Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Starsector 0.95a is out! (03/26/21); Blog post: Skill Changes, Part 2 (07/15/21)

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Reshy

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 70
General Discussion / Re: Overrated (overpriced) ships
« on: September 27, 2019, 04:09:06 PM »
Exactly my point that I forgot to put. It's kinda ridiculous to have these big ships and they need a specific weapon out of a whole bunch just to be viable.
Either that or able to perform at its cost.  Apogee and Odyssey would have remained mediocre if plasma cannon was not buffed so much since 0.8.x.  Similarly, the loss of 800 range needlers has hurt Medusa.

Normal Shrike compared to Shrike (P).  Standard Shrike is better than (P) for few specific loadouts (Sabots plus Expanded Missile Racks, or all beams).  For anything else, (P) version is superior.  At least Shrike is cheap compared to other ships, so it can get away with mediocrity.  All I want is for both Shrikes to have at least 80 OP and light hybrid.  Pirates have few ships that are identical to standard versions.  Shrike itself is probably worth its price.  My main gripes is Shrike (P) has so little OP (meaning mounts get left empty), but still generally better than normal Shrike.

Medusa needs Railguns in the universals.  Even with a good loadout, it is roughly on par with Hammerhead.  Medusa is probably fine, except its DP cost (12 is too much).  OP budget is a bit tight.

Apogee is fine, until it gets plasma cannon and Locusts.  Then it punches above its worth of 18 DP.  Not overrated as per OP, but underrated if anything.  Similarly, Astral is also a bit underrated.  With unlimited Recall Device and a skilled bomber captain, it is probably worth 50 DP.  I do not think Recall Device is overpowered, just the lone playable ship with it may be underpriced.

Paragon can be very powerful, but only worth 60 DP if it has long range beams to exploit its range advantage.  With pulse lasers, it is still powerful, but does not perform better than cheaper 40 DP battleships.  Probably a bit worse because it has no mobility system to catch enemies, and not enough range if armed with short-range weapons.  I think 50 DP from before was a better price.

P.S.  One highly overrated ship today:  Hyperion.  It has difficulty killing a medium-sized ship before peak performance times out, under player control.  AI is hopeless with Hyperion.  I have no use for Hyperion in the 0.9.x era.  As it is, Hyperion is worth no more than 10, maybe 12 DP.

Does sound like, in general, the high-tech ships are falling behind in terms of cost/deployment effectiveness.

The problem is that the game, originally, had issues where larger ships couldn't catch up to frigates and thus combats were long and drawn out in many instances without your own frigates.  With the CR changes, this has lead to the inverse problem, with the frigate effectiveness taking a nose dive over time, making skirmisher tactics they used to be pretty good at now impossible to pull off.

General Discussion / Re: Traffic due to recent Starsector Review
« on: August 16, 2019, 01:34:42 PM »

I just saw a YouTube review of Starsector by SsethTzeentach, and apparently the video brought over a ton of traffic to your website. 

The review gave it 10/10, btw.   8)

Ah yes, I saw it too.  Nice to see what the state of the current game is.  I haven't played since .54a I believe since I want to play once it's gone 100%.

General Discussion / Old Versions of Starfarer/Starsector
« on: December 31, 2018, 08:17:26 PM »
The blog only catalogues correctly down to version 0.53a, as the older links redirect to a broken link that no longer exists, so I decided to upload the older versions I still had on my computer.  So I decided to upload them so they could still be accessed, maybe Alex can eventually get the archive on the website working again:





I wonder if anyone else managed to catalogue the older versions besides just me.

General Discussion / Re: Anyone have .5a RC3?
« on: February 17, 2017, 01:28:06 AM »
Hey Alex, is there any chance of a blog post to point to an archive where all the old editions can be replayed at?

General Discussion / Anyone have .5a RC3?
« on: January 17, 2017, 11:21:38 AM »
Hello, I wanted to know if anyone still had the installer for the early edition of starfarer.  The fractalsoftworks forum doesn't have that old version anymore, so I want to know if anyone else backed it up manually.

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.65.2a (Released) Patch Notes
« on: February 20, 2015, 09:54:32 PM »
So why the sudden hot fix?  Seems to have suddenly threw out a lot of the changes in 65.2a.  Ballistics having clips and other things; as well as capitals originally not having a deployment timer.

Bug Reports & Support / Re: AI bug: charging enemy with half flux
« on: March 11, 2014, 09:44:25 PM »
Does this happen when it's an ally rather than an auto-pilot?  Their AI's are different according to Alex.

Suggestions / Re: Strategic AI
« on: January 31, 2014, 08:50:04 AM »
Huh. I agree there needs to be more coordination, but my experiences are almost opposite yours! I find that my ships are flanking the target waaaay too much, when all I want is for them to get in range and shoot. Particularly when intercepting.

Well in the system I'm proposing ships would react based on how many ships are currently targeting that ship.  One ship intercepting will go along it's trajectory to try and meet it in the middle.  Extra ships may try to box it in by getting in front of it and pushing the ship away from the edges where it can escape.

Honestly a lot of the mods seem incomplete or poorly constructed.  Automated Repair Unit I almost never found a use for as it was expensive and didn't do much.

Suggestions / Strategic AI
« on: January 31, 2014, 12:01:18 AM »
Just wondering but the game doesn't really seem to feature any real coordination between different ships, it's all sort of a free for all.  Ships always taking the shortest path to the target which isn't good for combat for many reasons.  My thought however is that the AI really should have more coordination between ships. Ie if three ships are heading to the same target they'll try to maintain distance from each other and approach at different angles even if it gets them there slightly slower.

For example say you're going against a cruiser, you have a destroyer and two frigates.  Right now if you attack they all end up going straight to the unit, often bumping into each other and getting in their personal space and creating bottlenecks and friendly fire incidents.  When giving multiple units orders (or the AI does) they each should create a strategy.  For example faster ships will move to flank while the slower ships will go straight towards the target so they all arrive at about the same time.  The more ships attacking a target the more the ships should spread out to attack from as many different angles as possible.  Omni shields are really good against enemies attacking from one direction and most of the time that's what they do, with the exception of fighters and frigates.  Even then those ones don't time it well so they tend to come at you one at a time giving a ship enough time to angle it around for the next fight.



>          V          <


While each ship alone seems pretty smart, as a group they feel pretty dumb and uncoordinated.  Some strafing into another strafing ship in the opposite direction.  Instead of all going clockwise or counter clock wise they go whichever way and end up bumping into each other.

General Discussion / Re: Trident bombers seem grossly underpowered?
« on: January 30, 2014, 11:48:12 PM »
Why not try giving them harpoons instead?  Maybe that can help things.

General Discussion / Fighters
« on: January 27, 2014, 11:12:09 PM »
Just a short thought but would fighters be more effective if they split up and each fighter flanked a ship from a different direction?  Right not they all cluster together making them vulnerable to things like flak and are easily protected against since all the damage is coming from a small angle.

Suggestions / Re: Offline fighters should only deal damage once
« on: January 10, 2014, 08:25:46 AM »
It's an interesting case of Emergent Gameplay and I think it should be kept.

The problem is it doesn't make sense for you to be hit multiple times by the same disabled fighter. Fighters pass through your ship to represent them flying overhead on an attack run. Disabled fighters gain collision because they can't avoid running into ships without the use of their engines (and because it's hilarious, presumably). This works for the most part, except when the fighter is directly overhead when disabled and gains collision inside your sprite.

In other words, it makes it appear that a Piranha that got hit with an Ion Cannon has somehow teleported into your ship's hallways and is ramming its way out. ;)

It's more like it's bouncing against the outer hull, after all the ships aren't flat;  They're just rendered in 2D.

Suggestions / Re: Offline fighters should only deal damage once
« on: January 09, 2014, 12:33:34 AM »
It's an interesting case of Emergent Gameplay and I think it should be kept.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 70