Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Hyperspace Topography (10/12/22)

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 - Silver Silence

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 66
1
Mods / Re: (ded) Obsidian Void (ASC: B5) (DOM: D2) - 0.6.2a
« on: April 19, 2019, 08:06:36 PM »
Oh yeah no, I've played this mod plenty in the past but I've gone through several computer changes over the years so I no longer have the files or older versions of the game around anymore. Something like mediafire, dropbox or google drive would be ways to upload.

2
Mods / Re: (ded) Obsidian Void (ASC: B5) (DOM: D2) - 0.6.2a
« on: April 19, 2019, 04:13:20 PM »
The dropbox link on this mod is dead, does anyone happen to have the files for this mod laying around? I'd like to be able to play around with the ships from this mod, even if not the total conversion itself.

3
I think if you wanted to do steadily regenerating missiles, you'd have to take a second look at all ships that can mount missiles, especially larger systems like medium and large mounts. I could totally understand if smalls remained as disposables while mediums and larges with their more sophisticated mounts and additional engineering could steadily load up more ammo for use over the course of a battle. But then the number of medium and large mounts available to ships would likely have to be reduced in general to compensate and try to make achieving critical mass wherein naught but a wall of double flaks will shoot down missiles fast enough to not take hits.
The Khopeshes are an outlier. To look at other bombers and their equivalent missile mounts, for 18 OP and a carrier slot, you get 1.5x Atropos racks (minimum of two racks for 8 OP and two small slots that only reload at the end of a fight) in the Daggers. 4000 (their engagement range) / 175 (combat speed) takes about 20 seconds and assuming 100% loss rate every time, its just shy of a minute for Daggers to go to the edge of their range, die and be ready to go again. An additional 10 OP plus the use of a carrier slot in exchange for Atropos torpedoes with greatly increased range with a grand total of three torpedoes a minute (before replacement rate comes into play anyway). For 25 OP and that carrier slot, you get two moving Atropos racks in the form of the Tridents, those take about 30 seconds to reach the edge of their tether range and assuming they die when they get there, it's over a minute before your flying Atropos racks are back up. An additional 17 OP plus the carrier slot usage get you shy of 4 torpedoes a minute. What is normally 4 OP and two small missiles for four Hammers is now 12 OP and 3 Hammers in the Perditions., which again take about 30 seconds to get to tether range, die, then take another 30 seconds to go again. Almost if not all the bombers take about a minute to reach tether range, die and be fully rebuilt. But most of those shoot single missiles. The Khopeshes shoots a spread of rockets instead. To compare them to Annihilators in one way, they are less than a single mount's worth of rockets, 50 rockets and 4 OP plus small mount compared to 28 rockets, 12 OP and a carrier mount. But to match the burst potential of Khopeshes, you'd need double their OP cost at 24 OP for 6 small Annihilator racks and then you'd also need the 6 small mounts that all face the same direction.

Are non-reloadable missiles bad or are bombers just really bloody good? I think I'd lean towards the latter over the former, even more so when mod factions like DME go all Space America on you and demonstrate the power of space superiority doctrine. Bombers are kept in check by limited carrier slot availability and that their motherships are typically poor when exposed to the frontline. To my monkey brain that throws so many mods together I literally don't know what's vanilla and what's vanilla-friendly mod content anymore, the balance of missiles comes from how cost prohibitive is it to play the numbers game. Like how a few versions ago, enough Pilum launchers and Fast Missile racks would create a death ball of Pila that gibs capitals on contact and maintains mass by obliterating frigate hulls. With how many ships can mount a small missile rack, you can't simply give all Harpoons and Sabots a minute long reload and call it a day.

4
Suggestions / Re: MEDUSA RATE-UP (10X ROLL ONLY 100 INFERNIUM)
« on: March 03, 2019, 09:44:23 AM »
10 rolls, got Paragon in the second one along with a gold Tachlance, AMA.

5
Mods / Re: [0.9a] Sylphon RnD 0.9.4b
« on: March 01, 2019, 12:54:48 AM »
Hey there, Nia

Just wanting to post about a quirk I've noticed while flying the Metafalica for a while. I seem to be having a consistent thing wherein the Metafalica's guns are failing to track targets that are moving laterally across their field of view while the ship is in motion. Case in point. The ship being in motion is an important aspect as bringing the ship to a stop allows the guns to hit all the time. I want to say that autofiring AI doesn't account for Sylph engineering witchcraft that allows them to speed up while cruising in straight lines. I disabled the AI on this frigate so that it stopped moving and until I slow the Metafalica down, it repeatedly but narrowly misses when going over the ship's usual 60su combat speed thanks to Sylph engineering. When I slow down, the issue immediately resolves itself and the Metafalica lands its hits. I am amusingly getting a lot of friendly fire incidents because of this as my ship thinks its safe to fire and hit then barely misses and dumps energy bolts into some friendly flanking frigate. Thankfully this isn't an X game where the whole sector turns red because I nicked a M5 one time with turrets. I would imagine this could happen with any Sylph ship but as the use case seems to be in having an edge in running down ships you give chase to, those targets are barely moving side to side compared to when the Metafalica is orbiting a target to allow for broadside fire.

6
I don't associate any foreign accents with the word so I just say it as I read it, Nex-e-re-lin.

7
Hey there, Histidine, crossposting from over here in the ORA thread.

I seem to have had an oopsie, ORA stations in my settled system have broken. Traveling to an ORA station to interact with it results in this instead. Initially all is okay, however, attempting to invade throws an error. Examining the colony again results in something new, but now the only option is to have the game commit non-existence. Alternatively, simply hovering the mouse over one of these stations crashes the game with the following error. And it appears hostilities with the ORA means eventually one of my fleets will interact with a station, also crashing the game.

Code
1470738 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.DefaultFleetInflater.inflate(DefaultFleetInflater.java:258)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet.inflateIfNeeded(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.C$2.if.float(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.C$2.beforeShown(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.C.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.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$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

8
Mods / Re: [0.9.0a] Outer Rim Alliance v0.83 (2019/01/05)
« on: January 25, 2019, 12:26:40 AM »
Hey there, Tart.

Through a combination of Nexerelin's random systems and ORA, I seem to have broken ORA stations. These stations have existed in system for longer than I have so I'm not sure what's causing the breakage. Flying to one results in an inability to attack it and hovering over it in the campaign map crashes the game to desktop with this error. I *did* update Nex from 0.9 to 0.9b but nothing in the changelog would indicate a fiddling with stations to me. I'm gonna crosspost this to the Nexerelin thread because I'm not entirely sure if I'm at fault for updating mods mid-campaign (probably), Nex is wigging out on me or ORA is wigging out on me.

Code
1470738 [Thread-4] ERROR com.fs.starfarer.combat.CombatMain  - java.lang.NullPointerException
java.lang.NullPointerException
at com.fs.starfarer.api.impl.campaign.fleets.DefaultFleetInflater.inflate(DefaultFleetInflater.java:258)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.fleet.CampaignFleet.inflateIfNeeded(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.C$2.if.float(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.ui.impl.C$2.beforeShown(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.C.super(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignEngine.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.campaign.CampaignState.advance(Unknown Source)
at com.fs.starfarer.BaseGameState.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$1.run(Unknown Source)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Unknown Source)

9
I would be intrigued to see if its possible simply because patch after patch there has been efforts made to hamper that sorta playstyle. The one-man ship vs the world style. This patch most recently introduced ECM and ECCM as a passive thing so that larger fleets impose weapon range debuffs on smaller fleets by virtue of being a big fleet.

10
General Discussion / Re: Ships now break apart!
« on: September 11, 2016, 07:15:42 AM »
Oh my, I can only imagine this with Templar ships as their exotic reactors melt down for a few seconds before they explode in a blinding flash with chunks of the ship hurled in all directions. Very yes. And for other mod factions like, I think it was the Scy, that can already break apart as they take damage.

11
You can exclude ships from appearing in the Prism. I don't think any Templar ships will ever show there.

12
Modding / Re: Broadside ships are still not viable
« on: May 02, 2016, 11:18:05 AM »
Perhaps a dropdown menu in the fitting screen to select and try to enforce certain combat styles? "Fight broadside whenever possible." "Fight frontal whenever possible." "Keep range at all times." "AUXILIARY POWER TO THE DEFLECTORS." "Raise shields only when faced with obnoxiously high alpha, ie torpedoes"

13
Mods / Re: (0.7.2a) Shadowyards Reconstruction Authority 0.6.0.5
« on: May 02, 2016, 07:00:25 AM »
If it wasn't for the difficulty in replacing destroyed Mimirs, I'd be totally fine with them "physics"ing things. I always find the results of physics to be amusing in the games I play. I haven't used my Mimirs too much so I've hadn't noticed the fact that lock drive keeps the ship unphased. I'd say you could give the ship massive temporary damage reduction but then I'd just boop things out of the field all the time and use the hull repair perk to keep it alive.

14
Modding / Re: Sub-Boards for mod authors
« on: April 27, 2016, 10:30:16 AM »
I would agree with Tartiflette. A sub section to find the more utilitarian mods like Omnifactory or Console Commands or the Sim Overhaul. The rest can stay as they are. In the case of Dark.Revenant's mods, I'd recommend combining them all into one thread. Call it "D.R Mods" or some such and have a moderator do some forum surgery to have the first 5-6 posts just be Dark.Revenant's posts. Then he can use each post for each of his mods and keep SS+ in there as legacy in the final one of his post chain. Less clutter and all of DR's mods in one place without needing to dedicate a whole sub section to it. I'm not sure this forum is big enough and active enough to necessitate sub sections for each active mod author.

15
Mods / Re: [0.7.2a] Starsector+ 3.4.0
« on: April 25, 2016, 09:08:20 PM »
Should just get this thread locked then if the mod is dead and no support is going to be provided. It bears no further use.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 66