Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

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.

1

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.97a (Released) Patch Notes

« on: February 18, 2024, 08:00:30 PM »

regarding hull restoration: "Somewhat faster repair of d-mods for ships with lower deployment points"

Is the early game result intentional or did the lever get pushed too far? Early game when I'm driving around exploring without one cruiser, a few battleships, and a bunch of frigates it's ... not just a little better, it's many times better. I mean, I don't just see multiple d-mods from one ship repair, I see multiple d-mods from multiple ships fall off. I went exploring and fixed 6 d-mods before making it home 90 days later.

Playing with only nexerelin. Just in case that affects this mechanic (though I doubt)

2

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes

« on: November 27, 2021, 03:22:02 PM »

I don't understand the 'colonies have been nerfed into oblivion' mindset. A planet without optimal placement or attributes, just present in a system with other semi-useful planets, can bring down millions per cycle. That fully developed system with every resource available lets you print expensive ships at a discount.

There have been nerfs but also more and more multiplying bonuses added to the game. An artifact for each industry. More ways to get accessibility. (now slightly pulled back apparently in 0.95.1a with the removal of certain administrator skills)

What's a problem is how they're only useful after dumping resources into them for a long time and going full max with multiplying bonuses. A basic planet with 1 resource should be useful for an early player who can barely afford to set it up. Currently, sure, as above, 7% per month ROI, but that hardly compares to doing missions and building your fleet. Having a colony without defense anchors you to it.

3

General Discussion / Re: FIX THE DAME AI.

« on: November 23, 2021, 05:25:23 AM »

i wonder if there's a mod to increase supply cap in the mix here?

I find it odd how many times I've seen people boost the supply cap with a mod and then complain about the AI.

4

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes

« on: November 15, 2021, 01:06:06 PM »

makes sense. thanks for answering.

Removed Colony Mangement, Space Operations, Planetary Operations

Does this include the same for administrators, or just the player's skills?

If the former, will there be any new way to get back that accessibility / stability?

5

Announcements / Re: Starsector 0.95.1a (In Development) Patch Notes

« on: November 15, 2021, 10:20:52 AM »

Something I have not seen asked (sorry if I missed it, only skimmed the 23 pages of comments)

Added slipstreams to hyperspace
   New slipstream systems form in hyperspace twice per cycle
   Can drastically speed up travel and cut fuel use
   Loosely follow certain patterns that can be figured out

Will slipstreams affect colony accessibility? I mean, if you get favorable slipstreams it seems like our accessibility bonus for "proximity to other colonies" should go up, and if the slipstreams are useless the bonus/penalty should remain as is now.

Thoughts?

6

General Discussion / Re: My complaints about overcomplexity and anti-fun game mechanics

« on: August 03, 2021, 03:15:30 PM »

feedback is dumb and it doesn't matter

7

General Discussion / Re: Do you have a preferred flagship role?

« on: June 22, 2021, 09:18:50 AM »

I use a tempest because they're fast; they can punch above their weight solo, and even turn the tide of a larger engagement among cruiser sized ships. I keep a pair of them with command center s-modded in, because I don't know if this is considered a thing generally, but for me command points seem really necessary.

I also frequently use it to stall; I mean, if I've got 2 battleships targeting my 8-point frigate by itself, I won't be able to kill them but that removes pressure from the fleet.

A hyperion would probably do all the above things even better, but, I really don't like its penalties.

8

General Discussion / Re: Colony Fleet Strength? Stop Stealing my AI cores!!

« on: June 21, 2021, 04:52:42 AM »

nobody just posted the rules, so here goes.

military base: Produces the following patrol fleets:
Size 3: 1 light
Size 4: 2 light, 1 medium
Size 5: 2 light, 1 medium
Size 6: 3 light, 2 medium, 1 heavy

high command: Produces the following patrol fleets:
Size 3: 1 light, 1 medium, 1 heavy
Size 4: 2 light, 2 medium, 1 heavy
Size 5: 2 light, 2 medium, 1 heavy
Size 6: 3 light, 3 medium, 2 heavy

The Cryoarithmetic Engine can be installed into the Patrol HQ, Military Base, or High Command structure. Increases the size of the fleets launched by colony by 25% for hot worlds and 100% for extreme heat worlds.
The Pristine Nanoforge can be installed into the Heavy Industry and Orbital Works industries. Increases the ship quality of all their faction's fleets by 50%.

------
So the max optimized seems to be:
- One of the worlds in your system is extreme heat, that's where you place your military.
- Upgrade to high command
- install a cryo engine
- Grow it to size 6
- Your heavy industry colony has some kind of nanoforge installed & upgraded to orbital works (for the quality bonus)
- Convert your "extra" fleet quality over 100% to bonus fleet size instead; using the faction doctrine (hit "d" and I think it's 4th tab)

You don't have to do ALL these things, they multiply, so, just whatever you have access to.

9

General Discussion / Re: Anti-Phase system and equipment needed

« on: June 08, 2021, 08:40:15 PM »

harbinger's special is an anti-phase system.

10

General Discussion / Re: About running a totally neutral faction

« on: June 08, 2021, 08:39:10 AM »

You can already stay neutral by just exploring around, you even get gamma cores to trade for rep that way. It's already unlikely that you'll end up at war with any faction without instigating that on purpose or getting a commission.

I was suggesting that it's too easy to stay neutral, and benefit hugely from other factions' wars, not that it's difficult.

if you're making money through trading than you're already doing something that's not intended.

Have to be honest, I'm in Nex in this current play through. What that means is that there are plenty of shortages to fulfill, and usually there are more interesting trades to be had with non-pirate factions than with pirates. When hegemony tries repeatedly to invade the perseans it creates huge shortages of every imaginable commodity. Much more trade volume than the pirates are ever able to take.

When you're selling huge quantities at triple base price, a little 18% tarriff doesn't matter.

That I'm in Nex *might* count against me for providing feedback on market mechanics.

11

General Discussion / Re: Balance is WAAAY off

« on: June 08, 2021, 08:32:00 AM »

trading objectives is a really great way to stall the AI and/or force it not to turtle in one big clump. Consider that, perhaps, you don't need to control them.

12

General Discussion / About running a totally neutral faction

« on: June 07, 2021, 05:19:34 PM »

In the real world, being totally neutral would only work if you didn't also engage in opportunistic trade.

Unforunately, in starsector it's totally sustainable to wait for conflicts and then supply both parties in the conflict. You lose a little bit of reputation, but gain more from the faction you're supplying. It's sustainable.

I suggest that this shouldn't be sustainable. Or, remaining neutral should be expensive. There are a lot of ways one could go about that in balancing:

- If two opposing factions are warring (not just at war) and they spot me trading with their enemies, I should lose more reputation with their enemies than the faction I'm supplying. That way,
- I can only make a few opportunistic trades, before being forced to butt out or have war declared.

Now, also, general supply lines from your colonies. If two factions are at war with each other, I'm neutral, AND I have a super high market share of some goods, I should get a lot more expeditions launched against me by both of them.

So, my specific suggestions aren't perfect. I'm more interested in the gap being discussed: it's too easy to remain neutral.

13

General Discussion / Terrain movement penalties

« on: June 04, 2021, 01:30:48 PM »

Hi all, I'm interested in figuring out exactly how this works, how to maximize my burn speed in terrain (especially when I'm on surveying and long range scavenging tasks)

Ship size & number of ships in your fleet obviously increase the penalty but I'm not sure beyond that.

- Adding a large ship to my fleet reduces my speed in terrain more than adding a small ship to my fleet does (I think?)
- But, adding more small ships definitely also reduces my speed in terrain, also (a large fleet of frigates moves through clouds and such much slower than a very small fleet with like ~2 destroyers)

Looked for this subject a few times over the last several days and come up dry.

14

Bug Reports & Support / Re: [0.95a] Longbows can't hit targets after Sabot nerf

« on: June 03, 2021, 04:27:50 AM »

Apparently, the single-shot Sabots have a flag that makes fighters think they have an extra 500 range. This is clearly intentional, but I don't remember what it was intended to address.

It might not have been to address anything specific - could the extra 500 range just represent the distance at which the warheads deploy? Seems like that happens at about 500 units of range.

In the case of the sabot since they're so darned slow and fragile - it just makes more practical sense for fighters to deploy them at the last possible moment, perhaps not even related to how much range the missile has. Applying more human logic to this, I get as close as I possibly can before firing them, and I love flying my tempest, very nearly a fighter - and I only fire at more than ~500 range if I'd take too much damage by getting closer.

Don't know if you could do it that way. "hold fire until 500 range, OR, within max range but also taking damage"

15

General Discussion / Re: New Player Needing Help with Lategame & Remnant

« on: June 01, 2021, 03:23:21 PM »

This may be obvious but I've been learning past this hurdle too (I called it the "midgame problem" in a recent post)

To handle a radiant ordo you need high tech ships, very mobile with shield s-mods. Hardened shields, Solar shielding, Shield conversion. Maybe resistant flux conduits. Specifically against redacted, solar shielding has incredible value: the vast majority of their damage is from energy weapons. Build your fleets to purpose.

Next, take an extremely defensive position, near enough to retreat that you can gradually cycle your ships out & in. I like to put two "defend" objectives on either side of the nearest comm relay. Now, as your ships begin to use up their missiles, retreat them one at a time and backfill. (don't wait until you are on back foot - rotate your deployed ships proactively)

This way the radiant has to blink into a big mob of fresh weaponry. It will hurt you but he will also regret it.

ALSO. include some harass in your fleet comp. A good special-built tank frigate can peel off a few of those medium ships and keep them occupied trying to recover beacons, and they're completely unable to kill him. A centurion costs 4 OP, he can keep easily 20 OP worth of enemy forces busy forever. I know the centurion is not a popular ship in the present meta but I think his special & reasonably good speed makes him a lot like a stall card in MTG. Just a big old "perpetually stall 20 OP worth of enemy ships" button.

edit2: lastly, can't stress enough, longbows. reserve deployment. Fighter uplink, carrier group, strike commander. I'll take 3 drovers over an astral, in this situation.

Honestly I don't know that I could beat the Ordo you pictured above. But I'm reasonably confident against ordos that have one radiant, and I'll keep trying against the really terrifying ones.