Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

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 - Drone_Fragger

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Suggestions / Re: Shield Shunt rework idea??
« on: February 05, 2024, 11:58:55 AM »
Pretty obvious solution here: simply make it so shield shunt causes armour damage to reduce your flux level. You're going to be taking damage on armour to use a shield shunt build, it's kind of built into it. So you may as well be rewarded by having it turn it into an offensive solution.

Something like "Flux capacitors are routed through the now disused shield nodes - When armour damage is taken these break off, taking accumulated flux with them", or something about "Shield nodes are repurposed to vent flux on impact with projectiles, reducing flux levels when damage is taken".

this way when your tripped out, shield shunted onslaught burn drives into a crowd of enemies it suddenly has a lot more flux to shoot all the guns... until the armour gets stripped.

Hmmm. All Mercenary fleets appear to be literally nothing but dromedaries, donkeys and crooks, even ~200k bounty ones.

I'm guessing this is unintended?

Suggestions / Re: A new combat role for civilian ships
« on: June 26, 2023, 02:51:11 AM »
A better option in my opinion is not to make civilian ships want to be in combat (there is no reason to attempt to force specifically civilian vessels into combat), but to provide a gameplay reason for them to be in combat, such that you have a reason to give them some amount of combat power.

Best idea I can think of is something like a rock paper scissors style minigame: if your fleet gets "ambushed" (exactly what qualifies, not sure. something with sensor readings, e-burn status, etc), you have to decide how to position your forces or respond to the threat (eg, "hold back the bulk of your forces to protect your logistics support" "chase the enemy fleet to force combat" "disengage while the enemy chases a rearguard detatchment", etc style responses).

If you pick badly compared to what the enemy fleet comp is and what they decide to do, you have to do a retreat style scenario where you have a random selection of your ships available for deployment at the start (to represent your fleet being mis-positioned to the enemy, and they've attacked your logistics train), with the ability to deploy as normal once you've successfully retreated your (enforced spawn) logistics vessels off the map.

Speed and ship size could tie into this as well - Perhaps this could be a type of fleet combat only available to ships (on both sides) with a burn speed or tactical speed of a certain limit, or even by ship size (destroyers and frigates) perhaps, to ensure that you need to keep at least some smaller ships in your fleet to act as "fast response" ships for these type of emergencies.

Firstly, this gives a reason to have some amount of combat power, even if just support weapons, on your civilian ships. A phaeton isn't going to add much combat help for instance, but it might help delay the enemy advance if it's got a converted hanger with thunders in, or you've fitted a salamader missle to your dram so it can provide support fire.

Secondly, it gives reasons to take different types of freighters and fuel haulers over just "whatever is biggest". Suddenly it might be better to take 2 collosi or a bunch of tarsus's over an atlas simply to help provide fire support in a ambush situation. This also then opens a reason for more "combat freighters" to exist (and be added), if they may actually have to try and fight off a bunch of hounds and wolves. Taking mules, for instance, might be a good idea over buffalos, whereas currently early on you'd probably just take buffalos.

Lastly, it provides incentive to keep smaller ships around still in late game fleets to act as logistic defense, if that route is taken.

This could even be applied by the player as well, to allow smaller player fleets to make hit and run attacks against trade convoys and attempt to outmaneuver the defenders to force the retreat style pursuit in the same way.

Godamn, I think better of the IR Autolance after watching that.

Also what's that thing beside the Janus Device at 5:12?

IR autolance has always been good - 500 dps frag is basically 125dps against armour or shields. That's better than the graviton beam against armour as it is, and with the way armour damage is calculated with beams is pretty solid generally.

Make the carrier skills work off "OP spent on fighters" rather than off flight decks. Problem solved. Inbuilt drones cost nothing, Odysseys without fighters don't count towards the limit, Geminis won't make them suck.

I don't know what the breakpoint count be but something like "120 OP on fighters" might be an idea for the soft limit. that's about 8-10 wings of mixed fighters or bombers, and gives you some options to intentionally mount "worse" fighters to keep your bonuses longer. Also means you can do hilarious stuff like fleets of mining drones with full bonuses, which I don't think will be threatening but would be funny.

Idea shamelessly credited from Somethingawful poster OctaMurk, who suggested this.

General Discussion / Re: Clipped Wings - An Eagle Thread
« on: June 04, 2023, 02:05:57 PM »
Eagle isn't bad, just suffers from the "medium energy" problem, wherein all the medium energy weapons are really only good as support weapons (graviton, IR lance), have too short a range (pulse laser, blaster, phase lance) to be good on line ships. They're still good, just not on a line ship. If there was an analogue of the HIL for medium (Medium Intensity laser, perhaps) with a similar range profile it would be very good.

As it is now you're forced to either make the eagle a flux war winner (beams with kinetics, rely on allied ships to blow ships up once they drop shields) or spend like 50 OP trying to buff phase lance range so you can finish ships once you drop their shields with Heavy autocannons or hypervelocity drivers.

There is some good eagle builds for AI usage, which are tediously boring for players to use - 2 gravitons/1 ion beam with 2 hypervelocity/1 mauler is the prime example. AI ships can't tank the hypervelocity hits forever due to the ion beam keeping their shield up, then the solitary mauler can eventually blow them, up once they're they're fluxed.

Update your starsector, it's a bug that was fixed in RC10

Mods / Re: [0.96a] Ship/Weapon Pack 1.14.0
« on: May 27, 2023, 04:23:21 AM »
Finally, now the real Starsector run can begin.

Once again, Thank you for every update DR, your work is really appreciated and I really don't think it can be said enough how much people enjoy your work.

General Discussion / Re: The lore stuff on the website
« on: May 25, 2023, 01:05:09 PM »
also given the number of planets you find which are way out in the sticks, away from the "core worlds" which have ruins on and a decivilized subpopulation, I would say that lore is entirely accurately. Some systems really did just collapse with the gates.

Hi - my apologies, saves from the previous release are not compatible with 0.96 and that's what's causing the issue. This is pretty much always the case between major releases, but in this case the older saves actually load (due to an oversight my part), which makes it confusing.

I think this is genuinely the first time this has come up - Previous versions have had enough "behind the scenes" changes that saves won't even load, so you're forced to start a new game anyway.

I guess this is a suggestion tying into this - but I guess that save files include details of the versions they're saved in? If such it may be wise to add a check on loading if the save is in the same main release of the game client running it or not, and if it isn't, abort loading.

General Discussion / Re: I love Pegasus
« on: May 13, 2023, 11:12:51 AM »
In my opinion the issue with the Pegasus was not the 4 large missile mounts, it was the fast missile racks.

Now, the Pegasus feels like a worse conquest, admittedly one that is easier to control. The conquest has better flux stats, and can mount large ballistics, and can still mount the same number of missiles the Pegasus can, so in combat can put a lot more damage out before ending fights with missles using gauss, mjollnirs or auto cannons.

Personally I would revert the Pegasus change, but then change it's ship system to be something that helps with missile usage but not one that makes spamming 12 mirvs at a target a viable option, which was honestly the main issue.

The obvious one is something like missile auto forge, but something that maybe boosts missile speed and turn rate could be useful too (to more quickly bring rear firing missiles on target and make them less likely to miss).

Yeah the gryphon on the whole is very good with finisher missles, like most AI ships, but with sabots it’s hopeless. Maybe the AI should consider it’s “primary armament” and figure out if sabots are the only effective shield breaking weapons and use them accordingly?

General Discussion / Re: Weird station loadouts.
« on: June 27, 2021, 01:18:42 AM »
Mining blaster only stations aren’t totally useless mind - their range boosting mods work with them so their range isn’t ass, and they have deep flux pools so won’t overload instantly like most ships do. They also have a very high damage so can crack armour very easily.

Suggestions / Re: Comm relay redius
« on: June 21, 2021, 11:45:35 AM »
It’s also worth noting com relays aren’t neutral: they belong to a faction, and if that faction is hostile to you they don’t let you use them.

This already exists: safety override with a reckless or agressive officer.
Fire support already exists: literally any steady or cautious officer with ITU

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5