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

Suggestions / Re: Omen's EMP Emitter and inconsistencies

« on: May 16, 2025, 10:01:26 PM »

...

The range is the weirdest thing. System Expertise does increase the range by ~50% and nothing else does, but the exact amounts I couldn't pin down. In play, I find the extra range is very impactful and consider omens/shades Sys Ex or bust. It lets them fire completely over allied ships more reliably.

EMP Emitter has a specified range of 500 on its .system file (emp.system), which is also listed in the wiki. Thus, System Expertise would raise the system range to 750.

I do think it makes sense for the EMP Emitter - and other direct-damage ship systems - to benefit from general damage increases like CR and Cyber Aug. Unlike something like Tactical Drills, EWM, or Ballistic Mastery, the "+X% damage dealt" line makes it sound like it should affect all damage dealt by the ship - except, according to the code, it actually does this by boosting only ballistic/energy/missile damage, which isn't obvious from just reading the skill descriptions.

The interesting thing is that Mine Strike is affected by missile damage bonuses (or, at the very least, the missile HP bonus from Missile Specialization) and, so, is theoretically boosted by Tactical Drills and Cyber Aug. Yet, EMP Emitter does not appear to get this same treatment at all for energy weapon bonuses. I can only assume this is mainly down to how the ship system is implemented and how damage modifiers are applied. I do know that there are other examples of damage modifiers not applying as expected, like Rift Lightning and possibly the rift explosions from the Rift Beam and Rift Cascade Emitter not being affected by EWM at all, so the EMP Emitter isn't alone in this regard.

2

General Discussion / Re: 0.98 Good seeds

« on: May 12, 2025, 07:59:53 PM »

...

How do you go about mapping these out? I know the hypershunts tend to spawn in blue supergiant systems. Would you just gun it to one of those on a fresh game and see their loadouts, then quickload back and check any remaining supergiants?

A while back in 0.97a, I made a script in my own personal mod that would just print out the locations of the hypershunts as well as their defender variants, so it was trivially easy for me to see where those hypershunts are and what loadouts - and, therefore, the possible large weapon drops - are in each hypershunt. However, it doesn't show what the actual drop amounts are, so, for any hypershunt that has two of the same defender variants, I still had to check them manually to confirm that they really do drop 2 large weapons, since only 1 of each weapon is a guaranteed drop. Fortunately, teleporting to the hypershunt system via Console Commands makes this process a lot simpler.

Speaking of which, I'm currently in the process of packaging that script and more into a proper seed-hunting mod for public release, which should make finding good vanilla seeds much faster. No ETA on when that will be done, however.

3

Mods / Re: [0.98a] Adversary (v7.1.1)

« on: May 12, 2025, 12:37:01 PM »

Update v7.1.1 is now out, which updates the Unknown Skies support for the Optimal system to account for the US v3.0.0 update. If your game uses Unknown Skies, this Adversary update will require the v3.0.0 US version when it generates the Optimal system.

v7.1.1

• Updated the Unknown Skies support for the Optimal system to work with the newest v3.0.0 update
  - Also changed a few planet types and the background for the US Optimal system

...

Seems the new version of Unknown Space (3.0.0) is causing an issue on game start. No issue with 2.1.0.

This crash should be fixed now with the newest Adversary update. For anyone that does not want to update their Unknown Skies mod just yet (in case they are adding the Adversary mod to an old save file), disabling the "Adversary Optimal Unknown Skies support" setting in settings.json or LunaSettings should allow the mod to work just fine.

4

Suggestions / Add option to disable initial saving when creating a new game

« on: May 07, 2025, 08:48:48 PM »

This would be a really useful option to have for anyone who is making new games frequently, like those testing their own mods or looking for a good seed. It would make creating new games slightly faster (since you don't have to save at all) and avoid the work of needing to clean up those extra saves to free up disk memory.

(According to my search, this was last asked in 2015, but, looking at settings.json and in the code, the option doesn't seem to have been implemented since!)

5

General Discussion / Re: 0.98 Good seeds

« on: May 03, 2025, 10:42:05 PM »

Did you actually check those hypershunt drops or only check the variant?

I did, in fact, check the hypershunt drops directly, though only after seeing the desired variant combinations. While there is no need to do that at all if a Hypershunt's defenders are different variants (so no overlapping large weapons for a given Hypershunt), manual checking is basically required when seeking out 3 or more of the same large weapons, since the duplicate large weapon is not guaranteed to drop if the defender variants for a Hypershunt are the same.

6

General Discussion / Re: How to build the Onslaught (XIV)??

« on: May 03, 2025, 10:11:27 PM »

As already stated by Phenir, the first build is too overfluxed, even for a Shield Shunt ship, since Mjolnirs are too inefficient for what large ballistic slots generally serve in an Onslaught, which is providing reliable armor-breaking damage. Since the Onslaught already has several small ballistic slots, you are better off using kinetics for the small slots and using an efficient HE for the large slots (I prefer triple HAGs to kill flanking ships faster, but side Devastators can work in a pinch). Since most fleets do not spam missiles that often, barring the Persean League and the new Threat enemies, PD can be easily managed with one or two (Dual) Flaks on the Onslaught's front, or by having an escort ship with good PD coverage to protect it (Anubis with Paladins is the best ship for this).

The second build I recognize, because that is literally the build I made (so you definitely did get that build from my video!). It replicates CaptHector's previous Onslaught build for multi-Ordo battles with Onslaught spam, except with tweaks to account for the 0.97a nerfs to both LDACs and PCLs. It should still be fine to use the build in the current 0.98a patch. However, nowadays, I like to use Light Needlers instead of Light Autocannons for that second build since needlers spike the enemy's flux instantly instead of over time, which leaves enemy ships with fewer flux to use against the Onslaught during the initial engagement (this is very important if you are deliberately over-fluxing ships for maximum damage output!). Also, if you are using the Onslaught as part of a cohesive fleet - instead of being spammed as the primary ship - then I think Omni shield conversion (possibly s-modded too) is more generally useful than leaning into frontal shields with Extended Shields, as the ship AI usually manages Omni shields better compared to Front shields.

Alternatively, a triple Storm Needler Onslaught build with s-modded Expanded Magazines is also a great build to use due to the synergy with the built-in TPCs (see this forum post showing off the build). It is a bit more specialized than the typical 900-base-range Onslaught builds since its primary kinetics, Storm Needlers, are only 700 base range, requiring the Onslaught to be more aggressive against foes that outrange it. Still, I think it'll work out fine if the rest of your fleet is also built towards similar shorter-range damage output.

In general, as long as the Onslaught has maxed flux dissipation, efficient kinetic weapons, and HE weapons with high DPS and/or hitstrength, it should at least do well for most of the current content. Do note that builds with much shorter weapon ranges, like the HMG build, will have problems engaging enemies that both outrange and outspeed the Onslaught, so I would not recommend those builds at all unless you are personally piloting the Onslaught and, thus, can play far more aggressively than the typical ship AI.

7

Bug Reports & Support / Re: The Typo Thread

« on: May 03, 2025, 09:14:49 PM »

There's an extra space in the "Recent events" section of the Luddic Path Cell intel description when a "reduce stability" event fails ("...civilian targets  were averted..."; line 527 in LuddicPathCellsIntel.java).

8

General Discussion / Re: 0.98 Good seeds

« on: May 03, 2025, 07:06:54 PM »

While what I will say isn't related to finding good colony candidates, I might as well post these seeds here since the stuff I'm looking for also happen to be seeded (I use a personal script to find good seeds much faster).

For those interested in the loot drops from the Hypershunt defenders, I found these 4 seeds which provide 3-4 of the same large weapon:

Seeds with Hypershunt locations + loot drops

MN-4813297664153669580 (4 Rift Cascade Emitters)
Hypershunt in Rama and Pitrloka

MN-4442775152998569644 (3 Volatile Particle Drivers + 1 Reality Disruptor)
Hypershunt in Kydoimos and Xaphan

MN-1081056032028983448 (3 Rift Torpedo Launchers + 1 Rift Cascade Emitter)
Hypershunt in Cha and Svaron

MN-211794512586131020 (3 Reality Disruptors + 1 Rift Cascade Emitter)
Hypershunt in Cadmus and Pelesius

[close]

I also found a seed with 4 of the same level 7 exceptional officer (with Missile Specialization, Gunnery Implants, Damage Control, Impact Mitigation, Polarized Armor, Ballistic Mastery, and Target Analysis) here:

Locations of all exceptional officers in MN-2297924031254980920

MN-2297924031254980920

• Derelict ship in Zirnitra
• Derelict ship in Berith
• Derelict ship in Buyan
• Mining Station in Smok

[close]

These seeds should work with 0.98a-RC8, as long as there are no installed mods that interfere with procedural generation (I didn't actually test these seeds on a completely-vanilla setting, but I only ran utility mods while finding these seeds, so the seeds should carry over just fine).

9

Mods / Re: [0.98a] Adversary (v7.1.0)

« on: April 23, 2025, 04:37:02 PM »

Update v7.1.0 is now out, adding 3 new Silly MagicBounties featuring the new 0.98a additions (as a reminder, Silly MagicBounties will need to be enabled for these bounties to show up). The update should be save-compatible with v7.0.0.

v7.1.0

• Added 3 ultra-difficult Silly MagicBounties that use end-game weapons
• Elite Phase Ship doctrine now prioritizes Anubis (instead of Omen) as its warship
• Fixed Adversary crisis factor not being added mid-game if the Colony Crisis intel already exists
• Adjusted New Opportunity Hycean planet to account for Unknown Skies nerf

Would like to make a CTD report, the ResLab for Adversary Opportunity is crashing my game are you aware of this?

Thank you for the report! I forwarded the crash to SirHartley, and the latest Industrial.Evolution update has now fixed this crash. Make sure to update that mod!

IMO most of the other bar quests simply need to be rebalanced to pay more. It's hilarious to see someone offer me 150k credits to invade a TriTach military world, telling me I'll need 2500 marines. Like oh yeah, let me just go get those out of the cupboard. Comically underpaid.

Agreed, in fact any of the missions that basically require a reputation hit should be paid more, including underworld bounties. The commodity sale/purchase/transport missions are incredibly profitable and have no downside and little risk, while the extraction, raid to disable industries, etc. missions requiring much more investment and risk and lost rep. At least dead drop missions send a fleet to harass you sometimes, otherwise they'd be overpowered too. I might make a thread about bar mission balance; since that's one of the primary ways players get missions and the pool is shared with Contact missions...

The contact missions sometimes not being worth the risks would certainly be worth a discussion on the General Discussion or Suggestion boards. In the context of this mod, however, there is not really much I can do, since there appears to be no way to tell the missions to not select a market for trade/smuggling/raid missions. The Adversary's economy is mainly balanced around their hostility with every single faction (resulting in maximum accessibility penalties due to hostility) and the export demands for the Orbital Fusion Lamp and Cryorevival Facility (where, on average, the export amount is just barely not enough to prevent the player from fully utilizing the colony item/structure without any investment). Fixing the surplus goods by increasing accessibility - which might indirectly fix a few trade contact missions from heavily prioritizing Adversary markets - would just exacerbate the Adversary's overall dominance in the Sector economy, which I prefer to avoid at this time.

At the same time though, for a proficient smuggler who knows all the smuggling tips and tricks (including using phase ships to reduce sensor profile), the higher rewards might be worth dodging all the hostile Adversary patrols flying around, so I guess it can work out fine for some people?

[BUG]

The unused planet in the Optimal Star System can be used as a valid target for the player's own faction start.  I doubt that's intended behavior:
...

Common issue with using Nexerelin's starting options for the player start; make sure to select "Non-Core" to avoid spawning on any of the hostile Core World systems (which includes the Optimal star system).

10

Mods / Re: [0.98a] D-MOD Services (v3.0.1)

« on: April 22, 2025, 12:35:08 PM »

Update v3.0.1 is now out. Nothing major here; mainly changing the dialogue to hopefully feel better to read. Save-compatible, as always.

v3.0.1

• Adjusted credit gain for the "Random d-mod" option
• Added unique dialogue for the "Random d-mod" option
• Adjusted some text
• Minor code refactors

Any chance we could get a D-mod service that makes ships look pristine regardless of the number of d-mods?

Not a bad idea. I can look to see if this is feasible and reasonable - although, since D-MOD Services is supposed to be a utility mod that can be safely added/removed at will, that is most likely beyond this mod's scope.

Hello

Please, tell me which quest is required to be cleared to unlock S-mod removal

Because it definitely isn't "at the Gates"

Spoiler

Completing the Usurpers questline is required to unlock the s-mod removal option at this time.

[close]

11

Bug Reports & Support / Re: The Typo Thread

« on: April 20, 2025, 08:22:46 PM »

The Tenebrous Expulsion ship system has a extra period after the system type, making its own Codex category as a "Defensive." type.

12

General Discussion / Re: Neutrino Detector maybe useful for once

« on: April 17, 2025, 10:43:31 PM »

I've just been running the Mk2 mod that removes the false positives.

I think the Volatile cost is what keeps me from using it, more than the false positives. It’s dumb, but I just don’t think about bringing volatiles with me when I’m exploring. I think I’d be more likely to use the Neutrino detector if it either didn’t have an upkeep cost, or it took something I was already going to bring with me, like supplies or fuel.

I almost always bring at least 20+ units of Volatiles whenever I go outside the Core Worlds. Volatiles are a fairly common station loot drop, and it's not very difficult to build up a stockpile of Volatiles that will effectively last the whole playthrough. Thus, in my opinion, sparing a few cargo space to use the Neutrino Detector is absolutely worth it.

First, it helps confirm where not to look in a system, since any direction with 0 streams typically means nothing of value is in that direction and, therefore, can be ignored while searching for salvage loot (And the detection range for the Neutrino Detector is very large, at 10000 units I believe? For many star systems, that's basically the whole map, so there's little worry about missing out on anything - except debris fields, which don't emit any signal at all - due to lack of detection range.).

Plus, since false positives almost always appear as consistent pulses, it's also pretty easy to point out anything that either produces occassional blips (which indicate derelict ships or active fleets) or constant streams (which are often salvageable stations that you really want to loot). Thanks to this, I've been able to clear systems of all their loot pretty reliably, which also leads me to finding those exceptional level 7 officers quite quickly as well.

Finally, unlike Active Sensor Burst, Neutrino Detector doesn't stop your fleet at all, so you can keep cruising along a system with Sustained Burn 100% of the time instead of just stopping-and-going as you would with spamming Sensor Bursts.

Frankly, if it weren't for the false positives, the 50% increased sensor profile (though that's usually ignorable), and the Volatile upkeep, Neutrino Detector would probably be the most busted campaign ability in the game. For me, it already feels that way, especially since I tend to focus on scouring every system of any salvage during most long playthroughs.

(Also, yes, I've been using the Detector to find Threat fleets as well. It's very reliable at tracking them after the initial Sensor-Burst-on-entry, which is nice for clearing out all the Threat fleets within any rogue planets.)

13

Bug Reports & Support / [0.98a-RC7] Crash when exiting mission battle with Attack Swarms active

« on: April 16, 2025, 10:16:15 PM »

Attempting to exit out of mission battle with at least 1 active Attack Swarm (might need to get one of them killed first) will result in the game crashing. Apparently, the mission battle report screen attempts to get the battle status of an Attack Wing, even though they are temporary fighters? I guess this technically only happens in a modded Starsector where Swarm Launchers or similar wing-launching weapons are equipped in missions, but the root cause is almost certainly within the vanilla code.

Error message

55451 [Thread-2] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.RuntimeException: Can't determine final status for Attack,Swarm, owner: 0, name: Swarm Attack Wing
java.lang.RuntimeException: Can't determine final status for Attack,Swarm, owner: 0, name: Swarm Attack Wing
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatFleetManager.getFinalStatus(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.C.B.<init>(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.C.o0OO.<init>(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.C.super.<init>(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.endCombatAndShowDialogIfMission(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatState.dialogDismissed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.O.dismiss(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.o0OO.dismiss(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.combat.o0OO.dialogDismissed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.O.dismiss(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.o0OO.dismiss(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.o0OO.actionPerformed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.n.buttonPressed(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.H. 00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.H.processInput(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.ui.classsuper.o00000(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.o00000(Unknown Source)
   at com.fs.starfarer.StarfarerLauncher$1.run(Unknown Source)
   at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

[close]

14

Bug Reports & Support / [0.98a-RC7] Recovered "pristine" (D) ship with only its built-in d-mods

« on: April 12, 2025, 12:57:35 PM »

With Hull Restoration, it's possible to recover a (D) ship that only has its built-in d-mod, meaning it'll remain a (D) ship until its been dock-restored. This was fixed for Hull Restoration's passive d-mod recovery effect, but I think Hull Restoration's secondary effect of quickly-removing 1 d-mod from salvaged ships can still result in a recovered (D) ship that only has its built-in d-mod (e.g., LG ships' Special Modifications). I'd expect that, if the salvaged ship only has its built-in d-mod left, it should be recovered in its base spec instead of its (D) spec.

15

Bug Reports & Support / [0.98a-RC7] Bugs with New Lightning Weapon

« on: April 09, 2025, 02:21:23 PM »

Noticed a few bugs with the Rift Lightning weapon while testing it out:

• If fired while using Temporal Shell (e.g., in an Anubis), the lightning will start passing through enemy ships instead of impacting the ship directly. This is easily replicated by using an Anubis with a Rift Lightning, driving up to a stationary simulator enemy ship, activating Temporal Shell, and then firing the Rift Lightning.
• The Energy Weapon Mastery damage bonus does not apply to the rift explosion caused by the Rift Lightning. This is easy to see using the same Anubis and going against a stationary shielded ship, where the rift explosion damage does not increase as the ship's flux starts rising. It's possible that similar rift explosion effects from other weapons (for example, Rift Beam and Rift Cascade Emitter) aren't properly affected by EWM either, but the Rift Lightning explosion is simply the most obvious case of this happening since that's all of its damage.