Fractal Softworks Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Starsector 0.95.1a is out! (12/10/21); Blog post: Hostile Activity (09/01/22)

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.

Topics - Baqar79

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Bug Reports & Support / [0.95.1a RC5] Game locks up while entering Nortia
« on: December 18, 2021, 08:37:18 PM »
I've noticed the game has had a few strange lock ups in certain places, so perhaps it is on my end, but I have this regular lock up (requires terminating the process and reloading the game), when entering Nortia.  Sometimes it happens immediately on opening up the interface screen, sometimes I can navigate some of the options before lock up.

I've sent the save already, hopefully you might be able to see what I'm seeing, though if not I'll need to figure out what is going on with my end.

EDIT: Whoops! I just sent the email without any message content (attached save is there though).  Basically I've already got autopilot already set for Nortia, so just fly there and try clicking some of the options to see whether the game will lock up.

This may be by design, but it looks like you can't rescue crew after forced to play through a second battle; normally I've stacked a lot of crew reduction losses, so I think I get around 75% back, but in this case none were able to be recovered.

General Discussion / Shipping Disruption between two very close colonies
« on: December 14, 2021, 07:40:39 PM »
Does shipping disruption actually require the ships carrying the goods to be destroyed or is it something that happens from pirate activity in general?

I have two very close colonies (Gas giant and the moon orbiting it) and somehow I'm getting shipping disruption (Heavy Machinery & Supplies) between my colonies.

Whoops uploaded the picture again as it was between Kalico and Rin which are even closer.  Seems like the necessary Supplies & Heavy Machinery are supplied by Kalico alone (5 Heavy Machinery & 5 Supplies while Rin requires 2 Heavy Machinery & 5 Supplies).

I think I noticed this on 0.95a, but thought perhaps something else was triggering it....or maybe it was intended.

So there is no need to wait one week as the conversation with Baird indicated after ferrying Scylla Coureuse back to Galatia Academy.  Once I exit the station I can go back immediately and start the next part of the quest without needing to wait the 1 week.

I made a backup save just in case (and can send it if you need it), just fly over to the station; hand Coureuse over to Baird and then at the end of the conversation with Baird exit the station and immediately dock again to start the next part of the quest.

(I often make mistakes with my understanding of the dialogue, so if this is intended and I misread something, sorry about that!)

I'm not sure if It is worth reporting, but it just seemed a little odd that a Paragon build I had would vent prematurely taking a decent amount of Thermal Pulse Canon shots without having any need to do so.

I'm sending the save in question so you can check it out (with the same title).  The Paragon I tested is the only one in the fleet (ISS Agelaus); just run the simulation with the SIM Tonatiuh Onslaught to hopefully see the same odd behaviour I'm seeing (I think you will see this behaviour with other ships, but this one I tested myself to see the odd behaviour).

The Apogee is great for high tech exploration, as it has a good amount of cargo, crew and fuel capacity (with it's fuel efficient engines even 200 units of fuel capacity is decent enough to give it a fairly long travel time across the sector). I normally s-mod Augmented Drives, Auxiliary Fuel Tanks and Expanded Cargo Holds to make it even better for exploration purposes.

The Venture class on the other hand is pretty poor in comparison; it uses 50% more fuel and has a small fuel tank for it's fuel consumption (120 units) and isn't as competitive as the Apogee for cargo and crew capacity.  It doesn't help that it is slower, so more time spent traveling means more supplies are wasted as well.  I'm assuming that the Venture class is considered a low-tech exploration ship because of the integrated surveying equipment, so perhaps I'm wrong here, but it needs a huge buff to fuel capacity and perhaps smaller buffs to cargo and crew capacity.

So if I was to keep the fuel consumption the same at 3 units/light year, I would probably:
-At least triple the fuel capacity.  I would probably suggest something like 400 units; this gives it slightly more range than the Apogee, but at a 50% greater fuel cost and at a slower speed.
-Increase the Cargo and Crew capacity to be competitive with the Apogee; I would probably make them around 500 each, maybe slightly higher.

The Apogee would still retain some great advantages over it Ventura in regards to exploration (High resolution sensors and great fuel economy for two), but it would at least be competitive as a decent exploration ship that is cheaper and easier to acquire (finding an Apogee beside the one I started with was particularly hard during my current playthrough).

Weird issue; seems like one of my ships (a hammerhead) is not being repaired with Field Repairs.  It will work with other ships since all other ships have been repaired to pristine condition (even ones that were d-modded well after I got this d-modded ship).  100% vanilla/no mods setup.

I've tested it several months now and no luck with any repairs being done.  If you would like the save let me know!

General Discussion / Starsector - thanks for the surround sound
« on: April 23, 2021, 05:31:08 PM »
I'm usually here for a month or two after an update and haven't noticed this before (so it has quite possibly been around a while), but I very much like that I can enjoy battles on my 5.1 setup (more like 5.0 setup as I don't have a subwoofer).

It's probably a normal thing these days, but just a thanks for including positional audio in the game (probably not using the right term here).

General Discussion / Are Gunnery Implants working correctly?
« on: April 18, 2021, 01:31:43 AM »
Before posting as a bug, I wanted to make sure I understood how range modifiers are calculated.  The situation I tried myself is a simple one, Unstable Injectors and Gunnery Implants vs a Stock setup on a Paragon (so it has +100% to weapon range from the Advanced Targeting Core).  It looks like Gunnery Implants are only adding 1/2 of the 15% bonus, so it doesn't counter the negative effects of Unstable Injectors; nor do you get 15% additional range without Unstable injectors, at least on the Paragon.

Paragon with Tachyon Lances (1000 range default)
Stock: ~2000 units
Unstable Injector: ~1700 units (about what is expected - 2000 * 0.85)
Gunnery Implants: ~2150 units (half of 15%, which is unexpected on my behalf)
Unstable Injector & Gunnery Implants: ~1825 units (this looks to be the range of 2150 * 0.85)

I measured the length of the firing arc with a ruler, and then scaled by a constant (eg stock range was 18.2cm, and since the range should be 2000, 2000/1820 gives a constant to scale the results).

The best way I can make sense of it is that Gunnery Implants isn't compounding with the Advanced Targeting Core of the Paragon and just adds a flat range calculated from the base range of the weapon.

Normally when you activate free port on a planet with light industry you can manufacture recreational drugs.  The problem is that toggling this off doesn't actually clear the recreational drugs until the next reload.

It looks like if you have both Containment Proceedures & Efficiency Overhaul the Fuel range map doesn't give the right coverage, ie if you have Containment Proceedures already the Fuel range map doesn't change when you install the Efficiency Overhaul mod.

They both work on their own to show the correct fuel range, but not together. In the example below I used a Mudskipper with 10 fuel:

And sorry about the ghastly cropping there combined by a resize to make it appear that the fuel range circle is bigger, at least I moused over the same star...

Suggestions / [0.95a - RC12] - Extensive Ruins on Gas Giant
« on: April 10, 2021, 04:31:13 AM »
This may of already come up, but just in case, I've attached a cropped image.

I've noticed this before with the salvage rig (less crew capacity than what is required to operate it), but I feel that I can explain that much of the equipment is externally operated, so the limited crew count is just to fly the ship rather than use the equipment.  However this seems to make less sense on other ships with d-mods like Faulty Automated Systems and Degraded Life Support:

I figued that with these sort of d-mods you would end up having a CR penalty for not being able to fully crew the ship, but it seems as long as you have the capacity elsewhere on another ship it doesn't matter. 

Shouldn't the Crew complement read 75/180 (with the associated penalties for not being fully crewed)?

It was a while back in a much older version when I tested them and they seemed to increase the amount of damage the ship could take before sustaining crew losses, but I've noticed that in a fight where I lost a lot of bigger ships the number of crew lost seemed well below expectation and on top of that I think about half of that amount that were presumed lost were rescued.

So do blast doors have several reduction components to it, eg one reduces the overall losses due to excessive hull damage or being disabled and one which reduces losses further in the event of being disabled by rescuing those presumed lost in battle?

Bug Reports & Support / [0.95a - RC12] - Gateways can't be activated
« on: April 04, 2021, 05:35:48 PM »
I think there might be some sort of bug during the quest to scan 6 gateways.  Aztlan & Zagan were otherwise occupied at the time, so I just went elsewhere to make up the 6 gateways for the quest. 

Now with the gateway network up and operational, I can't activate those gateways as I get a message about them being otherwise occupied when they are not.  Zagan was the one that convinced me this was a bug since it is refusing to scan on the basis of a civilian fleet directly above the gate....which is clearly not the case anymore.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4