IMO heph was already decent, just not a standout like squalls or HIL.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 01, 2023, 05:47:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Shogouki on February 01, 2023, 05:49:49 PM
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.


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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 01, 2023, 05:57:09 PM
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.


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.

Halved all of these - just halving the per-shot wouldn't do much, I don't think.


Jackhammer: Not gonna lie, that's pretty awesome but it looks like it will have low ammo.

(9 ammo, btw, and 9 OP.)



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.

Not for this release; I'll probably look at Neural Link again at some point, though. And possibly Cybernetic Augmentation. Energy Weapon Mastery, I'm quite happy with.


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.

I think at that point you might as well have different-size versions of that weapon, it'd be simpler than adding a bunch of rules! I don't really want to have too many "same but different size" weapons - it makes slot variety more meaningful and interesting. Basically, if you do too much of this, you take away from the things that make ships unique, so it needs to be approached carefully.

As you said, this is without skills / armour hullmods / cr bonuses, and i think those might bias things towards the hellbore some more.

Interesting point! A quick, non-rigorous test with max skills on both sides (and 70% CR) shows the Hephaestus with some relative improvement in that same test - 13 seconds vs 10 to start damaging an Onslaught's hull.


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.

Hey, that's a good point, I wasn't thinking about the new ships! And the Retribution's comparatively high flux dissipation won't hurt here, either. Neither will the Invictus' lack of shields, which makes it much more ok to over-flux.


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?

Ah - this probably belongs in another thread, but yeah, I'd expect the fleet inflator code to nuke s-mods. It treats existing variants as "roughly the shape the actual ship should have once it's done with it" and not "this is the actual ship", if that makes sense. The ships don't "exist" prior to the inflator running is another way to think about it.


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.

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.


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.

(I do think the +flux dissipation of OE is overtuned a bit. Not by a factor of 2, but maybe 3 dissipation per 2 OP might be more reasonable - it's one of my next things to look at. It's nice that it enables more builds, but I'm not sure it needs the full current bonus to do that...)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on February 01, 2023, 06:05:06 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on February 01, 2023, 06:16:54 PM
Will Tech-Mining be using Event System for .96?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on February 01, 2023, 06:22:22 PM
Modding:
[snip]
Thanks, Alex!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Shogouki on February 01, 2023, 06:28:21 PM

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.


Ahh ok, thanks!  I might have misread or misunderstood their hypothesis.  I'm hoping that upgrading my game to Java 8 will help because I really do love this game with lots of mods!  I just wish there was a list somewhere of which files from Oracle I need to download and use.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Spacer Heater on February 01, 2023, 06:38:53 PM
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.
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on February 01, 2023, 06:51:02 PM
any details on how much armor does smodded shield shunt provide?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Low Settings on February 01, 2023, 07:18:06 PM
"Our missiles will blot out the Sun"
- Manticore LP, Venture P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: redvyper on February 01, 2023, 07:32:55 PM
Terrific notes so far!

For new here and/or wondering... in the past there's been 5-7 months between notes being posted and then the patch dropping.

Surprises can always happen though I am sure!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Madbadger2 on February 01, 2023, 07:33:55 PM
Thank you everyone!

...


Quote
Integrated Point Defense AI:
  • Converting small weapons to PD is now the s-mod effect bonus
That's an unexpected change. Did you change it to avoid interaction with elite Point Defence? Because you felt it was too strong anyway?

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.


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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zr0Potential on February 01, 2023, 07:54:23 PM
Very excited for the new update, especially for new Music and Arts (with that distinct Starsector style)  ;D

One thing that got me curious is
Quote
Waystations now pull in a small quantity of Volatiles and Transplutonics
Wonder what's the reason and or explanation behind this one
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on February 01, 2023, 08:08:24 PM
Very excited for the new update, especially for new Music and Arts (with that distinct Starsector style)  ;D

One thing that got me curious is
Quote
Waystations now pull in a small quantity of Volatiles and Transplutonics
Wonder what's the reason and or explanation behind this one
Game-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."
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Timid on February 01, 2023, 08:12:54 PM
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)?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 01, 2023, 08:25:07 PM
Stoked! The light is now visible at the end of the tunnel! Huzzah!

Gotta ask though, is there any REDACTED stuff you didn't include in the patch notes? Hehe
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: IonDragonX on February 01, 2023, 09:01:37 PM
  • Fulgent: added built-in Energy Bolt Coherer (increases base non-beam energy/hybrid weapon range)
Okay, this new Hullmod is listed in the Ships section but not the Hullmods section. Is it unavailable to the player?

  • Added two new weapons (Kinetic Blaster and Gigacannon), only available to/from the Lion's Guard
Are they salvageable by the player?

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! :D
Eagle mega buffed (22->18DP, 600->700 dissipation and 50->60 speed)? Nice.
There are other indirect buffs for it, too. Reapers+Missile Autoloader+AI improved for off-center missiles seem almost custom made for Eagle.

"Our missiles will blot out the Sun"
- Manticore LP, Venture P
"Then we shall flak in the shade."
- Sarissa-class Support Fighter, Defensive Targeting Array
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: bananana on February 01, 2023, 09:41:04 PM
... 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
without the weird french magik, i mean
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 01, 2023, 11:45:29 PM
Fury: Imagine if Shrike suddenly costed 10 DP, this is how I feel about the Fury. It's really anemic for its price, only being strong in the hands of a player (but what isn't, there's also better flagships). People keep mentioning buffs to energy weapons but forget Fury isn't the only high tech ship in the game, EVERYTHING is going to get slightly better. Aurora even more so since it has many more medium mounts, why use Fury then? Shields might be durable but the ship crumbles under pressure. Ship system that's suicide for AI, almost no endurance when fighting, few mounts = somehow the same cost as Gryphon...

Again, I get that it's a fast ship and that's its whole schtick, but it realistically can't cost more than the new Eagle, it just can't.

HAG vs Hellbore: I admit I was a HAG hater for a long time, but with this change, the accuracy starts to show big time. The flux cost is annoying but as mentioned, it might be cool on new ships.

Jackhammer: Being usable only three times reminds me of the Harpoon Pod, it'll need ammo boosts but boy is that scary potent for a medium missile. Imagine a Dominator chucking 9 Hammers at once, yikess.

EDIT: Adding onto the Fury part, I consider it equal to Eradicator(P). Ship that can go in, deliver a few punches, but then needs to back away for a breather. And even if they costed the same I'd still prefer the Eradicator since it has much more reliable mounts and is less tricky for AI to use. Fury is also unfortunately in the worst place for "punching down" as many seem to defend it as such. Shrike doesn't have the same glaring issue since it's very cheap and disposable, costing a bit more than your average frigate. But the Fury costs the same as an average cruiser, while having the performance of a super destroyer, or light cruiser. Odyssey, another ship with the same system also works well due to much better mounts and crazy speed for its size. Fury doesn't really get to escape the ships that can threaten it since most can either also burn in, or have other mobility system for pressure.

Funnily enough, of all the weapons that were buffed Fury barely uses any of those. Typhoons and Jackhammers can give it serious firepower but Falcon(P) exists which has DOUBLE the missile potency and the exact same DP cost.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 02, 2023, 01:00:09 AM
No stats for the new ships? At least give us screenshots of the base stats like deployment cost!

Quote
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%

Does this mean that the Gemini now deploys THREE Cobra bombers?

Quote
Added Manticore (LP)

SO Hammer Barrage? That's not terrifying at all!

Quote
Brilliant:

    Changed system to Plasma Burn
    Reduced shield upkeep to 0.4 (was: 0.5)

Is that shield upkeep or shield efficiency?

Quote
Hurricane 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?

Quote
Logistics 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.

RE:HAG - it was always a good weapon but the problem is that toughest enemies in the game are all shield tanked. Large weapons dealing explosive damage just don't matter much, you're always better with a kinetic.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 02, 2023, 01:06:20 AM
@BCS
Ah yes you reminded me, Drover is currently overpriced and it seems none of the changes really help it.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bastion.Systems on February 02, 2023, 01:08:47 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 02, 2023, 01:12:28 AM
Isn't that simultaneously kinda fitting for a union? Every planet still retains their local government, and the main duties they have towards the League are military, not political. Kazeron is influential, but it's not the capital. There's no capital.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on February 02, 2023, 01:36:00 AM
@BCS
...and Apex 20.
Wut? I thought it'd be a new capital so 20DP cannot be?!...

Also: More threads about the Fury: https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=22611.0
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=24932.0
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 02, 2023, 01:37:15 AM
@BCS
Ah yes you reminded me, Drover is currently overpriced and it seems none of the changes really help it.

Drover has four small missile slots, which is potentially a lot of Harpoons, especially since so many missiles means EMR is a no-brainer. Unfortunately in my experience(I used them as fighter support for Brawler LP spam) Drovers never actually launch most of their missiles, they just refuse to do it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 02, 2023, 01:40:27 AM
@BCS
...and Apex 20.
Wut? I thought it'd be a new capital so 20DP cannot be?!...

Also: More threads about the Fury: https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=22611.0
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=24932.0
Apex is a cruiser built around Terminator Drones and Energy Bolt Coherer. Nova is the battlecruiser.

Oh hey it's a thread I made, called it 1.5 years ago!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on February 02, 2023, 02:56:23 AM
Reading a changelog in the morning is always a nice start in the day. I especially like the ones improving the atmosphere like the major event system, new missions, new music and new graphics.

One thing though confuses me:
  • Cheap commodity mission: remote pickup of legal goods variation now requires other colony to not be hostile to the player

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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: tomatopaste on February 02, 2023, 04:01:05 AM
 ShipEngineControllerAPI.ShipEngineAPI.repair() please, since .disable() already exists in the API
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gaaius on February 02, 2023, 04:46:54 AM
Quote
Added message explaining what's going on and what to do when there's no flagship deployed and the player starts in the command shuttle
Does this mean that the player always starts in the command shuttle if you dont deploy your flagship? - that would be ( / sounds ) annoying

Quote
Command points are no longer refunded when the last order given during a pause is cancelled
(Fundamental problem in that the same sequence of orders and a cancel could be a legitimate order or a "never mind")
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

Quote
Ordering an individual ship to retreat no longer requires a command point or opens the command frequency if that ship is out of peak time
thats good
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Spareribs on February 02, 2023, 05:20:55 AM
WOOHOO!! I'm so excited to read the patch notes!  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on February 02, 2023, 05:41:08 AM
Is Sarissa low_tech_bp or rare_bp?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cyan Leader on February 02, 2023, 06:16:55 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 02, 2023, 07:14:10 AM
Drover is competent as a battlecarrier, but if its system still takes -25% because it has more than one bay, I prefer for it to have "No System" or flares to avoid hurting itself by killing replacement rate with Reserve Deployment.

HAG was too inaccurate to be useful without all of the accuracy boosters.  If I had ePD, Devastator was often a better choice.  If not, Mjolnir.

Fury at 20 DP may look better with other cruisers' DP changed.  Apogee and Eradicator getting more expensive and Eagle getting cheaper.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on February 02, 2023, 07:55:07 AM
Quote
Many hullmods now have special effects when built into the hull using a story point

this is a really clever way to allow players to use a hullmod when some portion of its affect is a deal-breaker for them (like PDAI making my smalls shoot at missiles)
would you be willing to consider applying this treatment to most hullmods it's possible to? 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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Drazan on February 02, 2023, 08:00:43 AM
For real this time. I remember that there was a lengthy discussion in general aout SO nerf and Alex agreed that something has to be done.

Next patch maybe?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on February 02, 2023, 08:02:42 AM
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.

I also feel that the poor Drover has spent long enough in the corner for its crimes. 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.

While we're listing the many, many direct and indirect nerfs that it was subjected to, let's not forget that its partner in crime, the Spark, was also severely reigned in as part of that same reckoning.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on February 02, 2023, 08:30:44 AM
Also in regards to new medium sized hammer... I cant not post this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6EoW7xoJBM
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on February 02, 2023, 08:37:29 AM
So release soon?
Like in 3 days? Or 2 weeks?
Or we should expect another 1 year wait?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 02, 2023, 08:47:40 AM
Between 2 weeks and a year ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ruddygreat on February 02, 2023, 10:16:30 AM
  • 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)

yay, the slightest pcl nerf!

  • 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: IonDragonX on February 02, 2023, 10:48:16 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sandor057 on February 02, 2023, 11:13:31 AM
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

Very glad to see this change!


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%

Hooo leee mother of Ludd! The possibilities!


Quote
Persean League now has its own music
Are you entertained now, the guy who complained about PL not having its own theme?

Yes I am, I thoroughly am.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: highIntensityGazer on February 02, 2023, 11:24:30 AM
Quote
  • Added Venture (P)
    • Replaced mining drone with large missile slot pointing backwards
    • Medium missile slots changed to ballistic
Hehehe... I thought reapers on the Harbinger was hilarious. Now we have BAM - Big Ass Missiles!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 02, 2023, 11:45:16 AM
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!

Please don't do this.

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

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?

Will Tech-Mining be using Event System for .96?

No - but I really like the idea (Wyvern's, I think?) and have a note about 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?

I think some stuff didn't make it into the notes - iirc there was a bug that caused it to tank the replacement rate more quickly than it should have. I'm not 100% on this, though; it was a while ago. (There's probably a fair amount of misc fixes that didn't make it into the notes.) I've made a note to keep an eye on the Drover in particular during playtesting, though.



any details on how much armor does smodded shield shunt provide?

An extra 15%, 30% total.

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?

Hmm. I mean, it's going to hurt a bit, to the tune of - effectively - something like 5 OP for a capital ship (compared to the current cost of IPDAI), or 10 OP (compared to not building IPDAI in). That doesn't seem unreasonable for a qualitative change?


One thing that got me curious is
Quote
Waystations now pull in a small quantity of Volatiles and Transplutonics
Wonder what's the reason and or explanation behind this one
Game-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."

(Yep, exactly!)


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)?

All factions in theory, but I don't think any default variants have it in them and the autofitter is not just going to randomly slap it on. The player does need to acquire it in some way before they can use it, though. Another change that didn't make it into the notes is that factions generally have access to most/all hullmods, but there's a section in the .faction file that adjust how likely they're to sell certain hullmods - all part of making "buying stuff" a more reliable experience.


Gotta ask though, is there any REDACTED stuff you didn't include in the patch notes? Hehe

There is, though not of the endgame-redacted variety. I'm pretty excited for you all to get your hands on it but don't want to spoil it :)


  • Fulgent: added built-in Energy Bolt Coherer (increases base non-beam energy/hybrid weapon range)
Okay, this new Hullmod is listed in the Ships section but not the Hullmods section. Is it unavailable to the player?

It's not - it boosts non-beam energy weapon range and would be pretty busted if it was installable on arbitrary ships.

Are they salvageable by the player?

Yes!


please please please add function to change weapon slot coordinates in ShipAPI or cloned HullSpec
without the weird french magik, i mean

Ah, sorry - that's very hairy.


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.)



Does this mean that the Gemini now deploys THREE Cobra bombers?

Yep.

Quote
Brilliant:

    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!

Quote
Hurricane 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?

The damage of the subminutions is unchanged. The point was to reduce its damage output with ECCM but leave it similar without, making ECCM less "required" for it.


Quote
Logistics 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.

Yeah, but it's a SP sacrfice on civilian ships.



@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.

Pegasus/Executor: 50, Apex: 30; you're right about the rest!


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.

Duly noted!


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.

ShipEngineControllerAPI.ShipEngineAPI.repair() please, since .disable() already exists in the API

Added! (But, for future reference, this is *really* not the right thread for API requests.)


Quote
Added message explaining what's going on and what to do when there's no flagship deployed and the player starts in the command shuttle
Does this mean that the player always starts in the command shuttle if you dont deploy your flagship? - that would be ( / sounds ) annoying

That's how it's always worked. You're in the command shuttle, in theory, but it's not actually deployed on the battlefield. When you transfer command to another ship, the shuttle shows up a little ways away from it.

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.


Is Sarissa low_tech_bp or rare_bp?

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.

I think - I mean, there'll be features mods will probably want to update to use. But aside from that, just the other day I was able to load a modded savegame that someone sent in with a bug report. Some things *will* break for sure, though; I believe there is an interface or two that got new methods.

(Edit: you'd really want to create a new game, though; a bunch of new stuff - e.g. story missions won't work if you don't.)

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

I don't think this works as an across-the-board thing, but funnily enough, the s-mod effect for the omni shield conversion is removing the arc penalty :)


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.

Also in regards to new medium sized hammer... I cant not post this

(Hahah)

Like in 3 days? Or 2 weeks?
Or we should expect another 1 year wait?

No!


  • 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.

...? 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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on February 02, 2023, 11:56:24 AM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: coolio on February 02, 2023, 11:58:06 AM
add portraits that have moustaches so I can feel like a 18th century admiral and I will be happy.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: 00lewnor on February 02, 2023, 02:23:09 PM
Patch notes! please excuse me while I do the happy dance!

Ahem. Well, there’s a lot to talk about there but one that caught my eye was:

  • 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

I’ve discovered this feature as part of the QoL pack mod and it immediately became my favourite feature, I’m glad to hear that I’ll never have to worry about playing without it again. My question however is that I notice this only mentions venting and overload; is it possible for this to also apply to after system activation and/or phase coil cooldown?

Also, this:

  • Added Planetkiller and "Hostile Activity" related mission

I would like more details about this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 02, 2023, 03:09:38 PM
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.)
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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ruddygreat on February 02, 2023, 03:48:50 PM
...? 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.)

ahhh, fair, that makes a lot more sense! even if the ziggy situation is too silly imo

While I do agree that it having the PD hint does definitely make it suffer (and basically useless in AI hands, the "problem" I referred to), I think that that's almost a good thing?
IMO it's currently an excellent assault weapon that happens to also be really good PD & it sounds like it's meant to be the other way around, keeping PD there kinda balances them out? really not entirely sure how to properly write out my thoughts on it though.

But everything else sounds great, I've been theorycrafting retribtuion builds since it got announced! something something 3 mjolnirs, 6 sabots and a dream
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on February 02, 2023, 03:50:38 PM
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...
What I referred to is the UI like the left corner credits
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kos135 on February 02, 2023, 03:52:51 PM
Aside from the new capitals and P/LP variants, I am looking forward to the upgraded Legion, Eagle and Vigilance...

-Legion with +40 OP will allow for viable 4x Xyphos builds. Today I tried one out in simulator. It requires support (as all capitals do) but it was a brutal line-breaker. Shield Shunt build with max armor/hull, officered 6 skill/4 elite. Experienced players can guess the skills.

-Eagle has been sighed at for a while for being so mediocre.
It's not bad so you don't see a challenge in making it good, but it's not good enough to be optimal in any way. So it falls into this undesirable roll of being a relatively pricey, long range kinetic cruiser with lacklustre ability to punch down.

Frankly, the Eagle is boring. I would rather it be bad than boring!

The update enhances the Eagle in that role but still keeps it in that role. It feels like a gigantic point defense turret, scaled up to targeting light-mid destroyers.

-Vigilance, I haven't monkeyed around with flux/armor/hull stats to see how this thing will perform with the proposed upgrades. But those upgrades and the upgrade to Typhoon Launcher make it clear, this ship will be a Strike Frigate. 1x Typhoon, 1x HMG. Just run up and hammer them, with a cheap frigate built for Support Doctrine, I love it.

But regarding the new capitals I am looking forward to the Invictus most of all. Its system gives it enormous potential for burst damage. Just imagine 4x MK9's or even GC's with that ship system, it would be incredible.
And I hope that by now everyone has learned the value of un-officered frigate gangs w/ Support Doctrine skill.

I'm also looking forward to the lore expansion of the Luddic Church, which their fleet doctrine contributes to. Religion, philosophy, none of us can escape from those categories of thought.
Everyone has a worldview and must, at some point in their life, wade into the weeds of A-Priori thought: epistemology, ethics, telos, metaphysics.

It's impossible to believe that most of the Persean Sector has simply avoided such questions! Humans are greater than animals, we philosophize and invent technologies. Technology is a means, not an end.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 02, 2023, 07:15:56 PM
Quote
Brilliant:

    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!

Ah, so shield upkeep is actually defined as fraction of flux dissipation, got it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on February 02, 2023, 07:25:30 PM
Will any of the new mission grant Hypercognition (or new special skills) as rewards?
Has Rugged Construction been added to every Derelict?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on February 02, 2023, 09:40:33 PM
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.

I'd say it's interesting, yes. It's the only dedicated carrier with Reserve Deployment, which gives it different design incentives than its peers. Back when it was a ship worth flying, I generally wanted to build around keeping fighters in the air instead of optimizing around bombers like the Heron and Astral or supporting itself in direct combat like the Moras or the handful of High-Tech ships that have an incidental bay.

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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zr0Potential on February 02, 2023, 09:50:03 PM
One thing that got me curious is
Quote
Waystations now pull in a small quantity of Volatiles and Transplutonics
Wonder what's the reason and or explanation behind this one
Game-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."
(Yep, exactly!)

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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 02, 2023, 11:08:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Psigun on February 02, 2023, 11:19:23 PM
How dare my lovely Galaxy-class--- errrr, I mean Apogee--- flagship of every game I've ever played get a nerf!!!

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 02, 2023, 11:34:23 PM
@Alex
I'm not sure Falcon(P) even needs another nerf, it performs exactly how a 20 DP ship should. The fact that the player can maximize that potential is fine as there are even more gamebreaking ships. In fact, like another comment mentioned, I'm surprised Gryphon and Monitor got no changes, those things literally break the game.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 03, 2023, 01:24:43 AM
Will any of the new mission grant Hypercognition (or new special skills) as rewards?
Has Rugged Construction been added to every Derelict?
All derelicts already have rugged construction far as i know.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on February 03, 2023, 01:29:30 AM
I don't see it getting stronger than it currently is
Fury 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 01:55:53 AM
Again, indirect buffs help all ships similar to it. At the end of the day the ship in question is going to stay inferior regardless. I'd much rather have 2 Auroras than 3 Furies, hell even 4.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on February 03, 2023, 02:00:31 AM
Will any of the new mission grant Hypercognition (or new special skills) as rewards?
Has Rugged Construction been added to every Derelict?
All derelicts already have rugged construction far as i know.
Silly me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on February 03, 2023, 02:00:58 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 02:25:48 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 03, 2023, 03:15:30 AM
How dare my lovely Galaxy-class--- errrr, I mean Apogee--- flagship of every game I've ever played get a nerf!!!

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.
Yeah, going from 18 to 20 is justified IMO (update might even be an overall buff).
The big ones are burst weapons not turning away while firing, and a separate improvement for target switching that Apogee with HIL/Tach should like a lot.
Tac lasers use less flux, a cheap graviton in the bottom right is nice for support, can possibly use autoloader for the small missile on top of extended racks.
Probably my favorite ship in the entire game, and it keeps on trucking :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 03:55:32 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 03, 2023, 05:19:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 03, 2023, 05:23:27 AM
There is a lot of stuff to try on this new version but probably the first thing i am probably gonna do is to get my hands on an Invictus and a bunch of Derelict ships with Converted hangars&Defensive targeting array as defense instead of bothering to add makeshift shields and then put it all together with Field Repairs and Derelict operations.

Ah and doing that new main story chain of course! It sounds like it is going to be a fun one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 03, 2023, 05:28:15 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 05:44:19 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on February 03, 2023, 05:54:42 AM
In general  it looks good, a lot of new things,  lot of polishing include  AI.   I am missing skill  update, will it come ?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Integrated Point Defense AI:

    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)
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 03, 2023, 06:06:03 AM
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.

That was my first thought, too: drop the shield efficiency. I don’t think its firepower is bad for 15 DP but it is far too tough to kill. And/or reduce the shield arc to make it more vulnerable in general.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 06:12:20 AM
snip
Hey 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on February 03, 2023, 06:48:43 AM
snip
Hey 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.
I like my colors.
If you are right, then why I can use blue without moderator privilege ?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on February 03, 2023, 07:06:25 AM
As always, an interesting set of updates, although most of it has been teased by Alex over the months.  I am very excited to see the story missions, and can't wait to see what David and Alex have put together in those.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 07:28:54 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on February 03, 2023, 07:30:58 AM
If you are right, then why I can use blue without moderator privilege ?

(Because we'd rather spend out time making a cool game than modifying forum settings.)
So hey, just please be considerate of the standard of moderation text having exclusive use of the blue. Thank you!

... letsee, anything else to comment on... no, I think Alex has things covered nicely. Glad to see people excited, will be fun to see reactions to all the new stuff when it's out. *thumbs up*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 03, 2023, 07:37:19 AM
S-mods are looking more like hullmod version of elite skills.

Integrated Point Defense AI:

    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. 
My question to Alex is if the maximum target leading is basic or s-mod/elite only?

I usually use IPDAI for turning small weapons into PD to exploit elite Point Defense, that is a Ballistic Rangefinder alternative for those that cannot use Ballistic Rangefinder or cannot afford it but could afford IPDAI.

But there were few times I have used IPDAI to make ballistic PD reliable enough to track the likes of Salamanders (or other fast and/or erratic missile) and/or strong enough to stop Squalls.

Shield Shunt can be built in (and has an extra armor bonus effect when built in with a story point)
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.
This is what I do not want to see/kind of feared for s-mods.  Probably makes BotB even more important.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 03, 2023, 07:42:06 AM
@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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 03, 2023, 07:46:06 AM
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 tend to compare DP because I am only guaranteed 160 DP at the start, and I want overpowered ships if I am up against a superior enemy.

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.

Mora, I used, but Heron without s-mods is too OP-starved for a battlecarrier loadout (unlike Drover or Mora).


P.S.  Similarly, as an AI ship, I do not think Aurora is worth 30 DP.  I almost always picked Dominator, Champion, or rarely, Doom for AI after being disappointed with AI's underperformance with Aurora.  Aurora under AI control feels more like a 25 DP ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 08:43:39 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 03, 2023, 08:45:47 AM
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.

The Apogee is a weak ship for my playstyle because it is too slow to run away from anything that can kill it or chase things it can kill: 60 speed with no system is slow these days. It has raw defensive stats in its shield and surprisingly solid armor/hull, but fairs poorly when outmatched and it has a bad weapon layout (the medium energies can plink at flankers but can't point in the same arc as its large). If it uses a squall it has fire support but no finisher; if it uses a plasma cannon it has hard flux but bad range; if it uses a HIL it has range but struggles with shields, etc. All of these flaws can be corrected by either using formations of Apogees or supporting ships, but I wouldn't call them "all in one". For me in the cruiser niche that title goes to the Champion.

I prefer the Fury over the Apogee even post nerf (Gasp! Shock!). It's fast enough to reliably get itself out of the way of formations of capital ships and quickly hunt isolated targets. Stat wise it is weaker, but I find it a more useful ship for making the enemy die because of the speed differential. It is also burn 9, which is handy in campaign for choosing fights and leading a destroyer squad.

I'll also note that "and to this day I want to know the number of their dealer" doesn't actually argue anything, its just a casual ad-hominem insult. Please don't use those.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 08:58:18 AM
Well yeah playstyles are a big thing and some ships just won't match with some players. But doesn't Champion have meh campaign stats? With Apogee you have great sensors, cargo and fuel capacity.

Also that dealer thing was an obvious joke (incredibly tame), last time I checked those were legal here. Smh everything being called ad-hominem these days it barely has a meaning. Next time I'll use big red letters like gG_pilot to explain what the joke is.

EDIT: Forgot to type obligatory "speedcreep" comment to Thaago's post haha. It's funny how a 60 speed cruiser is considered slow since so many ships now get fancy movement systems.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 03, 2023, 09:06:36 AM
The shield shunt S-Mod effect makes me think that perhaps the list of the current effects could be posted? 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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Voyager I on February 03, 2023, 09:54:55 AM
When one of your jokes misses and receives gentle correction:

DO
Say "My bad, I didn't mean to be insulting." and allow the conversation to move on.

DO NOT
Say "Get over it snowflake, I didn't know jokes were illegal now." while planting your flag on the hilltop.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Darkin on February 03, 2023, 10:19:15 AM
This would be awesome!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on February 03, 2023, 10:24:21 AM
This is what I do not want to see/kind of feared for s-mods.  Probably makes BotB even more important.

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.
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.

Buff up Shield Shunt to  be better than shields is an option, however ... it could be turned into  pirate-version-safety-override. Low maintenance cost (hull repair & CR recover use metal plates instead of Supply boxes), quick to repair (out of combat bonus to gain CR per day), fast ship (bonus + 10% speed). Not powerful in long fight, but dirt cheap to run. Also add  a new type of attack with shunted ship  Ramming could be fun. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramming
Also change price to 1/2/2/3 would help add more umpf to assault power.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: itBeABruhMoment on February 03, 2023, 10:38:46 AM
I modded the ship balance changes into the game if anyone wants to try them. The id's of the rebalanced ships are the ids of the regular ship with "new_" added to the front (ie. new_hyperion)

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 03, 2023, 11:12:49 AM
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.

Just made a note to take a look and maybe try it/see how it feels. (Erm: "it" being "not closing the comm frequency".)


add portraits that have moustaches so I can feel like a 18th century admiral and I will be happy.

:-|D  (the | is meant to be a moustache, if that's not clear.)


I would like more details about this.

And I would like to share more, but I'll restrain myself!



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)

Honestly, the Gryphon and especially the Monitor could probably all stand to cost a little more DP. Not a huge amount, but some.


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

There was a campaign one at some point. I'm not sure if it still exists.


I'm also looking forward to the lore expansion of the Luddic Church

(Then this is certainly the update for you!)


Ah, so shield upkeep is actually defined as fraction of flux dissipation, got it.

Yep! Ahh, your question makes sense now, since it's not presented like that to the player.



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?

Hmm, this gives me an idea for an angle to take on testing it - see how it does in a simular configuration, 2vs3. Of course not the end-all of tests and not reflective of many different uses, but may be interesting to see regardless. E.G. if all-interceptor builds on all sides result in Drovers winning somehow, that'd be a pretty solid (and surprising) indicator they *are*.


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

Haha! None taken :)


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.

I have a note to look at it again.


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.

The Pegasus may well be undercosted; we'll see. It does tend to lose to the Paragon 1v1, depending on fit, anyway - and it only has mediums for non-missile firepower.


Will any of the new mission grant Hypercognition (or new special skills) as rewards?
Has Rugged Construction been added to every Derelict?
All derelicts already have rugged construction far as i know.

Ah! THat would explain how it didn't end up in the notes, I was confused for a minute :)


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.

Hmm. Lots of interesting thoughts here, thank you!


I am missing skill  update, will it come ?

Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.



My question to Alex is if the maximum target leading is basic or s-mod/elite only?

Basic.


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...


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?

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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 11:17:39 AM
Falcon(P) step aside, there's a new sheriff in town: Pather Manticore.

No joke I'm going to be so scared early game not to get jumped by Pathers.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 03, 2023, 11:28:03 AM
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...

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 11:30:52 AM
Squall damage remained the same, it got fixed (typo I guess). The part of the damage is just scripted now not to ravage hull.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 03, 2023, 11:34:26 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on February 03, 2023, 11:53:37 AM
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.

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.

Fury is a bigger Shrike, but so is a Medusa in a sense.  Medusa ticks all the same boxes that the Shrike and Fury do. Fast flanker/harasser that can zoom into battle and unleash a burst of missiles and energy weapons.  They all have systems to get them into trouble faster, and their speeds range from 90-120.

Actually, Medusa with Railguns and ITU has the same max range as a Fury with ITU with Heavy Blasters/Pulse Lasers.  700*1.2 = 840, 600*1.4 = 840.  So the most distinguishing feature, longer range, doesn't even really apply to the more common hardflux builds.  Going farther, an IPDAI + ePD Medusa has significantly longer range than a ITU Fury, so the cruiser chassis isn't doing much for you over the destroyer chassis.

I guess maybe from my point of view, I feel "cruiser" designation or "light cruiser" or "fast cruiser" are really nebulous.  Are people arguing all light and fast cruisers should cost 14-15 DP?  Are people also arguing we should modify the non-pirate Eradicator so it is only worth 15 DP or so as well?  Why only the Fury and the Falcon?  I mean, it fills in the same gap in the low tech lineup that the Falcon fills in the midline and the Fury fills in the high tech.  Sure the Eradicator is called "fast" instead of "light", but it's got the 9 burn thing going for it.  There doesn't seem to be any argument the Eradicator should be changed and dropped down to 15 DP.

Again, if the Fury is not worth 20 DP, I would rather see it be changed and buffed such that it is worth 20 DP, rather than match drop to 15 DP since I use Medusa and Hyperions from the high tech lineup for that job, or a Falcon from the midline line up, or the (P) Eradicator from the lowtech line up.  Isn't the 12-15 DP fast cruiser line up crowded enough at 15 DP? 

It's really barren at 20 DP for fast, highly mobile ships.  What high base speed + mobility system ships clock in at 20 to 25 DP?  Eagles didn't count at speed 50 since they really didn't have the sustained high speed, and they are dropping closer to the 15 DP range anyways.  Not Champions (25 DP line holder with long range weapons/missiles), not Dominators (again 25 DP line holder with anti-capital larges ), not Apogees (18-20 DP again line holder with anti-capital larges), not Gryphons (20 DP slow missile ship), not Heron's (20 DP fast carrier), not Mora (20 DP line holder carrier brick).

So I see no problem sticking a fast, short range, highly mobile ship into the 20-25 DP band, with the Aurora sitting way up at 30 DP.

From an actual overall game ship's filling unique roles at different balance points perspective, as opposed to just naming conventions, I think the Fury should be balanced around 20 DP, not 15 DP.  If people just want to change its designation to "fast cruiser" instead of a "light cruiser" so it gets compared to the Eradicator instead of the Falcon, I'm all for that.

@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.

I guess I'm advocating for buffs to the Fury then, if it really isn't worth 20 DP.  I'm saying where I would like to see the Fury end up, not necessarily where balance says it should be with its exact current stats.  I feel like the last time I looked at the balance considerations, it was working OK at 20 DP?  Certainly not over tuned, but it didn't seem that undertuned.  If it's really worth 17-8 DP now, say, I'd rather see some tweak ups to it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: 1glitchycent on February 03, 2023, 11:56:54 AM
Will the Lion's Guard ships be better than their standard counterparts?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 03, 2023, 12:05:47 PM
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 :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 03, 2023, 12:06:07 PM
Will the Lion's Guard ships be better than their standard counterparts?

What have you done… (j/k, this was just beaten to death when the blog post about it dropped)

@Hiruma Kai

Fair enough. What buffs would you propose without pushing it into Aurora territory? I know this seems small in the grand scheme of things but what if one of the forward/off-center Small Energies was a Universal? Throw a Light Needler/Railgun or even a Small Missile in there and that could really change the overall composition of the ship. If the Fury had access to Kinetics or an extra missile, it would be far more efficient without necessarily adding a lot of actual damage output. (Obviously inspired by the Pirate Shrike)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 03, 2023, 12:06:43 PM
@Hiruma Kai
I'm also perfectly fine with it being buffed to the worth of a 20 DP ship. It's just that I've more often heard suggestions and arguments to make it cheaper, rather than buffing it directly. Actually Megas suggested multiple times a small OP increase, like 5 or 10. That would maybe be a nice little touch.

I honestly don't pay much attention to names like "light" or "fast", but it would be pretty weird to have a 25 DP light cruiser, or 15 DP heavy cruiser. Also Eagle is going to be 18 DP, not 15.

EDIT: @Foof
Universal mount idea is cool but isn't it even more similar to a Medusa then? I feel like such mounts on high tech ships make for samey builds, which isn't a big deal tbh since there's only so much to do with a high tech ship with only mediums and smalls. Hmmm it sounds fun to me but somehow feels wrong, not sure how to put it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on February 03, 2023, 12:14:56 PM
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.

If I remember correctly, I think the sentiment to make it cheaper comes from a statement by Alex that he really liked how the Fury was and didn't want to adjust how it flies, just it's balance point.  So my arguments may fall flat against "the Fury just feels right as is".  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 03, 2023, 12:15:35 PM
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.
Maintenance makes it clunky to fit, has ~frigate level durability with shields down, very limited loadout, up until now it basically needed SO to not leave half its power unused, ...
Medusa is still pretty close at 12 ofc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 03, 2023, 12:21:16 PM
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.

I'd say racks are entirely unnecessary - the odds of it surviving long enough to use even the base Cyclone ammo seem low!


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.

Tempting! Basically the Pather Venture, though, and I don't want to keep hitting the same note. Maybe Fast Missile Racks could be fun, alongside more DP, hmm.


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.

Would you mind sharing a good build or two?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on February 03, 2023, 12:26:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 03, 2023, 12:40:18 PM
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.
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thog on February 03, 2023, 12:47:55 PM
Hello, is this the temp agency? Excellent. I need to hire 1000 people to update a ... uh ... sizable modlist. Yes, I'll hold. :|
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: liam10000888 on February 03, 2023, 01:06:55 PM
super excited! been chomping at the bitt for this update ever sense the april blog post on the website about new ludite lore!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on February 03, 2023, 01:12:17 PM
been chomping at the bitt for this update ever sense the april
Good news, you can keep doing that for another 3-12 months  :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Slyve on February 03, 2023, 02:29:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: memeextremist on February 03, 2023, 03:28:22 PM
YAY! new ships and fixes!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: pairedeciseaux on February 03, 2023, 04:05:47 PM
More hammers? Hammer time!

Looking forward to play with all of this.

Regarding the Fury tangent discussion,

Spoiler
Sabot-based build for my AI-controlled Fury, in current campaign:

1 Heavy Blaster
2 Sabot SRP Pods
4 PD Lasers
1 Mining Laser
(one small energy slot empty)

Pick hullmods among:

Expanded Missile Racks
Integrated Targeting Unit
Reinforce Bulkheads
Shield Conversion - Front

When you build in the first 3 hullmods (EMR + ITU + RB are worth 50 OP) and pay 10 OP for the last one you can do:

30 Capacitors
30 Vents

Depending on officer, you obtain a cruiser-sized brawler providing great to amazing performance. Even officer-less, Fury is a solid choice. I mean... fairly high speed, sustained fire with Heavy Blaster, good shield, kinetic burst with Sabots.

In the past, I have also used Fury without missile (or with a lower amount than in the build above) and was satisfied. Ion Pulser and IR Pulser Lasers are useful here.

I do like the suggestion to add some OP: improved incentive to fill all weapon slots. But truth be told, top priority on this ship is to spend OP on flux stats to support blaster and shield, the rest is icing on the cake.

Also, change the medium missile hardpoint into a synergy one? Like the existing right-side medium turret. It would provide more flexibility for those who want to build a missile-less Fury, like we can on Aurora. Although, sure, medium missile hardpoint might be a defining trait common with Shrike that needs so stay.
[close]

You can't touch this.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on February 03, 2023, 06:36:38 PM
Would you mind sharing a good build or two?

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:
1 Heavy Blaster
2 Sabot Pods (linked)
2 IR Pulse Laser
Xyphos
Converted Hangar
Expanded Missile Racks (s-mod)
Integrated Targeting Unit (s-mod)
Hardened Shield (s-mod)
Shield Conversion -Front
Solar Shielding
10 Vents
11 Caps

Individual builds can vary based on what you're trying to do (player pilot, AI, early game first cruiser, late game mono-cruiser fleet, s-mods available or no, skills available or no).

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.

Assuming unskilled, no s-mods, AI ship and staying away from Safety Overrides and Converted Hangar, I'd probably go something like:
1 Heavy Blaster (front energy mount)
1 Ion Pulser (synergy mount)
1 Sabot Pod
1 Burst PD or 2 Beam PD
Integrated Targeting Unit
Shield Conversion
30 Caps
24-25 vents
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SapphireSage on February 03, 2023, 06:40:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 03, 2023, 07:09:26 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on February 03, 2023, 07:19:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 03, 2023, 07:20:31 PM
All the Legion XIV is going to do with the extra OP us add more hullmods. Relative to the Onslaught, it is much less able to pack on the defensive buffs to make it a monster. It is strong, no doubt, but I can do thinks with an Onslaught that a Legion couldn’t begin to dream of, mostly because of OP shortages. They cost the same DP so of the two, the Legion needs more help.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 03, 2023, 07:26:23 PM
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.
The XIV always have more OP than the base. By not giving the XIV its additional OP, that's a nerf to that variant.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fartbox Wanderer on February 03, 2023, 07:33:31 PM
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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ifxXOTpozg
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 03, 2023, 07:42:57 PM
If the s-mod changes mean less expensive hullmods get stamped for s-modding, Legion (and other ships) may not get the full OP they are used to.  Currently, low tech capitals get Heavy Armor and EMR stamped.  If that ends up being not so great post-release, they will effectively lose OP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amazigh on February 03, 2023, 08:00:43 PM
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.

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)
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fartbox Wanderer on February 03, 2023, 08:26:21 PM
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)
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.
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."
- Level 31 officer: irrelevant; only a handful of skills really benefit this loadout
- Irrelevant; campaign ships commonly have d-mods and those present in this battle didn't determine the outcome
- Most ships don't have their rear protected. Omni shield is helpful but with a few extra shots, skillful piloting, or the benefit of additional ships in your fleet acting as distractions, they're still easily bypassed.
- Few ships have rear-facing weapons that aren't PD, fewer still could inflict meaningful damage in the fraction of a second before they're knocked out
- Fighters are easily kited and outrun, they're totally irrelevant to this strategy and the presence of carriers would only make it easier since their hulls are more fragile

This loadout or something very close to it is doable with a captain fresh out of the tutorial system (on normal difficulty) and works easily during the campaign against virtually any opposing fleet. This loadout doesn't care if the enemy has an entire fleet of optimally-chosen ships, they're all loaded with elite officers, the planets align... Please try it in campaign before you reply again. Respec your captain, even assign no skill points if you really want, give every reasonable benefit to the AI, see how it goes. If you're a half-decent pilot, the worst thing that's going to happen is you'll destroy or cripple a bunch of ships before being forced to retreat for lack of ammo. No other ship/loadout I've seen does this so safely and reliably.

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?

Even though I consider myself reasonably skilled at this game, I'd probably still have a rough time fighting 100 DP vs 200 DP under a normal scenario, but here's a fight of 8DP vs 200DP, and it's a one-sided slaughter. Possible mitigating factors are irrelevant. I'm not trying to ruin anyone's fun with phase ships, I love phase ships. Just hoping the developers will look at this sort of scenario and consider if there's anything that can be done to make such alpha-strike phase loadouts a little less overpowered. In my recent playthrough I found a perfect-condition Shade at the very first post-tutorial store I went to, and it was disheartening to know I could effectively win the game by purchasing it and a few AM blasters. When I have to consciously choose not to "cheat" in a game, it's something I think could be worth looking at.

It's been a while since I played, I just saw that a new patch might be coming out soon and decided it would be a good time to bring this up. I'm not sure what would be a good change that wouldn't be too much of a nerf. I think Shade's a cool ship, and I think it should still be usable in this sort of role, but it shouldn't be this sort of game-ending dreadnaught you can buy 10 minutes after starting the game. Every other sort of "optimal build" I've seen people suggest still requires a high degree of skill to fully exploit, while an assblasting Shade is virtually unkillable in even moderately-skilled hands.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cruacious on February 03, 2023, 09:38:38 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amazigh on February 03, 2023, 09:50:17 PM
"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.
Show the same level of effect against a real fleet with a normal level officer (and not just some pirate trash fleet) and i'll happily agree with you. Until then, i'll remain doubtful.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on February 03, 2023, 10:21:41 PM
Respec your captain, assign no skill points, give every reasonable benefit to the AI.

I don't believe you can do this well in a Shade against that kind of opposition with no skill points assigned right at the beginning of the game.  Believe me, I've tried.  With support ships you can leverage phase frigates much more, but solo you can't do it without significant skill investment.  Then again, with support ships, you can make most fast and heavily armed ships work well.

There are huge stat disparities between zero skills and that setup.  Base speed at 0-flux in phase is only 165 without skills or hullmods, not 285.  Max flux capacity is 5100 (2500+2000+600=5100).  You literally can spend at most 4 seconds in phase before you can only fire 2 antimatter blasters.  16 seconds until you can only fire 1, reducing your damage by 66% per pass.  Considering it took around 10 seconds to cross starting at speed 285, it'll take about 17 seconds starting at 165.   You get 180 seconds of peak performance time, not 480.  You'll get of order 10 passes and thus around 10-20 individual anti-matter shots off in a similar setup with no skills.

Try it.  Simply go to the Ambush mission from the mission selection, pick the shade, outfit as you see fit (which isn't going to be anywhere near the stats of that ship singe you lack skills and s-mods), and you'll find you can't even cross the pile of enemy ships and still do anything significant with your flux levels so high.

At a bare minimum you need to be level 3 to grab Phase Coil Tuning (along with Energy Weapon Mastery along the way) which makes this only begin to be conceivable, but even then the raw stats aren't there yet to support this kind of fight.  You need Wolf Pack Tactics, Crew Training and Combat Endurance to get CR to 100% and PPT up.  Flux Regulation is a huge jump in flux capacity (another 1250), so you're sitting at around level 7 before you can even begin to pull this off regularly against such a sim composition, or before I'd be willing to risk an iron man run on it against similar opposition.  And the opposition is restricted to a limited sub-set of ships which lacks omni-shields and fighters (especially Xyphos).  Also most capitals are out, since you need more range to reliably avoid the ship's explosion, at the very least ITU or IPDAI + ePD.  If you can time it just right, you can avoid it with base 400 range and flying away but it's really hard.

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?

One 8 DP ship with the player at the helm, which is a very big difference from just an 8 DP ship.  You only get one player piloted ship at a time, at which point, the DP cost is almost meaningless.  8 DP versus 30 DP is only a 10% swing in DP for a full 240 DP deployment which gets a shrug from me.  1 extra cruiser isn't going to make or break most of my fights.  As for 200 DP, I'd be impressed if you could reliably succeed against a mere 60 DP if that 60 DP were the sim Paragon.  Actually, show me a video of a Shade outfit like in that video you linked, dealing with a pair of sim Omens, a mere 12 DP, and I will also be impressed.

But the biggest reason I don't have an issue with this is because being at the helm of an incredible 8 DP ship means the player isn't at the helm of a bigger and more impactful ship, like say an Onslaught, Legion, Odyssey, or Conquest, or even a Neural Linked Radiant, which all have vastly more DPS.  In an optimized end game fleet, a good player with a good capital can do 30-40% of the entire fleet's damage/kills.  A lone shade isn't going to be putting out that much hull damage that fast, given it basically has to swing through, fire, back off, vent, and then come back at them.  I'd be curious what percent damage or percent kills you could get in a Shade against an Ordo or two.

Are phase frigates good in skilled players hands?  Yes.  Are they game breaking?  Shrug?  Given by the point you can do crazy things in them, you could be beating the exact same forces with a more traditional fleet?  An early Medusa or Fury, also backed by a small support fleet, can also do extremely well.  Personally, I don't consider 100 DP vs 200 DP particularly hard on the campaign layer, especially if I've got a level 10 or higher character behind it.  I've done 45 DP (Odyssey) against 370 DP (300k Persean bounty) without trouble.  Level 15, but no s-mods.  So you certainly don't need a phase ship to solo disproportionate fleets.

Personally, I appreciate the fact that player piloted phase ships expand the number of styles of play available.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on February 03, 2023, 10:50:09 PM
Just wanted to say that I like buff to Legion and the new Sarissa fighters.
I bet they will be the best fighters ever and not because they have cool name(which they have of course, very cool name).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 04, 2023, 12:10:26 AM
Man those are some basic Fury builds (which are great, even more so for player ships, I just got bored of the old HB + Sabots combo) and I really think it's a possible to make a more unique build of a very similar performance.

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.

The reason why I'm so full of myself or persistent on this topic because it isn't really about the builds. I've tried probably 6 different setups in campaign, and honestly everything works okay. You can't really screw up the ship unless you go full beam poke I guess. Likewise you can't make something broken since the ship is limited by a couple of factors (not to say it needs improvement in those). Each and every time I was disappointed with it wasn't because my build wasn't performing as it should. It was always the ship itself just having unfortunate Plasma Burn and not knowing when to back out and when to apply pressure.

Like I said, it works better for Shrike and Odyssey. Fury either chases a 5 DP ship or suicides, being a distraction at best. My conclusion is that it is somehow even more of a flagship bait ship than Aurora, which I also consider to be disappointing with AI.

Also also, HB builds will be slightly weaker since everything else seems to be buffed. I expect some nasty torpedo builds in the future  8)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on February 04, 2023, 12:22:52 AM
I am missing skill  update, will it come ?
Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
Support doctrine
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)

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on February 04, 2023, 01:28:32 AM
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."

It's more that the player in a fast ship (of which phase ships definitely apply) can do a lot of things to the AI that the AI doesn't know how to effectively counter. A player-piloted LP Brawler can do the same thing to the same 200 DP's worth of ships in sim too, for example, and actually kill the entire fleet instead of running out of ammo. The player is simply much better at exploiting opportunities and proper positioning than the AI, especially in a fast ship, especially against a bunch of non-officered, easy ships. Thus a player soloing a sim fleet isn't really representative of fleet-on-fleet combat, and doesn't really scale well to the more difficult fleets encountered in the campaign once the player gets out of the early game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 04, 2023, 02:25:33 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on February 04, 2023, 02:53:04 AM
currently the Legion XIV is considered one of the stronger capitals
Considered by whom? I don't think this is the majority opinion at all.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 04, 2023, 02:55:53 AM
- Irrelevant; campaign ships commonly have d-mods and those present in this battle didn't determine the outcome
Depends 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.

Other than that, yeah, phase ships are pretty good player ships, even after the nerf.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Low Settings on February 04, 2023, 04:02:24 AM
Those problems caused by phase ships are about to get solved since the phase a.i. will now do that to the player also  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lely on February 04, 2023, 04:22:52 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 04, 2023, 05:16:04 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on February 04, 2023, 05:17:06 AM
I am missing skill  update, will it come ?
Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
Support doctrine
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)
just stop using colors at all its pain to read

also i do agree that officer mechanics are terrible right now
i started doing save edits to them as its really annoying ingame, and finding lvl7 officers that are just completely useless feels like punishment instead of reward
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 04, 2023, 05:19:50 AM
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).
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CoverdInBees on February 04, 2023, 05:24:34 AM

(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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on February 04, 2023, 05:46:07 AM

(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.
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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on February 04, 2023, 05:50:15 AM

(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.
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)
that is not a normal post but an index that uses colors to highlight which mods are upto date
not a good line of defense
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 04, 2023, 05:54:37 AM
that is not a normal post but an index that uses colors to highlight which mods are upto date
not a good line of defense
More importantly, that's Alex's post anyway...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 04, 2023, 05:59:31 AM
Back to the Fury, yeah, I suppose the only really interesting decision to be made is what to use the Synergy mount for. 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 also tend to leave the lateral Small Energies empty so it’s a Cruiser that only has one meaningful decision to make: what Missile(s) or supporting Medium Energy to take?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on February 04, 2023, 06:50:08 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 04, 2023, 08:27:23 AM
I am missing skill  update, will it come ?
Hmm, I'm not sure what you mean.
Support doctrine
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 brighter blue is the mod blue i think so avoid using that one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kos135 on February 04, 2023, 08:51:31 AM
The addition of the Energy Bolt Coherer hullmod and the upgrade to Pulse Lasers are pretty big game changers. Combine that with the upgrades to the Eagle and you've got a pretty mean brawler on your hands.

But it will change things across the board, pretty much any ship with a high proportion of medium energy turrets is being given two very good reasons to use Pulse Lasers. I wonder if Support Doctrine Shrikes will become viable now?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 04, 2023, 08:54:38 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 04, 2023, 09:02:33 AM
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.
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.
Getting heavy blaster+2 IR pulses will generally be stronger, only cost 22 and leave an M slot free for missiles.
Ofc there are less and less obvious rights and wrongs in the game, double pulse should work well against weak hulls.

As you mentioned, pulse laser buff and kinetic blaster/mining blaster look like they will shake things up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on February 04, 2023, 09:31:39 AM
Good set of fixes and lots of new stuff. Hard to guess how the new meta will arrange itself, but I would think high-tech is overall taking the lead with the sweeping weapon buffs.

The only thing that strikes me as funny is the laser-shooting missiles. Further reinforcing the "fighters are missiles" trope. ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kos135 on February 04, 2023, 09:50:16 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CoverdInBees on February 04, 2023, 10:12:09 AM
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.

Current weapon balance would be completely broken if the mod was generally available. Well, unless the mod itself would have some prohibitive cost, i guess.
Anyway the mod *is* limited to ships that get it built in. Alex confirmed that somewhere in the early pages of this thread iirc.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 04, 2023, 10:21:35 AM
Eh, I dunno? Is beam weapon balance broken because of Advanced Optics?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 04, 2023, 10:24:43 AM
Beams are soft energy weapons and they can have longer ranges on that basis.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Pablovansnogger on February 04, 2023, 10:25:42 AM
Eh, I dunno? Is beam weapon balance broken because of Advanced Optics?

Maybe if you made it hard to get, like a rare drop from redacted and make the OP cost as much or more than ITU/Heavy armor could get the job done. But every hull mod doesn’t need to be available for every ship…
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 04, 2023, 11:38:19 AM
i might be wrong but i think i saw a Lion Guard ship having energy bolt coherer.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 04, 2023, 12:07:24 PM
Colossus already has both the hammer barrage and the burn drive.

A good point.


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.

I understand what you mean, yeah. I feel like that's a separate conversation about the balance of shield shunt that can be decoupled from s-mod effects.

Well that aside can i pry you about the s-mod effects of converted hangar and defensive targeting array?

(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)


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.

Ahh, thank you! I'm rather a fan of David's writing, myself :)

(Just to be super clear, while there's a bunch more story in this release, the "main" storyline ends in the same place, for now.)


Regarding the Fury tangent discussion,

Sabot-based build for my AI-controlled Fury, in current campaign:

Thank you! Made a note of this to check it out and see how it feels.


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:
...

And these, too - thank you!


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.

... and this!

... and the other ones! Thank you all! :)


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'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'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.

Hi - thank you! And, hmm. Not sure how exactly we might do this, but the idea is very neat - making a note about it. I can totally see how it would add some depth - as long as it didn't try to over-explain things. Just little snippets, somewhere, perhaps. Worth thinking about!




Re: phase ship stuff - I think the problem isn't so much that you can't match the performance of the Shade (or Afflictor) in a larger fleet or with another ship. It's pretty fun to fly a phase ship in support of other ships, imo. It gets boring trying to do a solo type of thing, though - fly through, rinse, repeat. FWIW, I tried a similar build just now vs an Ordo and - I mean, I'm definitely not great at this specifc type of piloting, but it was challenging to deal with ships with omni shields. You can generally get them to raise it then swing around it and nail them, but doing that while also being out of range of the explosion is where I start to have significant problems. (Omens aren't so bad, actually, btw - sometimes they block the shots, but sometimes they don't, and being frigates, the explosion danger is low.)

Still, this feels like something that is both 1) doable with enough skill, practice, and patience and 2) boring, so, not a good thing. Sort of the old Tempest-solos-everything situation, just with more skill and less time (so, not *as* bad!).

I wonder about something like, I don't know, Electronic Warfare (not the skill, the general effect) some kind of effect against phase ships. Or perhaps if making omni shields turn a little faster as a baseline might be enough. For something like in that video (which, yeah, a very lopsided example) if the AI just balled up facing shields outward, that would pretty much neutralize this tactic. And if the solution that is to bring in additional ships the phase ship plays in support of, then - problem solved!



I bet they will be the best fighters ever and not because they have cool name(which they have of course, very cool name).

*thumbs up* (A little concerned they'll be OP on high-tech ships, but we'll see, I guess. It's the curse of support fighters - best on the opposite tech style.)

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

I think it'd be worse - both might get absorbed by the same shield-overloading hit, and they'd be more at risk to being taken out by area-of-effect flak. The spacing now is short enough that it doesn't give non-AoE PD much opportunity to switch targets, but long enough to avoid small AoE.
 
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?

Hmm, that hasn't been my experience at all - not vs large ships, anyway. But more importantly: a certain amount of messy chaos is *extremely* intentional for that weapon!

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?

Not sure what you mean.


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)

Just stop, please. This rules-lawyering is not going to go anywhere, you were asked by a moderator to not do this.


i might be wrong but i think i saw a Lion Guard ship having energy bolt coherer.

Some of them do, yes. It has a modified effect on crewed ships, but still does boost non-beam energy range.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on February 04, 2023, 12:30:01 PM
In regards to the fury, I tried it out with the upcoming changes to burst pds and typhoons in this layout:
Spoiler
(https://i.imgur.com/YFs6H9z.png)
[close]

Feels fantastic in player hands. In AI hands it's not terrible, but definitely underperforming. Even given that it's a "punch down" ship, given the best case sim scenario of going up against 2 hammerheads the AI struggles to pull through. It often chases down one hammerhead while trying to point the ion pulser at the other one for some reason. It will overload the target, but refuse to burn forward to get in AM-blaster range. Is there some way the AI can identify the target is both isolated and overloaded, and use that as a trigger to burn forward and get all weapons in range?

It took several tries but I did get a recording of it succeeding. Even here, you can see the ion pulser trying to point at the other hammerhead when it's both out of range and out of its firing arc. Not burning forward I at least understand, but this ion pulser thing caused a couple of failures for seemingly no reason.
Spoiler
https://youtu.be/uwIZUbsA8V4
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 04, 2023, 12:32:19 PM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 04, 2023, 12:35:48 PM
(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?

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).
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.

I do not remember if I did this before 0.6 when PPT and CR were added or shortly after.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 04, 2023, 02:01:59 PM
(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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on February 04, 2023, 02:02:41 PM
(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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on February 04, 2023, 02:18:52 PM
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.

Elite point defense is better, of course, but the elite part of elite skills is pretty high-value, usually.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on February 04, 2023, 02:23:15 PM
+100 range is especially noticeable on those
Arguably, 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CoverdInBees on February 04, 2023, 02:31:45 PM
I don't think that logic really holds up when it comes to fighters. For them i think it's better to think about it expanding their sphere of influence, in which they can attack any missiles/enemy fighters that happen to pass by, or when they're attacking some bigger ship it gives them more "time on target" while they zoom back and forth past/over/around it.

(granted, in the 2nd case their flux is probably the more important limiting factor most of the time)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kriby on February 04, 2023, 03:05:20 PM
Feels good to read 10% of the patch notes and be super excited to play the new patch  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on February 04, 2023, 05:20:08 PM
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 :-[
RIP Mining Aurora
(https://i.imgur.com/Hjl4XRT.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 04, 2023, 05:59:43 PM
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 :-[
RIP Mining Aurora
(https://i.imgur.com/Hjl4XRT.png)
[close]
why not?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 04, 2023, 07:08:50 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: GrandLabyrinth on February 04, 2023, 08:16:15 PM
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 :-[
RIP Mining Aurora
(https://i.imgur.com/Hjl4XRT.png)
[close]
why not?

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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 04, 2023, 08:49:40 PM
In regards to the fury, I tried it out with the upcoming changes to burst pds and typhoons in this layout:

Noted this one too, thank you!


(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?

Sorry it wasn't clear, I just meant the damage taken/speed penalties and the d-mod overlay.

Wasn't DTA the cheapest hullmod in the game? +100 range seems like a fairly minor upside then.

One of - I think it's a pretty strong bonus! Maybe not for the Xyphos, but that's alright.


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 :-[

Oh no! BRB rolling back changes.


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?

I haven't, no. But: using an external 3rd-party source code (etc) repository, which has its own backups. And at any time, the most recent code (etc) (up to within a day or so) is on both my and David's computers. So there's a good amount of redundancy here.

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?

Yes!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on February 04, 2023, 09:01:25 PM
Whatever you do, Alex, don't mention the new AI raid event.

We have to put the fear of the god in the machine back into these filthy meatbags!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bummelei on February 04, 2023, 11:13:21 PM
(CH removes the fighter penalties and DTA adds +100 range to fighter weapons.)

No more d-mod tint! Woo-hoo! The only reason i didn't use the CH is the fighters unaesthetic look, and now it's no more!

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.

In my experience on XIV version this spare 40 DP is more of a QoL than overpowering factor. It just allows you to use more expensive fighters and pick up some hullmods, Thrusters for example. But in the base version, this is really a gamechanger. I hope that new missiles will make it look more appealing, otherwise it would be better to just revert it's buff to 20-25 but change it's layout to that of a bigger brother. It would spare of their balancing issues.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on February 04, 2023, 11:54:04 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 05, 2023, 12:06:06 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 05, 2023, 12:14:24 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Rain on February 05, 2023, 02:45:00 AM
Would you mind sharing a good build or two?

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.

In general for the patch though, looks good, can't wait to try it! I'm a little surprised at the extent of the Eagle buffs, I thought it was already a pretty okay ship, if a little awkward to outfit; my brain never clicked well with a mixture of ballistics and energy weapons and how best to use them. I'll be giving it a thorough try with those numbers though, be sure of that. :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 05, 2023, 02:59:43 AM
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 :-[
RIP Mining Aurora
(https://i.imgur.com/Hjl4XRT.png)
[close]
why not?

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...
Huh, i didn't know hybrid slots were incompatible to hybrid weapons. It was something that never came up during my runs.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 05, 2023, 03:32:32 AM
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.

In a Fury I just feel exactly how a 20 DP ship performs (contrary to other player ships), while AI performance is of a Fury MkII.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ruddygreat on February 05, 2023, 04:29:12 AM
Oh no! BRB rolling back changes.

the obivous solution here is mining laser pd DEMs!
only mostly joking here, pd DEMs have been rattling around in my brain as an idea since they were announced
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CMDShepfart on February 05, 2023, 04:41:01 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Spoorthuzad on February 05, 2023, 04:58:11 AM
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

It's still in development lad. If there's an actual build ready Alex will usually have a download link at the top of the post.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 05, 2023, 04:59:56 AM
With basic Legion, if I do not care much about fighters, then Onslaught can replace it.  Onslaught has similar design, without the fighters but better guns and stats.  For Legion XIV, the only thing that sort of substitute for it is two Champions.  Legion XIV, it can use any large missile it wants effectively, while many ships with a large missile are not friendly to dumb-fire torpedoes (like Apogee or Conquest) or requires Automated Ships to use (for Rampart and Radiant).  As for ballistics, it is possible for XIV to use a bunch of small kinetics (in small and medium mounts) and boost them with ePD+IPDAI or Ballistic Rangefinder.  Normal Legion cannot do that because its mediums are composite, and probably need to be filled with missiles.

With the way Legion XIV is designed, player can totally ignore fighters (fill bays with 0 OP pods) and build it like a missileboat, and there is no other capital that has mounts like it has.  If player wants to ignore fighters on standard Legion, just get the Onslaught instead.

I am not sure upcoming Pegasus can replace Legion XIV since it costs 50 DP instead of 40, and the mounts usable for dumb-fire torpedoes are widely spaced apart like the Eagle's small missiles.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on February 05, 2023, 05:39:14 AM
Small question
Do issue where game with hidden UI(F12) run much better than the one with UI on top was addressed?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 05, 2023, 05:57:29 AM
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.
Astral is 50 DP vs Legion's 40 for the 2 squalls, better fighters but worse missiles.
XIV legion is nice in that you park it on the front and have a safe zone where other ship can't be jumped (Legion won't die and can have lots of budget kinetic/some HE output).
Extra 100 armor isn't the main point but it's also a very nice boost ofc, with some flux/OP to boot. Less power directly in front, but not much flux to use with strong fighters anyway and squalls are just good.
Astral is also a fat target but won't do much with its weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 05, 2023, 05:59:55 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 05, 2023, 06:55:02 AM
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)

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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on February 05, 2023, 07:03:36 AM
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
Regular legion can burn in with reapers too, and it gets 5 per volley instead of 4.
Now with the new patch, you will have 15 hammer burst instead...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 05, 2023, 07:16:20 AM
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)

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)
Thankfully efficiency overhaul and containment procedures help a bunch. If that fails then bring a prometheus or two full of fuel.
Regular legion can burn in with reapers too, and it gets 5 per volley instead of 4.
Now with the new patch, you will have 15 hammer burst instead...
Huh. Well, two cyclone reapers tend to last me for the entire fight more often than not. On your case how does that go?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 05, 2023, 07:29:31 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 05, 2023, 08:52:11 AM
Now that there are going to be Medium Hammers, the regular Legion will be able emulate the XIV with dual Large Hammers. That’s what I use the XIV for the most: a battering ram with huge alpha potential. There’s just nothing in the game that can withstand point blank dual Hammer barrages every few seconds with 60 missiles each via Missile Spec and EMR. All that said, base Legion can abuse 5x Proximity Mines and back it with 2x Large Kinetics and a fighter complement.

I think both variants are good but both could use the extra OP. They’re still, overall, behind a well-equipped Onslaught of equal cost.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on February 05, 2023, 08:59:37 AM
Thankfully efficiency overhaul and containment procedures help a bunch. If that fails then bring a prometheus or two full of fuel.
Regular legion can burn in with reapers too, and it gets 5 per volley instead of 4.
Now with the new patch, you will have 15 hammer burst instead...
Huh. Well, two cyclone reapers tend to last me for the entire fight more often than not. On your case how does that go?
Cyclone ammo is very generous, it's one of the missiles that rarely uses everything in a single battle.
5 Typhoon reapers are slightly cheaper, will still last for most fights in AI hands (definitely until the part where it's decided) and you get a bigger burst/more controlled use.
Missile spec on officers is a really big boost so you might skimp on racks for cyclone, though with 7 base ammo that will also be a decent option on Ms now.

Efficiency overhaul eats into combat OP, fuel is so cheap I'd just geta bunch of tankers.
Biggest effect is just the inconvenience, but phase transports also help with sensors so they are a nice option anyway.
Late game it doesn't matter too much, the one hard requirement when looking for a place to colonize is having a gate and then a full restock is always at hand.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: jRivers on February 05, 2023, 10:39:55 AM
... and hephaestus gets a completely inconsequential buff
I'm just going to say it: the Hephaestus is underrated.

This, i don't get how some don't see the absolute devastation Hephaestus can wreak on the field when you build a ship around it with rest going to kinetics.
I often build around half of my conquests around dual hephaestus mounts and full kinetics bonuses and mods.

You can sweep an ungodly torrent of missiles out of the way while stripping down an onslaught in seconds,
all you need after that is hull killers say a medium or two doing frag and you can utterly wipe out even capital ships in seconds with it.

That said it isn't overpowered, certainly it needs a refit built around it it's a large gun after all but if you do it's a Beast!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on February 05, 2023, 11:23:18 AM
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.


Small question
Do issue where game with hidden UI(F12) run much better than the one with UI on top was addressed?

I'm not familiar with this being an issue, but I'm going to assume you mean the framerate improves when the UI is hidden? If so, that's just to be expected since the game has to do less rendering. However, the UI shouldn't have a huge impact on the framerate - not totally insignificant, but not huge either. So if it's that much of a difference, there's a good chance it's a driver issue.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: NEmergix on February 05, 2023, 01:18:47 PM
Very hyped for the incoming update. Couple questions about the eagle changes :

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 !
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: TheLaughingDead on February 05, 2023, 01:22:22 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 05, 2023, 01:48:13 PM
Very hyped for the incoming update. Couple questions about the eagle changes :

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 !
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kos135 on February 05, 2023, 02:25:04 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on February 05, 2023, 02:35:13 PM
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 ?

1) I don't see any reason why not. Even if it's not specifically listed here, any change to the base should be applied to the variants as far as I know.
2) For only 14 DP the falcon seems to be in a pretty good spot. I believe it was buffed last patch(?) but overall I like where it is right now.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 05, 2023, 02:42:16 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: IonDragonX on February 05, 2023, 03:35:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on February 05, 2023, 03:50:44 PM
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.

I think Fury and ships with like Burn Drive would benefit a lot if the AI was aware it had a go-forward ship system and could sometimes choose to face the direction it wants to go instead of strafing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on February 06, 2023, 12:08:33 AM
Cheap commodity mission: remote pickup of legal goods variation now requires other colony to not be hostile to the player
Umm, I didn't know I can remotely pick up those goods before. Gotta try it out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Marcoda on February 06, 2023, 04:52:37 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on February 06, 2023, 05:26:18 AM
Cheap commodity mission: remote pickup of legal goods variation now requires other colony to not be hostile to the player
Umm, 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?
(And there is a problem in the current version, were you get offered this mission but can't fulfill it, because your standing with the colony is too low [possibly because of the same contact].)

Or is there another way to pick up goods from a station/contacting a person from a station without accessing it with transponder on/off?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on February 06, 2023, 05:43:06 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Elshama on February 06, 2023, 06:21:56 AM
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.

Speaking of makeshift shields what if this was built into a Buffalo Mk. II you know the pirates took out the big shield to fit more missiles only to put in a smaller one lol would be funny lore.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bummelei on February 06, 2023, 08:04:59 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CoverdInBees on February 06, 2023, 08:45:16 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Pablovansnogger on February 06, 2023, 08:52:54 AM
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.

Don’t forget they will both be better against the new missiles compared to the burst, because of the longer range.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CoverdInBees on February 06, 2023, 09:33:58 AM
Longer range?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Pablovansnogger on February 06, 2023, 09:59:55 AM
Longer range?

Actually just realized the normal PD has shorter range. I’d say that may be a little weak now, but I think the LR laser PD will be in good shape next patch atleast.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on February 06, 2023, 10:05:56 AM
The beam missiles will certainly make the "use vulcans everywhere and nothing else" strategy less attractive.

Probably won't be enough to make Paladin PD Champion a thing, but the longer-ranged energy PD are likely more able to deal with the energy missiles than small ballistic PD.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Blothorn on February 06, 2023, 11:13:07 AM
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.

I think you're missing out on occasion. If you're building a doom fleet and have a means of fueling it, tugs are the way to go. If you're trying to minimize sensor range and fuel usage for a more surgical approach (which can get you certain things earlier in a game than a doom fleet in my experience) tugs are off the table, and bringing a heavy hitter via ADF can increase your combat potential more than a smaller ship with full combat mods. (Especially/at least if like me you lack the ability to fly Hyperions and other superships to their potential.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Timid on February 06, 2023, 05:09:58 PM
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.  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on February 06, 2023, 08:15:54 PM
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.  :)
Yes please!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Spacer Heater on February 06, 2023, 08:29:04 PM
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.  :)

If ship mass affects how much damage a ram does, please do this. Ram damage as whole is very underwhelming at the moment. A plasma burn into a destroyer for a whole 500 damage never feels good, and burn drive does almost nothing. Think of all the orion drives being added Alex (!!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on February 06, 2023, 08:46:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on February 06, 2023, 09:41:27 PM
The point is that it looks cool and no other reason is needed to add a small thing into a game.

I honestly really like the look of the high tech and especially the midline versions. It's the low tech that looks a bit strange.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on February 06, 2023, 11:14:38 PM
does that mean using onslaught as a battering ram is viable now in the next patch? does my big boy finally get a buff he needs
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on February 07, 2023, 05:00:12 AM
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 always felt odd about broadsword being categorized as Low Tech despite having Midline color theme.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 07, 2023, 05:09:25 AM
Lol, Broadswords aren’t Midline? I guess I never paid attention to the blueprint category.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on February 07, 2023, 05:22:06 AM
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.
The only ship where makeshift shields was decent on was Rampart (Derelict ship), but even then, Rampart all-in on armor still did better.

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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on February 07, 2023, 08:39:44 AM
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.
The only ship where makeshift shields was decent on was Rampart (Derelict ship), but even then, Rampart all-in on armor still did better.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Elshama on February 07, 2023, 11:03:24 AM
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.
The only ship where makeshift shields was decent on was Rampart (Derelict ship), but even then, Rampart all-in on armor still did better.

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.
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.

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. And while it may not be the ship we want; I think we all know it's the ship that we deserve SMH

P.S. I have been playing on and off for a couple years but I haven't come across anything that raises your burn by one generally as a hull mod.iif it's in the game I sincerely apologize if not can we have it please please please please please!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on February 07, 2023, 11:17:40 AM
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?

On a related note, the bonus for turret gyros looks cool, but 25% extra damage to frigates is a lot. It makes sense for capitals but if I can give that to say, a tempest or a scarab or a lasher or... basically any frigate with decent firepower then it's going to be an obvious pickup to help them blast through enemy frigates at the capture points.
Spoiler
(https://i.imgur.com/BS0I9Gw.jpg)
[close]

On the other hand, with wolfpack tactics and target analysis they'll have 25/30/35/40% bonus damage which is aesthetically pleasing so maybe it's worth it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: cotique on February 07, 2023, 11:35:02 AM
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.

It's only for support fighters, so there is logic to it. I would like it to be an option for all the fighters though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 07, 2023, 11:49:32 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Spacer Heater on February 07, 2023, 11:55:57 AM
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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 07, 2023, 12:04:31 PM
Oh I hadn't seen the changed gyros bonus - I think thats really cool! It avoids the "put it on early game frigates" problem but is still a meaningful bonus. Thats a hullmod that, even though I'm a fan of it in general, I wouldn't normally put on a Falcon (energy mounts tend to have good turn stats/accuracy) but maybe I would to emphasize its 'punching down' role! I'm not sure, which is great sign for my own build diversity.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 07, 2023, 09:35:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cruacious on February 07, 2023, 10:57:03 PM
I normally don't run a pure missile boat like a Gryphon unless I have a Timid or Cautious officer as I'm afraid of them over committing most of the time. It's really such an absolute pain to micro manage missile fleets when you choose to run them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on February 08, 2023, 12:23:53 AM
Reckless Gryphons! Fear the hammer spam!

Note: Thaago incorporated is not liable for destroyed Gryphons and lost fights. Advice is for entertainment purposes only.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zr0Potential on February 08, 2023, 04:14:51 AM
Very excited for that tech-matching support fighters skin, now we can have them blend in with the main ship

As someone else already mentioned, should Broadsword be reclassified as Midline and is there any chance we could get Hullmods in the Codex?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Elshama on February 08, 2023, 05:19:49 AM
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.

Really? I thought if you only put point defense and long range missiles they would not close in. I don't use that many missile boats so I didn't notice. Besides the Gryphon the closest thing I got to a missile boat is my Conquest. SMH
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on February 08, 2023, 07:55:33 AM
Very excited for that tech-matching support fighters skin, now we can have them blend in with the main ship

As someone else already mentioned, should Broadsword be reclassified as Midline and is there any chance we could get Hullmods in the Codex?
I mean the broadsword looks pretty midline-y
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cruacious on February 08, 2023, 08:45:50 AM
I always treated Broadsword as Mid Tech solely based off the color of the aircraft. It could go between Low and Mid tech, honestly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 08, 2023, 09:02:06 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on February 08, 2023, 09:41:04 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 08, 2023, 10:26:08 AM
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.

Right. The Broadsword is just armor and guns so it does fit the Low-Tech MO to a T. It’s just not painted that way :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on February 08, 2023, 11:00:20 AM
Warthogs are more low-tech than Broadsword but they are ALSO painted like midline.

Tridents should be made more durable as they are the physically largest of all fighters. Give them more flux capacity for their shield (currently only 500 would be nice to get 750 or 1000) and/or more hull please.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on February 08, 2023, 11:43:53 PM
Can u add a CombatEngineLayers like BELOW_SHIP_WEAPONS_LAYER or some render plugin which could render between the weapons(considering weapons' renderOrder)...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Rojnaz on February 10, 2023, 12:19:25 AM
I really like the update, big fan of the Mining Laser changes!

The change that worries me is the addition of Manticore (LP), specifically the combination of Safety Overrides and Large missile slot, I think this ship will collide with the role of Colossus Mk.II, Manticore (LP) being a direct upgrade in almost all aspects, normally this wouldn't be a problem, but its from the same faction.

A suggestion, for making the Manticore (LP) unique, it could get rid of Safety Overrides and their shields to get a second ship system just like Vanguard.
Example: Canister Flak and Missile Autoforge, would be potentially very offensive but without a shield, only one missile slot (Large), 750 armor and 80 speed I think would be balanced.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 10, 2023, 01:43:37 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on February 10, 2023, 02:07:51 AM
Can we have both medium flaks go back to being HE?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 10, 2023, 02:08:29 AM
Can we have both medium flaks go back to being HE?
But why?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on February 10, 2023, 02:10:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: llama on February 10, 2023, 02:11:35 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on February 10, 2023, 03:43:37 AM
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*
(But hey, thank you dev team, no pressure and keep cool)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on February 10, 2023, 03:45:19 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bummelei on February 10, 2023, 04:06:20 AM
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?

If ship system stays the same as it is right now, the idea of one universal mount looks interesting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ruddygreat on February 10, 2023, 05:32:39 AM
Modding:
  • Fixed issue where a torpedo impacting a module's shield could damage the body of the ship

Just wondering, does this also apply to armour modules or is it just for shield hits?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FabianClasen on February 11, 2023, 09:16:41 AM
Great to see these content-rich updates, can't wait.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: DancingMonkey on February 12, 2023, 06:44:46 AM
Can you send out an email please when the new version comes out, thanks!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Midnight Kitsune on February 12, 2023, 07:12:30 AM
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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Modo44 on February 12, 2023, 07:12:45 AM
Still no modern Java port? This is ridiculously overdue.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: IonDragonX on February 12, 2023, 07:29:53 AM
... 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, ...

From another thread. Why not give Destroyers with 2+ slots 6 reload points?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Agnostalgia on February 12, 2023, 01:44:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PandaTent on February 13, 2023, 06:52:40 AM
Great stuff! Look forwards to trying the new updates!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kinsume on February 16, 2023, 03:27:53 AM
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

While I do enjoy the sandbox aspects of the game, I'm a huge fan of additional story-related quests and such being added in so big win here. Keep up the good work![/list][/list]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: mllhild on February 16, 2023, 08:27:11 AM
  • Increased speed in hyperspace
[/li][/list]
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on February 16, 2023, 08:44:01 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on February 16, 2023, 08:45:03 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 16, 2023, 08:52:18 AM
Such QoL additions really should be a part of the base game. Although I understand it's an undertaking in itself to implement it for every stat.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sahqovum on February 17, 2023, 08:59:20 PM
Liking some changes for sure. Might try normal Legion with 3 Jackhammers, 2 MK9s, some mortars and the Sarissa fighters. Should help a lot with the flux side issues and the 40 extra OP never hurts. Honestly I'm really excited for the Jackhammers lol. I can think of so many ways to use them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Phearlock on February 18, 2023, 05:16:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on February 18, 2023, 10:40:16 PM
Looks great. Especially the missile part. Seems like a long needed baseline to actually level the playing field between techs. Also the support fighters capable of heavy duty "screening". I can't believe it finally happened.

Excellent work.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solidus667 on February 19, 2023, 12:45:28 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on February 19, 2023, 02:45:08 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Pablovansnogger on February 19, 2023, 09:53:02 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kos135 on February 19, 2023, 10:35:06 AM
Can the Gremlin get some love in 0.96? I know it's not supposed to be an S-tier ship but could it at least be usable? Better flux stats, more OP, more armor & hull, more speed, a built-in hullmod, a different ship system like FMR or AAF? It could really use some kind of upgrade.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 19, 2023, 10:46:08 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Pablovansnogger on February 19, 2023, 06:32:05 PM
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.

If it’s more accurate, I think that would be a buff to the conquest atleast. May not be as good at close range or against stations, but theres better options for that instead. I think it’s a good change to make players not just default to the hurricane if they want HE.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solidus667 on February 20, 2023, 12:35:44 PM
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.

Thankes mate.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ApolloStarsector on February 21, 2023, 08:29:59 AM
Love the proposed changes! Major hype!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CoverdInBees on February 21, 2023, 10:55:10 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Pablovansnogger on February 21, 2023, 08:46:03 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kragh on February 22, 2023, 08:18:11 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 22, 2023, 08:25:37 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: llama on February 22, 2023, 09:12:59 AM
To be fair, the blog post explicitly mentions the use case of Squalls on the Pegasus specifically, even if it's not the sole rationale for the nerf
Quote
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 22, 2023, 10:47:31 AM
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?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on February 22, 2023, 11:12:07 AM
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?)
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 22, 2023, 01:14:49 PM
It doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game of Kinetic vs. HE at endgame. A single monster Onslaught in an otherwise balanced shielded fleet just adds a wrinkle to the battle. If you overdo Kinetics, the Onslaught chews you up but if you go overboard on HE, you can’t beat the support vessels. Likewise, if Ordos had tougher ships that relied less on shields, Kinetics wouldn’t be king against them.

It’s actually what makes the Dorito fights interesting: if you go all Big Gun, you end up getting swarmed to death. I like that you have remain flexible to win that fight.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: BCS on February 22, 2023, 11:38:44 PM
I just want to point out that every Beta and Alpha core will have elite Impact Mitigation and Damage Control. So while Remnant don't have armor-tanked ships in the technical sense, you still need some anti-armor damage against them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kaisi on February 25, 2023, 11:48:28 PM
Didn't read the whole thread, but:

When will be fixed suicidal frigate_AI behavior where they consistently ram allied capitals shields with their engine sides? This gets especially funny, when a pirate fleet enters map with a lot of weak hull frigates and some capitals and you see a couple of deaths on there side in log, and when big line engagement take place and you lose your own ships in safe situation, where they try just rum themselves to death .

When will be fixed  suicidal frigate_AI behavior where they consistently swarm deadly station blocking line of fire of capitals without a chance to scratch the station, needlessly dying amass instead of hiding behind capitals and letting those do what they came for.

In general frigates tend to block line of fire of bigger ships in the beginning of major engagements, and avoid swarming isolated targets for guaranteed kill when they logically should.

Ships in general tend to forgo pressing the target, when it is isolated and very high flux, even when themselves are low.

Regarding fleet limit. It needs to be bp caped, not by ship number. Currently you are locked out of small ship swarm tactics. Soft fleet cap does not help, 20% penalty for extra Kite is just absurd.

Skill penalty for specializing your fleet is illogical too. There may be balance issues yes but this, for example, forcing players to remove fighter skills from the build, when they have a lot of those. Penalties must be reworked some other way. Currently they force player to avoid skills, that should boost their play style.

We also need auto retreat function for player ships with low CR and Hull.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Talando on February 26, 2023, 12:36:57 PM
I discovered this game just a month ago, and amazed by the quality and dedication that was put everywhere (coding, art, animation, sound by SianStark, writing for the lore and quests...).

Just wish your 4 people team will be well rewarded financially one day, because it deserves so much love :)

Did you investigate Github patrons or Patreon to help funding? I see people just making shaders for Skyrim starting to bring revenue this way. As you can play the game in arcade mode, it might also be worthwhile to check opportunities with consoles (and their editors like Microsoft) if you self-publish on their games marketplaces. There's a mod trying to make online battles (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=24577.0) in a kind of assymetric way if I understood.

Thanks again for the huuuuge work! (I only know Vanilla for now and discovering colonies, it's a lot of fun in the Freelancer style).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jackundor on February 26, 2023, 11:22:25 PM

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.

Halved all of these - just halving the per-shot wouldn't do much, I don't think.

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 buff

also i just remembered that i'll probably discontinue one of the weapons in my mods bc it's also a med hammer but too weak, too costly and has an ass sprite
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Verran on February 27, 2023, 08:55:56 AM
*reads about the small missile auto-loader. Recalls that some phase ships have missile mounts. Reasons that a phase ship is equivalent to submarine. Sabaton's "Wolfpack" starts playing in the background*
(https://i.imgflip.com/3dupa9.png)

In thinking about this, you say that the auto-loader only effects missiles placed in their proper mount. Marking out that ones placed in synergy won't receive the bonus. My question is: will it effect small missiles placed in medium missile mounts?

Update looks great and I can't wait for it! I particularly look forward to, beyond a submarine wolfpack play-through, the new S-mod changes. As, how it stands, whenever I design a ship with the intention of S-mods, I just make sure the most expensive mod is S-modded. With the changes adding additional benefits to S-modding, it'll make me think more in that department. Which is fantastic!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ILoveAnnihilators on February 27, 2023, 03:15:01 PM
Why does the hurricane MIRV nerfed? My beloved large missile... My conquest will suffer....
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on February 27, 2023, 06:15:48 PM
Just wanted to note that I think the buffs to the lesser used energy weapons are a good change of direction.  As it stands, most energy-heavy frigates lean heavily on anti-matter blasters for their raw flux output, and the category has needed some improvement.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: amoc on February 28, 2023, 03:25:52 AM
Do my current save work with 0.96a?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jackundor on February 28, 2023, 03:53:50 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on February 28, 2023, 06:09:10 AM
@Alex

Just curious: there have been quite a few minor, and not-so-minor, tweaks and changes posted on Twitter and the forums since the initial patch notes. Well, enough that I can’t keep track of them all or source them. Will you post a second round of changes or are you going to wait closer to release?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on February 28, 2023, 04:28:59 PM
I'm hoping that given this patch is from .95 to .96 that it will be out a few weeks after these notes, instead of a few months like we've seen with bigger version jumps.

It's been a few weeks already, so... ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: A_Random_Dude on March 01, 2023, 04:46:07 AM
Big updates seemed to stay consistent between each others until now, don't see why this one would take a few weeks instead.

Also, better it be months of wait for a stable, fully completed update, than a buggy and unfinished one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on March 01, 2023, 05:39:10 AM
We will probably get a buggy one with multiple hotfixes over the next month no matter what happens, if previous releases are anything to go by.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on March 01, 2023, 07:02:25 AM
Enough! Release the Release Candidates! The unwashed masses demand it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on March 01, 2023, 07:10:49 AM
Guys wait, please take it easy, I have a work assignment due in 8 days. Having a Starsector update drop right now would spell doom for me.

Thanks for the understanding.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on March 01, 2023, 08:49:05 AM
I would love to be wrong but I don’t think we’re less than a week away.

And look, just because you lack the self-control to delay playing a new update doesn’t mean the rest of us should have to wait!  ;) We’ll let you know how it goes…!  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on March 01, 2023, 03:22:56 PM
I'm going to lock this for now as it doesn't seem productive at the moment.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 12, 2023, 10:58:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Shogouki on April 12, 2023, 11:22:27 AM
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.

Woot!  Very awesome!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: memeextremist on April 12, 2023, 11:27:55 AM
yay! hope it's ready soon o7
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 12, 2023, 11:45:58 AM
Quote
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

Interesting. Suddenly all these "minor" built-in hullmods are worth a second look because they should provide big bonuses when S-modded.

Quote
Squall: removed EMP damage

Oof. Well, it had it coming.

Quote
Militarized Subsystems: no longer provides the minor armor/flux bonus

So a straight-up nerf?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on April 12, 2023, 11:52:48 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on April 12, 2023, 11:58:30 AM
  • 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
Huzzah!
  • Shield Conversion - Front:
    • Removed shield upkeep reduction
    • Reduced cost from 3/6/10/18 to 3/6/9/15
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.

Still, I guess we'll see what it looks like with playtesting?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 12, 2023, 12:06:24 PM
Quote
Militarized Subsystems: no longer provides the minor armor/flux bonus

So a straight-up nerf?

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.


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?

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.

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.

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.

  • Shield Conversion - Front:
    • Removed shield upkeep reduction
    • Reduced cost from 3/6/10/18 to 3/6/9/15
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.

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!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 12, 2023, 12:20:08 PM
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

It already did that and then some - its projectile just straight up passes through fighters, destroyed or not.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on April 12, 2023, 12:23:44 PM
  • Shield Conversion - Front:
    • Removed shield upkeep reduction
    • Reduced cost from 3/6/10/18 to 3/6/9/15
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.

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!)
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.

The primary exception here is the Paragon, which has shields that are so expensive that it really was worth installing both - and that's even before you count in how reduced shield costs interact with its ship system.
(And occasionally the Aurora, though only occasionally - you'd only get full return on investment* from both hullmods' discount if you didn't have Field Modulation, and if you're piloting an Aurora you should really have Field Modulation. At which point it tended to come down to "Do I have OP to spare, and do I want to spend that on adding stabilized shields, or do I want to spend that on a flux distributor?")

I'd suggest either changing the OP cost to 2/4/6/10, making it significantly cheaper than omni shield conversion, or adding back in something like the omni shield conversion's 25% upkeep discount.

Edit: Or, maybe better: make both shield conversion hullmods cheap at 2/4/6/10 and remove omni conversion's upkeep discount.
Edit2: * To clarify, by "full return on investment" I mean "10 less flux per second per OP spent", i.e., equivalent to what you'd get by adding more flux vents. For the Aurora in particular, the first cost-discount mod was always a good deal (if you weren't using SO), but the second wasn't, and was thus very much a "well, maybe add it in if you've got OP to spare" situation.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 12, 2023, 12:32:37 PM
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".)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on April 12, 2023, 12:41:46 PM
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".)
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 12, 2023, 12:52:03 PM
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.

EDIT: Also how did no one mention that Apogee now has a medium energy actually pointing forwards, that's big.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on April 12, 2023, 12:56:25 PM
Quote
Hull-standard built-in hullmods that have an s-mod bonus can now be "enhanced" to unlock that bonus

    Costs 1 story point, grants 100% bonus XP
    Does *not* count against the maximum number of s-mods per ship
So  you  have to spend 6 story points to get fully polished ship ?

I dont see any fix of char-skills, are they coming ?
I dont see any  spice for Salamanders, they are interesting (mechanic) rockets, but very weak in total effect. Could you add a bit power ? (at least rate of fire 25 >> 20s)


Looks good in general, I am surprised  that you spent so much time for AI fixing/improving.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on April 12, 2023, 12:59:13 PM
Quote
Fighters 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:)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on April 12, 2023, 01:57:19 PM
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.

Ahh okay. Yeah will be really interesting to see how the new s-mod bonuses/penalties play out, since the ones revealed so far provide a lot of interesting variations for ship builds.

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.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on April 12, 2023, 02:58:32 PM
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

Anyway, this all looks very nifty, and it's neat to see all the new modding options being added. The frontal shield conversion change is... interesting, and I'd sort of wondered about it myself (there are a lot of mod ships on which it can be extremely good), but it's definitely a sea change for its value proposition and resistance to the change might just highlight how hard it is to use omni shields well in the current game. (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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on April 12, 2023, 03:21:50 PM
Quote
Hull-standard built-in hullmods that have an s-mod bonus can now be "enhanced" to unlock that bonus

    Costs 1 story point, grants 100% bonus XP
    Does *not* count against the maximum number of s-mods per ship
So  you  have to spend 6 story points to get fully polished ship ?

It is still 2-3 story points normally, but ships that come with built-in hullmods can upgrade them into extra S-mods.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 12, 2023, 03:21:59 PM
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.

Hmm. All fair points, but e.g. 10 OP for a capital (or 2 for a frigate) just feels like it becomes a very casual decision. And this is a qualitative change for a ship. So in some cases it'd still be worth it at the 3/6/9/15 tier, in either case, and it feels like it makes sense to push the cost - a little! - just to maintain the overall character of the ships a bit more.


Let me guess, s-mod bonus gives it cost reduction?

Right now, it actually improves shield flux/damage by 5%.

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.

I wouldn't call faster vent speed a side effect of RFC, though, not at all.

EDIT: Also how did no one mention that Apogee now has a medium energy actually pointing forwards, that's big.

Right?


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.


Quote
Fighters 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:)

:D


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.)

Hmm, I feel like it ought to be at least a little more expensive than Wasps.

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?

Right, that doesn't interact with CH at all. The CCB continues to produce defective fighters and does not increase the ship's deployment points.

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.

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 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)).

(Personally, I tend to use autofire for the main guns; this makes handling Omni shields a lot easier. Can still get tricky at times, though.)

Anyway, pilgrim transport, eh? I just get curiouser and curiouser about the new campaign content... :D

:D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on April 12, 2023, 03:40:04 PM
I think I only used Front Shield when it would make a smaller omni shield into a full 360—I remember every Aurora I made got one. The halved upkeep and faster deploy was defs nice but not the main reason I personally went with it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lukas04 on April 12, 2023, 03:43:19 PM
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


when the feature i request makes it in hehe.
still very thankful for it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on April 12, 2023, 04:26:48 PM
Re: Front-Shield Conversion

Chalk me up as one who uses it primarily as a QoL mod. I appreciate the usefulness of Omni Shields in "oh crap!" moments but, in general, I prefer the stability of good coverage Front Shields. The shield upkeep reduction was nice but not the primary reason I used it (not to mention that FSC cost more than Stabilized Shields, anyway). My favorite use-case was on an Aurora, as it gave 360 degree coverage and reduced the fairly pricey upkeep.

I admit that FSC was essentially Accelerated Shields and Stabilized Shields "in one" but you were also giving up pin-point shield flexibility, which can be a big deal. The AI definitely prefers Omni-Shields in my experience. I don't think I ever put FSC on non-player ships. As a side-grade option, I think FSC is fine with the new changes but you're paying for that QoL preference.

Other stuffs:

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.

I imagine the Converted Hangar change will be polarizing, either due to disrupting the status quo, or because DP costs can be considered one of the key stats in shipbuilding, especially as you push up against the 240 limit.

I'm ambivalent about the Drover changes. I saw the tweet and I'm still...underwhelmed(?)...by the B-deck idea. The reason I pick a Drover over a Condor is because the fighters on a Drover are superior to those on a Condor on a 1:1 basis. You can field more fighters with the ship system and get more DPS. It's the same reason I pick a Heron over a Mora in some cases. So, the Drover's ability to restore its Replacement Rate once just doesn't strike me as suitable replacement to Reserve Deployment. If you go 2x Bomber, it seems to me that that B-Deck perk could get used up toward the beginning of a fight and then you just have a 2-deck carrier with Active Flare Launchers for the remainder. Or, if you go 2x Fighter and don't see a ton of losses, you may never even get down to 50%. It just doesn't strike me as 40% better than a Condor if all you want is more flight decks. The B-Deck is a great idea, just not as a replacement for Reserve Deployment. Of course, I need to try it before complaining too much.

"Medusa: adjusted misaligned engine nozzle" - truly the unheralded diamond in the rough. :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: jujuteux on April 12, 2023, 04:30:20 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Flet on April 12, 2023, 05:20:04 PM
I like the drover changes. 10 OP seems to be a straight buff to how i use them as a player ship, and combat carrier means maybe the AI will use them how i use them. For a passive carrier in AI hands id always just pick condors.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on April 12, 2023, 05:26:03 PM
More UI modding is GOOD.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 12, 2023, 05:52:38 PM
Quote
Hull-standard built-in hullmods that have an s-mod bonus can now be "enhanced" to unlock that bonus

    Costs 1 story point, grants 100% bonus XP
    Does *not* count against the maximum number of s-mods per ship
Do we know the s-mod bonus for insulated engines yet? Brawler (TT) is going to be meta as hell.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Low Settings on April 12, 2023, 06:01:23 PM
Oh wow heavy ballistic integration can get a bonus  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on April 12, 2023, 07:26:52 PM
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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lukas04 on April 12, 2023, 07:34:05 PM
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)

I dont think there are to many mods that are interested in doing so. It was technicly possible in different ways before this, just in a jank way. LunaLib currently already adds two Buttons to the Main Menu for Mod Settings and Version Checker, but with this update i will be able to do so in less janky ways.

I also considered adding a utility for other modders to add to the main menu without interference, but until that actually becomes an issue i dont think its worth wasting to much time on.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on April 12, 2023, 09:07:59 PM
Fury OP boost, great news!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: wraithstalke on April 12, 2023, 10:15:51 PM
- Support fighters (Xyphos, Sarissa, Mining Pod) will be repainted to match the carrier hull style

Well this is cute.

Also I like the converted hanger changes, although the deployment cost is probably going to be a major issue in regards to viability.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 12, 2023, 10:33:29 PM
Add me to the people confused about Shield Conversion/Front change - it used to be a more expensive alternative to Stabilized Shields for when the extra arc would benefit the ship but with the shield upkeep reduction completely gone I cannot imagine myself ever taking it now. (Extended Shields is even worse but that's another topic)

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.

Speaking of which, can you please give Militarized Subsystems a bonus to CR recovery? One of the problems with "civilian combat ships" like the Atlas Mk.II is how long it takes for them to fully recover CR after a fight. For a civilian ship it's 10 days base and you can only get it to about 7 with Efficiency Overhaul - which is usually still twice as long as rest of your fleet. And if you ever run into a Hyperspace storm, well... weigh down the Shift key and go make yourself a cup of tea.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on April 12, 2023, 11:52:37 PM
(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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Maethendias on April 13, 2023, 12:34:29 AM
apogee and int-laser buff? hell yeah!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 13, 2023, 12:54:37 AM
Yeah, about the Apogee?

(https://i.ibb.co/F8Pbs1G/apogee.jpg)

I think it's a bit too much. Note that in the next version:
 - Flux use will be 150 lower(-100 HIL, -50 Ion Beam) - easily flux neutral without Ordnance Expertise
 - It will have 6 more OP(burst weapon buffs)
 - You will be able to S-mod in the High Resolution Sensors and Surveying Equipment for as of yet unknown bonuses, on top of the two/three S-mods

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on April 13, 2023, 01:03:25 AM
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.
Admittedly editing panels would
1) be a sizable undertaking from code perspective (you need to mark a lot of panels DoNotObfuscate, and a whole bunch are created as anon class extensions to StandardTooltipV2 in CargoTooltipFactory and such)
and 2) better done from UIPanelAPI's existing API, which exists and looks very useful, but is also unreachable, unless you use a very complicated and, in java 7, flat out annoying way that i haven't even tested - i just know it exists.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 13, 2023, 01:04:26 AM
You forgot the Squall nerfs, and Apogee will cost 20 DP. I'd say it's nowhere close to Champion level purely because of ballistics difference. And any build can seem OP with 3 s-mods.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Oshi on April 13, 2023, 01:04:51 AM
RE: Militarized Subsystems - I'd had it in mind that I needed it to make the AI in civilian converted ships like the Atlas MKII actually be aggressive, and had regarded it as a required investment. Is that not the case?

If it's just intended to be a campaign level modifier I'm not sure I should have been installing it at all on those ships! :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on April 13, 2023, 03:36:36 AM

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.
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.

Afflictor is very  unique ship, it is better to highlight his special by smart logic than disable it.
I belive  add a few nested If-then  makes Ship  system used properly and use often  >>  it brings more  fun for players.
Highlight ship role of debuffer. Perhaps you  also think about  the new role: Healer.  Make salvage gantry release repair bot.  Yes, I like classic RPG.

It  is  one of very few ships where dmg  is not  the main focus. For sake  of diversity, ... keep Entropy usage on fighters.
Would you please rather make  priority logic smarter ?
Thanks

Edit2:
Also for same reason,  diversity and rebel style  of combat, add a buff for Salamander rockets. 25s > 20s refire.
Thanks
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on April 13, 2023, 03:57:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 13, 2023, 04:04:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on April 13, 2023, 06:06:47 AM
Great news that the second batch of patch notes ist published.  :)

Just as a reminder:

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?)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ruddygreat on April 13, 2023, 06:16:20 AM

It  is  one of very few ships where dmg  is not  the main focus. For sake  of diversity, ... keep Entropy usage on fighters.


even then, making one fighter out of a wing of like 3-6 take more damage is still a pretty big waste, it'd have to affect an entire wing / every ship in an area to be "worth it" & at that point that's basically an entirely different system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on April 13, 2023, 06:51:44 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on April 13, 2023, 06:58:22 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on April 13, 2023, 07:02:01 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on April 13, 2023, 07:06:01 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on April 13, 2023, 07:06:36 AM
Dem juicy changes. :D

Quote
Eagle:

    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)
Nice

Quote
Aurora:

    Improved shield efficiency to 0.6 (was: 0.8 )
I did not feel like the Aurora needed any buffs... I take it -- as a high tech enjoyer and Aurora lover. :D

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.

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!
Nice. :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on April 13, 2023, 07:07:50 AM
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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on April 13, 2023, 07:10:18 AM
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.

My experience says use single ACs then, which you should be doing most of the time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on April 13, 2023, 07:11:54 AM
Maybe a condition a la "established trade routes" or something which adds accessibility or even min. accessibility? Inb4 just buff core access and/or change fall off formula or S-Mod ports/waystations in (some) core regions.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 13, 2023, 07:12:07 AM
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.
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.

EDIT: Megas and some others are better historians than me but let me remind everyone of past Expanded Missile Racks, when it got nerfed, no one used it, and then got buffed. Hardened Shields went through a similar path. Expanded Deck Crew also got gutted and I have not used it a single time since then. Shield Shunt is yet another hullmod which got nerfed because one ship became too strong, now it's a joke hullmod pretty much (yes yes you can still use it but it's inferior to a normal fleet setup). There's probably something else I'm forgetting.

Anyways yeah, balance of ships and weapons is in a great place, but I feel like hullmods are all over the place. Guess we'll see how s-mod bonuses change that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on April 13, 2023, 07:27:26 AM
Frontal conversion being cheap without upkeep reduction would be nice, being that obvious a choice in lots of cases was a bit silly but as mentioned it's a nice convenience for player ships.

Looking forward to shield buffs on Wolf/Aurora, paired with M energy changes looks like the next playthrough will be more high-tech focused.

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 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).
Apogee without SO has real trouble with finishing, now ion can flame out engines after squall or plasma gets some hard flux on enemies.
Ion also helps a lot with keeping large threats down, graviton is just good support for anything, pulse laser is consistent cheap shield suppression and DPS against weak hulls.
Really excited to see how the changes work out in practice.

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.
Heavy blaster's 500 range also sucks super hard with 60 base speed for a main weapon.

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.
At 18 DP it was also an alternative to the Champion, much better shields+cheaper squalls vs stronger beam+ballistics+stronger armor.
Now it takes a shield/squall efficiency hit for the DP cost but has more versatile loadouts.

Don't think the burst PDs are worth counting as Apogee buffs, IMO they were plain bad before and still aren't good there.
0.7 shields, active flares, plenty of slots for PD laser/IR pulse/ion pulser and maybe advanced optics for frontal beams.
Extra OP is better used on ECCM, extended racks or just more flux.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 13, 2023, 07:53:04 AM
It doesn't have the range of a capital, why would it?

Advanced Optics.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on April 13, 2023, 08:12:42 AM
Excited to hear you're entering the final playtesting phase Alex.

In the list of changes, I think I was most struck by the large buff to Aurora shields (33%), but upon further thinking, it was probably warranted.

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.

Code
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

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.

Edit: Changed max vents to max caps in table.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on April 13, 2023, 08:53:01 AM
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.
Heavy blaster's 500 range also sucks super hard with 60 base speed for a main weapon.
It can be better to have two plasma guns rather than one. :p
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 13, 2023, 09:30:15 AM
A few assorted responses, before I get back to playtesting :)

Re: front shield conversion etc - I'll take another look at the OP costs.


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.

It's still in the "keep an eye on it" stage and I particularly want to use it during my playtesting. But it's a combination of things - the direct buffs, the Graviton change, the Ion Beam change, Missile Autoloader, cheaper burst PD. It all added up to something that felt like a bit much in actual practice.


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.

The goal is to give it more flexibility in loadouts. If the overall power is out of line, then it could definitely be pulled back in different ways - an extra point of DP, a bit less flux capacity, something like that.


"Medusa: adjusted misaligned engine nozzle" - truly the unheralded diamond in the rough. :D

Yes! There were a few other critical fixes of this nature that I think didn't make it in the notes.


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

The last ship engine can't be disabled while an engine-boosting system is on. (This isn't the right thread for this, though; let's keep it on-topic.)


Do we know the s-mod bonus for insulated engines yet? Brawler (TT) is going to be meta as hell.

An extra 100% engine health and the sensor profile reduction is changed to 90% (from 50%).


Oh wow heavy ballistic integration can get a bonus  ;D

It doesn't! Not every hullmod has s-mod effects, and in particular ones that are just hull features and can't be installed on arbitrary ships don't have any.


(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.

Not every build is going to have industry! The hullmod basically exists to negate the penalties of civgrade at a cost. Perhaps it could be cheaper OP-wise, though; definitely open to that possibility.


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.

Pretty much the main thing it's intended for! Modding the core UI is, as you say, much more involved.


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?)

Ah! I remember fixing this, so it looks like this just didn't make it into the notes. Thank you for the reminder, though!


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.

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)

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.

(Yeah, exactly.)


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.

Cool - thank you for doing the math!


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.

Design-wise, the Oddyssey is a battlecruiser, so that checks out - it trades defenses for firepower and moblity. I wouldn't call it a brawling ship - if it gets close, it probably wants to overwhelm quickly rather than get stuck in for a long time against equal opposition.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on April 13, 2023, 09:38:51 AM
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.

On the other hand, the Odyssey is the only one that *can* act in a more standoff manner, since it has 2 Large Energies and a Large Synergy, as well as 2 fighter slots. All the others are limited to smalls and mediums which don't provide much standoff offensive power, so they're more or less forced to close in and take damage in order for them to kill other ships. Thus they need more flux capacity to function than the Odyssey.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on April 13, 2023, 11:28:37 AM
It doesn't have the range of a capital, why would it?
Advanced Optics.
Capitals can also get advanced optics.
At that point you might as well just say Scarab has capital range, if it installs tactical lasers it'll shoot further than an Odyssey with AM blasters :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 13, 2023, 11:30:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on April 13, 2023, 11:37:18 AM
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."
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 13, 2023, 11:43:00 AM
I'm sorry, did I miss something? Since when do we judge hullmods by their usefulness against the Circus Missile?

Capitals can also get advanced optics.

Only if they have beams(most don't) and do get Advanced Optics(most don't)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 13, 2023, 11:58:46 AM
...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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: AcaMetis on April 13, 2023, 12:00:18 PM
90% is enough to reduce a capital's sensor profile down to that of a frigate. I am definitely going to experiment with that.

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.

(Yeah, exactly.)
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 13, 2023, 12:15:35 PM
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 all, and since that's clearly not true...

Seriously, though, that doesn't make much sense. There are various ways of reducing EMP damage, other ways of boosting engine health/reducing the damage they take, there are indirect hits that deal less damage (which will e.g. happen when a Salamander hits a cluster of engines - it can't score a direct hit on all of them at once - or simply when it misses by a bit, which happens often), etc. And, that's before you even get into other damage sources.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 13, 2023, 12:24:00 PM
By this argument, engine hitpoints don't matter at all
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Karas-V on April 13, 2023, 12:30:57 PM
Alex, is there a plan to add more factions in the future? Or the factions we have now is final?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 13, 2023, 12:32:41 PM
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.

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 such; all I can say is that this idea that engine health doesn't matter doesn't hold up for me *at all* when I'm playing. Having some kind of boost to it/EMP mitigation/etc feels essential.


Alex, is there a plan to add more factions in the future? Or the factions we have now is final?

Nothing I'd call plans, so: :-X
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 13, 2023, 01:03:26 PM
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 such
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on April 13, 2023, 01:26:46 PM
By this argument, engine hitpoints don't matter at all
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.
For me arcing EMP or medium/small enemies getting behind seems to be the main source of flameouts.
Since most low tech can kinda-sorta take an OP hit and the 10% hull is decentish anyway it might be an option on combat ships.
Not the biggest power boost but makes phase ships less "mandatory" for stealth/pirate gameplay.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 13, 2023, 01:28:46 PM
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.

Hmm. I get what you're saying, but that hasn't been my experience; it's felt essential from frigates on up to cruisers, depending.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ApolloStarsector on April 13, 2023, 01:30:48 PM
HYPE!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on April 13, 2023, 01:36:57 PM
It seems to me that Impact Mitigation's "engines and weapons take half damage" line is getting ignored, here, as is Resistant Flux Conduit's EMP protection. 2400 effective HP is enough to shrug off any Salamander that isn't rocking Elite Target Analysis, and that's the frigates.

Depending on which frigates you run, maybe you're not putting one or the other of those on them, but bluntly I've killed a lot of frigates 'cause their engines died, no Salamanders involved. The ships that most depend on their speed and maneuverability to survive really can't afford to lose it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on April 13, 2023, 01:50:48 PM
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.

It's been my in-game experience that a destroyer with insulated engines won't lose an engine from a single salamander hit, while two salamanders in rapid succession will burn out at least one, if not two or three engines. There are, as others have posted, a number of possible reasons why my experience doesn't match your math, and frankly, I'm not interested enough to bother testing out exactly what's going on here: it's enough for me to know that insulated engines works, and will work better when s-modded.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 13, 2023, 09:37:53 PM
A single circus missile can and will eventually lose you an entire fleet against a late-game ordo fight.

I probably fought Ordo over a hundred times at this point and I can't recall a single time any of my ships was hit by a Salamander. I can't even tell you which Remnant ships carry it. Some Lumens I guess?

Then again I do put PD on my ships. YMMV.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on April 14, 2023, 03:52:22 AM
Salamanders keep your ships honest, in a way. They're easily swatted by PD, but if you skip on it, well, have fun.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 14, 2023, 05:11:08 AM
Bit late but:

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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: strcat on April 14, 2023, 06:10:37 AM
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.

I think omni shields are extremely underrated for player ships and it's part of why ships where front shields don't work well like the Odyssey are significantly underrated. Omni shields are even quite useful with the Onslaught since turning takes so long even when you're holding fire for zero flux boost. Dropping all the hard flux while turning also isn't actually desirable due to Polarized Armor combined with tons of flux dissipation from Ordnance Expertise, maxed out vents and Flux Distributor. I don't currently include the conversion but it would probably be worth sacrificing something for it and then leaning more on shields instead of zero flux boost turning.

You need to make some changes to how you fly ships in order to properly take advantage of omni shields. It conflicts with aiming weapons manually since you often or even usually want the shield facing differently than your primary weapons. Weapons need target leading and shields are also used to defend against more than your primary target. Autofire is usually more efficient than the player at aiming and firing most weapons with Elite Gunnery Implants or high CR anyway. The player is much better at timing limited ammunition or high cooldown weapons which you can still do without manually aiming one of your weapon groups. You also need to use the normal keybindings for turning and strafing rather than holding shift for steering and using A and D for strafing. That has a learning curve if you're used to flying while holding shift.

For the Odyssey, I keep 3x Sabot SRM Pod as the selected weapon group and use the mouse to aim the 180 degree omni shield including redeploying it. It's extremely important to focus on that especially with such a mobile ship where you can dart towards and away from enemies. 2x Plasma Cannon on autofire works better than manually aiming them in most cases and frees up focus for managing the ship orientation / movement including the ship system, shield orientation, target selection and sabots. I use 2x Xyphos and a Locust SRM Launcher for 360 degree PD rather than PD weapons which helps make up for not having a 360 degree shield. It almost never wants the shield facing directing in front since you approach enemies from the side, circle around them and potentially disengage. If you need to disengage faster, the shield needs to be more rear facing. I focus on dissipation and venting speed with near 0 capacitors. Venting frequently and quickly deploying the shield in the right place is crucial. Front shields would be far worse despite full coverage and the ship would be far more prone to getting killed instead of being able to solo nearly anything.

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.

For player flagships, EMP resistance for RFC is really the secondary effect in most cases. I also use Hardened Shields to have much stronger shields without longer venting speed from adding capacitors. The same choices may not make sense for AI ships since they aren't nearly as aggressive with active venting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 14, 2023, 06:16:23 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on April 14, 2023, 07:04:35 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: strcat on April 14, 2023, 07:17:32 AM
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).

I haven't seen many people using the Odyssey and it typically gets rated under the Onslaught or Paragon as a player piloted ship. It's considered quite good but usually not top tier which is what I mean by underrated. Something can be widely regarded as very good while still being underrated. I personally didn't use it for a long time because I wasn't used to broadside ships or omni shields, and it wasn't hyped up as an incredible ship so I never put the effort into giving it a real shot. AI can't pilot it well but it's incredible as a player ship and is on a whole other level than those. I can't solo a typical Ordo fleet with an Onslaught or Paragon because they get swarmed and can't make nearly as much difference in a fleet battle with only burn drive. Charge-based ship systems get an extreme benefit from Systems Expertise and you can pick up BotB and the important technology skills by skipping Industry. It's unforgiving of mistakes but it's perfect as a player ship.

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. The battle report mod helps with seeing that manually aiming weapons may actually often be making them less efficient in practice. There are certainly cases where manually aiming them allows for clever usage but I'm not sure it makes up for all the little inaccuracies/mistakes. Autofire currently has issues with the Tachyon Lance and Phase Lance but it seems the latest patch will be fixing that issue. Player can do smart things with both timing and aiming for those kinds of weapons such as aiming TL off center so the AI can't raise front shields in time to block it but at least once the bug is fixed I expect that autofire is overall much more efficient since it won't miss lots of shots vs. frigates, etc. and will properly track them as they move. I think it's very obvious that beam weapons work extremely well on autofire but it's very good at target leading for projectiles too when that's maxed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on April 14, 2023, 07:54:10 AM
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.
Seems to be more reliable for lots of ships (often overlaps with the >300° coverage you mentioned ofc).


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.
Still prefer frontal shields in most cases, it's a mix of being bad at piloting and frontal arc/raise speed/flux buff being worth it :)

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.

The ships that like omni most are the armor tanks, can just take most hits to the face and react with shields against the big threats/beams.
They also tend to have strong PD and hard to reach backs so still not a necessity.

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.
Didn't see people saying it's anything but brutal with manual control, admittedly didn't look too hard but it'd be really silly IMO.
Being good in AI hands is the part that's not obvious, I think the AI is great with Odyssey but many don't like it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 14, 2023, 07:56:05 AM
Quote
Mining Pods: will now try to stay in front of the carrier
Does "in front" here mean "between the ship and its closest enemy" or "opposite from the engines"? Asking about broadside ships, like Odyssey.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: strcat on April 14, 2023, 08:03:24 AM
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.

Players can work around front shields better, but players can also take better advantage of omni shields if you fit it into your piloting. There are ships where front shield conversion is very obvious like the Aurora since 360° coverage is awesome and it has an easy time remaining facing almost any enemy. That's still going to be obvious without the flux cost discount and Aurora in particular is getting a buff which more than makes up for it. Slow turning ships get a lot of benefit from omni shields, especially if you're aggressively using active venting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 14, 2023, 08:32:09 AM
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?

Not to the same extent, no - though it's generally easier because factions have more distinct ship lineups. For the Apogee specifically, probably the easiest place to pick it up would be at the military market on Nortia, especially if its stability is not too low. Nothing like "reliable" (the independent faction has access to *a lot* of different cruisers!) but also not exceedingly rare.

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.

It does! It not always going to get it right but you'd really notice if it didn't do it at all :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: strcat on April 14, 2023, 08:50:43 AM
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.

Since the movement system only moves you forward, Odyssey is great at circling around and flanking. It can avoid getting swarmed that way without needing backup. Keeping enemies on the left by outrunning and circling around them works very well and the main benefit of more coverage would be again fighters, but those will still screw you over (especially Broadswords) if you try to tank them instead of quickly killing them (Locust SRM Launcher is amazing at a lot more than dealing with fighters, and 2x Xyphos helps too). Being able to raise the shield directly facing the enemies after venting greatly reduces how long it makes you vulnerable. Frequent active venting is part of what makes the player so strong compared to the AI. Running away as quickly as possible involves turning away and bursting past them, in which case they're behind you and your engines are facing them. If you're engaging the enemy as part of a battle line kiting back and forth, then I agree front shields don't hurt much but still hinder you when flanking. If you're alone, staying moving forward and active venting aggressively keeps you alive.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on April 14, 2023, 09:54:40 AM
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.

If I'm soloing a 300-400k bounty with a pile of Conquests and Champions, being able to drop and quickly bring up shields in the correct direction is key given the long range missile spam.  Front shield deployment would take way too long to get to the rear of the ship in that case, resulting in hits on the ship.

The only issue with 360 front shields is how quickly it gets to the position you need it at, but it happens to be a big issue for some ships. On small ships like the Hyperion or Scarab, it's not a big deal since it raises quickly and they can easily back off to vent and re-engage quickly.  If you're in the middle of a battle line, it's also not a big deal, since other ships are dealing with flankers.  But if you're isolated (or soloing) or defending a flank, then it can run into some issues.

I do tend to think omni shield conversion on armor tankers which don't start that way, such as on Onslaughts, and sometimes Legions, is quite nice as well, both for player and AI piloting. The smaller area is less of an issue since you want to use armor to win the flux war anyways, while also prioritizing incoming Reapers or phase ships from odd angles.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on April 14, 2023, 10:41:16 AM
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 :)
If you are hammering for your fleet you really don't get much from omni (doesn't matter that much ofc).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Deshara on April 14, 2023, 10:00:41 PM
(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.)

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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 14, 2023, 11:50:51 PM
You can get transverse jump from a quest without the skill, and in the next patch you will be able to reasonably easily get burn 20 without navigation thanks to the slipstream event reward.

The skills that feel most mandatory to me are tier 4 leadership ones. Officers are way too important in the current system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on April 15, 2023, 08:38:13 AM
An extra 100% engine health and the sensor profile reduction is changed to 90% (from 50%).

Didn't notice this at first, and it's likely the thing that will change my play the most.

It's always been hard to build a smuggler/raider fleet at the start of the game, since the balance is built with phase ships in mind.  Now I can do this right off, and it'll take out a lot of the early frustration!

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 looking for a frontline ship from this, just something like a pair of Vanguards that can cruise around the fight, take a good chunk out of the frigate screen, and then retreat.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 15, 2023, 09:17:36 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on April 15, 2023, 12:20:10 PM
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.

Eh, was the first thing I could think of, but a Wolf is a better example anyway.  Sharing the autoloader between a sabot for strike potential and a swarmer for anti-fighter sounds quite appealing to me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on April 15, 2023, 03:47:52 PM
We are at playtesting phase now? Oh man i thought the day would never come! It is so close now...

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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on April 16, 2023, 07:37:26 AM
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
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.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: bob888w on April 17, 2023, 02:53:55 PM
Bulk Transport is my go to (3-5th) skill. In the timeframe where I have already gotten my go to skills, but don't have the SPs, officers, or ships to grab what I describe as
tree-completing skills (crew training). When the combat layer has nothing to improve a gravitate towards campaign qol just to make my life easier
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on April 17, 2023, 03:08:23 PM
So release when?
or its another tease and playtests gonna take another year?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Bummelei on April 17, 2023, 03:22:46 PM
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.

And question about Warthogs: Did you change their distance? Were they too strong? Or did you not touch them? I just remembered your answer in a dedicated thread. Just curious.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PotatoFarmer1 on April 18, 2023, 01:28:58 AM
So release when?
or its another tease and playtests gonna take another year?
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on April 18, 2023, 02:40:11 AM
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.

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
 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 18, 2023, 02:46:32 AM
Joke comment incoming:

Come on guys the solution is obvious, we will introduce decimal DP points. Gladius is in a tough spot so why not just make it increase the DP of a ship by 1.5. That way it won't become "must pick", or an inferior choice. Xyphos should then raise the cost by 6.9 since it is the most broken fighter in the existence of space action rpgs with elements of Mechwarrior that has a working economy system which may or may not be realistic.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 18, 2023, 03:55:45 AM
Not-so-joke comment: set the minimum DP increase for fighters in Converted Hangar to 0 because Mining Pod Auxiliary costs 0 OP!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on April 18, 2023, 04:22:19 AM
Time for my favorite part of modding: disassembling someone else's balance concerns.
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.
The difference being:
"Fighters": infinite weapons, armored, flares.
Bombers: wet tissue paper, limited ammo, basically flying M slots.
Interceptors: flying PD slots. The difference between interceptors and "support fighters" is that interceptors have a non-zero range, but otherwise supports are just interceptors.

(I would love low-tech vulcan interceptors, but i understand why they don't exist.)

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
Ah yes, let's make one of the best bombers cheaper and give it better screening. That'll make it balanced.
Bombers usually have PD weapons because they're there for self-defense against interceptors. Unlike PD laser pointers, flares also work on target ship's PD weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on April 18, 2023, 08:55:02 AM
So release when?
Forum tradition: If anyone asks this question, release date will delay by one extra week per person per time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solidus667 on April 18, 2023, 12:31:38 PM
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 :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on April 18, 2023, 05:24:31 PM
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.

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
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: vanedor on April 19, 2023, 06:48:08 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on April 19, 2023, 07:00:15 AM
Converted hangars introduces sort of Tiers.
Becouse of OP >> DP conversion rounding mechanic means poison ship build :
I  suggest make Tiers  for Fighters official.
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
You suffered some kind of short-circuit issue.
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 ?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on April 19, 2023, 07:57:19 AM
Converted hangars introduces sort of Tiers.
Becouse of OP >> DP conversion rounding mechanic means poison ship build :
I  suggest make Tiers  for Fighters official.
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
You suffered some kind of short-circuit issue.
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 ?
Oh. Well still i am not quite convinced. You do have a point but i dunno.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dx on April 19, 2023, 11:06:03 AM
...
Come on guys the solution is obvious, we will introduce decimal DP points.
...
Or just multiply ALL DP by 5.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on April 20, 2023, 12:35:48 AM
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.

Technically you are already doing it, since we are still in prelaunch state.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jackundor on April 20, 2023, 02:07:34 AM
mfw hephag still gets only recoil buffs
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CrashToDesktop on April 20, 2023, 02:21:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: gG_pilot on April 20, 2023, 03:00:58 AM
Quote
Player ship autopilot behavior will now take into account the faction doctrine aggression setting
Sound like improvement but isnt.

Faction  aggression doctrine can  be used  to  set non-piloted ships  to reserved behaviour, like  :Careful.
Then  piloted ships are standard or aggressive,  which creates nice mix  leading to victory.
Enforce Main character use  behaviour of support ship is  not smart  (diplomatically  speaking)
Better solution  is, add switch  to character screen to set  AI behaviour  for  main-character  separately.

Player character  typically  use a  flag ship, contrary  non-piloted ships are  support.
Enforce  same  behaviour to both is stu...  :-X
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 20, 2023, 04:36:10 AM
Quote
Player ship autopilot behavior will now take into account the faction doctrine aggression setting
Sound 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.

That said, I agree that behavior should be set separately for the commander.  It would be nice for Neural Link or armchair play.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 20, 2023, 04:49:20 AM
Ideally, personality should be set on a per-ship basis. Especially with the changes to missile boat / carrier behaviours. It's nice if I can prevent my Vigilances from suiciding with a timid officer, but when running support doctrine, I'm not setting all ships to timid.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 20, 2023, 10:04:59 AM
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?

Yeah, it nullifies all of them, including the DP increase.

(Yeah, I'd already reduced the OP on MS.)


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.

I appreciate the thought! The reality is, though, that in-development versions are not really very playable; there's tons of loose ends etc. Things don't really come together in a properly playable state until very close to the actual release.

mfw hephag still gets only recoil buffs

If 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.)


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.

Negative; not to say that couldn't be a thing but this is in connection to the Luddic Shrines.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on April 20, 2023, 11:02:03 AM
Yeah, don’t sleep on a more accurate HAG. It’s a gun that you can’t shield flicker like the Hellbore and is generally useful against all hull sizes. The only thing I don’t like is its flux cost. Whereas the Mk. IX is probably more useful as a generalist weapon (it does have decent damage/shot), the HAG isn’t too far behind and its higher DPS once the armor goes down means it finishes ships off better. Against Ordos, I think it’s more than sufficient, and it only really struggles against outlier Low Tech with lots of skills and heavy armor. Even then, it’s not bad: just less impactful than Hellbore shots.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amazigh on April 21, 2023, 12:55:37 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: ApolloStarsector on April 21, 2023, 02:48:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on April 21, 2023, 03:55:51 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Radicaljack on April 21, 2023, 04:42:04 PM
LET ME IN
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on April 21, 2023, 05:52:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on April 21, 2023, 06:59:01 PM
Knowing my luck, the patch will drop at the same time as Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom. That would truly be a cruel choice.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 21, 2023, 08:38:41 PM
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.

Yep, the Invictus is very unpleasant indeed with that setup :)

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on April 21, 2023, 09:30:05 PM
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.

Huh good point, the past several releases have been on Fridays, presumably so players can't use this as an excuse to take off work for at least two days. So it'll be a guess as to which weekend it'll be. Mother's Day, so we won't get to see our parents? Memorial Weekend, so we won't get to go to barbecues?

Or maybe Alex will surprise us and release it on a Tuesday instead or something.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on April 21, 2023, 09:34:51 PM
If it drops on the same week as Age of Wonders 4 I'm going to S**t.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 21, 2023, 10:42:14 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on April 21, 2023, 11:24:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: David on April 22, 2023, 05:51:42 AM
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.

TBF when testing the missions during development, I'm not playing "honestly" - more like using lots of dev commands to teleport around and set up situations/variables to do a certain mission or stage of a mission.

Anyway, we're in more legitimate testing now, and have some additional help which has been very, uh, helpful. If I say something dumb like "this'll be soooo bug-free!" that'll curse it and there'll be bugs; nonetheless, I think it's going to be a good one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on April 22, 2023, 06:45:40 AM
I can't believe there is a bug that makes it so you can endlessly drop off a single load of luddic pilgrims over and over for infinite credits
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 22, 2023, 09:17:06 AM
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.

The mobility and firepower make up for *a lot*! It's definitely a ship that's going to be much stronger in player hands, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Schwartz on April 22, 2023, 01:25:22 PM
It sounds like a Conquest without the range. Overtuned ships are honestly fun to play because the risk never quite goes away. Situational shields also teach good habits.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on April 22, 2023, 05:32:36 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 22, 2023, 06:16:30 PM
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.

I think its weaknesses are easy to exploit for AI-controlled ships, as well - it pretty much requires allied ships around it to function well, but it can be very powerful when it does.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on April 22, 2023, 07:50:39 PM
Dominator can be very difficult to deal with if you can't flank it and don't have anything strong enough to face it head-on. I expect Invictus to be the same, but more.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Drazan on April 23, 2023, 03:55:42 AM
Whereas the Mk. IX is probably more useful as a generalist weapon (it does have decent damage/shot),

Stop staying that or Alex will nerf Mk. IX lol
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 23, 2023, 07:08:14 AM
MK9 needs some recoil reduction (at least 50%) to be good.  It is too inaccurate on a turret out-of-the-box.

For its flux cost, inaccuracy is HAG's biggest problem too.  Would rather take Mjolnir (better accuracy) or ePD+Devastator (AoE and better efficiency) instead.  At least HAG will get better accuracy soon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Valinra on April 23, 2023, 09:27:23 AM
It's been a long time since the last update. Like 16 months, I've read a lot that it is speculated it will be soon. I don't care for an ETA but is there a time frame in which we get updated somewhere else like a weekly blog. I really don't want to miss this update as I'm waiting to play again till then. Checking the website daily is a little obsessive tbh however worth it, it may be. Some people say Alex has weekly cycles and the patch notes are a good sign of a release and I encourage they take their due time. Also the MK IX is one of thee coolest guns, maybe the sole reason I undoubtedly like Starsector's guns over X4:Foundations Cannons. They actually do something for searching them out and per their model size. If he nerfed them, I would feel like the dmg wasn't proportional to the size of the model, like a .22 round fired out of a .44 magnum.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 23, 2023, 09:32:45 AM
Just follow Alex on Twitter (if you use it), he posts frequently about the game and shows changes he's done here and there. You won't find such info anywhere else unless someone shares the link. You can't miss the update also if you're on the game's discord, you'll get pinged when the update goes live. And then there's the mailing list to which you can subscribe to on the game's website. But iirc that usually takes a day or two.

Basically the forums are the least reliable source since you have to manually open it each time to check if something happened, and then look for the little text at the top.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ruddygreat on April 23, 2023, 04:35:38 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on April 23, 2023, 11:32:10 PM
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
maybe it just has less missile turrets instead of all the turrets being gone?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CrashToDesktop on April 24, 2023, 12:41:31 AM
Has the OP cost of the Sarissa been settled on yet?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 24, 2023, 12:45:45 AM
Has the OP cost of the Sarissa been settled on yet?

Better ask about stats of the Kinetic Blaster. That weapon alone is going to have a huge effect on meta/ship fitting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: CrashToDesktop on April 24, 2023, 01:01:31 AM
I know what I like, and what I like is off-meta.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Ruddygreat on April 24, 2023, 02:57:17 AM
maybe it just has less missile turrets instead of all the turrets being gone?

last we saw, (https://fractalsoftworks.com/2022/03/18/uniquifying-the-factions-part-1/) the ship had 2 forward-firing composite (effectively pure missile, there's next to no reason to use a ballistic weap in them) turrets & 4 side-facing missile hardpoints (2 on each side), cutting out the front missiles would really cut down the potential reaper / PCL shenanigans.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Pablovansnogger on April 24, 2023, 03:43:04 PM
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

I’m hoping the 2 turrets were just combined into one, so that we can still have 5 medium missiles, but your guess is probably right…
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on April 24, 2023, 04:00:36 PM
  • 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)

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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on April 24, 2023, 06:12:10 PM
Stop staying that or Alex will nerf Mk. IX lol

I appreciate Alex for making this great game, but there's a grain of truth in that.  I've learned over the years that the very best imbalanced strategies for breaking the game over my knee, it's best to keep to myself lest they get nerfed.  Alex wants his game to be balanced, I want it to be fun for me.  Alex wants people to play his game the way he designed it, with fleet engagements and command points.  I want to see how overpowered and unfair I can make my flagship and solo multiple fleets with it at once.  Common sense would dictate that I not make this comment, but I don't use that because it's overpowered and feels like the wrong way to play the game.

Okay, here's my comment on the new patch.  This isn't honest, read this imagining the smuggest, most insufferable tone of voice you can imagine.  "I sure am glad the Aurora is getting a better shield.  It was barely worth using in the current patch, even with Safety Overrides and Hardened Shields combined with character skills.  Why, by the midgame I was running into bounties I couldn't solo with it, I had to deploy the rest of my fleet on numerous occasions."
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Radicaljack on April 24, 2023, 10:29:08 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 24, 2023, 10:54:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on April 25, 2023, 01:39:32 AM
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 think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying.  I want to make it clear, this one will be honest.  Common sense is broken and unfair and imbalanced and I don't use it because it feels like the wrong way to play the game of life.  The Aurora is one of my favorite things that feels overpowered and imbalanced and I love it and use it all the time as a default cruiser flagship if I haven't gotten something even more crazy from a mod.  I'm unironically looking forward to stacking RFC and Hardened Shields and the skills that increase flux and seeing if I can't have a Safety Overrides flagship with 360-degree shields with about .35 flux to damage ratio and if I'm lucky I'll get a Cryoblaster and a Disintegrator from the Highly Shielded Cache.  I don't want the Aurora nerfed, I want to find one out among the stars that somehow has Safety Overrides built in.  If the development team actually thinks it's not strong enough, I don't really agree but I'm not going to argue about it with them, I'm going to be glad they don't see it my way.  I will happily use the new "strong enough" one and wish I had an Unreal Tournament Announcer Mod while I'm doing it.

Dreams
While I'm dreaming, it would be great if Alex pranked powergaming nerdlingers like myself by changing up the campaign a little.  "Man, you'll never guess what happened!"  Let me guess, did you go to the Ludd-Forsaken Hell Zone Of Infinite Horror And Unbeatable Boss Fights?  I bet you got beat so bad you couldn't savescum your way out of it, I bet you had to restart your campaign completely over and then there were spooky text files on your desktop with fifth-dimensional dudes calling you a cheater in the Zalgo font when you quit the game.  Why would you even go there, why does everybody do that?  That's for testing your final endgame build against an impossible fight once you've beaten the entire game and seeing how many seconds you could last, why would you go there at level 3?  Oh no, the Secret Location and the Highly Shielded Cache, they're somewhere else now, you might actually have to play through the game once before getting endgame hardware.
[close]

Ever since I found out that Flashman works for the Hegemony and they just threw in Swashbuckler from the Apple IIc out of nowhere in a minigame that 95% of players won't find without somebody telling them it exists, I'm always going to expect some crazy surprise in a new release, especially as big as this one.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 25, 2023, 02:02:25 AM
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).

@Network Pesci
Good job, your discovered SO is broken in player hands, also water is wet.

Like the argument above, we look at ships from an AI perspective. If you want to show off your skills, that's great. But coming in here saying x thing is broken when you're personally piloting it and using SO is goofy. You can trivialize the game with different strats, that doesn't mean x thing is OP, you just found a broken combo (that is finally getting fixed one day).

Part of me fears for this Aurora buff, since Alex decided to hold on with the SO rework. Which makes sense because that's a touchy thingy. But I'm sure we'll get a bunch of posts "Aurora is broken, too ez pz" when the patch drops, and every single one of those folks will use the same braindead SO build. Again, we don't include SO in balance discussions for obvious reasons. I hate that cursed hullmod from the bottom of my heart and what it did to the balance of some ships. Can't wait to get rid of the bad player's crutch tool.

EDIT: It's going to also help with my sanity since I inevitably get heated on every mention of it regarding game balance.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 25, 2023, 07:17:21 AM
Aurora used to have 15k caps back in early (Starfarer) releases.  Giving it 0.6 shields (with 11k caps) is another way of giving back its old 15k caps (or close enough) for shields use only.  It is sad that Aurora (a purpose-built warship) has less caps and worse shields (and worse weapons) than Apogee (high-tech Mule hybrid).

I would not mind Aurora getting buffed.  It seems overpriced as an AI ship, preforming around on par with a 25 DP ship like Dominator.  As an enemy, Aurora is one of the easier ships to isolate from the fleet and kill.

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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Valinra on April 25, 2023, 12:21:47 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on April 25, 2023, 01:41:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on April 25, 2023, 02:04:07 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 25, 2023, 02:27:28 PM
Remnants will eventually have AI cores in every ship, with at least half of them Alpha grade.  That gives them ships better than yours (through more and better officers) and more DP and ECM than your fleet.

Derelicts can be full of cores too, but they tend to pack Gammas.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on April 25, 2023, 05:25:31 PM
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!

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jackundor on April 26, 2023, 01:44:03 AM

mfw hephag still gets only recoil buffs
If 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.)

hm, possible, i probably base my belief of it being underpowered on a good amount of on-paper stuff bc i'm too lazy to test (even though i'm a modder, lmao).
but a lot of other people also say that it's underpowered in tier lists and such

the hephag is supposed to be good against medium armor and such, but i really don't think it is. This is partially because of which ships can mount it, there's one destroyer (manticore), one cruiser (dominator), and 5 capitals. On most ships it would thus be expected to be used against cruisers and capitals, and against ships in these sizes that use armor as their main defens it just can't perform. It's effectiveness falls off big between 1000 and 1500 armor.

for example, against 1000 armor the Hellbore needs 2 shots generating 1500 flux and needing 3 seconds (if we say that the first shot occurs at 0) vs the hephags 14 shots, 1680 flux, 3,25 seconds

at 1500 armor on the other hand we have: Hellbore 2 shots, 1500 flux, 3 seconds, hephag 27 shots, 3240 flux

now yes there are capitals at 1k armor and cruisers at even less but these generally use shields where the Hephag has the problem that it significantly more flux intensive while costing more op. Also, these statistics above are with all shots hitting the same spot, wich won't happen.

if the hephag were more flux efficient or a bit more effective against higher armor values it would be fine but it really isn't imo, and i really want it to be good

i should probably do more testing but well, i have exams approaching and also need to practice my spriting... though one idea i got recently that might be worth testing is increasing damage per shot to 150 and decreasing firerate to 180 shots per minute or 200 shots per minute... that should lead to it being a bit better against armor values found on the champion or eradicator for example
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on April 26, 2023, 01:53:33 AM
There aren't that many ships where HAG doesn't do enough armor damage, to be honest. My main gripe with it isn't its armor pierce or accuracy, really. I would actually rather have it fire faster (with a DPS increase). As is, it's a decent gun overall that can punch down very well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 26, 2023, 01:56:46 AM
I mean we can math nerd the whole comparison but the truth is that HAG will be a MUCH more accurate weapon than Hellbore. Plus it also has faster projectile speed. So it will actually be a choice between "reliable pew pew expensive gun" and "cheap big shot that can miss a whole cruiser". Flux is a big deal on low tech ships but it's less of an issue now that Ordnance Expertise exists.

I'm actually looking forward to using a weapon I previously avoided for so long.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on April 26, 2023, 02:02:30 AM
The truth of HAG is that it was only ever too inaccurate to shoot small ships at the edge of its range - there are very few ballistic ships that would rather keep their distance (and they would generally rather have a gauss). It's very much a gun that's designed to punch down and it's gonna be even better at it next patch.
Honestly the main problem with that, other than losing the special abilities of the other two HE LB (namely, DPS flak shotgun capabilities, and being an infinite torpedo), you're generally better off just spamming railguns if you're so afraid of frigates.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jackundor on April 26, 2023, 02:38:48 AM
one other gripe i might have with it is that the buff basically does nothing for how i would use hephag on domi... since my first playthrough i have generally been pretty fond of a dominator with dual hephag and three sabotpods, but with two far apart hardpoints and a slow ass turnrate the accuracy really won't do all too much for that
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 26, 2023, 03:14:34 AM
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".

Other than that, from where I'm sitting, the HAG is a straight upgrade to the Hellbore - almost twice the DPS, significantly faster turn rate, much higher rate of fire which lets it swat fighters and frigates alike, 60% faster projectiles - again, allowing it to hit said fighters and frigates more reliably... I would never pick Hellbore over HAG if I had the flux to do it. That's what Hellbore is to me, a budget entry-level weapon for when you can't afford the HAG.

Yes, the Hellbore does more damage per shot which lets it crack armor faster(as per Alex: 12 seconds to completely strip armor from sim Onslaught for the HAG, 8 seconds for the Hellbore) but then against hull the HAG will pull ahead because of much higher DPS, so I don't think the actual time to kill would be that much different - and I wouldn't be surprised if HAG ended up being faster. But even if HAG was slower, it just has too much of an utility advantage over Hellbore to use the latter IMO.

Plus, it looks a lot cooler.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on April 26, 2023, 04:41:35 AM
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.

The point being, the HAG does need a good turreted platform and flux to stand out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 26, 2023, 04:57:11 AM
For me who has ePD and recoil reduction on most of the important ships that use ballistics, Devastator does everything I want from HAG and more, while having flux cost not much more than Hellbore.  If I need high recoil reduction to give HAG acceptable accuracy, and I already have ePD, Devastator also has acceptable accuracy for assault, but the problem is range, unless I get ePD, in which case, the extra +200 range sends most shots to explode near max range of 900 range weapons.

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).

Small kinetics have the almighty Railgun, although Light Needler is not too bad.  Even mass LACs can be useful.

Medium kinetics is worse, mostly 700 range kinetics that only get +100 range from Rangefinder, and ePD+IPDAI does not work on these.  HAC has awful accuracy (and turns slow).

Heavy kinetics has MarkIX (bad accuracy, less efficient than smaller kinetics), Storm Needler (terrible range), and Gauss (sniper weapon).

Small anti-armor has Light Mortar (slow, less range) and LAG (poor armor penetration, less efficient than kinetics)

Medium anti-armor has Heavy Mortar (slow, 700 range) and Heavy Mauler (long reload delay)

Heavy anti-armor has Hellbore (faster Mauler), HAG (inaccurate), Devastator (inaccurate, less effective range), and Mjolnir (inefficient, high flux cost).  Onslaught has TPCs (fixed forward).

With that said, on some ships, the mounts may get beat up a bunch and heavy weapon can be better just by being harder to knock out than a light one, especially when enemies have skills that knock out weapons faster.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jackundor on April 26, 2023, 05:01:18 AM
yeah tbh, we have a lack of cruisers with 1 large... we have the gryphon, the brilliant and the colossus mk 2 but colossus 2 large isn't modular and brilliant is hardly the automated ship everybody is using... and we are getting the new venture skin but that's also a missile like the gryphon, and it even faces backwards

theres a real gap for ships that cruisers with 1 large energy or ballistic
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 26, 2023, 05:22:39 AM
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.

I would love to see that. Given how "generalist" and widespread Eagles are(or supposed to be in lore) you could imagine different factions modifying them for their own purposes. For example:
 - Regular buffed version that's coming next patch
 - XIV version with centerline weapons replaced with a large ballistic turret
 - TT version with centerline weapon replaced with a built-in hangar bay(especially now that Brilliant is losing it)
 - P version that basically copies Falcon P, for 25 DP
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Jackundor on April 26, 2023, 06:01:30 AM
hm, the problem with adding a large ballistic to the eagle is that then the falcon is less similar to it...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 26, 2023, 06:19:45 AM
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 evil artificers pirates that Lawrence suggested.

Pirates used to use (inferior versions of) Sunder and Eagle and/or Dominator in older releases, when they had rust versions of the original sprites.

Come to think of it, it would be nice if pirates had their version of all the ships, and selling blueprints to black market unlocked those pirate versions (pirates did not start with) instead of giving them stock or standard versions.  (For example, Medusa or Paragon with paint job, altered mounts, and hacked systems like turning Paragon's Fortress Shield into a rechargeable shockwave weapon.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on April 26, 2023, 06:21:43 AM
Yeah, I conceded the standard Eagle didn’t need it but as an XIV or Lion’s Guard variant, it would be cool. Kind of like the Legion XIV is a pretty big departure from the base version. I liked it on the XIV because it was a little slower and had better flux. It could support the Large better while not being too fast to disengage.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on April 26, 2023, 07:16:18 AM
HAG? Slow turn rate? It has the turn rate of *twenty.* What are you comparing it to, Paladin?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kalakanjakas on April 26, 2023, 07:21:14 AM
I hope for a new exclusiv diktat cruiser in the future. Something more aggressiv than Eagles and Falcons to support the Executor. Variants are cool too, especially the idea with the pirate variants. That would make me want to sell blueprints on the black market on purpose. :)
I love the new additions and am looking forward to the new version.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on April 26, 2023, 02:43:04 PM
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.

It could be the final push for me to deploy logi in conservative combat support roles. Even the AI never deploys logi in combat, maybe up until now. It's worth exploring.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Antichrist Hater on April 26, 2023, 07:48:30 PM
Where do I go to play this version of the game?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 26, 2023, 07:57:43 PM
Where do I go to play this version of the game?

FUTURE
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Low Settings on April 28, 2023, 02:44:38 AM
Is everyone ready? I imagine it's about to release..
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 28, 2023, 02:47:46 AM
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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on April 28, 2023, 02:55:29 AM
It is this weekend. I can feel it in my bones.

Alex please
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Zr0Potential on April 28, 2023, 03:34:21 AM
  • 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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Valinra on April 28, 2023, 08:15:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on April 28, 2023, 08:50:43 AM
  • 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)
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.

Though with the implementation of pather interest as part of a "Hostile Activity" event, a straight copy of exactly how the mod works now might not be the best solution? I'm not sure.

Regardless, thank you for thinking that my mod is something worthy of being considered for integration!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solidus667 on April 28, 2023, 11:16:02 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Valinra on April 28, 2023, 11:34:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 28, 2023, 12:55:16 PM
Jumping blind into a pulsar beam is lame.  I have save-scummed before entering neutron stars because of pulsar beams.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on April 28, 2023, 01:40:50 PM
There's a description somewhere in the game that suggests that sending a probe in first through a jump point is standard practice under some circumstances (warning for enemy fleets on the other side, I think?). Makes sense, and could also prevent you from, say, getting fried by a pulsar to plain bad luck.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on April 28, 2023, 03:20:04 PM
As an ironman player, I've learned to transverse jump into pulsar systems with the bulk of a planet in between my ship and the neutron star, so that I come into the system in the "shadow" of the planet.  Your relative positioning to the transverse jump point seems to map roughly to where you show up in the system.

If there are no planets, you can try jumping in directly on top of the neutron star instead of through a standard jump point, and then emergency burn out if you get unlucky.  At that point you're at the narrowest point of the beam.

As a general rule, I don't go into neutron star systems unless I have transverse jump.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solidus667 on April 29, 2023, 03:26:48 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Valinra on April 29, 2023, 12:00:21 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solidus667 on April 29, 2023, 12:10:29 PM
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.

Dude no wories. I dident mean anything bad against you. I ment p i s e d. But censore got me. I was thet becose i got blasted, not thet you corrected me. No worries mate, every thing is good.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: McTrigger on April 29, 2023, 04:20:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 29, 2023, 04:37:04 PM
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.
But the reload option is there, and there is every incentive to reload to undo that cheap shot.

If the fleet is blindsided and caught by a pulsar beam, escape is irrelevant, the damage is already done before fleet can escape.  Better for me to reload and try again.

P.S.  There are pre-jump warnings when jumping into a system when hostiles are camping at the gate or into a core world when transponder is off.  (In some earlier releases, there were no warnings, and there was requests for warnings, and they were added.)  Adding a warning when a pulsar beam overlaps the gate would be one less headache.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kragh on April 29, 2023, 09:59:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on April 30, 2023, 07:24:31 AM
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.

I think instead of adding a warning, a representation in hyperspace, perhaps in the neutron star gravity well "jump" point would be better.  Or maybe add it as something that shows up when using the neutrino detector around the jump point, making it glow white or something (I.e. the pulsar beam is leaking through and the neutrino detector picks it up) when the beam overlaps.

The problem with a jump warning is the game pauses.  In the case of hostile fleets, in many cases, just waiting and clicking again isn't going to make them go away.  It's really a one time warning you want, so having it as a text as you're about to enter is fine.

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.

A less elegant option than displaying the information live on the hyperspace map about where the beams are would be to tell you the number of estimated days until the beam no longer overlaps in the text warning.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 30, 2023, 07:47:30 AM
Generally speaking, not the right thread for this discussion, but I gotta say, I *love* the "show it through the jump-point visuals" idea - that's just so elegant! Going to remember that one for sure; bit late to try to add it in now, what with an RC already having been built (that I already know isn't quite "it", but still!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on April 30, 2023, 08:04:53 AM
what with an RC already having been built (that I already know isn't quite "it", but still!)
Praise the maker
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on April 30, 2023, 08:26:57 AM
Quote
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.

I sometimes go through the gate if it is closer than the (neutron) star itself and planets are near the gate.  Jumping through a gate, gas giant, or star is faster than T-jumping (and costs no CR).  Also, sometimes, stuff can spawn near a gate (although that tends to be wrecks or crates and not research stations), so I ought to check that.  There is a risk of getting beamed whether going in fast through gate, giant, or star.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on April 30, 2023, 08:49:42 AM
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.

This is very obvious if you, say, are hauling around mothballed ships.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solidus667 on April 30, 2023, 10:34:51 AM
what with an RC already having been built (that I already know isn't quite "it", but still!)
Praise the maker

For the poor fool... What does RC stand for?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on April 30, 2023, 10:36:33 AM
Release Candidate. Alex only talks or tweets about them when we are getting REALLY close.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on April 30, 2023, 10:41:21 AM
*heavy breathing*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on April 30, 2023, 10:50:47 AM
what with an RC already having been built (that I already know isn't quite "it", but still!)
Praise the maker
Amen to that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on April 30, 2023, 10:55:27 AM
what with an RC already having been built

So only one more week?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on April 30, 2023, 11:35:11 AM
So only one more week?
You never know. Some horrible game-crashing bug that absolutely must be fixed first could turn up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on April 30, 2023, 12:21:06 PM
0.8a released on RC17. 0.95a released on RC8 and hotfixed all the way to RC15. Those were the most extreme, though. Usually the last hotfix is only like RC8.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on April 30, 2023, 01:13:16 PM
Worth noting : eating the corona of a neutron star is far preferable to the pulsar beam.  So jumping into the star with emergency burn will let you minimize CR loss even if you jump directly into the beam.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Blips on April 30, 2023, 01:39:09 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on April 30, 2023, 02:07:42 PM
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?

I wouldn't read too much into version numbers; they're not something there's any serious thought behind, aside from "number go up" and the .1 business.

To answer your question, though, I'm not sure - there's a lot to consider, and I've been doing some considering, but there's nothing conclusive to share. I'll take stock and think about things longer-term after the .1 release is out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Blips on April 30, 2023, 02:13:15 PM
Okay, thanks for the info  8)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Solidus667 on May 01, 2023, 10:52:02 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Flet on May 01, 2023, 11:01:55 AM
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 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 01, 2023, 12:04:15 PM
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

Do it.  I'm doing it, I started a new campaign yesterday.  The "RNG of Life," fate, Nuffle, whatever you call the sadistic side of it, it always wants to jerk you around, but it's not smart, it's just cruel and impulsive.  So what you do, you give it a way to hurt you, but in a way that helps you more than it hurts.

"Oh no, I just started a new campaign three days ago and I was really having fun with it, but now there's this WHOLE NEW VERSION of my game to play, oh what ever shall I do, oh the agony of indecision.  I would like to see the new content, but my favorite mods won't work for months.  Truly fate has defeated me by giving me a new version of my favorite game, I am trolled and tormented, I am so furious right now.  (heh heh, sucker)" 


(edit)  IT WORKED!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Kirschbra on May 02, 2023, 08:44:33 AM
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

Same, I keep checking daily to see if Alex has released.  I'm pretty excited, this is going to be a great one!

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. 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 02, 2023, 08:55:24 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: RoadTrain on May 02, 2023, 10:54:12 AM
  • 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
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.

Also, update HYPE.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 02, 2023, 03:42:41 PM
The phase field hullmod is basically the ship using its coils to make a low powered field obfuscate the presence of the fleet... If you think about it the gremlin might not be the best candidate to keep a phase field always on for both the sake of the crew and that it might be asking too much to that trans-dimensional rust bucket.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 02, 2023, 07:20:34 PM
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

It may be on be default. I never updated the settings file and it's always worked out of the box for me
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PotatoFarmer1 on May 03, 2023, 12:29:50 AM
(Sorry I don't know how to quote the first page)
-Drover is kill
-Gremlin is superbuff
???

I have wanted to make an interceptor spam fleet but it hasn't really been working out. Sparks got nerfed a while ago now and they just aren't capable of destroying ships especially with high armour. I was experimenting with Warthogs but they just kinda suck, I don't think their power (or lack thereof) justifies having a measly 2k engagement range and it seems that you agree in part by changing their description.

I'm quite sad about the drover change because arguably their best loadout was already double Cobras (since they have low refit time and the reserve deployment doubled their alpha strike to 4 reapers). In general after experimenting rather a lot with carrier based fleets this update I can safely say that bomber spam is many many many times more effective than fighter spam. This nerf to drovers won't even achieve anything since you are buffing the Gemini in addition making it more flexible with the change to how reserve deployment works now making more loadouts than just Cobra's viable (which I'm all for) and removing civ-grade hullmod (why did it have it in the first place?). Now 2 Gemini cost 18DP and one drover used to cost 15DP so arguably if one were so inclined to use reserve deployment spam then all you did was make it 3DP more expensive and an extra ship slot (I don't value drover's missile slots at all btw since you won't be putting officers in it it will run out of missile ammo in the first 20 seconds of battle plus the Gemini already has missile slots so moot point anyway and the idea that a Drover can even remotely behave like a "combat carrier" is laughable since it has as much tank as a wet noodle).

Basically I see your Drover nerf and the Gremlin buff and I am going to make you a counter offer:
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!
I was experimenting with derelict ops carrier spam fleets and the malfunctioning coms D-mod just really really hurt. The Mora already works quite well as a front-line ship so I thought it would be perfectly natural to put Warthogs on it so the reduced engagement range wouldn't matter as much and any time one of my Mora's got the malfunctioning coms D-mod I would just swap out all the fighters for Xyphos, 3 of which can surprisingly even kill frigates or completely disable most other ships while the Mora can keep running it's damper field and still outputs loads of damage.
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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PotatoFarmer1 on May 03, 2023, 12:32:15 AM
While I am at it I must also beg you to consider adding a cool-down to the Drover's B-Deck hullmod. The fundamental problem with this game is that the player is many times outnumbered many many times over so the player values sustain much higher than the enemy AI does. AI ships just die and get replaced with new ships whereas player ships shoot all their extremely limited and precious reaper torpedo supply at the first hound that they see (and miss) which hurts a lot. You seem to understand this fact with the addition of the new mini-missile-autoforge (which was added for players not enemy AI, lets be perfectly honest here lmao).
Here is an interesting thought: make the Drover the obvious choice for fighters that have very high load on replacement rate! The flash bomber is good but it has an enormous replacement time should all the fighters in the wing be lost, so it's drain on replacement rate is titanic. Please consider making the hullmod have at least 3 charges or a 30-40 second cooldown or something?
Again I feel like the AI literally wouldn't care since the player just mulches through all the ships that the AI keeps spawning out, I really doubt the enemy AI drover would live long enough to use the B-deck more than once before it's destroyed anyways!
As it currently stands I already think that all the other carriers suck compared to spamming bombers/torpedo-bombers with Astrals; with the nerf to the drover I can confidently say that I will never ever ever be using it ever again. It's a waste of DP and I would rather replace it with the much cheaper and more spam-able condor or the infinitely more powerful Heron. Please give the player a reason to use something other than bombers+Astral in general by considering my suggestions here thanks!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 03, 2023, 02:39:24 AM
Basically I see your Drover nerf and the Gremlin buff and I am going to make you a counter offer:
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!
I like the idea A_A

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.

Yeah, RIP 4 Cobras@Dover reaping enemy capitals.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 03, 2023, 03:25:28 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 03, 2023, 03:40:03 AM
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 power
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 03, 2023, 04:29:42 AM
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).

5 Heavy Burst Lasers and 8 PD Lasers is bad PD?

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.

That said I wouldn't cry if it was 40 DP instead of 50 simply because anything over 40 DP is hard to fit in a typical BotB fleet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PotatoFarmer1 on May 03, 2023, 04:55:35 AM
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.
On top of this the Astral has 2(!) large missile mounts that allow you to either pressure shields like crazy or send Hurricane MIRV's down range which in combination with the constant pressure from the bombers is overwhelming. I am a derelict operations + support doctrine enjoyer myself so with a bit of spamming D-mods and repairing I can frequently make 2 or 3 "perfectly D-modded" Astral's with no fighter related D-mods so my Astrals cost ~36DP. Getting the +10% fighter refit time from max CR and some more from the support skills I've found them to be quite nice ships even without officers.
If Alex makes Astral 40DP I would cry tears of joy but I would also abuse DP reducing skills even harder than I am currently doing so I hope he doesn't.

Out of curiosity what is the best interceptor loadout to use? I've experimented with seemingly everything and all the interceptors suck. Outside of the utility of EMP damage the fighters just can't kill anything, or take so bloody long to do so that it would have just been better to use bombers/torpedo-bombers. I know there are a lot of good interceptors/gunships from mods but in vanilla we don't have anything good. I thought the Warthog was supposed to be the vanilla gunship archetype but it sucks so bad that it frequently out-ranges it's own mortar shots while it is circling larger enemy ships. Please tell me what fighters you are using for the Heron? I just go with 3xCobra or Lux + 2xFlash/2xPiranha. I haven't found any vanilla interceptor to be worth using against enemy ships.

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 power
4 Reaper torpedoes would beg to differ (15 second replacement time btw).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Iceforce on May 03, 2023, 05:51:27 AM
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.
 
Fleet compostion (see attachment for skills, officers and ships) - 240DP:
In short:
If Astral goes down to 40 points its gonna be really broken. I would probably go for 6 of them, which is a lot of missiles and a lot of fighters, and I suspect that this will trivialize all of the game's content.

Edit: Tried to improve the language a bit and fixed a few typos.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 03, 2023, 05:57:31 AM
Well, vanilla I mostly use Herons with Daggers and Longbows, but pure fighters and mixed seemed to work too, although I also, as you mentioned, find mixing bomber+fighter on carriers to be somewhat meh except for the one occasional "flare runner" or on bigger carriers with more bays, and some battle carriers are a thing of their own obviously. And you are right: the large rocket slots, ship system, large amount of bays makes the Astral excellent, put I prefer Herons as simple Dagger/Longbow carriers.

E:
If Astral goes down to 40 points its gonna be really broken
I agree, I think the ship is fine the way it is.
E2: I kinda like my carriers as in pure carriers fast so (mostly so they can avoid trouble) that's why I also gravitate to Herons. I love them.

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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 03, 2023, 06:10:36 AM
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.

To be perfectly honest, if Astral had same OP as Legion, it would be almost as good of a battlecarrier, just high tech. It could broadside with Heavy Blasters.

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.
I'm not arguing Astral is bad, it isn't, but it's very... restricted.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on May 03, 2023, 06:22:09 AM
AstrL should lose advanced optics and gain some OP in compensation. Having it built in feels out of place and is clearly just there to be an OP tax and trap you into putting subpar beams into its slots.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Iceforce on May 03, 2023, 06:30:28 AM
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)

Well, currently a playthrough for me usually goes like this: make some money, get a colony ASAP, make the fleet you want, complete the story quests, test your build vs the tough encounters, survey every planet in the sector. The last part is annoying if you don't have logistics (having to go back for supplies, fuel or crew before you find the next gate).

As to Recovery shuttles, it's just another logistics mod (disguised as a combat mod).  One of the main problems that I encountered with carrier heavy fleets with a lot of fighters is that you bleed crew like crazy, thus the Fighter uplink skill and Recovery shuttles. This makes your life so much easier.

But yeah, you are right, cool stuff!  :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: PotatoFarmer1 on May 03, 2023, 07:16:28 AM
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.
 
Fleet compostion (see attachment for skills, officers and ships) - 240DP:
Wow @Iceforce I love your build! Fellow Converted hanger enjoying Chad detected! Shame it's also getting nerfed in the upcoming update.
Thank you for supporting my idea! I hope you won't mind if just shoot the *** about what I would do differently with your build ;D

Firstly for your skills I would drop ordinance expertise, helmsmanship, and gunnery implants right away! I'm not sure what ship your captain is piloting but I think it should be a frigate (Wolf). I say this because really the only reason for you to pilot something as a non-combat skill build would be for the ops centre hullmod for the command point regen but you already have coordinated manoeuvres and it looks like you have more than enough officer'd frigates and destroyers to never run out of command points in battle. Your frigate would benefit from both coordinated manoeuvres and wolfpack tactics, and your buffed up officers would be far more effective in an important ship like an Astral than you would be!

Secondly I would drop electronic warfare without even thinking about it. Fighters don't benefit at all and the hardest fight in the game (the Dorito) will be so far up your a** that the +-10% range wouldn't even matter, plus I don't think EWAR has any effect on missile ranges! The other hardest enemy in vanilla is the "Wolf-like" REDACTED and that thing will also attempt to close in to like 400-700 range so ECM doesn't matter.

With the skillpoints you save I would 100% pick up sensors for it's campaign-level utility and with the remaining points I would either finish the industry tree until you get hull restoration, which tbh you don't really need since it looks like you already have max 100% CR on your ships but I would still consider it just to get rid of any D-mods you passively pick up on your suicidal frigs/destroyers; or I would go down the tech tree and pick up flux regulation to help with tanking when the REDACTED/very-REDACTED/very-very-REDACTED jump up your a** to nest for winter, and the cybernetic augmentation tree to buff up your officers even harder with 2 more elite skills each, thus making them 1 elite + 1 elite from officer training + 2 elite from cybenetics so you would have Lvl 6 max officers with 4 of 6 skills elite which is actually super powerful. In your endgame situation you should be swimming in SP so this is the best way to spend it I think!

In terms of build I like that you chose to put the Flash on the Astral since I noticed it behaves almost like a fighter by sticking around and going for multiple passes on target until it expends its ammo but in general I think the recall system is wasted on fighters, I think you could make virtually the same build but with Herons and have a much more logical build.
Also your Wolf build baffles me! Why put turret gyros on when you already have integrated point defence? Isn't it a little overkill for 3 small lasers to benefit (since the front laser is on a hardpoint not a turret mount?)
I'm not sure about the Shrike since they really suck with derelict ops but that build should actually be getting better with the next update buffing the graviton beams! I would personally go for some sort of tank ship like a Monitor which can become an absolute unkillable tank with an officer, or a Fury or Apogee or even an Aurora that you can build for max caps plus hardened shields so that it can survive the DPS of the Dorito at point-blank range. I would drop at least some of the more fragile Wolfs/Shrikes for something with tank.

Super cool build that you shared anyways! I love it! It's a shame we don't have any good fighters tbh  :'(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Iceforce on May 03, 2023, 09:23:56 AM

I realize I should have given some context to it: the whole idea was to go with a high-tech only, as carrier heavy as possible fleet, using only fighters (although the last part proved to be a bad idea, so I added some bombers).

You do need something to keep the distance between your carriers and the enemy fleet and you can either:
I wanted as many fighters as possible, and the best value for small high-tech ships per DP is the Shrike, since you can add a fighter to it.
Unfortunately, due to the way elite Gunnery Implants works you also want some frigates to get enough ECM rating to beat the ECM of some of the Ordos fleets (say 15+ Alpha cores), hence the Wolves (and all the ECM thingies you see). The idea is for the Shrikes (and Wolves if possible) to have at least as much range as a Radiant (you got to beat their ECM for that). That way a couple of Shrikes with 2-3 Wolves can keep a Radiant indefinitely (well, until they run out of CR, thus the Wolfpack Tactics and Hardened Subsystems on the Wolves). I will admit though, that in 95% of situations you don't need as much ECM (currently 70%), so its probably a good idea to replace some Wolves with more Shrikes. Also, ECM does affect missiles (although this is not of much consequence)!

You are 100% correct about Ordinance Expertise. I started the build with Hull Restoration, since it is the best way to acquire D-mod free ships early on, and I had nothing better then Ordinance Expertise to pick. I did keep the Hull Restoration until quite late (until 216, I believe, current year is 220). After respecing, I kept Ordinance Expertise because it is still useful on a Paragon, and to be honest, both Field Repairs and Salvaging are kind of bad. Note that I want to keep Containment Procedures - it's stupid how useful this skill is for sector exploration. If I remove that, then I would definitely go for Cybernetic Augmentation and Flux Regulations.

As I mentioned about the Wolves - their main purpose is the ECM from elite Gunnery Implants (and the nav rating from Coordinated Maneuvers). I had no idea what else to do with them (expect wanting them to not die), so long range PD-boats they are. Tactical Lasers have Fast turn rate (unlike PD's Excellent turn rate) and it kinda of shows. They can still shoot missiles but it doesn't feel as smooth as with PD lasers. The 75% turn rate improves that by a lot (and its only 2 OP). As I stated in my original post, the Wolves still do stupid ***, but it's a lot less frequent when they have as high range as possible, can shoot down missiles, and have omni-shields. For some reason, on occasion, the Wolves keep ramming into the Astrals (which obviously raise their shields) and without omni-shileds they just die.

I was pleasantly surprised by how rarely the Shrikes die! In fact, they only die if they get into a bad position (say picking up an Eliminate order from the other side of the map and passing through the entire enemy fleet) or they get their engines disabled (I should probably have picked Hardened Shields over Heavy Armor). In fact, if you keep an eye on them and correct their positioning from time to time (don't let them get surrounded and avoid tach lances), they do not die! The AI seems to be doing rather well with 1500+ range, high speed and 360 degree shields.

I disagree about Helmsmanship though. I don't pilot any particular ship, just try to actively correct the AI's positioning, and here this skill shines, especially on slow capital ships. The thing about Support Doctrine is that your ships get the skills as long as they are not being piloted, so without Helmsmanship your ships are slower when you pilot them.

And since we are on the subject of Support Doctrine, the best strategy for carrier focused fleets seems to be to get as many squadrons as possible, which means no officers on the carriers so you can get the DP reduction. Carrier skills do offer a 1.5x multiplier for ships with officers, but they are kind of weak - none of them directly improve your fighters' damage, and you quickly reach squadron numbers that make the bonuses negligible. So the choice is between fewer fighters with no way of directly increasing their damage or more fighters (more carriers). Note that more carriers also means more fighter replacement, so the choice seems obvious. The situation sucks, but it is what it is, although I hope that something gets changed in the future.

You are also correct, that any ship that can tank (like say, 4 Monitors) makes your life a lot easier. Also, adding any frontal focused capital ship (say a Paragon or an Onslaught) will probably improve the build, but as I said in the beginning of this post, the idea was a bit different.

Anyway, thank you for the positive words, but I believe we might be getting slightly offtopic :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on May 03, 2023, 02:10:37 PM
Should be noted that Gremlin losing Delicate Machinery means it can now sanely fit Safety Overrides, which will be quite a lot of fun.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Nanoelite001 on May 03, 2023, 02:37:08 PM
Quote
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

(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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 03, 2023, 03:12:34 PM
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?

A mod could do this, yeah!

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Big Bee on May 04, 2023, 01:58:03 AM
Quote
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

(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?

oh this is so cool!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 04, 2023, 02:03:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 04, 2023, 09:50:52 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 05, 2023, 01:21:39 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 05, 2023, 01:28:03 AM
Hey, 2 phase SO railguns can be scary on frigate level.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on May 05, 2023, 08:51:06 AM
Yep, two annihilator pods will get you at least two destroyer kills, and that’s before expanded missile racks or the auto-loader.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 05, 2023, 08:53:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 05, 2023, 09:00:19 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 09:27:31 AM
And, it's out! See OP for blog post link.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SurplusDOS on May 05, 2023, 09:28:38 AM
Your timing is impeccable Alex! Thank you!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 05, 2023, 09:34:00 AM
Wow and I refreshed the site one minute before it was out, finally we are graced with the long awaited update.

EDIT: @Alex
The 0.96 update is not listed under "Releases" on the official site, I've had the use the link from here.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 05, 2023, 09:39:11 AM
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Stormy Fairweather on May 05, 2023, 09:43:51 AM
anything in this about compatibility with amd systems?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Kirschbra on May 05, 2023, 09:44:25 AM
And, it's out! See OP for blog post link.

I knew checking everyday would pay off!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 09:46:11 AM
EDIT: @Alex
The 0.96 update is not listed under "Releases" on the official site, I've had the use the link from here.

Thank you! Hmm, it is for me - probably some sort of cloudflare caching thing?

(Edit: currently uploading the new javadoc, btw.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 05, 2023, 09:52:24 AM
The S-mod bonus description looks a bit silly on mods with S-mod debuffs.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 05, 2023, 09:53:36 AM
Quote
01:00 AM release
Should have gone to sleep so I didn't see this...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Soban on May 05, 2023, 09:55:58 AM
Finally after 10,000 years, time to conquer earth play starsector 0.96

I love the update content, better the base game is the more the modders have to build off from but I swear to bob Alex if 0.97 now takes +1½-2 years I'm just going to.. Well I dunno make a really desperate blog post but my man its like we're out here dying of thirst in the desert while after 1 year :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 05, 2023, 10:02:48 AM
Away from the computer for 3 days, life is  cruel  :)
Looks very interesting!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 05, 2023, 10:07:43 AM
Thanks for listening to feedback about the Executor!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Selachii on May 05, 2023, 10:13:48 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 10:16:43 AM
Thanks for listening to feedback about the Executor!

*thumbs up*


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.

Lots of ways! Among others, try using Active Sensor Burst in interesting places, talking to scavengers, or interacting with a sensor array.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 05, 2023, 10:18:04 AM
Ahhhh!!!! I have 4 more hours of work…

So excited though. Like, giddy as a toddler excited.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 10:20:53 AM
Ahhhh!!!! I have 4 more hours of work…

So excited though. Like, giddy as a toddler excited.

<3
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on May 05, 2023, 10:23:14 AM
RIP exams
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: smithney on May 05, 2023, 10:30:53 AM
And, it's out! See OP for blog post link.
A-starfaring we shall go!

Cheers to the release! May it bring much joy to fellow players and many new preorders to the hard workers at Fractal ^_^
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 05, 2023, 10:33:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 05, 2023, 10:37:43 AM
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.

I didn’t read the patch notes. This makes me happy.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SolarGalaxy on May 05, 2023, 10:38:47 AM
And, it's out! See OP for blog post link.

Yay! Update is out!
I can't wait to look at all the lovely new capital ship graphics in game.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 05, 2023, 10:52:32 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 05, 2023, 11:00:39 AM
Wuhu, nice, thank you Alex! <3 :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 05, 2023, 11:01:34 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/bbUuGV7.jpg)

IM MOR TA!      IM MOR TA!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 11:05:15 AM
Thank you!

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.

... wait, was it orange in the refit screen before? I think something may have gotten mixed up on my end; made a note to take a look at this. Edit: yeah, that was unintended; will fix it up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: poika on May 05, 2023, 11:22:52 AM
To wait for mods to be updated or not to wait...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on May 05, 2023, 11:29:10 AM
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]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 11:36:24 AM
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]

Hmm - is this an actual crash or just an error in the log/mission screen? Either way a clean install of the game should fix this, I believe.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 05, 2023, 11:40:03 AM
Any reason why Gorgons and Dragonfires have their damage listed as "Special"? I get that they deal damage over time but so do other burst beams. It's just for consistency sake from my point of view. You also can't tell from the tooltip that the medium Gorgon launches 2 missiles at a time, since every other missile example of such mechanic has "Damage - damage x number of payloads".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 05, 2023, 11:51:36 AM
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]
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vicegrip on May 05, 2023, 11:59:05 AM
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".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 12:02:38 PM
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".

Thank you, fixed this up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on May 05, 2023, 12:06:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 12:14:00 PM
Hotfix for the Gilead shrine intel crash is up! Also included: fix for the Nova system description, d-mod names having the wrong color, and the wrong (Sebestyen-specific) signoffs for generic contacts.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: mr. domain on May 05, 2023, 12:20:33 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vicegrip on May 05, 2023, 12:26:49 PM
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?

I just installed it to a new directory and did the usual pre-game setup (editing vmparams, swapping Java 8, turning DPI scaling to application etc), and it seems to work fine. If you make two .exe shortcuts you can pick whichever version of the game you want to run.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on May 05, 2023, 12:29:33 PM
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.

Ah mb then. Enjoying the update otherwise.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on May 05, 2023, 12:31:45 PM
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?

Just install it in its own folder. Call the folder "Starsector 0.96" or somesuch. Keep it in the Fractal Softworks folder for ease of sorting.

Hell, I haven't gotten rid of my .95 install yet.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 05, 2023, 12:32:37 PM
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.

Also wooow I am super glad for "smart" weapons actually firing when they should. Both IR Autolance and Mining Blaster (which is finally a decent weapon for a change).

EDIT: Also also, I really dig the explosions now that I can disable the flashbang.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 12:40:46 PM
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.

Yeah, it felt like a bit much!

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Havoc on May 05, 2023, 12:42:34 PM
yay, have to stop playing diablo2r for a while

back to starsector^^

hope some paused mods will come back soon ;)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: itBeABruhMoment on May 05, 2023, 12:59:57 PM
The AI feels so much better now for high tech ships. In 0.95 they tended to just stick near or hide behind allies and rarely ever went on attack runs. Now they seem to go on attack runs a lot more and the hiding behind allies behaviour seems mostly gone
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 05, 2023, 01:18:32 PM
Honorific seems locked after character creation.  We can rename our characters, but we cannot change from Sir to Captain or vice-versa.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on May 05, 2023, 01:19:27 PM
Quote
Combat

    Added option to make strafe key a toggle; added UI element to show "strafe lock" status

Finally, thank you very much! :D

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on May 05, 2023, 01:38:28 PM
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.

You will not be able to continue it in a .96 install. See the previous page, however, as you can simply install a .96 client in a separate folder and keep your .95.1 install intact without any problems.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on May 05, 2023, 01:41:10 PM
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. :-\
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 05, 2023, 01:48:04 PM
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 usually just have a habit of always starting up a new run for a "fresh" experience.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nao on May 05, 2023, 01:50:03 PM
Yay super excited, as per usual starting with complete vanilla <3. Thank you!

Btw "Added option to make strafe key a toggle; added UI element to show "strafe lock" status" does not work. There is an ui element showing "strafe lock" but you still have to hold shift to strafe. (i think invert behavior is overriding it). Am i missing something?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on May 05, 2023, 01:50:44 PM
Damn... I also usually restart every patch but I literally got my Paragon today with 4 Tachyon Lances, that sucks. And I had pretty good colonies too.

Not sure I will install the patch right now then.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Oni on May 05, 2023, 01:54:46 PM
Gonna take a Starsector break while I wait for all 150 of the mods I use to update.... might be while.  :P
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 05, 2023, 02:26:13 PM
Things have escalated quickly in this first run:

Sindrian Shenanigans! Just stopped in to...see the sights...and get thrown into a conspiracy. Heck yeah! My fleet was too small to even tackle the first mission so I'm just out exploring for now.

New weapons! The Kinetic Blaster is not what I expected and I don't think it's the cure-all that people expect it to be. That said, it does have a niche. The G I G A C A N N O N is basically a better AM Blaster with 700 range (and without charges). 2000 damage! I really like the flavor text for it.

The most unexpected, but awesome, change I've experienced thus far is the new music. Especially the ambient stuff while exploring in systems. I mean, perfect eerie atmospheric mood music. Makes you feel alone, isolated, and on edge. Maybe it's because [REDACTED] were about but it really (and I do mean really) adds to the experience.

I've only seen a few of the new ships as they fly by but I can't wait to see more.

Also, just in my brief foray into exploring, I feel like "loot" density is up. I found two orbital habitats around the same planet and it feels like weapon/supply caches are more common. I have a super small sample size but it felt like there was a lot more in each system. Also, just more fleets flying around in general. I was ganked by a massive (4x Prometheus, 2 Auroras, a Champion, 2 Furies, tons of Destroyers and Frigates) fleet coming back from the fringe as I was leaving a system and then they turned pirate. They were headed back to some core world. Again, very little to go off of here, but there's just "more" of everything so far. I like it!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: toopok4k3 on May 05, 2023, 02:43:39 PM
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=26558.0 (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=26558.0)

Hello, possible problem with s-mod bonuses in main menu missions.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ryxsen1421 on May 05, 2023, 02:55:26 PM
Always happy to see more official illustrations, can't wait to dive back into vanilla and check out the new stuff. Congratulations on the release!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: sb on May 05, 2023, 03:21:15 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: StahnAileron on May 05, 2023, 03:33:57 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: pairedeciseaux on May 05, 2023, 03:47:04 PM
Same observation as FooF:

I love the new in-system ambient music.

The sector feels more hostile with all those threatening scavenger fleets. Though those proved to be good logistic ship source after defeating two in the same system.  :D

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.

Thank you for the new version.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: YAZF on May 05, 2023, 03:49:25 PM
Insulated Engine Assembly's S-mod bonus is a smuggler's dream come true. Why is this the thing I'm most excited about?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 03:54:50 PM
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.

Ah, interesting! I'll need to take a look at it in that specific context; though, fun fact - the brightness is *already* reduced! Entirely possible that we didn't go too far with it, though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 05, 2023, 04:11:31 PM
Of course, same week as AOW4
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NEmergix on May 05, 2023, 04:13:38 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 05, 2023, 04:24:39 PM
Sorry, I picked up the game after the last release so I'm not sure how mod updates are communicated.

Is the main index list updated as they are or do we need to monitor each one's thread?

Edit: NVM - I see they are starting to get updated on the index list already. I'll just keep an eye on that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deageon on May 05, 2023, 04:46:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 05:15:34 PM
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.

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.

Oh, hmm. The one you pick up on Asharu, right? Making a note, thank you!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deageon on May 05, 2023, 05:18:01 PM
Yup! I'm using the station as storage, so it was noticable when I swung back around and saw him again.

I gotta say, I'm loving these new quests!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: sb on May 05, 2023, 05:19:17 PM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NEmergix on May 05, 2023, 05:25:17 PM
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.

Id say right now that it is the best ship in the game ... better even than a radiant.

EDIT: it doesn't even feel like a vanilla ship, more like a mod. When i go to the hesperus, it just looks off to have these massive and odd looking ships just next to an eradicator ....
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 05:50:03 PM
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.
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.

Ahh, Ballistic Rangefinder is bugged, not affecting any hybrid weapons at all. Fixed this up!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 05, 2023, 05:59:37 PM
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.

Edit: Unrelated but upon returning to Chalcedon and visiting the bar it always shows the option to follow Sedge even if you already completed the quest.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Forever Templar on May 05, 2023, 07:16:31 PM
Heh, what a nice way to end Golden Week. Thank you for your hard work, Alex.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 07:34:05 PM
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.

Hmm - not that I recall!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CheesusCrustBoyMillionare on May 05, 2023, 07:35:18 PM
The servers seem to be pretty overloaded.

@Alex, do you mind if I create a torrent and host it?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 07:37:47 PM
The servers seem to be pretty overloaded.

@Alex, do you mind if I create a torrent and host it?

Hmm - I'd rather you didn't! The download links here:

https://fractalsoftworks.com/preorder/

And in the blog post seem to be working fine - they're hosted on AWS. Just now, the windows installer downloaded for me in literally 4 seconds.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CheesusCrustBoyMillionare on May 05, 2023, 07:38:23 PM
Strange maybe its at my end. Thanks for the quick reply, looking forward to trying this!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on May 05, 2023, 07:52:30 PM
Honorific selection is a dropdown box and not a text input field long enough for something like "Captain Admiral General President Supreme Overlord Executor", I am disappoint
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Deageon on May 05, 2023, 08:21:04 PM
Also uhhh, Centurion (LG) appears to have AAF while not having any energy mounts. Intentional bad diktat engineering moment?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sundog on May 05, 2023, 08:27:14 PM
Gongrats on another great update, Alex!

Interaction dialog: added scroller to option area; only of interest for modded games
*thumbsup*
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: lili on May 05, 2023, 08:36:59 PM
I was thinking that a ship like Invictus-class must be full of various stories, at least 4,000 people staying on a ship will happen all kinds of things (just like how they live,  but the game does not seem to have any performance looks a bit sorry. If the game will consider adding some related small event system or what description system or related mod api to expand these contents?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 05, 2023, 08:45:18 PM
Also uhhh, Centurion (LG) appears to have AAF while not having any energy mounts. Intentional bad diktat engineering moment?

(Nope! Already fixed (set to damper field) on my end.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on May 05, 2023, 08:48:21 PM
Why buffed converted hanger? Well I don't think that is a nerf.

Scroll bar for option is great! what will happen to the index while it comes to 10(I mean over 10 options)? Will it show 10?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on May 05, 2023, 09:00:49 PM
Update when?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 05, 2023, 09:32:27 PM
Update when?
Gave me a darn good chuckle.

Patch not even 12 hours out and some already call stuff OP... Give it time.

P.S. *** this game I can't even sleep because I can't stop thinking about it. EMP my brain plsss
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on May 05, 2023, 09:46:50 PM
By the way, something interesting I noticed -- High Scatter Amplifier seems to work at making the Invictus's Lidar Array deal hard flux, but doesn't reduce its range. It's really mostly for flavor and the damage isn't really that big a deal (compared with what comes after), but thought I'd point it out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 05, 2023, 10:06:30 PM
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
Have 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on May 05, 2023, 11:20:38 PM
No, Alex! I'm on vacation! Without a computer! My family won't understand if I take the plane home now.

Well, at least I will enjoy the fully jotfixed version when I'm back :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on May 05, 2023, 11:30:38 PM
Ahhh I have the biggest deadline in like 2 years coming on monday morning!!!

Congrats on the release! It looks amazing and I am so excited to get to play it (starting at like 9am monday).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amazigh on May 06, 2023, 12:08:18 AM
Loving the update, but there's one change that has me (and some others) scratching our heads, Is the omen meant to be grey? just seems a little odd when the other Hightech resprites (eg: medusa/aurora) were made more saturated.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 06, 2023, 12:47:17 AM
Is it intentional that Executor is not showing up in the Codex?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on May 06, 2023, 01:36:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 06, 2023, 01:43:15 AM
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...

This isn't just a worse version of the base hull, it has different mounts and ship system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 06, 2023, 02:33:01 AM
Black hole scan bonus feels incredibly underwhelming, especially considering you have to get into the EH and send some of your supplies down the drain.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: smithney on May 06, 2023, 04:01:02 AM
The first most impressive new content for me is surprisingly gotta be Hyperspace Topography track. As it adds minor activities to exloration it makes the downtime between scavenging more bearable, even enjoyable. Looking forward to see how the Hostile Activity pans out and perhaps for more future additions like this

P.S. The new exploration theme absolutely hits the spot! I love how it introduces the melody right about the time I'm getting familiar with the system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Shinr on May 06, 2023, 04:02:40 AM
swapping Java 8

Is there is a new Java 8 for 0.96 already, or is it version agnostic?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 06, 2023, 06:21:35 AM
Are military contacts just gone lol? I've been searching for anyone to give me a bounty on the Luddic planets for sooooo long now. That's constantly visiting 4-5 planets and always seeing random trading and raiding missions. Don't know if it affects the chances but I've been doing bount hunting on the side from intel, unfortunately those suck (150k bounty fleet with an Invictus!) and don't give me reputation I need. Has anyone managed to find a military contact on Luddic planets?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on May 06, 2023, 06:54:07 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on May 06, 2023, 06:54:37 AM
swapping Java 8

Is there is a new Java 8 for 0.96 already, or is it version agnostic?
It’s not getting an update anytime soon, that’s for sure!


I’m fairly miffed about the Missile Autoloader.  First, it’s only viable for a handful of ships like the centurion, tempest, and dram.  Secondly, it’s typically more expense in OP per missile than Expanded Missile Racks.

It would be fine if it counted missile weapons instead of just slots, and even better if it provided the full reload count if all the weapons were unique.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 06, 2023, 07:12:02 AM
Something's weird with Persean League. A lot of their planets only sell machineguns.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: FooF on May 06, 2023, 07:29:26 AM
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 find it hilarious that the Missile Autoloader came standard on the Fast Start Dram. It is a perfect candidate(!), but...I'll never put it in battle.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 06, 2023, 07:50:15 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: basileus on May 06, 2023, 08:02:50 AM
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.

So you're saying that only a few of the usual suspects dominate the list?

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 06, 2023, 08:15:12 AM
If you want to go that far, just make it that every ship you fought is unlocked in the simulator.

Until then just keep copying sim_oppnents_dev.csv over sim_opponents.csv
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 06, 2023, 08:24:41 AM
I mean that's all cool but that won't probably make it into a patch, especially in one of the hotfixes. I just want to fight cruisers which are not low tech and won't run away from you at the first sign of higher flux.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 06, 2023, 08:43:37 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 06, 2023, 10:15:26 AM
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.

It definitely is repeating, not a reload/save issue.  I've seen it 3 times in an iron man game so far.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 06, 2023, 10:24:55 AM
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.
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 06, 2023, 10:26:53 AM
For the love of Ludd please let me complete the new questline.... 
I went to talk to someone in a luddic path planet, and I got greeted by a whole armada that I somehow destroyed...but now I can't speak to that person because of that fight that THEY initiated, and I won't be able to for "many months". 
This is SO frustrating as I saved after the fight before even thinking that could happen since it's a quest....
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 06, 2023, 10:32:14 AM
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.
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?
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.

But the real victim here is the poor gutted Hurricane. It got nerfed way too many times.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 06, 2023, 10:56:46 AM
Another hotfix is up! Details in OP; fixes the Hostile Activity intel crash and some other issues.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 06, 2023, 11:26:37 AM
Stupid question. The hotfix can be installed over the previous install or need to uninstall previous version first?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 06, 2023, 11:40:21 AM
I know it may seem stupid, but now that we have large pilums, I really NEED small mount single pilums....then I can have my dream pilum boat support ship
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 06, 2023, 11:45:13 AM
Stupid question. The hotfix can be installed over the previous install or need to uninstall previous version first?

Either way should be fine; I'd say just install over it and only bother uninstalling/manually deleting stuff if there's a problem. That *can* happen sometimes - windows can be a bit weird about deleting files etc - but it's quite rare.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 06, 2023, 04:28:16 PM
Nice update, thank you Alex.
And the new music, both for the Persean League and the exploration, is very cool.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Liral on May 06, 2023, 06:11:57 PM
Woooooo!  Congratulations!  Thanks for all the new story mechanics and content plus ships, weapons, and moddability enhancements.  I have in Realistic Combat replaced with calls to your API expansions all introspective black magic hitherto-necessary to modify the specs of wings, weapons, projectiles, and beams—but calls to the following two methods:

Code
beamWeaponSpecProxy.setDamagePerSecond(float damagePerSecond);
beamWeaponSpecProxy.setEmpPerSecond(float empPerSecond);
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 06, 2023, 06:54:27 PM
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.


Meanwhile, I like the new Hydra as a Locust alternative (in terms of endurance) against human fleets that have insignificant PD.  (I am still in midgame, just built my first colony.)

Dragonfire feels like a beam MIRV.  Smaller enemies dodge some of it too easily, kind of like sidestepping enemies' hitscan railgun in some old FPS games.  Seems to be made against big targets like MIRV.  Dragonfire looks so nice, but it has been a bit of a letdown.  Gorgon/Hydras seem more useful and fine, although I will probably eat those words after I meet stronger enemies with better PD.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 06, 2023, 07:15:48 PM
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:

Spoiler
unlock gate travel ASAP
[close]

Nice work.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 06, 2023, 07:25:26 PM
Hmm, keeping the MIRV feedback in mind, for sure.

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:

Spoiler
unlock gate travel ASAP
[close]

Nice work.

Ahh, thank you! Hearing that seriously makes me happy, it was one of the things I was least sure about how it'd come across.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Baqar79 on May 06, 2023, 08:16:09 PM
I can do a proper bug report (if requested), but I noticed the little Hermes shuttle's d-mod you pick up from Asharu's abandoned mining platform can't seem to be repaired with Hull Restoration.

I noticed this when I picked up a heavily d-modded Astral which I was hoping to repair while mothballed and noticed it had been a bit of a long time before the last d-mod repair.  Were d-mods still removed from ships when mothballed in 0.95.1 before, or maybe I just had assumed wrongly without testing it properly?

In any case once I took it out of mothballed mode and left it for a while it did start repairing the d-mods so I'm guessing that even if it wasn't like that in 0.95.1 that it is intended to work like that for this newer version.

Anyway, the rambling post was because I wasn't sure whether the Herme's shuttle was preventing further repairs but I discovered with a bit of testing that no, it wasn't the Herme's, but the fact that I had mothballed the Astral...however the Herme's d-mod still can't seem to have it's d-mod removed with Hull restoration so that is still a small bug I'm guessing.

Also, many thanks for the new update; I was part way through 0.95.1 in anticipation of the new release (so was rushing through that game so I could have a fresh comparison ready), and I had intended to start a new game if 0.96 released (and play through it much slower) and so it did!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: itBeABruhMoment on May 06, 2023, 09:20:20 PM
The luddic path Manticore is listed as a pirate ship in its description
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 06, 2023, 10:47:31 PM
Wasn't Breach supposed to get a new "high tech" sprite?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 06, 2023, 10:57:09 PM
Huh, so not only Executor, but the Venture variants are also missing from the Codex. Well they're definitely not secret content.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Embolism on May 06, 2023, 11:02:43 PM
Wasn't Breach supposed to get a new "high tech" sprite?

Same for the mining blaster. I'm actually rather disappointed as I'd love to use the new mining blaster on my high tech ships, but it just looks so ugly...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CrashToDesktop on May 06, 2023, 11:18:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vicegrip on May 07, 2023, 01:55:02 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 07, 2023, 02:39:41 AM
Not mentioned in changelog: Adaptive Phase Coils now cost 5/10/15/25

Solar Shielding damage reduction was nerfed to 10%
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PsychoThruster on May 07, 2023, 06:46:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 07, 2023, 07:01:00 AM
Energy Bolt Coherer is called exactly the same on both Apex and LG ships, yet it's not the same buff for all.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 07, 2023, 07:29:08 AM
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!

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.

Your new save should be fine!

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 07, 2023, 07:36:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Duloth on May 07, 2023, 11:26:01 AM
First playthrough on the new patch and.... yeah, the pirates/path bit is a bit excessive for colonies now. Even if you spend the entire time babysitting your colony crushing pirates, you end up with penalties and it rapidly gets out of hand; honestly, it just doesn't make sense. If every pirate base that gets setup dies, and the star system is a graveyard of hundreds, thousands, of destroyed pirate ships, the warlord Kanta is lying on a broken ruin of a sat-bombed husk and every pirate world is either gone or broken.... still, they keep coming, and the counter builds up to the next raid. Basically, building a colony turns it into a defense game; even with a high command and a star fortress, its still going to be suffering dramatically from pirates by the time you get a mission done.

Founding a colony before starting the main quest, and before I get to the ziggurat, I've already destroyed more pirate ships than the Hegemony has ships total; how the heck any of these nations can stay afloat amidst the endless sea of pirates and pathers is a huge question; the pirates are definitely the largest and most powerful faction in the current game by sheer weight of numbers.

So.... essentially, the colony stuff is now just an end-game, whereas before it was something you could viably do while working the main quest, every few missions stopping to track down a path or pirate base.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 07, 2023, 11:44:05 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 07, 2023, 12:00:38 PM
In combat, is the "i" key supposed to auto-destruct my converted hangar Xyphos on a Retribution?  I accidently hit it while not on the command layer, and my Xyphos blew up. Repeatably.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 07, 2023, 12:03:04 PM
What if I said yes? :D But no, no. Debug code left in by accident; fixed already for the next hotfix.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: memeextremist on May 07, 2023, 01:06:14 PM
hey Alex. I got this weird crash earlier when trying to fire a new large missile I haven't seen before [forgot the name. sorry]. I think it's yours? dunno but here's the log:

edit: yep it was the hydra

Code
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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 07, 2023, 01:08:58 PM
   at org.dark.graphics.plugins.LightInjector.advance(LightInjector.java:111)

Hey! This crash is in GraphicsLib.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dostya on May 07, 2023, 02:21:44 PM
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 think most of what's happening is that previous patches made 10 stability and enough access to export everything and then some the default, and the idea that sacrificing some of that might be needed in some cases is causing some players (myself included, admittedly) some issues with prior expectations vs new (ultimately perhaps intended) mechanics. It caused me some stress until I spent some time thinking on it, and then went on with my own chosen methods for mitigation.

A totally new player with no preconceptions on how to build and manage colonies might have it easier. I don't know. My experience definitely worked against me at the start since I gathered enough resources to juice my colonies up and spread some items out.

What I can say is that the progressive stability and access debuff hurts in the latter two stages, out of proportion in credit cost (considering what less stability and access does to credit income) with the actual problems caused with the recurring event. Pirate raids are anemic in the face of how colonies are expected to be spawning space patrols against faction expeditions, and Pather cells are solvable. The debuffs hurt especially much if you've got just enough to slowly tick up threat and not quickly get yourself through the higher penalties. Which a player probably does if they've spent time exploring.

I think there's some room for additional stuff at the conclusion of the meter to bring it into proportion with the debuffs, or maybe the market value of goods need a little buff since 10 stability isn't a baseline for most of the game if you're putting items and whatnot in anymore, or perhaps some more events in the meter to switch things up. I don't know. I can say that it felt bad when I was just starting up my colonies and didn't know how to game the increased threat, but after learning the mechanics it's entirely manageable.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 07, 2023, 03:03:30 PM
I have a bug in my game, whenever i visit the bar in chalcedon after doing the luddic church quest,
Spoiler
  it keeps triggering the event to meet with the luddic path recruiter, in order to find the missing knight, even if i shoot him it still triggers.
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 07, 2023, 03:04:00 PM
I like to keep stability high because of ship quality (when I want to build ships) and fleet size.

Regarding previous experiences influencing play, after starting my first colony in 0.96, I doubt I would open with Orbital Station again (which would be online just in time before the first raid arrives in older releases but does not apply now).  Next time, I probably would start out with Patrol HQ (to offset pirate counter) or Waystation (to get my fuel and supplies, possibly to dump on Chalcedon for profit).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Troll on May 07, 2023, 03:11:17 PM
Congratulations on this new release. It is excellent.
Many good things to (re)-discover and test.
The new ships are just great and unique

Too many things to comment so I'll just say this :
As an Onslaught worshipper, I found the Invictus hilarious. In a fantastical way.
This ship is the apex of mobile fortresses.
Instead of making ships and sending them to space, they decided to send the whole city to space, with adequate weaponry.
And the ship system is basically : "Sure I can't catch you, but my weapons can" (keeping it simple with two MK IX and 2 HAG for a good mix of kinetic and HE)

I went in for the Coronal Shunt fight just to test and ended up winning with most of my ships intact, my armor barely dented as they kept flying all around me.
I love that spiky metal brick. Going to add a second to my fleet, and maybe a third to see how slow and ridiculous fights can be.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 07, 2023, 03:29:47 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 07, 2023, 03:41:43 PM
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.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 07, 2023, 03:54:50 PM
Quote
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.

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 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? 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Duloth on May 07, 2023, 04:25:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: solardawning on May 07, 2023, 04:30:15 PM
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... 

Hint: Activate 'Emergency Burn' when crossing a slipstream horizontally. You'll barely be pushed off course.
Don't 'Sustained Burn' into them or you'll be swept away.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on May 07, 2023, 04:37:02 PM
I'd like to see a 5x speed-up option for hyperspace, too.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 07, 2023, 04:38:56 PM
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.

I'd love to see a screenshot of your hostile activity intel, or perhaps your save; something just doesn't add up here and I wonder if there's a bug somewhere. If you could send your save to fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com, that'd be ideal!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: memeextremist on May 07, 2023, 05:25:56 PM
   at org.dark.graphics.plugins.LightInjector.advance(LightInjector.java:111)

Hey! This crash is in GraphicsLib.
ahh. thank you. disabled it o7
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BrassGecko on May 07, 2023, 05:27:34 PM
Just wanted to say that the Retribution might be my favorite flagship in the game now. Took me some trial and error to find a setup I liked, but it's such a gloriously aggressive flanker. The look of detonating yourself into danger only adds to it, everything about the ship just -feels- belligerent. I love it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on May 07, 2023, 06:00:35 PM
I'd like to see a 5x speed-up option for hyperspace, too.

This is already available. Simply go into \starsector-core\data\config\settings.json, search for "campaignSpeedupMult", and change it from the default 2 to whatever you'd like. I have it set to 5.

As with all game files, be sure to back up your settings.json file first in case you mess up something.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on May 07, 2023, 06:41:56 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 07, 2023, 07:09:20 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on May 07, 2023, 07:19:20 PM
Yes, starting editing the settings is a slippery slope. First QoL improvements, then changing game mechanics bcs it feels better that way...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dostya on May 07, 2023, 07:46:41 PM
A reaction to some of the new stuff:

Spoiler
I thought it was odd that even though I've crapped on the Path most of the game, blew up their stations, their fleets, raided their planets, etc. that they were still okay with offering me permanent immunity when I rolled up on their station and handed over the thing from the place to them. There should probably be some hoops to jump through or something just because I'd expect that if they want my head on a pike there should be reasons not to do that thing. Or for me to tell them that I got them the thing and they just say "yes well done completing the mission" that I never got and they never asked for because they hate my guts and vice versa.

There should probably be dialogue at Galatia, too, if you don't use the gate to get back there. Which I didn't this run, just to see if there was.
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 07, 2023, 08:45:20 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 07, 2023, 08:47:56 PM
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?

The problem is when people who do that start giving balance/gameplay suggestions based on their "cheated" version of the game. Same with mods.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on May 07, 2023, 09:31:31 PM
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). Especially when the game is under development and I would rather see the developer spend his time on improving on the game and developing new game features instead of writing an in-game UI for each of the literally hundreds of parameters that can be changed, and when most players nowadays are computer-literate enough to know how to edit text files.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 07, 2023, 11:27:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 07, 2023, 11:35:41 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 08, 2023, 12:06:57 AM
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.

It is nothing but an advantage that Starsector is both modable and user configurable. It's a little sad to me that some people don't use mods for games they enjoy because it is "wrong" some how. Not only could they tailor the game more to their liking (which BTW is the entire purpose of a game - to let you do something you like) but it is better for the game as it can give it a much longer life.

Is cheating or dirty if you use an after market steering wheel cover in a car, or add a bit of pesto to a recipe even though it doesn't call for it, or repaint your house because you don't like the color?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 08, 2023, 12:15:13 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 08, 2023, 12:28:55 AM
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.
(Yes, it is easy, you add a widget to the list. One-liner. The only thing stopping mods from doing that is not having any entry access to UI editing even though the actual methods are all there.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 08, 2023, 12:42:13 AM
And the fact of it is, hyperspace travel is boring and annoying

No it's not.

What now?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 08, 2023, 12:55:50 AM
And the fact of it is, hyperspace travel is boring and annoying...

And... now you've proclaimed that your opinion is fact. There's no point continuing after that - I'm out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: bob888w on May 08, 2023, 03:44:26 AM
On the hyperspace slipstreams point, I'd personally like to have that stuff toggable in settings. The new hyperspace topography stuff is somewhat interesting, but I personally find the time in between systems just an annoying hazard
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on May 08, 2023, 03:50:10 AM
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.
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.

Edit: Thanks Grievious. Here's the link for anyone interested though you'd need to change the version number yourself until Sundog updates it. https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=17157.0
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 08, 2023, 04:19:28 AM
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.
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.
It's called Hyperdrive, or something like that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: basileus on May 08, 2023, 06:04:12 AM
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.

Don't be so sure of that.  It would certainly help explain all of the complaining about the Industry tree.  One of its biggest advantages is saving time, but the inconveniences of repair times or having to return to the core are both greatly mitigated by greatly speeding up the campaign layer.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Euphytose on May 08, 2023, 06:11:48 AM
Slipstreams annoy me and "block" me more than anything. They're very rarely useful for me. I would love to have an option to turn them off in the settings yeah.

Also, on hyperspace in general, I find it decent. But I would prefer if we had another speed up key, with a much higher multiplier.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tarkets on May 08, 2023, 08:24:37 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 08, 2023, 09:32:18 AM
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

Thank you, made a note - that's a strange one!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vicegrip on May 08, 2023, 11:48:07 AM
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!
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on May 08, 2023, 12:13:51 PM
I don't think this debate about whether it is cheating to edit the game files is useful for either side. But the fact that some people argued for both sides makes it clear, that some people DO think that creating a speed-up toggle setting would be useful. No one will change here the opinion of others, so there is no need to further debate it.

Either Alex will change it or not. Now he knows about the request and I'll leave it to him to decide.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Valinra on May 08, 2023, 01:25:31 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 08, 2023, 02:35:46 PM
Hey Alex, I've been seeing a lot of comments about the slipstreams and how a lot of the times they are more of a hindrance than help, I have an idea that could maybe make those people happy, since this update gave us the hyperspace topography thingy, 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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 08, 2023, 03:54:40 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 08, 2023, 04:04:33 PM
... 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?

(I've got some ideas in that same general direction that I'd like to try, but, nothing like promises!)

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.

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.

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?

It's not necessarily a question of "can handle" (though, of course, the bigger the Sector the more some things creak); I think the "normal" sector size is about as large as I'd like it to be under ideal circumstances.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 08, 2023, 04:31:12 PM
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.

I do. That explains it.

Must be the increase in traffic. I'll wait for the techs to deploy some signal repeaters.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PixiCode on May 08, 2023, 05:30:41 PM
I love the update so far. The new quest content is written in a very fun and engaging manner, the new content is really fun. new toys are great, the event system has a lot of potential and is really cool, the improved UI is really nice.

I’m posting a question in regards to the new toys. It looks like the Invictus does not use 10% of its minimum 5% armor when it is stripped, but actually the full armor as if the ablative hullmod is ignored.

Someone posted a video of them shooting a railgun at an invictus with stripped armor. The railgun was dealing its minimum 15% damage to hull instead of the expected ~57% or so (it was an invictus with AWM and nothing else - so it had 11,000 armor)

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 08, 2023, 05:32:03 PM
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.

Not intended! Fixed this earlier today.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PixiCode on May 08, 2023, 05:38:13 PM
Oh thanks! Sorry if it was already reported.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 08, 2023, 05:46:54 PM
No worries - someone told me about it on twitter :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lappers on May 08, 2023, 06:35:56 PM
Figured I'd add my take on slipstreams in case no one's said anything similar before.

As much as I really hate (in the moment) going around or e-burning through them when I run into them randomly, I think they're a perfectly reasonable obstacle. 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.
It may just be that my brain is small, but I find that 95% of the time, slipstreams are useless and moderately annoying to me simply because there isn't any clear way to factor them into my travels. Nearly every time I see one, it's something I didn't plan to encounter and is simply either not useful to me at the time or in my way. There have been a very small number of occasions where it just so happened that I found one leading more or less in the exact direction I was already going, but these instances are rare.
The issue could also be I'm just not thinking of ways I could be using them. I do that a lot in any game and in life. Plus in Starsector I always play in what seems like objectively the wrong way (based on how ships are outfitted automatically by the game and the way people design ships in mods), at least where combat is concerned.

It really isn't as big of a deal as I might be making it sound, but seeing how I always use an absurdly huge map thanks to the Adjusted Sector mod, I think it would be neat to have the ability to plan voyages to some extent using the chains of slipstreams that pop up on occasion. Just an idea I think sounds neat.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sts678 on May 08, 2023, 11:17:33 PM
Hello Alex, the price of Gazer missile pod seems to be wrong. A medium missile weapon only costs 300?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sts678 on May 08, 2023, 11:35:17 PM
Hello Alex, I find some change about factions' markets. I can find a Medusa Class hull in the black market of Hegemony. And now Independent has Scrab class in its markets? Are these situations caused by bugs or adjustments?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CrashToDesktop on May 09, 2023, 12:12:20 AM
The Gigacannon turret sprite is off-center for me. The most glorious Sindrian strike weapon in the arsenal, and the engineers don't know how to center it on the turret ring!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 09, 2023, 12:46:37 AM
This is the situation I'm always finding myself in. I need to go to the planet on the system on the right but the slipstream is in the way. Sure I can emergency burn and get there eventually, but it's just an annoyance.
(https://i.imgur.com/gp6Lurw.png)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 09, 2023, 12:49:19 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 09, 2023, 02:05:59 AM
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." 
doesn't mean I can't do it, it's just something else on top of the storms that made traveling in the hyperspace even more annoying than before.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on May 09, 2023, 02:24:56 AM
What do you mean by "eventually"? It just adds a few seconds to correct your course. And if you really don't like Hyperspace travel that you want to alt tab, just get that Hyperdrive mod mentioned earlier, I saw it was updated recently on discord so it should work fine.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 09, 2023, 02:26:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 09, 2023, 02:34:56 AM
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..... 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 09, 2023, 02:44:58 AM
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. 
So, statistically, you will encounter a helpful stream about 1/4th of the time.
There are diagonals, but on a diagonal, a stream is either helpful or you need to cross it, so it's a 50/50 there.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 09, 2023, 02:46:40 AM
But when the stream is completely opposite, you can just travel on the side, if you really need to cross once, then wait for the break with jump points.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 09, 2023, 02:56:39 AM
... 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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 09, 2023, 03:05:20 AM
Good point, it seems many haven't discovered the easier way of using the game's tools.

@Alex
Mini suggestion, how about making the default hyperspace view one that has actual useful information?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 09, 2023, 03:14:44 AM
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]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 09, 2023, 03:16:44 AM
@Alex
Mini suggestion, how about making the default hyperspace view one that has actual useful information?

I'll second that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 09, 2023, 03:19:38 AM
I'm also not sure why we don't just get a message "hey, the slipstreams are doing their biyearly thing". Actually listen to this, the absolute perfect place for this would be to put it on the new exploration event intel screen. Put a small countdown in days until next slipstream change and that's it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 09, 2023, 03:29:38 AM
"This is going to be a terrible night..."
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on May 09, 2023, 04:41:51 AM
IMO, there is absolutely no point in debating other players' subjective experience with the game and slipstreams in particular. Just accept, that for some people these little things are annoying. No need to ridicule others' gameplay experience.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: RoadTrain on May 09, 2023, 07:04:13 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: basileus on May 09, 2023, 07:24:02 AM
That would be more helpful if missions had a default duration of over 180 days.  The way slipstreams work would be a lot less annoying if mission duration was doubled from 120 to 240 days, then we reasonably could plan accordingly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lappers on May 09, 2023, 09:34:35 AM
... 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.)

Actually I think there was one time I turned off the starscape and noticed that, but I tend to leave it on because I like the contrast between the stars and background and I'm just more used to it at this point. Either way, it obviously didn't click in my head.
That said, while this certainly allows them to be more useful, there still is the issue of periodically changing direction which can be a problem if your timing is unfortunate (mine tends to be). There are also those occasional temporary ones that pop up and disappear, which since the first time I saw that happen has simply given me the impression that they're a fairly random force of nature that can't be planned around, much like hyperstorms (for example I swear there was at least one time where I had a newly forming slipstream just tear down the screen right on top of my fleet).

The problem with slipstreams as I see it is a lack of clear information regarding both how they behave and how they can be recorded. I saw someone else mention the Neutrino Detector's functionality for detecting slipstreams being essentially useless, and I'm inclined to agree. Assuming the main slipstreams are permanent and simply change direction without changing location, some method of charting them that's more obvious than using one non-default map view option (one which applies a significant aesthetic change that I personally don't like to look at) would be more useful in my opinion.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 09, 2023, 10:27:30 AM
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.

The whole changing direction thing takes about a month or so.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 09, 2023, 07:23:17 PM
Just a little bit of feedback.

Fought a few Persean League Deserters now, armed primarily with the "laser missiles" of their various types. (I've also used them in my own fleet, but that's sort of irrelevant to the feedback).

As primarily a phase ship user, I really enjoy the added wrinkle they add in combat. They're quite effective at area denial, and I found myself tripping up at times when my muscle memory decided "the missiles have passed, you are safe". There were times they could have been lethal if I had made a single mistake, and I often made quick decisions to change a target or abort an attack run in ways I wouldn't have against a more conventional fleet.

Good fun.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: crvt on May 09, 2023, 10:51:01 PM
Brilliants with Plasma Burn feels like a large change to me.

Tried 3 different comps that previously could take a triple ordo without resorting to monitor distractions, and they all kinda melted as soon as most of the ships on the field were Brilliants. Ships that could disengage safely from them tend to die now much more often, and sometimes even 2 Brilliants end up creating significant pressure/risks in a spot where previously you'd only worry about 4+
They can catch up towards kiting fleets and mess with attempts for defeat in detail quite well.

Also tends to help them with closing in on the slow-moving high-firepower lines, too. And in general they traverse the map much faster now, that includes random capture points, flanking, or simply reinforcing from the deployment position.

Missile spam probably still works as usual, but overall it feels like triple ordo fleets got significantly stronger. (and that is good)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 10, 2023, 01:15:30 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Rain on May 10, 2023, 05:48:09 AM
Some various little bits and bobs at the tail end of my first (modless save for portraits and aesthetics) campaign:

- DEMs are fun and have caused a few laughs. I don't yet quite know how good they are compared to equivalent missiles for the same OP/size/ammo counts, which at least suggests they're in the right ballpark, but I've found I tend to prefer Gazers to Sabots now. Dragonfires are cute but I think Reapers generally feel better and more impactful. Gorgons have caused a few harrowing near-misses and armour dents since I'm not yet used to how to move around them.
- The new capitals, while I find them aesthetically rather ugly, (personal taste and all that) seem to mostly do their thing well enough. The Pegasus especially has been neat to have around and the missile floods can be pretty nifty. I haven't had the others in-fleet yet, mostly because I find the Legion and Onslaught way too clunky and exploitable as is, but the fights I've had against the two low-tech ones have been interesting enough. The Lidar Array blinking on you is pretty unsettling, even if you can get out of its way quickly in my ever-trusty Fury.
- The Sindrian quests were... Very interesting. I couldn't help but feel far out of my depth, especially with the Big Insinuations in there. Nice. Is there perchance a next step somewhere in the "to do" documents? ;D
- The pilgrimage quest sadly broke on me this in a rather bewildering way so I haven't seen where that goes.
- The little extra dialogue options added in the main story quests were neat, especially
Spoiler
the conversation options with clone Loke.
[close]
But I also always really loved the chat with Cotton in general.
- I like the Fury and Eagle buffs, but I was always a Fury flying enthusiast and liked the idea of the Eagle already.
- The mining blaster change is nifty too, I've actually found some consistent uses for it now!
- The colony threat event I'm a little iffy about, mostly because it felt that until the step where you get the freebie -14 or whatever the only really effective way of keeping it down seemed to me to be to get a military base up really early since there were never enough fleets around to keep the number from steadily rising. My first colony was on a decivilized world, though, which definitely caused stability to be a bit lower which in turn might have pushed the event track along a lot more than it normally would have. Furthermore it didn't seem like friendly patrol fleets cleaning up pirates or Pathers gave the reduction which feels really weird.
- 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.
- Brilliants with Plasma Burn are very scary for their footprint in combat.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 10, 2023, 07:23:44 AM
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?

(Thank you! Yep, fixed for the next hot/warm fix. Was just... applying the effect incorrectly.)


- 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.

You have to get closer! And then if you get *even closer*, you get even more points! Trust me! (But no, really)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Daynen on May 10, 2023, 09:27:57 AM
Wall of patch notes attacks!

CRIT!  9999 damage!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 10, 2023, 09:30:49 AM
My first colony just grew to size 4, and I played with items to see what Pathers did to colonies.

Question:  Does removing items from colonies dissolve Pather cells anymore?  I removed items from the colony, waited about a week, and the cell is still there, as if waiting for me to put items back in, even though Pathers show no interest, while in previous releases the cell would dissolve.  If Pather cells never dissolve after forming, then colonies with a cell are stuck with a permanent -1 stability penalty, similar to Rogue AI Core.

Seems like if I want to avoid Pather cells, then I should never exceed +6 interest on a world ever.  So much for the Mining>Refinery>Orb.Works with forge on one world plan.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on May 10, 2023, 10:39:40 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/uXEh46q.png)
"can we pay you 6k to stay right here?
(yes, i am on gilead)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on May 10, 2023, 10:49:25 AM
"can we pay you 6k to stay right here?
(yes, i am on gilead)

Thank you for the report; this one is already fixed in-dev!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on May 10, 2023, 10:51:56 AM
One bug I noticed is the Revenant and Phantom both get the +2 burn from Bulk Transport despite not having the Civilian Grade mod.

So far as colonies go, I've found the simplest option is to spread them out. One Military Base will cover three colonies that I've rigged just for one industry to cover fleet costs.  All of them have one item.

It sounds to me like people are concentrating all their resources in one place when this system rewards a low profile.  I've had no real problems with constant  trade fleet losses, so this can continue until they're all size 4, and then I build my tower of Babel on some god-forsaken rock.

You should be establishing a farming colony on some 100 hazard world first thing.  You should NOT switch free port on unless you're ready for a fight.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 10, 2023, 10:57:11 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CorvusSquatter on May 10, 2023, 10:57:39 AM
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.

Quote
One bug I noticed is the Revenant and Phantom both get the +2 burn from Bulk Transport despite not having the Civilian Grade mod.

Stop that heresy right away. :o That's not a bug, it's a feature. It's there since forever and honestly it's really useful. Removing it would make a revenant inferior to a colossus... And that's just not right...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 10, 2023, 11:44:05 AM
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.

Fairly soon! (And yeah, the first week or two are always a bit shaky, plus the .1 releases are more polished anyway, with much of the .1 dev cycle being primarily concerned with polish!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 10, 2023, 12:09:02 PM
Why would Rev and Phan have Civ-grade? The only thing that does is make them more visible. The *whole point* of phase in campaign is that they're invisible.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 10, 2023, 12:29:06 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: facc00 on May 10, 2023, 12:32:41 PM
So I just noticed this article, it was on my news feed!


https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2023/05/the-2d-massive-space-epic-starsector-gets-a-big-upgrade/
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 10, 2023, 12:59:29 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on May 10, 2023, 01:00:45 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: itBeABruhMoment on May 10, 2023, 01:09:41 PM
Not sure if flat out not counting them is a good idea. That's 6 ai core officers
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 10, 2023, 01:15:01 PM
i think this could be indicated more clearly in their automated ship hullmod

Just got done removing an extra paragraph in that tooltip and highlighting the "does not require special expertise" bit in gold :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on May 10, 2023, 01:40:57 PM
What the hell happened to Ordinance Expertise?!?
Like anyone can explain?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on May 10, 2023, 01:47:11 PM
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.

Man, now I dunno how I feel about that going the other way, because that makes Those Ships kind of... incredibly powerful. Those ships, basically being given to the player if they can defeat them, and they don't require Automated Ships? And they can still take cores and don't need crew? That's hefty, especially if a few in particular end up salvageable.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on May 10, 2023, 02:02:57 PM
What the hell happened to Ordinance Expertise?!?
Like anyone can explain?
umm... nothing?
what do you mean
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 10, 2023, 02:06:49 PM
Yeah Ordinance Expertise is unchanged afaik?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 10, 2023, 03:02:48 PM
I found a bug during the PK quest
Spoiler
I could give it to the Hegemony and Tri-Tachyon by talking to a station commander, the option to give it to the Luddic Church was there but they wouldn't take it cause its against their religion, there's no option to give it to the Persean League.When i tried giving it to the Sindrian Diktat the option was there but when i clicked it it said "Error: no rule found for option pk_turnInDiktat, adding a failsafe option to exit dialog."
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on May 10, 2023, 04:01:25 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 10, 2023, 09:26:51 PM
There's a small typo in the Mudskipper's description, where it talks about the name.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: RoadTrain on May 11, 2023, 04:46:58 AM
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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on May 11, 2023, 05:06:38 AM
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...
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on May 11, 2023, 07:16:06 AM
Yeah Ordinance Expertise is unchanged afaik?
Exactly!!!!!!
How it is even possible?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 11, 2023, 07:32:19 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Delta_of_Isaire on May 11, 2023, 09:06:12 AM
It's the release! Wow! So come June 1st we might be able to play again  :D  (waiting for those hot/warm fixes to drop)

Meanwhile we can play around with the new toys.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 11, 2023, 09:16:27 AM
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, that's definitely a bug! Fixed this up, thank you for mentioning it.

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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 11, 2023, 09:30:38 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 11, 2023, 09:35:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 11, 2023, 09:42:05 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 11, 2023, 09:43:32 AM
Maybe replace two LCs with one DLC, assume wing of three.  Less DPS, less range, and less accuracy.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 11, 2023, 09:45:55 AM
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.

Maybe "main point" is too much, but it's definitely an integral part of it!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 11, 2023, 09:51:47 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 11, 2023, 11:14:59 AM
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

That is something you find during a quest but can also find without it, like the red planet quest.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Enjoyment Enjoyer on May 11, 2023, 05:06:21 PM
Hey, Alex! I think I found a bug concerning the PK mission and the option to give it to a certain faction. For other players: following is the story spoiler so if you haven't played yet - read at your own risk.

Spoiler
When I give the planet killer to Luddic Path to make them leave my colonies alone, there is no drop in hostile activity from their part whatsoever. It may be because I picked the lie option when accepting the quest to retrieve it, but I also acknowledge that this may be intended. Hence the question: is it intended that if you pick the lie option, pathers are somehow capable of discerning your dishonesty and refuse to stop terrorizing you because of it? Thanks in advance!
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 11, 2023, 05:57:17 PM
Hi! Nope, this is a bug; fixed for the upcoming hot/warm fix.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Enjoyment Enjoyer on May 11, 2023, 08:35:47 PM
Hi! Nope, this is a bug; fixed for the upcoming hot/warm fix.

Got it, thanks a lot!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on May 11, 2023, 08:49:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 11, 2023, 09:08:05 PM
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.

Fixed, thank you!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: kanliot on May 11, 2023, 09:18:15 PM
Quote
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

That's some love I feel right there. Thx!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 12, 2023, 12:50:52 AM
Ever since I saw hegemony ships with AI cores is there a possibility this will become prevalant in future updates? I also hope there will more buffs and debuffs for the rest of the hullmods when having them built into the ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 12, 2023, 07:43:34 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 12, 2023, 08:22:45 AM
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.

(Yep, thank you - this is fixed in-dev!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 12, 2023, 10:07:21 AM
Just stumbled across Sentinel in a far-fringe system (and the Red Planet in another system next to it) while exploring for a better system to colonize.  Found the hidden cache with special automated ships that do not count toward the capstone skill.  With eyes filled with greed, I devoured the fleet and recovered everything offered.  Afterwards, there was the cache to loot (I do not remember if looting is automatic immediately after combat).  I was hoping to get more blueprints or other special loot (like Omega weapons or unique colony upgrade) for the fleet.  Instead, I looted the infamous planetkiller.  I thought "nice" until I found out I could not drop it in storage, and I thought "ugh, not a D&D-style cursed item I cannot drop!" unless I give it to someone.  I guess I need to do special plot stuff to get rid of it, which I did not care about at the time.  (I would prefer to keep the bomb in storage myself.)

If looting the planetkiller is automatic, and player will not be allowed to store it in his colony, it would be nice if there was an option to leave it behind until the player is ready to take it and follow the plot related to it later.  The game should also let the player know, before taking the bomb, that once the bomb is taken, it cannot be left behind until it is turned in somewhere.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 12, 2023, 10:42:00 AM
I will suicide my fleet to see if that will drop the planetkiller in deep space or just get rid of it as an improvised Remove Curse.

Update:  Killed off my fleet and it respawned in Corvus with the planetkiller in cargo.  So much for the Remove Curse suicide plan.  Looks like I will avoid the cache until I decide to give the bomb to someone.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 12, 2023, 01:56:15 PM
Can we get some love for the sindrian diktat? I'm tired of hearing "The gigacannon is supposed to be bad", "the executor is supposed to be a trash capital"... 
Well, a faction that is supposed to be bad it's just not fun. 
I can get behind them being bad in the sense that their ship configurations are unoptimized, or with the d-mod that can be removed, but the ship itself or the weapon themselves being bad? why? feels like such a waste... 
the Gigacannon with its 10 seconds cooldown makes it borderline useless, and the executor that gets overloaded even if you mount the most flux efficient weapons in the game? why make a capital ship that's supposed to be bad? I was so excited about the executor, and while it's still strong, it doesn't compare to the other capital ships...it feels like a joke ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 12, 2023, 02:30:14 PM
Invictus with the armor bug is totally bonkers! I had every damage skill for a Reaper-armed Afflictor I could manage, and I still blew through 75% of my ammunition to sink just the Invictus. Not exactly sure what the loadout was on it, but it was crewed by a level 7 officer with Damage Control, Impact Mitigation, and Polarized Armor skills. Watching it stand up to 6 Reapers and over half my Antimatter charges - while damage boosted - is now a core memory.

Watching a vanilla ship tank that kind of damage was a priceless spectacle. I wish I had recorded it.

I'm applauding with the saltiest tears I can manage.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hatter on May 12, 2023, 03:29:16 PM
Sindria feels fine. They're interesting as a midline faction that doesn't throw DEM at me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Troll on May 12, 2023, 03:36:44 PM
Yes, the Invictus is quite broken.

Coming back from manning that ship to an Onslaught was super weird. The Onslaught felt slow and clunky with bad flux management and less firepower.
The Invictus has higher top speed, better maneuverability and so much armor you face tank anything for a while.
Add in hullmods like Armored Weapon Mounts for the huge +10% armor, weapon durability and S-modded +10% fire rate and you get an even more monstrous Murder Brick.
Heavy Armor is actually a bad mod for this shop, too little additional armor for the cost.

Add in a converted hangar with 2 Xyphos wings and you even get passive rear defense and additional anti missile protection, useful when using the Lidar Array.
The turrets are full on Devastator Canons for maximum coverage and the main guns (as I already mentioned a while back) are 2 Hepha and 2 MK IX. Missiles are Locust SRM on autofire, to force shields up, pressure and finish off targets and eliminate small ships buzzing around.
This all just works so well.

Can be quite boring, but deadly. AI has trouble aligning shots from afar from experience, even worse with longer range weaponry like Gauss Canons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 12, 2023, 07:54:19 PM
Be careful what you ask for when it comes to nerfs—Alex is infamous for using a not a nerf bat, but rather a nerf sledgehammer. I'd rather something be overpowered than have Alex nerf smash it into irrelevance.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SpaceDrake on May 12, 2023, 08:05:12 PM
You do understand that the Invictus is literally not functioning correctly in RC8?

We can re-evaluate it when its armor is actually functioning as intended.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 12, 2023, 08:28:57 PM
Since Invictus has unusually high campaign costs (base burn 6, 4k crew), hope it stays a bit overpowered for its DP cost like Ziggurat is.  The campaign costs are brutal when I do not have unlimited resources.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 12, 2023, 08:33:30 PM
You do understand that the Invictus is literally not functioning correctly in RC8?

We can re-evaluate it when its armor is actually functioning as intended.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Radicaljack on May 12, 2023, 11:11:20 PM
If that needs to happen it'll be assessed after the bug fix not before. Alex isn't balancing things based off of bugs lol
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 12, 2023, 11:11:32 PM
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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 12, 2023, 11:28:17 PM
Light Dual Autocannon now has flux efficiency of 0.6, but regular Light Autocannon still has 0.8 - is that intended?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: smithney on May 12, 2023, 11:41:40 PM
Speaking of Invictus, it really did deliver on my expectations. Perhaps it feels a bit too literally invincible at the moment (my level 7 AI officer almost solo'd the Ziggy with it with zero player input and two escort frigates). However, the fact that the Dreadnaught feels and plays like a hi-tech-level-of-premium hull is a super flavorful detail. As in it's genuinely the most exotic tech Luddies are willing to use in their fleets and it strains your fleet economy as much as a hi-tech ship would. Not to mention it's also a better anchor to a hi-tech fleet than a Paragon, trading self-sufficiency for even more power to bust large targets. I'd set the benchmark for a balanced Invictus as still being able to solo Orbital Stations*, while it shouldn't be as good in fleet vs fleet settings as it is right now.

I'd also like to take this chance to talk a bit about the storylines:
Spoiler
The way I tackled the new content made me expect that the Volturn Conspiracy and the Knight Errant quests will be connected. As in after experiencing the pilgrimage to Volturn and the Terrorist Padawan quests (at the same time to boot), the bridge from the Pilgrimage quest to the Knight Errant really built my hopes up that I'm getting first row seats to LION'S DAN: Ludd's Bloody Revenge Story IN SPACETM. Instead I got a one-of escort quest to Volturn, an admittedly enjoyable stop-by to the Volturn Undergroundwater, and I got beat up in a stinky Mazalot pub (of all places!) for a toothless manchild. Bummer, I know. I get that Starsec's still in production, but please, David, Checkhov's bots like these feel really sad when they don't go boom. I'm sure your improbable drive to write good stories will deliver when the time comes.
[close]

*For clarity: Level 1s.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 12, 2023, 11:48:10 PM
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.

@smithney
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 13, 2023, 12:14:30 AM
the Gigacannon with its 10 seconds cooldown makes it borderline useless

The long chargeup also means that it misses quite a lot. It would feel a lot better at 5-6 seconds, for 333-400 DPS.

Just about every ship with a Gigacannon would be improved - often significantly - by replacing it with a Tachyon Lance.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 13, 2023, 12:19:22 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 13, 2023, 12:49:37 AM
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).

But it's 1000 range vs 700, if you give it the high scatter it has comparable range to the giga cannon while being way way better in every single way
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 13, 2023, 01:47:51 AM
(at three times the flux)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Shinr on May 13, 2023, 01:59:30 AM
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...

Isn't that the whole point, lore-wise, that Invictus is a relic of a begone age, built when Shields and Weapons that needed Shields to defend against where not a consideration yet?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: smithney on May 13, 2023, 02:17:13 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Spaceman_Spiff on May 13, 2023, 03:07:01 AM
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.

Reading the blogs, it seems like it's been a consistent design challenge. Lowtech/industry was planned around losing and restoring ships, while hightech/leadership was planned around maintaining a few very well-refined ships. A lot of industry skills are written around making the former viable, but it still looks like the more challenging option.

I do think the recent expansion of Rugged Construction helps. I used Gremlins pretty heavily in midgame, when losing AI frigates is a constant issue and replacing them easily isn't a common thing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 04:18:27 AM
For Invictus, I had one fight that was probably its weakest matchup among human factions, a 300k+ Diktat bounty with three Executors and a bunch of Sunders chock full of HEF-boosted HILs.  While it took time for the beams to melt armor, they did melt it in time, and I could not win that fight with Invictus in the end.  Replayed that fight with two Pegasus replacing Invictus with less difficulty.

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.

I like fighters on Invictus because it looks like Lidar shuts off all ballistic mounts aside from the hardpoints, leaving only missiles and fighters operational while the Lidar is active.  I tried using Gauss Cannons on the turrets next to the hardpoints, but the weapons would not fire while Lidar was active even when enemy was in Gauss range.  Because of this undocumented feature, I leave all six large ballistic turrets empty since Lidar shuts them off when I need them.  I rely on Lidar mode at every opportunity to burst down targets at long range.  For fighters, I use Xyphos and Sarissa to defend the ship from frigates since I cannot rely on guns not on the hardpoints.  Two Xyphos would be better anti-missile PD, but I like something when frigates keep trying to shoot down the dreadnought.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on May 13, 2023, 04:25:10 AM
Because of this undocumented feature, I leave all six large ballistic turrets empty since Lidar shuts them off when I need them.

Undocumented? It was mentioned in the post where the ship was announced.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 04:37:24 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Pratapon51 on May 13, 2023, 05:09:05 AM
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.

It says right there when hovering over [?] that the LIDAR Array system disables turrets.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Troll on May 13, 2023, 05:10:52 AM
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.

Except it says it disables turrets when activating it in the ships tooltip in the fleet screen.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 13, 2023, 05:11:37 AM
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.

EDIT: Btw would anyone be insane enough to NOT put CH? Even if you just take mining pods, it's only 10 OP. Honestly it seems the large missile mounts are not needed out of all, your officer probably won't have room for missile spec, and low OP pool means you need to cleverly put points and s-mods.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 05:28:26 AM
I read the description again in the Codex and on the [?] in refit, and it does mention it.  I remember reading the description quickly before and I totally missed that part of the description even though I remember the other parts of the description.

Firepower without Lidar is not remarkable enough to suffer reduced range (no ITU) on a slow ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 13, 2023, 05:31:52 AM
No ITU but the ship still does receive a small range boost (hate that it doesn't say how much).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 05:44:50 AM
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%.)

P.S.  It says so on the HUD while Lidar is off.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 09:08:49 AM
Hotfix is out!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 13, 2023, 09:22:21 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on May 13, 2023, 09:23:49 AM
Oh cool, fixes!

Quote
Pegasus: front-facing missile hardpoints are now medium instead of large
wat
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 09:30:59 AM
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.

I feel like it's a pretty conservative nerf. Definitely going to keep an eye on it, either way.


Quote
Pegasus: front-facing missile hardpoints are now medium instead of large
wat
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 think it was a choice between keeping 4 large missile slots and keeping FMR and the latter feels like more fun to me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: llama on May 13, 2023, 09:34:00 AM
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 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 13, 2023, 09:34:50 AM
Quote
Gigacannon and Kinetic Blaster should no longer be found in weapon caches etc during exploration

Almost missed this one. Good change since it could kind of spoil the surprise in some cases. But now I really feel there should be another way of getting those weapons except for hunting down LG fleets and hoping you get the weapons. Maybe if you have a commission and you're in good relations, someone could sell it to you, idk. Similar thing with LG skin variants. Maybe you truly shown your dedication and loyalty that you could flaunt their ships for them.

EDIT: Pegasus - Not gonna lie, I was sure it was just going to get hit with a DP nerf as was mentioned in another thread. I'm honestly fine with whatever, but I can see how it would look lame for both capitals to have identical missile mounts. Not that I mind it that much.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 09:39:05 AM
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.

I get that, trust me. Much as I'd like to have 4 larges, though, it's just too much, and when push comes to shove, I want to keep FMR. And trying some loadouts with the 2 med/2 large, it was actually pretty fun and felt like maybe more choices.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on May 13, 2023, 09:43:49 AM
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 nerf the basic attributes like flux, mobilty, shield effciency or DP?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 09:45:01 AM
I guess now I will put MIRVs at the rear facing mounts on Pegasus, which would remove Squalls.  I ought to see if that works.  In fleet battles, I use Squalls less and just jam on F to pump out double MIRVs.  At least long-lasting Cyclone spam is gone.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 09:45:40 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zr0Potential on May 13, 2023, 09:47:27 AM
Good work as always but yeah that mismatched slot size and sprite looks ugly ngl
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NotSoLoneWolf on May 13, 2023, 09:49:42 AM
Admittedly I haven’t reached the point of using the Pegasus yet so I have only heard second-hand of how busted it was. However, I am a bit disappointed at the downgrading of its hardpoints. I think giving it some actual weaknesses to balance out the missile strength would have been a route to possibly go. In particular, the Pegasus having the same shield efficiency (0.6) as REDACTED feels incredibly, insanely strong for a midline ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on May 13, 2023, 09:53:17 AM
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!

And I don't quite think the system is the defining feature, the TOO GOOD status is more like the feature...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 09:53:50 AM
If Pegasus needs more missile power back, maybe it can have some of the small or medium turrets changed to synergy or universal.  If Pegasus will keep medium missile hardpoints, maybe the mounts could be changed to universals.  (People would probably still put missiles in them.)

Hopefully, Pegasus will not lose max OP from the mount downgrade.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 09:56:21 AM
But, like I said, nerf its attributes is also a choice!

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.

Hopefully, Pegasus will not lose max OP from the mount downgrade.

No OP change, no.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 13, 2023, 10:02:12 AM
I really don't understand the point of the Pegasus with forward-facing medium missiles. The AI is bad at using fast missile racks, so isn't this just a worse Conquest for 50 DP now?

Edit to elaborate:
Pegasus vs Conquest:

50 vs 40 DP
Fast Missile Racks (AI barely uses) vs Maneuvering Jets (AI is great with)
17000 hull and 1500 armor vs 12000 hull and 1200 armor
50 vs 45 top speed (but maneuvering system that makes it actually better than cruisers)
500 vs 1200 flux dissipation
14000 vs 20000 flux capacity
0.6 vs 1.4 shield efficiency
2x medium hybrid, 2x medium missile, 2x large missile, 4x medium energy, 4x small energy, 4x medium ballistic vs 2x medium missile, 2x large missile, 4x large ballistic, 4x medium ballistic, 8x small energy
365 op vs 315 op and heavy ballistics integration

The Pegasus basically has better shields and more armor and hull and in exchange is less mobile and has bad flux stats, and has no large ballistics but has forward facing medium but not large missile mounts. And remember, it costs 10 DP more so you could have a Conquest and a destroyer instead. So I do not think it is that great of a ship with this change, much as I grew to love it.

It would have been preferable to make it 60 DP or give it any other system or even no system at all.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 13, 2023, 10:12:52 AM
Medium missles on hardpoints look ugly as hell. Couldn't it at least be the other way around, with large hardpoints and rear mediums?

Glad I got to enjoy the ship for whole 3 days before it got gimped into utter trash. The mercurial scythe doesn't favor moderation, it would appear. Serves me right for writing about how much I enjoy something, I guess.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Originem on May 13, 2023, 10:18:30 AM

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.


You could also tweak the 9 medium slots, these slots seem to tell players that you should use Pegasus as a long-range capitalship, which is somewhat conflict with the FMR which indicates the ship is good at burst damage.

Now it's away from its description: a ship with heavy missile-focus loadout. Now it seems to have everything, but nothing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 13, 2023, 10:19:05 AM
I never planned to use Pegasus in the first place, but in my opinion FMR is not an issue because it doesn't really affect Squalls. All other missiles are not really a problem(Hurricane was just nerfed and is explosive, Locust already fires almost continuously, torpedoes have short range and comparatively limited ammo) and the AI can only use FMR effectively with Pilums. Pegasus may be strong in player hands but show me a capital that can't... I don't think that alone warrants a nerf.

I'm also surprised that of all things the nerf targeted missiles - wasn't the design goal of the ship to have four large missile slots? If I were to nerf Pegasus I'd start with shaving off the three hardpoint medium ballistics.

On the other hand I think Invictus nerf is spot-on. Seems like the way to use the ship is to alternate between LIDAR and venting, and lowered flux stats should push people towards using more low tech weapons instead of Mjolnirs or Gauss. It will also leave more OP to actually use side mounts, Vast Hangar and the missiles.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 13, 2023, 10:21:16 AM
While I haven't actually used a Pegasus yet, I'm going to agree with others that I'd rather it keep the large missile slots and lose the ship system.

The question, then, is what to replace the system with. Borrowing the Gryphon's reload system is certainly an option, and having built-in extra ammunition would support the league's preference for laser warheads, with the laser torpedo ammo being so limited...

...But then again, I don't think the Gryphon's system is a good one in the first place. It should just be a hull mod like the Drover's B-Deck or the Missile Autoloader. (I mean, really, it's basically just an up-scaled missile autoloader, isn't it?)

Accelerated Ammo Feeder would be functional. So would Fortress Shield or Damper Field.

But I think what I'd suggest is a Remote Guidance system that adds maneuverability & speed to all launched missiles for a short duration. Because applying even a little bit of guidance to your reaper torpedos sounds like fun.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 13, 2023, 10:31:11 AM
Personally I would've preferred 4 larges over 2L + 2M and FMR.

Medium missles on hardpoints look ugly as hell. Couldn't it at least be the other way around, with large hardpoints and rear mediums?

Then you have double Cyclone plus FMR, in five system charges (3 base, +1 from Systems Expertise, +1 from recharge during the salvo) you can fire twelve reapers per mount, 96k explosive damage - close to 10k DPS sustained for a little over ten seconds.

Now I'm wondering how a single-charge capital-grade FMR with four larges would work out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on May 13, 2023, 10:33:43 AM
The Pegasus nerf is really odd. Why not just reduce the FMR to only 1 or 2 charges instead of 3. Then you still have both 4 large missiles and FMR.

Edit: and increase DP and decrease speed to be in line with paragon and Invictus which it very comparable power to.

Damn me and Prav had the same idea at the same time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 10:35:48 AM
I'll keep an eye on the Pegasus; want to see how it goes. 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.

(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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: glorygal on May 13, 2023, 10:44:22 AM
Well guess I'm shelving my Pegasus for now and putting a 2nd Executor in my fleet. At least it has 2 forward facing large energy mounts.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 13, 2023, 10:47:16 AM
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.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 10:50:26 AM
Fast Missiles Racks seem like new Reserve Deployment or especially original Damper Field.  Fine on some ships but overpowered on others.  Original Damper Field made Mora too durable, so the system got nerfed and made Centurion, the first user of the system, too fragile (system just made it stop firing while it took damage anyway).  Now, we have Damper Field that works better on small ships than on large ships.


P.S.  Yes, it would be nice if Diktat had a distinct hull instead of only a reskin of another.  Would not mind Executor being a new hull while current Executor gets renamed to Pegasus (LG) and be like the other custom reskins like the infamous Falcon (P) pirates use.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 10:54:47 AM
Hmm. Well, I'll definitely keep an eye on it for .1; some good points!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 13, 2023, 11:00:56 AM
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 really do not understand the fuss about Fast Missile Racks.

I re-ran that combat I posted of Pegasus taking out 3 sim Onslaughts under AI control twice (note: this is not particularly powerful, you can make a Conquest take out 2 sim Radiants too under AI control), keeping my eye on the FMR system the entire time. Do you know how many times the AI used this system? Twice. In three combats.

Now note that most of the ships in the game are under AI control. I don't think the Pegasus should be made a bad ship for the AI just because the player can exploit the system. If the player wishes to play an undefeatable deathbringer ship that can solo several capitals they already have Onslaught with PCLs and Ziggurat, or Radiants for that matter. So just make it 60 or 70 DP and it's fine, or change the system.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 13, 2023, 11:02:38 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 13, 2023, 12:06:37 PM
Really impressive how fast you and David push out those hotfixes; thank you very much for that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on May 13, 2023, 12:09:46 PM
Making the executor a separate hull definitely sounds like a good idea. Easier to adjust it.

If you decrease FMR to 1 charge then that's only 3 volleys (initial, 1 charge, system Ex) at a time rather than 6 (initial, 3 charges, system Ex, recharge) 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.
Another option is to make it cooldown based with a faster recharge so smaller burst but better sustained output.

Another idea is to leave it with only 2 large but gives it more medium missiles or to give it small missiles which won't benefit much from FMR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 12:42:33 PM
One idea for Pegasus is a built-in hullmod to add +100% to medium missiles or a medium version of the Missile Autoloader.

...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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vicegrip on May 13, 2023, 12:48:56 PM
This is first impressions but I agree with the others that the Pegasus nerf seems to be less than ideal. It's a "fast" battleship but still lacks a mobility system, so it can't kite or charge into battle, and now it lacks enough long range firepower to snipe effectively as well. Compared to the Conquest that has 2 large missiles, 2 medium missiles, and 2 large ballistics that can all be fired off at the enemy at the same time depending on fit, the damage output on the Pegasus just feels anemic even when FMR is taken into account. Most large missile systems that are both off-axis and make FMR worthwhile also have very limited ammo, which means even if the ship had enough spike damage to help destroy a capital sized enemy or two, it's going to expend most of it's ammo doing so and be left as a fat eagle for the rest of the fight.

I think distinctive slot layout is almost always going to leave a stronger impression on players than ship systems. One is visually identifiable and active at all times, and is factored heavily into player decisions on loadout by default, while the other is an extra special ability that's only going to be active and affecting ship behavior some of the time. "Four large missiles" was the defining characteristic of the Pegasus, while FMR pushed it into the territory of being too unbalanced. But take away the two front larges and you end up with a ship that can't outshoot the Onslaught or Paragon (or even the Executor when not fit by idiots), and can't outmaneuver or outshoot the Conquest, while also costing more than both the Onslaught and Conquest to deploy. Right now it's just not very good. FMR on the Pegasus is still very strong, don't get me wrong, but when the common AI counter to that ability is just to keep range and PD/tank the damage, that's not really very fun. The old build needed a balance pass, but this new version doesn't seem to be it.

Edit: If I had to choose, I'd much rather prefer a visually and design distinct 4 large missile battleship with a boring ship system such as Missile Autoforge rather than a 2 large + 2 medium missile battleship with FMR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 13, 2023, 12:49:55 PM
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.
That might look pretty cool.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 13, 2023, 01:00:21 PM
Noooo just make the Pegasus 60 dp, not only do the mediums look ugly, its too heavy a nerf imo. :'(
I will admit that i am biased because even though it was short lived, the Pegasus was one of the most fun ships I've used in a long time, and yes it was too strong but i think i would rather it have FMR have less charges or something.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 13, 2023, 01:21:02 PM
So what is the release/hot fix/version numbering process? Just wondering how to tell when the 0.96a release is locked down.

I did just get notified via an email about this latest hot-fix but didn't get one for the earlier 0.96a ones so I thought this would be the last one. But looking at the comments it seems there may be more hotfixes?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 13, 2023, 01:26:11 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on May 13, 2023, 01:41:25 PM
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.

Thanks,

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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 13, 2023, 01:50:30 PM
+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.
The power gap between AI spamming hurricanes on a low flux enemy in a formation behind a wall of PD and a player deleting capitals one after the other is too large, don't think the concept itself can work without one case being too far out of line.

Nice to see the Retribution/LP Manticore/Sarissa changes though (and all the fixes ofc).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 13, 2023, 01:56:30 PM
Huh, so the missing Codex entries weren't filled. I guess that will all be a part of the general Codex touch up in some future update.

On problematic ship systems: Some designs honestly back themselves into a corner by limiting the area where they can be used without being insane. Remember original Damper Field on Mora? Reserve Deployment on Drover? Now Pegasus with FMR just shows how some system can't work across all sizes because of simple math. FMR on a ship 2 medium missiles is strong but not the end of the world. Same system works exactly the same on a ship with (previously) 4 large missiles. The benefit gets exponentially more potent the bigger you go.

So I'd honestly make up a new system for Pegasus and go back to 4 larges. It's boring but a system which increases missile damage is strong but doesn't break the game. Someone suggested a system giving a big tracking boost to fired missiles, which might be pretty funny. I'd hate for the ship to become Conquest 1.5 but a bit more focused on missiles. FMR as it is just doesn't belong on capital level firepower imo, that's literally all to it. Such designs heavily limit the functionality of those ships, where you need to artifically make them weaker.

Just imagine a capital with Temporal Shell or Damper Field and it's easy to see how things can get out of control.

EDIT: If everything is going to stay the same, improve AI use of FMR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 13, 2023, 02:11:36 PM
I'll miss my 4 pilum LRM boat....it wasn't op at all with them , life is unfair.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 03:20:02 PM
+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.

Now, I think I will replace the back Squalls with MIRVs and rely on the fleet to put hard-flux on the enemy, then see if that works.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 03:38:24 PM
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?

The next release would be 0.96.1a - polish, refinements, and smaller features/content additions. Another hotfix for this one is possible, depending on what comes up. Right now I need to get a sense for how prevalent the Hesperus shrine bug is and if it alone warrants it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 13, 2023, 04:02:20 PM
I'll miss my 4 pilum LRM boat....it wasn't op at all with them , life is unfair.
Pilum flood is ded ;_;
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 13, 2023, 04:27:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 04:36:17 PM
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.

Not for this 0.96a, but it's a definite possibility for .1!

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.

Thank you! <3
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Buggie on May 13, 2023, 04:37:12 PM
One idea for Pegasus is a built-in hullmod to add +100% to medium missiles or a medium version of the Missile Autoloader.

This is such a fun idea, would certainly make fitting the ship a lot more interesting. I'd love if it increased the base number too so emr and missile spec would each give you 24 sabots so you'd have 72 on each slot, that would probably be even more broken than two large slots though XD.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on May 13, 2023, 05:59:46 PM
Ships:
Pegasus: front-facing missile hardpoints are now medium instead of large
Executor is unaffected

NOOOOOOOOOO! ! !

EDIT: Fastest major nerf as far as I can retell.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Bummelei on May 13, 2023, 06:20:45 PM
0.96 update is great.
Especially new lore on Luddites, now they are much more than just space rednecks with hammers. The same goes to Sindriots. Love it.

But, pardon my French, the Pegasus changes are complete ass. It's just another Conquest. And as mentioned above, four large slots were an integral part of his identity. Increase in DP, system nerf (or even a complete replacement), everything is better than what was done. It's just sad. Alex, i hope you will change your mind.

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?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on May 13, 2023, 06:37:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 06:42:45 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 13, 2023, 06:45:43 PM
Just do the hard but best option: make a new ship system. The Pegasus is the freakin midline battleship, its worth it, your dev time and resources won't be wasted on it.

Keep the 4 large missiles, like the other guy said its become iconic already. Pegasus needs to have them.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 13, 2023, 06:48:49 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 13, 2023, 06:57:26 PM
It doesn't need to be an amazing or even powerful system since 4 large missiles are already amazing.

Just spitballing, how about a system that enhances the allied ships around it in some way? Allied missiles?

Or something like Histidine said, a system that in some way disrupts or impairs point defense of enemy ships?

A system when used that "hacks" nearby enemy missiles and causes them to target the very enemies that fired them or something?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TheLaughingDead on May 13, 2023, 06:59:12 PM
I simply must beat a dead horse and toss my two cents in regarding the Pegasus: I personally find myself agreeing with those that insist on four missile mounts. However, I disagree with the idea of removing Fast Missile Racks. It seems to me like the ship's entire identity hinges on its overwhelming capability with missiles, so the large missile array and the ship system centered around boosting missiles are equally important to the identity of the ship. FMR isn't just a flat missile ammo buff, but is an active ability that must be built around and used with some thought, like not bringing low-ammo missiles since they'd all go way too quickly, bringing an officer with Systems Expertise, saving charges for dangerous targets, etc etc.
And beyond identity, as a player, playing with a missile boat is just a lot of fun. There is something incredibly satisfying about watching a chunk of your fleet's DP focus its firepower on a single target and watch it be reduced to ash, and capitals are supposed to be the epitome of that: concentrated force. DP focused without the herding of artificially intelligent cats  :-*

So here's what I say: change the Pegasus' other stats. Pull some different levers, unrelated to its identity. Make it squishy, slow, or otherwise anemic. Gut its non-missile weaponry. Give it no slots for PD. Make all of its large missiles face backward. Increase its DP to 60, or even make it a special one-off ship like the Zig and make it 80 (missiles are of comparable power and we lack unique ships like the Zig, after all). Really any or all of the above. If FMR and four large missiles is too much after all that, I think it would be testament to a larger issue at hand. After all, a player can pay 56 DP for four large missiles and FMR via the Venture (P), which is slow, somewhat squishy, lacking in other stats, etc. I have heard no qualms with the latter's balancing.

All those levers aside, if a more drastic change must be made, then I could see switching the ship system. I just think most ship systems to do with missile ammo would be pretty generic (like Gryphon's missile reload) or have too small an impact to really give the ship its own flair (compared to how important, say, Targeting Feed is to Heron efficacy).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 07:03:48 PM
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.

Overall, DEMs have been a disappointment once player stops fighting early-game pirates and starts fighting stronger enemies like major factions that have stronger defenses.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on May 13, 2023, 07:32:55 PM
Clearly the way to go with the pegasus is to bring back the 4 large missiles and give it HEF like its brother ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 13, 2023, 07:42:47 PM
Clearly the way to go with the pegasus is to bring back the 4 large missiles and give it HEF like its brother ;D
Would not mind a system to buff the non-missile weapons to bring them up to snuff for a while.

If it has to be about missiles, maybe have it launch missiles that are faster and more maneuverable like what ECCM does to missiles, but better.  Or maybe a system that hardens missiles so that they are nearly impossible to intercept.  Or maybe something silly like provide infinite ECM for a short while so that the enemy eats -10% weapon range no matter how high their ECM is (take that Ordos!).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 13, 2023, 07:46:50 PM
I think the biggest problem with Fast Missile Racks is it is 2.5 to 4 times stronger than AAF, and 5 to 8 times stronger than HEF, and 5 to 8 times stronger than Targeting Feed.  And with Systems Expertise, Fast Missile Racks can recover back to peak capability in ~27 seconds.

Fire, use charge and 1 second cooldown, Fire, use 2nd charge and 1 second cooldown, Fire, use 3rd charge and 1 second cooldown, Fire, use 4th charge and 1 second cooldown, Fire.

That's 5 salvos in 4 seconds.  If you're using 15 second refire time missiles, like say Hurricanes, you just dropped 5 salvos in 4 seconds, and 7 salvos in 15 seconds (recharge 2 more charges), compared to the usual 1 salvo in 4 seconds, or 2 salvos in 15 seconds.

So in terms of a 15 second window, you've done +250% damage (7/2 = 3.5).  In a 4 second window you've done +400% (5/1 =5).

In a 5 second window, AAF increases DPS by +100%.  In a 3-9 second window, HEF increases DPS and hit strength by +50%.

Given the objective is to get missiles on target, there's no real cost to using Fast Missile Racks under human control since you can predict how many missiles you'll actually need. What keeps Fast Missile Racks in check is its typically the secondary weapon system, not the primary. 

+400% effective burst damage strikes me as really hard to balance.  Even +250% over 15 seconds seems kind of hard to balance.  Either a missile battleship has enough missiles to kill several enemy battleships over the course of a battle, and Fast missile racks lets you dump them in bursts of +400%, or it doesn't at which point Fast Missile Racks is applying to the secondary weapons loadout and you run out after the first one or two.

I know it's boring, but if you changed to a system like Charged Missiles or something, that dealt an additional +50% damage (maybe deal half the missile's damage as a separate energy damage instance just to be different - except frag would also be frag) for the next set of missiles launched, it'd be much easier to balance, since it'd be in line with the other damage systems damage buffs.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 13, 2023, 08:51:53 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PureTilt on May 13, 2023, 09:22:58 PM
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.

Simple make it launch missiles which launch decoy flares.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: llama on May 13, 2023, 09:30:23 PM
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 feel like the game generally tries not to incentivise one subset of weapons in a given mount so much, and this would narrow build diversity a bit.

But on the subject of the large DEMs, it seems like the consensus is they're less powerful than the top tier large missiles right now? Maybe they've been held back by having to be balanced against a single ship that can fire eight or more at once.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 13, 2023, 09:43:03 PM
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 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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: tovarichcookie on May 13, 2023, 10:35:56 PM
Losing the 4 large missile slots on the pegasus hurts like hell! The massive quintuple missile barrage burst is a bit broken, but hell, it was FUN!

But if fast missile racks make the ship broken, some of the previous suggestions like teleporting flares or super ECCM sound like great and fun ideas. But whatever it takes, having 4 large missile slots is key to its identity and gives it an immediate, recognizable and distinct feel compared to all the other battleships.

My personal suggestion would be to make its active ability project a shield bubble to all missiles in flight while active, making them not only much more resistant to PD fire, but also block incoming damage from other weapons so you can use it as a temporary tanking ability for your fleet. Hope to see quad large missile pegasus back soon!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 13, 2023, 10:49:58 PM
In the spirit of continuing the dead-horse beating, it doesn't really need a fancy new system to stand out or even a system that has anything to do with missiles to stand out.

It would have a fine unique identity as the only ship with 4 large missiles even if the system was Active Flare Launcher. 4 large missiles + Active Flare Launcher would imho be a more interesting and unique ship than 2 medium + 2 large + Fast Missile Racks.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 13, 2023, 10:58:48 PM
I liked the idea of a ship system that gives torpedoes guidance and improves tracking of already guided missiles.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 13, 2023, 11:06:44 PM
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? 
This way you can still have your 4 big missiles, but you can't destroy a fleet of capitals like before, because you have to rely on the ship system to rearm them (and you can balance how many times you want players to fire those missiles, by adjusting the ship system itself, its cooldown/flux generation etc). 

This has the interesting side effect of making missiles already limited by ammo regenerations like pilums, better, thus making a support pegasus build with 4 large pilums not just a meme but something that might actually be interesting (otherwise one would never use a capital for that reason). 
And of course, it would become the prime candidate for the[REDACTED] missile weapons as well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 13, 2023, 11:34:08 PM
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.

Omnimissile. Combat ability to pick missile types in a fixed mount. It allows you to break the spell and to have virtual mounts what are not affecting DPS.

I mean the true problem of any pure missile build is what you need several missile types to do different jobs. And the only way to get about it is to have several mounts. But if number of mounts is becoming too high player can and will exploit it by spamming strike ordnance. So you need the ability to switch missile types on the fly and limit the number of mounts.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Delta_of_Isaire on May 13, 2023, 11:44:31 PM
Review time! These are genuinely my first impressions of the new weapons, from messing around with them in sim battles via devmode > edit variants.

TL;DR:
> Sarissa has too much DPS. Latest patch fixes this.
> Kinetic Blaster and Gigacannon are very niche.
> Mining Blaster is awesome.
> Gorgons are awesome, lethal to Frigates.
> Hydra by contrast is underwhelming. The submunitions need higher speed.
> Medium mount Dragonfires are insane. They might need a longer refire delay.
> Large mount Dragonfire by contrast is a big letdown. It needs burst size 2.

SARISSA
>>> UPDATE: Latest patch reduces flux stats of Sarissa to balancing their DPS.
4x Sarissa on a Legion adds an impressive hailstorm of LAC rounds. Very good at taking out Frigates (including 2 Omen) and Destroyers attempting to flank the mothership. The Cannistar Flak is lethal against incoming fighters, and appears not to do friendly fire damage which is probably for the best. However the Sarissa are completely incapable of stopping Salamanders or things like Atropos strikes from Dagger bombers from hitting their mothership, so their capacity to function as anti-missile PD is limited. Well, that's just more obvious synergy with Xyphos I guess. Sarissa do hard-counter Piranha bombers though.

For the Legion, 2x Sarissa + 2x Xyphos + Defensive Targeting Array is a very strong defensive support package, that also synergizes well with the Legion's own weapons. Case in point: with this loadout and no other weapons, I could Burn Drive my legion into the face of the SIM Eagle (with its new shiny loadout) and watch as the fighters proceeded to pick it apart. Then I did the same thing with SIM Aurora. And then with the SIM Astral. Now of course Kinetic + Ion damage will cripple anything. But the raw DPS of the Sarissa is impressive. And killing an Astral with what is essentially just 4 fighter wings is kinda funny.
[close]
KINETIC BLASTER
They're really cool! High damage per shot which means the armor penetration is actually kinda good. 600 range is the Energy weapon standard which I guess is fine. The main balance lever used here is high flux cost: 1.5 flux/damage. That is terrible compared to Ballistic Kinetic weapons and notably worse than the Minipulser. Very much in line with a Heavy Blaster, which I guess accounts for the 'blaster' part of the name. The big downside of such high flux cost is it hurts flux efficiency against hull, which means these weapons are really only good against the defensives they hit for 2x damage. And the big Elephant in the room is the Pulse Laser which has 0.8 flux/damage now. The Kinetic Blaster has 1.5 / 2 = 0.75 flux/damage against shields which is barely better than the Pulse Laser. Now Kinetic Blaster has a hit strength of 125 against armor compared to 100 for Pulse Laser. However with the Pulse Laser literally firing 3 shots for every 1 Kinetic Blaster shot, and for less flux to boot... I am really not seeing the appeal of the Kinetic Blaster. It is really only good on ships with plenty of flux to spare. Which is kind of a thing for High Tech ships anyway so it *might* work out. The DPS per mount is definitely higher for Blasters compared to Pulse Lasers.

On balance, I can't help but feel that combining a Heavy Blaster with Pulse Lasers is better overall than combining a Heavy Blaster with Kinetic Blasters. Preliminary SIM battles appear to confirm this. And fact remains Minipulsers are just better if the range drop to 500 isn't an issue, which it shouldn't be for fast High Tech ships.
[close]
MINING BLASTER
It pounces on armor! On autofire it preserves charges vs shields, but will unload a barrage as soon as the enemy drops its shields. And that barrage HURTS. I can totally see this being a more flux-friendly alternative to a Heavy Blaster. Very impressive. And seeing another use for Expanded Magazines is nice too. Particularly now that Burst PD is fixed to be efficient with Expanded Magazines as well. My new standard weapon loadout for High Tech may very well be Burst PD + 1 Mining Blaster + Pulse Lasers now.
[close]
BURST PD / HEAVY BURST LASER
Speaking of Burst PD: I love how it conserves its charges for missiles and fighters, not wasting them on the shields of enemy ships.
[close]
IR AUTOLANCE
The perfect anti-fighter weapon. As long as enemy fighters come 2 wings at a time. Because after that the charges have run out and the sustained DPS is TERRIBLE. Expanded Magazines is an absolute must-have for this. At least 8 OP per Autolance isn't too expensive, so you can afford the Magazines if you have 2 or 3+ Autolances.

This weapons 100% feels like it was designed for Midline ships, which I guess it was so that works out.

Also a very good weapon for killing a lone Frigate attempting to flank you. Fire a couple Sabots to drop the shields and then IR Autolance it to death. And it might be the most reliable way to kill unshielded pirate Hounds. Again, Expanded Magazines is absolutely required to make Frigate-sniping work.

That's what this is, isn't it: the perfect anti-Pirate weapon. Kills those Hounds, Cerberi, Mudskipper Mk.IIs and Buffalo Mk.IIs at long range without hassle.

Addendum: These comments were based on SIM battles with an Eagle with 3 Autolances. The Autolance definitely benefits from being used in numbers, because the burst capacity of a single Autolance is underwhelming. Oh, and I suppose the Point Defense skill will be good for the +50% damage to fighters. Should make a noticeable difference.
[close]
GIGACANNON
This thing is surprisingly light on flux usage. Reminiscent of a Hellbore Cannon. How is this thing going to compete with the Plasma Cannon though? Large Energy mounts are scarce and ships that have them generally can afford the flux cost of a few Plasma Cannons. And Plasma Cannons are good enough armor-crackers for the majority of targets, so why bother adding a Gigacannon? Paragon may be one good candidate. I tested Paragon with 2x turreted Plasma Cannon, 2x Gigacannon in the front hardpoints, 2x Heavy Needlers in the universals and 2x Graviton Beams in the front mediums. It feels like a good fit in terms of total flux/sec, and it certainly performs.

Aside from Paragon though, who is going to use a Gigacannon effectively? Champion? Champion can afford the flux cost of a Tachyon Lance so I don't see the Gigacannon being used on it. The Gigacannon is definitely a very niche weapon.
[close]
GORGON DEM SRM
An Energy damage missile. That would make it an opener if it weren't soft-flux damage. Still, a large enough volley could overwhelm the shields on a Frigate and kill it outright. Sure enough: an Eradicator with 5 Gorgons can alpha-strike the SIM Lasher with 2x5 missiles. And with 4 capacity a piece it can then do it again, even without EMR. And even the Dev SIM Tempest dies easily to 3x5 Gorgons. Next I tried the Hammerhead, which was fried with 4x5 missiles.

There should be obvious synergy with Sabots here, so let's try 2x Sabots + 3x Gorgons on the Eradicator. OK, turns out enemy AI is quite willing to armor-tank the Sabots, but equipping a single Mauler solves that. Result: there is actually very little synergy. You still need to expend half your Gorgons to kill a Hammerhead. Moreover, if you overload an enemy ship then you might as well be using Harpoons or Atropos.

So yeah the strike potential of Gorgons is very real, if you use them en masse or against small targets.
[close]
GORGON SRM POD
Like the SRM, but bigger and better? Actually no, because with 10 second refire delay and a burst size of only 2 it is more difficult to achieve a large enough volley. Let's take a Legion to experiment with because I like the Legion and 5 medium missiles is quite good. A volley of 2x5 Gorgons is large enough to kill a Lasher or Tempest. And the ammo capacity is great: 12 volleys with EMR. You can keep dropping Frigates left and right for a while. Next I tried the Hammerhead again. And while a single volley isn't enough to fry it, then 2nd volley actually comes quickly enough to finish the job.

So is there a weakness? Yes - good point defense. Individual Gorgons are quite fragile, and Flak in particular will chew them up easily. SIM Assault Enforcer for example holds them off quite well. The claim in the description that it "initiates beyond the range of the heaviest expected PD coverage" is either a flat-out lie or written by someone with very conservative expectations.

Also, Phase Skimmer on e.g. the Medusa is a very effective defense against DEMs because they don't retarget after going off.

My bottom line: Gorgons are more dangerous to Frigates and light Destroyers than Harpoons, Atropos or Locusts ever were. And they don't even need ECCM for that.
[close]
GAZER DEM SRM
Very good ammo capacity at 6, with 10 second refire delay. That means Gazers remain available for longer and against more targets than most other small missiles, which is great. At first I was worried that these long-lasting DEMs might struggle to stay on target, however the missiles continue to maneuver after their beam starts, keeping it nicely in range. Even against Frigates.

So forget about pairing Gorgons with Sabots - pairing them with Gazers looks more promising! On the other hand, Gazers feel like they pair well with continuous-fire HE weapons like the HIL, or simply Heavy Mortars. Or, indeed, Mining Blasters. Weapons like Maulers and Hellbore are too bursty.
[close]
GAZER SRM POD
Same as the small mount version, really. A good amount of ammo and a sensible burst size of 2. A little bit like the Kinetic variant of Annihilator Pods as a pressure weapon. The refire delay of 10 seconds is such that a 2nd volley starts beaming as soon as the 1st volley stops so the pressure is nicely continuous.

So I reckon the choice between using Gazers or Gorgons comes down to what your targets are. Against smaller ships the Gorgons look better, in combination with hard-flux Kinetic guns, while against larger ships I would choose Gazers paired with HE guns.

Gazers have a listed range of only 1200, however their beam also has quite some range so you can actually fire the Gazers effectively from more than 1200 units away. But of course autofire and the AI won't do that. Guns on capital ships can have quite a bit more than 1200 range so this does come up. It means aggressive AI behavior - be it from Aggressive AI or Eliminate orders - will come in handy here to close that range gap and bring the Gazers in autofire range.
[close]
DRAGONFIRE DEM TORPEDO
Two ammo for twelve OP. That better be a hell of a munition. So 3000 soft Energy damage... That's quite a bit less than a Reaper. But it supposedly makes up for that with tracking ability and being less susceptible to PD. Well, let's test it!

OK so the graphics are definitely cool which is worth something. These things are also definitely underwhelming against shielded targets, unless used in large enough numbers. Notably, as with the Gorgons claim, the Dragonfire's claim of bypassing PD is not entirely accurate. Cruisers and especially Capitals with Flak can and will shoot down Dragonfires. SIM Onslaught in particular will just make an entire volley of Dragonfires disappear.

Fact remains though: a Legion firing a volley of 5 Dragonfires can just instantly delete a Hammerhead. Or any other Destroyer, except the Medusa which lives thanks to Phase Skimmer. That's a pretty powerful ability, and there is very little defense against it. Although the missiles are kinda slow, so backing away immediately might save you.

The refire delay of 5 seconds is also short enough that you can stack volleys on a target quit effectively. The abovementioned Legion with EMR can carry 5x4 Dragonfires, enough to delete SIM Eagle or even SIM Dominator, and nearly enough to kill SIM Conquest. Add a bit of hard-flux pressure from equipping actual guns, and the Legion can just Burn Drive up to the Conquest, drop 4 volleys of Dragonfires and kill the Conquest in the space of 30 seconds. Its really the short refire delay that lets you do that.

And you don't even need to rely on the Dragonfires alone: combined with Kinetic guns they are even better. Build up some hard flux on the target, launch a volley of Dragonfires. The enemy AI sees them coming and will refuse to drop shields, very reliably causing an overload under the Kinetic fire. And then the Dragonfires hit. Said Legion can delete like 3-4 Cruisers in a row with this tactic.

Dragonfires are dangerous...
[close]
DRAGONFIRE TORPEDO POD
OK I was genuinely expecting this to be burst size 2. But it is single shot, and to add insult to injury it has a longer refire delay than the medium mount version. It literally just has 2.5x the ammo capacity for 2.5x the OP cost. I mean, how is this not outclassed by the Hurricane?
[close]
JACKHAMMER
It's a medium sized Hammer Barrage! That doesn't fire in a spread pattern! The ammo capacity is atrocious though at just two bursts. At least at 8 OP you kinda get what you pay for. Let's call it thematically appropriate.
[close]
HYDRA MDEM LAUNCHER
The final DEM. A DEM version of the Hurricane. With 1 fewer submunition and a different damage type. Similar spreadfire pattern, similar benefit from ECCM by the looks of it. Best I can tell, this is like a large mount version of the Gorgon. It even has the same refire delay. A Frigate killing weapon. Although it really does need ECCM to reliably catch Frigates.

So where a base Legion with 5 Gorgon pods can kill a Lasher in 1 volley and has (with EMR) 12 volleys, a Legion (XIV) with two Hydras needs 2 volleys to kill a Lasher, but has 30 ammo meaning 15 Lashers. And that 2nd volley is overkill.

So I have two complaints about the Hydra. First, the submunitions do not hit the target simultaneously, which gives time for soft flux to dissipate and thus reduces effectiveness against shields. Second, while the first-stage Hydra has the same speed as Gorgons, the submunitions are noticeably slower, which makes them less capable of hitting fast Frigates.

And anti-Frigate duty is definitely what Hydras are for. I mean, with a hit strength of 500 Energy damage coming from multiple angles you aren't going to effectively punch through the better-armored Destroyers. Keep in mind this is less than the hit strength of Gorgons at 800. And Hurricanes with ECCM can hit Destroyers well enough, and with HE damage and more focused targeting will hurt more.

So Hydras are cute and they have good ammo and the OP cost of 20 is cheap enough to make tacking on ECCM not unreasonable. But the damage potential is a bit underwhelming. Definitely more of a support weapon than an assault weapon.

And of course the AI will happily shoot at the first unfluxed enemy it spots at maximum range, for little to no effect.
[close]
PILUM LRM CATAPULT
I love Pilums. Always have, and especially in 0.95 where they actually became good. For double the OP cost the Catapult launches double the Pilums, but as a bonus it has a shorter refire delay and regenerates ammo significantly faster. The downside is that the initial ammo lasts only half as long.

It's just a solid weapon.
[close]


I might do the new ships next.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 14, 2023, 01:32:31 AM
I heard that the gigacannon goes pretty well on a sunder.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 14, 2023, 01:34:39 AM
How is medium Dragonfire strong? You have just 2 shots, that's 4 with EMR... Sure it's homing but that barely makes an impact in fights unless your ship has 3-4 of these. And even then I see myself using other choices which will last longer than 2 minutes into a battle.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 01:37:53 AM
Due to the outpouring of emotion observed in this thread, I made a support badge for everybody who wants to observe a period of mourning for the 4 missile slot Pegasus. RIP!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 14, 2023, 01:46:38 AM
I dunno how that 4 LMM Pegasus came into existence in the first place. But since the scrapping of it and forgetting that it was is not an option can we just use the original version as an non-recoverable boss ship? And scrap the current version because, sorry, but 50 point superbattleship is supposed to have some character. And there is none.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 14, 2023, 01:53:14 AM
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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: tovarichcookie on May 14, 2023, 02:19:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NEmergix on May 14, 2023, 02:24:10 AM
poor poor pegasus :(

now it has the exact same missile slots as a conquest ! makes 0 sence ...

just put it at 60 dp and nerf the regen rate of the system charges, end of story.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: smithney on May 14, 2023, 02:29:57 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 14, 2023, 02:35:50 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vind on May 14, 2023, 02:41:46 AM
     Fast missile racks make ship OP as torpedo/whatever spammer - so capping its usage to or swapping for some new subsystem is more logical if not easiest way to fix the problem. Maybe just nerf fast misisle racks to work only on missiles but not torpedoes as torpedoes is the worst case scenario. Personally i like the idea of moving forward missile racks back or change their direction sideways so they dont face forward direction making them less usable as torpedo mounts.
   
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on May 14, 2023, 03:04:29 AM
If it is the FMR breaking the game balance on pegasus, replacing it sounds more reasonable than eliminating the unique 4 large missile design. FMR is a boring system IMO, to be honest.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 03:12:43 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on May 14, 2023, 03:32:36 AM
I will say I'm not 100% convinced yet that Fast Missile Racks + 4 Large Missiles is all that game-breaking considering how it seems to have been a player-only strategy and there are plenty of other player-only ways to overpower the game. Yes there were a lot of players talking about how good it is but that's common with any new shiny toy. Having said that, I haven't really tried it much myself though so maybe I'll change my mind once I get to try it.

If FMR + 4 LM is the issue, though, maybe it's just a matter of adjusting how FMR works. It seems like part of the issue is that its flux cost is way too low; 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 Missiles. So perhaps it's a matter of changing the skill so that the flux cost depends on the size of mounted weapons (for example, each Small costs 2%, each Medium costs 5%, each Large costs 10% of base capacity) or is a flat rate (for example, each Small costs 200 flux, each Medium costs 500 flux, each Large costs 1000 flux). This way it won't cripple the other ships that have FMR, but the player using Pegasus will end up with full flux real fast when using multiple charges at once.

Also, I think it's odd that the Pegasus has 0.6 shield efficiency, which is usually the province of good high-tech ships, and when it relies on missiles for a lot of its damage instead of brawling. That makes it too easy to survive; something between 0.8 and 1.0 would probably be better I think.

Along somewhat similar lines, I don't see why Invictus should have the same turn rate as the Onslaught with much better accel/decel and top speed. I think it'd be better if some or all of its max speed/accel/turn rates were decreased to make it more ponderous of a vessel, befitting its super long weapon range.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lenor on May 14, 2023, 03:36:22 AM
Quote
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

Now that is cool! Already tried the pirate deal when I found a great planet right next to a pirate base so it just made sense. I was also friendly with the pirates, I knew this would pay off eventually!

Quote
Increased immediate effect of gaining Kanta's Protection to 100 points (was: 50)

Still need to try this one out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 14, 2023, 03:47:06 AM
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 Missiles
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 03:58:57 AM
Oh, good point, it is weird that the Pegasus has Paragon/Radiant -level shields! Why? Give it Conquest shields and Retribution grade hull and that will go a long way to balancing the ship with its original design while also fitting in better with midline ships. From using it for Ordo farming it is not just the missiles but also the ability to tank significant damage on shields that make it strong.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Spaceman_Spiff on May 14, 2023, 04:02:11 AM
Found some (potential) issues. Not sure if they're new or old, but at least some of them seem unintentional.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 14, 2023, 04:03:18 AM
Invictus really doesn't need even more nerfs, try it out now, it' fine. Used it in a big bounty and I took a ton of damage in the end. It gets scary when your hull drops and you have no way of stopping non missile shots.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 14, 2023, 04:12:13 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 04:14:15 AM
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.

Yes, but why should it have a ton of shield HP in addition to missile spam (back when it had 4x LM)? Gryphon and Conquest don't.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 14, 2023, 04:16:27 AM
Because it's a relatively slow battleship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 14, 2023, 04:17:39 AM
Oh, good point, it is weird that the Pegasus has Paragon/Radiant -level shields! Why?

Because it has flux capacity of only 14,000, which is borderline cruiser territory. I even remember Alex explaining this in the devblog. Although I generally agree, a long-range missile spammer shouldn't get extra shield efficiency to make up for its bad flux pool. Look at the Gryphon, it has destroyer-level flux but still the base midline 0.8 shield efficiency because you are not supposed to run it face first into things(and if you do you better have a plan)

Nerfing Pegasus' tank would be another way to nerf torpedo alpha strikes, which I assume is the main problem with it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 04:20:00 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 14, 2023, 04:23:03 AM
Because the intended gameplay is tanky line ships with the same cookie-cutter mix of kinetic/HE long-range weapons and ITU. You aren't supposed to do alpha missile strikes, that would actually be fun and we can't have that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 14, 2023, 04:25:21 AM
When you deal 10k DPS from two mounts your shield efficiency doesn't really matter all that much. You could set it to 2.5, there's still a problem.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 04:29:13 AM
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. Novas for example would wreck it then, while currently it can tank their fire on its shield. For a playership FMR has exploitable potential, but why is that a problem when we already have ships that can solo fleets under player control?

Another thing is, does it really need 1500 armor. It has a weak point at its rear but is relatively durable. You might make it die faster if flanked.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 14, 2023, 04:30:09 AM
If the AI can't use FMR the AI needs to be improved and the problem remains. It's not an esoteric system, just needs another "yes, hit it" logic branch.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 14, 2023, 04:32:57 AM
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 wouldn't say that I liked that specific change to the Pegasus, because neither have I nor do I plan to play the ship. Which has two reasons:
1. I still really enjoy the early game, so before any kind of battleship.
2. Even when I get to that part, I won't touch a ship with a focus on missiles, because I dislike missiles as a whole (and so do have some kind of satisfaction to every missile related nerf). I'd really like to see all missiles nerfed to such an extent, that they only fulfill a support role and are always second place to the main damage dealers: ballistic- and energy-weapons. But if Alex wants to keep his holy trinity of arms, regarding to missile-focused-ships I'll only check if the AI can handle them and be useful and that's all I care there.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 04:44:58 AM
If Pegasus is more vulnerable, then it should not be called a battleship.

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.

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.  Otherwise, buff Conquest to be the battleship (more durability, burn 7) and demote Pegasus into the battlecruiser (burn 8, more speed, mobility system) or extra large missile platform.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 14, 2023, 04:53:06 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 04:57:42 AM
No, Conquest is mobile and has less firepower than Old Pegasus and more than New Pegasus (barring player FMR use).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cycerin on May 14, 2023, 05:45:36 AM
Crazy how much discussion this one ship is generating lol

How about 3 large missile, with one in a central turret, for the Pegasus. The displaced medium hybrids could move off to the sides on two new turret bastions. The large missile turret would put Reapers on a pivot so it retains the killyness while also allowing loadouts that spam one type of large missile. I guess this would also make it similar to an XIV legion though so IDK

FMR should go but I have no good idea for what to replace it with. 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 06:17:59 AM
Things I did not notice from the latest hotfix notes are boosted baseline stability and accessibility on colonies (and spaceport).  Makes it a real reward if player can prevent hostile activity from building up at all.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 14, 2023, 06:19:01 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Troll on May 14, 2023, 06:22:05 AM
Concerning the changes to the Invictus, they seem fine.
The ship is not as nigh un-breakable as it was but is still very much the definition of a tank and it overheats a little bit faster.
Overall I feel it has become a proper ship for the DP, before it was too tough.
I'd like it if the Canister Flaks had a bit more range as it's hard to properly calculate the time for detonation while in the heat of battle.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 06:38:07 AM
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.

Currently, I rely on officers with Missile Spec on Pegasus, then I hijack their ship to spam FMR and their extra missiles because my flagship does not have either Combat capstone.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 14, 2023, 06:42:22 AM
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).
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on May 14, 2023, 06:46:28 AM
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.

Right, and hence a way to balance it would be to make it cost a non-trivial amount of flux. That way if you really want to spam multiple FMR charges you could, but then you'll be vulnerable after that. The exact system or amount could come from playtesting. Just that it would need to scale properly to the Pegasus as well as the other ships which use the same system. Could also make it something like, 10% of base flux if frigate, 20% if destroyer, 30% if cruiser, 50% if capital or something, i.e. the amount depends on ship size. There are a lot of possibilities.

This makes it so that spamming FMR is still an option available to the player, but then it comes with the downside of making the ship vulnerable for some time afterward. So it becomes part of the decision of whether or not the player should spend flux for extra damage, on a weapon type where usually no flux is used (i.e. since missiles are usually flux-free).

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.

Pegasus should live up to the name of battleship, not just firepower (whether missiles or big guns) but durability too.

It already does. That's the problem. Its shields can absorb more damage than every non-Automated ship except the Paragon, 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), and it has a lot of long-range offensive power to boot. It also has good mobility for a capital ship as well.

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?

Yup that can certainly work too. It seems like the problem is that players can spam multiple FMR charges too easily, in which case, the simple solution is to decrease FMR charges and/or increase how long it takes to recharge.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 06:48:56 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 14, 2023, 06:49:57 AM
On a non-Pegasus note, fought two Pather fleets simultaneously today(to make things go faster) and damn they almost broke the line. These new SO Eradicators don't screw around, it definitely feels like you're fighting bunch of fanatics.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Catalina on May 14, 2023, 07:26:48 AM
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.

Cutting its armor or its shield to that point would actually make it a worse conquest, with slighty more missiles but slighty less ballistic firepower for 10 more dp. Since the conquest is already a glass cannon, the pegasus has to be an anchor with good defensive stats. 1500 armor feels right for a midline battleship, it's 250 less armor than an onslaught when the champion has 250 less armor than the dominator as well.

Some people already suggested it, but a decoy flare laucher system would be interesting on the pegasus. Let's imagine it lauches a mirv that deploys all those flares, then the player could use this system at the key point of the battle to successfully land all its missiles. Not to mention that would look way cooler than fmr it could also be used in synergy with allied fighters.

If the pegasus even needs another nerf on top of this system, just put the flare laucher in place of one of the large missile mount. The ship is already asymmetric, and this change looks like something the league, or the cruiser school, could do. On those heavily specialised ships, practicality and combat efficiency prevail over pure aesthetic considerations. See the heron and gryphon.

Though I understand such a system would require a lot of work for sure, and cutting fmr to one charge definitely feels like a much simpler way to balance this ship.



Alternatively make it spaw gremlins, loaded with nothing but decoy flare lauchers, right in front of ennemy ships! The pegasus is so wide it can probably hold some of them, and they are certainly not much more complicated to engineer than hydra dem.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 07:29:13 AM
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.
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.

I will give that Conquest has less armor and shield numbers than Pegasus.

Quote
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.

Invictus feels more like a super-capital from mod-land, and with its size and unusual campaign stats (in an expensive way), I expect it to be a bit overpowered in combat for its cost like Ziggurat is.  Was too durable before, but it seems less excessively durable after the armor fix now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 07:35:27 AM
4 Large Missiles with 2 forward facing is quite a lot more than 2 Large Missiles sideward facing (if you are using Conquest as intended with Large Ballistics facing the enemy). Twice more for 10 more DP in fact. Having farmed double Ordos with both Conquest and Pegasus I am confident it would still be stellar and worth its DP with the nerfs mentioned. Specifically the ability to use kinetic missiles or Locusts in the rear facing slots and Cyclone Reapers in the forward facing slots is unique and the defining feature of this ship. It is not something that depends on the FMR system, since the AI barely uses this system based on my testing yet the Pegasus still did fine under AI control with this layout.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: smithney on May 14, 2023, 08:00:43 AM
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*

I don't get how can the two be compared just based on the number of missile slots and being midline. Doesn't the playstyle differ by miles? If not, that would be something to concern me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 14, 2023, 08:06:00 AM
Thank you for all the ideas re: missiles/Pegasus/and so on!

Made some notes on that and other things; my apologies for not responding to everything directly, but I've read all the feedback and responses!

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.

This change would be an entirely behind-the-scenes implementation detail that would just make tweaking certain numbers easier.


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 AI is really bad at using FMR.

(Something I actually wanted to look at.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 08:41:36 AM
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.

Well, rather than theorize about it, let's test it empirically.

Here is my old fleet configured into a Hurricane spamming fleet. This is still the previous release.
(https://i.ibb.co/NZVZdd0/image.png) (https://ibb.co/SRsR44k)

We fight this Ordo. No orders given, all ships under AI control, all identical except the D-mods.
(https://i.ibb.co/fYjyLXh/image.png) (https://ibb.co/99Q1SpF)

(https://i.ibb.co/NNdLqd8/image.png) (https://ibb.co/7pdGDdw)

It is a resounding victory.
(https://i.ibb.co/HNpqMY6/image.png) (https://ibb.co/7gNKTVP)

Now, I change in ships.csv the Pegasus' armor value to 1200 and shield to 1.2 efficiency. Note I do not change the ship system.

The result is quite different as the Brilliants and Nova-class drone battlecruisers drive in and crush this fleet, ending in a full defeat.
(https://i.ibb.co/1QgyCyy/image.png) (https://ibb.co/KhP4t44)
(https://i.ibb.co/LQsjrDj/image.png) (https://ibb.co/HN9wCLw)
(https://i.ibb.co/vJYVnQ6/image.png) (https://ibb.co/8jcNZdL)

This is an expected result based on using this ship a lot. The tankiness does matter.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: basileus on May 14, 2023, 08:55:19 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 14, 2023, 08:58:26 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 14, 2023, 09:07:20 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 09:12:09 AM

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.

The thing that happened there is that when the Pegasus has Radiant-level defenses then it can take fire from a Nova or a Radiant and keep firing its missiles until the enemy needs to back off. When its defenses are substantially weaker it is vulnerable to agile ships that can catch up to it and take it down, since it is not mobile enough to escape. This is a real vulnerability that would exist in any fleet I think, and basically if you are fielding ships to defend the Pegasus that in itself limits the power of your fleet. By contrast, with its original stats it can hold a line by itself, so you can have Pegasi side by side covering each other's vulnerability and making an immovable object with immense firepower to boot.

One additional way to enhance this effect would be to limit the shield arc, since this ship is really vulnerable to flanking.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 14, 2023, 09:17:06 AM
Hmm, hmm. I appreciate the feedback! This makes a lot of sense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 09:24:14 AM
Thanks! So can we have 4 Large Missiles back now?  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on May 14, 2023, 09:41:50 AM
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".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 14, 2023, 09:45:23 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 09:53:06 AM
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.
We used to have +100% PD skill.  It was nerfed to 50%.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 14, 2023, 10:09:24 AM
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.
We used to have +100% PD skill.  It was nerfed to 50%.
Huh. So, how it was like before?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 10:59:30 AM
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.
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.

At the same time I kind of think that if he is eventually going to swing around to this way of thinking of keeping the original loadout but making the ship more fragile then it might be best to do it sooner rather than later, because if everybody has 1 year of getting used to it being a Radiant-level tank with (relatively for a 50DP capital) limited offensive power then people might get angry if it swings the other way.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainwright on May 14, 2023, 11:09:13 AM
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.
We used to have +100% PD skill.  It was nerfed to 50%.

Frankly, one thing that should be looked at is how much ITU boosts PD performance, and thus the design of missiles.  When capitals have 60% more range on their PD than frigates, you’re going to get a variety of disparities.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 14, 2023, 11:15:01 AM
Huh. So, how it was like before?
You put sabots in your missile slots.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 11:17:30 AM
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.

But even +50% today plus IPDAI is quite strong.  It can stop things that baseline PD cannot.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: smithney on May 14, 2023, 11:22:09 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: FreeBubbles on May 14, 2023, 01:20:32 PM
the main thing I care about in this game is chill trade (or not so chill sneaky blackmarketing ;) )
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 14, 2023, 02:17:25 PM
I don't use the Pegasus now, but I did enjoy its silliness when I flew one for a short time.

I feel a lot of what made it problematic when equipped with Hurricanes, is the Hurricane weapon system itself. The second stage missiles are pretty tanky, making them hard to shoot down. This leads to situations where a missile classified as a 'Finisher' is actually just a stand-off weapon with limited ammunition. At the very least, that's how I see the AI use it, and read about players using it. I realize the classification is pretty fluid with any weapon depending on how you use it, but it might be a lot easier to examine the Hurricane than tool around with the Pegasus itself.

I'll admit that I'm a bit biased against the Hurricane, I don't like the weapon system in its present state very much. I feel it has very "nuh-uh, you can't shoot THESE missiles down!" vibes, which is strange for a high explosive two-stage MIRV. The Squall is a lot more palatable when you consider it's just a cold-launched rocket with a solid body. Breach SRMs also gave me similar vibes when they dropped, but they're also a lot more palatable when their full damage is reserved against armor, and I've grown to like them as a specialized tool for certain ship configurations.

RIP Pegasus, I don't think the problem was you, it was a missile named after a weather phenomenon.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 14, 2023, 02:32:25 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 14, 2023, 02:43:27 PM
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.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 03:20:29 PM
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.

I guess medium Typhoon may be strong too, but only half the Reapers per shot, and only 21 per launcher at best.

(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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 14, 2023, 03:42:06 PM
Yeah - I wonder if weaker defenses can compensate for the Cyclone issue or not.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: lithyf on May 14, 2023, 04:17:05 PM
I feel like the solution should prioritize nerfing the Pegasus in a way that sets it apart from other midline capitals. Nerfing the shield and armor makes its disadvantages overlap with that of the Conquest battlecruiser, and does not do much to impair the effectiveness of a long-range Pegasus build.

Here are the tweaks I personally made to the Pegasus that seemed to have reigned in its effectiveness while preserving the wealth of loadout options available with x4 Large missile slots, at least based on my limited playtesting:
-Reverted hardpoints and variants to RC-8 versions
-Reduced top speed to 35 from 50
-Reduced OP to 350 from 365
-Reduced ship system to a max of 1 charge, and recharge rate to 0.6 (ideally it would be a separate ship system, but this was my first attempt at modding)
-Tangentially, reduced max Hydra MDEM capacity to 12, which helps reign in Pegasus' long range sustainability

At that speed the capital still feels more agile in terms of lateral/backwards movement than other battleship, but is caught by the like of destroyers/frigates, or even onslaught/legion significantly easier, giving it a need to have a screen of escort ships or dedicate 1-2 of its slots to the like of locusts or hydras. Torpedo builds would need to exercise far more caution not only due to the nerf to FMR charges, but because of the ship's nerfed ability to both reach its target quickly or disengage. At 35 top speed and 1 FMR charge, I struggled against frigate and destroyer swarms that surrounded me and drove my flux up (since I could not just delete everything around me by spamming FMR, nor disengage as easily,) giving me the difficult choice of ignoring this potentially lethal nuisance to dedicate my attention and limited ammunition to larger threats, or trying to very wastefully target the small ships around me as enemy cruisers closed in.

In other words it feels more like a proper battleship, requiring the support of smaller vessels, as opposed to the Conquest which functions better as a flanker.

I'm sure Alex can come up with a more elegant solution but personally I prefer my set up to the post-RC9 version of the pegasus for the following reasons:

-Loadout options are dramatically reduced without 4 Large Hardpoints, if you want to build a range-matched 2000/2500su loadout then your only option is the Harpoon+Squall which is an effective and boring solution identical to many Conquest setups, or perhaps Squall/Hydra+Dragonfires but either way your ship basically loses its burst damage within the first minute or two of the engagement and from then on it becomes a squall-spamming auxiliary ship; The front Medium slots have the knock-on effect of bottle-necking the usefulness and tactical adaptability of the ship as a whole

-One of the issue with the ship IMO is its very impressive number of OP points, which is only exacerbated by dropping the front slots to medium without also adjusting its OP; too easy to get all the hullmods you need while also maxing vents and caps, to my taste (which in turn exacerbates the issue with FMR through augmented flux stats)

-Again, base ship speed of 50 overemphasizes its ability to crush other battleships, since it can generally kite them (if not battlecruisers) with relative ease, and regardless of it lacking maneuvering jets, I feel like it having a higher cruise speed than the Conquest battlecruiser feels like an unnecessary, overlapping strength of the two ships

Besides this bit of compulsive rambling, I have a link to a little mod containing the above changes as well as some DEM-related thoughts and tweaks, but I am not sure what the appropriate place to share it may be. I'd figure I'd pitch into the Pegasus discourse while it is still actively relevant. 
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 14, 2023, 04:18:22 PM
Regarding the Pegasus i think making its shield bad (like Conquest Bad) should be a good enough nerf because as it stands it doesn't even need pd since its shield can take enough punishment that it can spam the FMR skill and have enough flux to not over-flux.

It has shields as good as a Paragon (0.6 flux/dam), with shield related skills, and hardened shields at 100%CR it has a shield flux/dam of 0.37 which is incredible, specially in a midline since the last midline capital had such bad shields.

If the player had to chose between either spamming reapers and risk over-fluxing or face-tanking damage (maybe nerf the armor a bit too to make it more risky) or only using a few and backing off before it gets over-fluxed, then i feel the ship would be in a good spot.

The problem with the Pegasus is that it trades with other ships extremely well, if it was a glass cannon then i think it wouldn't be so bad that it had the 4 large slots.

Unrelated but i have satbombed Chalcedon multiple times and it just doesn't die, is it because of the quest?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 14, 2023, 04:36:09 PM
I'd be perfectly fine with the Hurricane being faster, more accurate, and/or more powerful - but it's not a close range strike weapon like the Reaper series - it has tracking in the first stage and long range. Should it really also be able to consistently hit a shielded cruiser or capital ship with no flux accumulated and undamaged moderate-to-heavy point defenses?

With torpedoes, when you want consistent accuracy you need to move into range of your target's ballistic and energy weapons. Otherwise the best you can usually hope for is a hit to an armored area, unless your target has sustained heavy damage, or is particularly large.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 14, 2023, 05:09:20 PM
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.

Pegasus with Helmsmanship and elite Impact Mitigation is not very clumsy at all.  It can turn at a respectable speed.

Aside, even Invictus with both combat skills is not excessively slow to turn.  It is maneuverable enough to point at my target and mow down whatever with Lidar whenever I need to soon enough.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on May 14, 2023, 07:33:01 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fenrir on May 14, 2023, 07:36:18 PM
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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 07:56:24 PM
Yeah - I wonder if weaker defenses can compensate for the Cyclone issue or not.

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.

However another thing is you should probably adjust the Cyclone Reaper's ammo capacity to mitigate this issue. The current ammo capacity is such that, with my Pegasus fleet last release, under AI control the Cyclones lasted all the way through a triple Ordo fight despite active use from the start. That is silly, much as I like the weapon. It should be a finisher, not a main gun. As it is I can see Cyclone Reaper Manticore (LP) being able to just spam Cyclones through multiple fleets too, with the appropriate hullmod and skills. It could have half the ammo capacity and still be good, but then you couldn't use it as a main gun on your Pegasus in prolonged engagements.

The Manticores, even with the nerf, can bring 4 forward facing mobile Cyclone Reapers for 56 DP, come to mention it. I'm not saying that is a problem (I do not have experience with that ship yet) but it's a point of comparison.

Edit to add: also I'd like to note there are plenty of playership builds already with insane dps output in a one on one so that should not be a balancing issue but realistic fleet settings. If a 50 DP capital can't delete sim Onslaughts when optimized for the purpose and under player control then something is very wrong when even a such as a Drover or SO Condor  (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=26178.msg389247#msg389247)can.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 14, 2023, 09:49:32 PM
To illustrate how defense affects the ship's ability to leverage Cyclone Reaper spam, I did a few test runs again. This is last release and vanilla, with no mods.

I refitted my Ordo farming fleet into a "station buster" configuration with 2x Cyclone Reaper in front and 2x Squall in back. All ships are identical up to D-mods. The ships have aggressive officers with no orders given and all ships under AI control.

(https://i.ibb.co/5j8RzR6/screenshot066.png) (https://ibb.co/t2sJNJ4)

We fight Jangala star fortress alone and only deploy the Pegasi.
(https://i.ibb.co/g3H6zbL/image.png) (https://ibb.co/rmTv4KR)

Now, in both cases, deploying all 6 Pegasi is enough to take out the Star Fortress with no losses. However, if we only deploy 3 Pegasi, with original stats:

The Pegasi can close in, tank hits, fire missiles until the station is destroyed with no losses.
(https://i.ibb.co/6gMg778/image.png) (https://ibb.co/kQ7QssJ)
(https://i.ibb.co/mF6BTdZ/image.png) (https://ibb.co/3YBsdV6)


Exact same configuration, armor set to 1200, shield efficiency set to 1.2 in ship_data.csv:

The Pegasi cannot close in due to firepower from the Star Fortress. Despite having the potential to spam Cyclones they lose the fight and inflict relatively little damage.
(https://i.ibb.co/NTSF54g/image.png) (https://ibb.co/tLXHgdw)
(https://i.ibb.co/Drp7YY2/image.png) (https://ibb.co/xFHMYYT)

I repeated this combat twice. The first time I got the same result, so it is not a fluke. The second time I also deployed the 6 Glimmers and that time the 3 Pegasi were able to approach with the cover of the frigates and destroyed the station with Reaper spam, losing 1 Pegasus and all the frigates. So that illustrates how the fleet dynamics change when the Pegasus is no longer a tank and requires cover.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 14, 2023, 11:07:23 PM
And now for something completely different.

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?

Even without it those bounties are resource negative with all resource gathering skills. But with this they turn into a bad joke. And while we are at it: why exactly pure combat fleets became so low on resources? I mean with that level there is no need to destroy them just force them to deploy their ships, shoot for cheap damage then disengage and this is it. They will run out of supplies. Except they don't.

So what's the point of those bounties in current version? Piracy in the Core provides the very same experience/ships/weapons, much more resources and more money from exploiting deficits. To get something different you need those special bounties from the contacts. And from the looks of it, current bounties are more of a noob trap or something like that. Things that you are not supposed to do.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 14, 2023, 11:55:33 PM
A sim test, but still thought provoking. Some excellent points.

I was super wrong about the angle of the hard points on the front. Apologies for the misunderstanding. I misremembered and thought the hard points on the front of the Pegasus were angled like the ones on the back. Angling them all at 45 degrees to either side would be a pretty easy way to discourage cyclone spam. This is strictly my opinion, but I think it would look cooler that way anyhow.

Putting that aside, I've done what I could to mimic the sim encounter you mentioned. I was already specc'd for it skill wise, so altering a Pegasus I had laying around (on the last patch, mind you), and gave it a whirl, configuring the ship for a Reaper barrage. I ran the combat twenty or so times. When paired with Squalls in the aft and Cyclones on the fore, as well as with a large array of Graviton Beams, the strategy was very consistent. I think even if the ship was staffed with officers with the PD skill and equipped with IPDAI, it would still struggle to shoot down the incoming torpedoes, due to the Squall barrage.

I think a good takeaway from this experiment is that it might be a good idea for point defenses to prioritize torpedoes/high damage missiles over fighters and lower damage missiles, even if another missile is closer, or they already have a target. The exception being flares, under normal conditions. At the very least, it would be helpful to de-prioritize "hard" missiles like the Squall or Breach.

Thanks for responding Megas. I often find that I agree with you, even while lurking.

A clear, detailed experiment with pictures. (x2)

That's pretty cool! I went back and reviewed the last test you did as well. I've changed my mind, and I think your position on the defense reduction - while still allowing the ship to retain all four large missile hardpoints - is sound. I would add that the cyclone spam could be rendered very inconvenient by my suggestion above: angling the forward missile hard points 45 degrees to either side.

Thanks for the analysis, Capn.

---

Pegasus aside, I feel pretty strongly that reducing the Typhoon to 3 or 4 ammo and the Cyclone to 8 or 10 is long overdue. I use Reapers a lot - seriously, almost constantly - and while I don't often fly ships that can equip a Typhoon or even a Cyclone, I've thought for the last few releases they had way too much ammo capacity for such a bulky, tanky, high damage torpedo. I think its fine otherwise, just far too abundant in its medium and large incarnations. In a ship with Fast Missile Racks we can see how obscene the Cyclone can be.

The Cyclone's closest comparison is the Hammer Barrage, capable of outputting a total of 30,000 high explosive damage, while the Cyclone can spit out a grand total of 80,000. 9,000 vs 28,000 for the Jackhammer vs. the Typhoon, respectively: over three times more! On top of that, the Reaper far outclasses the Hammer already in burst damage, even in a barrage. After all, a higher damage single attack trumps several lower damage attacks against armor. The Hammer series is cheaper in terms of OP cost, but not enough to be significant - nor would I recommend altering their OP cost. Hammer torpedoes are also easier to shoot down since they're flimsier, even if they are faster.

In terms of ammo capacity, I think 4 for the Typhoon and 8 for the Cyclone is the way to go. If you want/need more, there are ways to do that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 15, 2023, 12:56:09 AM
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. 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 15, 2023, 02:44:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 15, 2023, 03:13:05 AM
Currently doesn't really feel like much of a tradeoff, slight nerf maybe.

Huge nerf, actually. It's 23% less (potential) damage.

IMO old Hurricane was better in just about every way - wider spread meant it could "catch" smaller ships or bypass narrow shields(I've seen my Conquest get hit by a submunition or two plenty of times) and IF you had ECCM then you could focus the damage more.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 15, 2023, 03:39:02 AM
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?

This is just a witch hunt at this point. Nerf every missile weapon in the game and then nerf Pegasus even more just to give it large slots back. Guess a 50 DP capital with limited ammo isn't really supposed to kill anything?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 15, 2023, 03:47:07 AM
People just seem to be hesitant to understand the fact that it's perfectly normal for an expensive capital to nuke a cheaper ship and then be caught without pants afterwards.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 15, 2023, 05:02:03 AM
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.

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.

Venture had Salamander spam during around 0.65a, and it was lethal when FMR was unlimited, and Salamanders first became unlimited (they used to have only three shots like Harpoons).  They had 500 damage at the time, and unlimited Salamanders could kill things past fog-of-war.  Later, Salamanders were nerfed to 100 damage, and Venture could still kill everything with Salamander spam, though it took longer.  Then FMR got three charges that we have today.

Aurora originally had Large Missile and High Energy Focus until 0.7.2a.  In essence, the original Champion.  It could almost solo the simulator with Cyclone Reaper, stopped by Paragon at the end, and Reapers were more powerful with super-charged skills, high HP, and no arming delay.  (Dominator was strong enough to kill everything in the SIM; Paragon did not have ATC at the time.)  Then 0.7.2a came and the large missile because a medium synergy (but Aurora still had HEF; Plasma Jets would come later), and Aurora did not have 35 double Reapers, just 8 single Reapers.  It could not solo fleets anymore.  (Expanded Missile Racks gave +75% ammo instead of +100%; and Missile Spec added +1 to ammo.  Missile Spec. main draw was the huge speed and damage bonuses.  6000 damage Reapers from Missile Spec. alone when maxxed.)

A sim test, but still thought provoking. Some excellent points.
I do not remember posting this exact quote.  Used search to find it but came up empty.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 15, 2023, 05:08:35 AM
Not enough ammo.

All of your(royal your) proposed extreme uses of Pegasus with FMR also would chew through ammo quickly.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 15, 2023, 05:34:59 AM
Not enough ammo.

All of your(royal your) proposed extreme uses of Pegasus with FMR also would chew through ammo quickly.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 15, 2023, 09:40:09 AM
Thank you everyone for your feedback!

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 15, 2023, 10:01:43 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 15, 2023, 10:05:41 AM
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.

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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 15, 2023, 10:11:05 AM
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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 15, 2023, 10:46:10 AM
Weren't you just gonna go ahead and make the Executor its own ship and not a variant of Pegasus?

Also, was 10,000 flux off the Invictus really necessary? Wouldn't 5,000 been a more...reasonable cut to start with?

Anyway, glad you're open to feedback on balance changes and will be looking into reverting to 4 large missile on the Pegasus.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NotSoLoneWolf on May 15, 2023, 10:49:05 AM
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

Awesome, love these changes. I also think the DP would be best kept at 50, if the ship is still too powerful, a suggestion someone else said above that I liked was reducing the number of FMR charges. As for the Executor, I like it keeping the higher movement speed. I also kind of want its shield efficiency to also go to 0.8, just because I dislike the thematic / immersion implications of it being at 0.6, but you’re right that it’s in a good place right now.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 15, 2023, 10:49:40 AM
Honestly, Executor would be much better as its own thing. A mostly-energy battleship needs a vastly different reactor than an oversized missile boat. Not to mention that you could give it better hardpoint arcs.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 15, 2023, 11:04:32 AM
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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 15, 2023, 11:13:18 AM
(I think the idea that the Executor is going to be "its own thing" is a misreading of an implementation detail that's going to be completely invisible to the player.)

Also, was 10,000 flux off the Invictus really necessary? Wouldn't 5,000 been a more...reasonable cut to start with?

Well, I think it was :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PixiCode on May 15, 2023, 11:56:11 AM
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.

Executor larger engine glows, I'm all for this oh yes.

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.

As far as the Pegasus goes, on top of the nerfs it currently has planned to make room for the 4 large missiles, you could try also giving it a smaller shield arc, say 120 degrees. This would keep its battleship identity, but introduce a new weakness to help accomodate the power of the 4 missile slots + FMR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 15, 2023, 12:04:07 PM

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.


It was about a dozen military ships and several transports in each case. But the debris density changed wildly (from 0.2 to 0.8) from merely reloading the save. Purely random.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zanathkariashi on May 15, 2023, 12:05:59 PM
Would be nice if full surveying a gas-giant would also scan it for Topography progress.

Should still keep the ability to do it with a scan if you want to if you lack the manpower/supplies to full survey it, but it is a minor annoyance having to remember to do that, since you'd think they'd full scan the planet as part of the survey process.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 15, 2023, 12:06:09 PM
Executor larger engine glows, I'm all for this oh yes.

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.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 15, 2023, 12:18:28 PM
I feel like Onslaught is the perfect battleship because we can easily balance other ships by asking "is it stronger than Onslaught?" If the answer is yes, then the ship in question is definitely broken.

EDIT: Previous comment was removed and now I look dumb.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 15, 2023, 12:29:41 PM
Is anyone using the Hephaestus Assault Gun on anything to good effect? Anything at all?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 15, 2023, 12:47:59 PM
EDIT: Previous comment was removed and now I look dumb.

I saw it. I made notes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tigasboss on May 15, 2023, 01:04:03 PM
Why is aggressive ai still afraid to use missiles, i had an officer with missile specialization and had equiped 2 gorgons on a hammer with EMR,  and it almost lost against 3 small derelicts because it was so conservative with the missiles, all it had to do was shoot them because the derelicts have no armor.
When i took control of the ship it still had 12 missiles, it shot a grand total of 3.
I could make it reckless and see if its better but reckless officers usually suicide.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 15, 2023, 01:16:36 PM
A sim test, but still thought provoking. Some excellent points.
I do not remember posting this exact quote.  Used search to find it but came up empty.

Apologies, I meant to reduce the wall I text I posted, by including my opinion of what you wrote instead of the entire body of text. I didn't mean to come off as misquoting you for my own benefit or being snarky. It really was helpful for me to think about what you were saying and perform the same test. It helped to change my perspective.

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.

I do disagree with both you here, though. I think if you perform your original test with a Pegasus vs. two sim Onslaughts without MS, ECCM, or EMR, you'll find that the Cyclones are far superior to Hammer Barrages. You'll pierce the first Onslaught's armor and destroy it more quickly, and be left with more potential damage for your next target.

The math on this is pretty clear cut. The gulf between both weapons only grows larger as you augment your missiles further.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 15, 2023, 01:19:20 PM
Is anyone using the Hephaestus Assault Gun on anything to good effect? Anything at all?
Yes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on May 15, 2023, 01:40:38 PM
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
way too flux hungry, same as small assault gun
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on May 15, 2023, 02:03:36 PM
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!

@Alex

What about raising the DP to 55?
It would be nice to have a 35,40,45,50,55,60 DP capital ship :)
And I think it looks great as a 55 DP ship. Not quite a Paragon or Radiant, but stronger than an Executor.
You could also advertise this 5 DP difference between the two skins as proof, that the Executor after all is kinda a failed project.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 15, 2023, 02:21:19 PM
Thank you everyone for your feedback!

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.
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.

That aside the diktat questline just showed up in a terrible moment of lack of credits and struggling to keep afloat my fleet and needless to say the introduction and the upfront rewards made me go wow hard very nice.
Update: This man is way more generous than i initially thought oh my goodness.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 15, 2023, 02:23:13 PM
Is anyone using the Hephaestus Assault Gun on anything to good effect? Anything at all?
Dominator and Invictus really like it.
Thought about it on non-XIV legion but sarissa+some heavy maulers+mark IXs feel much better than Heph+M kinetics, range matters a lot there. Maybe 1 Heph + 1 Mark IX, but the maulers+5 reapers are plenty of HE.
(related, both legions are brutal with the update)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: pairedeciseaux on May 15, 2023, 02:51:43 PM
Conquest also a great platform for Hephaestus, paired with Mark IX on each side.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: memeextremist on May 15, 2023, 03:01:36 PM
yeah, Alex. I just want to say that you adding scarabs and hyperions to the indies is the coolest flex for them. 'we have godfrigates but we won't bug you about your transponder. stick around and explore with us, starfarer!'

best faction gets better
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 15, 2023, 03:12:19 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Spaceman_Spiff on May 15, 2023, 03:58:15 PM
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.

I've had some success with dual Auto-Pulse Lasers. Executor's deal seems to be that it's a reliable fleet anchor that can't afford anything extravagant, but can move faster than a Paragon without being as vulnerable when unsupported as an Onslaught.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Talgo on May 15, 2023, 04:35:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 15, 2023, 04:48:23 PM
I just got my hands on an executor. I am probably going to be executed for doing this but i have just put mining blasters on all the medium ballistic and hybrid slots because i thought it was funny
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on May 15, 2023, 06:22:45 PM
Thank you everyone for your feedback!

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.
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.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sts678 on May 15, 2023, 06:57:51 PM
Thank you everyone for your feedback!

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.
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.

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 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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ANGRYABOUTELVES on May 15, 2023, 07:25:57 PM
I just got my hands on an executor. I am probably going to be executed for doing this but i have just put mining blasters on all the medium ballistic and hybrid slots because i thought it was funny
All 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 15, 2023, 09:34:16 PM

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 15, 2023, 10:09:55 PM
@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 ran the Ordo fight twice. The result was 1 win losing 2 Pegasi and 1 loss. With a lower top speed, the Pegasi seemed to be more vulnerable to being surrounded by Remnants, resulting in death. This compares to clean victories earlier.

(https://i.ibb.co/rdn7rjt/image.png) (https://ibb.co/wcD0mkL)

I ran the Jangala station fight three times (plus one that ended in a freeze due to Intel IRIS bug, which seemed to be heading to a loss since a Pegasus had gone down early). The result was 2 wins with no losses - but taking damage, unlike previously, and 1 loss.

In addition the character of the fights has changed. The Pegasus is no longer an agile and aggressive combatant but a slow lumbering battleship that takes its time to approach the target.

(https://i.ibb.co/H2Z8NLL/image.png) (https://ibb.co/1ncWsYY)

So, you have successfully nerfed the Pegasus and it is clearly no longer as strong as before.

Based on these tests I would keep it at 50 DP, not 60 DP. This is because at the 60 DP price point we have Paragon and Radiant which would have no trouble with these fights. I would also not nerf it further since three strong capitals really should be able to fight a Star Fortress and five strong capitals really should be able to fight an Ordo. However, if a balancing lever is needed, the next step might be to touch the armor or move shield efficiency to 1.0. Personally I would like to see you keep it as it is ie. 4 large missiles, .8 shield, 35 top speed for maybe one version's time and collect more data.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 15, 2023, 10:22:36 PM
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.

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.

This is why I always take tales of "I did a thing in a ship" with a fistful of salt - yeah you, the player, did it, but could AI do it too? Probably not, so it should be entirely secondary consideration when it comes to balance IMO.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 15, 2023, 10:31:09 PM
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 Onslaught is a bit special because due to its all out assault into vent and armor tank mechanics it uniquely rewards good strategic decision making which the player is much better at.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sts678 on May 15, 2023, 11:31:52 PM

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.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 15, 2023, 11:39:15 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 15, 2023, 11:42:45 PM
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. What they did lose was damage against armor and the EMP effect. Which means you can't rely on *just* the Squalls for everything anymore, and that was the entire idea behind the nerf.

For a typical Conquest with two Mjolnirs, two HVDs and an Ion Beam the nerf doesn't really change much. Squalls still strip shields, turrets still apply armor damage and EMP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 15, 2023, 11:46:02 PM
Squall got buffed, you sure? I'm pretty confident the idea was to keep the kinetic damage exactly the same while reducing hull damage, and remove the EMP component.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on May 15, 2023, 11:55:36 PM
I remember people being skeptical of the squall nerf because the shield damage wasn't being toned down, but having tried them out now I think Alex nailed it. Without emp or any significant armour damage they can still fill their intended purpose but feel a lot more fair. People really underestimated just how much armour/hull damage they accrued over the course of a battle. That being said, they could stand to have just a little more ammo now, like 20 extra missiles.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amazigh on May 15, 2023, 11:56:12 PM
The Squalls were actually buffed in their anti-shield role, the damage increasing from 250 kinetic to 100+200 kinetic.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 15, 2023, 11:58:28 PM
Ah so it was a double typo. I reminded him on the initial patch notes and he was surprised he wrote it himself. Probably a leftover from testing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vind on May 16, 2023, 02:05:14 AM
Speaking of balanced ships - how is the doom cruiser at 35 points even works now? Testing without any skills this ship loses to anyone badly. Mine strike aside it is useless without specific skills because chain and ball phase speed "fix" guts this ship speed in seconds. 35 points for mine spawner which cant even get into position without being destroyed? If ship is unusable without 3 specific skills it is a bad ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 16, 2023, 02:13:21 AM
35 points for mine spawner which cant even get into position without being destroyed?

You can use mines from phase space, you are literally indestructible while doing so.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 16, 2023, 02:14:23 AM
Yesterday I fought a full phase bounty fleet, 5 Dooms, 4 Harbingers, Afflictor and Centurion. Granted all ships had lvl 7 officers and 2 s-mods. It was downright disgusting, the whole screen was just mines and additional missiles fired by Dooms. My Invictus went down from full 40k hp to 130... They murdered every smaller than capital ship that I had, and capitals were barely alive at the end.

Which is kinda the stupid thing with phase ships, without proper investment they're a joke, and with everything they need they become monsters. I'm not a fan of them generally, so I only tried a couple back when the skill system got reworked, and they're useless without the Technology phase skill, Doom is especially super slow. I feel like you either min max the benefits from the skill or don't bother with phase ships in your fleet. You could run a Gremlin for the lulz now that it has Rugged Construction.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vind on May 16, 2023, 02:30:59 AM
     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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 16, 2023, 02:34:01 AM
And that's even more unrealistic since you'll never have a Doom without any skills soloing another cruiser.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 16, 2023, 04:19:05 AM
Squalls would be nerfed further if AI remembered to drop shields like they did for the second version of Sabot with the slow wide spread years ago.  AI keeps shields up for Squalls even when there are no other immediate threats to harm the ship.  Squalls that do not hit shields are not very effective.

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.

However, Gauss Dominator was strong in a head-to-head fight last release.  Out of all of the SIM cruisers, Gauss Dominator was the most obnoxious opponent for my cowardly AI controlled ships last release.  Did not help that behavior was locked at Steady previously (by not honoring doctrine settings).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foraven on May 16, 2023, 04:36:36 AM
I noticed some issues with the ship's behavior:

- 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 16, 2023, 04:57:52 AM
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.
Now it can also skip missile racks (4x14 reapers instead of 15) and build mags in for higher TPC recharge.
Ships with hardpoints also got some harder to quantify behavioural improvements.

Yeah, under AI control the Conquest was strongest capital last version according to Vanshilar
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 16, 2023, 05:02:10 AM
Yeah, I agree with you there and should have been more specific. The full statement is, according to him, 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.

For example if you want the AI to assume a tanking role and do nor care about dps, a Paragon is certainly stronger in that sense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 16, 2023, 05:15:17 AM
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.

In order to make a slow ship with low dissipation good in AI hands you would have to inflate its other baseline stats excessively, which is what modern Onslaught is, more or less.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 16, 2023, 05:19:12 AM
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.
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 16, 2023, 05:23:50 AM
Well, from having farmed Ordos a lot myself using Conquest last version, I actually think the AI handles the shield quite well for what it is. It's just that the shield is really bad. But if you give it hardened and stabilized shields and solar shielding and give your officer Field Modulation and max the flux stats, the AI can actually use the Conquest to tank somewhat effectively. This is helped a great deal by the ship being actually able to back out of trouble which is unusual for a capital and certainly helps the AI which occasionally makes very bad decisions.

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.

Yeah I'll need to remember to give more context in the future. Although I do agree that I think the Conquest was a particularly strong ship in any context last version if you know how to build it - I did a playthrough where I just beelined to a Conquest and jumped into the late game - but that's not specifically just because it is good at farming Remnants.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 16, 2023, 05:45:07 AM
Onslaught was already great under AI control, something is wrong with your setup.

AI is bad with weapons in hardpoints because it switches targets too often, a problem that is only compouded if the ship also has low maneouverability. My current fleet has four Sunders and even these have serious problems with staying on target - and they're destroyers with +50% maneouverability from the Helmsmanship skill. Onslaught is built around the two TPCs - without them you are literally better off with a Dominator - so it simply has no chance as an AI ship.

Then you have other factors like movement(AI can't really use burn drive to once the battle starts because it prioritizes facing towards the enemy while Maneouvering Jets work in every direction)

Quote
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.

So the first question is: why would I use an Onslaught with frigate support which increases its effective DP when I can just use a capital that does not need to be babysit instead? And use the DP I would otherwise "waste" on frigates to get even more capitals?

But I actually do run mixed fleets(currently 6 Glimmers, 4 Conquests and 4 Sunders) and I did try replacing Conquests with Onslaughts and the results were painful to watch. As for "not retrying the same battle 20 times" I don't even know what this is supposed to mean.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on May 16, 2023, 07:34:42 AM
Just to quickly give my opinion here.

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.
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.

Obviously, this is true for a lot of other ships, it's just that for them the advantageous situation is completely different, and that's why we have different playstyles/preferences/opinions. Thx Alex for implementing such a great game.

TLDR Onslaught is good as is, but you need to know how to use it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 08:45:56 AM
@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.

...

Thank you so much! I really appreciate it. So, alright, the Pegasus will stay that way for the next hotfix, and at 50 DP. We'll see how it goes after that, of course, as with everything :)


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.

Yeah; already fixed in-dev for the next hotfix!


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.

The Doom is extremely not meant for head-on 1-1 fights, so this is pretty much expected. It's about supporting allied ships in different ways, and it's very good for shifting the focus of its support quickly.

(Edit: perhaps it's more accurate to say it's not meant for fights where it's forced to trade damage, rather than specifically 1-1s.)


- 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.

Hmm, I'll keep an eye out for that, thank you!

- 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.

- 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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 16, 2023, 08:48:58 AM
- 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!
That does make it much better than what I expected from the patch notes, 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 think the design intention behind the Onslaught is to create the best CQB duelist in the game. Correct me @Alex if I'm wrong.
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.
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.
It can be built to shoot from a distance really well, sticking some unguided missiles in the 4 M turrets and going balls out with the bazillion armor is just stronger.
Actually likes it if a bunch of brilliants/novas/radiants jump in its face, doesn't care about squall/MIRV nerf. Does care about bad loadouts, see the post above yours genuinely comparing it to a Dominator.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 16, 2023, 09:07:54 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 16, 2023, 09:21:02 AM
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.
Yeah, the 20% reload penalty on missile rax and 25% maneouverability on heavy armor is just enough to make you consider something else.
Armored weapon mounts opens options up a bit for ships low on slots.
Builtin mags might be a bit too strong in the sense that it could turn out to be kinda-sorta mandatory for burst weapons, but effective cost is also pretty high so might be fine.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vanshilar on May 16, 2023, 09:41:07 AM
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.

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.

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...

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.

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.

It was actually 3 Conquests and 2 Gryphons (note that my total fleet was 200 DP, not 240 DP), but yeah, the player-controlled Onslaught regularly did 30% or more of the overall fleet damage. When I was testing with a fleet of the more underpowered ships like the Falcon or the Eagle, it was somewhere over 40% of the overall fleet damage, and that was with a close to 240 DP fleet. That's why I tend to go with DPS numbers; at around 1200-1500 DPS a player-controlled Onslaught is worth around 3.5 AI Gryphons or a bit less than 2 AI Conquests, and those are pretty strong in their own right.

I think that's why in these discussions, it's always worth keeping in mind whether the forum poster is talking about the ship being player-controlled or under AI control. I'm not particularly swayed by reports of the Pegasus being able to burst kill a Radiant under player control because I do it all the time in the Onslaught spamming Proximity Charge Launchers, a tactic that the AI doesn't know how to use. It's certainly possible that when I get around to testing it myself in a week or two I'll agree that it's overpowered, but it's just something that I'm used to expecting the player-controlled flagship to be able to do.

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.

Well technically I never released results for the other capitals so I can't really say that the Conquest was the strongest capital under AI control, only that it was the strongest one that I'm aware of. However, there were no takers for "feel free to submit an Onslaught loadout that you think does really well against Ordos under AI control" and I did dabble in a number of other capitals, but never found anything as good as the Conquest. My take on the whole Onslaught vs Conquest debate though is that Onslaught is better for player, Conquest is better for AI.

I admit that makes it harder to gauge what the DP should be for ships (the fact that different ships may perform better under player control versus under AI control). I think it's readily apparent that many phase ships, especially [REDACTED BROCCOLI], are much more suitable for the player than for the AI.

It'll be fun to compare the different capital ships under player control and under AI control once I get back from my trip in a week or two. I think that'll put the DP estimates on firmer footing -- or at least to see their performance under a controlled set of conditions. Otherwise a lot of the discussion right now lacks context or is largely feelings-based (i.e. "I feel like...") rather than based on something more concrete.

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?

I think a lot of mods add their own mod-specific hullmod type, so it's at least useful for that. No idea about vanilla though.

The Squalls were actually buffed in their anti-shield role, the damage increasing from 250 kinetic to 100+200 kinetic.

Actually that's just a description error, testing in sim shows that Squalls do 250 kinetic damage (i.e. 500 damage) to shields as they should. I already sent a bug report about it here (https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=26764.0).

- Sometimes they turn sideway while attempting to back-off from an engagement.

Yes that's been the AI for a long time I think, basically they're anticipating taking enemy fire on the sides (where their armor is still intact) instead of on the front (where the armor is likely gone already). Unfortunately it means that they miss with their hardpoints and/or can no longer pressure the enemy with the hardpoints, so I would rather they not, but that's known behavior.

- IR autolance has funky behavior when left auto-firing;

I actually quite like the IR Autolance behavior. It uses the new "USE_LESS_VS_SHIELDS" hint (the Mining Blaster is the only other weapon to have it). Basically when enemy shields are up, it'll only fire a few shots, just enough that it'll regen back to full capacity quickly. Then when enemy shields go down is when it spams its charges, which is what you want for a weapon that does very little to shields.

This is a pet peeve of mine, actual description would be "Strongest judged by a single, very narrow metric.

Yes, and that metric would be "how quickly it can kill off a sufficiently difficult enemy fleet" for which I chose double Ordos. Calling it narrow is like calling 0 to 60 mph a narrow measure of acceleration -- sure, it doesn't measure 0 to 50 mph or 0 to 100 mph, but it gives a pretty good intuitive metric of a car's acceleration.

Also not counting battles where something gets blown up ofc"

Ignoring fleets which are designed to get blown up (such as Derelict Operations fleets), if your fleet is getting blown up left and right then I don't think it's a good sustainable way to run a fleet. I don't find "hey I won but I lost half my fleet" to be very persuasive of a well-constructed fleet.

Not to mention, once a ship dies its contribution to the battle is exactly zero. Sure, you can send in another, but that ship is still contributing zero until it gets to the front lines, so a ship that doesn't die is going to contribute more by comparison. So basically, a fleet that doesn't die is going to do better than one that does. That rule is more to exclude fleets like say 200 Reaper-laden reckless Kites.

The entire test can be thrown out once you allow mixed fleets with frigate hunters to help out the slow capitals/cruisers,

No, you can use the same testing method. I started by testing via spamming the same ship just to establish a baseline for what each ship individually can do, since it's easier to evaluate a ship's performance in isolation without worrying about cross-ship interactions. In this case for testing these capital ships I'll likely be supporting them with Gryphons. (So for example, player Onslaught + 2 Pegasus + 3 Gryphons, or player Invictus + 2 Executor + 2 Gryphons, etc.).

or if you care about not retrying the same battle 20 times.

Funny thing, it's the underperforming ships like the Falcon and the Eagle that I had to try multiple tries, stronger ships like Conquest and Gryphon were pretty much nearly always completion and it's just a matter of how fast it was.

Conquest is certainly good, but saying it's objectively the strongest AI capital is just silly IMO.

If you have a stronger one you are more than welcome to propose a loadout for it. I don't think anybody has said that it's "objectively" anything because it's not defined as to what that even means, only that thus far it does the best as far as is known under a quantitative measurement of a fleet's ability to kill a sufficiently challenging enemy fleet.

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.

The Ordos fleets in 0.96a are a lot more dynamic and will quite often suicidally zoom forward into your fleet, breaking up the relatively smooth and static battle lines, so it'll be interesting to see if this type of "long range glass cannon" strategy still works well in this update. I'm all for having different playstyles be successful, but this was the most successful one that I found in the last version. Each version seems to have a playstyle that's generally more successful (when I first started playing it was Drover spam) and this was the most successful one I found in the last version, so it'll be interesting to see via testing what the new meta might be in 0.96a.

That does make it much better than what I expected from the patch notes, any chance the thumper could get something similar?

I was going to post this exact thing in the Suggestions forum, I hope the Thumper can get the same "USE_LESS_VS_SHIELDS" hint that the IR Autolance and the Mining Blaster have.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 09:48:48 AM
... 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.


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.

Hey, awesome, I'm really happy to hear it!

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.

Yeah, I definitely get that. It's also, unfortunately, pretty complicated to do comprehensively. And e.g. for something like damage - how is that even going to cover scripted effects? It's not an *impossible* problem but I looked at it maybe 2 months ago, I think spending a couple of hours thinking about it, and the end result was backing away slowly.


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.

Ah - looking at the code, the MISSILE_HARDPOINTS_ROTATE hint only affects mounts pointed within the front 180 degree arc of the ship. I think this was because the rear mounts on the Pegasus rotating looked untidy.


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.

(Yep, exactly! Though in this case I'd ended up, for the sake of making the changes more quickly, just adding two new properties to .skin files for max speed and shield efficiency.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 16, 2023, 10:38:12 AM
... 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.
It's not a decision under AI control, AI just dumps thumper at every opportunity :)
Does noticeable damage against shields, but the ships that could consider thumpers usually have much better shield damage from other sources and want the burst on hull instead.
In practice arbalest does ~same shield damage as thumper burst for much less flux, and often similar hull damage as sustained thumper (higher hit strength).
A bit silly comparison all things considered (accuracy, RoF), but thumper is just not very good when given to the AI.
Builtin mags might help it out a bit, fingers crossed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 10:40:30 AM
(I'd just say then that if this needs a change, the change should be in the ship AI and not adding an autofire hint to the Thumper, in this case; I think that's the more appropriate level for this type of decision.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 16, 2023, 10:47:41 AM
Personally, one of the things I use Thumpers for is absolutely murdering frigates trying to harass bigger ships, where only getting 1.2 efficiency versus their shields doesn't matter much and absolutely mulching their hull in the short period where their shields go down and they realize they need to GTFO matters lots.

Also, even with Elite Ballistic Mastery, I don't think the toggle would do a great job of actually avoiding hitting shields; Thumper projectiles aren't THAT fast.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 16, 2023, 12:04:50 PM
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.

My experience has also been that this strategy has been successful in previous patches as well. Well, of course it is! If you have fire superiority at any given place in the battle, you'll naturally have the initiative.

I'd like to add that I've been experimenting with different tactics since the last update dropped, creating escort "wings" or "elements" of 3-4 ships: typically a slower ship with an escort of three, with a specific purpose in mind. To reference the strategy you mentioned, I deploy one, two, or three 'tough' and 'defensive' elements that can stand off against a larger part of the enemy fleet during the initial part of the engagement, but aren't very good at chasing down and destroying enemy ships. They are supported by much more fragile, but faster and more powerful "DPS/Fire Superiority" elements that are detached from the main body of my fleet. I'm seeing a great deal of success, with less micro-management.

This sounds like a totally normal thing to do, I imagine? The difference being that on paper, my lean-running fleet (depending on what point of the game I'm in) is outnumbered and outgunned at virtually every stage of the game. Like you and Amoebka have said, the AI is somewhat "dumb" with position and flux management, and it's a simple matter to peel their forces away from one another by stretching the line of battle out, and then using the "divide and conquer" strategy. I've had a lot of success with this so far against pirates, pathers, faction fleets, and small-to-medium sized ordos.

Sprinkle in a small spattering of fast, long-range, but ultimately only annoying hulls and weapons and the enemy formation breaks apart reliably, and melts away sections at a time.

Of course, there is a limit to just how far this can go. No matter how clever I might think it is, being severely outclassed is still fatal.

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.

I guess all I really wanted to say was, "hey, I see the same thing and I think that's spot on. Here's a few cool things you can do with that in mind!"
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 12:24:25 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 16, 2023, 02:52:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foraven on May 16, 2023, 03:02:29 PM

- 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.

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).   
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 03:35:43 PM
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 all honesty, that sounds like exactly where it's meant to fall, balance-wise related to EMR.

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).   

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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 16, 2023, 03:40:07 PM
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.

Imo it would be more fun if autoloader worked better on more ships, but the reload delay aspect got amplified. Then it would be an actual choice between extra missiles here and now; versus even more extra missiles, but over a lond period of time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sly on May 16, 2023, 03:47:56 PM
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?

I believe it's working as intended! It's just fun to isolate a distant group like a sheep dog barking at the herd. It's very hard to do spontaneously in the middle of a big battle (needing advance scouting and planning), but I love that you created it. Watching the enemy fleet adapt to fighting primarily phase ships was a "wow, cool!" moment the first time I saw it. The change to phase combat tactics at a level below [HYPER REDACTED] is much appreciated, and I think it adds a neat tactic to the battles.

It can lead to some interesting alternate engagements early in a battle where you deploy phase ships as an advance force, during a staggered deployment, around the objective locations.

My phase ship allies, as noted by others, do sometimes make questionable decisions, unfortunately. I'm not sure what could be done to help them. I don't know much about programming AI, just the gist of weights and priorities. It seems like a challenging thing to do. A lot of phase ship combat comes down to reading the enemy and accurately predicting where to go, from where and when to fire, and how you'll escape afterward. There's a lot of nuance to consider, like enemy turret turning speed, fire rate and/or burst cooldown, your approach angle, your firing angle and position, and where you'll be shot - and by what. Because you'll almost definitely, eventually, be hit.

And of course the king of all considerations: making sure you don't overflux yourself and death spiral while surrounded by a pack of angry Hounds with Assault Chainguns. Or worse.

I'm impressed that the AI does as well as it does, all things considered.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 03:50:27 PM
Ah, awesome, thank you for the detail! I'm glad it's working out to be something interesting.

(Yeah, getting phase AI to the level of a human in those kinds of decisions - or anywhere close, really - would be quite the task. And I'm not sure it'd be a good thing, since at that point phase ships would probably need to be removed from the game due to how they'd be to face.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 16, 2023, 05:33:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 05:47:15 PM
IMO it's not really about the narrowness of the use case. The point is to give an option for boosting missile ammo to ships where EMR does not make sense, OP-to-missiles-reloaded-wise, under almost any circumstances, not to boost missiles overall in cases where EMR might already make some sense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Brainbread on May 16, 2023, 06:05:34 PM
Just a bug that caused me a couple of issues

During the Scan the Gates quest, I went to Magec and spaced the Tri-tachyon fleet that was interfering. A few of their ships got away and I let them go, but I was still being told that they were interfering with the gate. I left the system, came back. Same issue.

Later on in the campaign, after the Kanta quest line, I attempted to flee through said gate and was once again given the error that it was being interfered with. So I guess that quest flag never cleared despite being past that quest stage.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Spaceman_Spiff on May 16, 2023, 06:31:00 PM
Found a bug:

 - Remnants will occasionally have captured infrastructure in a remnant system. They can't capture it while I'm in-system, though they will swarm the infrastructure in response to my recapturing it. Conditions for this were a friendly colony with no patrol hub, and an active remnant station. Tends to happen after leaving the system for long periods of time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Toxcity on May 16, 2023, 06:41:00 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 06:48:58 PM
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.

(I was just looking at this, and haven't reproduced this yet; it seems to work correctly at least in the general case, hmm.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foraven on May 16, 2023, 06:58:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 16, 2023, 06:59:19 PM
I have a suggestion for a new energy focused hullmod: beam weapons equipped in bigger mounts get their damage scaled up(as well as flux cost) as more energy would be supplied to them. 
This opens up to some interesting builds, for example a more support oriented sunder could equip a graviton beam in its large slot and have it count as 3 gravitons with that hullmod, or you could equip some tactical lasers on the medium slots of an executor, and rely on your ballistic mounts for shield damage, while shifting the focus of your mediums to a more generalistic role. 
If you go for a beam build, There's very little choice, I think this hullmod could alleviate that a bit by giving more freedom to try different builds instead of the "small=tac, medium=grav, big=HIL/Tachyon".


Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 07:03:25 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sts678 on May 16, 2023, 07:35:13 PM
Hello Alex. I meet a strange thing, which is probably a bug?
When I am exploring the lost colony of Hegemony and salvaging the drone battleships around the fringe jump point, I recover a crew and some luxuries from these automatic ships. I am not sure whether it is a bug.  Or maybe it is your setting?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 07:44:32 PM
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 :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foraven on May 16, 2023, 08:04:11 PM
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?

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.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: HUcast on May 16, 2023, 08:11:55 PM
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.

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.

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.

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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 16, 2023, 08:16:29 PM
To add to what Foraven is saying, I have definitely seen my ships not respecting beam range(specifically Tachyon Lance range) and getting hit needlessly; usually happens with the Tachyon version of the Radiant. At the very edge of the range sometimes the ships will just get clipped by a beam even though they were low on flux and it would've cost them nothing to get the shield up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sts678 on May 16, 2023, 08:25:09 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 16, 2023, 08:56:20 PM
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.

Thank you, I see it! What was happening is it was considering this amount of incoming damage insignificant, in part due to its fragmentation type, and not worth keeping shields up for (and thus reducing mobility/keeping hard flux/etc, in general) unless it lost some amount of hull. I've increased the threshold a bit so it shouldn't do that anymore. Edit: there *will* be cases where that sort of thing still happens, though; that's just the breaks. But this behavior does not keep up until a ship blows up - they get more careful about it as they lose hull.

(I doubt this would account for getting clipped with Tachyon Lances; I'll keep an eye out for that.)


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.

The  hullmod tooltip talks about this :)


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.
...

Hey, awesome, I'm glad to hear someone's enjoying it :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sts678 on May 16, 2023, 09:17:24 PM
Oh, I see. Very interesting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Protonus on May 16, 2023, 10:56:09 PM
Monofilament Tow Cable has a UI bug that stretches throughout the screen.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 16, 2023, 11:24:19 PM
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.

(https://i.ibb.co/znZPDzV/image.png) (https://ibb.co/NVKWbM2)

(https://i.ibb.co/VBBHJz6/image.png) (https://ibb.co/PCCTFPk)
(https://i.ibb.co/26qGvLd/image.png) (https://ibb.co/8BM1rR9)
(https://i.ibb.co/94rFNdx/image.png) (https://ibb.co/LgZL8sT)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on May 16, 2023, 11:43:47 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: sajberhippien on May 17, 2023, 02:35:40 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 17, 2023, 03:37:32 AM
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:
1 OP -> 1 point
2-3 OP -> 2 points
4 OP -> 3 points
5-6 OP -> 4 points
7+ OP -> 6 points
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Question Mark on May 17, 2023, 03:55:11 AM
Any timeframe for Release Candidate 10?
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Draba on May 17, 2023, 04:23:21 AM
It's a lookup table on the weapon's base OP cost:
1 OP -> 1 point
2-3 OP -> 2 points
4 OP -> 3 points
5-6 OP -> 4 points
7+ OP -> 6 points
Breach/swarmer reload costs 2, Atropos 3, single Atropos 1.5 so should be something else.


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.
Feels better to stay at range, heavy autocannon has relatively high DPS for the mount that Eagle has few of and is base 800 anyway.

If you are going close IMO kinetic blasters aren't worth it, just stick some HMGs in the frontal mounts.
Further ahead + can get ballistic mastery, much higher damage, very low cost, mining blaster/phase lance/assault chaingun for armor+hull.


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.
You get 10 reapers total for 24 OP, already a complete *** deal.
15 OP ECCM or a skill for 10 reapers are both wasted, so best case the ship is firing pairs of slow, weak torpedos without the damage boost.
Often only 1 is fired, so hitrate is really, really bad (yet to see an Eagle land more than 2 shots in a battle, with <1 clean hull hit average).
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 17, 2023, 05:07:49 AM
Breach/swarmer reload costs 2, Atropos 3, single Atropos 1.5 so should be something else.

Atropos are tagged with overrides and Breach/Swarmer are 3 OP -> 2 points. MissileAutoloader.java:226.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 17, 2023, 09:16:19 AM
With so many important things about Pirates (like Hostile Activity) being influenced by Kanta, Pirates in 0.96a feel much more like a major faction monolith, one ruled by Kanta, than they used to be.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Troll on May 17, 2023, 10:34:53 AM
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.

I use ammo-less missiles on Eagles as they are long lasting harassers in my fleet.
So Salamander MRM harassement  it is. I don't expect Eagles to kill enemies quickly (or at all), they are more barbecue style., while forcing the enemies to keep shields up.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tarkets on May 17, 2023, 11:39:34 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 17, 2023, 12:05:45 PM
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.

...

Thank you! Yeah, that's a tough one to adjust for, because if you overtune for this specific case, you get the AI being even more hesitant to drop shields in other cases, to probably a greater overall detriment.


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.

(Just to be clear, the AI is aware of weapon cooldowns for this sort of thing! At least, iirc; though (also iirc) it tends to err on the side of caution.)



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.

I can't speak to what might happen with mods, but it should be save-compatible with 0.96a saves. 0.95a and 0.95.1a saves are NOT compatible with any version of 0.96a, they will crash in a million different ways.


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

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!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 17, 2023, 01:40:38 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Okawal on May 17, 2023, 01:42:37 PM
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?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 17, 2023, 01:49:35 PM
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.

Downsizing for Salamanders helps a lot with that, otherwise non-trivial, pointing at another thing part.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Tarkets on May 17, 2023, 01:50:48 PM
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

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!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 17, 2023, 01:52:17 PM
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 :)


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

Thank you for the details!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on May 17, 2023, 01:57:54 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Okawal on May 17, 2023, 02:09:53 PM
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 :)

thanks for the answer. I need to be more patient then before i start my first playthrough ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NaokiP on May 17, 2023, 04:13:17 PM
Looks like RC9 doesn't like the save I've been playing on 0.96a, game is heavily modded to be fair but it was doing fine until this latest update.

Relevant log entries appear to be (including a few prior because I'm not sure if that Nex info print could be relevant):
Spoiler
Code
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:
[close]
It prints that twice and then goes on for a while regarding AbstractReflectionConverters and TreeUnmarshallers.

Any clues on how to fix it on my end, or does this look like something it'd be worth providing further info for? Thanks.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 17, 2023, 04:20:38 PM
Oh, hmm - it looks like something is being put into the savefile that should not be. It's not clear whether this is a mod putting a reference that doesn't belong there, or if it's a vanilla issue. Would you mind sending me a copy of your save so I can take a quick look?

fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 17, 2023, 06:43:01 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on May 17, 2023, 08:35:19 PM
Is it just me or did the Heron almost disappear? Haven't seen it outside mercenary fleets.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 17, 2023, 08:39:31 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: tovarichcookie on May 17, 2023, 08:43:27 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 17, 2023, 09:09:11 PM
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.

Sounds like the perfect candidate for the new Catapult pilums. Cheap OP-wise, don't require EMR and they can fire faster than they regenerate ammo so LIDAR doesn't get too much in the way.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Insolent Peon on May 17, 2023, 11:28:47 PM
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?

Sounds like Space Trucking to me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vladokapuh on May 17, 2023, 11:35:05 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Damexius on May 18, 2023, 01:14:13 AM
Power!!!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 18, 2023, 01:17:16 AM
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 ?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 18, 2023, 01:24:16 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: NaokiP on May 18, 2023, 02:04:44 AM
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?

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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Troll on May 18, 2023, 03:19:21 AM
@ 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.

As for what missile to use, I'd say either Catapult or Locust. Locust is fast and very useful to overwhelm the more agile ships that are annoying to bear harpoints on and puts pressure on any target, while the Catapult is great for slow targets since they have EMP damage but are slow to reach said target.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vicegrip on May 18, 2023, 06:00:41 AM
An interesting interaction with looting remnant ships that I'm pretty sure isn't intended:

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 18, 2023, 06:28:56 AM
An interesting interaction with looting remnant ships that I'm pretty sure isn't intended:

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.
Clearly the malevolent machines stole humans to do something unspeakable and unknowable to our minds.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 18, 2023, 09:26:00 AM
Is it just me or did the Heron almost disappear? Haven't seen it outside mercenary fleets.

The independent faction has it, and so does the Persean League, so in theory you should see it at those markets, though it probably isn't super common.


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!

*thumbs up*

@ 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.

I'll check it out!


An interesting interaction with looting remnant ships that I'm pretty sure isn't intended:

It's kind of funny how this - or similar, with officers/crew being found in these - has come four or five separate times! I definitely get that this is unusual, but it just means there's a more interesting backstory to how that situation came to be :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Bozzola on May 18, 2023, 01:57:32 PM
Great update, can't wait to start a new save  ;D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 19, 2023, 12:48:12 AM
Maybe I have missed something but...

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 19, 2023, 01:46:20 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 19, 2023, 02:06:44 AM
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.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 19, 2023, 02:38:20 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 19, 2023, 02:47:20 AM
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?

No, I want to redirect the streams.

As I said:

"north route is eastbound, east vertical route is southbound, south route is westbound and west vertical route is northbound"
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 19, 2023, 02:53:34 AM
Ok, I misremembered that part and thought they were already doing that thing, instead of north- and south-stream running parallel.

In that case, I'm indifferent to that suggestion. May be helpful for some players, not sure if it's confusing for others.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Kelenius on May 19, 2023, 05:45:49 AM
I think I ran into a small bug - if you go to Hesperus to go to the shrine, get refused because of low relationship, then return while having the [certain item] in your inventory, you can't talk with Orbis about visiting the shrine, your only conversation option is to give him the [certain item].
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 19, 2023, 05:46:41 AM
Silly moment:  In a gate system I considered colonizing I looted a derelict drone and got a "Habitable World" pointer note.  That habitable world was 1) in the same system the drone and I were in at the moment and 2) it turned out to be the Sentinel colony (BOO!) after I went to the habitable it pointed at.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lucky33 on May 19, 2023, 07:00:23 AM
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?

This is what I'm talking about:

"I'm aiming at making slipstreams less of a pain and of more use"

And no, mostly continuous structure of slipstreams doesn't exist. Only half of the current structure can provide said continuous route.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 19, 2023, 07:05:00 AM
I miss old pegasus
also is there any future plans to expand the usurpurs storyline?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 19, 2023, 10:28:13 AM
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 Turrent 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: solardawning on May 19, 2023, 10:38:06 AM
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 went through a similar thought process- wondering why it didn't get an improvement to the in-battle Energy Damage reduction as well, but then I tried out a full S-Modded Solar Shielding fleet, and it opens up some pretty interesting gameplay options.

For example: Lure enemy fleets to chase you at the end of a corona that's pushing them away. Or into a black hole.
You can sit out of their reach for a short while, and let their CR plummet... and then engage them. :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 19, 2023, 10:42:40 AM
Qualitative benefits matter. Being completely immune to damage from hyperspace storms is a game-changer for how interesting it makes hyperspace travel. Being completely immune to neutron star beams is nice, too.

Now, I've got ships that don't have solar shielding s-modded. But they mostly sit in storage, only getting pulled out for special occasions.

(I am also running with Best of the Best. Without that, s-modding solar shielding everywhere would be rather more of a sacrifice.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 19, 2023, 10:52:03 AM
Well yeah that's what I wanted to say before that last line. S-modding it makes sense if you're going to do it for the whole fleet, but that's a huge cost just for being able to travel more comfortably. It doesn't do anything for combat unless you cheese the enemy fleets.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 19, 2023, 11:52:32 AM
On Executor, s-modding the builtin is +100% bonus, so it is a matter of "why not?" or "I need the green for faster leveling up."  As for other ships, I have more important things to s-mod.

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.

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 wonder if Combat is worth it on the flagship (that is not overpowered for its DP and/or cannot exploit dirty rotten cheese).  Old releases, Combat made the playership better than others.  Now, it is to try to keep up with everybody else in the endgame.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 19, 2023, 11:54:32 AM
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.

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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Üstad on May 19, 2023, 11:55:09 AM
Several different ships were using quantum disruptor on same ship while the effect is still lasting. Is this fixed yet?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 19, 2023, 12:05:43 PM
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.


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).
Ok so my average run has these skills:
Helmsmanship - Impact Mitigation - Field Modulation - Target Analysis - (depends on flagship) usually Missile Spec
Crew Training
Navigation - Gunnery Implants - Flux Regulation
Bulk Transport (Field Repairs for low tech runs) - Ordnance Expertise - Containment Procedures

This only makes for 12 skills but depending if my flagship is low tech (midline) or high tech, I go for Ballistic Mastery, Damage Control and Point Defense, and for high tech ships I double back to the Tech tree for Sensors, Energy Weapon Mastery and Electronic Warfare. I sometimes take Coordinated Maneuvers but other skills seem meh to me if I don't plan going full Leadership.
Tactical Drills is worse Crew Training, I don't need more officers and I don't use carriers much.

EDIT: As it's known to most players, the best skills are actually in other tiers. Ordnance Expertise is a godsend on capitals bristling with guns that need to squeeze the most of their flux.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 19, 2023, 12:06:31 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 19, 2023, 01:03:35 PM
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).

Also played out the Usurpers and got a few LG goodies out of it.  Kinetic Blasters are occasionally handy when Pulse Laser is not powerful enough (because of the ship's mounts).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 19, 2023, 01:21:56 PM
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).

I feel like it's best to do that quest in a d-modded Hound fit with two small guns, Augmented Drive Field, Safety Overrides, and Unstable Injector, so you can lay claim to the fastest hunk of junk in the galaxy.  Also bonus points from a spacer start, so you've got a mysterious debt (to a potential crime boss to be revealed in StarSector 3.0). :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 19, 2023, 05:58:25 PM
Just make Kanta the crime boss.  The robot-zombie-pirate is close enough to Jabba, and has a minion (Cydonia?) who gets humiliated from time to time.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on May 19, 2023, 06:49:02 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 19, 2023, 08:11:03 PM
On a related note: does Entropy Amplifier stack? The code looks like it does.

It shouldn't; they'll all modify the target's damage-taken stats using the same id, meaning they'll just overwrite each other's modifications (with the same value).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on May 19, 2023, 08:21:36 PM
I just want to say that its the worst update since(lets me check) 2022. Of course some people may argue that ist actualy the best update since 2022. We may both right because it was only update since 2022.
So far having fun, Luddic quest is quite nice and wholesome. Really great art.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 19, 2023, 08:53:02 PM
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 never got seriously into flagshipping but from my theorycrafting if you pilot a fast short ranged high tech ship like Aurora you can get by with as little as three combat skills and still remain effective. Hell, you could probably make do with only two(Field Modulation and Target Analysis)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 20, 2023, 01:39:33 AM
Okay double post because this is just funny.

When you order a ship to retreat it will cause it to instantly drop shields and then to flicker them constantly. Which means ordering your ship to retreat is one of the easiest ways to lose it.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 20, 2023, 02:17:33 AM
Yeah the AI is either god tier or absolute clowns with shield usage, there's no middle ground. Is it even aware of the zero flux speed boost? Because I have a similar problem with it.

End of the fight, there's only a single enemy frigate left, all by itself. And my genius AI Aurora with an aggressive officer will slowly approach it with shields up and not even use the system to kill it. It can be a Shephed, a Hound, anything non threatening all alone. And somehow the AI is scared of it, like something horrible is going to spawn out of it if it dies. Even steady ships should try to end the fight versus a single lone non phase frigate, especially a 30 DP aggressive elite ship.

So sometimes I'm so annoyed that I have to transfer command and do it myself. Scarab also tends to not realize how strong it is and just slowly drifts towards the enemy. This is not new though, I've witnessed this in previous versions but it's not a huge deal since you can just give the Eliminate command. But sometimes even then they seem skittish.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vind on May 20, 2023, 09:08:12 AM
The most clown usage of shield i saw - radiant with gamma core used shield to "tank" one gazer missile beam on the rear side with no enemy ships here at all while enemy eagle was in front of it with half flux empty for weapons usage. Needless to say next thing is eagle fires all weapons and AI cant rise shields in time receiving damage on precious forward armor.
    Also all high tech frigates love to be destroyed by auto cannon fire on hull  the worst offenders is omens and even scarabs.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 09:47:08 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 10:20:38 AM
Hotfix is up! Full list of changes in the OP.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on May 20, 2023, 10:22:25 AM
Oh yeah all the changes are very nice.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 20, 2023, 10:35:07 AM
Looking good!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 20, 2023, 10:40:45 AM
MY FAVORITE SHIP IS BACK!
THANK YOU ALEX
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on May 20, 2023, 10:42:51 AM
Loving it! Welcome back Pegasus!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 20, 2023, 11:04:47 AM
Awesome, thank you Alex!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Princess_of_Evil on May 20, 2023, 11:19:55 AM
>Skins of a base hull (e.g. Falcon (P)) will now keep the skin's description prefix when the hull becomes a (D) due to acquiring d-mods

PRAISE BE
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 20, 2023, 11:40:13 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 20, 2023, 12:02:52 PM
Executor is called a "Missile Battleship" too, but unlike Pegasus, Executor does not have more (large) missile mounts than some other capitals.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 12:04:58 PM
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?

Yep.

Executor is called a "Missile Battleship" too, but unlike Pegasus, Executor does not have more (large) missile mounts than some other capitals.

Oof, thank you. Fixed (by changing the Pegasus back to Battleship).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 20, 2023, 12:21:22 PM
Okay this is so trivial I would be embarrassed to make a bug report topic about it, but in the latest version, RC10 with my old save file that I started on RC9, there's a shrine on Gilead where I have the option to leave Brother Cotton's book as an offering.  I can leave the book as an offering as many times as I visit the shrine.

The unsaleable drugs and organs I made a bug report about are still on the market at Derinkyuu Station as well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 12:52:38 PM
Thank you, noted!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 20, 2023, 01:08:12 PM
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 relay was trying to test the Janus Prototype in occupied space to see what happens.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on May 20, 2023, 01:18:57 PM
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 relay was trying to test the Janus Prototype in occupied space to see what happens.

I think it's intentional. The two slashes indicate notes in the code, SC means Scylla Coureuse.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 02:20:17 PM
Yep, that bit is intentional.

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.

Thank you! The tutorial is breakable in some ways and not exactly on rails, so that sort of thing will happen. Though iirc in this case it specifically doesn't check whether the player has the core so as not to soft-lock it if they dump it into the sun or something. Or possibly that was an accident and left in for that reason, I don't quite remember :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 20, 2023, 03:19:51 PM
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 forwards
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 20, 2023, 03:25:26 PM
A new hotfix is always very welcome.

  • Trade fleets should in general not try to engage each other even if their factions are hostile
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.

  • Fixed issue with patrol fleets "patrolling system" and then "preparing for patrol duty", in some circumstances
I'm again and again impressed how quick you fix even such small bugs.

  • 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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 03:27:00 PM
  • 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on May 20, 2023, 03:33:26 PM
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.

Ok, so only a fix for new ships, got it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 20, 2023, 03:34:30 PM
Uhh, Asharus stellar shade is orbiting the sun in sync with the comm relay I guess? Is that normal?

Fresh RC10 although I still have a separate 0.95.1, Vanilla so zero mods, only change I did in the config was altmousetransfer on.
Is this a bug or am I missing something?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 03:38:55 PM
It's normal; the shade presumably went out of its orbit.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 20, 2023, 03:40:37 PM
Ohh... Okay.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 20, 2023, 04:00:19 PM
Yet another one.  There's some weirdness with the climax of the Galatia Academy storyline.  If this is obnoxious, I'll make separate topics in Bug Reports for all these, but it seems to be working.

Major Spoilers for the campaign
So after I met Cotton again and got the Loke clone from him, I took him back to the den, Kanta broke the deal as she has the other forty times I played the campaign this far, I spaced the clone, and fought the mercenary fleets.  Now my standard campaign story goes, I fight the mercenary fleets, then fight the Den itself, then I raid the Den until there's nothing left worth stealing, then I raid it until all the infrastructure is disabled for a year or more, then I precision bomb it.  But this time, the game wouldn't let me fight the Den, it said so much heat has been generated by my actions I can't do any business there.  I just want to trade a bunch of missiles and bullets for a bunch of experience points and a bit of satisfaction, but I can't even attack the Den.  A nearby Independent fleet was able to throw themselves suicidally at the battlestation, but I couldn't.  I even Transverse Jumped out of the system and came back in, but it still wouldn't let me fight the Den.

So I went to the Academy with Elissa Zal to finish the story, and Baird showed me a video of something that didn't happen.
https://i.imgur.com/Agk6U3V.jpg
I mean, that's how it would have gone, if I had been able to demolish the Den, I would have went to the Gate afterwards.  But I was thinking I need to turn in Zal at the Academy and maybe I will be able to interact with the Den again.  I didn't get the chance, because the Den decivilized while I was en route to the Academy.  I didn't even get to give my Judge Dredd speech.

Maybe this happened because I had raided the Den for drugs and luxury goods a month before and there was a lingering stability penalty left over, which took effect when the Den was no longer plot-protected from being decivilized?  I'd still like to have got the final whack in on them after Kanta betrayed me like the Darth Vader-wannabe version of Ma-Ma scorpion-in-the-shape-of-a-cyborg that she is (I mean that as a compliment if you read this, Jorien).  I gave my word to Brother Livewell.

Then when I went back to the ruins of the Den, there's only two inhabitants, the traffic control officer that likes half red and half green fry, and a somewhat impolite portboss who is not even courteous enough to have a defined identity.
https://i.imgur.com/eqS6V3I.jpg

This is the same campaign I've been talking about the past few days, started in .96 hotfix 9, moved my save over to hotfix 10 this morning, modded only in that my max character level is 30 and my max battle size is 500 and a custom faction flag.
[close]

Nice touch having my systems officer complain about the screen whiteout when ships explode.  Too bad, put on your sunglasses and deal with it, I like it that way.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 04:06:46 PM
Do you happen to have a save where you can't fight the den? That sounds weird.

Spoiler
(The video Baird showed you is fine, 100% intentional. Sure you didn't do it, a little thing like that isn't going to stop her PR campaign.)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 20, 2023, 04:17:14 PM
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"?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: vicegrip on May 20, 2023, 04:19:15 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 04:20:19 PM
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"?

The save folder would be ideal, fractalsoftworks [at] gmail [dot] com, if you don't mind - thank you!

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?

Not intended and fixed :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 20, 2023, 04:44:30 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on May 20, 2023, 04:46:24 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 20, 2023, 05:35:10 PM
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 forwards
Missiles are always nice to have though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 05:53:48 PM
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.

I get what you're saying - and made a note - but I don't think it's all that straightforward. It gives up point-defenses and the use of Canister Flak while venting, which can make quite a difference if there are bombers or torpedoes or similar around.

In general, ships without shields suffer less from being at high flux, too - sometimes it's even a positive (as with polarized armor), and the dissipation of the Invictus can be pretty good - 1000+. So it *can* put out reasonable firepower. And, on the flipside, if its dissipation is poor, it'll take even longer to vent.

And if it's surrounded... I'm not sure how much venting is going to help, really. I mean, there'll be situations when it does and when it doesn't.

Being so tough does mean it could get away with it more often, though, certainly. I just think it's not always clear when, and there are some other factors pulling in the other direction, too.

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?

Thank you, made a note! Not intended behavior, but also something where I could see how it would not have been affected by the Tri-Tach fleet fix.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on May 20, 2023, 06:20:25 PM
Quote
Fixed "protection from star corona" for certain structure not working for certain battle

Oh, that was a fun one. It was unexpected, but I barely managed a win after my Aroura and Executor both got plinked to death by the last six fighters while sitting at zero percent CR.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sarissofoi on May 20, 2023, 07:14:22 PM
BTW
Can venture get Salvage gantry?
Sure it would make Rig obsolete but then Rig could grant ability to add Logistic Hullmods in space or/and speed up repairs or ability to change weapons or maybe even hull mods (without losing CR(or at discount in case of Hullmods).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 20, 2023, 07:47:22 PM
Just make a capital size rig
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 20, 2023, 07:52:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 20, 2023, 08:14:09 PM
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.

Thank you, I'll check it out!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 20, 2023, 09:31:29 PM
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.

I think I narrowed down the issue to Shield Conversion - Front.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MhlfKS_n8Nc

Here's a vid comparing AI behaviour without and with it(I got off easy because I timed the Retreat order between volleys)

[Edit]Auto-embed is the bane of my existence
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Jaghaimo on May 21, 2023, 04:08:18 AM
Quote
An RC version mismatch no longer flags mods as potentially incompatible with the game

I'm not sure about this. Any RC that adds new method signatures (like RC10 does with say TooltipMakerAPI.addCheckbox) will not be flagged as incompatible. Example: game on RC9, mod requires RC10 (since it uses those methods) will happily launch... and crash on usage of missing methods.

It probably needs to be backwards only. Game on RC10 and mod requiring RC9 will play fine since you don't make incompatible changes in RCs so no warning. But mod requiring RC10 and game being RC9 or less should still bring the warning.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 21, 2023, 08:24:59 AM
Ahh, that's a good point, I wasn't thinking about it going in that direction. Made a note, thank you!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sabaton on May 21, 2023, 08:39:49 AM
You really outdid yourself with the Lions Guard skins, they look great! Probably warrants a revisit to the battlegroup skins since they're so dated?

Most of the Guards ships themselves are just as dubious in effectiveness as the descriptions make them to be, quite gimmicky to make proper use of them.

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?

Also, the mausoleum shrine really made me emotional :'( . Your storytelling is getting better and better, keep working on that and SS might get close to the likes of Homeworld regarding plot quality.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: llama on May 21, 2023, 09:01:28 AM
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?

I was thinking it would be cool to remake the LR PD Laser as a small-slot equivalent of the IR Autolance, with the same frag damage type and continuous charge system (plus PD tag). But I suppose this would be way too oppressive for fighters.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 21, 2023, 04:31:12 PM
Just started a new game (because I was unhappy with system generation for colonies with the old game).  Noticed that Pather and Pirate planets do not have massive shortages right off the bat as in recent releases.  I still had a minor shortage to make about 40k-50k, but not a massive shortage of supplies, drugs, or arms that would yield more or less 200k with a small fleet on a good run.  I guess I will need to look for a pirate convoy to intercept and kill to cause a shortage.

Will we get another hotfix or is .1 the next stop?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 21, 2023, 05:48:05 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 21, 2023, 06:06:49 PM
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.)
It's in the RC10 patch notes as fixed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on May 21, 2023, 07:59:12 PM
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.
Great news! Will .1 have skill changes (like for CA/NL)?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on May 22, 2023, 08:37:12 AM
Is it me or are contact bounty officer levels inflated (for reasons I haven't noticed in the code)?

Like with Tri-Tachyon still having its 1-5-1 doctrine, this bounty probably shouldn't be all level 6s with a level 7 commander
(payout was <250k IIRC)
(https://i.imgur.com/QSuifET.png)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 22, 2023, 09:07:05 AM
If you look in the CBDeserter class, you can see how that's set up. Looks like for a difficulty 10 bounty it's:

size = FleetSize.MAXIMUM;
quality = FleetQuality.HIGHER;
oQuality = OfficerQuality.HIGHER;
oNum = OfficerNum.MORE;

So still based off the doctrine, to some degree, but better.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on May 22, 2023, 09:38:06 AM
Noticed a few things, not sure if intentional:

 - 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.

 - 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.

 - 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.

 - I'm not sure if this is due to the recent changes to make sure tithing is offered regardless of faction relationship, but Luddic Path fleets will threaten the player with death upon accepting communications, even if relationship is at 100 percent. They won't attack, though, so this only happens if the player comes over to talk to them.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 22, 2023, 10:49:14 AM
Thank you, made some notes!

- 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.

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.

Excellent :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Rain on May 22, 2023, 11:31:49 AM
... Should I be worried..? This feels very ominous.
Spoiler
(https://i.imgur.com/BfGxosk.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 22, 2023, 12:12:10 PM
- 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.

That the ship she used for that was hers and that she'll probably want it back seems reasonable for the PC to know even if they don't have a mission from her to recover it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 22, 2023, 12:17:39 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 22, 2023, 12:25:36 PM
Could also just be you looking up the ship's VIN on the TriWeb (local copy) and seeing that there's a wanted notice on it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 22, 2023, 12:26:18 PM
Hamatsu can simply have the name of its owner and their address written down somewhere on the bridge. The player doesn't have to know Ibrahim beforehand.

edit: ninja'd
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 22, 2023, 12:48:42 PM
Assuming she is the administrator of the entire planet, and not just the person in charge of the port you docked to
Her official rank is "Entrepreneur," but she's the one who pops up on the Administrator slot if you open Agreus' planetary data, yes.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 22, 2023, 01:01:55 PM
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".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 22, 2023, 01:07:45 PM
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).

There's also a separate quartermaster, so we know she's not that, either.

Is there any particular reason you're so opposed to her being the planetary administrator?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 22, 2023, 01:46:27 PM
You can also dock to many other planets and not see any administrator, but "base commanders", "station commanders" or "portmasters".
Nevermind, they are just further down the contact screen. Except for Ancyra, which has only the station commander, for whatever reason.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Zaizai on May 22, 2023, 02:59:13 PM
I noticed a weird bug with AI piloted invictus (aggressive), they stand at max range, they activate the lidar array, shoot 1 time, then back off while the lidar array is off instead of shooting...once it's on cooldown they start getting really close. 
maybe make it so once the lidar array is active they just don't back down for no reason?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Doctorhealsgood on May 22, 2023, 03:55:57 PM
Guys i think the problem is that giving the Hamatsu back is bugged not a lore thing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on May 22, 2023, 04:25:38 PM
- 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.


Had a look - I'm on the right version, but the issue was spotted in an old save. Apologies for the false alarm.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Ehlloes on May 22, 2023, 10:00:50 PM
On a new save I've run into a 2 different star systems that have a neutron star as well as an habitable world, neither of which is irradiated. I believe this was supposed to be fixed, but perhaps it has something to do with the fact these are both trinary systems. This is on RC9.
As a side note, I've seen a few gates in systems with neutron stars, both where the neutron star is a secondary star (specifically the Gamma Sar system in the screenshot), and where the neutron star is the primary. I don't know if this intentional, but it's rather annoying, as using those gates becomes a bit of a roulette. I feel like it doesn't make a lot of lore sense either for the Domain to have placed interstellar travel points right next to the No. 1 stellar hazard.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Sts678 on May 23, 2023, 01:54:00 AM
Hello, Alex. The name of Pegasus shown in the missions seems to have some problem with its row spacing.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Jaghaimo on May 23, 2023, 03:56:32 AM
Noticed Executor is missing from Codex despite being "known" by and sold by (in Military Markets) the Sindrian Diktat.

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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on May 23, 2023, 06:15:29 AM
Noticed Executor is missing from Codex despite being "known" by and sold by (in Military Markets) the Sindrian Diktat.

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).
Executor is a skin of the Pegasus and the codex doesn’t show skins.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on May 24, 2023, 10:24:14 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on May 24, 2023, 10:27:10 AM
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.
I found the Hamatsu and returned it before starting up that section of the main plot, and it worked fine for me.

(Though, sample size of one, here. Well, two, I guess, with David's comment on having tested it above. From which we can conclude that this definitely works at least some of the time!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 24, 2023, 10:34:09 AM
Just started a new game with Navigation as my first skill, grabbed the Hamatsu, returned it just fine.

Sticking the MC in the captain's seat didn't interfere with the handover, but I'm not sure what would have happened if it was the only ship in my fleet.

... That said, having just done that, the game should probably have a special message for the player when they actually do that rather than quietly giving them the quest in the background. Preferably a message that happens before the player can choose to break the ship up.

There's in-universe explanations for why the MC would know to hand the ship over to Ibrahim, but they're not things that go without saying, and it's far from impossible for an exploration-minded player to find the ship early without intentionally trying to sequence break.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 24, 2023, 12:03:53 PM
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.

I always go to the hidden location as early as possible, sometimes right after beating the tutorial.  I'm just there for the Omega weapons but the hundred grand you get for returning the Hamatsu is a nice bonus as well.  In both my previous campaign in .96a RC6 and my current campaign that started on RC9 and I moved my save over to RC10, it has worked fine, although I returned the Hamatsu before I moved my save to RC10.  So call that a sample size of four.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on May 24, 2023, 09:17:09 PM
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.

Tested it again and it came out fine. Uncertain what went wrong the first time, but I'm unable to replicate it. Most likely something obscure on my end due to my having broken something else somewhere, and not worth worrying about, given that others haven't reported any issues.

I did find a few more things since my last post. Mostly small things, but some might be worth looking into:

 - (Bug?) The player can occasionally see a pirate Academy Shuttle Service ship. It'll give the standard pirate greetings, and attempt to interdict non-pirate traffic. I think they spawn at pirate bases, but I'm not sure.

 - (Very minor) Inspections and expeditions that get destroyed by any means are credited to the "defenders" of a colony.

 - (Bug) A "Hegemony is not hostile, are you sure you want to go to war with them?" message pops up sometimes when dealing with the rogue Hegemony officer after rescuing Gargoyle. It doesn't happen all the time, and will resolve itself if the player clicks on another dialogue after it happens and then engages.

 - (Very minor) If the player obtains Scylla and the archive at the same time, he'll have to undock and redock before the archive can be turned in.

 - (Very minor) A derelict Executor gets labelled as a "Pegasus-class Missile Battleship" when moused over.

 - (Intentional?) The player can't mention the planet-killer to any of the Persean League NPCs.

 - (Intentional?) The player can meet with Kanta after Kanta's Den de-civilizes. Kanta's Wrath also persists after decivilization.

 - (Bug) If the player meets with Kanta after the den decivilizes, the station leader will not be present in the game's data, and his name will appear as "$personName" in the dialogue.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on May 25, 2023, 06:21:00 AM
(lots of bug reports)

Awesome, thank you! This is a good pile of issues that have given us much to figure out.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 26, 2023, 12:37:14 AM
Hey, I have 2 minor bugs to report (vanilla):
3 times I experienced it, every 10 - 15 hours the game sort of slows down: saving and using a jump hole etc. takes 10 times as long, the save progress bar stutters once the slowdown happens, I restarted the game each time it happened and that fixed it, xmx etc. to 4096 had no effect (changed it from standard values after it happend the first time, sort of hoped to fix it). I did not experience such slowdowns in earlier versions without mods...
Except for that the game runs smooth in 4k as it should I guess.
(pc used for the game: Haswell Core i5 4590 3.3GHz base clock, 20GB ram, TLC SSD Crucial mx500 1TB, gtx 960 4GB)

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 26, 2023, 12:42:53 AM
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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 26, 2023, 12:54:39 AM
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.

- (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.

Additional info (4 da balance I guess), contains spoilers:
Spoiler
I did all content except hypershunt, the bounty with the dorito and bounties with 2 or more guardians, without fitting any ships by hand or flying a ship so only autofit + battle commands, also had only a few officers in use.

My fleets with 200DP - 350DP I used consisted of:
Capitals only against battle stations and star fortresses, like paragon, the new missle capital and Astral. Dooms, Eradicators non P, occasionally Apogees, Auroras, Eagles, Champions and Falcon P.
Destroyers and smaller: Sunders including the ones from Sindra, Hammerheads, Medusas, normal and TT brawlers, Afflictors mostly P. I mostly commanded point taking, flanking/battle line and the occasional eliminate, otherwise I did not do much, Ordos or some (a few) high bounties were a pain, the more expensive TT elite phase bounty was a pain, rest of the content was a breeze.

E: I did not dare to progress the event bar with my colonies but I found [the bomb].
E2: No S-Mods on combat ships were used. :D I am surprised it worked that well, with only a few officers and zero hand fitted combat ships, no S-Mods... Okay, Dooms are insane especially with system expertise, Afflictors and Eradicators are very strong, Sunders with High Intensity or Autopulse lasers (and Tach Lances) are strong.

E3: I also used the insane monitors for a few hours in the earlier part of the run, the fleet was mostly below 240DP excluding logistics and fortress busting for most of the run. Autofit is stronger than I expected. :D
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 26, 2023, 01:37:26 AM
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.

They always were very rare. But yeah they're a vanilla feature, as long as they have D-mods, don't move and give you the special text.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 26, 2023, 01:46:01 AM
Yeah. RC10 fresh run, I wasn't much in the outskirts of the sector but I encountered ZERO such fleets
Spoiler
which initially are sensor ghosts before they hover in and reveal themselves
[close]
in 30-45h of play time...
Spoiler
I think they also don't have any cores.
[close]

E: Found some screenshots online, so maybe they can have friend balls? I don't remember...
>distance
Yeah, I think it is but I dunno? Really weird that I didn't find a single one... I mean I wasn't much in the outskirts but still...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on May 26, 2023, 02:03:01 AM
Spoiler
which initially are sensor ghosts before they hover in and reveal themselves
[close]
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 27, 2023, 03:17:09 AM
Hyperspace ghosts resolving into derelicts, I mean a hyperspace ghost resolving into a single random derelict ship is vanilla or am I mistaken? Never saw that in my 30-45h fresh RC10 run either. I did have the
Spoiler
shadowing ghost, the charge ghost, the stream generating ghost, the interdicting ghost/s and maybe even a swarm of smaller ghosts but I encountered zero ghosts to derelicts and as mentioned no ghosts turned into redacted rust bucket fleets
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 27, 2023, 03:33:26 AM
I mean a hyperspace ghost resolving into a single random derelict ship is vanilla

Yes.

I don't think the D-modded Remnant fleet is a ghost, they just hang out in hyperspace close to edge of the map.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 27, 2023, 03:41:17 AM
Afaik ghost fleets can hover in and resolve into heavily D-modded remnant fleets which are inactive but can be attacked if one wishes, chance of a ghost fleet resolving into a remnant fleet is very low I think and needs a certain (far) distance from the core to happen at all(?), unless a mod did that but I think it is a vanilla feature.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: serp on May 27, 2023, 07:11:54 PM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 27, 2023, 07:15:22 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: serp on May 27, 2023, 08:00:39 PM
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 remember originally thinking that the fight was a way to punish people for using high tech, which was more or less seen as far superior at the time. And carriers of course, lol. Not a very good foundation for a gimmick, if that's the case.

Fight a (supposedly) complete unknown with efficient shields and papery hulls? You die! How fun!

Anyway, I think the fight's much harder now, regardless
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 27, 2023, 08:09:51 PM
Well, the phase AI has changed this version, but I'm not sure it did much for Zig. The difficulty there doesn't come from it doing anything smart, just "unfair" mechanics and high numbers. None of the hull or weapon stats, or captain skills, changed.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 27, 2023, 10:24:17 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Amoebka on May 27, 2023, 10:38:42 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 27, 2023, 11:09:49 PM
So both Ziggurats in sim_opponents_dev.csv are player Ziggurats? Because I remember testing against both of them.

What's the variant name for AI Ziggurat then?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 28, 2023, 04:32:08 AM
Yesterday, I had a ghost manifest into a Monitor derelict ship.  It was not the usual blip for random derelict ships commonly seen, but it behaved like the Remnant ghost fleet (enough that I was expecting a fight with Remnant clunkers and take their ships), and it had special text about automated something.  However, the Monitor could be recovered like any other derelict human ship and it had no unusual properties.  The special text made me expect an automated human ship like the ones at Sentinel.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 28, 2023, 04:46:32 AM
...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...

What unidentified hyperspace blobs and nightmares will the next update introduce? o.O
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: prav on May 28, 2023, 05:18:35 AM
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

Yeah I ran into this myself, it'd just squat in phase exactly underneath my Auroras and almost instagib them through the shields.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 28, 2023, 05:39:52 AM
I encountered Remnant ghost fleets more than once last release, but the Monitor ghost that moved like a ghost Remnant fleet before manifesting was new to me.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 28, 2023, 09:52:52 AM
@ Dadada:  That ghost Monitor had a bigger blip than the usual random derelicts.  The text is not the same as ghost Remnants; but it is unusual.  I forgot what it said, but it hinted at spooky stuff, which was disappointing when the end result was yet another derelict human ship with more d-mods than usual.  I spent a story point to recover the Monitor to see if it had Automated Ship bolted on like the Sentinel guardians, but it did not.  I thought "Lame! I can buy or build a new one with less d-mods!" and reloaded the game and scrapped the ghost ship for salvage.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Network Pesci on May 28, 2023, 10:07:49 AM
I'm not sure if this is a bug or intended behavior.  I went to Horus Yaribay looking for work (he's one of my five primary contacts this playthrough) and he had military bounties on offer.  I asked him for something challenging, and he gave me a Persean deserter bounty in the Zeta Kalico system.  I thought that sounded familiar, it's one of mine.  I have two size five colonies there.  Are bounties supposed to generate in inhabited systems?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 28, 2023, 10:40:06 AM
It can happen, yeah. Argument to be made that perhaps it shouldn't; I'll keep that in mind!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foraven on May 28, 2023, 01:17:28 PM
Not sure if it's vanilla code or interference from one of the installed mods, but the variety of bar encounters at my colonies are mostly pirates for some reason. I am at -100 with them yet I keep getting missions and other stuff from them there even though none of my colonies are free ports. I rarely get any legitimate missions there like trade or military stuff from my own faction.

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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on May 28, 2023, 02:03:35 PM
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.

I know there are military bounties in my colonies' bars, but they are sporadic and unreliable.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SonnaBanana on May 28, 2023, 08:09:32 PM
I think Hostile ships destroyed by Mercenaries/Patrols should also reduce hostile activity, it shouldn't just be from the player engaging them directly. Perhaps a randomized reduction every month if it's abstracted away?

And failed raids should also give reductions.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 29, 2023, 08:44:29 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 29, 2023, 09:28:37 AM
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)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 29, 2023, 10:06:01 AM
yeah i encounter this as well but this happens to me without an officer assigned to it. weird that ships are having some shield issues with the conversion hullmods
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 29, 2023, 10:13:21 AM
Sounds similar to the Monitor shield conversion bug I reported few pages back. (that I think Alex missed)

Where was that? I remember we had a conversation about it but I couldn't reproduce the scenario. ... aaaah, I think you mentioned something about it only happening with Shield Conversion - Front, right, right. And it just kinda fell through the cracks on my end. But that was specifically to do with the retreat order. Took a look just now - was able to reproduce and fix this! But yeah, this was exclusive to the retreat order being given to the ship.

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.

Hmm - I'll keep an eye out! It's really hard to tell just from a description whether this is a bug or not; with AI stuff being able to observe it directly in-game is worth its weight in gold. So if you've got a situation where it happens reliably or semi-reliably, that would be super, super helpful!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: averagebaughb on May 29, 2023, 03:13:25 PM
When buying ships, should the open market have a bunch of D-mods, and the black market have almost no D-mods?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on May 29, 2023, 03:28:06 PM
Yep. Thought the black market hulls could probably stand to be a bit less pristine.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foraven on May 29, 2023, 04:55:10 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on May 29, 2023, 07:12:11 PM
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.
If the ship's front armour is destroyed then the AI will turn it so fresh armor is facing the enemy.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Liral on May 30, 2023, 12:09:55 AM
Is the following mods-or-vanilla-but-not-both behavior intended?  I have had to work around it. :( 
Code
Global.getSettings(String path, boolean withMods)
returns the entries from the merged weapon_data.csv for mods without the entries from the vanilla weapon_data.csv if withMods is true; else, it returns the entries from the vanilla weapon_data.csv with empty JSONObjects corresponding to the entries from merged weapon_data.csv for mods.  To have all weapon_data.csv entries in one JSONArray, I have had to load each one and then merge them with this code.
Code
        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; }
        }
Edit: Users have reported that this code does not work either.
Edit: Trying this code. 
Code
Global.getSettings().getMergedSpreadsheetData("id", "data/weapons/weapon_data.csv")
It loads both vanilla and mod weapon_data.csv into one merged JSONArray on my end, and I hope it works on theirs.  Why does this method require a column name?  I had to guess and hope that "id" would work; the method returned everything rather than just "id".  I'm confused. :(
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 30, 2023, 01:40:38 AM
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.
If the ship's front armour is destroyed then the AI will turn it so fresh armor is facing the enemy.

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.

Wait don't we already have that with illegal arms dealers when encountering them in taverns or pubs? sounds a little repetitive if there was already another black market to sell more high end hulls. Would bump to have black markets sell more ships with D-mods. still remember getting an XIV onslaught on the black market in chicomoztoc without any d-mods but the one's in the open market have 1 or 2 D-mods.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Foraven on May 30, 2023, 04:41:22 PM
If the ship's front armour is destroyed then the AI will turn it so fresh armor is facing the enemy.

Ah well, I stand corrected.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 31, 2023, 02:15:10 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on May 31, 2023, 04:19:59 AM
Encountered a scenario where I got a few brilliants(used Alpha cores) and instead of staying a safe distance they began to ram the front of the station and died after that. Seen this a lot lately with AI ships even steady does not stay a safe distance anymore(although they only start to get close once the stations flux is high).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on May 31, 2023, 04:34:35 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on May 31, 2023, 05:20:47 AM
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.

Oh yeah, when fighting stations AI gets a major kick in the butt. But I feel like the kick is stronger in this patch.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on May 31, 2023, 01:41:32 PM
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.

I'm sure there are others that agree that out of all the ship sizes, destroyer is the one that needs the most love. Frigates/Cruisers/Capitals are doing just fine, but destroyers struggle to find a place—especially in late game fleets.

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BigBrainEnergy on May 31, 2023, 03:15:56 PM
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.

Sunder, hammerhead, enforcer.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on May 31, 2023, 03:34:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on May 31, 2023, 09:14:09 PM
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.

I've noticed this too. Ships with movement abilities try to ram the smaller modules, which generally leaves them out of position and unable to retreat. I've mostly seen this with automated ships and pirates (but maybe this is because those ships have movement-related abilities more often) - is it possible that reckless AI is only considering the targeted module, and not the whole station?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on May 31, 2023, 10:49:23 PM
it'd be nice to get a few more destroyers
1000 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...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on June 01, 2023, 02:14:43 AM
Destroyers are in an awkward spot where they're often neither quite fast enough or tough enough to survive long enough to help in bigger battles without being made overpowered in early game fights. Hammerheads are properly the best example of this, in early game they're really good but then fall off in the late game. They generally need to have a gimmick or be elite like Hyperion to stay relevant.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on June 01, 2023, 02:17:18 AM
Hyperion is a frigate...

It seems only the long ranged Destroyers have a place in late game fights, like Sunders and Manticores. You could use Shrikes and Medusas for pursuit scenarios but frigates are better.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on June 01, 2023, 02:57:57 AM
While destroyers are kinda too slow to catch faster frigates, I still like them that way, but if we get new ones maybe a class of "pursuit" destroyers or some with decent speed or a good movement system could be nice to crush frigates which are faster than 100, and yes, Medusa and Shrike are fast and fit that role. Damn, I know I am being a nag but I would really like more destroyers and maybe a few more cruisers.

E: The Huntress, a destroyer from Vayras ship pack (? or Vayras Sector?) I think would be a nice addition after maybe rebalancing it, I think it fits vanilla well.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on June 01, 2023, 03:08:31 AM
Ehh, destroyers are cool but kinda limited in what they do. I'm always more excited about upcoming cruisers, as they're in the sweetspot of ship classes. Big enough that they make an impact and have great build variety while also not costing 40 DP so that most fleet are cruiser heavy. The feeling of fighting each faction usually rests on cruisers since you'll probably spend most of the time engaging with them (small ships die fast and capitals are here and there).

Note that we still don't have a high tech ship with a large energy turret. Apogee has a hardpoint and Champion is almost a high tech ship.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 01, 2023, 03:28:32 AM
Frigates are a lot faster than next size class and have unique skill interactions that emphasize them (mostly Coordinated Maneuvers, to lesser degree elite Cybernetic Implants). And are just better at taking capturable points due to speed.

Destroyers are only slightly faster than next size class (on average, it's really on ship by ship basis). For smart player this small speed advantage is enough to pilot a destroyer safely (though even then, there is little reason to - there are many far more impactful ships for player to pilot). AI-piloted destroyers just fail at cardinal rule of "outrun what you can't outgun".

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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2023, 05:11:14 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on June 01, 2023, 06:08:02 AM
Medusa is already a bit of a super-destroyer in player hands, especially if you put omega weapons on it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on June 01, 2023, 06:11:59 AM
Last version, Medusa seemed like a worse Hyperion for less DP. Which is kind of kooky when the latter is the frigate. Haven't played a single High Tech ship this version though.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TaLaR on June 01, 2023, 10:16:18 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 01, 2023, 04:31:46 PM
Medusa is not super like it was during early 0.6a.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on June 01, 2023, 05:54:14 PM
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.
A lot of ships are better with omega weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on June 01, 2023, 06:10:16 PM
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).

I'll note Medusa seem a lot more common to me now, given they've been added to the Independents roster, in addition to Tri-tach's.  I think I've run across my first Medusa for sale fairly early on in a number of runs.  Just doing a check with 3 quickly started game and Stellar Networks, there's typically 4-7 Medusa for sale somewhere at the beginning of the game.  Falcon (P) seems to number between 8 and 12.  I'd say it's only about half as common as the Falcon (P).  So something like 1/3 chance you'll find a Medusa before a 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 would also need to be costed like a battlecruiser, given a Hyperion is costed like a Falcon or Venture.

Although, Medusa literally hits about as hard as a Hyperion, so cruiser tier by that metric, given it havs identical maximum flux stat lines, and similar 2 medium energy plus one medium universal vs 2 small universal and 3 forward small energies.  System Expertise NPC officers can make it move pretty well.

I do think the Extended Shields s-mod helps them a fair bit, along with the extra 5 OP.  360 shield Medusa are possible now, but perhaps not optimal due to phase skimmer dropping shields.  In AI hands, they seem to stand up to 0.96 late game Ordos better than most frigates (although perhaps not Hyperions).  I've been trying to make use of some aggressive SO Glimmers but they just drop really fast.  Scarabs which used to do OK end game seem to also pop rather quickly for me.  All those Brilliants switching to Plasma Burn (and losing the fighter wings), and the introduction of Novas, means Ordo hunting is harder for frigates, while making it easier for missile ships (since there are fewer PD fighters, no smart flares, and Novas are glass cannons).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on June 02, 2023, 06:59:36 AM
it'd be nice to get a few more destroyers
1000 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on June 02, 2023, 07:02:37 AM
it'd be nice to get a few more destroyers
1000 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.
Manticore LP says hi.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: MajorTheRed on June 02, 2023, 08:34:29 AM
I love how the game feel less and less like a sandbox and more like a living setting to which your character belong. I'm in the middle of a new run, re-playing the main quest (already finished a few side quests). A twist of luck really made for a great experience in my current situation in the main quest:
Gargoyle needed to be evacuated from the Tri-Tach station after the heist because the Hegemony is unhappy. Well, it happened both the Task force and the S-mod fleets jumped in on the Station in-system. I was thinking about fleeing, but a second after, Hegemony and Tri-Tachyon started a war. So I was able to defeat each fleet thanks to the help of the Tri-Tachyon station! In the end the local market was refusing any interaction with my fleet because of all the mess around. That was at the level of a good episode of Babylon 5, I could really picture Tri-Tachyon trying to legally block the inspection from the Hegemony, with the task force answering something like "well, like it or not we are coming", and Tri-Tachyon replying "So be it", then the war started...
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on June 02, 2023, 11:51:53 AM
Found two things that might not be intentional.

 - Should trade fleets try to attack stations? A smuggler saw Thulean Raider Base and decided to move to attack it. In any case, it didn't appear to be under attack already, and it had a few fleets guarding it, so the smuggler definitely wasn't in a position to win.

 - Should pirate fleets spawn into the player's system when hostile activity is at zero? I didn't see them entering through any jump points, but I might have missed it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 03, 2023, 11:37:44 AM
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).

Aside, now I can raid for nearly every ship that is not a capital at New Maxios, instead of at a much tougher market to get blueprints that were formerly TT or League exclusives.  Unfortunately, Indies no longer own Doom (which is probably equivalent to a capital).  Indies also have Eradicator, but since Church still has defenses as bad as New Maxios, I raid that ship from Asher to be one less raid needed at New Maxios.  After all, -3 stability that takes nine months to clear up is a long wait before another raid.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on June 03, 2023, 12:19:32 PM
Wait, do mercs still have the Doom?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SolarGalaxy on June 03, 2023, 12:31:23 PM
I noticed that the Sindrian Diktat now have two new special fleets that spawn using PersonalFleetScript.java.

I was wondering if Deputy Star Marshal Oxana Hyder should have a level higher than Level 1?

If I look into People.java, it looks like she does have 4 admiral skills, but otherwise she is lower level than her subordinate captains.

Spoiler
(https://i.imgur.com/UnYGbNf.jpg)
[close]

Spoiler
(https://i.imgur.com/2vsTHy6.jpg)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 03, 2023, 12:45:13 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on June 03, 2023, 12:49:56 PM
Got it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hiruma Kai on June 03, 2023, 03:41:18 PM
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).

Wolf line of ships.csv has "hightech_bp, merc, ind" Tags.  In the independent faction file, it lists ships with the "ind" and "independent" tags as being in faction.  So, yes, Wolves should be in independent (non-merc) fleets.  A quick check, and I see a Wolf in an independent Merchant fleet, and I can find one in an independent military market at the beginning of the game with Stellar Networks.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 03, 2023, 04:06:09 PM
So ind was with Wolf.  I kept looking for ind for Wolf but could not find it.  I will need to look again to see how I missed that.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: serp on June 04, 2023, 06:29:51 PM
I've noticed that when I get a VIP mission from Galatia, it almost always points to the Samarra system. This is across two(maybe three) ironman saves.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dadada on June 05, 2023, 12:18:45 AM
Can confirm, most of the time the "transport VIP from Galatia" mission sends me to Samarra.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on June 05, 2023, 01:24:50 AM
Done the mission once, same here.
But what irritated me more was, how excited that VIP acted for a short 2, 3 day travel without anything happening. I mean, has she never left her home planet, or what?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on June 05, 2023, 02:27:34 AM
As someone who has never left his home planet and would be very excited by a three day trip to another star, I find that VIP very relatable.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on June 05, 2023, 02:34:37 AM
Ok. Can't remember the exact wording of this story, but I thought being the daughter of a VIP means, that travelling to different planets is kind of part of the job. (Especially being the daughter of a VIP of an "explorer's guild".)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: AcaMetis on June 05, 2023, 02:49:07 AM
For what it's worth in my save I have gotten that VIP mission sending me to Kanta's Den in Magec, so it doesn't seem bugged to only send you to Samarra at least.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 05, 2023, 07:35:49 AM
Hmm, I thought it might be some debug code left in by mistake, but I think it's actually fine. Nothing looks wrong and first try I got the mission sending me to Raesvelg (in Valhalla).

(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...)

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.

Yes, exactly!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Whitey on June 05, 2023, 08:41:05 AM
Hope this is an acceptable place for bug reports- the Academy Ruins Data Recovery mission can send you to Gas Giants, that contain ruins.
Quote
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.

Spoiler
(https://i.gyazo.com/85dfb9b9b628536b2cb6e92e888a2695.png)
(https://i.gyazo.com/568a97e4de1517e78ad4ba5b81733085.png)
[close]
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on June 05, 2023, 09:58:26 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on June 05, 2023, 10:06:32 AM
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?

Stuck.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CapnHector on June 05, 2023, 10:11:27 AM
They're not stuck. If you use them in combat and they die they get new D-mods that are also unremovable like the initial ones.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 05, 2023, 10:46:45 AM
Hope this is an acceptable place for bug reports- the Academy Ruins Data Recovery mission can send you to Gas Giants, that contain ruins.
Quote
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.

Thank you, fixed! Was only an issue for "scattered" ruins :)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mortrag on June 05, 2023, 12:52:01 PM
(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...)


(Is much more aware of all the dangers that are out there, and sends the daughter to Kanta's Den. I really do like your sense of humor. :D )
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on June 05, 2023, 07:10:19 PM
good to know. whelp gonna use these guys a massive meatshields.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: MajorTheRed on June 07, 2023, 11:52:50 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on June 07, 2023, 12:04:32 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on June 10, 2023, 07:59:18 AM
Uh i just encountered this... this ship was registered as a blip until it got close and it turned into a wolf frigate. Ghost ships are real, you cannot change my mind.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on June 10, 2023, 09:58:32 AM
For all the foreshadowing, such ghost ships are a letdown.  The end result is yet another derelict ship to recover or scrap.  I encountered another one yesterday.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on June 10, 2023, 07:42:14 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TerranEmpire on June 11, 2023, 09:52:53 AM
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.

Maaaaan such a good idea. Flying Dutchman of the XIVth.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on June 16, 2023, 08:53:02 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on June 16, 2023, 09:00:18 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on June 17, 2023, 11:52:18 PM
right and we are in space so yeah able to something that big could make sense.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: tjbqr on June 25, 2023, 01:41:31 PM
  • 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
Started a new game but contact Wrestling Sedge is still not giving any work. Was this bugfix referring to some other mission?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on June 25, 2023, 03:04:46 PM
It was indeed, thank you - fixed this one up, too!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Kat on June 26, 2023, 04:18:57 AM
I'm enjoying the new bits of story that I'm encountering.

Really liked the story of Sentinel, and the people there.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Helldiver on June 26, 2023, 10:46:28 AM
Will 0.96.1 bring some sneaky additional sprite improvements like 0.95.1 did (like for the Condor which no longer matches the new Tarsus sprite) ?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Obscurus on June 26, 2023, 04:51:54 PM
I just noticed that when I accepted a Remnant bounty in a high danger system, the Remnant Nexus disappeared along with all the normal remnant patrols. I've never actually visited this system before, so I know it shouldn't be destroyed. There's also a pirate blueprint mission active in system as well, but I know that's not the issue since I have an older save where the Nexus is there while the blueprint mission is active as well. Anyone else also experienced this issue?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on July 03, 2023, 11:55:07 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on July 04, 2023, 08:14:25 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: ASSIMKO on July 04, 2023, 08:21:55 AM
I downloaded Starsector 0.96a Release, I installed it, but when I click on the shortcut it says that Windows is looking for the shortcut, I click to search and it takes me to the game folder, but there is no 'Stasector.exe'. And then Alex how to proceed?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Karma Chimera on July 06, 2023, 02:14:48 AM
I'm getting back into Starsector after taking the yearly break and going through the update changelong, and I see the Gremlin got a big stat buff but nothing about autopilot AI changes. Did the Gremlin AI get any actual fixes or improvements? It was completely borked after the phase nerf in 0.95 and used to get caught in repetitive back-and-forth motions and pointless phase cycles, seemingly because it would get confused about moving much slower than it expected to and no longer being able to reach its desired positions relative to other moving ships even though it thought it still could.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (In Development) Patch Notes
Post by: Karma Chimera on July 06, 2023, 03:06:09 AM
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!

This is a fantastic suggestion just because it jives so well with the Mora lore about surviving Moras being converted to industrial facilities or colony foundations long before the collapse and then still being in good enough condition to be re-armed after the collapse happened. The word "rugged" is even in the hull description! And the lore suggests the Mora is ollllllllllld, referring to a 'period of carrier-centric Domain doctrine' so obscure I've not seen it mentioned anywhere else, except for possibly being hinted at in the Legion's description, and it's anyone's guess which is older, even if the Mora skin looks like the Hegemony gave it a fresh coat of orange paint since then. It would make sense that the durability-obsessed early Domain space engineers would resort to designing a carrier that could survive being blown up to serve alongside the Onslaught when it wasn't practical to make the carrier as heavily armored as the Onslaught itself, on account of needing those giant holes in the hull for the fighters to actually fly in and out of.

I have a personal vanilla balance mod I've been working on for ages, this is going into it.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on July 07, 2023, 08:07:24 AM
Yet it's not old enough not to have a shield.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on July 08, 2023, 08:38:28 AM
I want to complain about arms dealers, now that they're more common(?)

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?

Problem #2: 200k and 300k arms dealers have such small ship selection that they effectively suffer from the same problem as weapon-only arms dealers. Yay, I can get a 200% price Scarab... or I could simply go visit a Tri-Tachyon market and get a much cheaper Scarab.

Problem #3: their offer is randomized. 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. But because arms dealers offer random ship selection, most of the time it won't even be available for sale in the first place.

Problem #4: I don't know if it's the case of low-level arms dealers diluting the pool, but in the past few weeks I've checked literally hundreds of different markets across multiple games and I've seen a 600k arms dealer(the first one that is actually useful) exactly once. I have never, not one time, seen a 1m arms dealer(the one that's actually good) Now I don't know how arms dealers are generated, maybe they're tied to level or something but good lord. I don't remember it being THAT hard in 0.95...

IMO:
 - Get rid of weapons-only arms dealers, they're useless and in practice mean you're getting half as many "real" arms dealer as you're supposed to.
 - Have every arms dealer offer EVERY ship in the game in their respective category(i.e. 200k ones offer every frigate, 300k ones offer every frigate and destroyer, etc.), including really rare stuff like LP variants, and perhaps even LG variants.
 - If that's too much, then at least make it so that the algorithm that picks which ships are available for sale picks the most rare ships first. No one needs an arms dealer to buy Lashers.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on July 08, 2023, 08:47:12 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on July 08, 2023, 12:42:30 PM
I had massive trouble finding PCLs on my low tech run. I only have 5 of them and I'm at the "mid" endgame (colonies that are barely profitable as they are all growing/building things a lot, and a 240 DP but non-optimized fleet farming ordos). If I found an arms dealer selling PCLs right now I would buy like 50 :D
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on July 08, 2023, 12:57:12 PM
(The Diktat sells these somewhat more frequently than others, btw!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on July 08, 2023, 02:10:10 PM
(Surprised pikachu is going to go get more weaponry!)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Aeson on July 08, 2023, 03:22:33 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on July 08, 2023, 07:08:42 PM
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.
Though if you’re using story points that also doesn’t matter.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 08, 2023, 08:15:17 PM
Buffalo (A) is good because it can use Expanded Cargo Holds without penalty and without s-mod investment.  It is practically an extra-large Wayfarer because it has high enough storage for its size that it gets +30% cargo from Expanded Cargo Holds.  During the time I use small freighters, I do not want to waste s-mods on ships that I know I will not keep in the fleet for very long (because I will upgrade to bigger ships soon enough), and my DP is not high enough to penalize skills yet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Aeson on July 08, 2023, 11:22:30 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on July 08, 2023, 11:47:38 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 09, 2023, 04:47:57 AM
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).

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Aeson on July 09, 2023, 04:11:56 PM
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).

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're acting like Militarized Subsystems is mandatory; it isn't.
- Most cruisers have a base burn level of 8 and Augmented Engines are somewhat impractical to fit into most builds without spending story points somewhere. Unmilitarized Buffaloes have a burn level of either 8 or 10 depending on whether or not you took Bulk Transport while militarized Buffaloes have a burn level of 9; unless your cruisers are specifically Eradicators, Falcons, or Furies and you didn't take Bulk Transport, the +1 burn level of Militarized Subsystems is essentially irrelevant.
- If you have "a dozen warships ranging from frigates to cruisers," you're probably talking about 80+ supplies per month just for your warships. Assuming no story points are invested, a Buffalo's supply consumption is between 2.4 and 6.0 supplies per month, and unless you have a lot of Buffaloes the difference between 80 + 2.4n + x and 80 + 6n + x supplies per month, where x is however many supplies per month you're spending on non-Buffalo support ships, isn't going to be large enough to be of material significance.
- If you have "a dozen warships ranging from frigates to cruisers," you're probably talking about enough sensor strength/profile that getting 30 more sensor strength and 60 less sensor profile out of each Buffalo isn't particularly meaningful. Say you have 2 cruisers, 4 destroyers, 6 frigates, and a Phaeton; this gives you either 630 sensor strength and 720 sensor profile or 660 sensor strength and profile before bonuses and penalties are applied; each unmilitarized Buffalo increases sensor strength/profile by 30/120 while each militarized Buffalo increases sensor strength/profile by 60/60, so if we add five Buffaloes to the fleet we're looking at between 780 and 960 sensor strength and between 960 and 1320 sensor profile before applying bonuses and penalties. The differences here aren't nothing, but they're also not especially concerning; neither stealth nor the ability to detect other fleets before they detect your fleet are of particularly great importance except when smuggling or maybe when trying to do something in particularly dangerous systems before you have a fleet that can deal with whatever's present (although being noticed and then dragging whatever spotted you off to the middle of nowhere before losing them and dashing back to whatever point of interest you were trying to look at tends to work well enough as long as Sustained/Emergency Burn will let you outrun your pursuers).

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.

Also, any "stealth" fleet worthy of the name is unlikely to get much real value out of stacking both Militarized Subsystems and Insulated Engine Assembly on a little freighter like the Buffalo. You're almost certainly going to have at least a 30% reduction in sensor profile while the transponder is off from phase ships in the fleet, so putting both Militarized Subsystems and Insulated Engine Assembly on a destroyer-scale civilian fleet probably saves you no more than 21 sensor profile (10.5 while darkened) before terrain effects as compared to either Militarized Subsystems or Insulated Engine Assembly alone, and as long as your sensor profile is below about two or three hundred while darkened finding an opportunity to drop off a spysat or sneak up to a colony usually isn't too much trouble even without doing something to bait off the local patrols. A capital- or maybe cruiser-scale civilian ship might be worth both, at least if you're not going to spend a story point on Insulated Engine Assembly, but a destroyer-scale freighter like the Buffalo isn't.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on July 09, 2023, 07:52:05 PM
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?

Well I don't really NEED it but it's nice to be able to have Expanded Cargo Holds on a hauler when doing exploration. The more cargo space the longer you can go.

But please, do continue to write walls of text about how a free thing doesn't matter because [wild assumptions].
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on July 09, 2023, 08:43:34 PM
But please, do continue to write walls of text about how a free thing doesn't matter because [wild assumptions].

That's totally uncalled for.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 12, 2023, 05:29:04 AM
You're acting like Militarized Subsystems is mandatory; it isn't.
Of course it is not.

If I want a destroyer-sized hauler, I want Buffalo (A) for the same reason I want Wayfarer if I want a frigate-sized hauler, which is a ship with the highest capacity that can get +30% from Expanded Cargo Holds without eating more supplies.  The other Buffalos can get that, but need to get Militaried Subsystems to avoid the maintenance penalty, which I do not want.  The second dock-mod I pick on ships like Wayfarer is often fuel tanks or more crew/marines (because trade is my primary income early).

I always take Apogee start, so having cruisers without Augmented Engines is something I need to deal with from the start.  I take Navigation for T-Jump and extra burn.

I bring everything with me like a Galactia ragtag fleet until I build my first colony, then I start putting ships and items in storage.  I try to avoid using abandoned stations because I do not want to rely on them (and I do not want to use other factions' worlds for storage).  I would not be surprised if Alex closes the free abandoned storage exploit somehow (like having space cubes or salvagers visiting said stations and looting them) by final release.

I do not bother with stealth early.  I get more interested in stealth later when I start raiding tougher core worlds for blueprints and/or flying a sub-100 DP Ziggurat-led fleet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on July 13, 2023, 11:14:32 AM
Is 0.96a-RC10 the last version in this cycle before 0.97x?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on July 13, 2023, 12:05:58 PM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on July 13, 2023, 12:46:04 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on July 13, 2023, 12:55:34 PM
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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on July 13, 2023, 01:03:32 PM
Thanks for the information, that does sound pretty spot on what the community was suggesting.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Cubano on July 13, 2023, 06:15:30 PM
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!

So probably a few more RC versions to test that out then as well.

Thanks for the info

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on July 13, 2023, 10:49:59 PM
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!

Looking forward to it. I remember you seemed wary of adding multiple bars for the different factions - were you thinking of a single bar, still?

I think it could work with one bar, if some of the colony defenses were taken into account for reductions. For example, a cryoarithmatic engine right now is purely detrimental, but if it multiplied the reduction of the military base it was installed on, that'd scale the activity reductions to accommodate an extra source of danger.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on July 13, 2023, 11:11:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Talinoth on July 14, 2023, 01:01:30 AM
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.

I concur. I'm running a heavily modded version of the game and I went against the International Bounty Board $2.5M bounty the Star Federation adds. It took me 5 tries to win even with a very, very powerful fleet, and even when I won I was down to my last three combat ships after losing 13 or 14. What a glorious clusterf***.
A single capital-sized Dorito is already bad enough, but when you flank and "kill" it, your fleet (that was naturally flanking and surrounding an oversized dorito) is now about to be counter-flanked and ripped to shreds by a cruiser-shard and 3 destroyer-shard doritos. And yes, firing a Semibreve into them (or other similar ludicrously high damage weapon) while they're spawning makes it worse, as they are going to split again into countless more destroyer and frigate sized doritos which are even more dangerous and will rip your entire fleet to shreds like magic superspeed piranhas.

The Reality Disruptor is absolutely the worst thing to get hit by, period. It goes through and around your shields and if even a couple of arcs land your engines and weapons are gone. If your ship isn't an armour-based/Fortress Shield capital and didn't have Automated Repair Unit and a Damage Control officer, they are going to get permanently locked down with no escape. There are three counters to this weapon:
1: Have a 360 shield.
2: Just not be there, ever (pretty hard when the ship shooting it is likely 3x faster than you are).
3: Use a very tanky ship with Heavy Armour, Automated Repair Unit, Armored Weapon Mounts and Resistant Flux Conduits (optional) as mods - not to kill them, but as bait The officer should have Impact Mitigation Elite, Damage Control Elite, Polarised Armor Elite, Field Modulation Elite (optional) as their skills. To be clear - this ship may or may not kill some doritos, or just spend the entire battle being locked down. However, this ship should take up so much dorito attention that your actual DPS ships (like your flagship) should have a relatively clear window to start popping doritos. My tank ship (a UAF Reisen II) did because it had prv Starworks' "Spinnerets" on it and a really nasty kinetics + "point-defense" loadout that it used to clear shields, then grab with the Spinnerets and munch the doritos in melee range, but it only managed that on one cruiser and a frigate because it then got locked down with Reality Disruptors, Shock Repeater fighters and all manner of other monstrosities. Nevertheless, it did its job. o7

Point #3 is sort of an extension of Point #2. You must not expose yourself to this weapon or you're on the chopping block. I blew up about 270 DP of doritos using obscene missile spam, but as soon as a single bigger dorito took exception with my continued life and existence between missile reloads, well that was the end of the Purcellyra flagship. Just taking care of the "mere" remaining 80 DP of doritos was nearly the death of my fleet.
Uh, where was I going with this? Yeah, some of the other Omega weapons are almost balanced (especially after nerfs), and the 30 DP beam is good but more like an improved Tachyon Lance, but the Reality Disruptor just shuts down entire fighter swarms, cripples ships and let me tell you it's just as insane if not more in the player's hands. Put it on a battlecarrier that can mount it, and you have the perfect "get away from me" and "shut down the opposing ship so my fighters can rip it to shreds" weapon. That arc length... jesus.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: BaBosa on July 14, 2023, 01:43:18 AM
For a large omega weapon that deals no damage, the reality disrupter feels like it’s in a pretty good spot, maybe reduce its ability to go around shields but that’s about it.
On the topic of omega weapons though, is it just me or is the disintegrator ***?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 14, 2023, 05:22:51 AM
Disruptor works great for ships that have a lot of firepower in other mounts.  It lets them punch up.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on July 14, 2023, 05:31:03 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 14, 2023, 05:55:58 AM
If Reality Disruptor needed to be nerfed, one quick way would be to remove the doubled repair times.  That way, s-mod Automated Repair Unit would shrug off knockouts.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on July 14, 2023, 12:47:54 PM
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.

I'm not sure about that. If a weapon is overpowered, we'd also see it being OP in the hands of the player, and I haven't really seen that. It works well on the doritos because they are exceptionally powerful ships that aren't meant to be balanced - they're extremely fast, well-shielded, and can maneuver around the battlefield to exploit the opportunities the weapon creates. 

I've fought RD doritos in the current build. They're hard, but they're essentially the game's final boss. A roughly assembled end-game fleet can usually beat them handily enough, even if it loses a few capitals.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on July 15, 2023, 12:20:48 AM
a) you can't reliably get Omega weapons so players can't plan builds around them, b) most player-effective ships don't have large energy slots in the first place, and c) there can absolutely be things in the game that are strong in AI hands but weak in player hands, for example AI cores.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 15, 2023, 08:57:21 AM
You probably get one or two per game, or none if unlucky.

In my current game, I have not found Rift Cascade Emitter, and I was rerolling the Omega bounty until it generates a Tesseract with one.  (But now, I have stopped playing until the next release is out.)  I only got three large Omega weapons (Rift Torpedo, Reality Disruptor, VPD) out of four Tesseracts this time, the first game this happened.  I used to get one large Omega weapon per Tesseract, but not in my current rc10 game.

I would not use Reality Disruptor on Ziggurat because I need the large mounts for DPS and it has motes.  I made good use of Reality Disruptor on Radiant (flagship via Neural Link) and Champion.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on July 16, 2023, 01:30:14 AM
Speaking of VPD that one needs to have a buff as it currently is a lackluster omega weapon now ever since the Reality Disruptor got a buff and I like it the way it is but the idea of removing double repair sounds nice or the skill Systems Expertise could be revamped to counter such issues. VPD is rather flux heavy even on a paragon and its mechanic where some of its projectiles disappear midway is a rather bad idea, would like some kind of fix to this. But instead of nerfing the omega weapons how come the devs never expanded the idea of experimental hullmods? It also feels bland after a few playthroughs that none of the factions ever praise or even give you unique quests when being commissioned by them(apart from the planetkiller which is a VERY nice touch) would be nice that if I was commissioned by tri-tach it would give me an option to fully restore these ships at the cost you need to give tri-tachyon at least 2 of these ships as an exchange. also would like to see questlines involving the more obscure companies such as Alitair Exotech, Orion Shipyards, Eridani, and more.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 16, 2023, 05:43:22 AM
For possible VPD buffs:
* Better efficiency.  1.0 is more than autopulse or storm needler.
* Remove variable range.  (Would not be volatile anymore, though.)
* Make it receive Ballistic bonuses instead of Energy.  I am not paying full price to use it on ships with Heavy Ballistics Integration, and (at least basic level) Ballistic Mastery bonuses are more useful than Energy Mastery.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hatter on July 16, 2023, 02:58:44 PM
Re: VPD buffs-
How silly would an onhit effect for 100% frag damage be? It gives it higher damag vs shields and extreme damage vs hull while leaving anti-armor damage lackluster.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on July 17, 2023, 03:38:22 PM
RE: VPD: Much like the minipulser, this is a hybrid-class weapon that does not have any value in a ballistic slot. I'd suggest, then, buffing them both with a trait that is unavailable in ballistic weaponry: EMP arcs on hit against armor/hull.

For energy-heavy hulls, this shouldn't be a major improvement, since energy weapons have plenty of EMP options already. But it would give some reason to consider using these guns in ballistic slots.

Alternatively, just make the minipulser and VPD pure energy-type weapons, rather than hybrid weapons.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 17, 2023, 03:57:14 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on July 17, 2023, 05:23:34 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on July 17, 2023, 10:46:50 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on July 18, 2023, 01:11:58 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Mantas on July 18, 2023, 04:49:44 AM
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!

That's great to hear! Say, will there be changes to how Pather interest and mitigation work?

Right now, under the current system, it feels very punitive to pursue colony building as an activity ingame. Once you've achieved a certain point in your progression two of the more common, maybe even expected, activities for players to engage in is the hunting of Ordo fleets and wide range exploration. These activities reward players with AI-cores and the rare colony item. These rewards, in turn, feed into the colony system: giving you the tools and incentives to create industries and install AI-cores in your planets for you to generate bigger profits if you so desire.

However, that's where the Pathers come in. 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. The more you improve your colonies with the rewards you get from organically playing the game, the worse it gets. On the other hand, there's no way to properly mitigate this problem within the system. The only measure you can actively take gives you a global one-off flat reduction of (-18 at best) that will quickly amount to nothing if you do choose to engage with colony play at scale.

I know Starsector as game in vanilla isn't meant to be a 4x game, but you have a system where there are gameplay rewards that feed into this system, but you're actively punished for using, without any proper way to play the system at scale without feeling handicapped. It is, in my humble opinion, a bad experience. You find planets, 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.

I'm not saying to completely do away with the pathers or to stop their gathering interest completely, but I feel the player experience would benefit for your defenses to be able to keep up with the pather interest growth in some fashion. There are systems in the game that already do this: Player skills that reduce percentual resource usage up to a point, and then with diminishing returns; and ship systems/hulls mods that vary in effectiveness depending on hull-size and stack with diminishing returns. I would like to propose for the Patrol HQ tree (or another defensive measure you implement) to work in a similar manner, to give a percentual reduction to pather interest overall plus a small flat subtraction to the total value, with diminishing returns the more of these you stack. Similar to the Salvage Gantry. This way, pather interest would still grow organically and culminate, but a player's defensive measures would feel more impactful over the long term.

Apologies for the rant, I'm not the most eloquent person around, but I really like the colony system and the colony threats, and it feels that we're just a fine-tuning away from it being perfect.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on July 18, 2023, 08:00:30 AM
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?

Yep! "Hidden" in the sense of having a low detection range/for flavor.


That's great to hear! Say, will there be changes to how Pather interest and mitigation work?

The overall changes are significant enough that I don't think the same overall concerns really apply!

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.

This is not the case as of the most recent release candidate, maybe even the one before; see the patch notes for details! In brief, Pather interest scales non-linearly.

... 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.

(Even with the original linear calculation, I don't think that checks out - you can use AI-cores and items to brute-force the penalties into irrelevance compared to the benefits you get. But there's still the question of feel, and, again, enough changes that I don't know that the same concerns apply in the same way.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Marco_Paulo on July 18, 2023, 09:32:28 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on July 18, 2023, 11:38:28 AM
Would be cool to have another endgame threat that wasn't all-in on amazing flux stats/shields/speed...

Is that even possible though?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on July 19, 2023, 12:35:40 AM
Most likely the gates will have a major role in that as we have not encountered other battlegroups yet nor the domains true military might apart from the hegemony. It opens up a massive amount of opportunity on how the devs will approach this
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Talkie Toaster on July 19, 2023, 01:03:17 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on July 19, 2023, 02:02:14 AM
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.

That we can agree on since we already know what his true ulterior motives are after what he asked us to collect. I hope in future updates they can bring a continuation of The Usurpers and REALLY looking forward to version 1.0 in the coming years
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on July 19, 2023, 04:27:15 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on July 19, 2023, 10:15:30 PM
Didn't Usurpers end with us learning that ONE out of eight possible Andrada successors is dead? I can't really see the storyline going anywhere.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on July 21, 2023, 06:24:56 PM
It would be weird to leave it that way. It would benefit the hegemony to have someone from andrada's line help them annex the diktat from the inside in order for them to finally gain a foothold on the core worlds. Or the League could also see this as an opportunity to gain a valuable fuel production center that is close to Hegemony space.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on July 22, 2023, 01:07:46 AM
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.

Wait how high was the importance of the contact? Never used my very high pirate contact since they do not offer the illegal arms trade that often but never expected them to obtain ships the size of battlecruisers before. The biggest I ever got was an aurora.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on July 22, 2023, 07:36:15 AM
I'm pretty sure mission offers are influenced by contact type as well as importance.

There's definitely a fairly common Pirate bar mission to steal a random ship from a faction, though, and it's interesting to hear that High Importance contacts can offer Capitals that way. I'm gonna have to actually check what's being offered by those more often.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 22, 2023, 08:39:07 AM
Sounds like powered armor pirate guy.  He is one of the few good bar encounters I check for.

Other good ones I look for:  flashy guy with drink (blueprint intel), arms dealers (those with million credit limit are Very High importance), commander/admiral sitting at table (can be High+ military, if Arroyo alone is not enough, but I usually check for cheap ships), tattooed guys with contract (trained marines), and guy with paper book (historian).

On the other hand, some missions are traps.  I avoid hard-drinking spacer like the plague, since it raises suspicion.  Then there are the menial oddjob missions that may generate a revenge fleet (close to a 200k bounty fleet) after the job is done for less than 100k.  In effect, a named bounty worth less than a regular named bounty (which already underpays).

If the bar encounter is not one of the few I care about, I ignore either because they are schmuck baits or I have better things to do (or in case of colonies, I either do not generate enough or I already have everything and do not need the petty cash).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on July 22, 2023, 01:00:59 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on July 22, 2023, 03:45:01 PM
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)!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Thaago on July 22, 2023, 04:57:05 PM
Are they? Huh. I had one experience where I dodged one, went to do another thing, then on my way back to the core saw it also going to the core on a parallel track (not hunting me, just going home) and I had to dodge it again. But that was the most persistent I saw one - all the rest just go away.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Candesce on July 22, 2023, 07:30:10 PM
I do the drop offs often enough, and I've never had to dodge the fleets more than the once. Not saying it can't happen, but "relentless" is not how I'd describe them

Of course, if I'm doing those missions it's early enough in the game that keeping my sensor signature low isn't too costly and I often run Sensors; someone hauling around an Atlas without insulated engines might have a lot more trouble losing those fleets.

(On the subject of "what doomfleets get up to when they lose track of you," I recently dodged the phase fleet from the questline that gets you Alpha Site's location, and it decided to return to its home port of ... Chicomoztoc. I found it there fighting the local patrol fleets to death later.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on July 22, 2023, 11:41:20 PM
Dragging quest-spawned fleets into systems hostile to them is always a lot of fun. Don't fight them alone, get a Star Fortress to help!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on July 23, 2023, 08:49:31 AM
you think they would add more missions in the future? ever since the storyline quests we got in this current update we have barely gotten any new side missions to do. Would like the commission side to be explored since the only thing that ever was unique when being commissioned was the princess of eventide quest but that got sidelined quickly afterwards. would like more exclusive faction quests since they add more flavour to the games. I wonder if we get one exploring more about the remnant fleets
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on August 02, 2023, 11:24:34 PM
Two months with no blog post or even teasers on Twitter. Come on, man.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 02, 2023, 11:26:39 PM
Excuse me, they're called X teases now  8)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Dri on August 02, 2023, 11:49:00 PM
Excuse me, they're called X teases now  8)
Hah, watch everyone just keep on calling it Twitter. Screw Ol' Musky.

In before Thaago or Gothars lock this thread because it's "no longer productive".
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 02, 2023, 11:59:58 PM
Well now that you've said it, it's inevitable.

But really on the topic of blog posts and teases, Alex said he's going to make a blog post about updated Hostile Activity mechanics once it's ready (obviously not yet). There might just not be anything interesting to tease, no new ships, no new weapons, no mind blowing QoL additions.

One thing that I really hope makes it into this one, which didn't for the current patch, is the SO rework. That could also be a whole blog post in itself.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: CrashToDesktop on August 04, 2023, 09:27:52 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Wyvern on August 04, 2023, 09:36:26 PM
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!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 05, 2023, 01:53:23 AM
https://fractalsoftworks.com/forum/index.php?topic=27459.0

Already made a discussion about it and it seems they're thinking where to post them alongside Twitter.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on August 05, 2023, 06:19:30 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on August 06, 2023, 01:51:49 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 06, 2023, 02:03:56 AM
Fracttal softworks has a youtube channel already with trailers and some old footage. Figure it might be easier to post teases there with community posts or something, rather than to break your head thinking of new platforms. This forum is also useful but there is no way to get notified when something happens. Discord and reddit are better than Twitter since you don't need a premium account but they still require an account. I don't know a single person that doesn't use Youtube already. I'm sure they went far more in depth than me but this is just my immediate thought.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on August 06, 2023, 02:16:16 AM
YT is terrible for making small news, especially for a small developer.

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

Really? Damn, Musk is either going to be rolling in cash or Twitter will just die.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 06, 2023, 02:59:33 AM
Then what is better in your opinion? The game already has a following, those who like games like this probably already found it, and a few of them who aren't yet aware probably won't even know of it before it hits Steam at 1.0 (not 100% confirmed yet).

Can't think of a single platform where a small developer can be noticed without them already having a fanbase. Also guess what platform is guilty for the massive surge of players we got, and I'd bet where most of the new people still find about it.

Lastly, uploading a video is easiest on youtube since on every other site you have to worry about size limitations, your footage gets compressed to an ugly level and the biggest one is stability. Watching twitter videos on a phone is medieval torture.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on August 06, 2023, 04:04:29 AM
I just meant that it's very inefficient to spend few hours making a short video about upcoming changes when it can be presented in less than a minute on Twitter(or equivalent)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 06, 2023, 04:11:35 AM
Where are you getting these ridiculous numbers? You still need to cut videos on Twitter, it's the same. And be assured that it takes more than "less than a minute" lol.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Lawrence Master-blaster on August 06, 2023, 08:55:39 AM
You don't normally make videos for Twitter. You post some text and add a screenshot.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 06, 2023, 09:19:48 AM
Every youtube channel has a community tab where you can post screenshots with descriptions and people can comment on that. I don't see how Twitter has anything over other sites.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on August 06, 2023, 10:11:51 AM
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 blogs
There always were...

I don't see how Twitter has anything over other sites.
It has the userbase.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 06, 2023, 10:36:42 AM
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.

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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on August 06, 2023, 10:50:47 AM
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.

I will say that, based on a sample size of one (1) tweet a couple of days ago, twitter seems to be doing alright in terms of reach/views/etc. Unless/until it actually goes completely belly up at some point. I also have no idea whether it's actually useful in promoting the game directly to potential customers; I see it more as a quick way to share stuff with people that already know about it. Which includes a bunch of youtube/streaming folks, and *that* definitely makes an impact!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 06, 2023, 11:07:36 AM
Fair enough.

Btw when I mention Youtube I specifically talk about the "Community" tab which it seems not many know about somehow. It's a separate tab where you post content (screenshots, videos of any length, polls, etc. all with text) which is visible to people that follow that channel. Then they can comment on that similar to how Twitter works. I also don't like shorts and they definitely don't seem fit for posting updates. But all of this is irrelevant as long as Twitter works well enough for us.

I actually forgot one useful thing Twitter has, retweets. You can share things on other platforms but it's usually more involved and clunky.

Guess we'll see the game's youtube channel next time on 1.0 trailer. What a day that will be.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on August 06, 2023, 11:10:18 AM
Ah yeah - I had no idea about the Community tab, either!
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on August 06, 2023, 11:32:30 AM
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).
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on August 06, 2023, 11:48:57 AM
I will say that, based on a sample size of one (1) tweet a couple of days ago

Looking at your Twitter without being logged in because I don't have an account, the posts are all out of order and the most recent one I can find is the Condor render on July 10th.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on August 06, 2023, 11:56:27 AM
I just went to an incognito window and searched up Alexander Mosolov, I did not expect to learn more about a composer from the past lol, first time seeing this. But yeah if you go to Twitter not logged in, something very funky is happening. The posts seem entirely random, only the pinned one is, well pinned. I know it worked before since there was a time I didn't have an account and followed the game's teases.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Alex on August 06, 2023, 12:09:45 PM
Just had a look myself and yeah, that's weird. ... better than requiring a login, I guess? No idea how they're deciding what to show; probably some mixture of popularity and recent-ness but it just looks random.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Fartbox Wanderer on August 20, 2023, 05:54:06 PM
I'm a huge fan of Starsector and I'm reasonably competent at video editing... if Alex gave me access to dev builds and directed me what he wanted me to highlight I'd happy make periodic videos for the official YouTube channel.

I'm regularly astounded that Rimworld and other great indie games get tons of popular videos but RimWorld seems oddly niche and in the background. Maybe just from not being on Steam (yet?). Thinking of doing a few tutorial or "challenge" series maybe, regardless.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Gothars on September 05, 2023, 06:03:48 AM
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)

I think it might be good to mention that in the faster start option descriptions. It is a little bit of a newbie trap to get swatted by pirates in your starter frig, re-try with a fast start flotilla just to be swatted again by a now much stronger pirate fleet.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on September 06, 2023, 07:25:31 AM
say will there be an update to the start menu? Would like to see some the ships passing by shooting at eachother
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on September 06, 2023, 08:01:31 AM
say will there be an update to the start menu? Would like to see some the ships passing by shooting at eachother
That 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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: mortache on September 17, 2023, 08:08:00 PM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Hatter on September 17, 2023, 08:10:09 PM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: siefer on September 20, 2023, 07:27:48 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on September 20, 2023, 10:09:20 AM
Worth noting is that minor polish updates have lately become a bit more meatier (Alex likes to introduce/rework some things to test them for the future, and in a minor update you get more focused feedback), so those initially had maybe 3-4 months delay after the big one, but now it's more like 6-9 months.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on September 21, 2023, 05:26:30 AM
hey are there any new updates for the game? been awhile
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Grievous69 on September 21, 2023, 05:42:18 AM
hey are there any new updates for the game? been awhile
There was a blog post 3 weeks ago.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: PizzaInSpace on September 22, 2023, 05:51:52 AM
Just read it and DAMN YOU COMSEC! I WAS CLOSE TO KNOWING THE KNOWLEDGE OF GATE PLACEMENT(ignore my swear i was being dramatic)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Yudka on October 04, 2023, 02:07:46 AM

  • 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.

Mention update after a week of play.

1) Threat system is extreemly punishing with stability and acsessibility penalty. It needs to be rebalanced. You dont get money from planets if you can sell 2 units of your production. There should be a cumulative positive modifier from multiple stable planets in one system. Most problems you have with 2-3 planets with 4-5 size. 
2) Lions guard ships are good stuff. But. There is a basic eagle and falcon. Basic Eagle needs -1 deploy point, LG falcon and battlegroup falcon need +1 deploy point.
3) Pegasus and executor are fine except two things. Executor is not strong enough for 50 points and needs 45ish. Pegasus is not compatible with torpedoes unless you play it manually. If torpedoes are mixed in one group with guns they should be triggered with guns instead never. Also it would be nice to have about 15 degree rotation for frontal heavy mounts.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nettle on October 04, 2023, 02:29:46 AM

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Vehemence on October 10, 2023, 03:41:20 PM
I just got rant a bit.

Why is there an exit campaign button in the combat pause screen, that just lets you exit without a secondary warning?

Or, why is it there to begin with?

Wouldn't it be a better option to auto retreat? Or a "main menu", button?

While I'm whining, when will auto-resolve be added? Like, it's there for when they dis-engage, why not have it be an option always?

Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SCC on October 11, 2023, 12:15:48 AM
Auto-resolve was removed ages ago because it could be abused.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 11, 2023, 04:59:41 AM
Auto-resolve finished fights in seconds instead of minutes.  It allowed the player to powerlevel faster in older releases without a level cap, effectively extending the soft cap by at least ten levels.  Today, auto-resolve would let the player farm alpha cores and other Ordos loot much faster if he can build a fleet strong enough to auto-resolve Ordos fleets.  A build that optimizes for auto-resolve would probably look different (in skills and fleet composition) than one built for normal combat.

Auto-resolve bypasses the combat action entirely.  Why would Alex waste time creating and refining the combat part of the game when players bypass all of it with auto-resolve for more power faster?  Auto-resolve for normal combat had to go.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Yudka on October 11, 2023, 05:34:47 AM

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.

I rolled it back to previous patch conditions after spending 5 mils on pirate raids and other "fun" stuff.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 15, 2023, 06:07:32 PM
I don't know how anyone manages to spend 5M trying to manage colony threats. Either way though, it's getting an overhaul next version.

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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Nettle on October 16, 2023, 01:00:19 AM
I rolled it back to previous patch conditions after spending 5 mils on pirate raids and other "fun" stuff.

Good, colony threats management really isn't that difficult though - military base on a high stability world should take care of pirate activity entirely, provided you didn't majorly tick off Kanta. As for pathers - you should be able to keep them in check by destroying bases whenever they pop up. However if you start using all the cores at some point it will become impossible to keep up with pathers interest and your only option from now on is to bribe. Which isn't a big deal considering you are probably swimming in credits at this stage, but it does achieve the exact opposite of what system was designed to do. This is probably going to be adressed, since colony threats system is getting refined.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Neldonax on October 30, 2023, 01:10:56 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Neldonax on October 30, 2023, 01:16:10 AM
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
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 30, 2023, 05:55:57 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Neldonax on October 30, 2023, 11:49:46 AM
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?
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: TimeDiver on October 30, 2023, 12:05:12 PM
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.

The Church happens to be the most organized, and the Pathers don't bother to hide their end-goal.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: SafariJohn on October 30, 2023, 05:53:34 PM
Luddics are NOT Christians. Nor are they any other modern or historic religion.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Neldonax on October 31, 2023, 12:11:49 AM
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.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Histidine on October 31, 2023, 01:42:38 AM
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 denomination
I 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.

Anyway I could write a post here about the reasons it's good for an SFF society or setting to not have real world present day labels stuck on them, even if they're clearly intended to comment on the said present day issues. (The late Shamus Young discussed some of them in a blog post about Deus Ex: Mankind Divided (https://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=33885).) But for some reason I feel that such a post would be wasted effort here.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Megas on October 31, 2023, 06:11:13 AM
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.

I do not want Luddic Church/Path to be a mirror or mockery of real-life religions.


P.S.  The worst thing about the Church right now is following their plot does not (seem to) have any rewards I care about (few more story points?)  The best I get is a picture of a shambling mound or other D&D veggie-monster when visiting Jangala on the pilgrimage, which... is not loot like Ziggurat or Omega weapons, or new game-changing powers like gate travel.  At least Diktat offers an Executor and few special weapons, when Diktat ships and weapons are a pain to farm without destroying rep.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: David on October 31, 2023, 06:43:24 AM
*Ahem* hello.

So, yes, obviously the Church of Galactic Redemption et al is a commentary on/exploration of religion which borrows elements from many different, but mostly Christian, sources. This is due largely to me being more familiar with the aesthetics and history of Christianity rather than other religions due to growing up in North America.

There are a few very good reasons why the in-game Luddic religion is intentionally portrayed as a slightly kooky "scifi religion" which intentionally doesn't reference certain extremely contemporary real-world associations ie. Jesus Christ, or, for that matter Muhammad, or the actual Bible.

The reasons are:
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.

Neldonax, if I may: For the reasons above, it is not reasonable for us to put explicit references to Jesus Christ, etc., into the game, nor do I think it would serve the narrative or aesthetics. It'd probably just make a lot of people from every viewpoint really, really mad. There is a place in the world for a space game that is built from the ground up that specifically centers an exploration of Christianity in particular, but this is not that game.

From a moderation standpoint, I would ask that everyone be respectful here and keep it chill. We've got rules about no bigotry and no toxicity ie. don't be a huge jerk.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: Neldonax on November 02, 2023, 06:33:29 AM
i do see your point, but rustling jimmies is always part of good worldbuilding. I like the luddics, they're the only faction i really *get*, i mean how can i not? they are the only ones who make any normal sense to me, they ain't lying to themselves, they are living the truth while the rest of the sector is in denial. I just want to see them be fully realised, sure it doesn't have to have my main man JC, but i'd like it.
Title: Literary Merit
Post by: Network Pesci on November 02, 2023, 08:51:54 AM
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.  When I plug StarSector to my online friends, I tell the more literary-minded ones that "The writing stands proudly in the same tier as Banks and Reynolds."  And I tell you, David, the fictional religion of the Luddic Church is the only video game religion that has ever altered my personal moral and philosophical structure in real life.  Like Fury Road or The Man Of Steel is to movies, StarSector is to video games.  I'm not joking when I say that if and when it is possible to read Brother Cotton's book in full like it was Morrowind, I'm gonna read that book cover to cover twice.
Title: Re: Literary Merit
Post by: David on November 10, 2023, 05:15:59 AM
Yeah, you succeeded.

(You are far too kind! I have no words, for once.)
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: smithney on November 10, 2023, 10:45:52 PM
Having the luxury of engaging with Dune related media recently, I have no fear saying David's depiction of religion is on par with Frank Herbert's. Obviously on a much smaler scale. Except David's take is actually rather sympathetic, where Herbert gets pretty critical. What I mean is that so far, David has made a good job showing us the whole spectrum of religious characters. To an areligious theist like me who used to work in a Christian organisation, the experience has actually been rather realistic.
Title: Re: Starsector 0.96a (Released) Patch Notes
Post by: pairedeciseaux on November 11, 2023, 04:01:51 AM
Fear is the mind killer.

Frank Herbert's Dune
Regarding Frank Herbert's original series, which spans from "Dune" (1965) to "Chapterhouse: Dune" (1985), one would be tempted to describe those novels as religious-themed books. I think this is not actually the case. Herbert painted ecosystems with environments, people as organisations, people as individuals, social interactions, humanity.

In this light, Herbert did a rather broad social commentary and/or maybe a bare fictional-not-so-fictional society depiction, showing how and why people act the way they do, also showing consequences. Feudalism, religious organisations, religious faith, non-religious organisations, non-religious aims and beliefs, family ties, loyalty, power struggles, survival, emotions, ... are all part of the recipe used by Herbert to create the Dune special sauce.

A great characteristic of Dune being, in my opinion, it is not science fiction. I mean it is not made of technological gimmicks used to justify and color boring stories already told a thousand times, ... rehashing preconceptions, prejudices, tainted views, propaganda.

An other interesting thing about Dune: it is told from various points of view, which reinforces its attempt at describing a society honestly and reduces the risk of filtering perspectives and motivations though a common-somewhat-neutral-but-actually-biased main lens.
[close]

As David put it, he managed to put in more nuance writing Starsector than what typical entertainment offers, for what ultimately is the backdrop of an interactive space adventure with spaceships shooting at each other. And he did so not just for the religion-related bits. I wouldn't go as far to say that David has set Starsector players on the Golden Path (Dune reference), but still we should be thankfull to have good stuff in Starsector.