Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Starsector 0.97a is out! (02/02/24); New blog post: Simulator Enhancements (03/13/24)

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 - FooF

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 92
1
Just checked it out. Mobile experience is literally 1000x better. The only quibble I have is that all the links to ships, weapons, etc. aren’t listed at the bottom like Fandom when you’re in that category. That was a nice ease-of-access feature. If it can’t happen, no biggie but thought I’d mention it.

Thank you and well done!

2
Level 14 Officers and mod Hullmods…? Nothing done here is remotely close to Vanilla so I’m not sure what it’s supposed to evidence.

I mean, I guess all things are equal but I don’t know how the results translate into normal play.

3
The mobile experience on Fandom is downright abusive. I can’t stand it. 1000% in favor.

4
Suggestions / Re: Hull restoration giving a 3rd s-mod instead of BOTB
« on: March 18, 2024, 12:55:18 PM »
I wouldn’t call it “ease” necessarily because you’re putting 3 points into Industry instead of 3 points elsewhere. Granted, I often spring for Ordinance Expertise so Industrial Planning is only 1 skill away but unless I’m actually going down the Industry tree, I avoid it if I can. 

An extra S-mod is powerful but divorced from BotB and Leadership, it’s a totally different animal to me.

5
Blog Posts / Re: Simulator Enhancements
« on: March 18, 2024, 10:53:46 AM »
By the way, added these 3 behavior options:
Do nothing
Stationary, defenses only (shields/defensive system e.g. fortress shields)
Stationary (no movement or movement systems, but anything else goes)

w00t! So many Onslaughts are going to be used for target practice…  ;D

6
General Discussion / Re: should we just nerf the Onslaught?
« on: March 18, 2024, 09:30:47 AM »
mille viae ducunt homines per saecula Conquests…

Truth be told, I haven’t used a Conquest this patch. With buffed HAG and Storm Needler, it might be able to also mount some other flux hungry weapons like a Heavy Blaster. Agreed with the above: it’s best as offensive support and struggles when counted on to hold the line. It’s very average in a lot of areas but I don’t think it’s “weak.” I just don’t think the endgame can be won by sustained firepower alone, which is what it excels at. You have to have some burst and/or decent defense to weather being swarmed.


7
Suggestions / Re: Hull restoration giving a 3rd s-mod instead of BOTB
« on: March 18, 2024, 06:38:46 AM »
I was going to suggest +1 S-mod goes in Industrial Planning. The thing is, if you do get it early, who cares? What are you going to do: dump 3 s-mods into a Destroyer? It also makes Industrial Planning worthwhile on a few levels and not just for Colonies. For a T3 skill, I think it’s fair.

That still leaves BotB without a capstone perk. I posted this elsewhere but let the buff be +10% effectiveness of all player/officer base skills (not Elite perks). Doesn’t seem like a lot at an individual level but added up over 8-10 officers times 5-6 skills (+flagship), that amounts to a lot of fleetwide bonuses. I think it also reinforces that your officers are better than equivalent level ones with the same skills.


8
Suggestions / Re: Dark Mirror Fleet Encounter
« on: March 17, 2024, 04:22:51 PM »
Hmm. Hyperspace is "not completely understood" in Starsector but it doesn't seem to me be the stuff of nightmares, a la The Warp in Waharmmer 40k. Dark mirror fleets would seem (to me) more on the edge of supernatural phenomena or some kind of malicious intent, which I don't think hyperspace in the game insinuates. Now, the Abyss definitely makes you believe that there are stranger things in the Sector than previously thought. "Here be dragons" and all that. I think that kind of mystery is good but anything that appears to be specifically tailored to spook you (and you in particular) feels like a bridge too far.

Time-shenanigans is interesting though. I think one of the more interesting wrinkles the game could throw at you is a fleet (maybe just a single ship) that has knowledge from outside the Sector. I.e., a current Domain ship. Maybe it's a scouting party as to why the Persean Sector's Gate system crashed. It just took them a long time to get there on conventional drives. Maybe it's stragglers from an interstellar war that the Domain lost. Maybe aliens invaded. Who's to say that the whole Persean Sector isn't like the Sentinel group cut off and making due with decaying technology for centuries, just at a larger scale?

9
Blog Posts / Re: Simulator Enhancements
« on: March 14, 2024, 11:56:14 AM »
@Alex

Probably overlooked in the flood of posts but I’d love to hear your thoughts on the below suggestion.

If it's not too much work, I'd love to see a few additional options as it pertains to enemy sim behavior (maybe under the Aggression menu):

- Play Dead: Ships are stationary and do absolutely nothing. Useful for weapons testing against armor.
- Shields Only: Identical to Play Dead with the exception that ships will try to defend themselves with shields. Useful for testing loadouts against various shield efficiencies.
- Defend: Ships are stationary but will rotate to face you and have full access to all their weapons, fighters, and shields. Useful for testing your ship's overall effectiveness in a controlled head-on fight.

As "spirited" as some of our balance discussions get, some standardized tools for weapons/balance testing would be most welcome. I guess you could also create some "test dummies" that perform the same function but I figured modifying ship behavior would be easier.

10
Blog Posts / Re: Simulator Enhancements
« on: March 13, 2024, 07:19:54 PM »
Praise Ludd! My prayers have been answered :)

The simulator was literally #1 on my "needs an overhaul" list and this makes me very happy. I like how you're approaching it with factions, custom fleets, officers, meta-progression, etc. No complaints whatsoever.

If it's not too much work, I'd love to see a few additional options as it pertains to enemy sim behavior (maybe under the Aggression menu):

- Play Dead: Ships are stationary and do absolutely nothing. Useful for weapons testing against armor.
- Shields Only: Identical to Play Dead with the exception that ships will try to defend themselves with shields. Useful for testing loadouts against various shield efficiencies.
- Defend: Ships are stationary but will rotate to face you and have full access to all their weapons, fighters, and shields. Useful for testing your ship's overall effectiveness in a controlled head-on fight.

As "spirited" as some of our balance discussions get, some standardized tools for weapons/balance testing would be most welcome. I guess you could also create some "test dummies" that perform the same function but I figured modifying ship behavior would be easier.

11
General Discussion / Re: is HEAVY MACHINE GUN!!! any good?
« on: March 13, 2024, 08:25:42 AM »
L/HMG is really hurt by its PD tag, imo.

Counterpoint: it means they get an extra 200 range from Elite PD. That’s the only time I invest in HMGs.

I will say that the HMG could go to 650 range and lose the PD tag and I would be perfectly happy. The small variants are bad PD but are better than nothing and cost virtually no flux. HMGs have 5x the flux cost for 1.5x the damage of LDMG and twice the OP cost. It’s a horrible trade for the additional 150 range and extra damage/shot.

12
General Discussion / Re: Is the Hephaestus at a good spot?
« on: March 13, 2024, 07:55:50 AM »
Regarding the inner/outer cells, Vanshilar is 100% correct. However, it’s hard to eyeball a weapon’s performance when you have residual outer cells contributing fractions of the total armor well past the failure of the inner cells. All that to say, even though armor doesn’t work in way that I outlined in the guide or how it’s being presented above, it’s useful to estimate a weapon’s damage over time using the simplification and comparing it against other simplified examples.

In other words, it’s in the ballpark even if it’s not technically correct. The caveat is that as armor values increase, the more the simplification will deviate from reality. The partial fractions of outer armor cells will provide significantly more damage mitigation at higher base values than lower. So, something like an Invictus will not follow the estimate/simplification. Like, at all. I’d love to work out the the delta on that just as an example.

All that to say, the HAG is still doing the Lord’s work and doing it well, despite other options being equally good or better. I don’t compare the Hellbore and HAG against each other but I do make comparisons against the Mjolnir. They share some of the same space. Likewise, I don’t think the HIL or Plasma Cannons are direct competitors.

13
Support Doctrine would be better if there were ways for ships to provide meaningful support in battles. Things like Nav Relay and ECM--those provide the same benefit for the same cost whether it's an officered ship or not. Or, use of low-damage line holders with support weapons (e.g. Eagle). Or things like Escort Package. Or wolfpack+SD capitals providing overhead cover as Thaago mentioned.

If it's just another ballistic ship with -20% range and -30% damage, not sure it's worth it.

Adding a 5th officer skill feels like, well, maybe we should just rethink the officer system from the ground up.

“Support” is up for interpretation but by making non-officered ‘fodder’ ships better and cheaper, you’re getting support by fielding more flux, hulls, and distractions on the field. Ultimately, we’re fighting AI fleets that has its own weaknesses, which near the top of the list is being outnumbered/outflanked. So, while you are fielding generic ballistic ships that have -20% range and damage, you’re also adding 100% of that hull’s flux, missiles, and hitpoints into the mix.

To put it another way, at a certain point, the fleet becomes more than the sum of its parts. It reaches a critical mass that belies the inferiority of its individual members. This is how DO fleets run roughshod over even endgame battles. SD is less pronounced on its own but it is bolstering numbers with good-not-great filler ships.

It’s not as good as BotB at the high end but it does work.




14
Now that you mention it, the new perk from Cybernetic Augmentation (buffing officers via Flagship Elite Skills) feels more like Best of the Best/Leadership skill, than a Tech skill. It buffs officers, buffs the player (truly making them "best of the best"), and depending on if you chose some of the Officer skills, you either get 8 uber officers or 10 really strong ones.

So, we could do a switch-a-roo with some of the capstone skills. The +1 S-mod bonus from BotB goes to Hull Restoration. The 15% CR bonus from Hull Restoration gets moved to Cybernetic Augmentation but tweaked to only include officered ships (+flagship) along with some other fairly significant in-battle perk. The first thought that comes to mind is it mproves the base (not Elite!) effect of all skills on the player and officers by 10%. That doesn't seem like a lot but +10% on 5-6 skills times 9-11 ships (officers+flagship) add up!

All that said, I have nothing against Flux Regulation or BotB perks as they are now. I don't feel "locked" into them or that any builds are truly locked behind them. To be frank, I rarely get BotB because the prospect of spending all those SPs on S-mods turns me off. I do acknowledge how powerful it can be but I prefer wide to tall fleets.

15
I found out, mostly by accident, how strong HIL and with Smodded Expanded Mags IR Autolance Sunder is when I switched the Autopulse out. True, you need another ship to get the shields down but once they are, it’s a Death Star laser.

And, yes, if Remnant shields go down, you have to inflict real damage to them or you end up treading water so rapid and forceful application of armor/hull damage is paramount. Sunder delivers this in spades.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 92