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.

Topics - Deshara

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17
Discussions / Diluvion
« on: November 27, 2023, 04:03:42 PM »
It's on a crazy steep sale right now & I realized I didn't actually have a copy on Steam so I got it (again) plus bought the DLC that just gives you a PFD to show the devs some love
I can't play it without thinking about starsector. its so hypnotic and pretty, and i just find floating around the void to be incredibly relaxing. The game bombed & killed the studio when it came out, but while descending/ascending when your ship levels out at about a 65 degree tilt if you wiggle your nose side to side your ship will continue to angle into a full straight-up or straight-down dive making you plummet in what may or may not be movement tech and, there's just something about navigating the gameworld that to this day scratches an itch deep within my brain
Got put me on this earth to be a boat & this game has done it better than any other. I think it's one of my all-time favorites. Wish it did better.
Did anyone play this little gem?

in an old version of the game i remember realizing that i liked ships without shields more. this got changed when the game was updated, shield AI got better, but i remember that there was a je ne sais quois to the way that the AI kind of, accepted that being deployed into battle meant they were going to die & that their job was to get as much value out of their healthbar as they could before going down, and if in the process of doing so they won & survived the battle that was a happy accident -- the bushido concept of dying before going into battle. it was fun, and it made your and the enemy ships fight more predictably (a bit more RTS, a bit less sim)
i did try out modding shield shunt onto every ship but losing the hard flux gameplay loop sapped the game of an intangible Something, so i think it'd need to put something else onto the right mouse button that generates hard flux, but isn't something you use to negate incoming damage

so, i have a hypothetical question -- really more of a request for help brainstorming something (did i mention today's my birthday?). this doesn't belong in suggestions bc im not suggesting the game have shields removed (it IS a sim with an open world campaign map, a bushido fleet would ruin every playthru), but if you had to remove shields from the game & replace it with something else what would it be?
bonus points if it keeps the same gameplay loop of managing hard flux, venting & overloading, and if the idea would have a hard binary "go/no-go" facet to its logic that an AI would have an easy time using

just for the record, "everybody gets damper fields or temporal shell" have been considered & while they're valid, since they're basically just reduced versions of what most ships already do i am filing them in the "not quite there yet" folder.
i do have two ideas thus far; one that ticks all the boxes would be to give phase ships a reduced version of the hyperion's teleport or an increased version of the wolf's phase skimmer as those both are both easy for the AI to judge while still having all shots that hit do permanent damage, and one where all guns/engines that get knocked out are permanent & you have to activate damage control parties that generates hard flux & ticks down your combat readiness while active to restore disabled systems to operation but that doesn't quite fit because an AI would have a hard time making judgment calls on it

I'd love to hear your ideas, even if it isn't Quite There Yet (these can often be workshopped into fitting, & even if not they still make good ideas for ship systems!)

Discussions / does anyone know where my pfp comes from?
« on: July 25, 2023, 02:13:36 PM »
i know its the battlecruiser from sc but i have no clue where i found it. its really good tho
edit: wait im dumb, if i click-drag the pfp to my browser tab line i can find out from the URL, it's Raynor's ult in HOTS. now im sad that i cant use HOTS to get an up-res of the WC3 death and decay icon since they went with a different blue design, that old icon was a classic
edit edit: ALTHOUGHH, i CAN use the fandom dot com page for HOTS kelthuzad to get his in-game unlockable portrait that IS a remake of his wc3 ult. score!

also, while we're here; fun fact you can tell the person who made the hyperion ult has astigmatism (& which kind), the horizontal flash of light from the gun is an artifact of the artist's eyeshape that he may or may not be aware other people dont see. mine are vertical!

theres transport contracts where ppl ask you to take them somewhere but your only options are accept for money or decline. since using spare crew capacity doesn't cost anything it'd be fun to just fill your fleet with people going random places & drop them off when my path aligns with theirs, & get XP and faction relations when you do
a floating pilgrim fleet

sometimes i think about how much money i would spend to have my favorite mech i built in Armored Core 4 modeled & 3d printed and i get a stab of pain thru my heart that that will never happen, & when it happens it makes me wonder what ships from SS i would let someone empty my wallet to produce figurines of
what do you guys think?

i think for me a ship to be THE ship it has to be A) sexy (so no Onslaught, sorry),
2) iconic IE not like another ship in-game or that you might see in another game, (so no medusa despite it being sexy (its just a flying saucer, sorry) or odyssey (whose silhouette is defined very heavily by the circles for its turret mounts which is visually similar to SPAZ1 ships (the SPAZ wiki has no pics & when i google "SPAZ ships" i just get pics of SS ships LMFAO so i couldn't tell you which it looks like), or paragon (ring ships have Been Done),
3) visually readable (i couldn't imagine how the eradicator is supposed to look so if someone put one on my desk i couldn't say whether it lives up to my mental image. similarly, the wolf is covered in guns so aside from the general shape i don't actually know what it looks like; put one on my desk without telling me what it is & i couldn't tell you what it is. lasher too)
4) single handedly impactful in combat (no atlas, sorry), &
5) have a distinct combat role (so no Falcon, which is Just Okay At A Lot Of Stuff)

out of all the capitals that basically leaves the Astral. obviously the Tempest. I think the Gryphon could fit but I doubt most players have been run down by a SO annihilator Gryphon like I have. the Shepherd fits the bill. Harbringer too. the Monitor is pretty distinctive & readable, even if the Brawler just barely isn't

and ive never played the actual campaign mode.

context: ua:d is a ship designing game with an intense eye on resource management (would you put a hullmod on your capital ship in SS to get +17% turn rate but it multiplies the cost of your engines by their weight and then multiplying the result by +9900% (no i am not missing a decimal point)? have fun parsing that after a long day at the office), in which you take your ships into combat (TO WATCH THE AI PILOT THEM YOU DONT GET TO SHOOT THE GUNS). TLDR; If you've played HOI4 lately it's the equipment designer but if it were the whole game
the game was in early access for a while as they hammered out the building/combat mechanics with a string of missions meant to tutorialize the player to the game's mechanics as well as to explain & test naval warfare doctrine (can you prove Jeune Ecole's doctrine of all torpedoes & light HE guns correct? sink a ship suspiciously close to the Bismark but dunk on the british navy by not losing a battleship in the process like some sort of nerd) that got built out more & more until they added the last feature before release which was the actual campaign

I recently had a big changeup in my medication & while i waited for the insanity debuff to wear off i snuggled up with this game in a concerted effort to actually Beat the darn missions and after getting far enough in that I've started to get bored of it I realized I had put 130 hours into what is effectively a tutorial mode. So I decided to crack open the campaign bc, if I liked the missions imagine how much more the Real Mode has to offer.
I took a look at the ship design available to me; i can make a carrier that has 2 pre-determined spots for guns, 1 turret in the front that can only shoot right & 1 turret in the back that can only shoot left, & if I dedicate 100% of the displacement to building the most efficient engine possible the best I can achieve is a passive -80% to movespeed & acceleration, and no matter what I do all 3 of the weight distribution stats are screaming at me in red. I barfed in my mouth & closed that as fast as I could. Gonna see if I can build a super-dreadnought absurd enough to sink the entire US Pacific fleet circa december 6th 1941 -- and in this game as in SS you know i will NOT, accept subpar targeting computers; every salvo will cross international timezones or by god the design goes in the trash

PS, the worst part? im only 70% of the way thru. You guys ever get this, becoming completely enraptured by a game's silly little side mode & have 0% interest in the main/campaign mode? Do you think Alex should at some point add another, like, 60 more missions to the roster?

Suggestions / let us neural interface with a fighter
« on: March 11, 2023, 03:00:15 PM »
Edit: added spoiler around distracting gif. Please do that in the future. -Alex

Original post:

neural interface doesn't work with a ship that's controlled by an officer or ai core. you should be allowed to put an officer or ai core on a carrier with NI & if you do it hotswaps you into a fighter, picking which wing in order from top to bottom (left to right in-combat on the UI?), if the wing has more than 0 in play

Suggestions / long range medium/large frag torpedo
« on: November 15, 2021, 04:20:39 AM »
torpedoes require large damage pools, specialization to feel good, & usage limitations to make up for the damage it does. what would feel good that the game currently lacks? Massive, massive hideous frag damage alpha strike weapon. I get why there is no ballistic fragmenting hellbore cannon, but a large long-ranged coup-de-grace, anti-capital ship torpedo that you only get to use once or twice? I would enjoy

Modding / free camera (RTS style) mod?
« on: November 03, 2021, 06:41:23 PM »
i know devmode already has a feature that lets you pan the camera unlocked in combat but devmode also creates a whole host of other issues that ruins the vanilla-friendly aspect that a mod like this would have
since its already a devmode feature, would it be easy for someone to make a mod that only activates that feature?

I've always found it interesting in games to pay attention to what IRL ratings games go with when classifying ships and while I've been able to pick up some sense of the meanings over time from gaming & cultural osmosis and the occasional lazy google, but I always got the sense (& google solidified this sense) that these terms were largely arbitrary & overlapping, or just described a general continuity of scale. But I decided tonight to really sit down & figure out what all is going on, and it turns out that sense was wrong! All of these terms have concrete & distinct meanings, and I find it fascinating and want to share.

So! Origin, usage or how they relate to eachother. In no particular size order;

A) Battleships! Gotta start here, this one's important so bear with me all of this winds up being relevant to other stuff.
The name for the modern "Battleship" comes from "Ship of the Line (Of Battle)". The end of wind sails & ships gaining the ability to sail regardless of the wind heralded the end of broadsiding & line battles, and with them they dropped all but the "battle" part of the name, hence "Battleships". It's actually a little funny, it went from "Ship of the Line (Of Battle)" to "(Ship of the Line of) Battleship." It flipped lol. It's important to note that in the pre-modern era nearly every ship built for the express purpose of leaving the coast to make war was a battleship, even if they were small. The only classification below Battleship was Sloop Of War (more on that later). So, for the rest of section A when I say "battleship" I mean "any warship larger than a sloop / with a gundeck", the modern usage of the word "battleship" when applied to pre-modern ships refers specifically to Ships of the Line of the 1st, 2nd & 3rd rating.

1st rate ships were national flagships, 3 full decks of guns (some had 4 but the 4th deck was basically fake, essentially a PR trick for propaganda. The largest sotl with the most guns ever was a 3-decker). These were so powerful that they always had to be the flagships of their country's defense fleet & couldn't operate with the country's "blue sea navy" -- IE the portion of a country's navy that can sail around the world to wage distant wars. Of note; bc a non-blue sea navy could use coastal craft, and bc a blue sea navy couldn't take the 1st rate battleships with it, that meant that 1st rate battleships were effectively coastal ships. Combine the fact that they were extremely expensive with the fact that they were barely usable for anything, they didn't make many of these.
2nd rate battleships had 2 1/2 gun or 3 decks but couldn't stand up to a 1st rated ship in 1v1. Because these were less important in battles critical to a government's continued existence, these tended to be the flagships of blue sea navies, sailing with invasion or colonial fleets to function as their anchor in large battles.
3rd rate battleships had 2 decks & it was found that as long as the ship doesn't need to be relegated to permanent capital defense (1st) or operate as a flagship for a blue sea navy (2nd), it was always better to run a 3rd rate ship bc they were A) able to go toe-to-toe with any ship that wasn't permanently relegated to capital defense (1st) or blue sea navy flagship (2nd) duty both of which were rarely surprise circumstances, 2) were much, much cheaper to build, C) were much, much faster & less prone to being pinned, outmaneuvered or just abandoned by their own fleet, and 3) bc they didn't have a 3rd deck to make the ship sit lower in the water they were much less likely for a wave to hit the bottom gundeck's open gunports & sink it out of nowhere, which was a thing that kept happening to 1st & 2nd rate ships which keep in mind were the most expensive ships in a navy.
Battleships of the 4th, 5th & 6th rating (fewer than 2 full gundecks) weren't (or weren't for very long) considered to be Ships Of The Line, & in the advent of a large battle with Ships Of The Line (1 2 & 3rd rated ships) in play would be kept out of the centre of the battle bc they'd get split in half before they could do much, and thus aren't important to the discussion of the (Ship of the Line of) Battleship class. And with this the very lengthy but annoyingly important first segment comes to a close and I get to stop talking about ship ratings.

B) Frigates. HAHA JUST KIDDING ABOUT NO MORE RATINGS. Remember how one of the benefits of a 3rd rate ship of the line is that the lack of a third deck meant the ship was far less likely to drop dead instantly for no reason? They figured out that if they built a battleship but instead of giving it 3 or 2 full or even 2 partial gundecks, if they flat out ditch all but the top gundeck they can have a battleship that is almost completely immune to the "our battleship was instakilled by a random wave hitting a gunport" thing bc of how high off the water the guns sit, and thus unlike all other rated battleships were actually capable of operating with all its guns out safely in harsh weather. Importantly, because ships had to have their heaviest guns on the bottom & lightest guns on top, that meant that even if in a storm a frigate went up against a ship with more guns on its top deck than the frigate has, all of the frigate's guns can be heavy cannons while none of the bigger ship's can be, allowing a frigate to situationally punch above its own weight, and bc of how much lighter it is it can usually run away in unfavorable situations.
Because of all these factors, frigates were the ideal setup for battleships operating either in a fleet without ships of the line that needed to avoid combat in unfavourable weather, or operating on their own in roles such as commerce raiding, scouting for a battle fleet, & long ranged cruising. The ship classification is 6th (the lowest) rate battleship, the ship's design is frigate, the ship's operational role is to cruise the open ocean independently.
... wait, cruisi--

C) CRUISERS. A cruiser is a frigate, or what a frigate was. The names split during the interim between the age of sail & the modern naval era, when ironclads were too heavy/slow to perform cruising operations so scouting battleships had to still be wooden frigates, which they slowly started trying to semi-armor with iron internal bulkheads which were called armored cruisers to differentiate them from full wooden frigates that were still able to scout but no longer able to battle and fully armored ironclads that could battle but not scout. Once a wooden hull was no longer needed for a battleship to be able to scout, they dropped the "armored" from "armored cruisers" & just called them "cruisers". So a Cruiser is just a large-ish battleship that instead of being specialized into heavy armament & armor for trading blows to the detriment of its speed & general operating capability, sacrifices heavy armament & armor for increased speed & operating capability.
As a result of this split, with the name frigate being stuck on ships essentially rendered useless in open combat, ships designed to be capable of independant cruising operations but so small that they have to specialize into their role tend to be called frigates (such as missile frigates) whereas ships large enough to be capable of independant cruising operations that are large enough to either be capable of open guns combat and/or are capable of generalized/non-specialized operations as cruisers.
(Interestingly, frigates ceased to be a thing by the time of WW1 bc of being pigeonholed out of being capable of combat, but now there are no more battleships or cruisers (only 2 countries have them, the US & Russia) but frigates have made a comeback because they were pigeonholed out of being capable of combat since open guns-based naval battles aren't a thing anymore)

4) Last one, which is the only one of SS's 4 classifications that doesn't directly stem from Royal British Naval battleship rating doctrine; Destroyers.
In the late era of the age of sail Ships of the Line were becoming so big as to be invincible to gunfire from anything but Ships of the Line of equal or greater size, which were ruinously expensive to operate (& remember, prone to capsizing for no reason). Since the biggest Ships of the Line were generally relegated to coastal capital defense or (again coastal) invasion fleets, it turned out that you could defeat a fleet of Ships of the Line by letting them get to coastal waters and then instead of deploying massive ships to gunfight them, deploy a fleet of tiny ships with bombs to suicide charge them -- a thousand of these boats cost less than 1 Ship of the Line, and it only took a single one of them finding their mark to scuttle a battleship on the spot -- a bomb the size of a boat's entire load capacity set off right against a heavy sea-capable ship's prow will capsize it no matter what (this is still true), more or less regardless of how tiny the boat is. if it holds water out well enough to make it to an enemy battleship then it can hold enough explosives to blow its keel off which instakills any ship capable of open ocean travel.
At first they were fireships, then they became bomb ships, then they started sticking the bomb on the end of a piece of wood so they could pretend it wasn't a suicide mission. Those bombs-on-a-stick were called Torpedoes, and then they attached propellers & engines to them and became what we think of as torpedoes nowadays.
The point was, as battleships became bigger & slower & more invincible to gunfire, there was an increasing prevalence of Torpedo Boats to instakill them, and with them came the need to fight them -- which you couldn't do with the fixed heavy cannons, or even with the light swivel guns way up on the deck of a battleship. So they started deploying fleets of Torpedo Gunboats; tiny boats the size of a Torpedo Boat that could match it in maneuverability & operating conditions, but with a freely maneuverable deck gun instead of a suicide bomb, small enough to mount on what was essentially a raft but still big enough to blow a hole in someone else's raft with a single shot. As the Torpedo Boats got bigger, more expensive, more sophisticated, got sails to go along with their oars, got a closed deck, got an engine, got the ability to launch their charge, got radar, so too did the Torpedo Gunboats along with them. Two "kinds" of ships, of the same size & basically the same equipment, the only difference being which of the two roles they fulfill. And eventually people started to realize -- hey, I'm bringing a fleet of torpedo ships, and also a fleet of torpedo gunships to hunt their torpedo ships. Why are they two different kinds of ship, why not just combine them.
And thus the Destroyer was born. It is a torpedo ship meant to sunder battleships. It is a torpedo gunship meant to screen battleships. Also of note, if you squint really hard, blur ur vision & look past what you see, submarines are also destroyers -- and this tracks when you consider that, the job of a submarine is to hunt enemy keel-bottomed ships and kill enemy vessels trying to do the same thing. And thus, the destroyer gets equipped to destroy submarines too. But mostly, their name refers to their role of fighting other destroyers, oddly enough. And because of how non-specific that role is (basically fight anything ur size), that means that functionally any ship smaller than a cruiser can be a destroyer. The only really concrete discerning factor in what distinguishes a heavy destroyer from a light cruiser is that destroyers arent built to cruise -- in a fleet setting destroyers need destroyer tenders, ships with a high operational capacity to lend some of that capacity to it.

So! That's the origin of all 4 of SS's classes. Frigates and cruisers are the same thing, destroyers should be the smallest class of vessel except that they can't hunt phase ships so really they're more of sloops of war, and everything else is a battleship, unless they have a good logistical profile in which case they're a cruiser (and also a battleship), regardless of size. Wasn't this a productive use of time?

Also, unrelated strictly to SS's 4 classes but relevant to the topic since we're here; what's the difference between a corvette and a sloop and a sloop of war and a brig and a cutter and a schooner and a ketch and a blah blah blah. Turns out the answers are very simple; a sloop of war is any warship smaller than a battleship, all of the rest are different styles of mast setups that, aside from determining how the ship sails in different wind conditions does little to actually distinguish them from eachother (sloops upwind better than a brig, but either could be bigger than the other), except for a corvette which is just the french name for a small boat. So, if a game uses these names and it doesn't have any wind mechanic then those names are basically meaningless, and if a game implies that a corvette is a different kind of boat than any random name for a small boat in english then it's just talking nonsense.

PS, I used the British Royal Navy classification bc -- well, we're speaking english. Find me another global naval power with a thousand+ years of naval tradition that speaks english & I'll use their system instead

General Discussion / player's flagship be like
« on: September 16, 2021, 10:37:47 AM »

(apparently only admins are allowed to embed HTML)

no-gun venture with built-in hammers, "evidence of a better time".

a civilian vigilance that bucks the trend of s-mod ships in that it is a flat upgrade (outside of combat); its ship system is downgraded to flares & it gets a tac beam built-in but it gets advanced ground support package built-in, representing the ship's capacity to A) casually operate in atmosphere, 2) deliver persistent fire support to ground operations from long range with its beam and C) its ability to deliver heavy ordinance at close range, and built-in surveying equipment representing its suitability for samples-collection operations both in using its dedicated tac laser to perform distant spectrometer readings and in using its medium missile mount to smash gigantic holes in the ground to take spectrometer readings of sub-surface deposits. Sure a Paragon could do those things too but a Vigilance doesn't need 3 offices of mathematicians to calculate the maneuvers needed to get it in position of the asteroid they want to study.
a non-smuggler cerberus that loses its guns and shielded cargo hullmod. a no-gun brawler with built-in burn speed & no-shields hullmods, "Once a common sight; an aspirational statement now only found in ship graveyards."

a tritach fleet called "corporate headquarters" or something that inspires the image of the ultra-rich living in luxury completely physically seperate from the mere existance of poverty, of 1 civilian paragon & nothing else that permanently orbits eochu bres. literally name the ship "Elysium".

make fleets require logistical support for long-term operation, even in the core, by making combat ships no longer function as light freighters & troop transports & tankers. A fleet of enforcers shouldn't be able to cross the stars on their own.

Every ship that isn't a freighter/transport/tanker gets a hullmod that reduces their crew, cargo and/or fuel capacity by 70/50/0/80%, every ship that isn't a cruiser gets an additional hullmod that reduces their c/c/f by a flat 20% additively with the previous malus (all military battleships get -100% logistics), and then any ship that isn't a civilian ship then gets the resulting logitical profile cut in half. The logistical hullmods that increase one of those stats gets the additional affect of negating that stat reductions for that hullmod's stat -- so your enforcer can carry enough fuel to go places, but it costs OP & a logistics slot to do it & will need another ship to house its crew or give up its second logistics slot to do it.

The reason cruisers dont get the debuff is that, well -- its in the name. Frigates & destroyers get it bc they're too small to house both battle armaments and a broad suite of logistical infrastructure, and battleships are large enough to house a broad suite of logistical infrastructure but use all of that space to house guns & armor instead. A cruiser, then, definitionally, is a ship large enough to house the logistical infrastructure to operate self-sufficiently and chooses that over battleship armament

Suggestions / (option to) remove the armor widget
« on: August 16, 2021, 08:19:02 AM »
you can see armor damage on the ship's graphic; its actually not subtle at all, I have eye problems & I can see the bright glow & the annihilated hull. I think it mostly just distracts players from looking at the ships as closely as they could be, and clutters up the screen big-time.
at the very least give an option to pin it to the corner like your ship's is, or an option to hide it

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 17